The role of philanthropy in promoting progress (and safety)
Audio Brief
Show transcript
This episode covers a conversation with Alexander Berger, CEO of Coefficient Giving, regarding the unique role of philanthropic capital in driving societal progress and policy reform.
There are three key takeaways from this discussion. First, philanthropy serves a critical function by addressing market and democratic failures that traditional systems ignore. Second, successful policy change requires a long-term investment in building advocacy ecosystems rather than seeking quick wins. Third, safety must be reframed as an essential dimension of technological progress rather than its enemy.
Philanthropy is often misunderstood as merely a tool for redistribution, but Berger argues its true power lies in solving free-rider problems. Democratic systems naturally prioritize current voters, often neglecting future beneficiaries like potential immigrants or people priced out of housing markets. Similarly, private companies under-invest in advocacy because they cannot capture the full profit of social policy changes. Philanthropic capital is uniquely positioned to fill this void by representing those without current political or market power, effectively subsidizing the advocacy needed for broad-based benefits.
The second takeaway focuses on the mechanics of legislative success, using the YIMBY or Yes In My Backyard movement in California as a case study. Transformational policy change is rarely immediate. The recent legislative victories in California housing policy were the result of funding organizers as far back as 2014 and weathering multiple failed attempts. Success required funding a diverse ecosystem of advocacy groups, legal defense funds, and policy researchers. This highlights the high return on investment available when small amounts of capital are used to professionalize passionate volunteers and build a field over a decade.
Finally, the conversation addresses the tension between innovation and safety, particularly concerning artificial intelligence. Berger pushes back against the idea that safety is a brake on innovation. Instead, he argues that safety should be viewed as a quality metric of technology, similar to speed or efficiency. Using autonomous vehicles as an example, the product's value proposition is its safety. For powerful emerging technologies, maximizing upside requires actively investing resources to mitigate catastrophic risks that could derail human advancement entirely.
This discussion ultimately provides a blueprint for how strategic capital can unlock stalled progress by empowering the right advocates and redefining the metrics of success.
Episode Overview
- Understanding the role of philanthropy in progress: Alexander Berger, CEO of Coefficient Giving (formerly Open Philanthropy), explains why philanthropic capital is uniquely positioned to solve "free-rider problems" and advocate for diffuse benefits that market forces and democratic politics often ignore.
- A case study in legislative success: The episode details the decade-long journey of the YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) movement in California, illustrating how early, small investments in field-building can eventually lead to massive legislative victories like SB 79.
- Bridging the gap between progress and safety: Berger addresses the controversial topic of AI risk, arguing that "pro-progress" advocates should care about existential safety because catastrophic risks are the ultimate derailer of human advancement, while acknowledging the tension of over-regulation.
Key Concepts
- Philanthropy as a Solution to Market and Democratic Failures: Philanthropy is necessary not just for redistribution, but to address structural deficits in democracy. Future beneficiaries (like potential immigrants or people priced out of housing) cannot vote, and private companies under-invest in advocacy because they cannot capture the full social value of policy changes. Philanthropy fills this gap by representing those without political or market power.
- The "Long Slog" of Field-Building: Transformational policy change rarely happens overnight. The YIMBY victory in California required funding organizers as far back as 2014 and weathering multiple failed legislative attempts (SB 827, SB 50) over several years. Success came from building an ecosystem of advocacy groups (California YIMBY, YIMBY Law, YIMBY Action) rather than just funding a single bill.
- Safety is a Dimension of Progress, Not its Opposite: Rather than viewing safety as a brake on innovation, it should be viewed as a quality metric similar to speed, cost, or efficiency. The autonomous vehicle company Waymo illustrates this: their product is safety. However, this is distinct from "safety theater" or over-regulation (like the stagnation of nuclear power), creating a difficult balance between avoiding existential catastrophe and allowing technological development.
Quotes
- At 1:18 - "There's really sort of one thing that has happened in human history, and it's the Industrial Revolution... that basic observation that scientific and technological progress that began roughly 250 years ago is the central driver of these transformatively positive human outcomes." - This explains the foundational worldview driving the speaker's investments: the singular importance of the industrial revolution in improving human well-being.
- At 8:18 - "This rhymes with Tyler Cowen's advice about 'the high return activity of raising others' aspirations.' Being able to help people who are really passionate about a problem... start to work on it and really devote their effort to it full time... can often do so really effectively." - This highlights the leverage available in philanthropy: small amounts of money used to professionalize passionate volunteers can catalyze entire movements.
- At 13:46 - "Safety is one dimension of progress... All else being equal, safer lives are better lives, a safer technology is a better technology... Sometimes safety is seen as something outside of progress or opposed to it. This seems to come from an overly-narrow conception of progress." - This reframes the debate around AI safety, arguing that reducing risk is inherent to the definition of improving technology, rather than an external constraint.
Takeaways
- Target areas with "diffuse benefits" and "concentrated costs": When looking for high-impact opportunities, identify issues where the beneficiaries (e.g., future residents, global poor, future generations) lack the political capital to advocate for themselves.
- Fund "ecosystems" rather than just projects: To drive legislative change, invest in the people and organizations that build the field (like legal defense funds, action groups, and policy researchers) early on, even if immediate legislative wins seem unlikely.
- Adopt a "dual-use" mindset for technology: When evaluating powerful emerging technologies (like AI or bio), resist the urge to be purely optimistic or purely pessimistic. Instead, acknowledge that technologies are intrinsically dual-use; maximizing the upside requires actively investing resources to mitigate the specific worst-case scenarios that could derail the entire trajectory.
