Balancing economic prosperity with environmental conservation is crucial in managing renewable bioeconomic resources. We explored a predator-prey fishery model that incorporates tourism, dynamic harvesting, and pricing strategies. Our analysis showed that increased fishing taxes reduce fishing efforts, enabling fish populations to recover. Furthermore, higher entrance fees for ecotourism support the predator population's growth. Bifurcation analysis revealed key dynamic transitions, including transcritical and Hopf bifurcations. A deeper look into coupled parameter bifurcation uncovered a transcritical bifurcation of the limit cycle, emphasizing the system's complexity. Using Pontryagin's maximum principle, we optimized fishing taxes and ecotourism entrance fees to achieve sustainable trade-offs between ecosystem health and societal revenue. The results highlighted that societal revenue peaked at an intermediate level of entrance fees, suggesting diminishing returns beyond a certain point. Revenue landscape analysis further showed that centralized, two-parameter optimization strategies outperform decentralized, single-parameter approaches. These insights provide policymakers with effective tools to design regulations that promote ecological resilience and economic viability through balanced fishing and tourism practices.
Citation: Santanu Bhattacharya, Nandadulal Bairagi. Dynamic optimization of fishing tax and tourism fees for sustainable bioeconomic resource management[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2025, 22(7): 1751-1789. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2025064
[1] | José M. Campos-Salazar, Roya Rafiezadeh, Juan L. Aguayo-Lazcano, Constanza Márquez . Reduction of harmonic distortion in electromagnetic torque of a single-phase reluctance motor using a multilevel neutral-point-clamped DC-AC converter. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2025, 9(2): 215-242. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2025011 |
[2] | Cristian Cadena-Zarate, Juan Caballero-Peña, German Osma-Pinto . Simulation-based probabilistic-harmonic load flow for the study of DERs integration in a low-voltage distribution network. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2024, 8(1): 53-70. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2024003 |
[3] | Tarun Naruka, Debasis Tripathy, Prangya Mohanty . Power quality enhancement by a solar photovoltaic-based distribution static compensator. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2025, 9(2): 192-214. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2025010 |
[4] | Said Oucheriah, Abul Azad . Current-sensorless robust sliding mode control for the DC-DC boost converter. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2025, 9(1): 46-59. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2025003 |
[5] | Rasool M. Imran, Kadhim Hamzah Chalok, Siraj A. M. Nasrallah . Innovative two-stage thermal control of DC-DC converter for hybrid PV-battery system. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2025, 9(1): 26-45. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2025002 |
[6] | I.E.S. Naidu, S. Srikanth, A. Siva sarapakara Rao, Adabala Venkatanarayana . A novel mine blast optimization algorithm (MBOA) based MPPT controlling for grid-PV systems. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2023, 7(2): 135-155. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2023008 |
[7] | Anjan Ku. Sahoo, Ranjan Ku. Jena . Improved DTC strategy with fuzzy logic controller for induction motor driven electric vehicle. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2022, 6(3): 296-316. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2022018 |
[8] | Cherechi Ndukwe, M. Tariq Iqbal, Xiaodong Liang, Jahangir Khan, Lawrence Aghenta . LoRa-based communication system for data transfer in microgrids. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2020, 4(3): 303-325. doi: 10.3934/ElectrEng.2020.3.303 |
[9] | Mulualem T. Yeshalem, Baseem Khan, Om Prakash Mahela . Conducted electromagnetic emissions of compact fluorescent lamps and electronic ballast modeling. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2022, 6(2): 178-187. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2022011 |
[10] | Sundararajan Seenivasaan, Naduvil Madhusoodanan Kottarthil . Enhancing sensor linearity through the translinear circuit implementation of piecewise and neural network models. AIMS Electronics and Electrical Engineering, 2023, 7(3): 196-216. doi: 10.3934/electreng.2023012 |
Balancing economic prosperity with environmental conservation is crucial in managing renewable bioeconomic resources. We explored a predator-prey fishery model that incorporates tourism, dynamic harvesting, and pricing strategies. Our analysis showed that increased fishing taxes reduce fishing efforts, enabling fish populations to recover. Furthermore, higher entrance fees for ecotourism support the predator population's growth. Bifurcation analysis revealed key dynamic transitions, including transcritical and Hopf bifurcations. A deeper look into coupled parameter bifurcation uncovered a transcritical bifurcation of the limit cycle, emphasizing the system's complexity. Using Pontryagin's maximum principle, we optimized fishing taxes and ecotourism entrance fees to achieve sustainable trade-offs between ecosystem health and societal revenue. The results highlighted that societal revenue peaked at an intermediate level of entrance fees, suggesting diminishing returns beyond a certain point. Revenue landscape analysis further showed that centralized, two-parameter optimization strategies outperform decentralized, single-parameter approaches. These insights provide policymakers with effective tools to design regulations that promote ecological resilience and economic viability through balanced fishing and tourism practices.
