Perspective: How to spend a billion (Google) dollars

Google.org, the search giant's philanthropic arm, is managing a commitment of roughly $1 billion to work on global issues such as poverty, energy and the environment over the next 20 years.

While that's a lot of clams, how much will $1 billion really buy you in global social change--particularly if spent over a 20-year time frame?

It works out to about $50 million a year, minus foundation administrative expenses. Assuming that Google indeed allocates $1 billion to the foundation, and the foundation elects to spend it all down (foundations are only required to spend 5 percent of their assets each year), that would leave roughly $47.5 million a year for direct donations.

Why not leverage the power of Google's search engine to solicit ideas from Google users directly?

What will $47.5 million a year get you in today's dollars? According to economist Jeffrey Sachs, director of the United Nations Millennium project, a contribution of $110 a person a year can lift a dirt-poor village out of poverty in five years. That means a $47.5 million annual investment could move half a million people out of the world's 1 billion desperately poor each year. And if Sachs' five-year plan is correct, in 20 years a $1 billion allocation could potentially raise close to 2 million people out of poverty.

Now that is an achievement any socially responsible billionaire would be proud to own.

But we have to remember that Google has built its reputation on being the odd corporate duck, and the Google.org is likely to want to distinguish itself from the established do-gooder billionaire club. Google.org is competing with the likes of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, currently valued at $28.8 billion, which made well over $1 billion in global health and education grants last year alone.

Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page have stated publicly that, beyond devoting significant resources, they are also interested in "ambitiously applying innovation" to the largest of the world's problems. So, let's talk innovative.

How about leveraging the Google billion and joining with other billionaire philanthropists to do what world governments have proven incapable of doing? Why not establish a globally operated "just in time" detection and transport system that redirects surplus food and supplies to everyone who needs them, when they need them.

Google could set up free, mobile medical monitoring and care units in underserved communities worldwide, utilizing electronic health implants, computerized tracking systems, and mobile supply and distribution centers operating on an as needed basis.

Further, it could try to connect and empower communities all over the world via virtual community centers that offer self-organizing and social-collaboration tools, including real-time feedback mechanisms from individual households on community needs and the performance of elected and community officials.

In addition, Google.org could choose to innovate on the homefront immediately. Right on the Google campus they could build an economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable global village inhabited by people of all backgrounds, races, and belief systems (including Google employees) to represent a positive and achievable vision for the future.

The company could try to leverage in-house technologies and R&D to create a separate "technology for good" division within the company that produces products and services specifically to address challenges in the social sector.

Another idea: Issue all Google employees social credit cards that encourage each individual to lend or borrow "social credit" with others in their local and global neighborhoods in the form of volunteer time or expertise. The 20 percent work time that Google employees currently are granted for individual projects could also be offered up as time to work on socially significant efforts specifically.

Finally, why not leverage the power of Google's search engine to solicit ideas from Google users directly? A simple question like "How should Google spend a billion dollars to change the world for the better?" on Google's home page would undoubtedly generate a lot of great ideas. That's putting a billion minds to work for you, and it wouldn't cost a dime.

There are lots of good ways to spend a billion dollars. But if Google.org stays true to the vision of Sergey and Larry--who suggest that Google the foundation could eventually eclipse Google the company in overall impact--then maybe making a difference in the world will itself become the next big thing.

Biography
Technology activist Paul Lamb is the principal of Man On a Mission Consulting and a founder of Streettech.org.

More Perspectives

[attitlaw]

finaly the correct rules

bravo I am very impressed that common sense will prevail and correct the mistakes of our senseless drainage of our natural resource's

[itispals]

Heal the World

It is one of the wonderful moves. It is true that all the giants are trying to contribute back to the society. The thoughts from the founders of Google that "our contribution would be innovative" is really meaningful. If Google attempts, it can change the world. Then Google can rightly sing "heal the world" and "We are the world".
http://www.buckleupnow.com

[hoppina]

Social Return on Investment: empower

Paul, I love this article-- thanks. While the scale of Google's
investment is remarkable, the most important impact of the
Foundation's work could be to mainstream the notion that
foundations and non-profit organizations can be nimble,
efficient, and entrepreneurial, all in service of leveraging the $
invested to greater impact. While "SROI" (Social Return on
Investment) and Venture Philanthropy may seem like old hat to
those of us blowing the dot-org bubble in the Bay Area these
days, they may still be bleeding-edge concepts in Peoria. If
Google.org leads by example by taking on transformative social
projects that are worthy of incurring the risk failure in order to
create the possibility of profound success, and does so in a
transparent high-leverage entrepreneurial manner, they will
blaze a trail of knowledge and precedent that 100,000s of
smaller foundation and non-profits can be inspired to follow.
To that end, I'd love to see Google.org invest itself in helping
other foundations and non-profits to themselves innovate. And
I'd love to see the project-specific work of Google.org include
executing small projects and also regranting large numbers of
other smaller projects, rather than throwing vast resources at a
few large projects. If, by contrast, Google takes on a few
hundred million dollar projects, few others will be able to follow
in their footsteps.

[Blito]

Now where getting somewhere

I was falling asleep with all this talk of money and monopolies latley. It's tiresome.

This is more of a reneawble resource approach that creates a dependency on Google for realworld objects and services to sustain their business and make it more diuturnal.

I wouldn't want Google to just throw money or even a search engine at a culture. Allot of people don't even like to use the Internet for too long or if it's not geared toward a specific service.
This could also calm some privacy rights fears as the services could be monitored and controlled better to avoid abuse and promote maintenance.

Also I went to the author's website and posted how I think Non-Profits would become more the norm in the future as they usually are more focused on their objective.
So they really wouldn't be called 'Non-Profits' anymore as it would be more the mainstream.

[Blito]

Services avoid spam advertising

Also serevices help to avoid spam/viruses and mass advertising. If you have a small footprint device as a service then just a geeral webrowwer it help s to control the costs.

Try the math again, and it looks a little better...

Half a million people per year, with a five year gestation period does not mean 2 million -- that would be an investment once every 5 years. If invested every year you get twenty investments, so after 25 years the number affected would be ten million (assuming one could wait that final 5 years to count the benefits.)

If I ever get a billion dollars, that sounds like a good investment. On the other hand, where can I send my $110 today?