The Tragedy Of The Commons Essay

The Tragedy Of The Commons Essay
The Tragedy of the Commons American Earth: Environmental Writing Since Thoreau is a diverse yet interconnected collection of essays by renowned
environmentalist authors who have been influential in literature, religion, science, and politics. Each piece has a specific purpose and role that it plays
in conveying ideas and themes. Many authors share their personal opinions on issues such as the world's declining forests, the extinction of species, as
well their intimate experiences with nature. However, the most influential essay in this book is "The Tragedy of the Commons" by Garrett Hardin (438).
A multitude of pieces in this book tie into the tragedy of the commons and support its ideas in one way or another.
In his essay Hardin discusses how the rapid decline of the world's common places, such as natural animal pastures, are the result of rapid, uncontrolled
human population growth. Hardin suggests that environmental problems such as deforestation, crowding out of native species, loss of resources,
pollution, poor job economy, etc., are the result of the loss of common spaces. He indicated that common spaces used to be plentiful enough for every
person to have an abundant share, but that was when the human population was smaller than the current population of 7 billion people. Hardin's
powerful essay proposes many solutions and methods for solving the ever increasing tragedy of the commons.
"Ruin is the destination towards which all men rush, each pursuing his
Get more content on HelpWriting.net

John Locke's The Tragedy Of The Commons
Common pool resources denotes natural resources used by many individuals in common, such as fisheries, groundwater basins, and irrigation systems.
Such resources have long been subject to overexploitation and misuse by individuals acting in their own best interests.
The state of our environment and the environmental problems that have evolved are considerably different today to when John Locke wrote his
influential essay 'Two treatises on Government' (1680–1690). Humans are the freest, least genetically constrained species found. According to Locke's
natural right theory, the state of nature is the original condition of human beings in regard to any common authority. Men were born free and equal:
free to do what they wished without being required...show more content...
With this Locke is of the opinion that properties do not have much value as a divine ordainment rather he is of the view that labour adds the deserving
value to the property which is regarded as the principle of the first appropriation. The way we think about environmental concerns or when we deal
with the question of the common use of resources, the phrase 'The Tragedy of the Common's almost inevitably props up. Our thinking is heavily
influenced by Garrett Hardin's pivotal 1968 essay with the same name "The Tragedy of the Commons". In his essay, Hardin described the fate of a
common pasture, unowned and available to all. The tragedy of the commons lies in the anticipation that a resource will be overused when it is part of
a "commons." As Hardin explained, in such a situation it is in each herder's self–interest to maximize his use of the commons at the expense of the
community at large. Each herder captures all of the benefit from adding one more animal to his herd. Yet the costs of overgrazing the pasture are
distributed among every user of the pasture. And when all of the herders respond to these incentives, the pasture is overgrazed – hence the tragedy. The
tragedy is that people don't look at the bigger picture; the over use of

The Tragedy Of The Commons
Within the article "The Tragedy of the Commons," ecologist Garrett Hardin asserts that eventually all resources used in common will encounter
overexploitation or degradation as these difficult to enclose systems incentivize individuals to pursue their own self–interest while simultaneously
behaving contrary to the common good of all users (Anukwonke, 2015, p. 3). Affirming that the absence of both state regulation as well as
privatization inescapably encourages individuals to act selfishly so as to maximize personal gains, Hardin claims that when there is no ownership
over a specific resource than there is a tendency to overexploit it as no one is responsible for ensuring that the vitality of that resource remains intact
(Marlow, n.d., p. 3). With an individual inclination to overuse or pollute a resource as it precipitates economic advantages for the individual, Hardin
emphasizes that when a resource can be used by anyone yet is owned by no one than it not only generates private benefits but it also distributes the
costs among all those who are sharing it (Hintz, & Moore, & Robbins, 2014, p. 55). Sacrificing the good of everyone involved by refraining from
using a resource sustainably, Hardin underscores that when individuals are motivated by personal advantage rather than what is favourable to
everyone, then they inevitably end up destroying the very resource upon which they all depend (Bargum, & Kokko, & Rankin, 2007, p. 643). While
Hardin concentrated extensively on the