Defined as any degree of glucose intolerance with onset during pregnancy, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a temporary condition that predisposes pregnant women to type 2 diabetes [1],[2]. Prenatal screenings are used to diagnose GDM, a condition that is present when blood glucose levels are above normal but below diagnostic value for diabetes [3]. According to International Diabetes Federation's statistics, 21.3 million of live births (16.2%) had some form of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy [4], and globally GDM accounts for up to 90% of cases of hyperglycaemia during pregnancy (4,5). Collectively, low- and middle-income countries accounted for more than 90% of cases of hyperglycaemia in pregnancy [5]. Middle-Eastern and North African regions recorded highest prevalence of GDM (12.9%), followed by South-East Asian and Western Pacific regions (11.7% respectively) [6].
Most common risk factors for GDM were older age, obesity, excessive pregnancy weight gain, family history of diabetes, history of GDM and previous history of poor obstetric outcomes (macrosomia and congenital anomalies) [7]. In addition, a recently published systematic review and meta-analysis reported pregnancy-induced hypertension, polycystic ovarian syndrome, history of abortion, and preterm delivery or abortion to be associated with the risk for GDM [8].
With every 1 in 7 live births is affected by GDM [4], its consequences are of public health concern. Although GDM-caused proportions of maternal and perinatal deaths, and obstructed births are unknown [7], GDM increases the risk of various adverse outcomes for the mother and child during pregnancy, childbirth and post-delivery [9]. Women with GDM have higher risks for pregnancy-related hypertension, pre-eclampsia spontaneous abortion, preterm labour and caesarean section [10],[11]. Studies have also shown these women to be at a higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular, renal and ophthalmic diseases [2],[6],[11]. Short-term adverse outcomes for infants born to women with GDM include macrosomia, hypoglycaemia, polycythemia, cardiac complications, neurological impairment [12]. Risks of future development of obesity, type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome also increase in offspring of women with GDM [7],[13].
Evidence from varying populations suggest that 70–85% of women diagnosed with GDM can achieve normal glycaemic levels with lifestyle modification alone [14]. The value of lifestyle modification as the first-line strategy for the prevention and management of GDM is therefore, well-recognised. Thus, measures to improve diet and physical activity are important prior to, during and post-delivery in GDM pregnancies [15].
Medical Nutrition Therapy (MNT) is commonly described as the ‘cornerstone’ of GDM management. Recent American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes (2019) recommends that a diagnosis of GDM is followed by a treatment that ‘starts with MNT, physical activity, and weight management’. The goal of this treatment is to (i) support maternal, placental, and foetal metabolic needs [16] while achieving targets recommended for maternal weight gain, glycaemic control and foetal development and (ii) to prevent long-term complications [14],[17]. The benefits of MNT in managing GDM pregnancies cannot be understated since effective management ensures the long-term health for these mothers and their infants.
