This sentence expresses first the objective, then the action undertaken to reach this objective, thus creating a strong and elegant connection between need and task.
Here are three examples of such a combination: An Introduction is usually clearer and more logical when it separates what the authors have done (the task) from what the paper itself attempts or covers (the object of the document).
At the beginning of the Introduction section, the context and need work together as a funnel: They start broad and progressively narrow down to the issue addressed in the paper.
To spark interest among your audience — referees and journal readers alike — provide a compelling motivation for the work presented in your paper: The fact that a phenomenon has never been studied before is not, in and of itself, a reason to study that phenomenon.
Scientific papers typically have two audiences: first, the referees, who help the journal editor decide whether a paper is suitable for publication; and second, the journal readers themselves, who may be more or less knowledgeable about the topic addressed in the paper.
To be accepted by referees and cited by readers, papers must do more than simply present a chronological account of the research work.
Convey the need for the work as an opposition between actual and desired situations.
Start by stating the actual situation (what we have) as a direct continuation of the context.
Rather, they must convince their audience that the research presented is important, valid, and relevant to other scientists in the same field.
To this end, they must emphasize both the motivation for the work and the outcome of it, and they must include just enough evidence to establish the validity of this outcome.