I may have missed this but does the $10 billion spent on peace building programs in 2016 include spending by governments, or is that just foundations?
I’m not sure that’s roughly true, EA priorities also have to be neglected, generally the most effective interventions are already taken by governments and large organisations.
I don’t think that this article is a good representation of the debate over these issues and takes an approach where the author seems to have already made up their mind about possible solutions.
This post from Our World in Data probably gives the best overview of stagnation in global poverty
“A generation ago the majority of the world’s poorest lived in economies that went on to grow very fast. What is different now is that a rising share of the world’s poorest are living in economies which have not achieved economic growth in the recent past.
Half a billion are expected to remain in extreme poverty by 2030 if current trends of economic growth and levels of within-country inequality persist.The decline of extreme poverty is expected to slow down.
Much of the progress will be driven by economic growth in Asia, and India in particular. The number of people in extreme poverty in Africa is expected to stagnate.”
I think this article in Vox covers some of the main points.
″...improving the American education system, while important, is neither a neglected cause nor a tractable one. It is a system on which hundreds of billions of dollars are spent annually by diffuse governments whose policies are difficult and expensive to change, where matters of importance are intensely contested, and where interest groups tend to fight each other to a standstill.
And it’s a system where, even after investing millions if not billions in research, we still don’t have a lot of confidence as to which interventions are helpful and which are not. The views of key actors, notably the Gates Foundation, have tended to shift rapidly on those substantive questions.
If every issue in the world were as crowded and hard to make progress on as education in the US, then I’d understand why foundations like Gates and Broad keep chugging. But that’s not the case...”
I think tags might be helpful, but would probably be used by very few people and still miss out the most important reasons for having a different structure.
Another thing to think about is that the forum as it currently is might be favoured by people who use it, but may miss out on the counterfactual people who would use an actual forum if it existed or bounce upon impact with this forum.
Functionally it would be similar, but from a user point of view it would probably be quite a different experience.
From my own usage I have rarely used tags on blogs or news feeds but have often interacted with different sub-forums.
I guess I have concerns with over valuing metrics that are easier to collect which might lead to optimising for the wrong activities.
There is the impact report from EA London for 2018.
Why not just use Glassdoor?
Thanks for writing this up, I think it’s really useful to collate these resources together. Although I think some of the sources are a bit out of date and some recent write ups indicate the opposite advice in some situations—one example being outreach techniques.
Facebook advertisement, direct messages and meetup.com subscriptions are very effectivefor outreach but are costly. Email lists and word of mouth are not effective.
I would say that email lists and word of mouth have been the two most useful ways of building up a community in London, this could potentially be down to how it’s done, but we stopped doing FB adverts and meetup events as it would generally attract people who aren’t as interested in EA.
I also have this list of various community building resources I have found useful over the last few years that might have some things that could be added to the literature review.
I wrote a similar post about this a few months ago, a few days before GiveWell announced they were looking into a wider range of interventions.
The EA fund for global development seems to be the easiest way to get funding towards this area. I suspect that most donors involved in EA would be happy to fund interventions with less hard evidence if given the choice.
One reason why there may be a lack of conversation in this area is that there are many organisations and 10,000+ experts in international development and ways to engage that don’t involve EA. Whereas in factory farming and emerging technology risks there are fewer places for people to go to discuss these causes and so discussion happens in EA spaces (until causes get big enough to create their own networks).
There is a paper from the Centre for Global Development that might be relevant.
“We Can Learn a Lot about Improving Girls’ Education from Interventions That Don’t Target Girls”
It is probably this career discussion one.
One low cost way of doing this, if the EA newsletter people thought it was useful, would be to just have a link in the main newsletter for the recent updates post.
I’d be happy if someone else wanted to send out these updates or put them on a website.
These updates don’t add any extra info so if people are happy to ignore jobs/events they could sign up or use an RSS feed for the website.
The books on this list by conceptually are quite useful. The ones I’ve read and thought are useful I’ve listed below.
Thinking Fast and Slow
The Undercover Economist
The Righteous Mind
The Better Angels of our Nature
The Signal and the Noise
Some others I have found useful
4DX—How to execute plans efficiently (meant more for people in charge of orgs or teams but still applicable to individuals)
Good Strategy/Bad Strategy—Summary of a useful strategy framework
The Charisma Myth
The Art of Gathering
The Art of Community
You Are Not So Smart
Also two EA reading lists that cover poverty, future generations, animal welfare, psychology, productivity, career/business and advocacy.
Not the posts exactly, but there is the EA London blog page which contains all the newsletters although they include events and job postings that might be less relevant.
I’d be happy for other people to make posts if they’ve found something they want to dive into.
I think the gist of the “Heretical Knot” is that we could always do more good, and so we are always second guessing ourselves and burning out attempting to do more.
Here is an edited version of the dissertation mentioned earlier. It has had most of the non EA London related content removed to help make it more relevant.
An ethnographic exploration of ethics, empathy and data practises within the London Effective Altruist community
I remember a couple of people doing something slightly similar to this.
Dan Artus wrote a dissertation in 2018 - “An ethnographic exploration of ethics,empathy and data practises within the London Effective Altruist community”
Nick Philips wrote a thesis about the EA movement in 2015 -”Rational Faith: A Study of the Effective Altruism Movement ”