Stay up to date with Giving What We Can's blog. Featuring the latest news about our community, how to donate effectively, charity evaluation, community events and more!

Blog

Giving What We Can's blog, featuring the latest news from our community.

Donate

Pledge

footerNavigation

About us

Contact us

Our team

Our values

Our members

Our events

Transparency

Our mistakes

Our impact

Donate to Giving What We Can

Careers

Leave feedback or make a complaint

About

Our best charities

Take a giving pledge

Get involved

Make a bequest

Videos, books, podcasts

FAQs

Learn more

Press kit

Media coverage

Case studies: People who pledge to give

Media

Footer Navigation

Make your donation go further this Giving Season

topNavigation

Our research team’s 2026 recommendations

How we choose which charities to recommend

Other places to donate

Create a fundraiser

Best charities

The 10% Pledge

The Trial Pledge

Pledging vs. donating

View all pledgers

Share your pledge to inspire others

Giving pledges

About our research

Browse our guides and resources

Connect with our community

Read our blog

Help others discover effective giving

Research and resources

Who we are & what we do

Our structure

Mistakes

Top Navigation

Caroline Wood

Isn’t poverty just a symptom and not the real problem we should be addressing?

‘Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime’

This popular saying is often used to illustrate the argument that, over the long-term, it is more efficient to address the fundamental issues causing a problem rather than relying on ‘quick fixes.’ For example, the effective altruism (EA) community, along with other organisations which work to alleviate poverty, has occasionally been criticised for focusing on short-term solutions instead of tackling the root causes of poverty. Sometimes these interventions are given the (rather derogatory) name ‘band-aid’ solutions, implying that they merely cover up the superficial symptoms of poverty like a bandage would, without doing anything to improve the underlying situation.

But is this really fair? After all, achieving systemic change takes time, and may even eclipse the lifetimes of those suffering right here and now. Sometimes, a quick-fix might actually be the most empowering thing you can do, and be 

the first step that helps break the cycle of poverty

 found that children who received deworming treatment had significantly fewer school absences, and earned 13% more income as adults, compared with children who did not receive the treatment. Given that deworming treatment costs less than $1 US per child per year, the researchers estimated the social rate of return to be 37%. Not bad for a band-aid surely?

Nevertheless, it’s true that a lack of strategy or long-term thinking can allow problems to perpetuate, or even get worse. For instance, providing food to the hungry through charity-funded food banks 

may shift the responsibility from governments, making them less compelled to introduce state support

. Similarly, although camps for refugees and displaced people are a quick solution to save lives and provide food, water, shelter, and medical care, they are incredibly costly to run, undignified, and can lead to long-term dependency. Paul Spiegel, a former senior official at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 

 would introduce policies to give displaced people work permits, besides access to educational and healthcare systems within their host countries.

Perhaps the ultimate band-aid example comes from ‘

’ itself: the charity supergroup founded in 1984 by Bob Geldof and Midge Ure to raise money for anti-famine efforts in Ethiopia. This culminated in the legendary 1985 Live Aid concert, which raised $127 million, sparking real hope that this would start to reverse Ethiopia’s desperate levels of poverty. But 35 years later, 

Ethiopia remains a ‘Humanitarian Catastrophe’

, crippled by drought, famine and conflict. 

, key reasons for this include lack of investment in broad, long-term policies for agricultural development, managing natural resources, and credit/insurance.

When we consider the examples above, it can seem obvious that the most effective strategy would be to tackle the major causes of suffering - as the fifteen-year 

 aimed to do. These addressed eight grand challenges, with the first being to ‘eradicate extreme poverty and hunger.’ And indeed, the goals definitely made some progress towards this: within the project’s timeframe 

the number of those living in extreme poverty

 halved, reducing the number of people living on less than $1.25 a day from 1.9 billion in 1990 to 836 million in 2015. However, several reasons mean that addressing the root causes of poverty that remain will be much, 

1. Poverty looks very different depending on where you are

In some countries, while only a small proportion of their population lives in poverty, this translates into large 

 numbers. For instance, the countries with the highest numbers of people living below the poverty line are India, Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of Congo, 

which have a combined total of over 280 million people

. But there are many smaller countries that have higher 

 levels of poverty: in South Sudan and Burundi, for example, 

around 80% of the population lives below the poverty line

. On top of this, each country has its own unique combination of political systems, infrastructure, environmental resources, cultural traditions, and foreign policy. Improving people’s livelihoods as quickly as possible will therefore require an individual, tailored plan for every region.

