There are different ways to model the protection of wildlife and natural resources, but one possible approach

is to use a
system of differential equations. Let’s consider a simple model that includes three components: wildlife population, natural
resources, and human activities.
Let 𝑊 (𝑡) be the population of a certain wildlife species at time 𝑡, 𝑅(𝑡) be the amount of natural resources available
to support the wildlife population at time 𝑡, and 𝐻 (𝑡) be the level of human activities that may impact the wildlife and
natural resources at time 𝑡. We can write the above system of differential equations to describe the dynamics of these three
components.
Here, 𝑓 (𝑊, 𝑅) represents the growth rate of the wildlife population as a function of the available natural resources,
𝑔(𝐻, 𝑊) represents the impact of human activities on the wildlife population, ℎ(𝑅) represents the regeneration rate of the
natural resources, 𝑘 (𝐻, 𝑅) represents the impact of human activities on the natural resources, and 𝑝(𝐻, 𝑊, 𝑅) represents
the level of human activities that can be adjusted to balance the conservation of the wildlife and natural resources with other
economic and social needs.
𝑑𝑊
= 𝑓 (𝑊, 𝑅) − 𝑔(𝐻, 𝑊)
𝑑𝑡
𝑑𝑅
= ℎ(𝑅) − 𝑘 (𝐻, 𝑅)
𝑑𝑡
𝑑𝐻
= 𝑝(𝐻, 𝑊, 𝑅)
𝑑𝑡
This model can be used to explore different scenarios and policies that may affect the conservation of the wildlife
and natural resources. For example, we can test the effects of reducing human activities in certain areas, increasing the
regeneration of natural resources, or adjusting the level of human activities to achieve a certain target for the wildlife
population. We can define:
𝑊
𝑓 (𝑊, 𝑅) = 𝑟𝑊 (1 − )𝑅
𝐾

𝑔(𝐻, 𝑊) = 𝛼𝐻𝑊

𝑅
ℎ(𝑅) = 𝑎𝑅(1 − )
𝑀

𝑘 (𝐻, 𝑅) = 𝛽𝐻𝑅

𝑊 𝑅
𝑝(𝐻, 𝑊, 𝑅) = 𝛾𝐻 (1 − ) (1 − )
𝐾 𝑀
where 𝑟, 𝐾, 𝛼, 𝑎, 𝑀, 𝛽, and 𝛾 are positive constants that represent the growth rate of the wildlife population, the carrying
capacity of the natural resources, the impact of human activities on the wildlife population, the regeneration rate of the
natural resources, the carrying capacity of the natural resources, the impact of human activities on the natural resources,
and the trade-off between conservation and other needs, respectively.
With these functions, the system of differential equations becomes:
𝑑𝑊 𝑊
= 𝑟𝑊 (1 − )𝑅 − 𝛼𝐻𝑊
𝑑𝑡 𝐾
𝑑𝑅 𝑅
= 𝑎𝑅(1 − ) − 𝛽𝐻𝑅
𝑑𝑡 𝑀
𝑑𝐻 𝑊 𝑅
= 𝛾𝐻 (1 − ) (1 − )
𝑑𝑡 𝐾 𝑀
To solve this system, we need to specify initial conditions for W, R, and H, i.e., 𝑊 (0), 𝑅(0), and 𝐻 (0). We can then
use numerical methods such as Euler’s method, Runge-Kutta method, or a numerical ODE solver to obtain a numerical
solution for the system. The solution will give us the time evolution of the wildlife population, natural resources, and human
activities under the specified functions and initial conditions.

1
0.1 Economical impact - The Conservation Officer
0.1.1 Assessment of Maintaining cost
A mathematical model to represent the maintaining cost of a national park could be:

𝑇 𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 (𝑀𝐶) = 𝐹𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑑𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 + 𝑉 𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡

where
• Fixed Cost = Cost of maintaining permanent infrastructure (e.g., staff salaries, equipment maintenance, etc.)

• Variable Cost = Cost of maintaining natural resources and wildlife (e.g., restoration, conservation, anti-poaching
efforts). It is a function of the number of visitors

0.1.2 Assessment of Tourism income

The revenue can be bifurcated into two components: Entrance fees and service payments paid by visitors and penalties
imposed on violators.

• Profit from visitors can be approximated as 𝑁 · 𝐴𝐹 where 𝑁 is the estimated number of the visitors (annual) and
𝐴𝐹 is the average fees.

𝑁 = 𝛼0 + 𝛼1 𝑅 + 𝛼2𝑊 + 𝛼3 𝐻 + 𝛼4 𝑅𝑊 2
where
– 𝑅 is the measure of natural resources in the park (e.g. land area, vegetation cover, water availability), which has
a linear effect on visitation
– 𝑊 is the measure of wildlife diversity in the park (e.g. number of species, abundance of wildlife), which has a
non-linear effect on visitation
– 𝐻 is the measure of local people’s lives (e.g. population, income, education), which has a linear effect on
visitation.
– 𝛼0 is the intercept, representing the number of visitors when all other factors are zero.

