Assignment #3

Garrett Hardin, "The Tragedy of the Commons," Science, 162(1968):1243-1248.

Summary:
This article is an interesting philosophical piece that was published in a scientific journal (which is somewhat interesting in itself) that talks about solving problems where technical means are simply not able to generate a result (meaning that some human thought or some other intervention is required to generate a "solution" going forward).

Principally, the paper uses the analogy of a "commons", which basically means an area of resource that is shared by a group of people (for raising livestock, hence the commons). The problem arises when the use of the resource of the commons reaches its limit (that is to say that the entire area suffers if the resource is utilized any more). The tragedy lies in that an individual that uses the additional resource receives much more benefit than loss since the problem is shared equally by all who use the commons. From this, we see the downfall of the commons because every user thus would rationally decide to get more benefit, and thereby everyone uses all of the natural resource. An extension of this problem discussed includes the likelihood that people will have as many children as possible (through various discussions).

The next important concept that the author attempts to tackle is to define effective mechanisms for regulating this effect (partially through pointing out the faults with using conscience-type means separate from penalties). The primary mechanism would be through a governmental (or mutually agreed upon body) that utilizes coercion.

Discussion:
This topic is very interesting for those interested in activities dealing with the development of natural resources. Many topics, especially like water, fall into similar categories. This discussion reminded me about some of the later stages that my dad talks about in his Environmental Management class with respect to the "Pattern of Resource Development" (which describes how a resource is used and misused (typically) throughout its lifespan from discovery to eventual total depletion.

From a philosophical standpoint, I think I disagree with the author to some extent about the establishment of means to regulate. I do generally agree that in most cases (particularly in business and water related issues) that some body is necessary that has authority and coercive abilities (take for example the EPA with water pollution). I do think that given certain situations, people can govern themselves if they use the proper mindset (one of his big assumptions in the consience portion seemed to dwell on the fact that people could be counted on to not act in a correct manner in relation to others based upon their conscience. In all, I am looking forward to class discussions on this topic.