Want to learn the ideas in Doing Good Better better than ever? Read the world’s #1 book summary of Doing Good Better by William MacAskill here.
Read a brief 1-Page Summary or watch video summaries curated by our expert team. Note: this book guide is not affiliated with or endorsed by the publisher or author, and we always encourage you to purchase and read the full book.
Video Summaries of Doing Good Better
We’ve scoured the Internet for the very best videos on Doing Good Better, from high-quality videos summaries to interviews or commentary by William MacAskill.
1-Page Summary of Doing Good Better
“Effective Altruism”
In 1989, South African Trevor Field was amazed by the PlayPump invention. It offered a better way to get water than walking miles to a wind-powered pump and waiting hours for water. Children could ride on a merry-go-round that pumped water into storage tanks. By 2006, celebrities like Steve Case and Jay Z had joined the movement, but then it all spun out of control in 2009 when problems were revealed with the pumps.
Two reports concluded that the PlayPump project had some faults and failures. Children quickly grew tired on the merry-go-round or fell off, which caused them to get hurt. Women preferred a cheaper and easier to operate Zimbabwe Bush Pump, which drew five times as much water as the PlayPump. The PlayPumps broke down frequently and were difficult to repair because they used technology that wasn’t easily accessible in Africa at the time of its creation. Despite Field’s best intentions, great press and funding for his idea, it proved inefficient and costly for those who used it.
The PlayPump is an example of unreflective altruism, which means that it was done out of good will and without data to support its effectiveness. Effective altruism takes a scientific approach in helping people with the resources available. For example, Michael Kremer and Rachel Glennerster worked with International Christian Support to test educational programs in Kenya. Studies showed that providing textbooks or reducing class size did little to improve learning, but treating children for intestinal worms had a dramatic impact on attendance and long-term positive effects. They founded Deworm the World Initiative to continue this work.
Why Bother?
You may feel that your individual efforts are pointless. If you live in the United States and make $28,000 or more per year, you are wealthier than most people on Earth. If you earn $52,000 or more, then you’re even richer than most of the world’s population. Today, some 1.22 billion people live in extreme poverty; they survive on less than $1.50 a day (or about $0.75).
The Western world is much richer than the rest of the world. This means that when we give money to charity, it can do more good for those who are extremely poor. When you spend money on yourself, your donation only goes so far in helping people. However, there are still parts of the developing world that need help. The question is how to donate effectively and make sure your money does as much good as possible by asking five crucial questions about a charitable effort:
1. “How Many People Benefit and by How Much?”
Choosing which of thousands of charities to support can be difficult. Many don’t explain how they spend their money, or if the funds are being allocated effectively. For example, New York City’s United Way says a donation of $50 buys five books for children at risk. However, it doesn’t document how these books help kids learn and succeed in school.
Health care providers and insurance companies use quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) to measure the benefits of health treatments. One QALY combines the value of a person’s life and/or their living standards. Economists also use QALYs to compare different health therapies, such as pharmaceutical drugs or surgeries. The method helps determine how effective each therapy is in improving people’s lives based on their well-being improvements.
Suppose you want to donate $10,000 and need to choose between two options: a 40-year-old with AIDS or a 20-year-old who is going blind. The first option will improve the recipient’s quality of life by 50% to 90% for five years. This equals 6.5 QALYs (Quality Adjusted Life Years). The second option improves the recipient’s quality of life from 40% to 100%. This equals 30 QALYs (Quality Adjusted Life Years).
