Cross-posted from my Substack.
Epistemic status: Iāve puzzled over this for a long time but Iām 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...
This post is part of the Cross-Cause Fund (CCF) seriesĀ by Rethink Priorities ā a sequence of articles dedicated to effective giving across philanthropic areas.
TL;DR:Ā
There is a seemingly plausible argument that do...
TL;DR: We lack high-quality evidence on what reduces animal product consumption, and I see current academic incentives as part of the reason. Drawing on my experience as a PhD researcher, I describe six ways academic incentives misalign with what animal advocates need:
* 1) research questions follow the literature rather than practitioner decision relevance;
* 2) health- and climate-motivated research leads to disproportional attention to red meat and neglect o...
Would it be possible to know a breakdown of the grants by geography and outcome type?
We are still working on the map visualizing grant recipient locations but hope to have it published online within the next few weeks. As for the outcome types, does this bar chart illustrate what you're looking for?
Note that some of the 49 grants fall under more than one outcome. We have more info about how we define these outcomes here.
Hi Erika, thanks for you reponse. I did see this graph, but the map is what I'd be interested in, and specifically looking at the distribution of outcome type(s) by geography.
Thanks for clarifying, I had a feeling that is what you meant. I will let you know when the map is published :)
Here is a link to the webpage with the map embed. You can also view it directly via this Data Studio dashboard. We weren't able to parse the outcome types by geographic location, but we are looking at other software we can use. For now, at least, you can see the grant amounts by geographic location. I will keep you posted.