Bernicus

Givewell suggests that donations to public health charities such as the Against Malaria Foundation - who distribute insecticide treated bed nets - and the Deworm the World Initiative or Schistosomiasis Control Initiative are ~5-10x more effective than donations GiveDirectly. Do you agree think that it is plausible that donations to public health charities do more good than donations to cash transfer charities? If so, are there additional, non-impact reasons for donating to GiveDirectly instead?

I think part of the goal is to get the cause that people are passionate about to be 'doing good' in general, not doing good for a specific group of people. I personally find it to be a really exciting cause because it makes me realise how much I can do with my money! If we really are concerned about making the world a better place, which is the reason most people give to charity, surely we should give to the charity and the cause that does the most good?

I think you're right to be worried about the total amount of charitable giving decreasing, but have you seen any evidence supporting that claim?

If you click the link I posted and scroll down to the summary, there is a table where they estimate that AMF, DtWI and SCI are ~5-10x more cost effective than GiveDirectly.