If we take a look around, it doesn’t take much to see that the future doesn’t look that bright: climate change, food insecurity, the decline of mental and physical health, world peace at a knife’s edge… and social media algorithms trying to grab every bit of your attention!

Yet, despite this critical state, much of our innovation and entrepreneurial energy is directed elsewhere. Instead of concerning ourselves with these deep-rooted issues, we see most new businesses focusing on solving superficial, immediate pains: optimizing advertisements, making the next smartphone gadget, or launching those new shoe soles that make you run 1% faster.

And this really is a question that makes me restless most of the time, if not every day: why does so much innovation focus on the trivial, while the most pressing issues remain under-funded and basically ignored? If you’re really going to put so much effort into something, why not at least try to make a difference for a better world?

To understand this misalignment, we need to break down the positioning between these two types of issues and how solutions are addressing them. Then hopefully, we can start to understand how we can shift more brilliant minds to focus on making a real impact.

Deep Problems, Acute Problems and Solutions

When we examine the landscape of global challenges and solutions, we can classify them into three main key elements:

Deep problems: These are the large-scale, systemic challenges that affect humanity as a whole: climate change, hunger, water scarcity, public health crises (both mental and physical). Their resolution could define the long-term future of our planet and species.

Acute but superficial problems: These are short-term pains that individual businesses, industries, or consumers feel day-to-day. A company struggling with getting more customers, how annoying it is to cut your grass, or the new clothes that just can’t arrive fast enough because “you don’t have anything to wear”. These are all acute problems. Solving them can be profitable, but they don’t necessarily move the needle on humanity’s most urgent issues.

Solutions: This category includes the technologies, products, and services that entrepreneurs and businesses create. Some of these solutions target deep problems, others address acute problems, and some exist but really don’t solve anything at all!

Now, if we put these three categories into a Venn diagram, we can see six different intersections:

1. Deep problems that remain unsolved

These are the issues that concern everyone but somehow remain stagnant. Climate change, biodiversity loss, systemic poverty. Because they affect everyone, they tend to become no one’s direct responsibility. Entrepreneurs struggle to develop financially sustainable businesses around them, governments move too slowly, and the profit-driven market simply does not prioritize them. So all things equal, they remain unsolved.

2. Acute problems that have no meaningful impact

Most startup incubators, business advisors, you name it, will tell you to look here. “Find a problem people are willing to pay for you to solve”... any problem, as long as someone pays for it, and then when you’re making money, scale it 1000x and make a lot more. You’re now successful and happy in life… right? These are problems that companies or individuals are willing to pay to solve, yet they do little for the long-term well-being of the planet or society. Yes, they generate profit, but at best, they maintain the status quo, and at worst, they make things worse. Sad but true.

3. Solutions that solve nothing

This category consists of ideas in search of a problem. I’ve seen this very often when looking at spin-offs from research labs. There’s a new technology that could create something amazing for the world, but really, it’s not solving any problem any better than what we already have today. Other examples are entrepreneurs who build products because they think it’s cool, or there’s a trend. Remember that IoT toaster you could control with your phone? The blockchain-based coffee ordering system? Just because you can, it doesn’t mean you should.

4. Businesses solving acute problems but ignoring deep ones

The most profitable businesses in the world currently in operation usually fall into this category. They solve immediate pains, but they either ignore or actively worsen deep problems. It’s basically point number 3 above, but there are already numerous solutions to these problems. The opportunity here is to do it better. A company making accounting software improves financial efficiency for businesses, but does little for the planet. An e-commerce giant optimizing logistics to deliver goods faster also increases carbon emissions. These businesses dominate the global economy because they make money by solving problems that companies and consumers are actively willing to pay for, and they’ll switch to anyone doing it better and/or cheaper.

5. Businesses solving deep problems without clear incentives

This is where impact-driven startups like carbon capture technology, sustainable fuels, and climate-tech innovations live. These companies address major global crises but often struggle because few are willing to pay for it. Why? Because people and businesses often only pay for what is a problem today, what impairs their individual day-to-day, their operations this year. Few will pay for the problems they’ll have tomorrow, and fewer will contribute to problems that are not only theirs, as it is too easy not to feel responsible for them. So these problem-solution fits are not financially incentivized. Few people will pay directly for carbon removal to offset their emissions, and sustainable food systems often face unfair competition against subsidized traditional industries. Without strong external pressures (such as government policies or shifting consumer behavior), these solutions struggle to scale.

6. Today’s ideal: When deep and acute problems align

The sweet spot today is when solving a deep problem also addresses an acute problem, meaning someone is willing to pay for a solution. Companies in this space are solving meaningful issues while also generating revenue by solving superficial problems. For example:

> Energy efficiency tech that saves companies money while reducing emissions.

> Electric cars in countries where they’ve become a status, luxury symbol.

> Circular economy solutions that help businesses turn waste into valuable products that sell for profit.

This is where successful impact-driven innovation thrives, and it’s also where some of the most attractive white-space opportunities exist today: problems that matter in the long run with short-term pains but still lack scalable solutions.

Why aren’t more entrepreneurs focused on deep problems?

