Figure 1.
Conceptual diagram of the simulation model of primary interactions between model components.
Conservation options act on the system by increasing the land rental price or increasing the cost of fishing. Pollution is driven by land use and impacts the fish stock through recruitment and mortality. Fish stock is also impacted by fishing effort through harvest. Wage rate is affected by fish stock and cost of fishing. Demand for tourism is influenced by the fish stock, while the demand, wage rate, and land rental price determine the allocation of land and tourism labor. (1) Shows where fisheries enforcement interacts with the model by increasing the cost of fishing and decreasing the profit from fishing. (2) Land conservation interacts with the model by increasing the land rental price and decreasing the amount of land used. (3) Fish stock affects the quantity of tourism demanded by increasing or decreasing the amount people are willing to pay for a unit of tourism. (4) Fishing effort alters fish mortality and controls the size of the fish stock.
Table 1.
Results from analytic model.
Figure 2.
Benefit shift of conservation actions.
Figure 2 illustrates how benefits are shifted with conservation action. Supply1 represents the initial state of our system with no conservation action, and Supply2 represents the new supply curve when land conservation is implemented.
Figure 3.
Impacts of the various marine conservation strategies on fish stocks.
Conservation strategies are implemented at year 10, denoted by the vertical line. Both conservation strategies lead to an increase in fish stock in this scenario.
Figure 4.
Impacts of the various marine conservation strategies on the yearly wage rate.
Conservation strategies are implemented at year 10, denoted by the vertical line. Land conservation leads to an increase in the wage rate, while fisheries enforcement decreases the wage rate.
Table 2.
Present value of all future income for an individual worker with the different conservation actions.
Figure 5.
Marine conservation strategies on fish stock when the stock is declining.
Fish stock is modeled as declining due to an increase in the catchability coefficient, representing improving fishing technology, with conservation strategies being implemented at 10 years, denoted by the vertical line. Fisheries enforcement slows the loss of fish stock, while land conservation has ambiguous effects on the fish stock.
Figure 6.
Wage rate with declining fish stock.
Conservation strategies are implemented at year 10, denoted by the vertical line. Fisheries enforcement leads to a decline in the present value of all future income for workers, and also creates instability in wage rates. Land conservation leads to an increase in the wage rate. The initial instability in the model is due to the implementation of increased ability to catch fish. Due to the recruitment delay of our fish stock, it takes several years for these dynamics to stabilize.