Quantifying the limits of HANPP and carbon emissions which prolong total species well-being

Anthropogenic climate and land-use change are leading to irreversible losses of global biodiversity, upon which ecosystem functioning depends. Since total species' well-being depends on ecosystem goods and services, man must determine how much net primary productivity (NPP) may be appropriated and carbon emitted so as to not adversely impact this and future generations. In 2005, man ought to have only appropriated 9.72 Pg C of NPP, representing a factor 2.50, or 59.93%, reduction in human-appropriated NPP in that year. Concurrently, the carbon cycle would have been balanced with a factor 1.26, or 20.84%, reduction from 7.60 Gt C/year to 5.70 Gt C/year, representing a return to the 1986 levels. This limit is in keeping with the category III stabilization scenario of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change. Projecting population growth to 2030 and its associated basic food requirements, the maximum HANPP remains at 9.74 ± 0.02 Pg C/year. This time-invariant HANPP may only provide for the current global population of 6.51 billion equitably at the current average consumption of 1.49 t C per capita, calling into question the sustainability of developing countries striving for high-consuming country levels of 5.85 t C per capita and its impacts on equitable resource distribution. © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009.

Changes of mind in decision-making.

A decision is a commitment to a proposition or plan of action based on evidence and the expected costs and benefits associated with the outcome. Progress in a variety of fields has led to a quantitative understanding of the mechanisms that evaluate evidence and reach a decision. Several formalisms propose that a representation of noisy evidence is evaluated against a criterion to produce a decision. Without additional evidence, however, these formalisms fail to explain why a decision-maker would change their mind. Here we extend a model, developed to account for both the timing and the accuracy of the initial decision, to explain subsequent changes of mind. Subjects made decisions about a noisy visual stimulus, which they indicated by moving a handle. Although they received no additional information after initiating their movement, their hand trajectories betrayed a change of mind in some trials. We propose that noisy evidence is accumulated over time until it reaches a criterion level, or bound, which determines the initial decision, and that the brain exploits information that is in the processing pipeline when the initial decision is made to subsequently either reverse or reaffirm the initial decision. The model explains both the frequency of changes of mind as well as their dependence on both task difficulty and whether the initial decision was accurate or erroneous. The theoretical and experimental findings advance the understanding of decision-making to the highly flexible and cognitive acts of vacillation and self-correction.