Here is a timeline of the wild-animal suffering (WAS) movement which I originally wrote in 2018. I recently updated the timeline with some more recent events. The timeline has major contributions from Mati Roy and Blue and some minor contributions from Vipul Naik and Issa Rice. Here are some of the major developments in the history of the movement, quoted from the article:

Big picture
pre-1970: Wild-animal suffering is occasionally mentioned by philosophers as an example of the amorality of nature. In general, there is little discussion of whether humans should intervene to improve the situation.
1970–2004: After the emergence of the contemporary animal rights/welfare movement, wild-animal suffering is discussed by animal rights philosophers and their critics. The critics consider intervention in nature a reductio ad absurdum of animal rights, while some animal rights authors take it to be a serious moral issue. Most discussion takes place through journals, and discussion participants are mostly academics.
2005–2012: During this period, interest in wild-animal suffering blossoms with the help of the Internet. Prolific and passionate individuals such as Brian Tomasik, David Pearce, and Oscar Horta play a leading role in creating content and birthing online communities. The academic moral philosophy community also continues debating the issue.
2013–2016: Organizations begin to form that focus on wild-animal suffering, research, and advocacy (as either a primary or secondary focus). Publications reated to wild animals come from a mix of individuals and organizations. Some organizations use prizes to incentivize work on wild-animal suffering, with mixed results. The nascent effective altruism community exposes more people to wild-animal suffering earlier on in their lives.
2017–2020: In this era, a large share of the production of research related to wild-animal suffering is by individuals as part of their work for organizations. Key organizations that sponsor a large number of publications are: Utility Farm, Wild-Animal Suffering Research (the two would later merge into the Wild Animal Initiative), Animal Ethics, Sentience Institute, and (starting late 2018) Rethink Priorities. The ecosystem is sustained by grant money from the Effective Altruism Animal Welfare Fund, Animal Charity Evaluators' Animal Advocacy Research Fund, and individual donors.

Any thoughts or feedback would be greatly appreciated!

59

0
0
1

Reactions

0
0
1
Comments9
Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

Impressive timeline!

Minor feedback: it could be nice to have an overall name for each of those big picture eras. Also I remember that Richard Dawkins has written about the suffering of wild animals but it isn't in your timeline: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_animal_suffering#Extent_of_suffering_in_nature

Apologies if that's an intentional omission.

Dawkins wrote about it and said "it must be so." Maybe the timeline is about people who explicitly challenged that perception.

Thanks, I've added Dawkins's River Out of Eden. I agree with Lukas Gloor that Dawkins doesn't challenge the perception of WAS as necessary, but then again many of the other early entries don't. I think it's worthy of inclusion here.

I like this quotation from the book which I think is quite powerful:

"The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored."

Amazing work, thanks for writing this up!

Nice and helpful -- thanks!

I've always been fascinated by the biblical vision of a perfect world which features the lion and the lamb (etc) living together peacefully: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_lamb_and_lion

It might be interesting to sift through the history of humanity in order to collect further pre-1970 visions which lament WAS or which feature a utopia without WAS. I know extremely little about Buddhism, Hinduism, etc but given the links between humans and animals via rebirths: isn't the Nirvana as a state without suffering also the ultimate vision for wild animals? Also, there is the biblical new testament reference to the *whole* creation groaning and waiting for redemption.

thanks for the summary. useful for me since i dont know a lot about this subject yet. :)

would definitely also enjoy a bit more detail about the results of the research of the last years. like what are the major camps, arguments, open questions etc

ACE's Effective Animal Advocacy Fund (full disclosure, I run this fund) also funds WAW orgs. ACE's EAA Fund is separate from ACE's Research Fund and not affiliated with EA Animal Welfare Fund.

I think I already included all relevant EAA Fund entries under April and November 2019 in the timeline. Is there anything I'm missing?

Edit: I just realized that you were referring to the "Big picture" section. Added!