So why is there such a massive imbalance? Why do most businesses focus on acute but superficial problems rather than solving humanity’s greatest challenges? The reasons come down to incentives, market forces, and short-term thinking:

1. Solving deep problems is very rarely the most profitable solution

Entrepreneurs and investors naturally go where the money is, and right now, many deep problems lack strong financial rewards. People won’t personally pay to fix climate change or eradicate hunger, but they will pay for things like pleasure, convenience, comfort, and status. Meanwhile, resource usage and negative impact are still either highly unregulated, or stimulated in a completely nonsensical way: unsustainable industries receive financial advantages! Meat and fossil fuels, for example, are still heavily subsidized, making sustainable alternatives less competitive since the playing field is completely unbalanced.

2. Short-term capitalism favors quick wins

Venture capital often prioritizes high returns within a few years, which makes deep, long-term problems unattractive. Deep-problem entrepreneurs are often faced with long build times before their solutions are profitable, sometimes even requiring significant investments before that happens. The technology might need development, customer acquisition is not straightforward, or the market is just not ready. On the other hand, a startup promising to optimize advertising revenues can show fast growth and immediate revenues. The question is: who is willing to take that risk and blow when the scalability of profits most times doesn’t even look better than a more traditional financial investment? Which leads to the third point:

3. The world competes on profit, not on making our species better

As weird as it might seem from an evolutionary perspective, our species doesn’t care about its own survival. We created a system of individual competition based on material possessions, and built a whole society around profit and “growing the economy”. A business that does good, competing against a profit-oriented one, will often lose if finance is the only deciding factor. Right now, profitability wins over anything in most industries, which pressures every single business and entrepreneur to compromise on good causes. It takes courage to go against this pressure, and few are willing to do it.

As it looks today, the only solution seems to be that narrow space where profit meets a good future. But surely there must be more we can do?

How can we do better?

Are we then stuck in that narrow space where we will only ever solve deep problems when they magically match a short-term pain someone is willing to pay for? How do we shift the problem around to ensure deep problems are worth the effort? Here are some takes of on how we can approach it:

1. Turn deep problems into acute ones

This is a place where governments, regulatory bodies and advocacy groups can accelerate change by turning deep problems into acute pains for companies. For example:

Make companies accountable through regulations. Stricter regulations and penalties for unsustainable practices (e.g., carbon taxes, transparency laws like the CSRD) can turn deep problems into acute business challenges. This will increase the urgency of solving things in a compatible way where we can address deep problems simultaneously.

Stop subsidizing unsustainable industries. Examples of this are the absurd subsidies directed into animal farming instead of plant-based food production. Redirecting funds toward sustainable alternatives in industry leaves a better choice for everyone while not increasing the pressure on tax-payers.

Mandate transparency and implement stricter rules against green-washing and mislabelling. Consumers must see the real impact of their purchases, whether that’s a positive or negative one. If the tobacco industry in the EU could be regulated for mandatory labelling of the harms of tobacco use in packages, so could many industries be with the harm/benefits towards climate and other health impact.

2. Elevate gains in deep problem solving

If there are no acute pains to solve, there must be gains to make in the “Deep Problem” space, so that it stimulates entrepreneurial activity to move into this field. Examples of this could be:

Financial stimulus made available from public funds that narrow down the wealth gap between impact-focused and profit-focused activities. Especially if these are derived from wealth created through harmful activities.

Consumers start demanding change through their purchasing habits, creating a stimulus for companies to adapt and contribute to the causes that their customers care about.

Employees start demanding better from their employers. The job market is changing, and workers understand the power they have to ask their employers “What’s in it for me? Why shouldn’t I go work anywhere else?”. This power for change could and should be used to drive companies to do better, and normalize making resources available to take care of the world in which their profits come from.

3. The entrepreneurial ecosystem must change mindset

Incubators, grants, and startup ecosystems need to prioritize solutions that benefit humanity rather than just maximizing financial returns. At the same time, entrepreneurs must ask themselves:

Am I solving a problem that truly matters? Or am I just chasing money because that’s what I’ve been told success is?

In the end, investors must prioritize impact so that new entrepreneurs follow through. Success should not be celebrated in how much a company sold for, but in what difference it made to the world and the people around them. More funds should focus on long-term returns and blended finance models that support sustainability-driven innovation. But this won’t happen without pressure, without individual expectations and demands changing, and until we stop caring what other people think our success should be.

Bonus thought: Are you happy?

If you’re an entrepreneur, investor, someone who can make anything, this small section is for you.

Look around and count: how many cases did you ever experience where making more money resulted in a more meaningful and fulfilled life? Studies around wellness show that money will make a difference up to a certain point, after that, it kind of plateaus. And that point is not that high. If you want numbers, it’s around 100,000 €/year. That’s it, making more than that won’t make you happier. 

Ask yourself, would you be happier if you put your efforts towards more money or rather towards a more meaningful existence, a purpose? Is hitting financial targets just a way to feed your innate need for achievement? Can we achieve something else instead? Yes, but you know, it takes courage to do good and swim against the current.

Final thoughts: The future is ours to ahape

The biggest challenges of our time will not solve themselves. If we leave things to the market alone and profit-driven forces, we will continue seeing businesses optimizing click-through rates while the planet burns. Change will only happen if we demand it. Through our votes, our wallet, and our voices. So:

Entrepreneurs: Build businesses that make a difference, not just money.

Investors: Fund solutions that will still matter in 20 years.

Governments: Stop rewarding destruction and start creating incentives for the future.

Everyone: Hold companies accountable - choose who you buy from, and who you work for.

In the end, most of the destructive pursuit of wealth is you caring too much about what other people think. Let’s do what matters and build a world where we can actually live good, meaningful lives.

Author: Paulo Teixeira, PhD