Professor Mariana Mazzucato

So when you just have a list, and I think this is happening now with AI, AI is a sector or it's a set of problems that we should be solving, and that means a lot for also other sectors and how they engage with AI.

Whether we have governments capable of doing this or not, I think, first of all, we have to invest in that capability, but coming back to the contracts, there is so much, how do you say,

Not just inertia, but incumbency effects, which you had mentioned before, which is very right.

It's not true that it's win-win.

Pfizer will make less money if this book is the recipe, if you want, especially in how we think about health.

Why?

Because Pfizer abused its power.

You know, Pfizer benefits massively from publicly funded research and then is able to set whatever prices it wants, but also how it interacts with publicly funded research, which I've written about elsewhere.

I used to tell my husband if I don't come home at night, it was Pfizer.

You know, it's a company that's very financialized, spends much more on share buybacks and R&D.

I think government has failed in how it works with companies like Pfizer to not make sure that the intellectual property rights are not too strong, too wide, too upstream, so on and so forth.

So the book is not about saying this is easy.

It's hard.

That's why we need the compass to hold us all accountable when we talk about good.

But it's also very prescriptive in terms of where things have gone wrong.

And that's not because the civil servants didn't care.

They have been trying their hardest, but I think as long as the ideology that the market works and you come in to fix it as opposed to shaping the market to deliver for people and planet with a compass that holds you within the civil service and others inside business accountable for doing good, then it will not happen.

Absolutely.

And I'm not saying... And all the researchers, by the way.

They are buying all the researchers in AI.