Climate research in effective altruism

By Rethink Priorities, Greer Gosnell @ 2024-07-15T17:44 (+30)

This is a linkpost to https://rethinkpriorities.org/publications/climate-research-in-effective-altruism

Editorial note

The Global Health and Development (GHD) team at Rethink Priorities (RP) periodically assesses its approach to impactful research and exploring promising lines of work going forward. This report is an output of one such exercise for the cause area of climate change and, therefore, differs from the conventional research outputs of the Global Health and Development team, including in its more subjective tone and its attempted overview of the approaches of the effective altruism (EA) aligned climate community. 

This output was originally produced over a two-week period in January 2023, though some information may be more recent, e.g., if an organization we describe subsequently provided information to us directly during their review of this document prior to its publication.

Greer Gosnell — RP’s resident climate specialist — is the point person for this work and the lead author on this output. Its contents should be considered to be her perspective. There may be some diversity of views within the organization.

Key takeaways

• Founders Pledge (FP) and Giving Green (GG) are the two most prominent EA organizations with a track record of conducting research and making recommendations on climate change.
  • GG focuses on mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions to minimize human suffering, while FP focuses on minimizing expected climate damage, or “probability-weighted damage across worlds.”
  • My best guess is that these two organizations have likely collectively influenced $50 million to $100 million in donations to date (updated in the second half of 2023), with further funding of about $10 million to $20 million committed.
  • Some other currently or historically relevant EA organizations include SoGive, Open Philanthropy, Effektiv Spenden, and Let’s Fund. Effektiv Spenden, a regrantor, relies significantly on FP’s research, and Let’s Fund has made at least one climate recommendation in the past but is likely no longer involved in climate research.
• In my view, a major missing component of most research conducted in EA climate and global health and development (GHD) to date is the limited consideration of co-benefits across these and other related topics (e.g., particulate matter reduction or animal welfare improvements arising from efforts to mitigate climate change, and vice versa).
• The EA climate sphere may also benefit from “offering” research and recommendations tailored to different worldviews or preferences, such as neartermist versus longtermist or level of risk aversion.
• Assuming our ongoing research supports our current belief that there are neglected climate change interventions that are both high-impact and cost-effective relative to other GHD interventions, RP’s GHD team may develop and pursue its own climate research strategy that capitalizes on RP’s comparative advantages. Based on the research that informed this report, initial ideas include:
  • Research to better gauge comparative impacts and giving dynamics within and across climate change and GHD interventions;
  • Research to resolve decision-relevant uncertainties in the EA climate sphere;
  • Strategizing and outreach to grow the pipeline of high-skilled (non-)EA climate researchers;
  • Collaboration with reputable organizations and academics on primary research to improve our understanding of interventions’ impact and cost-effectiveness; and,
  • Assessing, conducting, or supporting EA-style investigations into plausibly high-impact interventions. ​​

Introduction

This report contains information on EA-aligned organizations that have been substantively involved with climate research, as well as some reflections on my climate-related observations in EA thus far while at RP. I joined RP in October 2021 after leaving my academic career as an environmental, behavioral, and (field) experimental economist. During my time in academia, I developed a passion for rigor, skepticism, and contextual understanding in answering research questions, which I aim to bring to my current role.

I had not spent much time reading the climate-related research or philosophical perspectives of the EA community prior to joining RP. My research at RP has been client-driven, so my exposure to EA thinking primarily comes from conversations with clients and EA experts, as well as limited reading, watching, or listening, a vast majority of which has generally taken place in the context of attempting to answer client-motivated research questions. As such, by no means do I consider myself an expert on the full EA climate landscape, and I am humble about my contributions thus far and open to learning. While not comprehensive, my exposure to the climate landscape in EA seems sufficient to contribute meaningfully to conversations around its direction.

My initial exposure to climate expertise in EA — having spent the better part of 10 years working alongside some of the most thoughtful and well-respected academics in environmental economics and policy — left me wondering whether EA climate is under-resourced in terms of personnel, time, and expertise. This document, therefore, attempts to gather a baseline understanding of the theories of change and recommendations in the EA climate space thus far,¹ with some initial musings on potential ways in which to bolster the reputation, coherence, and impact of the EA climate community. While I cannot promise a thorough response given capacity constraints, I invite others to challenge my positions humbly, thoughtfully, and with a sincere drive toward the collective goal of improving the flow of philanthropic resources to the most impactful cause areas and interventions — climate and/or otherwise — that we are capable of identifying. The differences in our perspectives and experiences can be an asset, in this sense, as we iteratively brainstorm, research, and refute the best objections to the various approaches, perhaps ultimately spreading risk by diversifying the collective approach to climate among organizations affiliated with or sympathetic to EA.

Finally, to date I have only dedicated about three weeks of committed time to researching and writing this report, and it is, therefore, subject to change. We remain in conversation with several of the major players in the EA climate space to brainstorm ways in which to improve our collective research through fruitful collaboration and knowledge sharing, including through a series of roundtable discussions among these players to identify opportunities for collaboration that can improve our organizations’ respective and the community’s collective thinking with regard to philanthropic climate change impact.

Read the full report on RP's website or download it as a PDF.