Generally, MNT for GDM mothers includes an individualized diet plan that maintains adequate nutrition to facilitate appropriate weight gain and optimises carbohydrate consumption to manage maternal glycaemia within an acceptable range [15],[18]. The former goal is achieved ideally through ensuring a daily calorie intake in the range of 1800–2000 kcal. The latter is attempted through achieving a macronutrient distribution to account for approximately 50–60%, 15–20%, and 25–30% of daily energy intake from carbohydrate, protein, and fat intakes respectively [15]. Dietary quality indicators such as adequate intake of fruits, green leafy vegetables, poultry, fish and nuts are also known to be beneficial. Additionally, reducing postprandial glycaemia in GDM pregnancies with low glycaemic index (GI) is also associated with reduced the prevalence of maternal insulin use and reduced central adiposity in women born to GDM mothers [15],[18]. Therefore, current MNT practice ensures appropriate dietary quantity and quality through individualised diet counselling during pregnancy [15].
Interestingly, while MNT has long been recognised as a key to GDM treatment, experts lament that current MNT advice lacks sufficient scientific substantiation and it is feared to be “non–evidence-based, fragmented, and inconsistent” [16]. Therefore, the growing momentum to build evidence in this area is more than justified. A recent meta-analysis on the effectiveness of MNT in the GDM management found that available evidence is limited by the small sample size and short duration of the intervention trials in this target population. The authors emphasised the need for holistic evaluation of nutrient quality and quantity, and dietary patterns in GDM management. Specifically, an urgent need for well-designed and sufficiently powered dietary randomised-controlled trials in low and middle-income countries, where the long-term and inter-generational consequences of GDM create the heaviest burden, was identified [19]. Furthermore, there is very little specific advice for women at risk for GDM or for women with prior GDM. Current recommendations for these populations are built on the premise of body weight management and its beneficial effect in preventing the deterioration of glucose tolerance.
This AIMS Medical Science special issue on “Diet in Gestational Diabetes” synthesises some interesting evidence in this much needed area of maternal nutrition. Our final selection of papers for this Special Issue presents three interesting reviews, giving the readers an opportunity to be aware of possible areas of research ranging from epidemiology to clinical nutrition to functional foods. Misra et al evaluate the existing evidence for dietary patterns, diet quality and micronutrient composition in GDM prevention and management across populations that vary in their socio-economic status. Mahadzir et al in their review evaluate the evidence for lifestyle interventions in improving maternal and foetal outcomes. Gulati et al explore the potential for development of novel functional foods from mushroom for prevention and treatment of GDM. Collectively these reviews showcase the scope for further research in the area of nutrition in the prevention and management of GDM. We believe that these articles will be useful to readers who are working in the area of prevention, treatment and management of acute and long-term complications of GDM.
[1] |
S. J. Pittman, L. D. Rodwell, R. J. Shellock, M. Williams, M. J. Attrill, J. Bedford, Marine parks for coastal cities: A concept for enhanced community well-being, prosperity and sustainable city living, Mar. Policy, 103 (2019), 160–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.02.012 doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2019.02.012
![]() |
[2] | H. Österblom, C. C. Wabnitz, D. Tladi, E. H. Allison, S. Arnaud-Haond, J. Bebbington, et al., Towards Ocean Equity, The Blue Compendium: From knowledge to action for a sustainable ocean economy. Cham: Springer International Publishing, (2023), 485–521. |
[3] |
P. Karani, P. Failler, Comparative coastal and marine tourism, climate change, and the blue economy in African Large Marine Ecosystems, Environ. Dev., 36 (2020), 100572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2020.100572 doi: 10.1016/j.envdev.2020.100572
![]() |
[4] |
