Overview

This model simulates logging and mountain biking competition in Derby, Tasmania. The Simulation is referenced to simulate Derby mountain biking with logging.

Model Work

The tourism industry is represented on the model's left side, and the logging industry is on the right side. Interactions between these two industries generate tax revenues. Logging and tourism have different growth rates regarding people working/consuming. The initial values of these two industries in the model are not fixed but increase yearly due to inflation or economic growth.

Detail Insights

From the perspective of tourism, as the number of tourists keeps growing, the number of people who choose to ride in Derby City also gradually increases. And the people who ride rate the ride. The negative feedback feeds back into the cycling population. Similarly, positive cycling reviews lead to more customer visits. And all the customers will create a revenue through tourism, and a certain proportion of the income will become tourism tax.

From a logging perspective, it is very similar to the tourism industry. As the number of people working in the industry is forecast to increase, the industry's overall size is predicted to grow. And as the industry's size continues to rise, the taxes on the logging industry will also continue to rise. Since logging is an industry, the tax contribution will be more significant than the tourism excise tax.

This model assumption is illustrated below:

1. The amount of tax reflects the level of industrial development.

2. The goal of reducing carbon emissions lets us always pay attention to the environmental damage caused by the logging industry.

3. The government's regulatory goal is to increase overall income while ensuring the environment.

4. Logging will lead to environmental damage, which will decrease the number of tourists.

This model is based on tourism tax revenue versus logging tax revenue. Tourism tax revenue is more incredible than logging tax revenue, indicating a better environment. As a result of government policy, the logging industry will be heavily developed in the short term. Growth in the logging industry will increase by 40%. A growth rate of 0.8 and 0.6 of the original is obtained when logging taxes are 2 and 4 times higher than tourism taxes.

Furthermore, tourism tax and logging tax also act on the positive rate, which is the probability that customers give a positive evaluation. The over-development of the logging industry will lead to the destruction of environmental resources and further affect the tourism industry. The logging tax will also affect the tourism Ride Rate, which is the probability that all tourism customers will choose Derby city.

This model more accurately reflects logging and tourism's natural growth and ties the two industries together environmentally. Two ways of development are evident in the two industries. Compared to tourism, logging shows an upward spiral influenced by government policies. Government attitudes also affect tourism revenue, but more by the logging industry. 

Overview: 

This model displays the conflict between the tourism and timber industry in Derby, Tasmania. It becomes a problem for the government officials when choosing the future policy direction. Our aim is to construct a model for simulation and find a equilibrium point to maximize the state benefit.

How Does the Model Work?

The key factor of the model is the value of the policy variable. It can take values between -1 and +1. The more it is close to +1 means that the policy government takes is more tourism-friendly. The more it is close to -1 means that the policy government takes is more timber-friendly.

Other than the policy variable, there are three sections for the model.

Section 1: The tourism

       We assume that there exist a population which contains the whole potential customers. The potential customers will make bike trips to Derby at a relatively stable rate. The input policy value will affect the satisfaction rate for the tourists. Some of them will provide positive feedbacks and become our potential customers again. On the other hand, those had bad experience will no longer make trips to Derby. All the tourists make consumption every month and part of the expense will become the tourism revenue. The average expense variable is also provided in this section.

Section 2: The timber industry

      The input policy variable will also affect the employment in the timber industry. It will partially determine the industry growth rate. Like the tourism, the sales/industry scale will generate monthly revenue for the industry at a given rate.

Section 3: The state benefit

      The revenue from the two industries will be added up. Our aim is to adjust the policy value to maximize the state benefit.

       Excessive logging may lead to environmental problems and it isn’t the best option for the whole state benefit. Based on the pre-set parameters and the model, we can see that the revenue contribution from the tourism is also considerable. According to our results, the policy value should be around 0.31, which represents the tourism-friendly policy.

This model demonstrates the intertwining relationship between the economic contribution of industrial logging and that of adventure tourism (dominated by mountain biking).

In terms of the revenue from industrial logging at Derby, it is driven by demand of timber and the timber price. However, the forest resources are limited, which will put constraints on the expansion of industrial logging due to regrowth rate and existing forestation.

The tourism can bring economic benefits to Derby from hospitality and selling tickets to local adventure activities. The hospitality income can be determined by the average length of holidaying at Derby and average local pricing for accommodation, food and beverages and related essentials. Tickets sales are largely affected by the similar factors such as average expense per activity and average number of activities that tourists usually choose. Having explained the streams of possible income from the tourism, the key driver for tourism income is the desire or demand to travel. Unlikely logging, tourism is renewable and perpetual. However, logging can be conceived as a major constraint on attracting as many tourists as the economy so desires.

This is because deforestation caused by logging will diminish the natural scenery at Derby and in turn, the tourist operations and attractions based upon natural scenery. Loss of forest resources is likely to make Derby less attractive to visitors.

In short, the tourism and logging both provides economic benefits to Derby but in a competing relationship. However, the sustainability possessed by tourism cannot be rivaled by industrial logging in long term. Logging revenue reveals its advantage at inception of observed time period. Such advantage wears out over the time due to reduction in resources and sluggish regrowth. Eventually. the tourism income turns into the major player. To understand how they co-exist, please simulate the model. 

Overview

This model simulates logging and mountain biking competition in Derby, Tasmania. The Simulation is referenced to simulate Derby mountain biking with logging.

Model Work

The tourism industry is represented on the model's left side, and the logging industry is on the right side. Interactions between these two industries generate tax revenues. Logging and tourism have different growth rates regarding people working/consuming. The initial values of these two industries in the model are not fixed but increase yearly due to inflation or economic growth.

Detail Insights

From the perspective of tourism, as the number of tourists keeps growing, the number of people who choose to ride in Derby City also gradually increases. And the people who ride rate the ride. The negative feedback feeds back into the cycling population. Similarly, positive cycling reviews lead to more customer visits. And all the customers will create a revenue through tourism, and a certain proportion of the income will become tourism tax.

From a logging perspective, it is very similar to the tourism industry. As the number of people working in the industry is forecast to increase, the industry's overall size is predicted to grow. And as the industry's size continues to rise, the taxes on the logging industry will also continue to rise. Since logging is an industry, the tax contribution will be more significant than the tourism excise tax.

This model assumption is illustrated below:

1. The amount of tax reflects the level of industrial development.

2. The goal of reducing carbon emissions lets us always pay attention to the environmental damage caused by the logging industry.

3. The government's regulatory goal is to increase overall income while ensuring the environment.

4. Logging will lead to environmental damage, which will decrease the number of tourists.

This model is based on tourism tax revenue versus logging tax revenue. Tourism tax revenue is more incredible than logging tax revenue, indicating a better environment. As a result of government policy, the logging industry will be heavily developed in the short term. Growth in the logging industry will increase by 40%. A growth rate of 0.8 and 0.6 of the original is obtained when logging taxes are 2 and 4 times higher than tourism taxes.

Furthermore, tourism tax and logging tax also act on the positive rate, which is the probability that customers give a positive evaluation. The over-development of the logging industry will lead to the destruction of environmental resources and further affect the tourism industry. The logging tax will also affect the tourism Ride Rate, which is the probability that all tourism customers will choose Derby city.

This model more accurately reflects logging and tourism's natural growth and ties the two industries together environmentally. Two ways of development are evident in the two industries. Compared to tourism, logging shows an upward spiral influenced by government policies. Government attitudes also affect tourism revenue, but more by the logging industry.