The Returns to Science in the Presence of Technological Risk

Matt Clancy

2024-05-10

Abstract:Scientific and technological progress has historically been very beneficial to humanity but this does not always need to be true. Going forward, science may enable bad actors to cause genetically engineered pandemics that are more frequent and deadly than prior pandemics. I develop a quantitative economic model to assess the social returns to science, taking into account benefits to health and income, and forecast damages from new biological capabilities enabled by science. I set parameters for this model based on historical trends and forecasts from a large forecasting tournament of domain experts and superforecasters, which included forecasts about genetically engineered pandemic events. The results depend on the forecast likelihood that new scientific capabilities might lead to the end of our advanced civilization - there is substantial disagreement about this probability from participants in the forecasting tournament I use. If I set aside this remote possibility, I find the expected future social returns to science are strongly positive. Otherwise, the desirability of accelerating science depends on the value placed on the long-run future, in addition to which set of (quite different) forecasts of extinction risk are preferred. I also explore the sensitivity of these conclusions to a range of alternative assumptions.

General Economics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper attempts to address the following two core issues:

1. **Estimating the social impact of scientific research**: The authors attempt to quantify the current social benefits generated by each dollar spent on scientific research and compare it to the social impact of directly giving the same amount to an individual with an annual income of $50,000. The results show that the social return on investment (ROI) of scientific research is approximately 230 times the benchmark.

2. **Exploring whether accelerating scientific development is desirable**: The core dilemma of the study is that while scientific development has brought significant economic and health benefits, it may also enable more countries and individuals to create new viruses through synthetic biology, thereby increasing the frequency and severity of pandemics. Therefore, this paper aims to explore whether accelerating scientific progress in the presence of technological risks will enhance or reduce social welfare.

To answer these questions, the authors developed a quantitative economic model that compares the historical benefits of science with potential future harms. The study finds that under certain assumptions, the benefits of science still outweigh its costs; but under other assumptions, particularly considering the possibility of civilization's end, accelerating scientific development may do more harm than good.