Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2609.06123

Optimal harvesting under annuity and compound interest laws: economic-ecological trade-offs in a logistic growth model

Abstract

The relationship between investment policy associated with species growth profile is essential in seeking the most appropriate strategy for a policymaker. Balancing maximum profit with the sustainability of species remains a central issue in both ecological and economic contexts. This study presents a comparative analysis of two interest principles, annuity and compounding, within the framework of optimal control. Various investment policies are examined from the perspective of capital theory, incorporating concepts such as future value, accumulation function, and force of interest, each contributing to the formulation of an optimal control strategy. Our analysis is based on a one dimensional logistic model incorporating linear harvesting. Key parameters include the species growth rate and interest rate, and optimality is evaluated with respect to these variables. Using Pontryagins Maximum Principle, we derive the optimal harvesting policies under both discounting laws and characterize the resulting steady state equilibria. The principal finding indicates that for species with low intrinsic growth rates and low annual interest rates, the annuity law of interest yields optimal outcomes. Conversely, for any annual interest rate, species exhibiting moderate or high growth rates maximize profit under the compound law of interest. The study also addresses maximum net revenue and optimal strategies for varying growth rates under each interest law.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Anurag Sau, Sujayan Gupta, Uttam Ghosh, Sabyasachi Bhattacharya. 2026-09-05. Optimal harvesting under annuity and compound interest laws: economic-ecological trade-offs in a logistic growth model. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.06123

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN