Hi Ron and colleagues, Fully support the previous notes - misconceptions about the commons is quite an issue that the commons community has been trying to raise awareness about. A lot of debate can be found in the links already shared, but here is one more source that I thought might interest you when it comes to teaching - a paper by Marco Janssen and colleagues at the IASC that specifically reports on the findings from a survey of US based instructors who use the concept (Tragedy of Commons) in education:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504622.2019.1632266 (let me know if you want a pdf) Best, Ilkhom -- Ilkhom Soliev, PhD Senior Research Fellow | Lecturer Global Environmental Policy and Sustainability Governance Methods for Institutional Analysis and Policy Evaluation Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Policy Martin Luther University (MLU) Halle-Wittenberg Von-Seckendorff-Platz 4 (R. 4.23) 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany Communications Officer for IASC Europe The International Association for the Study of the Commons (IASC) On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 6:05 PM 'Jonathan Rosenberg' via gep-ed < [email protected]> wrote: > Yes, a very interesting and timely discussion. The abridgement of Tragedy > in the latest edition of Conca and Dabelko's *Green Planet Blues* is on > this week's reading list for my Environmental Politics and Policy class. > Aware of Hardin's sordid history, I continue to assign it because it > represents a logic of environmental policy-making and assumptions about > human nature that are still hegemonic in many seats of political power. > But on rereading it to prepare for class this week I am struck by the > distressingly loaded terminology, especially since the abridgement > highlights issues related to overpopulation and the need for coercive > measures to save benighted humans from themselves. We can also see how > Hardin is already considering some humans less human than others with the > repeated use of the word "breeders" to describe them. Early editions of > this reader included "No Tragedy on the Commons" by historian Susan J. Buck > Cox, which points out how Hardin misrepresented and/or misunderstood the > history of the commons on which he bases his analysis. I find that useful > for stimulating debate among students. > > Best wishes, > Jonathan > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 10:47 AM Benjamin Sovacool < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Ron, all, very interesting. My colleague Tony Patt wrote the attached >> as well, on why the tragedy of the commons has conceptual problems, too. >> (Not sure I agree entirely with the essay, but I thought I’d share >> nonetheless): >> >> >> >> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629617301433 >> >> >> >> PDF attached for ease of reference. >> >> >> >> Benjamin >> >> >> >> *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of >> *Ronald >> Mitchell >> *Sent:* 31 August 2020 15:23 >> *To:* GEP-Ed List <[email protected]> >> *Subject:* [gep-ed] Tragedy of the Commons >> >> >> >> Colleagues, >> >> I have, like many I assume, taught the Tragedy of the Commons as part of >> my international environmental politics course for years. I find it a >> particularly useful concept as one means of making sense of what we are >> doing to the planet. I also made a simple online game illustrating it @ >> https://rmitchel.uoregon.edu/commons A high school teacher in Oman >> registered and played it yesterday and brought to my attention an article >> in *Scientific American* entitled: “The Tragedy of the Tragedy of the >> Commons” with blurb: “The man who wrote one of environmentalism’s >> most-cited essays was a racist, eugenicist, nativist and Islamaphobe—plus >> his argument was wrong.” More background is at: >> https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/garrett-hardin >> from the Southern Poverty Law Center. I am confident that some of you knew >> this about Hardin already and that there will be a diverse set of views on >> how this should influence the teaching of the Tragedy of the Commons >> concept, if at all. But I wanted to bring it to the attention of people who >> might not know about it. >> >> Best to all of you, Ron >> >> >> The Tragedy of "The Tragedy of the Commons" >> >> >> >> By Matto Mildenberger on April 23, 2019 >> >> >> >> >> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-tragedy-of-the-tragedy-of-the-commons/ >> >> >> >> Fifty years ago, University of California professor Garrett Hardin penned >> an influential essay in the journal Science. Hardin saw all humans as >> selfish herders: we worry that our neighbors’ cattle will graze the best >> grass. So, we