Econ131-Assignment

By Aleksandar Stankovic: 44881894

Ecological footprint (EF)

ECON131-Assignment
Question 1:
The Ecological Footprint is the amount/area of productive land and water
required for the human population to generate renewable resources it
consumes and also to be able to absorb the corresponding waste it
generates from land and water. At current operating levels in 2012 the
human population is living beyond Earths natural capacity. According to
figure 2 (Ecological footprint and Bio-capacity per capita 1961-2012) since
approximately 1970 (since 1969 is when it breaks-even) the human
population has been living beyond the Earths natural bio capacity as the
Global Hectares per person for Ecological Footprint is greater than the
global hectares per person of Bio capacity. This has been the case for the
past 42 years from the period beginning 1970 and ending 2012. Assisting
this is Figure 1 which states that the number of Earths demanded in 2012
is approximately 1.7 to meet the current ecological footprint demand.
These levels of human demand are not sustainable as the ecological
footprint which is the amount the human population demands from the
biologically productive surfaces of the Earth will significantly outstrip the
ability of how much the planet can regenerate those productive surfaces.
Thus this indicates that the regeneration capability of natural resources
from plant earth will not be sufficient enough to meet the growing demand
of the human population for productive surfaces and planet Earth will not
be able to sustain the human population in the near future. This can be
backed by figure 2 as the gap between EF and Biocapacity has been
widening at a growing rate ever since they overlapped in 1969.
Question 2:

ECON131-Assignment
According to the Ecological Footprint, the Australian population is living
below Australias natural bio capacity. This can be seen in figure 3
(Australias Ecological footprint and Bio capacity per capita 1961-2012).
As seen from the graph Australias population/Ecological Footprint has
been living well below Australias natural biocapacity. This has been the
case since 1961 all the way through to 2012 which is 51 years according
to the graph. These levels of Australias ecological footprint are
sustainable in the short term for maybe another 10-15 years for the
earths biocapacity to regenerate enough resources to meet Australias
demand. But it is prominent in the graph that since inception in 1961
Australias Ecological footprint is catching up to its corresponding
biocapacity, with a narrower gap in 2012 compared to that of previous
years especially since 1961. This indicates that in the long run
(extrapolating approximately 30 years) Australias Ecological footprint will
out strip its corresponding Biocapacity meaning that the demand for
biologically productive surfaces will out do the ability of Australias
biocapacity to regenerate on those surfaces and to meet the ever
increasing demand. Therefore this is not sustainable in the long run for
Australias population.
Question 3:
If EF grows at a constant yearly rate, then the approximate slope of the EF
relationship with time for Australia is calculated as follows;
m=slope of EF= (y2-y1)/(x2-x1) = (EF2-EF1)/ (year2-year1)
EF for 2012=9.3 and EF for 1961= approximately 8
Slope of EF= (9.3-8)/(2012-1961)= 0.02549019608

ECON131-Assignment
Slope of EF relationship with time for Australia is approximately 0.0255.
The units are measured in Global Hectares per Person or more specifically
gha. One global hectare is the measurement of a biologically productive
hectare with the world average productivity. Each unit is therefore counted
or measured as a proportion to its corresponding global biocapacity share.

Question 4:
If biocapacity grows at a constant yearly rate, then the approximate slope
of the biocapacity relationship with time for Australia is calculated as
follows;
m=slope of Biocapacity=(y2-y1)/(x2-x1)=(Biocapcity2-Biocapacity1)/ (year2-
year1)
Biocapacity for 2012=16.6 and Biocapacity for 1961=29.
Slope of Biocapacity= (16.6-29)/(2012-1961)=-0.2431372549

ECON131-Assignment
Slope of Biocapacity relationship with time for Australia is approximately
-0.243. The units used to measure Biocapacity is the same as the one for
Ecological footprint which is Global Hectare (gha). This measurement unit
is used for quantifying both EF and Biocapacity.

Question 5:

ECON131-Assignment
Question 6:
According to the data presented in figure 1 the carbon footprint
component has the largest weight/proportion when it comes to humanitys
ecological footprint. It also has the largest corresponding Earths
demanded of approximately 1.1 required in the current operating levels
in 2012. The accumulated weight of fish, crops, built up land, forest
products and grazing products only require approximately 0.6 of an
Earth to meet the planets Ecological footprint. So it is clear that a policy
regarding the ever increasing demand for carbon is needed to be put in
place immediately to reduce the demand of the product and also the
World ecological footprint. To make land use sustainable instead of using
carbon for fuel or electricity purposes a policy can be put in place by the
Government to intervene and either tax carbon (carbon tax) use or set a
price floor which is the minimum amount of money that needs to be paid
for the use/selling of carbon. For it to be effective it needs to have a
greater price than that of the equilibrium price for coal. This will force
both consumers and producers to switch to alternative uses of renewable
energy/resources such as the use of solar panels/wind or even nuclear
energy. It will also drastically reduce the use of carbon and its emissions
and any deforestation that is done to search for new coal mines. Through
the use of renewable energy it will reduce the dependence on the land
and make it more sustainable in the future as it will reduce the Worlds
ecological Footprint through the successful use of the abundance in
renewable resources/energy. Finally, it is possible that the policy will have
the ability to reduce the number of earths required/demanded by the
World Ecological footprint back to sustainable levels of one or below. The
positive side of effect of taxing carbon use and its production is that it will
ultimately reduce the reliability on land use by humans and also reduce
the number of Earths demanded .Therefore making land use more
sustainable in the future to come.

ECON131-Assignment
 Environmental Resource Management
Motivation
Part A
Planet Issues - Unlimited Population Growth
Question 1:

If the annual birth rate which in this case in 2% (exponential birth rate) is
greater than the annual death rate which is 1% (exponential death rate),
than over time the population will increase as there are more units (living
organisms) being born then there are units dying. Hence after one year
the population is 1010 which is greater than the initial year of 1000
humans deducing that there is a 10 unit increase in population over one
year as the birth rate is greater than the death rate-which gives a positive
power (0.02-0.1)*1=0.01 which is a positive number and hence a positive
exponential graph and/or increasing population.

Question 2:

ECON131-Assignment
Question 3:
If d<b the expression found in the previous part will be positive. This can
be confirmed by substituting random numbers such as;
Let b=0.02 and d=0.01 therefore d<b

What this means that if the birth rate is greater than the death rate then
the growth rate of the population will be positive as the annual birth rate
is increasing at a faster rate proportionally to the decrease in the death
rate as is it decreasing at a slower rate than that of the birth rate. What
this concludes that over time the population will be growing at an
exponential rate due to the fact that the proportion increase in organisms
being born in a period is greater than the proportion decrease in the death
for organisms in the same period. Finally, deriving expression (1) will give
the rate that the population changes at. This is dependent on the
population at a given point in time and also the annual birth and death
rate. This means that the rate of population change will be positive as
d<b, meaning that over time the population will increase.

ECON131-Assignment
 Part B
Planet Issues-Unlimited population growth
with harvesting
Question 1:

ECON131-Assignment
Question 2:
The meaning of expression (3) is that deriving an expression gives the
rate of change of a function with respect to one of its inputs or variables.
In this case, this means that deriving the population with respect to time
will give a rate of population change for a particular point in time or period
when the rate that the population changes at is not the same and/or
constant. In other words it allows us to find the function (expression 3)
that will give an output of the rate of population change of one variable in
this case being population with respect to time.
Expression (3) also has 4 possible variables (b, d, H and N(t)) that will
impact the rate of change of the population if 1 or more of these variables
were to change. In this model, it is clear that the rate of change of a
population is dependent on the birth rate, death rate, harvesting rate per
period and also the population at a given point in time/period.
Essentially expression (3) allows us to determine the rate that a
population will change at if we were to know the 4 variables present in the
expression at a particular point in time-meaning we would know the rate
of population change for a particular period. This is so, as the rate of
population change is dependent on 4 variables (b, d, H and N(t)).

Question 3:

ECON131-Assignment
Question 4:
Assuming that the initial population is still 1000 units and the birth rate
still remains 5% with a corresponding 1% death rate. If the ecosystem is
still being harvested at the exact same replacement rate of 40units per
period (as found in question 3) and the population experiences a brief
disease epidemic, which causes 5% of individuals to perish. This will now
cause the population to go from 1000 units to 950 units (1000*0.95=950).
Since the net gain in ecological growth is 4% (5%-1%=4%) per period and
in that same period 40 units are being harvested or taken out of the
ecological system, this will cause the population to decrease over time if
the harvesting continues at the same rate.
Explanation:
Since the population is now 950 units after the epidemic, and the
population grows at 4% per period and in the same period 40 units are
being harvested. 4% of 950 units is 38units and 40 will be
harvested/removed from the ecological system this leaves with a net gain
in population of -2 units after 1 period. In the second period the population
starts as 948 units and grows by 4% which gives 958.92 units and then
shortly after 40 units is removed from the ecological system ending up
with 945.92units at the end of the period. If this keeps going at the same

ECON131-Assignment
rate then the population will decrease over time taking approximately
76.5 years for the population to reach 0 units. This can be in the graph
below.