The Tragedy Of The Commons Summary
Aruna Somwaru
GEOG 337
Summary #2
In Hardin's, The Tragedy of the Commons, he makes two major points that are still widely accepted. He argues that people act in their own self
interest which causes them to over use the resources in the commons and that the only way to solve this problem is by utilizing socialism or privatizing
free enterprises. This is not always true because there are people who have organized themselves in a way to manager common pool resources that
allowed them use a long–term sustainable institution for governing resources. Government ownership and privatization does not always work. In
China, Mongolia, and southern Siberia, there are signs of degradation where there is government regulation of the land. China and...show more content...
They are natural or human constructed resources that connect to short–term thinking. One user can reduce the quality or quantity of a resource by
using too much of it and excluding beneficiaries are costly. CPR's include renewable and delectable resources such as ground water basins and
atmosphere. Basically, anything that is on land or in the water. In order to save CPR's we must restrict people's access and create incentives for
people to invest in the CPRs instead of over using the resources. The notion that CPR depletion is due to resource users overexploiting an area is
based on the idea that individuals are selfish, norm–free, and only cares about their short–term gains. Users of CPR are usually narrow and
self–interested. These people are free riders, altruist, or people who want to gain something from their interactions with other people. This is why
cooperating is better for individuals when they are interacting with people they know rather than strangers. People within this group become trust
worthy and others will want to cooperate with them. This is good for their offspring and their access to the resource. Well–managed CPRs exist in
Nepal where they have a monitored irrigation system that relies on locally crafted rules and evolved norms. When the government became
involved, their yields were reduce, people's access to the resource was cut off and lead to the possibilities of people having to pay in the future. Solving
these dilemmas are never easy or error free. However, we need to figure out a way in which we could take what we've learned from the past, our
failures, and success and use it to better the way we look at CPRs

Tragedy Of The Commons Paper
For hundreds of years, humans have exploited the environment for resources in a somewhat selfish manner. This has pushed Earth to breaking point,
and caused large scale environmental problems such as global warming, deforestation, water pollution, air pollution and animal extinction. These
problems have to be solved by those who created them, however there are contrasting arguments on the methods to do this. Garrett Hardin (1968)
states in this Tragedy of the Commons paper that mutual coercion is needed to solved dilemmas involving the environment as appeals to conscience
are too long term to make an effective mark, or alternatively making property private so each individual is responsible for their land and any issues
that arise from their...show more content...
[3, pg. 54]He states that while coercion can be effective in some cases that require clear outlines and clear consequences, it's hard to monitor and
enforce those rules as no one body be a impartial decider. The enforcement for un–cooperation can be brought about by those cooperating, instead of a
large body of power as Hardin suggests such as The United Nations. One of Benson's issues with the UN, is that their actions can be influenced by
big power nations such as the US or Germany which causes them to be less morally neutral, allowing the cooperates to enforce the rules of agreement
means that those who don't cooperate don't reap the benefits and can be cut off based on a decision of many rather than one.[3, pg. 60] A recent
example of this is the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (Paris Agreement or COP21), in which legislation between 80 countries to limit
global warming was agreed upon and they will hold each other accountable for doing their part to decrease their emissions. The agreement aims not to
have fixed obligations but rather a situation in which each country does the best they can with regular intervals for reviewing and accountability.[2]
Not only will this begin to help solve a large scale environmental problem, it allows cooperation between countries to aim for a common

