Organisations working on multiple Global Catastrophic risks

post by Stuart_Armstrong · 2014-05-22T10:37:49.289Z · LW · GW · Legacy · 7 comments

Contents

7 comments

It is not uncommon to find organisations working, directly or indirectly, on a single Global Catastrophic Risk (GCR). For instance, the World Health Organization does much work to prevent pandemics, as part of its remit.

It is rarer for organisations to focus on multiple GCRs - for a start, this involves them having the concept akin to GCR, which is not often the case. In a report I'm preparing with Dennis Pamlin of the Global Challenges Foundation, here is a list of organisations focusing on multiple GCRs (note that it is not necessarily an endorsement of their quality). Let me know if there are any organisations missing, and I'll add them:

Brookings

http://www.brookings.edu/research#topics/

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

http://thebulletin.org/

CSER

http://cser.org/emerging-risks-from-technology/

Center for International Security and Cooperation

http://cisac.stanford.edu/

Club of Rome

http://www.clubofrome.org/

Council on Foreign Relations

http://www.cfr.org/issue/

Federation of American Scientists

http://www.fas.org/programs

Future of Humanity Institute

http://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/research/research-areas/

Global Catastrophic Risk Institute

http://gcrinstitute.org/research/

Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

http://www.idsa.in/topics

International Risk Governance Council

http://www.irgc.org/issues/

Lifeboat Foundation

http://lifeboat.com/ex/programs

Nuclear Threat Initiative

http://www.nti.org/

Saving Humanity from Homo Sapiens

http://shfhs.org/whatarexrisks.html

Skoll Global Threats Fund

http://www.skollglobalthreats.org/

Stimson Center

http://www.stimson.org/programs/

Risk Response Network

http://forumblog.org/communities/risk-response-network/

World Economic Forum

http://www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-2014-report

Tower Watson

http://www.towerswatson.com/en/Insights/IC-Types/Survey-Research-Results/2013/10/Extreme-risks-2013

What kind of GCRs are being worked on? This can be seen in the following graph; AI is not as badly situated as I would initially have expected:

7 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by lukeprog · 2014-05-22T18:10:27.332Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I don't suppose your report will include an estimate of the funding amount going toward studying/mitigating each risk (from these organizations alone)?

Replies from: Stuart_Armstrong
↑ comment by Stuart_Armstrong · 2014-05-23T10:58:40.155Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Nope! That would be a good subject for another report.

comment by Lumifer · 2014-05-22T19:40:33.751Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

What exactly is a Global Catastrophic Risk?

Seeing how "chemical weapons" or "poverty" made the list, I am quite confused about the scope of this concept.

Replies from: Stuart_Armstrong
↑ comment by Stuart_Armstrong · 2014-05-23T11:01:25.184Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Poverty is on the list for complicated reasons that aren't all that interesting. Some people do define chemical weapons as having catastrophic potentials; I don't agree with that, but I can't reject it out of hand.

comment by Username · 2014-05-22T19:16:45.018Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I'd love a general introduction to what you're targeting and general methodology, because this post leaves me with a lot of questions.

What is "Phase Transition" and "Reject Procreation"? How is climate change different from biogeochem and ocean acidification? Is poverty really a catastrophic risk? How were the zero-organization GCR's chosen?

Replies from: Stuart_Armstrong
↑ comment by Stuart_Armstrong · 2014-05-23T11:02:56.974Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

There will be a write up of the methodology in respectable terms in the final report, but it's essentially knowledge+google search+checking links on various sites (such as those found by the above processes, and some of the effective altruism sites that have looked into this).

comment by turchin · 2014-05-26T21:48:16.918Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

This collective blog is about runaway global warming and possible human extinction - a lot of good info graphic http://arctic-news.blogspot.ru/

About different seismic catastrophes - while not so scientifically based, it sometimes has some interesting news http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/author/theextinctionprotocol/

All doom oriented conspiracy theorists are here. Fast news discussion and all possible gossips. Useless but addictive. http://www.godlikeproductions.com/

Now semiclosed blog about Peak oil and Peak everything - a lot of good analisys http://www.theoildrum.com/

This blog is orientated on economic collapse and war http://www.zerohedge.com/