*Shenanigans*
Hey! Welcome to the 3 Things Show where Maddi and I categorize the world of books...
Through...
The world of knowledge!
Through books, 3 things at a time
This week's book is called Doing Good Better
and is by William MacAskill
Giving to charity is a benefit to the world...
but are you optimizing your impact?
Quick Intro
This book is 272 pages hardcover and seven
hours two minutes audible.
The book is described on Amazon as follows,
"Most of us want to make a difference.
We donate our time and money to charities
and causes we deem worthy, choose careers
we consider meaningful, and patronize businesses
and buy products we believe make the world
a better place.
Unfortunately, we often base these decisions
on assumptions and emotions rather than facts.
As a result, even our best intentions often
lead to ineffective�and sometimes downright
harmful�outcomes.
How can we do better?
At the core of this philosophy are five key
questions that help guide our altruistic decisions:
How many people benefit, and by how much?
Is this the most effective thing I can do?
Is this area neglected?
What would have happened otherwise?
What are the chances of success, and how good
would success be?
By applying these questions to real-life scenarios,
MacAskill shows how many of our assumptions
about doing good are misguided.
MacAskill urges us to think differently, set
aside biases, and use evidence and careful
reasoning rather than act on impulse.
When we do this�when we apply the head and
the heart to each of our altruistic endeavors�we
find that each of us has the power to do an
astonishing amount of good."
So...
What are three things we can use from this
book?
3 Things You Can Use
1.
QALY
So if we are going to do our charity efficiently
and measurably then we are going to need some
metrics.
This is one of the hardest things to do because
having a metric that is based on subjectivity
means that we have to rely on subjectivity
to be constant -- which we know it is not.
But, putting that to the side and using our
best approximations through self-reports,
we, humankind, not Maddi and me, have come
up with a metric that so far best approximates
experience as it relates to health.
A quality-adjusted life-year.
A QALY.
The premise of a QALY is it assumes that a
year of life lived in perfect health is worth
one QALY.
So a year lived in a state of less than perfect
health is worth less than one.
States of less than perfect health are decided
on a scale using different characteristics
also rated by self-reporting.
So for example if someone would live for 10
years at a state of 0.5, because they were
bedridden, that would amount to a QALY of
10 years times 0.5 state, or a QALY of 5.
Now what if you donate and buy them treatment
for $100 and instead they live for 10 years
at a state of 0.8.
Now their improved QALY over that period is
8.
With your $100, you have affected a QALY by
3.
So spending $100 on this treatment produces
3 QALY over 10 years.
So a great way to weight charities against
each other, for how much impact they make,
is to see how many QALYs you can affect for
a certain amount.
If charity A can affect 5 QALYs for $100 but
charity B can affect 6, all other things being
equal, charity B will provide the most utility
with your donation, the most bang for your
buck, so they become the best qualitative
choice.
2.
Earning to Give
So you want to make the most impact that you
can.
You feel that our quality of life is so unfairly
out of proportion with the poorer societies
that you should do whatever you can to even
it out.
So the best way for you to do the most is
to become a doctor and move to Africa and
help stop the spread of diseases.
Well wait, maybe not.
There may be a way to enact more change and
do more good things for the world by never
setting foot in Africa and never studying
to be a doctor.
There are a couple of things to consider in
this situation.
Is someone else going to fill that position
in Africa?
Are they better than you or is your time better
spent?
Are you actually causing the greatest good
by going in this direction?
For this we will focus on the second question.
Are you actually causing the greatest good
by moving to Africa.
Let me present my most convincing anecdote:
Would Bill Gates have had a greater impact
in Africa if he had become a doctor and moved
to help?
Sometimes the way to do the most good is to
make the most money and donate a large amount
to effective charities.
If you can provide, throughout your time as
a doctor in Africa, say 40 years, you can
provide 200 QALYs over that span or by staying
and earning more, but donating over the course
of 40 years you could affect 300 QALYS, which
is the better thing to do?
If the quality-adjusted life-year is a metric
that you can stand behind, then staying and
donating is the better thing to do.
Now the implication of this is that you can
strive for wealth, with the intention to donate,
and feel great about the impact you are making,
without sacrificing in some other way by living
for an extended period in Africa.
3.
Five Questions
So to put it all together, there are five
questions to ask and answer when considering
which charities to donate to if you want your
donation to have the most impact:
1.
How many people benefit and by how much?
You can use QALYs to help to figure this one
out.
How many QALYs would you buy using a standard
dollar amount compared to the next charity.
2.
Is this the most effective thing you can do?
Would you be best to donate?
Volunteer?
Or take a job in this area?
3.
Is this area neglected?
Will MacAskill brings up the principle of
diminishing returns here.
This principle shows that when resources are
allocated to something, the easier things
that provide the most utility are taken care
of first.
Progress slows as more and more resources
are allocated because providing utility becomes
harder and harder.
So take this into account when weighing charities
against each other and realize that more neglected
charity areas will receive the most impact
from your contribution.
4.
What would have happened otherwise?
As mentioned in the example in the second
thing you could use, does taking the position
as a doctor in Africa keep someone else, more
qualified, from getting that position.
And does that ultimately mean that you did
more harm than good?
5.
What are the chances of success and how good
would success be?
If something has a low probability of happening,
but has a large value if it does happen, does
that make it worth it to invest in?
MacAskill uses something called "expected
value" to put this into mathematical terms
and this involves calculating a value proposition
(be it an amount of money or an amount of
life in time) from a regression to the mean.
For example: Using micromorts, which is a
chance of one in a million of dying, accident
statistics and a regression to the mean, you
can figure out that every time you ride an
hour in a car you are giving away three minutes
of your life.
Because of the potential of dying and based
on how many people do die in this way they
can figure this out.
So you calculate whether that hour drive is
worth three minutes.
MacAskill does a great job of translating
this into a charity frame-of-reference.
Recap:
Use a QALY, or quality-adjusted life-year,
to determine how much of an impact you are
making when volunteering, donating or working
non-profit.
Determine if you have a better chance of doing
more good by staying and earning to give or
training and going to help on a different
front.
Ask the five questions, how many people benefit,
and by how much? is this the most effective
thing I can do? is this area neglected?
what would have happened otherwise? and what
are the chances of success, and how good would
success be?, when deciding if your charitable
choice is the most effective way to go.
The concepts MacAskill brings up are so counter-intuitive
from the charity perspective we have all been
brought up in, but they make so much sense.
He shows how intentions aren't always the
best things to trust and that data and asking
the right questions are more important for
doing good and having an impact.
I really liked this book though I thought
that the chapter at the end about career choices
seemed out of place and the narrator could
sometimes read condescendingly while I don't
think it was meant to be read that way.
Overall very glad to have read it and been
given the perspective of an impact focus rather
than an intention focus.
I'll link up the website to learn more, effectivealtruism.org,
in the description.
Thank you for reading and we'll see you next
week!
