At EAG London 2024, Zach Robinson (CEA’s new CEO) highlighted strengthening EA institutions as a top priority. One avenue is democratizing EA organisations. While there’s been abstract discussion on democracy within EA, concrete examples are rare. EA Norway’s governance model — and similar structures in EA Sweden, Denmark, and Finland — offers a practical illustration. In this post, we provide an overview of how things work at EA Norway. We don’t make strong arguments or claims about this being the best solution for everyone.
About EA Norway
Founded in 2017, EA Norway has grown to 300 paying members — alongside over 1,000 affiliated supporters. Its annual budget stands at around 3.8m Norwegian kroner (about €320,000), with 3.25 full-time-equivalent staff handling day-to-day tasks.
At EAG London 2024, the Norwegian delegation ranked third in per-capita terms. Alumni of EA Norway have gone on to work at organisations such as CEA, the Forethought Foundation, 80,000 Hours, GovAI, and Horizon, and have founded CE-incubated Family Empowerment Media. What’s more, 125 people from Norway have taken Giving What We Can’s 10% Pledge. Gi Effektivt, Norways Effective Giving organisation, has raised 110m NOK (~€9.5m) since 2016 and boasts 17% brand recognition among the Norwegian public.
Democracy from the Ground Up
EA Norway’s governance is structured via democratic statutes, which ensure that crucial decisions rest with its membership. Anyone who supports the goals of the organisation and is aged 15 or older can join, subject to a small annual fee. Members receive quarterly updates, financial statements, and strategic plans. They also attend an annual General Assembly, a meeting at which they review reports, debate resolutions, and elect board members.
Inside the General Assembly
Once a year, all eyes turn to the General Assembly, the organisation’s highest authority. An invitation goes out at least eight weeks beforehand, so members can mark their calendars and draft any proposals. Then, at least a week beforehand, the Board shares detailed documents — annual reports, financial statements, strategic updates — ensuring everyone walks in well-prepared.
On the day, the meeting kicks off like a miniature parliamentary session. Members can raise questions and propose changes. Most significantly, they elect the Board, thus holding the leadership accountable. If the Board veers off track, the General Assembly can redirect it. If the membership wants a bold new approach, they can bring it up — and vote it in.
The Board and Beyond
Between Assemblies, EA Norway’s Board has overall authority. Typically comprising four to six members (including a chairperson and a treasurer), the board is responsible for implementing Assembly decisions and holding the General Secretary to account. Terms are staggered so that institutional memory is preserved whilst still allowing new voices to join at regular intervals. Elections take place during the annual General Assemblies.
To ensure a supply of capable and willing candidates, an Election Committee organizes board elections. Comprising up to four members — elected annually by the General Assembly — it informs the membership of upcoming elections, gathers nominations, presents candidates, and submits a Board proposal.
Alongside the board sits a pair of Community Liaisons. Elected by the Assembly each year, these two serve as independent points of contact in the event of conflicts or concerns. They afford members a confidential route to airing grievances — especially helpful if disputes arise with board members or staff.
A Hands-On General Secretary
At the operational helm is the General Secretary. This official oversees everyday activities and supervises staff and volunteers. The role is akin to a chief executive, with one twist: the post is accountable not to shareholders or a founder but to the elected board, which is itself accountable to paying members. In this manner, strategic directives filter from members at the Assembly, through the Board, and on to the General Secretary
Lessons for the Global Movement
Some critics worry that democracy might impede nimble decision-making or divert energy from high-impact goals. Yet EA Norway’s record — attracting steady funding and successfully supporting members with their careers and donations — suggests otherwise.
Other Nordic EA organisations follow similar democratic practices, further indicating that Norway’s approach is neither accidental nor unique. For proponents of more robust institutions, the Norwegian example demonstrates how democracy can keep leadership accountable and engage members without bogging the organisation down in bureaucracy and squabbling or deviating from its core mission of benefiting others.
Whether this model could scale to contexts where democratic membership associations are less common is an open question. Still, EA Norway’s experience serves as an example of the possibilities for democratisation within the movement.
I am sympathetic to this argument vibes wise and I thought this was an elegant numerate utilitarian case for it. Part of my motivation is that I think it would be good if a lot of EA-ish values were a lot more mainstream. Like, I would even say that you probably get non-linear returns to scale in some important ways. You kind of need a critical mass of people to do certain things.
It feels like, necessarily, these organizations would also be about providing value to the members as well. That is a good thing.
I think there is something like a "but what if we get watered down too much" concern latent here. I can kind of see how this would happen, but I am also not that worried about it. The tent is already pretty big in some ways. Stuff like numerate utilitarianism, empiricism, broad moral circles, thoughtfulness, tough trade-offs doesn't seem in danger of going away soon. Probably EA growing would spread these ideas rather than shrink them.
Also, I just think that societies/people all over the world could significantly benefit from stronger third pillars and that the ideal versions of these sorts of community spaces would tend to share a lot of things in common with EA.
Picture it. The year is 2035 (9 years after the RSI near-miss event triggered the first Great Revolt). You ride your bitchin' electric scooter to the EA-adjacent community center where you and your friends co-work on a local voter awareness campaign, startup idea, or just a fun painting or whatever. An intentional community.
That sounds like a step towards the glorious transhumanist future to me, but maybe the margins on that are bad in practice and the community centers of my day dreams will remain merely EA-adjacent. Perhaps, I just need to move to a town with cooler libraries. I am really not sure what the Dao here is or where the official EA brand really fits into any of this.