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
Clifford2
0
0

Maybe I was being too negative in counting the chapters that make a go of trying and then end up fizzling out. If you manage to run a year of events with consistent effort then perhaps getting one or two pledges is fair.

3-5 is higher than when I was working with chapters, but great that it's that high now.

Yep, completely agree with the overarching point. Keep up the top work.

Reply
See in context
by jonathancourtney
3 min read 8

12

Giving What We Can
Frontpage

I think most of us in the EA movement have a sense that EA chapters are valuable, but its often hard to tell how valuable they are.  Well, in this blog post, I am going to argue that they are incredibly valuable.  So much so, that starting a Giving What We Can/EA chapter could be one of the most effective things you can do with your time.  Some rough calculations show that establishing even a relatively small chapter at a university could result in producing 100,000 USD for effective charities.  Similar calculations lead me to think that time starting a community based chapter can be worth 110 USD/hour of work.  These are both incredible results, and I hope they inspire many of you to start up a new chapter!  


The Importance of Chapters


Chapters are important because they represent a natural way for Giving What We Can and EA to grow.  Given our experiences with chapters so far, we think it is reasonable to expect a new Giving What We Can Chapter to produce 3-5 new members in their first year. This represents an absolutely incredible amount of money moved to the most effective charities. Even by conservative estimate, we should value this at $60,000-$100,000 USD moved to the most effective charities. (We have settled on valuing the pledge at $20,000USD to accommodate counterfactual giving and possible attrition rates.  This is a very conservative figure, as the median earning individual in the US will give away over $150,000USD  over the course of their career through the pledge.  That said, valuing the pledge quite conservatively at $20,000USD only helps to strengthen the conclusions of this post- if anything we might expect the real value of money moved to the most effective charities to be much higher than the numbers considered here)  


Even if we assume that running a chapter is quite time intensive, requiring say 40 hours a month, this means that you will still be producing 120-200 dollars of value per hour of work- an incredible result!   The most successful chapters do much better than this. During Cambridge’s exceptionally successful event this December, over 100 individuals, took the pledge representing over $2 million USD going to cost-effective charities.  This is an absolutely amazing result for students to be able to have, and it really shows the potential of chapters.  


If you are an EA, I argue that one of the most impactful things you can do with your time is to start a chapter.


If we turn our attention from University chapters, to community chapters, the same incredible returns still seem to apply. Most community chapters focus their time on social events.  Recently, Sam Hilton, head of the London chapter, explained that he runs their successful chapter on only 30 minutes a month, which is quite an achievement!  But even if we assume that organising a community chapter will take much more time than this, it turns out to be an incredibly valuable activity. If over the course of a year your social events lead to just one person in the group taking the pledge, that represents $20,000 USD for the most cost effective charities.  Lets say it takes 15 hours a month to organise these activities (30x more time than Sam’s figure). That is 180 hours of work over the course of the year producing $20,000 USD. That means you earn roughly 110 dollars/hour for the most effective charities.  Just to put that in perspective, this represents the same value added, per hour, as someone earning $440,000 USD a year pursuing earning to give at 50% of their income.  


Sufficed to say this is an incredible fact.  It clearly paints a picture of how unbelievably effective working on EA Movement growth is, insofar as this movement growth translates into people taking the pledge.  


Start a chapter today!


I hope this post has inspired you to start a chapter at your city or at your university!  As I mentioned, by starting a chapter at your university or in your city, you could potentially move tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to the most effective charities.  


In my next post, I will be addressing some of the concerns that often prevent people from starting up a chapter.  One concern people often express is that they don't know how to properly start up a chapter, and feel intimated by the potential difficulty of it.  Luckily, Giving What We Can has shifted our outreach strategy, in part, to try and address this concern. Our outreach strategy will now be much more Chapter focused, I will be spending most of my time communicating with current chapters, and supporting people starting out new chapters.


If you are interested in starting a chapter, please email me and/or fill out this form. I will be happy to work with you- sharing best practices, directing you to other EAs in your area, and otherwise doing all that I can to help make your chapter a success!

 

2015 is going to be a big year for EA- let’s make it even bigger by pursuing big wins like starting up successful chapters!

12

0
0

Reactions

0
0

More posts like this

Comments8


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Clifford6
0
0

I'm a big fan of starting new chapters as I've discussed with Jon.

Just thought I'd flag that this seemed over optimistic:

"we think it is reasonable to expect a new Giving What We Can Chapter to produce 3-5 new members in their first year"

In my experience of working with GWWC chapters the median chapter produced 0 members a year because it's hard to get things off the ground. Even the chapters who are putting a lot of effort in do well to get 1 or 2 people to pledge.

I don't say this to undermine the article - I think the points can still apply if you get one person to pledge. I just want to make clear that if you start a chapter and one person pledges in a year that's awesome and you've probably done a v good job.

Reply
jonathancourtney2
0
0

A good point! The 3-5 number averages over a number of chapters, many of whom have been running for several years and are well established, and so is likely on the optimistic side.

I absolutely agree with your point that if your chapter produces 1 pledge, that is an amazing achievement that should be congratulated! That said, I don't think it is right to say that the median chapter produces 0 pledges a year- most chapters which start up and run a successful first year on average result in at least one or two pledges. I should also note that my analysis ignores any flow-through effects of those people at the university who become interested in EA from the chapter's activity- these are likely also quite large although harder to calculate!

All that being said- the important common ground here is that chapters are awesome, and any chapters which get even a single pledge are doing a very good job!