Population change after epidemic

1200

1000

800

600
Population
400

200

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-200

Number of years or periods

Populati *Small snippet from excel showing that if the initial

Year on population is 950 (after the epidemic) and the net
0 950 growth is 4% per period and in the same period 40units
1 948 is removed then the population decreases over time. As
2 945.92 time goes on the rate at which the population changes
943.756 (decreasing over time) increase as the slope at later
3 8 periods is steeper showing a greater decrease in
941.507 population than the period before.
4 072
939.167
5 355
936.734
6 049
934.203
7 411
931.571
8 547
928.834
9 409
925.987
10 786

Question 5:
Assuming the same assumptions as in question 4;

ECON131-Assignment
 Initial population 1000 units
Birth rate 5% per period and Death rate is 1% per period
Harvesting rate is 40units per period
If the population is being harvested sustainability so that there is no
change in population and one day a fisherman decides to throw one of the
fish back this will cause the population to go from 1000 to 1001 units.
Since the net ecological growth is 4% this means that after 1 period the
population will increase to 1041.04 units (1.04*1001=1041.04), and in the
same period 40 units will be harvested/removed from the ecological
system leaving 1001.04 units remaining in the population or ecological
system. In the second period the population will increase from 1001.04 to
1041.0816 units and then 40 units will be harvested from the ecological
system leaving 1001.0816 units remaining in the population. Following
this pattern, in the long run the population will increase at an exponential
rate (indefinitely) as seen below in the graph- but it will be increasing at a
very slow rate initially for the first 150 years;
Populatio
Year n
0 1001 Population after 1 fish thrown back
1 1001.04
140000
1001.081
120000
2 6 100000
1001.124 80000
3 86 Population 60000
1001.169 40000
4 86 20000
1001.216 0
5 65 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

1001.265 Number of years or periods

6 32
1001.315
7 93
1001.368
8 57 *Small snippet from excel
1001.423 showing that the population
9 31 over time increases at an
1001.480 exponential rate, with a very
10 24 slow population growth in the
early periods/years. The
population will grow
indefinitely in the long run.

Question 6:

ECON131-Assignment
The knife edge equilibrium occurs when the equilibrium in a population is
unstable. In this model when the equilibrium is reached so that after every
period the rate at which the ecological system is being harvested at and
the rate of ecological growth leaves the population unchanged at the end
of the period, it is possible to keep this this equilibrium if there is no
disturbance or shock such as external factors impacting the equilibrium
such as a disease epidemic or a fish being thrown back into the population
after being harvested. Once a disturbance occurs and directly impacts the
population or other underlying factors the ecological system cant
automatically return to the same equilibrium as initially. This indicates that
the underlying forces such as birth rate, death rate, population and the
harvesting rate cant restore the equilibrium to its original equilibrium by
it being able to self-correct itself.
Example:
If a disease epidemic occurs as before leading to a change in population
and leaving all other factors the same then the equilibrium or stable
population will no longer be able to be in balance or correct itself. The
shock change in the population will cause the population to decrease over
time until there is no more resources to be harvested any more.
This essentially means that the knife edge equilibrium is an equilibrium
that if there is the slightest of disturbances impacting a closed system
(ecological system in this case) then this will force the system away from
the initial equilibrium and will cause the system to never be able to
restore to its initial equilibrium as it cant automatically self-correct itself
without outside help. Hence the term knife edge, holding on to a thin
thread of string.

Question 7:
This model does shed light on the effectiveness of these policies (fishing
quotas) imposed by the government. By using this model the government
can calculate the number of fish that can be harvested per period and/or
year so that the population at a particular point in time will be either
unchanged or stable. If the public is to fish less than the harvesting rate
(the rate at which the population doesnt change) then this will cause the
population to increase over time, even if the harvesting rate resumes back
to the original fishing quota. The problem with this model is that it doesnt
take into account if someone decides to cheat and harvest fish at a
greater rate than what is required to keep the population stable. Even if
for only one period/year a person decides to harvest more fish than the
fishing quotas (i.e. Harvest at a greater rate than the harvesting rate that
is required to keep the population constant/stable) then the population will
not be in equilibrium and over time the population will start to decrease,
even if the fishing quota is resumed in the following years. This is seen as

ECON131-Assignment
the knife edge equilibrium as explained in the previous question.
Concluding that this model is only effective if the public population is to
keep harvesting at or below the fishing quota, and is not effective if
someone is to cheat and harvest fish that is at a much greater rate than
the fishing quota imposed by the Government. It also doesnt include any
other shock disturbances in the model that may cause changes in the
equilibrium such as a disease epidemic or any other factors that can
impact the fish population in the enclosed ecological system. It also only
assumes that the only thing impacting the ecological population is the
harvesting rate, net reproduction rate and the population at a particular
point in time. Therefore, this model doesnt shed any light on the
effectiveness of these policies.