2. Poverty is now concentrated in extremely challenging environments

Most (96%) of those living in extreme poverty 

live in countries that are environmentally vulnerable, politically unstable, or both

the largest recipient countries of international humanitarian aid are burdened with protracted or recurring crises

. In these circumstances it is difficult, if not impossible, to plot a route out of poverty, and this is typically well beyond the scope of a charity or NGO to deal with. 

Writing for Vox, journalist and EA advocate Kelsey Piper put it this way:

“… there’s no doubt that it’s significantly more complex to identify the best ways to do good in [lobbying and advocacy work] than it is to identify the best ways to distribute bednets.”

3. Solving poverty is not a linear process

Unlike giving a child a vaccination or installing a well, solving poverty isn’t a simple ‘once it’s done, it’s done’ process. The overall success of the Millennium Development Goals wasn’t felt everywhere, 

with some areas experiencing little change and 30 countries seeing the number of people living in extreme poverty actually increase

. Furthermore, sudden conflicts and political instability can rapidly undo decades of slow policy change, 

4. Assumptions about the best way out of poverty aren't always correct

It is often assumed that if you can increase a country’s economic growth, poverty levels will naturally fall, but this isn’t always the case in reality. Without policies that ensure that increased wealth is distributed across many levels of society, 

growth alone typically lifts few people out of poverty

. We also lack measures that link overall economic growth with the amount of poverty within a country. One of the most commonly used measures, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), simply measures the total value of goods produced and services provided in a country during one year, 

but it doesn’t say anything about how this wealth is shared, and the gulf between the highest and lowest levels of society.

 Economic growth can simply lead to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, 

particularly if there are high levels of corruption.

Arbitrary attempts to change systems are unlikely to have positive effects, 

particularly if we aren’t clear on what the causes of the problem are, and what the best solutions may be

. Even worse, they can actually do harm, especially when led by rich Westerners who assume that their money and background means they have more knowledge and expertise than local groups 

(also known as ‘White Saviour Complex’).

In combination, these reasons mean that addressing poverty at a systems-level — whether through advocacy, policy engagement or research — carries a much higher risk of being ineffective or totally unsuccessful. 

An evidence-based approach to systemic change

However, since ‘bigger picture’ approaches can (if successful) have a much higher 

impact, we shouldn’t disregard them completely. Thanks to increasingly sophisticated data sources and new approaches, the EA community is beginning to also assess charities working for systemic change. For instance, in 2019 

GiveWell announced that it would be expanding its scope

 to include interventions where causality is harder to establish, as part of its mission to provide guidance on everything that could potentially be among the most cost-effective giving opportunities. This could include charities that provide technical assistance, work to influence government policies, organisations undertaking research and development, or groups supporting social entrepreneurship.

The aim is to support the best charities, using evidence as a guide (bearing in mind that 

). Some examples of evidence-based charities include:

to ban the pesticides that cause accidental poisonings and are used most in suicides

. Ending the ready availability of these harmful substances could prevent thousands of deaths each year.

 to support small business owners. This can have major ripple effects within families, for instance by generating enough income to enable children to attend school.

Public health campaigns, including anti-smoking legislation, 

, strategies to tackle air pollution, and stronger policies against counterfeit medicines. These promote healthier environments, leading to greater societal wellbeing.

Organisations lobbying for producers in low- and middle-income countries 

. This can open up new markets and income sources for farmers working at all scales.

 to be given to the poorest countries, thus removing a severe constraint on national economic growth.


In all cases, working for societal change is most likely to succeed 

when there is a focused strategy, and donor charities work in partnership with local communities

, drawing on their expertise, resources, and connections. For instance, 

the Centre for Pesticide Suicide Prevention (CPSP)

 collaborates with local and regional governments to collect information on the use of lethal pesticides in their country, then trains local researchers to identify the suicide, accidental poisoning, and environmental consequences of their use.

