gwern comments on Pay charities for results? - Less Wrong

1 Post author: BenGilbert 08 February 2013 03:31PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (18)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: gwern 08 February 2013 05:52:28PM 11 points [-]

You may want to read up on the burgeoning area of charity success or social impact bonds: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/09/business/economy/09leonhardt.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_impact_bond

Note that the metrics have to be carefully designed to avoid the obvious principal-agent problems/Goodhart's law/Lucas critique.

Comment author: BenGilbert 09 February 2013 08:53:26PM 0 points [-]

Yes, it's thinking about social impact bonds and the like that started me thinking about paying charities for results. What I would note, though, is that, at the moment, individual donors/investors can invest in social impact bonds. What they cannot do is offer money for the payouts to investors in social impact bonds. So, you can put money into a bond which pays out if charities are effective at, eg, reducing the number of children who go into care homes in the UK. (this is a real example). But you'd only want to do that if you were confident that the charity was effective, otherwise you'll both lose out financially and have achieved no good. I'd be more interested in adding money to the fund which pays out for results I care about, thus giving investors who might have a better idea of what is and isn't effective incentives to put money into the charities they think will produce good results.