> "The list of innovations we need is long: clean and cheap energy, better crops, interventions to help against the diseases that shorten and impair our lives. This, and much more besides, is needed to make progress against the big problems we face. But while the demand for innovation is large, its supply is limited."
Yes and no. What we need is better problem identification and more appropriate priorities.
For example, we don't need "better crops." We need to stop wasting so much of that we do have. Less waste means less wasted resources.
For example, less wasted food also means less chemicals and pesticides, which likely means less disease and medical issues.
If we solved for root problem (i.e., apply The Five Whys) we'd waste less time and resources solving for symptoms.
As for the supply of innovation being limit. IDK, I've heard that scarcity breeds innovation. So perhaps we are innovating, but in the wrong places, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons.
Reducing waste can only go so far - zero waste - and worse, it has diminishing returns. Improving technology, on the other hand, has no upper bound and builds on itself to enable even more improvements.
Imagine if people had just reduced food waste instead of inventing fertilizer? We probably wouldn't have western civilization.
Yes and no. What we need is better problem identification and more appropriate priorities.
For example, we don't need "better crops." We need to stop wasting so much of that we do have. Less waste means less wasted resources.
For example, less wasted food also means less chemicals and pesticides, which likely means less disease and medical issues.
If we solved for root problem (i.e., apply The Five Whys) we'd waste less time and resources solving for symptoms.
As for the supply of innovation being limit. IDK, I've heard that scarcity breeds innovation. So perhaps we are innovating, but in the wrong places, at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons.