What's your take on when a promising intervention seems cost-effective enough to be tried? Do you think we should be using something akin to GiveWell's approach, piloting stuff that's estimated to be, e.g., ~10x more cost-effective than further cage-free campaigns, or...? I realise your opinion on this might not correspond to OP's overall stance, but I'd love to hear your thoughts about such existent and upcoming benchmarks and thresholds within EAA. Thank you!
Thanks for providing these external benchmarks and making it easier to compare! Do you mind if I updated the text to include a reference to your comments?
Indeed, since these were initial estimates, we excluded reporting the other pain intensities to keep it brief. However, once we go through the follow-up data and have the second set of estimates, we'll make sure to include all of the ranges, so that more comprehensive comparisons could be made. But my understanding is that for water and feed, it could be ~1:5:7 (disabling:hurtful:annoying) and ~1:1:0.1 for heat stress.
But your caveat is very important - we've only just identified this as an interesting intervention for the Global South, the feasibility of cost effectively mitigating such welfare issues remains untested.
Definitely... We expected no effect at worst, so at least it was trialled small and in a well-controlled manner! Do share if you have opportunities, so that it's not repeated or rolled out somewhere. Thanks!
We'll see what the data show and post an update once we make a decision.
Thanks for doing this AMA, Lewis!
What's your take on when a promising intervention seems cost-effective enough to be tried? Do you think we should be using something akin to GiveWell's approach, piloting stuff that's estimated to be, e.g., ~10x more cost-effective than further cage-free campaigns, or...? I realise your opinion on this might not correspond to OP's overall stance, but I'd love to hear your thoughts about such existent and upcoming benchmarks and thresholds within EAA. Thank you!
Thanks for providing these external benchmarks and making it easier to compare! Do you mind if I updated the text to include a reference to your comments?
Indeed, since these were initial estimates, we excluded reporting the other pain intensities to keep it brief. However, once we go through the follow-up data and have the second set of estimates, we'll make sure to include all of the ranges, so that more comprehensive comparisons could be made. But my understanding is that for water and feed, it could be ~1:5:7 (disabling:hurtful:annoying) and ~1:1:0.1 for heat stress.
But your caveat is very important - we've only just identified this as an interesting intervention for the Global South, the feasibility of cost effectively mitigating such welfare issues remains untested.
Is it just me or is the map image link broken?
Definitely... We expected no effect at worst, so at least it was trialled small and in a well-controlled manner! Do share if you have opportunities, so that it's not repeated or rolled out somewhere. Thanks!
We'll see what the data show and post an update once we make a decision.
Thanks for putting this together, Ren!
Double link for Animal Advocacy in the Age of AI (EA Forum), I think.
Thanks for the feedback Tristan. Yes, really happy with the hire!
Great idea with the narrative-type write-up! I definitely see how it could read better.
Thanks for your support, Charles! Y2 should really give us more insight into what's possible.
Thanks for sharing this - interesting! Would your opinion on the mandatory use of CCTV change significantly if you considered on-farm CCTV instead?
Thanks for the feedback, pete! I've just gotten rid of AW. We'll read it once more to see where we can reduce the use of some of the others, too.
Thanks for your kind words and support!