E. K. O. Yuwono, R. Illa Maulany, R. A Barkey, Site suitability evaluation for ecotourism development: A case study in Bulue village, Soppeng district, Indonesia, J. Sustainability Sci. Manage., 16 (2021), 129–140. https://doi.org/10.46754/jssm.2021.01.012 doi: 10.46754/jssm.2021.01.012
![]() |
[5] |
L. Li, B. Wu, A. K. Patwary, How marine tourism promote financial development in sustainable economy: New evidences from South Asia and implications to future tourism students, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 29 (2022), 1155–1172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-024-32868-z doi: 10.1007/s11356-024-32868-z
![]() |
[6] |
M. Khokhar, Y. Hou, M. A. Rafique, W. Iqbal, Evaluating the social sustainability criteria of supply chain management in manufacturing industries: A role of BWM in MCDM, Probl. Ekoroz., 15 (2020), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.35784/pe.2020.2.18 doi: 10.35784/pe.2020.2.18
![]() |
[7] |
A. Balmford, J. M. H. Green, M. Anderson, J. Beresford, C. Huang, R. Naidoo, et al., Walk on the wild side: estimating the global magnitude of visits to protected areas, PLoS Biol., 13 (2015), e1002074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074
![]() |
[8] |
I. D. Wolf, D. B. Croft, R. J. Green, Nature conservation and nature-based tourism: a paradox?, Environments, 6 (2019), 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments6090104 doi: 10.3390/environments6090104
![]() |
[9] |
Y. F. Leung, J. L. Marion, Characterizing backcountry camping impacts in Great Smoky Mountains national park, USA, J. Environ. Manage., 57 (1999), 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1999.0303 doi: 10.1006/jema.1999.0303
![]() |
[10] |
G. Shannon, C. L. Larson, S. E. Reed, K. R. Crooks, L. M. Angeloni, Ecological consequences of ecotourism for wildlife populations and communities, Ecotourism's Promise Peril: Biol. Eval., (2017), 29–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58331-0 doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-58331-0
![]() |
[11] |
A. S. Dye, S. L. Shaw, A GIS-based spatial decision support system for tourists of Great Smoky Mountains National Park, J. Retail. Consum. Serv., 14 (2007), 269–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2006.07.005 doi: 10.1016/j.jretconser.2006.07.005
![]() |
[12] |
P. Deaden, S. Harron, Alternative tourism and adaptive change, Ann. Tour. Res., 21 (1994), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(94)90006-x doi: 10.1016/0160-7383(94)90006-x
![]() |
[13] |
A. Barros, C. Monz, C. Pickering, Is tourism damaging ecosystems in the Andes? Current knowledge and an agenda for future research, Ambio, 44 (2015), 82–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0550-7 doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0550-7
![]() |
[14] | C. M. Hall, S. McArthur, Heritage Management in Australia and New Zealand: The Human Dimension, Oxford University Press, 1996. |
[15] | A. Stankus, State of world aquaculture 2020 and regional reviews: FAO webinar series, FAO Aquacult. Newsl., 63 (2021), 17–18. http://www.fao.org/3/cb4850en/cb4850en.pdf |
[16] |
O. Hoegh-Guldberg, J. F. Bruno, The impact of climate change on the world's marine ecosystems, Science, 328 (2010), 1523–1528. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189930 doi: 10.1126/science.1189930
![]() |
[17] |
A. S. Brierley, M. J. Kingsford, Impacts of climate change on marine organisms and ecosystems, Curr. Biol., 19 (2009), R602–R614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2009.05.046 doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.05.046
![]() |
[18] |
M. J. Tegner, P. K. Dayton, Ecosystem effects of fishing in kelp forest communities, ICES J. Mar. Sci., 57 (2000), 579–589. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmsc.2000.0715 doi: 10.1006/jmsc.2000.0715
![]() |
[19] |
E. S. Poloczanska, C. J. Brown, W. J. Sydeman, W. Kiessling, D. S. Schoeman, P. J. Moore, Global imprint of climate change on marine life, Nat. Clim. Change, 3 (2013), 919–925. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1958 doi: 10.1038/nclimate1958
![]() |
[20] |
M. Dixon, G. Grilli, B. D. Stewart, R. H. Bark, S. Ferrini, The importance of rebuilding trust in fisheries governance in post-Brexit England, Mar. Policy, 161 (2024), 106034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106034 doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106034
![]() |
[21] | R. E. Ommer, Coasts Under Stress: Restructuring and Social-Ecological Health, McGill-Queen's Press-MQUP, 2007. |
[22] |
