This makes a lot of sense and does seem like an important distinction to make. I like the analysis as well.
Are there ways to apply some more numbers (i.e. in terms of the economic impact of YLL in middle age) where appropriate, or is that number not available? It seems like maybe applying it to those specific geographies could be helpful?
In addition, one consideration that I didn’t see mentioned (but may have missed) is the economic cost of additional children. Infant mortality is a key component of having more children, and therefore there is more familial early capital spent and maternal health risk when infant mortality is higher.
I don’t think the other comments have really nailed the most challenging parts of working in policy.
It is all about the voters. 99% of what politicians care about is reelection, and therefore the will of the majority often wins. Voters are stupid, especially when it comes to the majority. They don’t want to see their policymakers spend time (much less money!) on things that don’t matter to them. This is why letter-writing (although at much greater scale than the EA community could currently support) is actually somewhat effective.
Lobbying is all about relationships. Lobbying does not get done with an appointment set up with a representative. It happens over very long periods of getting to know a number of politicians involved, including frank discussions and the support of a powerful group.
Politicians rely on those they’ve selected as experts. There’s no chance they’re going to listen to EA at this point… they’re going to listen to the head of the World Bank and USAID. They’ll pay a little attention to Gates, Amnesty and ONE, but those organizations struggle mightily to influence policy themselves.
OK, now that I was a jerk who discussed huge barriers, here’s what I see as opportunities:
One thing organizations such as J-PAL have clearly demonstrated is that the details of interventions matter greatly. Luckily, the details are often the things policymakers care the least about. There are opportunities to make what would be considered minute changes in policy, as long as we pay close attention and then work hard to make them happen.
Because policymakers represent a single geography, if you can gain scale within a single geography, you can get the attention of that policymaker. A concentrated EA population in Oxford and/or SF for example, can have an outside shot of getting the attention of their representative. If they happen to have a good one, he could help get the ball rolling a bit.
Organizations like ONE and Gates have spent many years doing a lot of this work for us. What that means is if we can influence them, or even partner with them, there’s the potential to piggy-back those relationships and be heard.
It’s definitely a very difficult road, and scaling EA while gaining influence and political contacts is key. Of course, it does open up the potential for enormous long-term opportunity.
I worked for a US Congressman and a US Congress Committee on policy, so let me know if there’s questions regarding those experiences that I could help answer.