Bài đọc 4
In 1968, the ecologist Garrett Hardin published an essay in the journal Science that would become one of the most cited works of the twentieth century. Its title was "The Tragedy of the Commons". Hardin asked his readers to imagine a pasture open to all. Each herder, he argued, gains the full benefit of adding one more animal to the field, while the cost of overgrazing is shared by everyone. Acting rationally, every herder therefore keeps adding animals, until the pasture is destroyed. "Freedom in a commons," Hardin concluded, "brings ruin to all."
The logic seemed compelling, and it appeared to explain a wide range of problems, from overfishing to polluted rivers. Hardin himself saw only two solutions: either the government must control the resource, or it must be divided into private property, so that each owner bears the cost of misusing it.
For decades, this view shaped policy around the world. Yet the political scientist Elinor Ostrom spent her career showing that Hardin's story was incomplete. Studying communities as varied as Swiss villages sharing alpine meadows, Japanese villages managing forests and farmers sharing irrigation systems in Spain and the Philippines, she found many cases in which people had successfully managed shared resources for centuries, without either central control or privatisation.
What these communities had in common was not goodwill alone, but well-designed local institutions. They had clear boundaries defining who could use the resource; rules adapted to local conditions; ways for users to take part in making those rules; systems for monitoring behaviour; and gradually increasing penalties for those who broke them. Crucially, the people who used the resource were also the ones who designed and enforced the rules. In 2009, Ostrom became the first woman to win the Nobel Prize in Economics, largely for this work.
Ostrom did not claim that commons never fail. The collapse of the cod fishery off the coast of Newfoundland, which led the Canadian government to ban fishing there in 1992, is a painful example of what can happen when a shared resource is overused. Her point was rather that tragedy is not inevitable; it depends on institutions.
This distinction matters greatly for today's largest shared resources, such as the oceans and the atmosphere, which no single community or government can control. Ostrom's work does not offer a simple solution to global problems like climate change, but it suggests that cooperation is possible, and that it is more likely to succeed when built from many local and regional efforts rather than imposed entirely from above.