Max Daniel proposed a tag for GPR and a tag for macrostrategy (or maybe he meant one tag to capture both?), and said:

There is a tag on cause prioritization. But I think it’d be more useful if that tag was focused on content that is directly relevant for prioritizing between causes, e.g. “here is why I think cause A is more tractable than cause B” or “here’s a framework for assessing the neglectedness of a cause”. Some global priorities or macrostrategy research has this property, but not all of it. E.g. I think it’d be a bit of a stretch to apply the cause prioritization label to this (amazing!) post on Quantifying anthropic effects on the Fermi paradox.

I think this makes sense, and it aligns with Rossa O’Keeffe-O’Donovan’s conceptualisation of GPR vs cause prioritization research in this talk. But I think probably just a tag for GPR or just a tag for macrostrategy is sufficient, rather than having a separate tag for each.

So I’ve made this tag.

I went with GPR rather than macrostrategy partly because I think the term macrostrategy is mostly used in longtermism, and perhaps this tag should be applicable across causes. But if people think it’d have been better to have the tag be Macrostrategy, let me know—we could probably just change the name and description and keep the same posts tagged.

One rationale for using Macrostrategy instead is that GPR is arguably a superset of cause prioritization, which we already have a tag for, while macrostrategy arguably sort-of lines up with the parts of GPR that aren’t cause prioritization. So maybe the better way to cover the space of GPR is to have a tag for ~its two components, rather than one for the whole thing and one for a big part of the thing.