ECON131-Assignment
 Part C
Planet issues-The Verhulst model of
ecological growth

Question 1:
The growth rate if the initial population is zero will also be zero. This is so
as there is no living organisms to reproduce, meaning it is impossible for a
population to grow if nothing initially exists or is present. This can be seen
mathematically below using equation (4).

Question 2:
When the population is initially at its carrying capacity, so that N0=K, then
the population at time t will be K which is the carrying capacity. This is
shown below mathematically;

ECON131-Assignment
If the initial population is at carrying capacity, then there will be no
population change if the growth rate r increases as the environment can
only support up to a certain carrying capacity of K. The only way that the
population could increase theoretically is that if once the carrying capacity
is reached that the population starts to get harvested or removed from the
ecological system so that more can be produced-as the environment can
only support a certain amount. This can be seen mathematically below if
the initial population is at carrying capacity.

If the population at a particular point in time is less than the carrying

capacity (N<K) then when the growth rate r increases so will the
population until it reaches a limit that the environment can sustain, in this
the carrying capacity of k. This can be seen below;

Assume initial population is 5 units

Set the carrying capacity at 10units
Set t=1
Start the net reproduction rate at 1% and keep increasing until the
limit is reached.
Use equation (4) to show changes-this was completed in excel

Net
Populat reproduction
ion rate
5.02499
979 0.01
5.04999
833 0.02
5.07499
438 0.03
5.09998
667 0.04
5.12497
396 0.05
5.14995
502 0.06
5.17492
858 0.07

ECON131-Assignment
 5.19989
34 0.08
5.22484
825 0.09
5.24979
187 0.1

Ecological growth
3.5
3
2.5
2
Reproduction rate in decimal form 1.5

1
0.5
0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Population

When the population is below the carrying capacity then when the growth
rate r increase the population will increase at an increasing rate
(exponentially) until it reaches a limit of 10units which is the capacity. This
concludes that the growth rate is restricted from growing past the carrying
capacity.

ECON131-Assignment
Question 3:

ECON131-Assignment
ECON131-Assignment
Question 4:
The population will grow faster when it is below its environmental carrying
capacity (N<K). This is shown mathematically below in excel.
*Note: The formula below was plugged into excel to give out the
following output.

In both outputs it was assumed that the net reproduction rate was
constant at r=0.05.
Values for N and K were assigned.
The only variable that was changed was time.

Populatio
n n=5 k=10 time
5 5 10 0
5.12497396
5 5 10 1
5.24979187
5 5 10 2
5.37429845
3 5 10 3
5.49833997
3 5 10 4
5.62176500
9 5 10 5
5.74442516
8 5 10 6
5.86617578
9 5 10 7
5.98687660
1 5 10 8
6.10639233
9 5 10 9
6.22459331
2 5 10 10
6.34135591 5 10 11
6.45656306
2 5 10 12

ECON131-Assignment
6.57010462
7 5 10 13

Population n=10 k=5 time

10 10 5 0
9.53497383
9 10 5 1
9.13106434
1 10 5 2
8.77738085
9 10 5 3
8.46547053
2 10 5 4
8.18867213
6 10 5 5
7.94166510
7 10 5 6
7.72014826
7 10 5 7
7.52060672
2 10 5 8
7.34013992
7 10 5 9
7.17633299
2 10 5 10
7.02715903
7 10 5 11
6.89090420
6 10 5 12
6.76610942
5 10 5 13

If N>K this will cause the population to decrease over time, and not grow
faster. Hence the population grows faster when its below the

ECON131-Assignment
environments carrying capacity. One thing to notice about the data is
that the proportional decrease in population when N>K is greater than the
proportional increase in population when N<K.

Question 5:
To leave a constant population of 90,000 fish, 180 fish can be sustainably
harvested per year to leave the population unchanged every period. This
is calculated below;

Question 6:
If due to unlicensed fishing causing the population to fall by half, to
45,000 then 495 fish can be harvested per year, in order to maintain a
stable population. This is calculated below, assuming that the
reproduction ratio is still r=2% and that the carrying capacity is still
100,000 fish.

ECON131-Assignment
The difference between this question and the previous is that question 5
asked us to find the number of fish that can be harvested per year (180)
to leave a constant population of 90,000 fish. This question, the
population falls by half, to 45,000 and asks us to find the number of fish
that can be harvested per year (495) in order to keep the new population
of 45,000 stable every year so that it does not change one year to the
next. Essentially the difference is to calculate the number of fish that can
be harvested per year to keep different populations the same at different
periods of time without a change in population occurring, so that the
system is in an existing equilibrium or a new equilibrium (knife edge
concept).

ECON131-Assignment