The Life You Can Save: How To Do Your Part To End World Poverty

Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2009

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Preface-Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Tools

Beta

Discussion Questions

Part 3Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Part 3, Chapter 6 Summary: “How Much Does It Cost to Change a Life, and How Can You Tell Which Charities Do It Best?”

Singer notes that an unstated presupposition in the earlier chapters entailed the possibility of rectifying extreme suffering. Now he asks the practical question of whether this really is possible. He relies on the work of Karnofsky and Hassenfield, who did significant research into charities they were interested in funding. Karnofsky and Hassenfield inquired into many charities that were not able to provide them with detailed financial information, which they found shocking; individuals and organizations had been funding agencies without any insight into whether those agencies were effective. They eventually realized that it wasn’t that the agencies were being cagey about their data but rather that they didn’t even have data. Singer discusses the downsides of focusing on administrative expenses as if agency effectiveness were a function of this. Karnofsky and Hassenfield’s institute GiveWell “is a nonprofit dedicated to improving the transparency and effectiveness of charities” and therefore concerned with finding the exact information Singer needs for answering whether a modest sum can save a life (84).

Singer discusses historical examples of global aid that were massively successful, like the 1967 campaign by the World Health Organization to eliminate smallpox. Determining whether these campaigns were as effective as possible is another question, and Singer appreciates the complexity of the issue. Finding accurate measures for how far any particular program goes towards saving a life, not to mention what “saving a life” actually means, is not a straightforward matter. He includes the complicated example of mosquito nets used to reduce cases of malaria. In 2007 GiveWell published a list of charities they found to be most cost-effective, at the top of which was Population Services International. PSI does work to alleviate malaria and diarrhea. Other effective organizations include Partners in Health and Interplast.

Another metric for the effectiveness of aid concerns how well it helps people escape the trap of extreme poverty, not simply how many lives it saves from imminent disease. One avenue of effectively overcoming poverty, Singer writes, is through microfinance. This happens when those in dire situations receive very small loans. The success of such programs, Singer claims, challenges “economic wisdom that lending to the poor carries high risks and therefore can only be economically viable if high rates of interest are charged” (90). Singer documents incredibly high repayment rates for microloans. These loans are also ways for the poor to handle emergencies without selling everything they own. Singer writes that GiveWell provided a grant to Opportunity International for their microfinance program because of its effectiveness.

Singer then discusses methodologies for proving how effective aid agencies and their various programs are. He endorses the work of an MIT lab that uses scientific methodology to discover aid effectiveness. This includes setting up randomized control trials in which one group of aid recipients is documented against a control group that does not receive aid. In defense of the expenses these trials entail, Singer writes, “It is better to help only half as many people, but be sure that you are really helping them, than to risk helping no one” (94). He then discusses “capacity building” aid projects. These are aid projects that seek to enhance the long-term self-reliance of the aid’s recipients. He uses an example of Indian women who, with Oxfam’s help, eventually mobilized politically to demand better treatment. This group became totally independent of Oxfam and fully self-sufficient. He describes a similar situation in Mozambique resulting in the improvement of conditions for women at the legal/political level.

Sometimes formal scientific evaluation is not necessary to determine if a particular program is effective. Singer documents a few individual donors who have changed lives through simple contributions. One man bought arsenic filters, cooking stoves, and toilets for people in Nepal. Another example is a woman who climbs mountains and works on community projects that help build schools. Singer also describes the plight of fistula patients, whose surgery can be paid for with a few hundred dollars. This surgery will forever improve the physical health of girls and women while eliminating an adjoining social stigma. The Worldwide Fistula Fund estimates the cost of one surgery at $450. These cases elucidate how much difference one person can make.

Singer states that even though a lot more needs to be done in order to scientifically understand how best to approach altruism, “We can reasonably believe that the cost of saving a life through one of these (particularly effective) charities is somewhere between $200 and $2,000” (103). Singer contrasts this with a study that concluded the cost of life-saving medical interventions in the US is, on average, $2.2 million.

Part 3, Chapter 7 Summary: “Improving Aid”

Chapter 7 combats critics of the effectiveness of aid agencies. These critics are theoretically in favor of aid but see serious practical issues.

