1. Is Hardin’s tragedy of the commons analysis helpful in understanding the problem of
climate change? Why or why not?
Hardin’s tragedy of the commons helps us understand the problem of climate change because
it highlights the impact of individual actions on society as a whole. The logic of self-interest will
lead each and every individual to steal a march on the rest of the group before the rest over–
exploit those open lands. In other words, individuals in a free market cannot be trusted to
refrain from over-grazing common lands. We often talk about the corporate social
responsibility large companies have to contribute to societal goals, but when it comes to
climate change, every individual must be held responsible to some extent. Solving climate
change starts first and foremost by a change of habit by everyone (i.e. choosing the more
environmentally friendly alternative when possible, but this obviously requires a minimum
effort).
However, the problem is that we believe climate change is a problem for the future. There are
so many problems now (e.g. racism, police brutality, pandemic, terrorism,
national/international political conflicts and many others) that we can’t deal with the problems
of the future. While in general I agree that we should solve current problems before tackling
future problems, but the case of climate change is different because the more we wait, the
worst it gets, and the more complicated it’ll be to rectify in the future. In addition, with this
mindset we will almost never fully take care of the issue of climate change because there will
always be other problems to deal with in the present. Waiting for the right moment to solve
climate change is not an option, it must be done proactively.
Overall, Hardin pinpoints the danger of self-interested individuals not willing to change their
lifestyle to anticipate problems of the future.