Writing for Wired, Institute Prof. Daron Acemoglu predicts that expectations for generative AI will need to recalibrated during the year ahead. Acemoglu notes that he believes in 2024, “generative AI will have been adopted by many companies, but it will prove to be just ‘so-so automation’ of the type that displaces workers but fails to deliver huge productivity improvements.”
Prof. Jessika Trancik speaks with Associated Press reporter Alexa St. John to discuss electric vehicle emissions and ownership costs. Trancik notes, “buyers should consider total cost of ownership, which for an EV is generally less than that of a gas-powered counterpart due to savings on maintenance and fuel.”
Prof. Florian Berg speaks with Fortune reporter Paolo Confino about the future of ESG initiatives. “The problem is that companies and also investors are often not really honest about their intentions,” Berg says. “They might actually sell something that’s purely a profit-driven decision and then write it in a report as they’re doing a lot for society even though they’re just engaging in profit maximization.”
Robert Stoner, interim director of the MIT Energy Initiative, speaks with Boston Public Radio hosts Margery Eagan and Jim Braude to discuss the climate crisis and some solutions being developed at MIT. "You have to be [optimistic]," says Stoner. "I do feel there are technological pathways that we can go down and get there. Solar and wind and storage get us an awful long way. We have to make these things cheaper, and there are an awful lot of people at MIT and at other great universities, and many companies, hammering away at those problems."
Prof. Jonathan Gruber speaks with Boston Public Radio hosts Jim Braude and Margery Eagan to explain the US deficit and its impact on the economy. Gruber says “there are four options to lowering the deficit. The first is to get inflation under control. Second is to ensure a stable and responsible government. Third, is to decrease spending. And the fourth option is to raise taxes.”
Writing for Fast Company, Lecturer Guadalupe Hayes-Mota '08, SM '16, MBA '16 shares three strategies that are reshaping access to healthcare and medicine, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). “Integrating local production enhancement, strategic partnership and pooled purchasing power represents a new dawn in global health care,” writes Hayes-Mota. “These innovative approaches are pivotal in making quality medicine and healthcare accessible to all, particularly LMICs.”
Michael Mehling, deputy director of the Center for Energy and Environment Policy Research, speaks with E&E News reporter Benjamin Storrow about the impact of global climate deals on climate change. “The history of the Paris Agreement suggests that global climate deals do make a dent in emissions,” Mehling says. “But the impact can be subtle and felt over time.”
Brian Deese, an MIT Innovation Fellow, speaks with CNBC host Andrew Ross Sorkin about the state of the U.S. economy. “Perceptions of the economy have gotten increasingly polarized along political lines, and so when you look at that polling around sentiment and the economy one of the things it reflects is that increasing polarization that we are seeing everywhere and reflected in that data,” says Deese. “But number two, we do know historically that as economic data improves it leads to improved sentiment and in general, the incumbents benefit from that.”
Lecturer Guadalupe Hayes-Mota '08, SM '16, MBA '16 writes for the National Academy of Engineering to discuss the importance of a “well-functioning healthcare supply chain.” “A connected supply chain represents a paradigm shift, offering the potential to revolutionize how drugs are developed, produced, and delivered to patients,” writes Hayes-Mota. “Embracing this approach can enhance drug delivery efficiency, ensure patient satisfaction, and ultimately contribute to a healthier and more prosperous global community.”
Writing for The Hill, Prof. Caitlin Talmadge and Michael O’Hanlon of the Brookings Institute make the case that America’s aims for the war in Ukraine should not be “strategic defeat” of Russia. “The goals, rather, should be stability in Europe and the sustainability of a strong Ukraine, both of which are best served by ending the war sooner rather than later,” they write.
Writing for The Hill Prof. Emeritus Henry Jacoby highlights the importance of addressing climate change in discussions of government policy. “If the global emission reduction efforts falter, the ensuing damages to the most vulnerable will be especially dire,” says Jacoby. “The world is already plagued with failed nation-states unable to sustain their population while maintaining political stability. As the number of these nation-state failures increases, there will be hundreds of millions of environmental refugees and stateless people, taxing the available resources of the entire planet.”
Writing for Politico, MIT Prof. Armando Solar-Lezama and University of Texas at Austin Prof. Swarat Chaudhuri examine the recent executive order on AI. “Especially as new ways to train models with limited resources emerge, and as the price of computing goes down,” they write, “such regulations could start hurting the outsiders — the researchers, small companies, and other independent organizations whose work will be necessary to keep a fast-moving technology in check.”
Prof. Emeritus Olivier Blanchard speaks with Robert Armstrong of the Financial Times about inflation, the rise in long yields and the fiscal endgame in the U.S. Blanchard urges regulators to, “have plans for a steady reduction of primary deficits to close to zero. Slow, steady, convincing, credible.”
Prof. Daron Acemoglu and Prof. Simon Johnson write for Project Syndicate about how to structure U.S. international trade policies so that they benefit American workers and global stability. “Two new principles can form the basis of U.S. policy. First, international trade should be structured in a way to encourage a stable world order,” they write. “Second, appealing to abstract 'gains of trade' is no longer enough. American workers need to see the benefits. Any trade arrangement that significantly undermines the quality and quantity of middle-class American jobs is bad for the country and its people, and will likely incite a political backlash.”