Curated and popular this week
 ·  · 22m read
 · 
The cause prioritization landscape in EA is changing. Prominent groups have shut down, others have been founded, and everyone’s trying to figure out how to prepare for AI. This is the third in a series of posts critically examining the state of cause prioritization and strategies for moving forward. Executive Summary * An increasingly common argument is that we should prioritize work in AI over work in other cause areas (e.g. farmed animal welfare, reducing nuclear risks) because the impending AI revolution undermines the value of working in those other areas. * We consider three versions of the argument: * Aligned superintelligent AI will solve many of the problems that we currently face in other cause areas. * Misaligned AI will be so disastrous that none of the existing problems will matter because we’ll all be dead or worse. * AI will be so disruptive that our current theories of change will all be obsolete, so the best thing to do is wait, build resources, and reformulate plans until after the AI revolution. * We identify some key cruxes of these arguments, and present reasons to be skeptical of them. A more direct case needs to be made for these cruxes before we rely on them in making important cause prioritization decisions. * Even on short timelines, the AI transition may be a protracted and patchy process, leaving many opportunities to act on longer timelines. * Work in other cause areas will often make essential contributions to the AI transition going well. * Projects that require cultural, social, and legal changes for success, and projects where opposing sides will both benefit from AI, will be more resistant to being solved by AI. * Many of the reasons why AI might undermine projects in other cause areas (e.g. its unpredictable and destabilizing effects) would seem to undermine lots of work on AI as well. * While an impending AI revolution should affect how we approach and prioritize non-AI (and AI) projects, doing this wisel
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
TLDR When we look across all jobs globally, many of us in the EA community occupy positions that would rank in the 99.9th percentile or higher by our own preferences within jobs that we could plausibly get.[1] Whether you work at an EA-aligned organization, hold a high-impact role elsewhere, or have a well-compensated position which allows you to make significant high effectiveness donations, your job situation is likely extraordinarily fortunate and high impact by global standards. This career conversations week, it's worth reflecting on this and considering how we can make the most of these opportunities. Intro I think job choice is one of the great advantages of development. Before the industrial revolution, nearly everyone had to be a hunter-gatherer or a farmer, and they typically didn’t get a choice between those. Now there is typically some choice in low income countries, and typically a lot of choice in high income countries. This already suggests that having a job in your preferred field puts you in a high percentile of job choice. But for many in the EA community, the situation is even more fortunate. The Mathematics of Job Preference If you work at an EA-aligned organization and that is your top preference, you occupy an extraordinarily rare position. There are perhaps a few thousand such positions globally, out of the world's several billion jobs. Simple division suggests this puts you in roughly the 99.9999th percentile of job preference. Even if you don't work directly for an EA organization but have secured: * A job allowing significant donations * A position with direct positive impact aligned with your values * Work that combines your skills, interests, and preferred location You likely still occupy a position in the 99.9th percentile or higher of global job preference matching. Even without the impact perspective, if you are working in your preferred field and preferred country, that may put you in the 99.9th percentile of job preference
 ·  · 5m read
 · 
Summary Following our co-founder Joey's recent transition announcement we're actively searching for exceptional leadership to join our C-level team and guide AIM into its next phase. * Find the full job description here * To apply, please visit the following link * Recommend someone you think could be a great fit here * Location: London strongly preferred. Remote candidates willing to work from London at least 3 months a year and otherwise overlapping at least 6 hours with 9 am to 5 pm BST will be considered. We are happy to sponsor UK work visas. * Employment Type: Full-time (35 hours) * Application Deadline: rolling until August 10, 2025 * Start Date: as soon as possible (with some flexibility for the right candidate) * Compensation: £45,000–£90,000 (for details on our compensation policy see full job description) Leadership Transition On March 15th, Joey announced he's stepping away from his role as CEO of AIM, with his planned last day as December 1st. This follows our other co-founder Karolina's completed transition in 2024. Like Karolina, Joey will transition to a board member role while we bring in new leadership to guide AIM's next phase of growth. The Opportunity AIM is at a unique inflection point. We're seeking an exceptional leader to join Samantha and Devon on our C-level team and help shape the next era of one of the most impactful organizations in the EA ecosystem. With foundations established (including a strong leadership team and funding runway), we're ready to scale our influence dramatically and see many exciting pathways to do so. While the current leadership team has a default 2026 strategic plan, we are open to a new CEO proposing radical departures. This might include: * Proposing alternative ways to integrate or spin off existing or new programs * Deciding to spend more resources trialling more experimental programs, or double down on Charity Entrepreneurship * Expanding geographically or deepening impact in existing region