“The population problem has no technical solution; it requires a fundamental extension in morality.”—Garrett Hardin
Global climate change. Carbon footprints. Petroleum. Batteries. Health care. Education. Etc. We dance around these and other such topics with strong opinions and weak political will. The discussion always takes me back to an assignment I completed in a Geography elective in college some 35+ years ago. We were asked to read Garrett Hardin’s classic 1968 essay, “The Tragedy of the Commons”. Few other writings (other than perhaps the Bible and some classic interpretations of the Bible) have had such an impact on my worldview.
I wholeheartedly believe that the essay should be required reading in high school civics. Hardin’s focus was on population growth—as sensitive a topic today (when the global population has exceeded 7.7 billion) as it was in the late ‘60s (when the global population was a mere 3.6 billion). While many issues of human population growth can be tempered with technological advances, many (perhaps most) cannot be fixed without addressing the consumption (the over-exploitation) of limited resource problem.
The article comes to mind in almost every political discussion. It was awakened this morning by an article addressing the “tightening nickel supply” and electric cars2. The solution isn’t drilling for more oil or creating better batteries (as all batteries will require access to some limited resource and there are issues that go along with the mining and production processes that go along with these).
I see the article in the discussion of “free” and open access to health care. Indeed, I am surprised that the essay (or the concept of the “negative commons”) doesn’t come up in the discussion about health care.
I see global climate change as an issue related to global population whether one determines that it of natural or man-made origins. Glacial ice has advanced and receded countless times over Earth’s history. It is only a problem now as it affects man directly—as it displaces and inconveniences us individually and collectively. There are only hard answers to the questions of climate change. As with most of the issues that might bring up the “tragedy of the commons”, we have to come to the realization that our lives are impacted.
Perhaps science can fix some of the problems facing humankind. In general, though, we are faced with a Spiritual problem. The tragedy of the commons is an ethical, moral, and Spiritual dilemma. The issues are complex and require everyone to consider his or her role in the commons. We have a choice whether we are to be governed by conscience or governed by regulation. Understanding the “tragedy of the commons” is a step toward understanding our role in the solution to global problems. Character must supersede self-interests. Substituting consumption for breeding in Hardin’s essay, I would share his concluding remarks:
“The only way we can preserve and nurture other and more precious freedoms is by relinquishing the freedom to (consume), and that very soon. ‘Freedom is the recognition of necessity’—and it is the role of education to reveal to all the necessity of abandoning the freedom to (consume). Only so, can we put an end to this aspect of the tragedy of the commons.”—Garrett Hardin.
Be your best today; be better tomorrow.
Carpe momento!
1 https://sites01.lsu.edu/faculty/kharms/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2017/04/HardinG_1968_Science.pdf
2 https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-08/tightening-nickel-supply-threatens-electric-vehicle-boom?fbclid=IwAR3WQrIOU9eENyliNPC4_avTIAlw762-rv24vUmI5WrPl8QSS3Od4vVVeXo