Tragedy Of The Commons Summary
"Tragedy of the Commons"
What is Garrett Hardin's central idea in this article? The central idea of "The Tragedy of the Commons" is that, to ensure an acceptable, general quality
of life, the human race must limit its population growth, ultimately through means of coercion. To reach this conclusion, Hardin works through
multiple assumptions and their various conclusions. First is that we live in a world of finite resources. No amount of technical, technological, or
agricultural innovation will be able to adequately satisfy humanity's exponential population growth. Furthermore, current attitudes towards reproduction
suffer from the "Tragedy of the Commons". Since for each individual the immediate benefits of having a child outweigh the...show more content...
Human beings, across the board, need to be less wasteful. Beyond that, however, my and Hardin's views differ. My main point of contention is that,
in modern society, the benefits of having a child generally do not outweigh the individual and societal costs. Having a baby is expensive. Nowadays,
not only do you have to buy food and clothes for the children, but baby cribs, toys, carriages, school supplies, etc. Once upon a time, everyone lived
on a farm, which made having children great because they could work as farm hands and earn their keep, but that's mostly in the past. Child labor laws
outright prevent children from being economically profitable in any legal capacity. In reality, present–day parenting is totally caring for an abnormally
needy human being for around twenty years with absolutely no economic gain. There simply is little to no, actual benefit to having a child. This fact is
reflected in the fact that birth rates in developed nations has steadily decreased over the years (Yew). Similarly, the assumption that the welfare state
somehow encourages over–reproduction is also unsupported. It is within the welfare state that contraceptives are most readily available, meaning
women are less likely to get pregnant by accident. This greatly reduces the birth rate. Plus, the greater education that these nations usually provide
means more women are joining the workforce. Because of this, more women might decide to hold off parenthood, as

Tragedy Of The Commons Case Study
Summarize, in YOUR own words (do NOT copy–n–paste from the book or article) what the "Tragedy of the Commons" means. This term refers to the
self beneficial actions taken by individuals that deplete common resources within an open access, unowned system resulting in a loss of those
resources. What natural resource in your area, environment, community, or town has been a victim of the Tragedy of the Commons? In what way?
Explain. In Florida the tragedy of the commons is being seen in the Floridan Aquifer and springs, as the number of extraction places and removal
amounts amplify, bodies of surface water have begun to vanish and, underneath the surface, salt water will eventually begin to invade, ruining the
natural aquifer. The springs...show more content...
Restrictions need to be put in place to avoid the utilization of land in that matter. I hope permission was not granted for the sake of the people drinking
the natural water of the springs and for the manatees who spend the winter months there. Select an aspect of your day–to–day existence that has
environmental consequences. Describe the environmental consequences, and briefly discuss more sustainable alternatives. An aspect of my daily life
that has consequences on the environment would be sitting idle for about 15 minutes each morning while I wait to bring my daughter into daycare,
releasing toxic fumes from my car into the environment. Leaving the car running when it is cool enough to sit with the windows down is unnecessary
and can be easily changed. I can make a more sustainable transition by putting the windows down and turning off the engine for the 15 minutes we
wait. Tell me what aspects of the course you really liked and would not want changed if we update/revise this

Tragedy Of Commons
Garrett Hardin's, The Tragedy of the Commons discusses the exploitation of common resources and the inability to solve the problem with technical
solutions. Hardin focuses on population and the effect it has and will continue to have on what he refers to as the commons. The exploitation of natural
resources or the tragedy of the commons, as he puts it, refers to all resources that are not formally regulated. Such resources include rivers, parks, the
atmosphere, energy and so on. Robert Wade and James Acheson take different approaches in how the use ofcommon property can help address the
tragedy of the commons. Hardin's primary focus is on the negative effects of a continuous population growth and the welfare state's inevitable need to
support population growth. He often describes the optimum population being when growth rate approaches zero. This, he points out, might lead us to
believe that any population with an increasing growth rate must be below its optimum however it is mostly the case that the...show more content...
The two types of fishing areas play a role in the amount of mixed fishing that is allowed. The more mixed an area is, the less chance of
overstepping local boundaries. Nucleated fishing areas have a stronger sense of ownership, close to the harbor and weaker as one moves in deeper.
I didn't know about the existence of harbor gangs and how violent fishing can become. Acceptance into a harbor game apparently isn't too difficult
and mostly open to locals and those willing to follow the local standards. Perimeter defended areas have sharper boundaries that usually align with
the location of their residence. Regardless of where the owner chooses to anchor his boat, the area is his. Mixed fishing is less common here and the
membership of harbor gangs here is typically limited to families with land close to

The Tragedy of the Commons: By Garrett Hardin
A common resource refers to a natural or man–made property that is characterized by high rivalry in consumption, meaning an increase in the amount
of resource consumed by one person reduces that for others to consume, and non–excludability, meaning the resource is freely accessible to a large
group of people. These factors make a common resource susceptible to its overuse and damage in the long run, especially without a controlled
management and protection of the resource.
In his writing, Hardin introduces the phenomenon of the commons problem, known as the Tragedy of the Commons, which arises from the way humans
use the natural resources on earth and the long–term effects of their growing exploitation of the "commons". Hardin gives a hypothetical example of
the grazing rights in a village. Each herdsman will try to maximize his gain by continually adding one more animal to his herd, which eventually
leads to overgrazing. This is an inevitable decision of any rational person, who knows that he will gain the full benefit from his use of the resource
whereas the cost of the use is divided among all users. According to Hardin, this instinctive desire to pursue one's own best interest over the collective
benefits of the entire population causes destruction of the resources and "brings ruins" to a society that exercises freedom of common resources .
In order to prevent further overexploitation of the resources, Hardin argues that the system of freedom of the commons must be

Tragedy of the Commons Essays
Garrett Hardin's article "The Tragedy of the Commons" illustrates the continuing problem of the commons. The article clearly illustrates the effects of
the exponentially increasing population such as pollution and food. Possible solutions to the problems are stated in the article, but any and all solution
will be difficult to accomplish and may not be effective because of man's sense of freedom and selfishness.
The commons is an area of land that belongs to the public as opposed to being owned by individuals, which is private property. Garrett Hardin
describes the 'tragedy of commons' as a population problem and individuals over–exploiting a commons for their own personal gain. He discusses the
over–exploitation of resources, and...show more content...
Even with all of these negative aspects of over–grazing, farmers still choose to do so to gain a better profit.
Pollution is a constant problem that the world faces; Garrett blames the majority of the pollution problems on the population aspect of the 'tragedy of
commons'. One of the main problems with pollution is treatment. Many companies find it too expensive to treat their waste and so many harmful
chemical gasses, and other harmful wastes are released into the air, which can potentially get into the water. This is problematic because it is the air
we breathe in and the water we drink and use day to day. Spending the money to treat the waste reducing these harmful effects is overlooked causing
the public to suffer the consequences because of companies concerns with their own gains.
In the article "Why the BP Oil Spill is a Tragedy of the Commons, Part II", Andy Mannle discusses the 2010 oil spill crisis in the Gulf that effected
and effects many companies and people. Mannle points out in the first part of his article that these companies are earning large amounts of money
in drilling and selling oil; however, there were no crisis plans or funds collected in case of emergencies. The funds would usually come from paying
lands fees for example, but these companies are drilling for free: they are not being charged to drill oil in the specific areas; therefore, if something
goes wrong it would cost

