Social pressures create {Youth Alienation}, leading to youth developing bad behaviours and committing crimes. This attracts {Police Enforcement} who will, in turn, engage the {Community Leadership} where they introduce programs that are designed to assist youth to prevent re-offending through the development of {Community Clubs}, which then contributes to {Community Development}.

{Police Enforcement} collaborates with {Educational Institutions} to boost retention, which translates to socio-economic progress through {Community Development}. On the other hand, criminals are detained and put through the {Court} system, where the offenders are removed from the community through {Imprisonment}. This results in a stable and safe environment, which aid support for {Community Development).

The role of {Community Leadership} in the system, particularly at the grassroots will result is huge savings in the economy, aiding economic growth. The {Community Leadership} collaborates with the {Employment & Justice Agencies}, translating into socio-economic progress {Community Development}

The Community Development Model

This model provides an understanding into the relationships and links between a range of variable units and fixed units, and how {Community Development} is supported.

As {Youth Alienation} rate increases,  the {Crime} rate increases (both variables) demands police enforcement. {Police Enforcement} is a fixed variable as increase in police force is fixed over a period of time. 

To increase efficiency, engages or collaborate with:

•{Community Leadership} (fixed and variable) – is fixed for a certain period, and becomes variable as youth criminal activities increases

•{Court} (variable) – as youth criminal activities increase, the court resources reman fixed. It then removes some offenders from the community and imprison them, creating peace and stability in the community 

•{Educational Institutions} (variables) – as student retention increases, more institutions are needed.  

This model indicate indicates the modeling COVID-19 outbreaks and responses from government policies with the effect on the local economy. Model was occurred at Burnie, Tasmania. The model mainly contains three parts: COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, four differences government policies and what the impact on economy from those policies.

Assumptions:

(1) Various variables influence the model, which can result in varied outcomes. The following values are based on an estimate and may differ from actual values. Government initiatives are focused at reducing Covid-19 infections and, as a result, affecting (both positive and negative) economic growth.

(2) 42% of infected people will recovery. 10% of people who are infected will die and the rate relatively higher due to the much old people living in Burnie, Tasmania.

78% of cases get tested.

(3) Government policy will only be implemented when there are ten or more recorded cases. Four government policies have had influences on infection.  

(4) The rising number of instances will have a negative impact on Burnie's economic growth.

Insights:

1. As a result of the government's covid 19 rules, fewer people will be vulnerable. Less people going to be susceptible.

2. After the government policy intervention, there is a effectively reduce of infected people.

3. Overall, there is no big differences of economic performance from the graph, might due to the positive and negative effect of economy. And after two weeks, the economy maintained a level of development without much decline.