At the end of the day, the distinctions between short-term, individualised solutions and societal change can be highly arbitrary, and not the most helpful way to evaluate charities. The band-aid metaphor, for instance, assumes that the intervention can only be applied retrospectively - it can’t stop you getting the cut in the first place. But many so-called band-aid solutions can actually prevent the harm from happening, for example 

providing vitamin A supplements to stop children from developing blindness

In any case, a charity’s strategy will likely include both direct interventions and broader, systemic work. For instance, despite their big picture approach, the successes of the Millennium Development Goals were partly achieved through apparently short-term methods, including distributing millions of measles vaccinations and insecticide-treated mosquito nets.

the guiding principle for effective altruism remains the same

: to support charities which the evidence suggests will achieve the most good

 to donate a portion of your regular income to help the world’s poorest, then you are already part of a systemic change within society — one that asks ‘What can I give?’ instead of ‘What can I get?’ Telling others about your decision and explaining effective altruism to your friends and family can have a ripple effect that sees even more people lifted out of poverty. And isn’t that a beautiful thing?

In this guest blog, Caroline Wood addresses whether trying to eliminate poverty  through charity is just a 'band-aid' fix to larger systemic problems.

Grace Adams

Have us talk to your workplace/group this Giving Season!

Giving What We Can is excited to talk to your workplace or community group about effective giving this Giving Season.

If you bring the people, we’ll bring the content!

We’ve found that these kinds of engagements have been successful for fundraising and engaging people in the effective giving and effective altruism communities. In fact, our Head of Marketing, Grace first heard about GWWC at a workplace talk!

You can register your interest in us running one of the following events for your group during November and December:

A standard talk we usually give to groups and workplaces (options for 15min, 30min, 60min, new content is being developed right now).

A new workshop format which aims to get people to reason about their approach to philanthropy and come up with their first steps.

We sponsor some funds, give your group some information on different effective charities and the group votes on where to donate!

Our friends over at One for the World and High Impact Professionals are also running talks and fundraising events this season.

If you want some further evidence about why this could be impactful, or want to see what else is happening in this space, check out the following post on the Effective Altruism forum:

Fundraising Campaigns at Your Organization: A Reliable Path to Counterfactual Impact

Key Factors for Success in Organizing a Fundraising Campaign at Your Company

A Playbook for Running Corporate Fundraising Campaigns

Would you like to host an effective giving talk in your workplace this Giving Season?

Timeo Williams

Member Profile: Timeo Williams

We recently spoke with Timeo Williams, a blockchain software developer living in Mexico City, Mexico. He told us about his passion for decentralisation, the causes he supports, and how it feels to "make giving a part of living." 

Tell us about yourself. What keeps you busy and what makes you tick?

 and ethical principles to solve societal problems. (By leverage, I mean leveraging the resources of computers to create value and perform computations, which helps me get the most out of the limited number of hours in a day. There are actually four different types of leverage -- capitol, labor, code, and media; as a software developer, I lean towards code!)

Lately, the dream of decentralisation and allowing people to have greater control of their data has been pushing me into the world of blockchains and crypto. For example, one of the projects I'm focused on is adding the titles for purchased homes onto the blockchain. Part of the process of home ownership in the United States is legally recognizing the “title” to the home you purchased as your proof of ownership. This ends up becoming a cumbersome process as you need a third-party company to be involved in verification and holding on to this title during the process of selling and buying a home. There’s an opportunity to really decentralise information regarding home ownership to be at much more easily accessible levels and get rid of the need for third party processes/lessen the financial constraints on local governments to maintain and regularly update databases.

Outside of that, I enjoy playing tennis, traveling the world and dancing some salsa/bachata.

Tell us about your effective giving journey.

My brother introduced me to the concept of effective altruism a few years ago, and I was left with the belief that If I did give money, I would give it to organizations that were effective with that money.

A few months ago, my dad reminded me of the importance of giving a tithe (10% of one’s income) to the church. I agreed with the concept of giving away a part of the wealth we’ve accumulated in order to give back to others, but didn’t agree with how the church would have used those funds. I knew I wanted any funds I donated to be used for causes that would have the highest impact on the world. Giving What We Can helped me to find those causes!

I give because I’m privileged to come from an extraordinary background of education and wealth. I want to help spread these resources to others.

Why did you take the Giving What We Can pledge?

I took the pledge because I believe in the lifetime commitment to continually give and to make giving a part of living; it makes me happy to know that I am living below my means and helping out others in need. And this energy of giving permeates throughout the businesses I’m involved with and the people I interact with on a daily basis. Giving to others truly makes you a happier person and that spirit of abundance begets even more wealth.

What are the issues in the world that you care most deeply about?