Reply
Clifford2
0
0

Maybe I was being too negative in counting the chapters that make a go of trying and then end up fizzling out. If you manage to run a year of events with consistent effort then perhaps getting one or two pledges is fair.

3-5 is higher than when I was working with chapters, but great that it's that high now.

Yep, completely agree with the overarching point. Keep up the top work.

Reply
John_Salvatier4
0
0

A counter force is that at least some of those people would have found EA anyway or found GiveWell and donated to effective charities.

However, for lots of people (for example, me) the in person connection is going to make them a lot more excited than just finding out about the movement in the abstract. In my case, that's made me donate substantially more than I would otherwise.

Reply
AGB 🔸6
0
0

One person I introduced to the EA London group framed this as 'it's not that I wouldn't have found this and been interested in it anyway, eventually, but you probably sped up that process by 6 months to a year'. That doesn't strike me as a crazy estimate, and such reasoning leads to similar practical conclusions I think.

Reply
jonathancourtney3
0
0

Agreed- part of valuing the pledge at $20,000US (rather than the $150,000US that the median earner would donate over their life time) is an attempt to capture this sort of counter-factual concern.

I also totally agree about your point about personal connections- I think many people find that they do a lot to motivate them to do more for EA- just another way that chapters are awesome!

Reply
John_Sturm2
0
0

Hi all! I'm John. I was co-president of the Harvard EA group for the last 2 years.

I agree strongly that starting a chapter is an incredibly valuable thing to do.

I just want to add that much of the impact of a chapter--and at universities, arguably, most of the impact--can come from influencing the career choices that members will make (whether or not they become GWWC members) and the choices that they will make later on, in whatever careers they choose. This article might make a reader think that chapters' only impact is through donations.

I think it's important to account for the importance of having people who will actually do object level things or who can think critically about what decisions are the right ones, especially if we believe that EA will grow rapidly in the coming years. This is even more relevant if we are worried that EA will become more herd-like as it spreads.

Reply
weeatquince1
0
0

I think one of the biggest impacts of starting a chapter (in a city) is the small probability of outreaching to someone with a very large opportunity to do a lot of good - whether they are indepently wealth, in politics, work for a philanthropic fund, etc.

Reply
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
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
Note: This post was crossposted from the Open Philanthropy Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. ---------------------------------------- > Why ending the worst abuses of factory farming is an issue ripe for moral reform I recently joined Dwarkesh Patel’s podcast to discuss factory farming. I hope you’ll give it a listen — and consider supporting his fundraiser for FarmKind’s Impact Fund. (Dwarkesh is matching all donations up to $250K; use the code “dwarkesh”.) We discuss two contradictory views about factory farming that produce the same conclusion: that its end is either inevitable or impossible. Some techno-optimists assume factory farming will vanish in the wake of AGI. Some pessimists see reforming it as a hopeless cause. Both camps arrive at the same conclusion: fatalism. If factory farming is destined to end, or persist, then what’s the point in fighting it? I think both views are wrong. In fact, I think factory farming sits in the ideal position for moral reform. Because its end is neither inevitable nor impossible, it offers a unique opportunity for advocacy to change the trajectory of human moral progress. Not inevitable Dwarkesh raised an objection to working on factory farming that I often hear from techno-optimists who care about the issue: isn’t its end inevitable? Some cite the long arc of moral progress; others the promise of vast technological change like cultivated meat or Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) which surpasses human capabilities. It’s true that humanity has achieved incredible moral progress for humans. But that progress was never inevitable — it was the result of moral and political reform as much as technology. And that moral progress mostly hasn’t yet extended to animals. For them, the long moral arc of history has so far only bent downward. Technology may one day end factory farming, just as cars liberated w
 ·  · 1m read
 · 
This is a personal essay about my failed attempt to convince effective altruists to become socialists. I started as a convinced socialist who thought EA ignored the 'root causes' of poverty by focusing on charity instead of structural change. After studying sociology and economics to build a rigorous case for socialism, the project completely backfired as I realized my political beliefs were largely psychological coping mechanisms. Here are the key points: * Understanding the "root cause" of a problem doesn't necessarily lead to better solutions - Even if capitalism causes poverty, understanding "dynamics of capitalism" won't necessarily help you solve it * Abstract sociological theories are mostly obscurantist bullshit - Academic sociology suffers from either unrealistic mathematical models or vague, unfalsifiable claims that don't help you understand or change the world * The world is better understood as misaligned incentives rather than coordinated oppression - Most social problems stem from coordination failures and competing interests, not a capitalist class conspiring against everyone else * Individual variation undermines class-based politics - People within the same "class" have wildly different cognitive traits, interests, and beliefs, making collective action nearly impossible * Political beliefs serve important psychological functions - They help us cope with personal limitations and maintain self-esteem, often at the expense of accuracy * Evolution shaped us for competition, not truth - Our brains prioritize survival, status, and reproduction over understanding reality or being happy * Marx's insights, properly applied, undermine the Marxist political project - His theory of ideological formation aligns with evolutionary psychology, but when applied to individuals rather than classes, it explains why the working class will not overthrow capitalism. In terms of ideas, I don’t think there’s anything too groundbreaking in this essay. A lot of the
Relevant opportunities
4
Research Engineer @ Timaeus
Sara Recktenwald, Jesse Hoogland, Stan van Wingerden
· · 3m read
0
0
38
The Bone-Chilling Evil of Factory Farming
Bentham's Bulldog
· · 7m read
0
0
20
European Progress Conference
Ben Anderson, Berke
· · 2m read
0
0
View more