E. Ostrom, A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems, Science, 325 (2009), 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1172133 doi: 10.1126/science.1172133
![]() |
[23] |
L. C. Gammage, A. Jarre, Using structured decision-making tools with marginalised fishers to promote system-based fisheries management approaches in South Africa, Front. Mar. Sci., 7 (2020), 477. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00477 doi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00477
![]() |
[24] | S. M. Garcia, The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries: Issues, Terminology, Principles, Institutional Foundations, Implementation and Outlook, Food & Agriculture Organization, 443 (2003). |
[25] |
B. Sarkar, N. Bairagi, S. Bhattacharya, An integrated dynamic biological supply chain management with three layers under logistic strategies, Comput. Ind. Eng., 194 (2024), 110387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2024.110387 doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2024.110387
![]() |
[26] | FAO, The State of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, 2020. https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en |
[27] |
M. Sarkar, A. Majumder, S. Bhattacharya, B. Sarkar, Optimization of energy cycle under a sustainable supply chain management, RAIRO-Oper. Res., 57 (2023), 2177–2196. https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/2023061 doi: 10.1051/ro/2023061
![]() |
[28] |
S. M. Garcia, D. J. Staples, J. Chesson, The FAO guidelines for the development and use of indicators for sustainable development of marine capture fisheries and an australian example of their application, Ocean Coast. Manage., 43 (2000), 537–556. doi:https://doi.org/10. 1016/s0964-5691(00)00045-4 doi: 10.1016/s0964-5691(00)00045-4
![]() |
[29] |
P. Degnbol, A. Jarre, Review of indicators in fisheries management–a development perspective, Afr. J. Mar. Sci., 26 (2004), 303–326. https://doi.org/10.2989/18142320409504063 doi: 10.2989/18142320409504063
![]() |
[30] |
W. K. Balwan, S. Kour, Wetland-an ecological boon for the environment, East Afr. Sch. J. Agric. Life Sci., 4 (2021), 38–48. https://doi.org/10.36349/easjals.2021.v04i03.001 doi: 10.36349/easjals.2021.v04i03.001
![]() |
[31] |
T. Xu, B. Weng, D. Yan, K. Wang, X. Li, W. Bi, et al., Wetlands of international importance: status, threats, and future protection, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 16 (2019), 1818. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101818 doi: 10.3390/ijerph16101818
![]() |
[32] |
E. R. Herbert, P. Boon, A. J. Burgin, S. C. Neubauer, R. B. Franklin, M. Ardón, et al., A global perspective on wetland salinization: ecological consequences of a growing threat to freshwater wetlands, Ecosphere, 6 (2015), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1890/es14-00534.1 doi: 10.1890/es14-00534.1
![]() |
[33] |
E. Aceves-Bueno, A. J. Read, M. A. Cisneros-Mata, Illegal fisheries, environmental crime, and the conservation of marine resources, Conserv. Biol., 35 (2021), 1120–1129. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13674 doi: 10.1111/cobi.13674
![]() |
[34] |
L. Cui, G. Li, H. Liao, N. Ouyang, Y. Zhang, Integrated approach based on a regional habitat succession model to assess wetland landscape ecological degradation, Wetlands, 35 (2015), 281–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-014-0617-z doi: 10.1007/s13157-014-0617-z
![]() |
[35] |
E. B. Barbier, Valuing ecosystem services for coastal wetland protection and restoration: progress and challenges, Resources, 2 (2013), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources2030213 doi: 10.3390/resources2030213
![]() |
[36] |
R. K. Dowling, D. A. Fennell, The context of ecotourism policy and planning, Ecotourism Policy Plan., (2003), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851996097.0001 doi: 10.1079/9780851996097.0001
![]() |
[37] |
I. Logar, Sustainable tourism management in Crikvenica, Croatia: An assessment of policy instruments, Tour. Manage., 31 (2010), 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.005 doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2009.02.005
![]() |
[38] |
P. W. Wang, J. B. Jia, Tourists' willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation and environment protection, Dalai Lake protected area: Implications for entrance fee and sustainable management, Ocean Coast. Manage., 62 (2012), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.03.001 doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.03.001
