tags: Africa, agriculture, AI, apes, artificial, artificial intelligens, ASPM, atoms, biological diversity, biology, biosphere, biotechnology, birds, bloom, botany, bottom-up, brain, breeding, carbon dioxide, Carl Linnaeus, cells, cell division, chemical vapour deposition, children, chimpanzee, classification, climate, cloning, computers, computer chips, consciousness, cross-fertilisation, Darwin, death, development, DNA, domestic animals, Earth, ecology, economics, ecosystems, egg cell, egoism, electronic devices, elevator, embryo, embryonic stem cells, emotions, energy forests, environment, ethics, evolution, flooding, florigen, flowering, forestry, FOXP2, fullerenes, GDP, genemanipulation, genes, genetics, genetic code, gene manipulation, global change, God, heridity, human being, invisibility, kieselguhr, language, learning, life, materials, medicine, Mendel, molecular biology, molecular electronics, molecules, mutations, MYH16, nano, nanometres, nanotechnology, nanotubes, nano clocks, Nobel, nobel prize, oceans, organs, ozone hole, parkinson, pharmaceuticals, plants, play, poplar, proteins, quantum effects, rain forests, religion, resilience, robots, scanning tunnel microscope, self-awareness, self-consciousness, sex, space, speech, stem cells, top-down, trees, urbanisation, wetlands, Ångström,

question 24: can we put a price tag on natural resources?

If a well-functioning wetland is important for a region, can you calculate its value? If a virgin forest is insurance for the future, how does it appear in the country's GDP? If our planet is to survive, economists and biologists will have to collaborate in developing a whole new kind of balance sheet.  Read more