If one company is charging $10,000 for a laptop and another company is charging $1,000 for a better laptop, the first company wouldn’t survive long. Many investments lose money while some return 1,000 times the initial investmentįurthermore, charities don’t have the same competitive dynamics as the private sector because it isn’t the beneficiary that pays for the intervention.A bestselling author far outsells the average author.The most profitable businesses are many many times more profitable than the average business.We’re used to seeing uneven distributions in all kinds of fields: Most people find this surprising, but it probably shouldn’t be. We’ve collated a list of examples at the bottom of this page, but first. In that case, it’s estimated that would have a negative effect, costing society $29,300 for that $100 invested. ![]() Suppose you were to spend that same $100 on trying to prevent juvenile offending using the “Scared Straight” program. A factor of almost one thousand.Īt least merit scholarships and new cancer drugs have positive effects – they still improve schooling and save lives. In comparison, new cancer drugs are generally recommended in Australia if their cost per year of healthy life saved is around $45,000-$75,000. That would seem like a pretty good deal, right? However, if you spent that $100 on school-based deworming treatments it would result in about 14 years of school – that’s almost one hundred times more schooling.įurthermore, that same deworming program could give an extra year of healthy life for roughly $28-$70 (according to charity evaluator GiveWell). Providing merit scholarships for girls would result in about a month or two of school attendance (0.15 years). How many additional years of school could that buy? Imagine you had $100 to spend to help improve school attendance of school children in low-income countries. For a more recent analysis of this topic, see 80,000 Hours' article: " How much do social problems differ in their effectiveness? A collection of all the studies we could find." Comparing charities We hope to update it as soon as we can, and still believe that the core argument is correct. This page contains some out-of-date information. Compiled from The Moral Imperative Towards Cost Effectiveness by Toby Ord. Intervention cost-effectiveness in global health in order of DALY per $1,000 on the y-axis, from the DCP2. ![]() ![]() The best charities can be at least ten times better than a typical charity within the same area, hundreds of times better than poor-performing charities, and the worst charities can do harm. However, the impact can vary wildly depending on where you donate. Your donations can do an astonishing amount of good. Comparing charities: How big is the difference?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |