Question

In an opinion piece (Free Markets Avoid "Tragedy of the Commons"), dated September 7, 2014, from the Columbia Daily Tribune out of Columbia, Missouri, John Stossel argues that letting markets and property protect nature is a strategy that avoids the tragedy of the commons.

Please read this opinion piece, as well as reviewing the assigned Garrett Hardin reading "The Tragedy of the Commons". After doing this, please explain whether you believe that Stossel is correct and why you believe this. Does Hardin's account of the "tragedy of the commons" offer a reasonable and effective strategy for avoiding damage to the natural environment?

Answer 1

The tragedy of the commons can trace back to Aristotle, who noted that ‘what is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it’ . The tragedy of the commons refers to a dilemma described by Garrett Hardin, which first published in the Science magazine in 1968 (Hardin, 1968). Central to Hardin’s essay is an example which is a useful parable for understanding how over-exploitation can occur. This example was based on Europe’s medieval land tenure, in which herders shared a common on which they were each entitled to let their cows graze.

In Hardin’s example, each herder has an interest to put each succeeding cow he acquires onto the land, even if the carrying capacity of the common is exceeded and it is permanently damaged for all as a result. The herder receives all of the benefits from an additional cow, while the damage to the common is shared by all the herders involved. If all herders are free to make their individually rational economic decision, the common will be over-exploited or even destroyed eventually.

In the course of his analysis, Hardin develops the theme, drawing in many examples of present-day commons, such as national parks, the atmosphere, oceans, rivers and fish stocks. Since then, there have been a big stream of literature relating to this topic. For example, the example of fish stocks had led some to call this the ‘tragedy of the fishers’. A major theme running through much of the literature is the growth of human populations, with earth’s finite resources being the general common:

Therein is the tragedy. Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit – in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons (Cited from Hardin (1968).).

The tragedy of the commons” (Hardin, 1968) describes how a common-access sheep-grazing pasture will degrade as each individual herder seeks to improve their own outcome by increasing their own sheep numbers (an individual gain), while the common pasture becomes overgrazed. As Hardin eloquently states:

Therein is the tragedy. Each man is locked into a system that compels him to increase his herd without limit—in a world that is limited. Ruin is the destination toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a society that believes in the freedom of the commons.

We see many parallels in attitudes to freshwater resources. Their management is a complex and enduring policy problem, involving multiple participants at the individual and jurisdictional level, each with their own interests and purposes for water use. We can conceptualize this by considering freshwater resource management as a commons resource challenge.