send more of our cows out to consume that grass first. We >> take it first, before someone else steals our share. This creates a vicious >> cycle of environmental degradation that Hardin described as the “tragedy of >> the commons.” >> >> >> >> It's hard to overstate Hardin’s impact on modern environmentalism. His >> views are taught across ecology, economics, political science and >> environmental studies. His essay remains an academic blockbuster, with >> almost 40,000 citations. It still gets republished in prominent >> environmental anthologies. >> >> >> >> But here are some inconvenient truths: Hardin was a racist, eugenicist, >> nativist and Islamophobe. He is listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center >> as a known white nationalist. His writings and political activism helped >> inspire the anti-immigrant hatred spilling across America today. >> >> >> >> And he promoted an idea he called “lifeboat ethics”: since global >> resources are finite, Hardin believed the rich should throw poor people >> overboard to keep their boat above water. >> >> >> >> To create a just and vibrant climate future, we need to instead cast >> Hardin and his flawed metaphor overboard. >> >> >> >> People who revisit Hardin’s original essay are in for a surprise. Its six >> pages are filled with fear-mongering. Subheadings proclaim that “freedom to >> breed is intolerable.” It opines at length about the benefits if “children >> of improvident parents starve to death.” A few paragraphs later Hardin >> writes: “If we love the truth we must openly deny the validity of the >> Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” And on and on. Hardin practically >> calls for a fascist state to snuff out unwanted gene pools. >> >> >> >> Or build a wall to keep immigrants out. Hardin was a virulent nativist >> whose ideas inspired some of today’s ugliest anti-immigrant sentiment. He >> believed that only racially homogenous societies could survive. He was also >> involved with the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a hate >> group that now cheers President Trump’s racist policies. Today, American >> neo-Nazis cite Hardin’s theories to justify racial violence. >> >> >> >> These were not mere words on paper. Hardin lobbied Congress against >> sending food aid to poor nations, because he believed their populations >> were threatening Earth’s “carrying capacity.” >> >> >> >> Of course, plenty of flawed people have left behind noble ideas. That >> Hardin’s tragedy was advanced as part of a white nationalist project should >> not automatically condemn its merits. >> >> >> >> But the facts are not on Hardin’s side. For one, he got the history of >> the commons wrong. As Susan Cox pointed out, early pastures were well >> regulated by local institutions. They were not free-for-all grazing sites >> where people took and took at the expense of everyone else. >> >> >> >> Many global commons have been similarly sustained through community >> institutions. This striking finding was the life’s work of Elinor Ostrom, >> who won the 2009 Nobel Prize in Economics (technically called the Sveriges >> Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel). Using the >> tools of science—rather than the tools of hatred—Ostrom showed the >> diversity of institutions humans have created to manage our shared >> environment. >> >> >> >> Of course, humans can deplete finite resources. This often happens when >> we lack appropriate institutions to manage them. But let’s not credit >> Hardin for that common insight. Hardin wasn’t making an informed scientific >> case. Instead, he was using concerns about environmental scarcity to >> justify racial discrimination. >> >> >> >> We must reject his pernicious ideas on both scientific and moral grounds. >> Environmental sustainability cannot exist without environmental justice. >> Are we really prepared to follow Hardin and say there are only so many lead >> pipes we can replace? Only so many bodies that should be protected from >> cancer-causing pollutants? Only so many children whose futures matter? >> >> >> >> This is particularly important when we deal with climate change. Despite >> what Hardin might have said, the climate crisis is not a tragedy of the >> commons. The culprit is not our individual impulses to consume fossil fuels >> to the ruin of all. And the solution is not to let small islands in >> Chesapeake Bay or whole countries in the Pacific sink into the past, >> without a seat on our planetary lifeboat. >> >> >> >> Instead, rejecting Hardin’s diagnosis requires us to name the true >> culprit for the climate crisis we now face. Thirty years ago, a different >> future was available. Gradual climate policies could have slowly steered >> our