The Tragedy - 40 Years Later
“Picture a pasture open to all,” wrote ecologist Garrett Hardin in the December 13, 1968 issue of Science. According to Hardin, each herdsman seeks to maximize her gain by keeping as many cattle as possible on the field: the famous “tragedy of the commons.”
As climate concerns mount, let's note that the planetary atmosphere is not unlike Hardin's pasture. Into this global commons, each of us contributes, not cattle, but a share of greenhouse gases. We enjoy the utility of each carbon-powered car trip or manufactured item or temperature-controlled environment. But the cumulative effects of seemingly rational choices risk macro-economic madness.
Climate scientist James Hansen warns that atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations should be stabilized at or below 350 parts per million. This figure addresses what ecological economist Herman Daly calls the scale question; it sets a target for the carrying capacity of the atmosphere. Other economists focus on the allocation question, meaning the comparative efficiencies of, say, a carbon tax versus a cap-and-trade system. Probably most thorny, though, is the distribution question. Whose cows – whose CO2 molecules – get to inhabit this pasture?
The dilemma, as Hardin reassessed 30 years after his original essay, is not that the atmosphere is a commons, but that it is an unmanaged commons, an open-access regime. “To judge from the critical literature,” he wrote in the May 1, 1998 issue of Science, “the weightiest mistake in my synthesizing paper was the omission of the modifying adjective ‘unmanaged’.”
How might societies reach a comprehensive agreement for management of the global atmospheric commons? As efforts in Kyoto, Bali and now Poznan, Poland demonstrate, it will not be easy. (See today's Dot Earth.)
Which disciplines, what areas of expertise, might provide guidance or leadership?
Political scientist (and Resilience Alliance board member) Elinor Ostrom has spent decades researching the management of common-pool resources, both in controlled studies and in societies around the world. She finds that humans hold some significant advantages over Hardin's theoretical herdsmen. Most importantly, people can talk with one another. And, when it comes to solving social dilemmas, communication can make all the difference.
RE: CARBON DISCHARGE CRISIS
The atmosphere is no more an open cow pasture, then the waters of the world are.
No one can discharge waste into US waters without a permit. If a permit has been issued to discharge chemical or biological waste to waters, then specific numeric limits are set for point discharges and storm water runoff. Discharges without a permit or in excess of permit limitations are fined at $32,500 per day per violation. A prohibitve injunction on illegal discharges will be granted. A government agency grants the permits and sets the numeric standards after notice and comment by the public. Citzens may enforce the prohibitions and permit limitations if the government agency fails to do so after being advised of the alleged violation.
Why should it be any different for carbon discharges? Carbon point source discharges should be prohibited if no no permit has been issued. In addition, carbon discharges that don't occur from a point source could be regulated by reference to their carbon discharge over the life of the product.
There is no need for a carbon tax. Such a tax allows those who can pay to pollute at a higher level and pass that cost on to consumers. We allow no such exception for water pollution. EACH POLLUTER MUST BE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARD. A polluter must not be able to the their way out if equity and democracy are to be the guiding principles of a managed sollution.
Nor is a cap and trade system viable. This approach has been tried in Europe and found to be ineffective in achieving the needed carbon discharge levels.
Thus, the question is not which cows or whose cows get to inhabit the carbon pasture. All cows get to inhabit the pasture - if they follow the same rules and can't buy their way out of following the rules.
I do agree with Mr. Silverman that assessment of the CUMULATIVE impacts is key to proper resolution of the carbon discharge crisis. Carbon point source discharges should be set at levels that take into account cumulative impacts as Mr. Silverman suggest. Such a cumulative impact assessment must include the proposed project's impacts given the past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Only then will decision makers and the public be able to assess the true cost of continued Carbon contributions.