Singer challenges the assumption that affluent persons have already spent vast sums on global aid to no avail. He attempts to prove aid is much more insignificant than is commonly believed. The aid the US government offers, for example, comes with strings attached. The US government also imposes tariffs that, while ostensibly helping American citizens, harm farmers and others in countries where the goods can be produced more cheaply. It’s also the case that the countries the US aids are generally not those in the direst need. Singer concludes, “No one really knows whether poverty on a global scale could be overcome by a truly substantial amount of aid provided without political interference. It’s never been tried” (145).

Others argue that aid doesn’t reduce poverty and that economic growth is the answer. Singer discusses unfair trade policies that disadvantage poorer nations. He also challenges the idea that aid and economic growth cannot go hand in hand. More important, though, is the inherent value of human life. Singer expresses approval of Bill Gates, whose rebuttal to an interlocutor at the World Economic Forum made clear that the suffering of extreme poverty is worth rectifying regardless of whether doing so “will cause a GNP increase” (151). Still, Singer believes that good aid should be contingent on the development of institutions that promote economic growth. This is his response to the view that some nations are rich whilst others are poor because they have good institutions (political, legal, economic, infrastructural, etc.)

Singer thinks it’s necessary to figure out what aid works and why. He again discusses the success of microfinancing and microloans. He discusses No Lean Season, a program from Evidence Action that helped people in rural communities after the harvests were collected but before the next year’s planting. The program, by Evidence Action’s own standards, was a failure. Singer includes this as an exemplar of transparency and commends the “commitment not to a particular solution, but to following the evidence” (156). He contrasts this with The United Nations’ Millennium Villages Project, which also failed but was not “rigorously evaluated” (159). This high bar for accountability, Singer writes, will mean more money flowing in the right direction. He contrasts the Millennium Project with the Graduation Approach utilized by Village Enterprises, which was both rigorously evaluated and effective.

Researchers, according to Singer, need to be open to different kinds of evidence. It is also important to look at unrealized opportunities—not just to evaluate current programs. Singer then looks at the success of several Oxfam projects. He ends by recapping the chapter, discussing how government aid can be effective, and explaining its difference from individual aid. One of the reasons Singer supports individual aid is because of the freedom of choice it leaves people who would like to contribute. He notes that all that is left is to determine how much aid people should give.

Part 3 Analysis

Part 3, “The Facts About Aid,” is primarily concerned with outlining the relevant empirical information required for making good charity decisions. Along with Part 2, it functions to inform the choices that the moral argument presented in Part 1 requires (assuming one accepts it).

All moral arguments of the modern Western philosophical tradition consist of a series of premises from which one is meant to infer a particular conclusion. The validity of the argument depends on whether that conclusion actually follows on the basis of those premises. Any argument for a particular moral claim proceeds on the basis of two distinct types of premises: value judgments and factual evidence. In Singer’s basic argument from Part 1, the first and second premises are simple value judgements. The third premise, though, is more complicated. It requires an analysis of factual data in order to determine truth or falsity. This premise states that people can significantly relieve the suffering of others by donating to effective charities without sacrificing goods nearly as important.

In Part 3, Singer does the legwork to determine what the effective charities are and whether or not individuals can make a meaningful difference in donation. This leads to a series of more determinant questions on the viability of different programs and how best to measure and evaluate these programs. Other values, like adherence to scientific methodological standards and the need for transparent reporting, crop up in relation to this factual inquiry. This inquiry is necessary in order to prove that an abstract moral theory grounded in the importance of utilitarian results can be made practical and therefore viable.

The results of this inquiry complicate any simple answer to the question of how much one should give and to whom (which the closing chapters of the book will look at more closely), but it should positively answer the question of whether effective charities exist and if individuals can make a difference through giving to them. According to Singer, the answer is a resounding yes. This “yes” comes from different kinds of evidence. Firsthand experience, testimonials, and example cases embody a kind of intuitive evidence. Statistical information, metadata, and randomized trials exemplify another kind of information—one based in the rational, scientific tools developed in the last few centuries.

Singer’s hope is that the information collected from these various sources provides overwhelming evidence for acceptance of the third premise. This would mean that if one accepts his value judgements (for which he argued in Part 1) and his factual evidence (provided in Part 2 and Part 3), then one should accept his conclusion (assuming that the logic of the argument is valid). Singer, acting on the view that readers should accept his argument by the end of Part 3, only must figure out how to best implement its conclusion. He turns toward this in the final part of the book.