Can Mankind Escape the Tragedy of the Commons?
How does the tragedy of the commons impact the ever-growing need for sustainability in modern society?
By Nishant Sharma
Sketched in 1833 by British mathematician William Forster Lloyd, the image above marked an extremely significant, yet controversial development in the field of social sciences. It remained an “obscure snippet” of the field until ecologist Garrett Hardin wrote the influential paper “The tragedy of the commons.” Hardin wrote, “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. Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all.” Hardin’s tragedy of the commons has had profound impacts on history and continues to play a pivotal role in the continued environmental degradation today. The concept can simply be defined as a situation in which individuals within a shared-resource system act according to their own self-interest, consequently making decisions contrary to the common good of others. Ultimately this leads to the depletion of that same shared resource, through collective action.
But what does this have to do with the environment? Currently, the largest tragedy of the commons is climate change. A growing number of people see climate change as a perfect example of Hardin’s theory. In this situation, the earth’s atmosphere can be regarded as the “commons” of the future or the shared resource. Many climate change activists over history have taken different approaches to describing this environmental catastrophe as a tragedy of the commons. One of the earliest pioneers of climate change advocates, Nicholas Stern, drew comparisons between the global economy, and climate change. He called global warming the “the greatest market failure of all time.” Essentially, when individual free markets are left to their own devices, “they will fail and continue to fail to control harmful behaviour when it comes to the depleting state of the environment” (Schwartz, 2020). When the Kyoto Protocol — a legal framework designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions — came to an end (in 2012) greenhouse gas emissions increased by an alarming 60% from 1990 levels (when the Kyoto protocol was instated). “Today, countries remain far from reaching the level of emission cuts required to stay within the two-degree threshold. IPCC has called for rich countries to reduce their emissions to half of their 2010 levels by 2030, and developing countries to maintain emissions at their 2010 levels to achieve the target.” (Mint, 2014). Given the development endeavours of modern society and the energy supplies required to maintain current living standards, these sustainable changes seem highly unlikely.
The real question one should be asking, is how mankind remains complacent in the face of such a perilous threat, with imminent catastrophic consequences? In today’s world, our climate is probably one of the best examples of a resource that is exploited for individual gain. The absence of “enforceable liability” — or in other words the state of being legally responsible for something — allows individuals to unload the cost of their actions onto a multitude of third parties (Mint, 2014). A prime example of this is the role that MEDCs and LEDCs play in GHG emissions. All across the world, developing nations have retained their stance that richer countries have been major polluters for a long time now. The developing world certainly does play have a point. Developed countries such as Maldives or Bangladesh play a major role in rising sea levels. While this may be true, developing countries have rapidly growing economies, and due to their increasing need for energy sources, these MEDCs are catching up. In this situation, the root of the problem lies within developing nation’s unwillingness to make changes within their economies. However, solely attributing the consequences to developing countries would be impractical. Due to the absence of effective international governmental coordination, the world will continue to ignore the looming threat of climate change.
Greenhouse gas emissions are only one part of this extremely diverse problem that can be applied to the tragedy of the commons. Plenty of natural resources are subject to over-exploitation and, ultimately, exhaustion. The prioritization of individual development and self-gain, over global cooperation, will be the true downfall of mankind.
Works Cited
“Carbon Footprint — Human Impact on Our Environment — CCEA — GCSE Geography Revision — CCEA — BBC Bitesize.” BBC News, BBC, www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/z33jk2p/revision/3.
Kelly, Joe. “The Top 10 Causes of Global Warming.” Sciencing, 22 Nov. 2019, sciencing.com/the-top-10-causes-of-global-warming-12512484.html.
“Lesson 6 — Impacts on MEDCs.” Climate Change Teacher Resources, leicuniclimatechange.weebly.com/lesson-6 — -impacts-on-medcs.html.
Patt, Anthony. “Beyond the Tragedy of the Commons: Reframing Effective Climate Change Governance.” Energy Research & Social Science, Elsevier, 27 May 2017, www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629617301433.
Schwartz, Pedro, et al. “Climate Change: A Tragedy of the Commons?” Econlib, 6 Apr. 2020, www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2020/Schwartzclimatechange.html.
