Keep it in your pants - an article concerning restricted baby-making

The Tragedy of the Commons
by Garrett Hardin
Science, 1968

Summary
The Tragedy of the Commons uses the illustration of a common parcel of land shared by herders for the grazing of their cattle to allude to a grander commons – the Earth and its finite resources – and its users, all mankind. Following this analogy, Hardin contest that it is in each herder’s best interest to raise as many cattle as possible because the individual herder gains all the benefit while the cost is distributed amongst all the common’s users. Although this action may be justified on an individual level (any rational person will try to maximize their net benefit), it will eventually bring about the demise of the commons (and all the herdsmen) because when everyone seeks to maximize their benefit, the finite resources provide by the commons are diminished. Hardin claims that, in a similar manner, we are all seeking our own ends by over-breeding and the world’s exponentially increasing population will eventually destroy all “commons” that we share today. Hardin suggest that there is no technical solution in solving this quagmire, but that only a moral and social adjustment can manage and possibly avoid the currently inevitable destruction of all resources and mankind.
In conclusion, Hardin notes that there was benefit in different “commons” throughout history but that circumstances and increasing populations has caused us to abandoned using the commons as a means of food gathering and waste disposal in progression to privately owned agricultural land and designated waste disposal areas. In an effort to ensure the longevity and prosperity of all mankind, the author contest that the next common that should be given over to regulation is that of breeding.


Discussion
Although the paper was written over 40 years ago, I believe it is more applicable today than when it was written. Since the Tragedy of the Commons was written the population has more than doubled to nearly 7 billion people. The worldwide population growth shows no signs of regression, which will place an even heavier burden on our finite resources. Hardin’s recommendation is both compelling and controversial because it seeks to restrict something that mankind has tried to maximize since its dawn – the number of offspring they produce. Although I agree that something needs to be done and his argument makes sense (on a logically level), I don’t think it will ever be implemented. Or maybe I should say this… I don’t believe a breeding restriction will be placed on mankind until it has reached a point where considerable, irreversible damage has been done. Government is typically retroactive, not proactive.