economy towards gently declining carbon pollution levels. The costs to >> most Americans would have been imperceptible. >> >> >> >> But that future was stolen from us. It was stolen by powerful, >> carbon-polluting interests who blocked policy reforms at every turn to >> preserve their short-term profits. They locked each of us into an economy >> where fossil fuel consumption continues to be a necessity, not a choice. >> >> >> >> This is what makes attacks on individual behavior so counterproductive. >> Yes, it’s great to drive an electric vehicle (if you can afford it) and >> purchase solar panels (if powerful utilities in your state haven’t >> conspired to make renewable energy more expensive). But the point is that >> interest groups have structured the choices available to us today. >> Individuals don’t have the agency to steer our economic ship from the >> passenger deck. >> >> >> >> As Harvard historian Naomi Oreskes reminds us, “[abolitionists] wore >> clothes made of cotton picked by slaves. But that did not make them >> hypocrites … it just meant that they were also part of the slave economy, >> and they knew it. That is why they acted to change the system, not just >> their clothes.” >> >> >> >> Or as Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez tweeted: “Living in the >> world as it is isn’t an argument against working towards a better future.” >> The truth is that two-thirds of all the carbon pollution ever released into >> the atmosphere can be traced to the activities of just ninety companies. >> >> >> >> These corporations’ efforts to successfully thwart climate action are the >> real tragedy. >> >> >> >> We are left with very little time. We need political leaders to pilot our >> economy through a period of rapid economic transformation, on a grand scale >> unseen since the Second World War. And to get there, we are going to have >> make sure our leaders listen to us, not—as my colleagues and I show in our >> research—fossil fuel companies. >> >> >> >> Hope requires us to start from an unconditional commitment to one >> another, as passengers aboard a common lifeboat being rattled by heavy >> winds. The climate movement needs more people on this lifeboat, not fewer. >> We must make room for every human if we are going to build the political >> power necessary to face down the looming oil tankers and coal barges that >> send heavy waves in our direction. This is a commitment at the heart of >> proposals like the Green New Deal. >> >> >> >> Fifty years on, let’s stop the mindless invocation of Hardin. Let’s stop >> saying that we are all to blame because we all overuse shared resources. >> Let’s stop championing policies that privilege environmental protection for >> some human beings at the expense of others. And let’s replace Hardin’s >> flawed metaphor with an inclusive vision for humanity—one based on >> democratic governance and cooperation in this time of darkness. >> >> >> >> Instead of writing a tragedy, we must offer hope for every single human >> on Earth. Only then will the public rise up to silence the powerful carbon >> polluters trying to steal our future. >> >> >> >> >> >> Ronald Mitchell, Professor >> >> Department of Political Science and Program in Environmental Studies >> >> University of Oregon, Eugene OR 97403-1284 >> >> [email protected] >> >> https://rmitchel.uoregon.edu/ >> >> IEA Database Director: https://iea.uoregon.edu/ >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "gep-ed" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/MWHPR10MB1887327F23C496C9FA34F8A8CB510%40MWHPR10MB1887.namprd10.prod.outlook.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/MWHPR10MB1887327F23C496C9FA34F8A8CB510%40MWHPR10MB1887.namprd10.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "gep-ed" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/CWXP265MB02624BAAF1C74553E439FD7FB5510%40CWXP265MB0262.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/CWXP265MB02624BAAF1C74553E439FD7FB5510%40CWXP265MB0262.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > > > -- > Jonathan Rosenberg, PhD > Professor of Political Science > Department of Social Sciences > Illinois Institute of Technology > Siegel Hall 116E > 3301 S. Dearborn St. > Chicago, IL 60616 > tel. 312-567-5188 > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "gep-ed" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/CAGQWTHQB2ffim6bZjp3FGs%3DoOwat%2Bco%2BRR%2B_BsXzmwH7c%2BStKw%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/CAGQWTHQB2ffim6bZjp3FGs%3DoOwat%2Bco%2BRR%2B_BsXzmwH7c%2BStKw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gep-ed" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/CALfzjnLbRN0u3MvZ-Bd%3DGC-emwapUp0oDAfebZpSEadtxwg4Zw%40mail.gmail.com.
