EA Forum Bot Site
EA Forum

Take the 2025 EA Forum Survey to help inform our strategy and prioritiesTake the survey
Hide table of contents
Comment Permalink
JDBauman5
0
0

This looks really cool!

Reply
See in context
by DavidNash
5 min read 1

32

Career choiceGlobal health & developmentOpportunities to take actionPolicyApplication announcementsEconomic growthFellowships and internships
Frontpage
Show all topics

I'm organising a free 7-week program exploring different approaches to impact in global development. There will be both a virtual version and in-person (in London) version.

If this is something you may find useful (now or in the future), sign up to indicate interest and I will send out more info if enough people sign up. It would be helpful if you could also share with other individuals/organisations who may find this kind of program relevant.

Sign up to indicate interest

The Program

Through weekly readings and discussions, we'll examine multiple pathways to creating positive change at scale.

I've included more links than you'd be expected to read. It's to give a sense of the types of topics we could discuss each week, and for people to dive into after a discussion. Also if you have ideas on relevant articles/videos/etc for each topic, let me know.

 

  • Week 1 - A history of global development
    • How has poverty changed over the last two centuries? (and what was life like before 1825)
    • A history of global health - Our World in Data
    • 1940-80s
      • Bretton Woods institutions, United Nations, WHO, Marshall Plan, Green Revolution, vaccination campaigns, development economics
    • What has happened in the last few decades
      • Washington Consensus policies, rise of NGOs and civil society, rise of evidence-based development,  internet, mobile phones, and growth in China & India
    • Winning the war on child mortality - Hans Rosling
    • Why have some regions developed faster than others?
    • Which areas do you think were most transformative for human welfare?
      • Industrial revolution and mass production
      • The germ theory of disease and modern medicine
      • Spread of electricity and modern energy
      • Mass education and literacy
      • Scientific advancement and research methods
      • Spread of democracy and rights
      • Global trade and economic integration
      • Agricultural productivity
Our World in Data
  • Week 2 - Evidence-based interventions, RCTs, global health & charities
    • A history of RCTs
    • Global Health & Development: An Impact-Focused Overview
    • A history of JPAL
    • Comparing charities: How big is the difference?
    • PEPFAR and the Costs of Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • The Rapid Rise of the Randomistas and the Trouble with the RCTs
    • What makes RCTs the "gold standard" for evidence? What are their limitations?
    • What alternatives exist when RCTs aren't feasible?
    • What are the challenges in scaling interventions that worked well in trials?
    • How do we compare measurable and hard to measure interventions?

 

  • Week 3 - Economic growth
    • Global economic inequality - OWID
    • Economic Growth in LMICs - Open Philanthropy
    • Rethinking evidence and refocusing on growth in development economics - Lant Pritchett
    • How Asia Works - Joe Studwell
    • Poor Numbers: The Politics of Improving GDP Statistics in Africa  - Morten Jerven
    • How do you know how well the World is doing? - Yaw
    • Growth and the case against randomista development
    • Does growth improve wellbeing for the poorest?
    • What may not be captured by economic growth metrics?
    • Is it possible to identify reliable interventions to promote growth?
    • Is there anything neglected you could do as a donor or  with your career?

 

 

  • Week 5 - Startups and large firms
    • Why and how to start a for-profit company serving emerging markets
    • Want Growth? Kill Small Businesses - Karthik Tadepalli
    • Direct Work For-Profit Entrepreneurship is Underrated
    • When are market solutions more effective than other approaches?
    • How do we balance social impact with financial sustainability?
    • How neglected is this sector, will you be able to have counterfactual impact?

 

  • Week 6 - Innovation & science
    • Global Health R&D, Innovation Policy , Scientific Research - OP programs
    • Salt, Sugar, Water, Zinc: How Scientists Learned to Treat the 20th Century’s Biggest Killer of Children
    • How to get involved in metascience
    • Tom Kalil on Institutions for Innovation
    • Patrick Collinson - Progress
    • How do we identify and foster  innovation pathways?
    • How do we think about the counterfactual impact of supporting innovation?
    • How can we better direct innovation toward neglected problems?
    • What factors have historically enabled or hindered progress?
    • Is this an area where extra money/people will make a difference?

 

Agricultural drone in the Mekong River delta - Chiara Negrello
  • Week 7 - AI, data and the future of development

 

Each week combines curated readings, structured discussions and case studies. The time commitment is 2 hours per week, 1 hour of reading and 1 hour of discussion.


Who It's For

The program is relevant for:

  • Professionals outside of development considering a career transition
  • Global development professionals considering shifting into another part of development they are less familiar with
  • Anyone wanting to understand & discuss effective approaches to global development


Format

  • Duration: 7 weeks
  • Time Commitment: ~2 hours/week
  • Cost: Free
  • Startdate: March 2025
  • Two options:
    • Virtual Cohort: Weekly online sessions
    • London Cohort: Weekly in-person discussions

If you're interested in joining either cohort or a future version, you can express interest here.

 

Why?

There are quite a few programs for other areas[1], but I hadn't seen anything related to broader global development. Most EA related courses have a section on starting a charity or earning money to donate effectively but not much about the wider range of areas you can have impact, and the global development focused courses like MIT micromasters were generally at least 11 weeks and each one had a relatively narrow focus.

There didn't seem to be anything between broad EA and broad global development, even outside of EA (although if you know of one, that'd be useful to hear about). I'm hoping this could bridge that gap, and if this trial goes well it could be scaled up.

 

  1. ^
    • Bluedot for AI/biosecurity
    • AAC for animal advocacy
    • EA virtual programs for EA & the Precipice

32

0
0

Reactions

0
0
Mentioned in

More posts like this

Comments1


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
JDBauman5
0
0

This looks really cool!

