上傳人：奔***

認(rèn)證信息

認(rèn)證類型：個人認(rèn)證

認(rèn)證主體：常**（實名認(rèn)證）

IP屬地：河北

IP屬地：河北 更新時間：2024-03-12 格式：pdf 頁數(shù)：20 大?。?.48MB 人氣指數(shù)：12 舉報 版權(quán)申訴

1、For office use only T1 ________________ T2 ________________ T3 ________________ T4 ________________ Team Control Number 43181 Problem Chosen F For office use only F1 ________________ F2 ________________ F3 ______________

2、__ F4 ________________ 2016 ICM Summary Sheet In recent months, Europe's migrant crisis has begun to unfold at an unprecedented pace, which becomes a matter of great concern. To help better understand and thus effec

3、tively deal with the problem, we established a Dual Goal Network Planning Model. Firstly, we quantify the factors that influence refugee’s migration routes. According to the refugee amount and geographical distribution

4、features of their original countries, we then select five typical refugee exporting places and ten major refugee receiving countries. These routes are abstracted to a Networking Model for analysis. For each route, we p

5、ut weighted values on its model parameters, establish the optimal objective function, find the optimal solution and acquire the optimal pattern of refugee migration. To improve the accuracy and applicability, we then re

6、vise and further optimize our model in two ways. Firstly, traffic conditions on each route are taken into account and an analysis of dynamic changes on receiving countries' capacity is conducted. Also, uncertain fa

7、ctors were eliminated while the most sensitive ones are retained to enlarge the model's scope of application. In the end, we make a set of policy proposals concerning refugee migration. Firstly, we choose the distri

8、bution of refugees, transportation availability and capacity of refugee-receiving countries as three general factors which can influence the security and efficient movement of refugees. Each factor is determined by seve

9、ral metrics which can be easily detected. Firstly we use the quantity of refugees and major origins to describe the scope and distribution of refugees. Secondly we choose three parameters to evaluate the transportation

10、 availability of each route: the death rate of each migration routes, the distance between two countries (measured by the distance of accessible routes between two countries’ capitals), and the average time refugees dri

11、ve the distance (adjusted with different time spend when crossing different countries’ borders). We set up a risk preference model to evaluate the objective function of the transportation availability and introduce Acc

12、essibility Index as an overall measurement. Thirdly, we analyze the capacity of refugee-receiving countries in two dimensions: we use principal component analysis (PCA) to combine five metrics into a new index to measu

13、re the refugees’ quality of prospective life in the receiving country, and we set the upper limit of capacity of receiving refugees according to countries’ population, economy, and unemployment rate. Secondly, To find

14、the optimal refugee movement, we first abstract refugee migration routes on maps based on several popular routes based on the popularity and volume of refugees they take. Then we define the optimal refugee movements as

15、the maximum of living quality for refugees and the maximum of transportation availability. Also we set constrains that all refugees shall be settled and the amount of refugees in each country shall not exceed the upper

16、 limit of countries’ capacity. We then set up a Network Planning Model (NPM). But because the network model cannot effectively solve problems with multiple objective functions, we further included Weighted Model and Go

17、al Program in our analysis. The results simulate the optimal strategy of refugees’ movement and the amount of refugees each country receives. Thirdly, we include the traffic conditions on each route in our analysis. The

18、 dynamic changes on refugee-receiving countries' capacity resulted from the flooding of refugees and the cascading effects, which will alter the current optimal refugee movement, are also considered. The System Dyn

19、amics Model (SDM) displays the dynamic changes clearly. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) increase the total resource supply and healthcare services. We put data into the model iteration and test if the optimal refu

20、gee is stable in two different situations. Fourthly, we devise a set of policies based on the analysis of the results from our model. We also put the laws, cultural and religion constraints of the effected countries in

21、 to consideration. The role of NGO is not negligible and thus their significant impact on policy- making is also included. In our report, we take the safety and health of refugees and local people as our priority, and pu

22、t forward the optimal refugee movement pattern. We emphasis the importance of the establishment of a cooperation mechanism towards this crisis between EU countries, supporting the frontline countries, inhibiting refuge

