This simulation makes the negative effects of starting work too soon visible. You can play around with the parameters.

From Stephen Toulmin's Book The Uses of Argument Cambridge University Press 2003. See wikipedia  Also Francis Miller Claim Hexagon 2025 web article

Model Explanation

The model to be simulate the possible crime patterns among the youth population of Bourke, where levels of alienation, policing and community engagement expenditure can be manipulated. Here the youth in Bourke have a minimum percentage of the interested participated on the community activities which government aims to improve their lifestyle and therefore they can specified on the reduce the rate of criminal activity. 

Assumption:

The assumption of the 2530 youth of the Bourke n the population susceptible to committing crime and simulations of criminal tendencies are only based on the factor presented, no external influences

Variable:

Alienation includes any factors that can increase the like hood of youth to commit crime such as exposure to domestic violence, household income, education level, and family background community engagement expenditure is the total monies budgeted into community activities to develop youths in and out of growth detention policing is the amount of police placed onto patrol in the town of Bourke to reinforce safety and that the law is abided.

Stocks: 

conviction rate is set to 60% A growth detention sentence for convicted criminals is set to 3 months the top 30% of the most server offenders are sent to rehabilitation for 3 months, to which they return to Bourke assuming in a better state and less likely to repeat a petty crime community activities are set to last 3 months to be calculating the align with the seasons: sporting club of the growth of community participants have 20% change of being disengaged as it may not align with their interests investments into policing are felt immediately & community engagement expenditure has a delay of 3 months. 

Finding the interest:

1. Alienation of the set maximum value is 0.2, policing and community engagement set to minimum shows a simulation where by all criminals are in town rather than being expedited and placed into growth detention even after a base value on the 500 youth placed into growth detention- this shouts that budget is required to control the overwhelming number of criminal youth as they overrun brouke.

2.  Set of community activity they can identified the 0.01 policing to max & alienation to max. The lack of social crime has caused much trouble among young people. The Police Immigration Police has not been deployed to the city of town, which has such a crime rate. Growth prevention can only last a long time, and all young people cannot be rehabilitated, so if they continue to commit crimes.

3. It plays an important role in considering the crime of young people. In order to keep the criminal activity minimal, the bulk of the budgets in police and social involvement among young people must be put at risk. Realistically, budget in a small town is an important factor, it may be engagement. 

4. To be set the police value 0.2, and engaged alienation expenditure value 0.04 of the community activities that can use of improve the youth in town of Bourke

 

We start with an SEIR social virality model and adapt it to model social media adoption of Playcast Hosts.  *Note that this model does not attempt to model WOM emergent virality.  

Assignment 3: Bourke Crime and Community Development​

This map is a WIP derived from the MIT D-memo 4641 presentation by Nelson Repenning 1996 and the paper "Nobody Ever Gets Credit for Fixing Problems that Never Happened: Creating and Sustaining Process Improvement" by Nelson P. Repenning and John D Sterman. http://bit.ly/jCXGKL See Insight 9781 for a simulation of this model. This map adds additional features mentioned in the article to the bare bones simulation in IM-9781

Assignment 3 MGMT220
**Scroll down for adjustable sliders**

This model is designed as a simplified field of inputs and outputs for the proposed future justice reinvestment in the north-western NSW town of Bourke. This town is quite small with a total population of around 3,000 people but a worryingly high rate of criminal  activity, antisocial behaviour and a generally low sense of community engagement. To plan for a better future this model has been created to map future patterns and changes given certain levels of community investment and policing which can me modified by users, including you!

Key Assumptions & Things to Note:
-Model interactions and consequences only focused on the effects of youth not adults.
-Total youth population assumed to be 1,500 out of the total 3,000 people in Bourke
-Model moves in monthly increments
-Model duration is 5 years (60 Months) as this seems like a realistic time frame for such a project plan to span over
-Engagement return modification allows between 0 and 6 months return to allow insight into the positive effects a shorter engagement time can have on the community
-Police Investment allows adjustment of police force units between 15 and 50
-Community Investment allows an investment of between 0 and 100 to provide a full spectrum of the town with or without investment

Model Prerequisite Understandings:
The model commences with 400 people engaging in criminal activity, and a further 300 people already in juvenile detention to provide a more realistic start point.

Model Analysis:
The most important message this model shows is that there is no one sided solution for everything. Without community investment, regardless of how many police you have the town is still going to be full of bored people committing crimes - just more will be caught and convicted.

On the flip side a town with no police and only community investment may have a low rate of people in juvenile detention and a high number of people in sports teams - but criminal activity may still be higher than optimal due to a low chance of getting caught.

You can see these results for yourselves simply by adjusting the variable sliders on the bottom right of the page to suit your investment interests. Relevant boundaries have been set to give only useful and meaningful information. Furthermore an engagement return tool has been added to show the effects of a slow or fast engagement pickup time ranging from 0 to 6 months. You will note that things change a lot quicker with a shorter engagement return time.

An interesting thing to note is how evenly 3 of the 4 key data fields in the first simulation display (with the outlier being sports team enrolment) when police investment is set to maximum and community investment is set to the minimum - we see essentially an even split between the 3 possibilities: In town, In Juvenile Detention or engaging in Criminal Activity. a 2:1 split of "bad" to "good" things happening. This shows with certainty that just adding policing with no positive reward or outlet for good behaviour results in a flattened cycle of boredom, criminal activity and conviction.

In this model it also seems that Bourke does require a fairly even but high matching of Police and Community Investment. For example setting the policing at 20 and the community engagement higher at say 50 results in indeed a high intake and output of town to sports team memberships however crime rates do still maintain a steady high dictating a more even match between policing and community investment like 40 and 60 to the former and latter to "eradicate" crime. (Of course this will never be 0 in the real world but it is a positive indicator here)

2f. [thought question] Is it possible for r maxrmax to be positive and yet for the total regional abundance to exhibit a persistent declining trend? Explain your reasoning, using at least one biologically realistic example. You can use the agent-based metapopulation model in InsightMaker to help test your ideas, but this is not required.

Based on the Market and Price simulation model in System Zoo 3, Z504. In this model the profit calculations were not realistic. They were based on the per unit profit, which does not take items not sold into account. Also the model was not very clear on profit since it was included in the total production costs and consequently in the unit costs and subsequently profit was calculated by subtracting unit costs of the market price. Thus profit had a double layer which does not make the model better accessible. I have tried to remedy both in this simplified version.

Attempts to model in the social dynamics of  Pavilion host aquisition

Rich picture version of Tanner's Clinical Judgment Model, with the addition of clinical reasoning cycle concepts from T Levett-Jones et al Nurse Education Today 30 (2010) 515-520

The complex systems model ‘Engagement vs Police Expenditure for Justice Reinvestment in Bourke, NSW’ evaluates the effectiveness of allocating government funding to either community engagement activities or law enforcement. In this model, it is possible for the user to designate resources from a scale of 20-100 and to also modify the crime rate for both adults and youth. Below, there are detailed notes that describe the reasoning and assumptions that justify the logic applied to this model. Similar notes can be found when stocks, flows and variables is clicked under the field ‘notes’.