Interesting post! Smil is great on this. His (poorly named) book How The World Really Works is excellent and has a chapter on fertilizers.
I’ve done some research on sustainable transitions in the concrete industry, which is another high capital expenditure/low margin product that requires innovation. It contributes ~4-8% to global CO2 emissions and is expected to rise. I wouldn’t say concrete is as important for wellbeing as fertilizer, but it follows the same pattern that the developing world needs green innovations, not de-growth.
I’m skeptical that direct investments in fertilizer or R&D would meet GiveWell’s 10x cash transfers threshold, at least in the short/medium term. For the fertilizer itself, it might be cheaper to subsidize imports of food from more productive regions. For R&D, cleantech breakthroughs typically start in university or private research labs, requiring significant investment without guaranteed returns. One approach might be to follow the Good Food Institute’s model of $ spent persuading governments to unlock $$$ at the scale required for these problems. (Exciting to note that alternative proteins are also a high capital expenditure/low margin product which requires innovation to overcome climate barriers. I think this is a common pattern policymakers should be more aware of, trying to get the same learning-curve benefits solar had). Low emission concrete is often held back by regulatory barriers, I wonder if the same is true for fertilizer?
Lastly, I’m not sure how neglected this is in the overall development/climate space. You describe a bunch of ongoing research and investment- what is the marginal benefit of the next EA dollar compared to other causes? I’d be interested to hear more about that aspect of the problem!
Thanks for the book recommendation and your inputs on the concrete industry, interesting to see the parallels!
Yeah, I also wonder about neglectedness. Just did a quick Google search and saw that both Oxfam and the Gates Foundation include agricultural development in their focus areas. I assume that if two prominent charities in the global development field are working on agricultural interventions, other organizations are likely to work on them as well. I don’t know how effective their efforts are though. I could imagine that – as it’s the case with global health interventions – some agricultural development interventions might be one or more orders of magnitude more effective than others. But I’m not aware of any resources or research comparing possible/existing interventions in this field.
Interesting post! Smil is great on this. His (poorly named) book How The World Really Works is excellent and has a chapter on fertilizers.
I’ve done some research on sustainable transitions in the concrete industry, which is another high capital expenditure/low margin product that requires innovation. It contributes ~4-8% to global CO2 emissions and is expected to rise. I wouldn’t say concrete is as important for wellbeing as fertilizer, but it follows the same pattern that the developing world needs green innovations, not de-growth.
I’m skeptical that direct investments in fertilizer or R&D would meet GiveWell’s 10x cash transfers threshold, at least in the short/medium term. For the fertilizer itself, it might be cheaper to subsidize imports of food from more productive regions. For R&D, cleantech breakthroughs typically start in university or private research labs, requiring significant investment without guaranteed returns. One approach might be to follow the Good Food Institute’s model of $ spent persuading governments to unlock $$$ at the scale required for these problems. (Exciting to note that alternative proteins are also a high capital expenditure/low margin product which requires innovation to overcome climate barriers. I think this is a common pattern policymakers should be more aware of, trying to get the same learning-curve benefits solar had). Low emission concrete is often held back by regulatory barriers, I wonder if the same is true for fertilizer?
Lastly, I’m not sure how neglected this is in the overall development/climate space. You describe a bunch of ongoing research and investment- what is the marginal benefit of the next EA dollar compared to other causes? I’d be interested to hear more about that aspect of the problem!
Thanks for the book recommendation and your inputs on the concrete industry, interesting to see the parallels!
Yeah, I also wonder about neglectedness. Just did a quick Google search and saw that both Oxfam and the Gates Foundation include agricultural development in their focus areas. I assume that if two prominent charities in the global development field are working on agricultural interventions, other organizations are likely to work on them as well. I don’t know how effective their efforts are though. I could imagine that – as it’s the case with global health interventions – some agricultural development interventions might be one or more orders of magnitude more effective than others. But I’m not aware of any resources or research comparing possible/existing interventions in this field.