23、es retention because of unilateral border-closing, and ect. Finally, we analyze the impact of exogenous events on the optimal refugee movement. We make changes on the assumptions based on a specific exogenous event and

24、the parameters shift correspondingly. We use stability analysis to test the stability of the movement between two sets of parameters in two different situations. According to the result of analysis, exogenous event will

25、 interrupt the relationship between two countries, and bring about barriers for the migration of refugees. This parameter is not included in our model, which provides basis to further optimize our model. Then we discus

26、s the reasonable range for the scale of refugees in this model. We expand the total scale of refugees by a factor of 10. Then we exclude some irrelevant uncertainties and retain the major factors such as refugees’ adapt

27、ability in receiving countries. From model analysis, the results show that when the number of refugees reaches the upper limit of receiving countries, the model cannot make proper allocation for the remaining refugees,

28、 which also provides basis for further optimization. In the end we conclude the strength and weakness of our model. By setting a ceiling, the model can prevent the flooding of refugee which is beyond the capability of t

29、he refugee-receiving countries to avoid some conflict. However, although we set a ceiling of the capability, when encountered with the overflow of the refugee, the model cannot offer a resolution to relocate the refugee

30、 properly. The policy of the countries and the culture difference can also influence the acceptance between countries which are not measured in our model. Also, the support and function of International government and

31、NGO’s are not included in our model. Team#43181

32、 2/ 19 1 Introduction 1.1Background The largely and intensively rising number of people entering Europe in search of safety and a better life has captured the world’s attention with scenes of heartb

33、reaking tragedy. There are more than a million migrants and refugees crossed into Europe in 2015, According to the UNHCR’s (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees) estimates, however, around 366,000 illegal migr

34、ants have reached Europe this year, setting a record. At least 2,800 have died or disappeared during the journey. Challenges are not only faced by those asylum-seekers, emigrating from Africa, the Middle East and Asia

35、to the safe-haven countries, to choose the safe and efficient routes, but also faced by those countries to provide refugees with enough food, water, healthcare and other necessities. According to Bertrand Benoit and Ni

36、cholas Winning ( September 2015), in September 2015, seen as the most sought-after final destination in the EU migrant and refugee crisis, Germany has reached the brink of its capacities, and the Government in Berlin a

37、re criticized by the federal states, which are responsible for accommodation of refugees, for its inconsiderate approach to the crisis. Other countries including Greece and Italy are also struggling to cope with the in

38、flux, and creating division in the EU over how best to deal with resettling people. With the increasingly mounting resettlement burden lying on both sides, a model of effective policies and practices to help better fac

39、ilitate the movement of refugees is thus needed. In this problem, as members of International Coalition of Modelers, we are supposed to build a model of optimal refugee movement that would incorporate projected flows of

40、 refugees with consideration of transportation accessibility, safety of emigration routes and countries’ resource capacities. We are expected to establish our model on a set of parameters as metrics of the crisis and t

41、ake the endogenous systemic dynamics of the crisis into account. The working model serves to support the optimal set of conditions with our proposals of a set of policies for optimal migration pattern. In addition, we

42、modelers also embrace exogenous events that may result in substantial shifts in the volatile environment and consider the scalability and corresponding changes of the model. 1.2 Assumption (1) Every refugee choose their

43、 route owing to their own desire depending on the condition of the refugee receiving country and the accessibility of the route. The choice they make would not be influenced by other factors like the family's desire

44、 or their friend's decision. (2) The difference of language between two countries have little influence on the choice of movement route. (3) The international organization has no restrict on the capability of the re

45、fugee-receiving country, which means when measuring the capability of the refugee country, we only consider its comprehensive national power. (4) There is no unexpected terrorism event and disasters that be of inconveni

46、ent significance on the choice of the refugee. (5) Once the refugees flood in, there would be no conflict between the local and the refugee that may cause the change of policy about the refugee-receiving countries attit

47、ude towards the refugee. (6) The death rate of the route which is the parameter of the accessibility index of the route results from the difficulty of the route objectively and the death rate has little connection with

48、the lack of resources during the route. 2 Model 2.1 Parameters We choose the distribution of refugees, transportation availability and capacity of refugee-receiving countries as three general factors which can influence