I am currently working as researcher and software dev exactly in this field, this is my personal opinion:
Nope. At least not at the current market conditions.
Almost ALL the clients and institutions with which I have collaborated like lot of things about web3 and blockchains, but in the process of finalizing the requirements they end up disliking a lot more of them.
Like almost everyone wants a way to revert transactions easily and very fast by a "controller" entity managed by themselves. They want advanced fraud prevention. They want a way to recover private keys (wallets) for their clients or to manage those directly themselves. They want a way to manage whatever there is in those wallet for various security purposes. They often want to collect a lot of personal information which require a strong synchronization between what there is in the bc and a very large db. They want transaction costs to be almost nil with nonsensical transaction volumes. Etc etc
All these things are hard to do using blockchains, but possible in some way or another. The problem is that the result is often a bastardization of what a blockchain is, with lot of extra slow, sync and cost factors. So you end up with just another centralized and very inefficient solution that most of the time would be far better just removing the whole blockchain concept from the project.
In the last three years probably I can count just ONE project which was truly a good match for a bc solution (and was not strangely requested by a local association of no-profits for a local-economy solution), another dozen which were hard bastardization, and a lot of others which we just refused to implement because they were absurd proposals, even if the clients put a lot of money on the table.
My contacts in the same field feel all the same.