I think the counterfactuals here are tricky to think about and I wouldn’t confidently claim that wild harvesting prevents more suffering than it causes.
I totally agree, this is all very speculative.
And, if current demand were to sustain or increase it seems like a marginal increase in industry would come from the farmed side. E.g.,
This makes sense and substantially increases my probability that the grant is net-positive.
One thing to think about here is whether to make the research public. If it’s public, I’d still worry about it causing more suffering than it prevents because we don’t know how it might impact the supply and what will be the future of carmine. But if it’s not public, then I’m not sure how the research would make an impact. I imagine that it would be public because it’s by a university. I would consider first commissioning an economic analysis of how synthetic carmine would alter farmed and wild-caught quantities.
I totally agree, this is all very speculative.
This makes sense and substantially increases my probability that the grant is net-positive.
One thing to think about here is whether to make the research public. If it’s public, I’d still worry about it causing more suffering than it prevents because we don’t know how it might impact the supply and what will be the future of carmine. But if it’s not public, then I’m not sure how the research would make an impact. I imagine that it would be public because it’s by a university. I would consider first commissioning an economic analysis of how synthetic carmine would alter farmed and wild-caught quantities.