One piece of feedback: my view on "resource" allocation depends pretty significantly on whether I'm thinking of mainly financial-type resources or people-type resources. There's obviously some, albeit incomplete, fungability between the two. Anyway, I found the resource-allocation question hard to answer because I found it hard to consider "resources" as an abstraction.
Thanks! I agree that allocating a percentage of "resources", where this contains very different kinds of resources (money and labour) can be difficult. Still, we wanted this to largely match the question asked at the Meta Coordination Forum, which also combined this, so we matched their wording.
Thanks team! I can't keep track of which email address I've used from year to year on the surveys, do you plan to send an email to those who filled in the previous surveys with a link to fill it in again which pre-fills the email address? That'd be wonderful if so 🙌
Thanks Luke! Everyone who opted to receive additional surveys by email in the last EA Survey, will have received an email with this survey (December 11-12th). We find they often get sent to the spam folder though, so you might want to check.
If you follow the link in that email, it won't automatically pre-fill your email or automatically track you, but you will be able to know which email address it was sent to, so that you can enter that one.
We are announcing a supplementary survey to gather timely information from the EA community before the next EA Survey in 2024.
This survey will contain questions related to:
Community health and satisfaction with the EA community
Cause prioritization and how EA resources should be allocated
Demographics (which can optionally be skipped if you provided your email address last time and opt for us to link your responses)
We are also sending out a separate survey, requested by CEA’s Community Health and Special Projects team, focusing primarily on sexual harassment and gender-related experiences:
4. EA Climate and Harassment Survey
You can take the first survey here. This will give you the option to take the Climate and Harassment Survey immediately afterwards, without having to answer the demographic questions twice.
The first survey should be significantly shorter than the main EA Survey, depending on how much detail you choose to provide in the open comment questions and whether you skip the demographic section by providing your email address. The EA Climate and Harassment Survey is estimated to take between 5 and 30 minutes depending on how much detail you choose to provide.
Both surveys are planned to close on 1st January 2024.
Acknowledgements
The post is a project of Rethink Priorities, a global priority think-and-do tank, aiming to do good at scale. We research and implement pressing opportunities to make the world better. We act upon these opportunities by developing and implementing strategies, projects, and solutions to key issues. We do this work in close partnership with foundations and impact-focused non-profits or other entities. If you're interested in Rethink Priorities' work, please consider subscribing to our newsletter. You can explore our completed public work here.
Cross-posted from my Substack.
Epistemic status: I’ve puzzled over this for a long time but I’m not sure I came to the right answers. I'm sharing this partly because it might help others work on resource allocation, but mostly because some smarter reader might tell me how to do it better.
TL;DR:
* I he...
With the AI windfall, mental health may be taken increasingly seriously by mainstream EA. There’s increasingly room to explore the cause area and answer some of the biggest uncertainties; at the same time, costs of the most effective interventions are continuing to fall. StrongMinds is now treating for ~$35, about a third of GiveWell’s best guess from a few years ago, and is expected to...
This post is part of the Cross-Cause Fund (CCF) series by Rethink Priorities — a sequence of articles dedicated to effective giving across philanthropic areas.
TL;DR:
There is a seemingly plausible argument that do...
One piece of feedback: my view on "resource" allocation depends pretty significantly on whether I'm thinking of mainly financial-type resources or people-type resources. There's obviously some, albeit incomplete, fungability between the two. Anyway, I found the resource-allocation question hard to answer because I found it hard to consider "resources" as an abstraction.
Thanks! I agree that allocating a percentage of "resources", where this contains very different kinds of resources (money and labour) can be difficult. Still, we wanted this to largely match the question asked at the Meta Coordination Forum, which also combined this, so we matched their wording.