New ideas are getting harder to find—and more expensive

August 1, 2018 by Tom Relihan  , MIT Sloan School of Management
New ideas are getting harder to find — and more expensive
Credit: Bears Eat Berries

It's an age of astonishing technological progress—but are we starting to have a harder time coming up with new ideas?

Yes, argues a group of MIT Sloan and Stanford University researchers, who found in a study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research in March that the productivity of scientific research is falling sharply across the board.

That, they argue, is because researchers are putting in more and more effort to sustain the same—or even a slightly lower—pace of idea generation as we experienced half a century ago.

"Just to sustain the constant growth in GDP per person, the U.S. must double the amount of research effort put into searching for a new idea every 13 years to offset the increased difficulty in finding new ideas," write MIT Sloan professor of applied economics John Van Reenen, Stanford University professors Nicholas Bloom and Charles I. Jones, and Stanford doctoral candidate Michael Webb.

Moore's Law—the observed doubling of the number of transistors packed onto new computer central processing units every two years—stands as a prime example. The doubling effect represents a growth rate of 35 percent each year, and that growth is driven only by ever-more-extensive research, the authors write.

"Many commentators note that Moore's Law is not a law of nature, but instead results from intense research effort: Doubling the transistor density is often viewed as a goal or target for research programs," they write.

They continue: "The constant exponential growth implied by Moore's Law has been achieved only by a massive increase in the amount of resources devoted to pushing the frontier forward."

In fact, research efforts toward semiconductor improvement have risen by a factor of 18 since the early 1970s, the study found, while productivity has fallen by the same factor. Taken together, that means it's about 18 times harder today to push Moore's Law forward than it was half a century ago, the authors write.

New ideas are getting harder to find — and more expensive
urple: Number of researchers; Green: Growth rate of additional semiconductors

The same trend held true for agricultural crop yields. Per-acre yields for corn, soybeans, wheat, and cotton grew about 1.5 percent on average every five years between 1960 and 2015, while the number of researchers working on boosting yields has risen by a factor of between three and 25, depending on the crop.

"It is … evident … that research productivity has fallen sharply for agricultural yields," the authors write. "Yield growth is relatively stable or even declining, while the effective research that has driven this yield growth has risen tremendously."

And when the researchers examined the pharmaceutical industry, it was the same story: Research effort put into discovering new drugs since the 1970s rose by 6 percent each year, while the productivity of those efforts, measured by how many were approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration, fell by 3.5 percent per year.

When comparing the years of life per 100 people saved by research targeting cancer since the 1970s to the number of medical studies published over the same time period, the study found that productivity declined by a factor of 1.2 for all work, and a factor of 4.8 for clinical trials.

But cancer research productivity actually rose between 1975 and the mid 1980s, the authors note. "These cases suggest that it may get easier to find new ideas at first before getting harder, at least in some areas."

In the broader economy, the study found it now takes about 15 times as many researchers today versus 30 years ago for a firm to enjoy the same rate of revenue growth.

To keep afloat, investment is key

Van Reenen said one factor that could explain the trend is that it's simply taking longer for researchers to achieve the level of education they need to make a breakthrough discovery.

New ideas are getting harder to find — and more expensive
Purple: Years of life saved per 100 publications; Green: Years of life saved per clinical trial. Credit: MIT Sloan School of Management

"As the total amount of knowledge becomes larger and larger and larger, it becomes increasingly difficult to get to its frontier of that knowledge," Van Reenen said. "It was much easier a couple thousand years ago."

Narrowing the focus of one's studies to specialize in a very particular domain has emerged as a common workaround to that problem, Van Reenen said, but that strategy breeds its own set of issues.

"In order to carry on innovating, you're constantly working together, and it's very complicated to get all of these people and ideas together," he said. "That, itself, could be a reason why things start slowing down."

