The standard, Bayesian account of rational belief and decision is often argued to be unable to cope properly with severe uncertainty, of the sort ubiquitous in some areas of policy making. This paper tackles the question of what should replace it as a guide for rational decision making. It defends a recent proposal, which reserves a role for the decision maker’s confidence in beliefs. Beyond being able to cope with severe uncertainty, the account has strong normative credentials on the main fronts typically evoked as relevant for rational belief and decision. It fares particularly well, we argue, in comparison to other prominent non-Bayesian models in the literature.

This paper considers the role of costless decisions relating to the extraction of a non-renewable resource in the presence of uncertainty. We begin by deriving a size scale of the extractable resource, above which the solution to the valuation and optimal control strategy can be described by analytic solutions; we produce solutions for a general form of operating cost function. Below this critical resource size level the valuation and optimal control strategy must be solved by numerical means; we present a robust numerical algorithm that can solve such a class of problem. We also allow for the embedding of an irreversible investment decision (abandonment) into the optimisation. Finally, we conduct experimentation for each of these two approaches (analytical and numerical), and show how they are consistent with one another when used appropriately. The extensions of this paper's techniques to renewable resources are explored.