The world is far from perfect. Many problems remain to be solved. At the same time, our resources are limited, which means that we are forced to prioritize where to direct our efforts. A prioritization happens whether you do it arbitrarily or based on proper thought, because work in one area inevitably means you have less time for another. By making a thoughtful and informed choice, you can increase the likelihood of directing your limited resources where they will do the most good.
Neutrality in the face of problem selection
We start from a principle called cause neutrality when we evaluate which problems we should focus on. We are committed to working in the areas where we can do as much good as possible, but have not decided in advance which those are. Instead, we leave it as an open question guided by research, rationality, good arguments and critical thinking. We currently have an idea of which problems seem very promising to focus on, given our current best estimates. But we are ready to change as the world changes, or if evidence or arguments emerge that point in a different direction.
So, how do you choose a problem when so many feel important to work on? Researchers from organizations such as the Global Priorities Institute, Open Philanthropy and 80,000 Hours have developed a framework to help us evaluate that question. Accordingly, we should look at the following three criteria:
Scale of the problem: Some problems affect a dozen people, others can affect billions. The bigger the problem, the more good we can do by solving it.
Neglectedness: The fewer resources already put into a problem, the better opportunities there are for you to add value at the margin.
Solvability: How easy is it to make progress on the problem? If there are effective measures, the likelihood that our efforts will bear fruit increases.
Now we will go through the three criteria in more detail.
Read more
One approach to comparing global problems in terms of expected impact – article by 80,000 Hours