Van Reenen said any sort of hard limits to technological growth is a long way off, and population growth, the increasing ease of connection and communication, and globalization present new opportunities for to emerge.

"As long as we keep increasing the amount of resources we put into research, we'll keep doing that," he said. But that requires continuous investment of national GDP, and he worries the impetus to do that hasn't been as strong lately.

"The concern I have is that the investments are not being done. I think a lot of the time you hear we'll just cut the top tax rates to generate lots of innovation—I'm pretty skeptical about that in terms of the incentives you're going to give," he said.

Instead, investment in new technologies and innovation should be more targeted, with governments directly allocating funds worthwhile projects. That could cover funding for specific projects, or expanding science, technology, engineering, and mathematics opportunities for women and people of color, who are underrepresented in those fields.

"Both have positive effects on growth and equality. Instead of giving away $5 trillion in tax cuts, use that to invest in opportunities for the future," said Van Reenen.

Explore further: Scholars say big ideas are getting harder to find

Related Stories

Big ideas are getting harder to find

June 5, 2017

Modern-day inventors—even those in the league of Steve Jobs—will have a tough time measuring up to the productivity of the Thomas Edisons of the past.

No, we aren't running out of new ideas

November 23, 2017

We've picked all the low hanging fruit when it comes to new ideas, and the world is set for more parsimonious times. This is the idea put forward in a recent research paper by Nicholas Bloom, John Van Reenen and their co-authors.

Most employees can work smarter, given the chance

July 20, 2018

More than half (58 percent) of employees in Britain can identify changes at work which would make them more productive, a research team drawn from UCL Institute of Education (IOE), Cardiff University and Nuffield College, ...

Concerned by decline in smolts

January 9, 2015

Since 2006 there has been negative productivity growth in the Norwegian hatchery industry. "There is every reason for the salmon industry to be concerned when the productivity of such an essential supplier starts declining," ...

Recommended for you

Fossils reveal diverse Mesozoic pollinating lacewings

September 17, 2018

Insect pollination played an important role in the evolution of angiosperms. Little is known, however, about ancient pollination insects and their niche diversity during the pre-angiosperm period due to the rarity of fossil ...

8 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Shakescene21
5 / 5 (2) Aug 01, 2018
These economists are not claiming that big new discoveries are not out there anymore. Rather, they are claiming that big new ideas are harder to find and develop because there is so much more knowledge that needs to be learned before scientists can tackle big problems, and then the problems are so much more complicated that it takes much more analysis and work to find new discoveries.

This type of thinking is a variation of marginal-cost vs marginal-revenue analysis that is fundamental in economics. It's often useful, but in this case it does not fully contemplate that in the future (and sometimes now) most of the work in scientific discovery will be done by AI, robots, and other machines. As a result, vast amounts of analysis, testing, and production will be done by machines at a fraction of the cost if done by humans.
b_man
1 / 5 (2) Aug 01, 2018
I have an idea... I can make an audio file 1,000 times smaller than an MP3 with no compression. But I am afraid to patent it because of our corrupted patent office.
KBK
1 / 5 (1) Aug 01, 2018
New functional ideas are easy to find.

It's when the desire to maintain and hold the current structure of ownership and it's expectations in the future, for it..when that drive comes into play, then progress can be drastically slowed.

This is due to the 'new' that is attempting to be.. that new is likened to a break from the old.

There are only so may ways a given system can advance linearly from where it is whilst maintaining the same structure.

The idea of functional discovery must also include near or complete breaks from the old systems.

Then the rates of advance --might increase again.

Whart1984
Aug 01, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 01, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Whart1984
Aug 01, 2018
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
orti
not rated yet Aug 02, 2018
"everything that can be invented has been invented."
Charles H Duell, Commissioner of US patent office, 1899
grandpa
1 / 5 (1) Aug 02, 2018
I am an idea guy. But I think we could go with no changes for awhile so, so many people aren't left behind. All this change is unsustainable and not stable.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.