This accounts for the idea that visitors may be more attracted to parks with a high diversity of wildlife, but may
become less interested if the diversity is too low or too high. The non-linear effect of wildlife diversity (𝑊) is
captured by including a squared term (𝑊 2 ) with a separate coefficient. The average fees 𝐴𝐹 can be estimated when
we have the data of entrance fees in The Wildlife Conservation and Management Act (No. 47 of 2013). Legal Notice
No. 155 (2020).

𝑉 = 𝑣1, 𝑣2, . . . , 𝑣 𝑛 (visitor from 1 to 𝑛)

𝑃 = 𝑝1, 𝑝2, . . . , 𝑝 𝑛 (range of entrance fees and benefit for local people from its activities)
𝑅 = 𝑝 1 𝑣 1 + 𝑝 2 𝑣 2 + · · · + 𝑝 𝑛 𝑣 𝑛 (total revenue)
𝑅
𝐴𝐹 = (average income)
𝑣1 + 𝑣2 + · · · + 𝑣 𝑛

• Penalties imposed on violators

Let 𝑃 be the penalty fee for a violation, and let 𝐼 be the impact of the violation on the environment. Let 𝐸 be the per
capita income of the residents in the region.
We can then define the penalty fee as:
𝑃 = 𝛽 ∗ 𝐼 ∗ (1 − 𝐸/𝐸 max )

where 𝛽 is a constant that scales the penalty fee based on the severity of the violation, and 𝐸 max is the maximum per
capita income in the region. The (1 − 𝐸/𝐸 max ) factor ensures that the penalty fee is adjusted based on the economic
status of the residents, so that it remains reasonable and doesn’t become a burden on the local community.

2
0.2 Economical Impact - Local Residents
The local residents who live within the boundaries of the national park rely on two sources of income to sustain their
livelihoods: grazing their livestock and participating in tourism-related activities.
Let’s denote the income from grazing livestock by 𝐼𝑔 and the income from participating in tourism-related activities by 𝐼𝑡 .
We can then build a mathematical model as follows:
𝑑𝐼𝑔
= 𝑟 𝑔 𝐺 (𝑇) − 𝑐 𝑔 𝐼𝑔
𝑑𝑡
𝑑𝐼𝑡
= 𝑟 𝑡 𝑇 − 𝑐 𝑡 𝐼𝑡
𝑑𝑡
where 𝑟 𝑔 and 𝑟 𝑡 represent the income per unit time from grazing and tourism activities, respectively. 𝐺 (𝑇) is the grazing
area available to the local residents and is a function of the tourism 𝑇. As tourism activity increases, the available grazing
area decreases. 𝑐 𝑔 and 𝑐 𝑡 represent the costs of maintaining livestock and participating in tourism activities, respectively.
This model assumes that the income from grazing livestock is dependent on the available grazing area, which decreases
as tourism activity increases. Similarly, the income from tourism activities is dependent on the level of tourism activity.
The costs of maintaining livestock and participating in tourism activities are assumed to be constant over time.
This model can be used to explore different scenarios and policy decisions that may affect the income of local residents
living within the boundaries of the national park. For example, increasing the available grazing area may result in an
increase in the income from grazing livestock, while increasing the level of tourism activity may result in an increase in
the income from tourism-related activities. However, there may be trade-offs between these two sources of income as
increasing tourism activity may decrease the available grazing area. The costs of maintaining livestock and participating in
tourism activities can also be adjusted to reflect changes in the cost of living or changes in the regulatory environment.
In conclusion, we have the measurement for the economical impact denoted as 𝐸 𝐼.

𝐸 𝐼 = 𝐼𝑔 + 𝐼𝑡 + 𝑁 ∗ 𝐴𝐹 + 𝑝 ∗ 𝑃 − 𝑀𝐶 (1)

where 𝑝 is the probability of violance.

0.3 Gathering
After considering the arguments presented above, we obtain a final vector of statements at time 𝑡: 𝑆(𝑡) = (𝑆𝐼 (𝑡), 𝑊 (𝑡), 𝑅(𝑡), 𝐻 (𝑡), 𝐸 𝐼 (𝑡)),
encompassing all aspects related to wildlife conservation, natural resources, benefits to local people, and overall economic
impact. We normalize the 𝑆(𝑡) vector and compute the statement value as the 𝐿 2 norm of 𝑆(𝑡) using the equation:
√︁
||𝑆(𝑡)|| 22 = 𝑆𝐼 (𝑡) 2 + 𝑊 (𝑡) 2 + 𝑅(𝑡) 2 + 𝐻 (𝑡) 2 + 𝐸 𝐼 (𝑡) 2 . (2)
Note that all the elements are normalized into [0, 1]. This output serves as a benchmark for comparison with other
scenarios and also provides a means of evaluating the trade-off between economic impact and conservation. Our approach
for assessing whether a policy or strategy is effective is based on this measurement.

Algorithm 1 Determining if a policy is good or not

Step 0: Create an Agent-Based model
Step 1: Calculate statement value from time 𝑡0 to 𝑡1
Step 2: From time 𝑡1 , adding policy in to our Agent-Based Model. Calculate new statement value from then to 𝑡 2
Step 3: If the statement value experience an increasing trend, return this policy as good. If not, return as not good