Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What is garrett hardin's concept of "the tragedy of the commons" one page summary
Reasons for environmental pollution
Reflection about the tragedy of the commons
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Garret Hardin’s “Tragedy of the Commons” is an article that identifies the nation’s current problems and predicaments that can’t be resolved through the use of technical solutions. Hardin’s work heavily focuses on overpopulation, a prominent and unceasing issue that significantly distorts and affects the stability of the Earth and the abundance of the planet’s resources. In his article, he mentioned some reasonable and important solutions to overpopulation, but he also explained its downside and how the said solutions may not be ideal and practical. “Tragedy of the Commons” revealed that the human population will continue to flourish and how it will be greatly detrimental to our society unless individuals get the education that they need and …show more content…
In my opinion, Hardin’s story intends to depict humans as creatures who prefer to acquire temporary rewards yet suffer in the long run than encounter a few nuisances and in the end gain more. Through Hardin’s work, people’s self-centeredness and their perspective of being the most supreme being in the universe or anthropocentrism were solidified and their role in destroying the planet was put into perspective. Based on the article, we can infer that humans have an innate behavior of acquiring more items than they need, simply put, individuals tend to be greedy. A person has a tendency to hoard supplies and goods without considering the possible consequences of her action. Moreover, the short narrative revealed that humans are more focused on obtaining their own desires than of considering the well-being and the needs of the society. In some individuals, their greediness influences the number of children they desire, thus they over breed to “secure its own aggrandizement.” As a result of this selfishness and greediness, there is now an imbalance in our resources, community, and …show more content…
As time passes, our population continues to increase and multiply; yet, on the other hand, our planet’s resources continue to decrease and deplete. As our population flourishes, human beings also increase their demands and clamor for the Earth’s natural products, yet are unable to sacrifice their surplus of the said resources. Garret Hardin’s work highlighted the reality that humans fail to remember that the Earth is finite and its resources are limited. Hardin’s article revealed that people are unable to fathom that we indeed have a moral obligation to our community and our natural habitat — that we are not our planet’s conquerors but its protectors. We fail to acknowledge and accept that we only have one Earth and that we must protect and treasure it at all costs. Despite all our attempts at annihilating the planet, the Earth will still be unrelenting — it will still continue to be present and powerful. Human beings must recognize that we need this planet more than it needs us and if we persist on being egocentric and covetous, in the end it is us who will
In his 1968 essay, The Tragedy of the Commons, Garret Hardin addresses the problem with overpopulation and it’s eventual toll on our planet’s resources in a scenario where the individual interest clashes with the collective interest. Self-interest only serves the good of an individual while collective interest is meant to serve the good of everyone in the society. In his essay, he describes overpopulation as a tragedy of the commons because as population grows exponentially, resources only grow statically, and this will result in the depletion of our resources. When a resourc...
In 1986, Garrett Hardin wrote an article about the population problem we have in our current world, and presented it to a big highly educated audience. He basically told them about the population problem we are currently going through in specific terms. First, he studied the relation of our current population to our current resources, and realized that our population should be brought under control because of the limited amount of resources we have. He then examined the actions that have caused population to increase uncontrollably.
Garrett Hardin, an American ecologist, warned of the dangers of overpopulation. In Hardin’s best-known works, “The tragedy of the Commons” and “Lifeboat Ethics,” he talks about the importance of sustainability and requiring everyone to take action. Hardin stresses the importance of evaluating our environment to maintain a high quality of life without sacrificing future generations ability to do the same. Sustainability is having a healthy balance between economic, social, and ecological issues. In my essay, I will expand on these issues and how they are addressed in Hardin’s writings.
Garrett Hardin developed the concept of the Tragedy of the Commons. The basic concept is a giant pasture that is for everyone to have a piece of land and for the herdsman to have as many cattle a possible to sustain the land. This land should be able to maintain itself for quite a long time because of cattle dying as well as the population staying relatively stable. But at some point the population will begin growing and the herdsman will want to maximize their profits by having more cattle, which in return the land cannot sustain. The herdsman receives all the profit from adding one more animal to the pasture so the herdsman will eventually begin adding more cattle, but the overgrazing caused by that added animal will destroy the land making it uninhabitable for everyone. Thus you have the tragedy of the commons. For all the herdsman on the common, it is the only rational decision to make, adding another animal. This is the tragedy. Each man is compelled to add an infinite number of cattle to increase his profits, but in a world with limited resources it is impossible to continually grow. When resources are held "in common" with many people having access and ownership to it, then a rational person will increase their exploitation of it because the individual is receiving all the benefit, while everyone is sharing the costs.
In 1968, Garrett Hardin published his essay “The Tragedy of the Commons” in Science, in which he elaborated his theories for curtailing the overpopulation problem. The article is perhaps best known for Hardin’s definition of the “commons” as a shared, limited resource under limited (if any) regulation. In his essay, Hardin considered the right to breed as a commons and confronted the resulting problem of global overpopulation. Hardin believed in the inevitable exploitation of any commons, and therein lies the tragedy of commons: a commodity which is universally free and accessible will inexorably result in overutilization precisely beca...
According to Hardin, freedom is the cause of tragedy of commons. There is no technical solution to solve it. The only solution is to alter human’s principles. The article by Hardin focused on the population growth. Overpopulation is an example of tragedy of commons. Because the world is finite, one is unable to maximize goods and population at the same time. Hardin then propose that the only solution is to limit breeding. “Common system from breeding must be abandoned”
When I think of the earth, it is one of the most important issues to consider for the very existence of man, yet it is not top priority on the political or moral radar for most. The earth is one of the most sought after places for most known and imagined life forces today, dating back as far as the “1950’s “fueled by the public’s fear of the “red scare” alien invasion movies hitting their stride” (Thompson, 2011). Can we simply forge ahead without the careful consideration of our “moral and political” obligation as the appointed keepers of this precious gift, the “earth”? . "We have no reason to accept this estimate at face value" (Conner, 2014). Politics are involved in the global mess we see today as global warming.
