How Should We Set Priorities?

The world faces no shortage of problems--or of good ideas to solve them. Which should we tackle next? Even as leaders converge on some answers, new markets are being set up to preempt politics

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


How should humanity progress in the next two generations? Which challenges should we engage, in what order, and with how much sacrifice (if any) of comfort and liberty? There are probably as many distinct responses to these questions as there are thoughtful people on the planet. Not all answers are equally wise, of course, but none can be definitive either. These are ultimately questions about one's moral values and personal preferences.

Experts can help us to understand which problems are most threatening, which solutions are most promising, and how costly it might be to act or to wait. Scientists can exhort us--just as the other contributors to this special issue urge us to focus on ending extreme poverty, securing biodiversity "hot spots," improving agricultural infrastructure, boosting the efficiency of our energy use, and reining in epidemic diseases--yet the experts cannot directly steer the course of humanity.

W. Wayt Gibbs is a contributing editor for Scientific American based in Seattle. He also works as a scientific editor at Intellectual Ventures.

More by W. Wayt Gibbs
Scientific American Magazine Vol 293 Issue 3This article was published with the title “How Should We Set Priorities?” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 293 No. 3 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican092005-7imhnv6Jegiyb629FYaJUE

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe