SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Ecosystem Destruction — Death by a Thousand Cuts
Little unnoticeable drops make the mighty ocean. Similarly, little, decentralized, and almost unnoticeable damages are causing the whole ecosystem to collapse
A few years ago, I stumbled upon the concept of what is commonly known as the Tyranny of Small Decisions (TOSD). I don’t fully recall which research article I read, possibly by William Odum mentioned on this Wikipedia page. The article described an example of a coastal or lake habitat loss by unplanned and scattered housing development. The author explained that no authorities planned or anticipated the habitat loss from housing but it was the aggregate outcome of approving individual houses along the shorelines. Since each house was approved and built independently and in isolation, the impacts of a single house seemed too small to notice. However, over time the cumulative impact of thousands of houses destroyed the habitat. Many environmental protection laws have failed to protect the environment and promote true sustainability precisely because they see each project independently, thereby failing to recognize the cumulative and aggregate impacts.
Many environmental protection laws have failed to protect the environment and promote true sustainability precisely because they see each project independently, thereby fail to recognize the cumulative and aggregate impacts.
Broader than the tragedy of the commons
TOSD is more general than another popular phenomenon known as the tragedy of the commons (TOTC). One may say that the tragedy of the commons is a subset or a special case of TOSD. While both describe how micro decisions contribute to macro patterns, TOTC explains the overexploitation of common-pool resources, which are rivalrous and non-excludable. TOSD is applicable to the overexploitation of all types of resources but it also describes the impacts of collective decisions in cases other than the overexploitation of resources. Further, TOTC occurs particularly due to selfish and greedy human nature, whereas TOSD can occur mainly from individual and institutional ignorance and bounded rationality even if everybody had the best intentions.
Forest fragmentation and tyranny of small decisions
One of the major causes of concern is forest fragmentation. Forest fragmentation is a perfect example of how small-scale, decentralized impacts. While deforestation is declining, forest fragmentation is increasing, which should be an even bigger worry.
Let me provide some background. Until recently, I believed that agriculture (food and textile) was the major driver of deforestation of intact forests, but new research indicates agriculture is responsible for only 40% of deforestation; it is non-agricultural products (e.g., logging for wood, paper, and energy; mining for minerals and metals) that account for about 60% of intact forest loss. Much of such goods are exported from Canada, Russia, and tropical regions to China, the EU, and the US.
Now think about that. We see a macro pattern of destruction. However, there is no single entity responsible. It is an aggregate impact of hundreds of thousands of independent entities spread across the globe (individuals or corporations) from many industries that depend on forests. Everyone is only making a small destruction on their own, which may often be undetectable. However, even minor disturbances can affect the integrity of a whole forest and this is what is happening and we are unable to stop it.
One may argue that the collective action of everyone with enough political will can stop everything. However, here is where I will somewhat differ. All these damages are too decentralized for any single entity to control, irrespective of what political and social systems they live in. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to stop them no matter who is elected or what laws they make.
We are indeed witnessing the death of our planet by a thousand cuts.
TOSD is terrifying for our connected ecosystems. The negative impacts from an individual source are scattered and too small on their own, but the aggregated impacts of all sources become too significant to ignore. This concept can describe nearly all of our environmental, or even socioeconomic, problems, even political polarization. Naturally, individuals have small differences in how they think and what they do. These differences lead to differences in how we make everyday decisions such as who we vote, what we buy, or who we befriend. At a small level, these differences may not seem concerning, but when these differences are aggregated, they create quite a polarized pattern in the society that we see today.
TOSD essentially captures the age-old saying: What difference would it make if one person did it? The response is if everyone did that, it would have a huge impact on society. I think this wisdom is more important than ever to understand the death of our planet by a thousand cuts. I am still skeptical if we can really slow or prevent it under any political or social system.