At the U.S. Science Convention of 2011, the dire prediction was made that by 2050, we will have an “unrecognizable” planet by virtue of a huge population competing for a deficient number of resources. It is envisioned that the global population will climb to nine billion by 2050. Due to the increasing population, “we will need to produce as much food in the next 40 years as we have in the last 8,000,” said Jason Clay at the yearly meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). The only effective solution is to “minimize population growth…through more effective family planning”. We are now witnessing the truth that lied behind the theory of the economist, Thomas Malthus, who foreshadowed the increase of population with minimal resources to support it.
It is a known fact that the world population is increasing without bound; however, there is a debate if this increase is a good thing or if it will prove catastrophic. The article “The Tragedy of the Commons” by Garrett Hardin discusses how the ever-increasing world population will exhaust the world of its natural resources, and eliminate human’s capability of survival. On the other side of the argument is Julian L. Simon who wrote “More People, Greater Wealth, More Resources, Healthier Environment.” This article proposes the theory that with an increase in population, human’s quality of life is amplified. One particular issue that they both mention and have drastically different views on is the future of agriculture and human’s ability to sustain it.
The worldwide population is approaching 7 billion and is expected to reach 9 billion by 2050 (Baird). This projected population number is down from a once predicted 16 billion (Baird) and while some are not concerned, others are worried about any increase in population. Population growth is discussed in the articles “Too Many People?” by Vanessa Baird; “Population Control: How Can There Possibly Be Too Many of Us?” by Frank Furedi; and “The Population Bomb Revisited,” by Paul R. Ehrlich and Anne H. Ehrlich. Baird and Furedi concur that a concern for population growth has been around since mathematician Thomas Malthus, in 1798, warned that overpopulation could lead to “the collapse of society” (Furedi). Furedi claims that too much human life is being used as an excuse, by population control supporters, for the world’s current and future problems. Baird tries to discover if “the current panic over population growth is reasonable.” For Ehrlich and Ehrlich the concern over population growth is very real, and they reinforce and support their book “calling attention to the demographic element in the human predicament” (Ehrlich and Ehrlich 63). While taking different approaches to their articles, the authors offer their perspectives on population growth, population control and the environmental impacts of a growing population.
‘The Tragedy of the Commons’ deals with the over growing population and suggests a solution in a unique prospect. Undeniably, science and technology is often suggested as a solution to the problem (by majority of the published journal). However, Hardin believes that there is no technical solution, and would only aggravate to the issue if the universe does not change its attitude/ assumption that there is an ‘actual’ technical solution. Hardin tackled the population problem in a harsh manner; defining the roots of the problem and to his idea of solution. Hardin examined the correlation between the population and resources, then analyzed the key factors that caused the population to swell.
Throughout this reading by Garrett Hardin, he presented in a very scientific fashion, a theory of the population problem. He argued against the freedom to “breed”, with the worry that the worlds human population is growing exponentially even as our resources just become more limited. His conclusion when confronting this problem was that population needs to be controlled in some way. With the application of his theory he states that breeding rights is a common good, but the people that abuse that right are the ones pushing us closer to extinction. He points out the forces that he believes must change in order to stop the continued growth of population and after doing so he suggests solutions. The “over breeders” will eventually force the gene pool of people that acknowledge their
‘The Tragedy of the Commons’ written by Garrett Hardin is an article that is highly pessimistic in its approach. It mainly talks about the problems of the “commons” because of overpopulation, keeping the Malthusian theory as the central argument. Malthus had concluded after observing the continuous growth in the population of the northern states of America that, if unchecked, the population had the tendency to double itself in every twenty-five year period. He proposed that the population would increase in a geometrical fashion (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 …) and on the other hand, the food supply could increase in an arithmetic progression (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7…). For Malthus, the main reason for this was that since the supply of food is fixed, in accordance with the law
Anthropocentrism is the school of thought that human beings are the single most significant entity in the universe. As a result, the philosophies of those with this belief reflect the prioritization of human objectives over the well-being of one’s environment. However, this is not to say that anthropocentric views neglect to recognize the importance of preserving the Earth. In fact, it is often in the best interests of humans to make concerted efforts towards sustaining the environment. Even from a purely anthropocentric point of view, there are three main reasons why mankind has a moral duty to protect the natural world.
One of the problems facing our world is population. It began about ten thousand years ago when the humans settled and began farming. The farming provides more food for the people thus making the population grow. Now we are about 6 billion in population and in a few years we will be around 10 to 11 billion. Therefore, our population will almost double in size. This means that we will need more food to support us. A study in 1986 by Peter Vitonesk, a Stanford biologist, showed that the humans are already consuming about 38.8 of what is possible for us to eat. Thus, if the population keeps increasing, the percentage will increase also, making us closer and closer to the biophysical limits. By studying the earth's capacity, Dr. Cornell, another biologist, believes that we are already crowded for this would. He believes that our world can only support two million people. Not only this, but population can cause complicated problems to the countries with very high population. These countries will need more schools to educate its people, they will need more hospitals and public health to take care of their people, and they will need more water and more soil for farming to feed all the people. In order to solve the population growth problem, the people should be educated. Once the people are educated they will be aware of the problems they ca...