![]() |
[39] |
N. Gooroochurn, M. T. Sinclair, Economics of tourism taxation: evidence from Mauritius, Ann. Tour. Res., 32 (2015), 478–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0550-7 doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0550-7
![]() |
[40] |
R. B. Ditton, S. M. Holland, D. K. Anderson, Recreational fishing as tourism, Fisheries, 27 (2002), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8446(2002)027<0017:RFAT>2.0.CO;2 doi: 10.1577/1548-8446(2002)027<0017:RFAT>2.0.CO;2
![]() |
[41] |
S. Morton, D. Pencheon, N. Squires, Sustainable development goals (SDGs), and their implementation: a national global framework for health, development and equity needs a systems approach at every level, Br. Med. Bull., 124 (2017), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldx031 doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldx031
![]() |
[42] |
E. Y. Mohammed, D. Steinbach, P. Steele, Fiscal reforms for sustainable marine fisheries governance: delivering the SDGs and ensuring no one is left behind, Mar. Policy, 93 (2018), 262–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.05.017 doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2017.05.017
![]() |
[43] |
E. Cohen-Shacham, T. Dayan, R. de Groot, C. Beltrame, F. Guillet, E. Feitelson, Using the ecosystem services concept to analyse stakeholder involvement in wetland management, Wetlands Ecol. Manage., 23 (2015), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-014-9375-1 doi: 10.1007/s11273-014-9375-1
![]() |
[44] |
J. Boncoeur, F. Alban, O. Guyader, O. Thébaud, Fish, fishers, seals and tourists: economic consequences of creating a marine reserve in a multi-species, multi-activity context, Nat. Resour. Model., 15 (2002), 387–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-7445.2002.tb00095.x doi: 10.1111/j.1939-7445.2002.tb00095.x
![]() |
[45] |
T. K. Kar, B. Ghosh, Sustainability and economic consequences of creating marine protected areas in multispecies multiactivity context, J. Theor. Biol., 318 (2013), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.004 doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.004
![]() |
[46] |
A. J. Gallagher, N. Hammerschlag, Global shark currency: the distribution, frequency, and economic value of shark ecotourism, Curr. Issues Tour., 14 (2011), 797–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2011.585227 doi: 10.1080/13683500.2011.585227
![]() |
[47] |
J. H. Lee, Y. Iwasa, Tourists and traditional divers in a common fishing ground, Ecol. Econ., 70 (2011), 2350–2360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.07.013 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.07.013
![]() |
[48] |
B. Sarkar, S. Bhattacharya, N. Bairagi, An ecological-economic fishery model: Maximizing the societal benefit through an integrated approach of fishing and ecotourism, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 46 (2023), 14962–14982. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.9356 doi: 10.1002/mma.9356
![]() |
[49] |
R. Mchich, N. Charouki, P. Auger, N. Raïssi, O. Ettahiri, Optimal spatial distribution of the fishing effort in a multi fishing zone model, Ecol. Model., 197 (2006), 274–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.03.026 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.03.026
![]() |
[50] |
J. H. Lee, Y. Iwasa, Ecotourism development and the heterogeneity of tourists, Theor. Ecol., 13 (2020), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12080-020-00458-7 doi: 10.1007/s12080-020-00458-7
![]() |
[51] |
P. Paul, T. K. Kar, A. Ghorai, Ecotourism and fishing in a common ground of two interacting species, Ecol. Model., 328 (2016), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.02.010 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.02.010
![]() |
[52] |
S. Marick, S. Bhattacharya, N. Bairagi, Dynamic properties of a reaction–diffusion predator–prey model with nonlinear harvesting: a linear and weakly nonlinear analysis, Chaos Solit. Fractals, 175 (2023), 113996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113996 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2023.113996
![]() |
[53] | S. Bhattacharya, S. Ghorai, N. Bairagi, Dynamic patterns in herding predator–prey system: analyzing the impact of inertial delays and harvesting, Chaos: Interdiscip. J. Nonlinear Sci., 34 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0239612 |