I’ve chosen to focus on donations to charities that are 

 by Effective Altruism Funds. I believe that solving the most primal issues with society — making sure everyone has access to basic health and clean water — are among the simplest steps to moving people up from Maslow’s hierarchy to allow for deeper conversations and thinking.

Which organizations do you give to (and why)?

, which has the stated intention to “improve the health or economic empowerment of people around the world as effectively as possible

” I donate to this fund because it makes me feel confident that my money is going to the highest-impact charities!

I’ve been blessed to be in the financial situation I'm in, so there usually isn’t any second guessing whether or not to give. There are times when the stock/crypto market looks rather low and I feel a little tempted not to donate as much this month so I can go “all-in” on crypto investments. I’ve been able to beat past these urges for the time being, though, since my motivation to continue a regular commitment to giving supersedes the allure of temporary monetary gain.

" series, which profiles a selection of the Giving What We Can community. The Giving What We Can community is comprised of people from all walks of life, with different perspectives and motivations for giving – all united by their desire to make a significant commitment to use their income to effectively help others. 

-Read more 

 to help inspire others to give more, and more effectively.

For more information about Giving What We Can, we recommend you check out our 

Timeo Williams, a blockchain software developer living in Mexico City, Mexico, tells us about his passion for decentralisation, the causes he supports, and how it feels to "make giving a part of living." 

September Newsletter 2022

September Newsletter Summary | Giving What We Can

Thank you for being a part of our growing community.

Every month, our community grows and it warms our hearts. Since the 1st of September, we’ve had 186 people take a new pledge with us and over 4000 people make a donation!

When someone takes a pledge with us, they are asked to write down what motivated them to pledge, and we wanted to share a few of our favourites from September:

“... because I want to help other people and improve the quality of life on earth.”

“I consider it every able person’s duty to do what they can to leave the world a better place for all.”

“I want to dedicate my life to promoting the happiness and well-being of other beings.”

“My main motivation in life is to minimize suffering. It is the value I hold the highest.”

“I want to do more good, and I know I can.”

Knowing that there are thousands of people who are taking lifelong action to help others, especially those they will never meet, is a wonderful thing.


Get us to talk at your workplace or community group!

Many people start thinking about how to give back towards the end of the year. If you’d like us to host a talk or workshop at your workplace or with your community group about effective giving over the coming months,

! We are excited to share the ideas of effective giving with new people and have found talks and workshops to be impactful.

There’s lots of interesting news, content from Giving What We Can and events to attend in the rest of our newsletter down below!

-Grace Adams & the rest of the Giving What We Can team

Many of our Giving What We Can Pledge members have received their Pledge Pins and have been wearing them out and about. Here’s one of our early members José Oliveira wearing his pin!

This month, join us for a discussion on our co-founder Will MacAskill’s new book, 

. Bring your questions and thoughts on the book and chat with other community members.

 (New York: 6:00 pm; San Francisco: 3:00 pm, Sydney: Sun, Oct. 9, 9:00 am, Auckland: Sun, Oct. 9, 11:00 am)

 (London: 9:30 am, Munich: 10:30 am, Mumbai: 2:00 pm, Singapore: 4:30 pm)

Our open forum is an event where you can come along with questions about effective giving and/or to meet others interested in effective giving. This event alternates between Europe/Asia and Americas/Oceania each month.


 (London: 12:00 pm, Munich: 1:00 pm, Mumbai: 4:30 pm, Singapore: 7:00 pm)

 - Alana Horowitz Friedman, contributing writer

Announcement: Renaming of legal entity to Effective Ventures Foundation

Rutger Bregman on Effective Giving: Highlights from an Interview with Effektiv Spenden

What is counterfactual thinking and why should you care about it?

You can prevent animal suffering. Here’s how.

Don’t make these 10 mistakes when trying to improve the world

: Dr. Michael Noetel, High Performance Psychologist - 

Blog

Isn’t poverty just a symptom and not the real problem we should be addressing?

Have us talk to your workplace/group this Giving Season!

Member Profile: Timeo Williams

September Newsletter 2022

Should charity begin at home?

Member Profile: Fernando Martin-Gullans

Announcement: Renaming of legal entity to Effective Ventures Foundation

Rutger Bregman on Effective Giving: Interview with Effektiv Spenden

What is counterfactual thinking and why should you care about it?

August Newsletter 2022