Vaclav Smil, Invention and Innovation. MIT Press. 2024. ISBN: 978-0-262-55101-4. $19.95.

Recently, many technologies have been branded as “inevitable”: 3D television, the Metaverse (the online environment with legless avatars from Facebook’s parent company, not Neal Stephenson’s conception from the novel Snow Crash), and vacuum-based transportation systems. The first two technologies in that list are no longer extant and the third, though allegedly implemented in Las Vegas as the Hyperloop, consists of human drivers piloting cars through underground tunnels instead of pneumatic tubes ferrying passengers in a high-speed subway system.

In his book Invention and Innovation, published by MIT Press, Dr. Vaclav Smil examines the history of technological hype within three categories of products: inventions that turned from welcome to unwelcome, inventions that were supposed to dominate but did not, and inventions we keep waiting for. The first category includes effective but harmful substances such as the insecticide DDT and lead as a fuel additive; the second features aircraft such as the zeppelin (lighter than air) and supersonic transport such as the Concorde, both of which fell out of favor when reasonable alternatives arose; and we’re still waiting for our flying cars, jetpacks, and vacuum-tube conveyances that have been promised for years but never delivered.

I was a bit surprised that Smil spends relatively little time on artificial intelligence (AI), but after a few paragraphs on the nature and expense of AI output and the cost of its training, he sums up his two pages on the subject this way:

“The conclusion is obvious: our quest for AI is an enormously complex, multifaceted process whose progress must be measured across decades and generations and whose impressive achievements on some relatively easy tasks coexist with the much larger realm of intelligence that remains well beyond the capabilities of programmed machines.”

Each of Smil’s cases provides important context for the current economic and technological environment. I read Invention and Innovation in its entirety and believe that’s the best way to take in his arguments and analysis, but I also think the book would be equally useful as a reference work for researchers and policy makers or as part of the readings for a course on the social impacts of technology and how it is marketed. Smil’s congenial writing style and comprehensive framework make it easy to appreciate his sensible approach to evaluating claims for products marketed now and in the future.

Elisabeth B. Reynolds (ed.), Priority Technologies. MIT Press. 2026. ISBN 978-0-262-05429-4. $24.95.

Priority Technologies, edited by Dr. Elisabeth B. Reynolds and published by the MIT Press, offers policy recommendations to develop six technologies critical to U.S. national security: critical minerals, semiconductors, biomanufacturing, quantum computing, drones, and advanced manufacturing. Reynolds and her Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) colleagues make specific policy recommendations for each of the technologies.

The technology-focused chapters follow a set structure: Strategic Importance, Current Landscape, Gaps and Opportunities, and Recommendations. This format is similar to the popular SWOT framework, which looks at Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats, in this case with added context provided by the strategic analysis. The recommendations, made by senior faculty with impressive credentials (most of whom occupy named chairs), follow a similar format and often contain similar recommendations.

Among the authors, there appears to be a consensus that the United States should develop regional hubs centered on specific technology groups. I first encountered this type of analysis in AnnaLee Saxenian’s book Regional Advantage, which was published in 1994 and depicted the rise of technology hubs along Route 128 near Boston and in Silicon Valley. Much as in Shenzhen now and with craft-based artisanry in pre-industrial Italy, concentrations of skill and resources create beneficial interactions and competition.

Proposing this type of government-led development within the United States can be a bit fraught. When I worked in the Washington, DC, area in the 1990s the term “industrial policy” evoked strong reactions. Discussions meandered from claims that central planning doomed the Soviet Union, through arguments pointing out the success of Japanese programs running through the Ministry of Technology and Industry (MITI), and often concluding with someone claiming that the United States was a free market economy and the government had no business “picking winners and losers.”

Such discussions went from interesting to drudgery after the first few times through the loop, but one could easily make the case that government entities have always picked winners and losers through acquisitions, tax incentives, and subsidies. More directly, the United States federal government acquired about 10% of Intel stock in 2025 with the stated goal of strengthening our domestic chip design and fabrication capabilities.

Thankfully, the authors bypass the age-old industrial policy debate and recommend sensible levels of government support for specific technologies, industries, and regional development hubs. While Europe has moved away from national champions, at least in part, countries such as China are following aggressive loss-leading strategies to extend their dominance beyond contracted manufacturing. It might not be time to dust off our copies of MITI and the Japanese Miracle, but there are certainly lessons to be learned.

Priority Technologies offers sensible recommendations for policymakers, legislators, and other parties interested in shaping the future of American industry. Yes, it appears that some level of explicit industrial policy is required to create a solid technological foundation for the next phase of economic development, but old prejudices should not stand in the way of future growth.