[54] | J. N. Tsitsiklis, Problems in Decentralized Decision Making and Computation, PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1984. |
[55] |
J. Zabojnik, Centralized and decentralized decision making in organizations, J. Labor Econ., 20 (2002), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.244581 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.244581
![]() |
[56] |
S. X. Wu, X. Y. Meng, Hopf bifurcation analysis of a multiple delays stage-structure predator-prey model with refuge and cooperation, Electron. Res. Arch., 33 (2025). https://doi.org/10.3934/era.2025045 doi: 10.3934/era.2025045
![]() |
[57] |
X. Y. Meng, Y. Q. Wu, Bifurcation and control in a singular phytoplankton-zooplankton-fish model with nonlinear fish harvesting and taxation, Int. J. Bifurcation Chaos, 28 (2018), 1850042. https://doi.org/10.1142/s0218127418500426 doi: 10.1142/s0218127418500426
![]() |
[58] |
Y. Ma, R. Yang, Bifurcation analysis in a modified Leslie-Gower with nonlocal competition and Beddington-Deangelis functional response, J. Appl. Anal. Comput., 15 (2025), 2152–2184. https://doi.org/10.11948/20240415 doi: 10.11948/20240415
![]() |
[59] |
F. Zhu, R. Yang, Bifurcation in a modified Leslie-Gower model with nonlocal competition and fear effect, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst.-B, (2025), 2865–2893. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2024195 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2024195
![]() |
[60] |
S. Chatterjee, D. Kesh, N. Bairagi, How population dynamics change in presence of migratory prey and predator's preference, Ecol. Complex., 11 (2012), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2012.03.001 doi: 10.1016/j.ecocom.2012.03.001
![]() |
[61] |
S. Ghorai, B. Chakraborty, N. Bairagi Preferential selection of zooplankton and emergence of spatiotemporal patterns in plankton population, Chaos Soliton Fract., 153 (2021), 111471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2021.111471 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2021.111471
![]() |
[62] |
A. Chatterjee, M. A. Abbasi, E. Venturino, J. Zhen, M. Haque, A predator–prey model with prey refuge: under a stochastic and deterministic environment, Nonlinear Dyn., 112 (2024), 13667–13693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-024-09756-9 doi: 10.1007/s11071-024-09756-9
![]() |
[63] |
M. L. Rosenzweig, R. H. MacArthur, Graphical representation and stability conditions of predator-prey interactions, Am. Nat., 97 (1963), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1086/282272 doi: 10.1086/282272
![]() |
[64] |
C. W. Clark, The optimal management of renewable resources, Math. Bioeconomics, 2 (1990), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532591 doi: 10.2307/2532591
![]() |
[65] |
S. V. Krishna, P. D. N. Srinivasu, B. Kaymakcalan, Conservation of an ecosystem through optimal taxation, Bull. Math. Biol., 60 (1998), 569–584. https://doi.org/10.1006/bulm.1997.0023 doi: 10.1006/bulm.1997.0023
![]() |
[66] |
A. Moussaoui, P. Auger, A bioeconomic model of a fishery with saturated catch and variable price: Stabilizing effect of marine reserves on fishery dynamics, Ecol. Complex., 45 (2021), 100906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2020.100906 doi: 10.1016/j.ecocom.2020.100906
![]() |
[67] |
N. Bairagi, S. Bhattacharya, B. Sarkar, Demand-induced regime shift in fishery: a mathematical perspective, Math. Biosci., 361 (2023), 109008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2023.109008 doi: 10.1016/j.mbs.2023.109008
![]() |
[68] |
B. Ghosh, T. K. Kar, Sustainable use of prey species in a prey–predator system: jointly determined ecological thresholds and economic trade-offs, Ecol. Model., 272 (2014), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.09.013 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.09.013
![]() |
[69] |
T. T. Agnew, Optimal exploitation of a fishery employing a non-linear harvesting function, Ecol. Model., 6 (1979), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3800(79)90057-7 doi: 10.1016/0304-3800(79)90057-7
![]() |
[70] |
P. A. Abrams, L. R. Ginzburg, The nature of predation: prey dependent, ratio dependent or neither?, Trends Ecol. Evol., 15 (2000), 337–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(00)01908-x doi: 10.1016/s0169-5347(00)01908-x
![]() |
[71] |
