Reply #117: extending the Commons analogy.... [View All]

[mike_c]

Forgive me for belaboring this, but I think it's important.

Hardin's essay is specifically about human reproduction and over-population, but the fundamental principle underlying the whole essay is economic. He uses the story of land destruction by herdsmen to illustrate this idea, but overgrazing isn't the main point of the essay at all. I think this is really important because Hardin articulates a fundamental truth about human nature, but that truth is often lost in contexts other than common grazing lands.

From The Tragedy of the Commons: http://dieoff.org/page95.htm

1. The positive component is a function of the increment of one animal. Since the herdsman receives all the proceeds from the sale of the additional animal, the positive utility is nearly + 1.

2. The negative component is a function of the additional overgrazing created by one more animal. Since, however, the effects of overgrazing are shared by all the herdsmen, the negative utility for any particular decision ­making herdsman is only a fraction of - 1.

Remember, the common grazing is a metaphor. Stated more generally, when the benefits of any actions accrue to the individuals who perform them, but the costs of those actions are distributed throughout society, there is little incentive for individuals to act responsibly, even when the cost is high. Hardin maintains that there is exactly the opposite incentive-- that only a fool would forgo the benefits if he doesn't have to personally pay all the costs, no matter how disastrous.

Does this make my comments above clearer?