Bio

Participation
2

I am a lecturer in public health at Halmstad University, Sweden. Since 2019, I have been helping Happier Lives Institute. My main interests are systemic change, tax policy, global health, climate change and public health. I made a forum post about green basic income, and it was the base for this input to the UN together with Cool Earth: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uAzSycfm190C1hnVDCnYTXK2d1tvw0WsbfE8RJYvw2U/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.4h2l20plkgwz

How others can help me

Help me start EA Systemic Change or collaborate when it comes to teaching students.

How I can help others

I am good at finding articles, I have much knowledge about public health and I have quite many connections in the EA community. I am also doing a little research and I have knowledge about things that may not be very common in the EA community. E.g. welfare systems, income equality, global mental health and so on. I am also good at teaching at the university. So I would gladly help if you need it!

Comments
27

When this was posted I would have said probably yes, now I say probably no.

I would say that we need to address the root causes in areas that are too complex to solve with simple solutions, e.g. biodiversity loss, since it is interconnected with many other systemic challenges. According to the assessment report about Nexus, which is the interconnections between the following crises: Climate change, biodiversity, water, food and health. According to the report, there are 7 trillion USD in subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, and damages to nature for 10-25 trillion USD in unaccounted costs. Also, there are 35 times more resources going to causes that destroy our planet than supports our nature. In this case it is hard to find a solution that doesn't address the root causes. But for individual diseases or more simple challenges, there may not be any need to address the root causes.

I think that it is a high risk that AI or something else will be a great threat for humanity within a short future. But I can't say how high the risk is or when in the future. But no matter how long or short time I have left, I would carry on like I always do. I spend time with my family and I love my job as a teacher at an university. I couldn't ask for more. I feel that there is nothing more I must do before I die. So I am grateful and happy every day. But... My parents have four houses in a forest in the middle of Sweden. So if the apocalypse comes, I have a place where it is a quite good chance for surviving.

I skimmed in your article and must say that I am impressed. I think it is important for the EA community to think about what planet and what society we want. I looked at the summary of the IPBES Nexus Assesment and it seems clear to me that our economic system doesn't work in its current state. That 7 trillion in subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, and damages on nature for 10-25 trillion in unaccounted costs is problematic. Also, the fact that there is 35 times more resources going to causes that destroys our planet than supports our nature shows that we need to do something. I think a realistic way might be national income, by Thomas Piketty. It is a global measurement instead of GDP. For example: “If you take 100 billion euros of oil from oil reserves underground or you take 100 billion euros in fish from the ocean, you have 100 billion euros of GDP, but you have zero euros of national income. And if in addition when you burn oil or gas you create global warming and you reduce the durability of life on earth, then if you put a price on the negative impact of these emissions you should have negative national income instead of positive GDP.” Buckton et al. (2024) give examples of other economic systems that might work and that are more or less capitalistic.

Hi Alexis! I think it is a wonderful idea and I would like to help you! I am kind of time constrained (having a one year old at home and working) but I will be able to give you advise. I am teaching public health at a Swedish university and I hold lectures about these topics. So I have some knowledge in this topic and would love to share it with you!

Thank you for a wonderful initiative! I think that many people will be happy about this!

I think that we should aim for using evidence based on reality and not try to change our ways because we want to appeal to different political groups. That doesn't mean that we can find cause areas that are more interesting for different political groups. I guess that many conservatives might be skeptical to some paths in the EA movement that involves areas like animal welfare, climate change and raising some types of taxes and health policies (e.g. the Swedish right actively work against climate change mitigation, animal welfare and health policies), which some EA organisations promote.

But as many people have pointed out already in the comments, there are many interesting areas for conservatives as well and I think we should welcome people on different parts of the political spectrum. Since the EA community is very left leaning, I think it might be easier to recruit people from the left. The problem there is that the left might be skeptical to EA because of the lack of focus on systemic change or welfare systems. But I think that the Effective Institutions Project and Effective Environmentalism might be able to reduce that kind of critique in the future.

Thank you, I am happy that it was helpful! I am just an ordinary university teacher without a PhD so it was the first time someone called me professor! :) I wish you luck with finding the right path for you! No matter what path you choose, I think you will do great things and have a large impact! :)

Thank you for your post! I will try to give you as good advice as I can. I teach public health at a university in Sweden so I am a little biased towards global health probably.

Depending on you think is interesting and meaningful, you should choose what you like. As you are good at math, maybe statistics or health economics is a good way for you? I think that no matter what cause area you choose, it is probably good to be able to make a cost-effectiveness analysis. 

Do you want to start your own organisation or choose an already existing? Volunteering at an organisation or in the effective altruism community might be more important than what education you choose. Your skills and motivation is very important. One skill that might be good in the future is to apply for grants... If it is something you like, of course. I chose to become an university teacher, since I think that I will have many students who are more capable of making great things than I am, but I can give them the tools. I think it is the advice I would give a younger version of myself. But what you think makes you and your skills unique and what you think is fun and important is what matters most. You already have the EA mindset so whatever path you choose will probably be great! :)

 

Kind regards,

Ulf Graf

Load more