The Tragedy Of The Commons By Garrett Hardin
Over the decades, researchers from many disciplines have been known to analyse an assortment of academic writings including academic journals. The
article, The Tragedy of the Commons, written by Garrett Hardin is a critique that modestly describes the magnitude of overpopulation. Hardin based
the Tragedy of the Commons on a pamphlet entitled, Two Lectures on the Checks to Population, written in 1833 by English mathematician William
Forster Lloyd. The author Garrett Hardin was an influential ecologist, genetically trained biologist and philosopher. Hardin has been noted as the
leading advocate over the last three decades of the 20th century for the necessity of controlling the growth of world population and reducing
immigration into the United States (Lynn, 2003, para. 1). A major focus of Hardin career was the issue of humanoverpopulation, which led to him
writing numerous pieces on controversial subjects such as advocating abortion rights, eugenics and strict limits to...show more content...
Hardin addresses the issue of pollution stating that "the rational man finds that his share of the cost of the wastes he discharges into the commons is
less than the cost of purifying his wastes before releasing them" (Hardin, 1968, p. 1245). Thus, the rational man finds that it is more economical to
discharge his waste into the commons. Hardin's states that an increase in the population is vastly threatening our environment due to its direct relation
to increased pollution. Therefore, to avoid pollution, it must be easier and lower in cost to treat the pollutants, than to get rid of them untreated. As the
numbers of people increase, there will inevitably be rising levels of pollution, degeneration of the quality of agricultural land, deforestation, and
deterioration of air and water quality. To prevent this deterioration, Hardin believes our first aim should be to arrest the growth of world

The Article ' The Tragedy Of The Commons '
The article "The Tragedy of the Commons" by Garrett Hardin argues that we, as human beings, should give up our right to breed. Hardin claims that
overpopulation will destroy our planet and that life will be tough if we reach our carrying capacity. With this problem looming overhead, Hardin says
that there is no technical solution meaning that we cannot invent our way out of this and that the only solution is to change our values, namely to give
up the right to make babies. In spite of Hardin's argument, I believe that human beings should not give up the right to breed because I believe there is
a natural solution and Mother Nature, above all, is the limiting force of all growth and the law in which all life abides by.
Hardin goes into explaining how the world is finite and how human beings must have food to live. Energy must be obtained through calories:
maintenance calories which are required to live and work calories which are used for various extracurricular things like work, leisure, and anything
beyond just being alive. If we maximize our population, the amount of work calories will be zero and Hardin says it won't be good for human beings if
that happens. So he says that the optimum population is less than the maximum.
Hardin suggests that over population will soon destroy our environment through an example involving herdsmen and grazing cattle. Hardin argues that,
through personal greed, each herdsman will keep adding cattle to the pasture without thinking about the

Tragedy Commons
Econ145 assignment 1, Minyeong Kim(A91424682), Professor Squires
In the first reading which is called "Tragedy of the Commons," written by Garrett Harden, the author Harden talks about the problems of the public
goods and some solutions as well. The author basically insists that there are no technical solutions for the problems caused by overpopulation. He also
gives some examples of the tragedy of the commons and the reasons why these problems cannot be overcome. He mentioned about the appearance of
the atomic resources which is considered as an infinite resource, and he says that people usually tend to consider this infinite resources as a solution of
the problem of overpopulation. However, the author claims that the infinite resources is...show more content...
First of all, he explains that the difference between public goods and common–pool resources. For example, we can say that groundwater, grazing and
trees are common–pool resources. If a person uses resource at once and gets benefits from it, the value of the resource becomes lower to the another
person. On the other hand, using of the public goods does not make lower the value of the resources whoever uses it. He gives an unusual observations
regarding Indian Village which has no clearly defined social domain or institution separate from state authority. The author observed total of forty–one
villages, and he found out that people in all of the villages share the goods and services very effectively and evenly based on common property rights.
The reason why this village could use resources properly is that there are four main institutions; a village council, village standing fund, village guards,
and common irrigators; which have their own common property rights. These institutions also have their own rights to do such as council organize the
supply of the public goods, or village guards protect crops from livestock etc. Also, all the services in this village except water distribution are financed
from the village standing fund. As a result, since these institutions have their own common property rights, they cannot help but have responsibility to
protect village properly. Also, this well–made common property rights of the village could protect total tragedy of the commons as a result.
Furthermore, the author gives another example about grazing in a village. For example, as he mentions above, every single rational herdsman prefers
to keep as many cattle as they can to make higher benefits. To keep as many cattle as they can, they have to protect them by hiring

