EA Forum Bot Site
EA Forum

GIVING SEASON 2024
Hide table of contents
by Froolow
1 min read3 answers 0

26

Building effective altruismCause prioritizationCost-effectiveness analysisCriticism of effective altruism
Frontpage

Hi all,

A friend linked me to the 'red team' contest, and since I undertake cost-effectiveness modelling professionally I thought that would be a useful place I could contribute, potentially.

I'm not an active member of the EA community, so I'd like to ensure I don't straw man the state of the art here; would it be fair to say GiveWell's evaluation of some of its most cost-effective charities represents what the EA community would consider to be a high-quality cost-effectiveness model? If not, what would the EA community consider to be a high-quality cost-effectiveness model in an EA context?

https://www.givewell.org/how-we-work/our-criteria/cost-effectiveness/cost-effectiveness-models

(To be clear, the model is great but I think there are a number of areas where it could be improved upon!)

Thanks so much,

Froolow

26

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Mentioned in
New Answer
New Comment

3 Answers sorted by
Top

Lorenzo Buonanno🔸

9
0
0

I would say that GiveWell's cost-effectiveness analyses are considered excellent (here is a guide from 2019), but they should be taken in context.
From https://www.givewell.org/how-we-work/our-criteria/cost-effectiveness/cost-effectiveness-models "we consider our cost-effectiveness numbers to be extremely rough."
"There are many limitations to cost-effectiveness estimates, and we do not assess charities only—or primarily—based on their estimated cost-effectiveness."

And this old blog post: https://blog.givewell.org/2011/08/18/why-we-cant-take-expected-value-estimates-literally-even-when-theyre-unbiased/

They definitely have a much smaller weight than what I first assumed: I initially thought all GiveWell did was to make cost-effectiveness analyses of dozens of charities and recommend the most cost-effective ones. It seems that's completely wrong, and they rely a lot on other criteria and less quantitative or public information.

You might also be interested in the series: Concerns about AMF from GiveWell reading (especially Part 3 and Part 2)

And this FAQ from 2017 from GiveWell

Froolow5
0
0

Thank you - really helpful additional information and very useful to have it confirmed that GiveWell are considered high quality models by the EA community. Really appreciate it.

Reply
Vasco Grilo🔸2
0
0

Hi Lorenzo,

They definitely have a much smaller weight than what I first assumed: I initially thought all GiveWell did was to make cost-effectiveness analyses of dozens of charities and recommend the most cost-effective ones. It seems that's completely wrong, and they rely a lot on other criteria and less quantitative or public information.

I think GiveWell actually puts a major weight on their cost-effectiveness analyses. Elie Hassenfeld (co-founder and CEO of GiveWell) mentioned in the Clearer Thinking podcast that (emphasis mine):

ELIE: You know, there's a

... (read more)
Reply

Gavin

4
0
0

I'd say Michael Dickens and Sam Nolan are probably peak performance. 

This is a classic, devastating methodological piece too.

Froolow4
0
0

Thank you - these are really helpful to help me understand. On the Sam Nolan piece especially quantifying uncertainty was one of the biggest critiques I had of the GiveWell model so I'm glad this has already been considered!

Reply
2
NunoSempere
This has been considered by Sam, but it's still a valid criticism of GiveWell's models as they are now.
Stefan_Schubert2
0
0

I would guess that other orgs besides GiveWell also have cost-effectiveness models/analyses.

Reply
4
Gavin
Couldn't find any public OP analyses on a cursory look
4
Stefan_Schubert
I guess that if one wants to red team effective altruist cost-effectiveness analyses that inform, e.g. giving decisions, non-public analyses may be relevant.

Gavin

2
0
0

See also

https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/kyJtzRHd6hLzfxshd/announcing-the-legal-priorities-project-writing-competition

More from Froolow
View more
Curated and popular this week
Relevant opportunities
View more