N. Bairagi, S. Bhattacharya, P. Auger, B. Sarkar, Bioeconomics fishery model in presence of infection: Sustainability and demand-price perspectives, Appl. Math. Comput., 405 (2021), 126225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2021.126225 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2021.126225
![]() |
[72] |
B. Sarkar, S. Bhattacharya, N. Bairagi, Dynamic behaviour of a single-species nonlinear fishery model with infection: the role of fishing tax and time-dependent market price, J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. (JNSA), 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.22436/jnsa.016.03.02 doi: 10.22436/jnsa.016.03.02
![]() |
[73] |
D. Das, T. K. Kar, Marine reserve and its consequences in a predator-prey system for ecotourism and fishing, Int. J. Math. Model. Numer. Optim., 11 (2021), 20–36. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmmno.2021.111720 doi: 10.1504/ijmmno.2021.111720
![]() |
[74] |
T. Brochier, P. Auger, D. Thiao, A. Bah, S. Ly, T. Nguyen-Huu, Can overexploited fisheries recover by self-organization? Reallocation of fishing effort as an emergent form of governance, Mar. Policy, 95 (2018), 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.06.009 doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2018.06.009
![]() |
[75] | G. Birkhoff, G. C. Rota, Ordinary Differential Equations, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1978. |
[76] |
B. Petrie, K. T. Frank, N. L. Shackell, W. C. Leggett, Structure and stability in exploited marine fish communities: quantifying critical transitions, Fish. Oceanogr., 18 (2009), 83–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2419.2009.00500.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2419.2009.00500.x
![]() |
[77] |
P. B. Bayley, D. J. Austen, Capture efficiency of a boat electrofisher, Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 131 (2002), 435–451. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8659(2002)131<0435:ceoabe>2.0.co;2 doi: 10.1577/1548-8659(2002)131<0435:ceoabe>2.0.co;2
![]() |
[78] |
F. B. Hanson, D. Ryan, Optimal harvesting with both population and price dynamics, Math. Biosci., 148 (1998), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0025-5564(97)10011-6 doi: 10.1016/s0025-5564(97)10011-6
![]() |
[79] |
N. M. Brites, C. A. Braumann, Fisheries management in random environments: comparison of harvesting policies for the logistic model, Fish. Res., 195 (2017), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2017.07.016 doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2017.07.016
![]() |
[80] |
Y. Li, J. S. Muldowney, On Bendixson's criterion, J. Differ. Equations, 106 (1993), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1006/jdeq.1993.1097 doi: 10.1006/jdeq.1993.1097
![]() |
[81] | J. K. Hale, Ordinary Differential Equations, Courier Corporation, 2009. |
[82] | M. Fiedler, Additive compound matrices and an inequality for eigenvalues of symmetric stochastic matrices, Czechoslovak Math. J., 24 (1974), 392–402. http://dml.cz/dmlcz/101253 |
[83] |
J. S. Muldowney, Compound matrices and ordinary differential equations, Rocky Mt. J. Math., 20 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1216/rmjm/1181073047 doi: 10.1216/rmjm/1181073047
![]() |
[84] | L. Perko, Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems, Springer Science & Business Media, 2013. |
[85] |
N. R. De Jager, J. J. Rohweder, M. J. Duveneck, Climate change is likely to alter future wolf–moose–forest interactions at Isle Royale National Park, United States, Front. Ecol. Evol., 8 (2020), 543915. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2020.543915 doi: 10.3389/fevo.2020.543915
![]() |
[86] |
S. Kiel, J. L. Goedert, T. L. Huynh, M. Krings, D. Parkinson, R. Romero, et al., Early Oligocene kelp holdfasts and stepwise evolution of the kelp ecosystem in the North Pacific, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 121 (2024), e2317054121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2317054121 doi: 10.1073/pnas.2317054121
![]() |
[87] |
S. Barteneva-Vitry, C. Appadoo, S. Plön, Sperm whales—Island specialists, are they on the way to extinction? Systematic literature review in a global context, Mammal Rev., (2025), e70000. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.70000 doi: 10.1111/mam.70000
![]() |
[88] | A. Hurwitz, On the conditions under which an equation has only roots with negative real parts, Sel. Papers Math. Trends Control Theory, 65 (1964), 273–284. |