The tragedy of the commons and the problem of collective action are two key concepts in the world of political science. They act under the
assumption that man is a rational being who will act in his own self interest. Humanity id broadly diverse meaning that each individual has their own
ideas as to how society should run and how people should live.(heywood) This inevitably results in disagreement and this is where politics steps in.
Aristotle described politics as the 'master science', 'the activity through which human beings attempt to improve their lives and create the Good Society.'
Through the tragedy of the commons and the problem of collective action we can see how politics is essentially the 'search for conflict resolution'
...show more content...
However Mancur Olson (cite) states in his book that 'rational self–interested individuals will not act to achieve their common or group interests.'
Coercion or other incentives are needed for this to occur. Communication can be used as moral suasion (ostrom) This became known as the 'zero
contribution thesis'. A social dilemma is when individuals choose actions that will affect others as well as themselves. The individual will aim to
benefit themselves short term which generally results in a lower joint outcome. If the individuals acted collectively they would achieve a better
optimal outcome than the one they would achieve on their own. These social dilemmas have been characterised in game theory by the prisoners
dilemma. They will achieve the Nash equilibrium which is lower than the socially desirable outcome. This is the problem of collective action. This is
not to say that forms of collective action cannot be seen in everyday world. Mobs, gangs, cartels, neighbourhood associations, charities and voting are
all forms of collective action. (ostrom) These social dilemmas are related to common–pool resources. The problem of free riding can be an issue. .
There has to be governance of common pool resources. If, for example collective action was man's natural instinct then

Garrett Hardin published in Psychology Today in September 1974. This passage is an excerpt from his popular paper "The Tragedy of the
Commons" as a warning that overpopulation was dangerous due to how limited Earth's resources are. This theory is reflected in Hardin's thesis
that the rich should do nothing to help the people of poor nations and turn away those trying to come in. Hardin used the imagery of a lifeboat
almost filled in a sea full of drowning people to pose and answer a single question, "what should the lifeboat passengers do?" (290). Hardin's answer
was to defend the boat against all trying to board. If anyone felt guilty about this course of action they should feel free to swap places with a drowning
man and give them their...show more content...
By presenting these arguments Hardin lets the reader come to the conclusion on their own, that they could let no one on. The use of the examples,
arguments, and metaphors promoted Hardin's purpose well. However, Hardin relied on his metaphor too much. There was a notable lack of sources
in Hardin's paper. By presenting the reader with definite numbers saying that Earth is reaching its limits Hardin could have brought the reader to his
conclusion faster. There are a few more additional places Hardin could have presented data from a source. The subject of America's current energy
crisis is touched on briefly if data was included that explained that America was going to go through more energy than it can make soon it would have
cemented Hardin's main point even more. Hardin also mentioned that one–third of the world was rich and two–thirds considerably poor (290), this
should have been cited from a reliable source so it sounded more factual and not just an opinion. Although, this did not stop Hardin from proving his
thesis. This paper can be an excellent source for anyone researching into how to fight overpopulation. Hardin provides several other viewpoints that
show he did not selectively choose evidence or distort it. Hardin proceeds from point to point logically which allowed the reader to comprehend the
main idea effortlessly. The author glided to how the people of poor

