Opinion: Disaster Donors Should Consider ‘Everyday’ Crises

The philanthropic outpouring that follows natural disasters is notably less effective in saving lives than charity aimed at tackling the thousands of preventable deaths that occur daily due to disease and unsafe drinking water, the author of a recent book on giving writes in a Los Angeles Times opinion piece.

While immediate aid does help victims of earthquakes, hurricanes, and other catastrophes, such emergency interventions “are indisputably more costly and less effective than time-tested health activities” such as providing clean water and mosquito nets, Eric Friedman writes, quoting a study by the Disease Control Priorities project.

“Donors face choices about how to allocate their giving. Though it is offensive to many people to pick between those who suffer from one horrible thing and those who suffer from a different horrible thing, the need to prioritize is legitimate,” says Mr. Friedman, whose book Reinventing Philanthropy: A Framework for More Effective Giving was published last year.

Read a Chronicle of Philanthropy column by Eric Friedman on donor priorities.