The Tragedy of the Commons

According to a recent article in the Chicago Tribune (December 17, 2006), vast areas of China are being transformed from grassland to desert through over-grazing of goats raised to produce cashmere for America’s growing appetite for this silky wool. The dust that is being raised in China is on its way to the United States where it will contribute to smog and climate change.

The story is a compelling – if overwhelming – example of an economic principle known as “The Tragedy of the Commons.” In short, the tragedy is that individual decisions regarding the use of commonly held resources are not made with the common good in mind unless “coerced” through regulations.

To bring the idea closer to home, consider the Clean Water Act in the United States which mandated dramatic changes in the way people were allowed to treat water resources. Prior to the Act (1970’s), thousands of miles of U.S. rivers and streams were deemed unsafe for human use. By the 1990’s, water quality had been restored in many of the once degraded resources. Close to home, the Fox River benefited from Clean Water regulations.

What are Woodstock’s “commons”?

Public parks, air, water in creeks and wetlands, groundwater, even wildlife are all examples of “commons” if we take the term to mean those things that cannot be owned by an individual, but exist for the enjoyment of all.

What then is the “tragedy” of Woodstock’s commons? Consider the city-owned park Ryder’s Woods on Kimball Avenue. At some point during the last twenty years, someone chose to dump concrete waste in the park. Presumably, this was debris from a construction project and the dumping incident was unobserved. Thus, for many years, the concrete waste has remained, blocking access to portions of the park’s trails and marring the natural resources on the site. People began to stay away from the park because it had an unkempt, even creepy feeling, and neglect set in.

Similar examples abound. An individual makes a decision that maximizes his or her benefit (in the above instance, avoiding the cost of legally disposing of the waste) thus degrading the commons and reducing the benefits that they provide for the public. A tragedy results when multiple individuals make similar selfish decisions regarding a resource such as Ryder’s Woods, leading to the loss of the resource entirely.

And this is where the story of Ryder’s Woods takes a dramatic turn for the better. As reported recently in this newspaper (December 13, 2006), a group of individuals who reside in and near Woodstock are working to “fix-up” Ryder’s Woods and to make it a more attractive park for everyone to enjoy. The City is paying someone to remove brush and open up the trails. The City is also mulching the brush to create wood chips for use on City-trails at this and other parks.

So, perhaps there is an antidote to avoid a tragedy of the commons: that is, when individuals make decisions with the common good – or “community” – in mind. This idea is the essence of the “Land Ethic” that Aldo Leopold promoted through his life and work:

"A land ethic, then, reflects the existence of an ecological conscience, and this in turn reflects a conviction of individual responsibility for the health of the land. We can be ethical only in relation to something we can see, feel, understand, love, or otherwise have faith in," he wrote.

How does Leopold’s land ethic help with the global tragedy unfolding through Americans’ thirst for inexpensive cashmere sweaters? I’m not sure. But, by sticking with the axiom of “Think Globally, Act Locally,” local people making decisions in the best interest of “local commons” all around the world just might turn things around.