We live in a world where sometimes we are told there are endless resources. The population of the world is growing rapidly, so the question we must
ask, are we going to run into a problem where there are too many people in this world and not enough resources to accompany this rapid growth in
population? In the article "Tragedy of the Commons" written by Garrett Hardin, Hardin believes that the population problem cannot be solved in a
technical way because the problem involves questions of human freedoms and rights, both of which are issues of morality as opposed to scientific
fact. He goes on to explain how we have become too self–interested in the short term that we aren't looking at the long–term affects. In order to fix the
problem...show more content...
The simple answer is no. Some new reserves will be found which will help fossil fuels last longer, but they won't last forever. New reserves of
fossil fuels are becoming harder to find, and those that are being discovered are significantly smaller than the ones that have been found in the past."
This goes back to Hardin point of having finite resources. Population in the world in 1968 was around 3.5 billion, and in todays society we are
approaching 7.5 billion. If people want to keep their privileges like Hardin says, then there must be change to how we consume our resources, or else I
must agree with Hardin that we need to mandate the population.
One good comparison Hardin makes is the example of the herdsman bringing in new cattle for personal gain. These men are forced to decide between
brining in a extra cattle and gain the benefits, or the negative effect being bringing in another animal and causing overgrazing. The positive outcome
almost always wins, which brings in the moral reasoning of if the herdsman is doing the right thing. They want to reap the benefits but Hardin is
making the point this selfish decision is going to have consequences down the line to others.
After lying out strong starting arguments Hardin makes the case for instituting flexible and adaptable laws. Dealing with the tragedy of the

Introduction
Economic activity and our environment have been closely linked since man first discovered the concept of trade. In the language of economics, the
environment has itself, become an increasingly "scarce resource1". Since economics is about managing these scarce resources, it will be a useful tool
when considering some of the environmental issues facing our planet. One of the major concerns confronting the environment today is the overfishing
of the world's oceans, depleting some species to near extinction. With continued advances in technological and industrial proficiency, fishing vessels
are able to fish across the globe, further exacerbating the effects of overfishing. Because the oceans are considered a shared or common...show more
content...
This market failure exists because the market price for Bluefin Tuna undervalues the full social cost of unrestricted consumption of this once plentiful
fish. When negative environmental externalities exist, the private equilibrium price and quantity, as determined by free market supply and demand, is
not the same as the social equilibrium. Since social costs are not priced into the individual or organization decision making, when accounting for the
intrinsic costs to society (see graph 1), the socially efficient quantity while decline and the socially efficient price will increase. Because overfishing is
so widespread and pervasive, coordinated global intervention is necessary through a combination of market–based corrective policies in order to
adequately address this market failure.
Market Solutions
One of the distinct features of any common resource is that it is a "non–excludable good1", meaning no one can be prevented from using what is
available. As discussed, the consequence of this scenario is that it will produce a socially inefficient outcome. There are differing theories on how to
achieve an economically feasible marginal cost and marginal social benefit equilibrium. The difficulty, of course, is to determine what the socially
optimal supply level for Bluefin Tuna should be in relation to fish stock restoration and future sustainability as well as empowering the global
community to act in unison. The discussion here

The Tragedy Of The Commons
Around 44% of American citizens rely solely on groundwater from aquifers for their drinking water, according to the National Ground Water
Association (NGWA), a cooperative organization dedicated to improving groundwater knowledge (National Ground Water Association [NGWA],
2010). However, groundwater depletion in California's Central Valley has begun to have a more pronounced impact on the population and the
environment located in this area. Groundwater depletion in this region developed partly because of a problem represented by the idea of the tragedy
of the commons, which is expounded upon by Thomas Dietz, Elinor Ostrom, and Paul Stern in "The Struggle to Govern the Commons" (Dietz,
Ostrom, & Stern, 2003). The concept of the tragedy of commons evolves from the belief that individuals will undoubtedly act in their own self–interest
when a shared resource, such as water or air, is at stake as explained by Dietz, Ostrom, and Stern (2003). Garrett Hardin (1968), the father of this
theory, wanted to explain that there has to be a change in the world's approach and "ideas of morality" to prevent the exhaustion of limited resources.
Memphis, TN, an area with a population growth pattern comparable to that of the Central Valley, also uses aquifers, such as the Memphis and Fort
Pillow aquifers, as a main source for drinking water (Brahana & Broshears, 2001). Because of these connections, concern has grown over the past
several years as to whether Memphis could experience similar

The Tragedy Of The Commons Essay

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to The Tragedy Of The Commons Essay

Similar to The Tragedy Of The Commons Essay (12)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Tragedy Of The Commons Essay