Reply
[comment deleted]0
0
0
Deleted by CaptainAmerica,
More from DavidNash
37
A History of Global Development
DavidNash
· · 12m read
0
0
146
Nigeria's Missing 50 Million People
DavidNash
· · 14m read
17
17
137
Economic Growth - Donation suggestions and ideas
DavidNash
· · 9m read
29
29
View more
Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
This morning I was looking into Switzerland's new animal welfare labelling law. I was going through the list of abuses that are now required to be documented on labels, and one of them made me do a double-take: "Frogs: Leg removal without anaesthesia."  This confused me. Why are we talking about anaesthesia? Shouldn't the frogs be dead before having their legs removed? It turns out the answer is no; standard industry practice is to cut their legs off while they are fully conscious. They remain alive and responsive for up to 15 minutes afterward. As far as I can tell, there are zero welfare regulations in any major producing country. The scientific evidence for frog sentience is robust - they have nociceptors, opioid receptors, demonstrate pain avoidance learning, and show cognitive abilities including spatial mapping and rule-based learning.  It's hard to find data on the scale of this issue, but estimates put the order of magnitude at billions of frogs annually. I could not find any organisations working directly on frog welfare interventions.  Here are the organizations I found that come closest: * Animal Welfare Institute has documented the issue and published reports, but their focus appears more on the ecological impact and population decline rather than welfare reforms * PETA has conducted investigations and released footage, but their approach is typically to advocate for complete elimination of the practice rather than welfare improvements * Pro Wildlife, Defenders of Wildlife focus on conservation and sustainability rather than welfare standards This issue seems tractable. There is scientific research on humane euthanasia methods for amphibians, but this research is primarily for laboratory settings rather than commercial operations. The EU imports the majority of traded frog legs through just a few countries such as Indonesia and Vietnam, creating clear policy leverage points. A major retailer (Carrefour) just stopped selling frog legs after welfar
 ·  · 10m read
 · 
This is a cross post written by Andy Masley, not me. I found it really interesting and wanted to see what EAs/rationalists thought of his arguments.  This post was inspired by similar posts by Tyler Cowen and Fergus McCullough. My argument is that while most drinkers are unlikely to be harmed by alcohol, alcohol is drastically harming so many people that we should denormalize alcohol and avoid funding the alcohol industry, and the best way to do that is to stop drinking. This post is not meant to be an objective cost-benefit analysis of alcohol. I may be missing hard-to-measure benefits of alcohol for individuals and societies. My goal here is to highlight specific blindspots a lot of people have to the negative impacts of alcohol, which personally convinced me to stop drinking, but I do not want to imply that this is a fully objective analysis. It seems very hard to create a true cost-benefit analysis, so we each have to make decisions about alcohol given limited information. I’ve never had problems with alcohol. It’s been a fun part of my life and my friends’ lives. I never expected to stop drinking or to write this post. Before I read more about it, I thought of alcohol like junk food: something fun that does not harm most people, but that a few people are moderately harmed by. I thought of alcoholism, like overeating junk food, as a problem of personal responsibility: it’s the addict’s job (along with their friends, family, and doctors) to fix it, rather than the job of everyday consumers. Now I think of alcohol more like tobacco: many people use it without harming themselves, but so many people are being drastically harmed by it (especially and disproportionately the most vulnerable people in society) that everyone has a responsibility to denormalize it. You are not likely to be harmed by alcohol. The average drinker probably suffers few if any negative effects. My argument is about how our collective decision to drink affects other people. This post is not
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
Today, Forethought and I are releasing an essay series called Better Futures, here.[1] It’s been something like eight years in the making, so I’m pretty happy it’s finally out! It asks: when looking to the future, should we focus on surviving, or on flourishing? In practice at least, future-oriented altruists tend to focus on ensuring we survive (or are not permanently disempowered by some valueless AIs). But maybe we should focus on future flourishing, instead.  Why?  Well, even if we survive, we probably just get a future that’s a small fraction as good as it could have been. We could, instead, try to help guide society to be on track to a truly wonderful future.    That is, I think there’s more at stake when it comes to flourishing than when it comes to survival. So maybe that should be our main focus. The whole essay series is out today. But I’ll post summaries of each essay over the course of the next couple of weeks. And the first episode of Forethought’s video podcast is on the topic, and out now, too. The first essay is Introducing Better Futures: along with the supplement, it gives the basic case for focusing on trying to make the future wonderful, rather than just ensuring we get any ok future at all. It’s based on a simple two-factor model: that the value of the future is the product of our chance of “Surviving” and of the value of the future, if we do Survive, i.e. our “Flourishing”.  (“not-Surviving”, here, means anything that locks us into a near-0 value future in the near-term: extinction from a bio-catastrophe counts but if valueless superintelligence disempowers us without causing human extinction, that counts, too. I think this is how “existential catastrophe” is often used in practice.) The key thought is: maybe we’re closer to the “ceiling” on Survival than we are to the “ceiling” of Flourishing.  Most people (though not everyone) thinks we’re much more likely than not to Survive this century.  Metaculus puts *extinction* risk at about 4
Recent opportunities in Career choice
48
Funding needed to preserve critical malaria vaccine research
Seth Ari Sim-Son Hoffman
· · 3m read
6
6
19
GiveWell is hiring a Head of Finance
GiveWell
· · 1m read
0
0
16
Apply to SPAR Fall 2025—80+ projects!
Agustín Covarrubias 🔸, Topaz
· · 2m read
0
0
View more