Leo Tolstoy and The Tragedy of The Commons

Recently, in class, we were introduced to Leo Tolstoy and some of his ideas. Through his story and the lecture, we learned about his dislike for the idea of private ownership of land. For me, this idea seemed to have a big problem, notably known as, The Tragedy of The Commons. I thought this problem with his idea was important and worth mentioning as we, as a society, are still having problems addressing this issue in the world today.

The Tragedy of The Commons is an article written by Garrett Hardin which refers to the problem that arises when there is no private ownership of land. When there is no private ownership of land, people will tend to take more than is optimal, even if rules are in place against it, which will lead to the degradation of the land. The example used to illustrate this point in his article is that of communal grazing land. In his article he describes a pasture set aside by a community to graze cattle that is open for all to use. The community has set rules on how much one is allowed to let their cattle graze on the land. One day, however, someone decides to start letting their cattle graze a little more than they’re supposed to. After a while, some of the people in the community noticed, so they began to do the same. They thought if he was doing it then they should to. Soon, nearly everyone in the community was breaking the rules and letting their cattle graze more than they were supposed to. This lead to the degradation of the grazing land, and before they knew it, the land was no longer usable. The land had been so degraded by overuse that it had been turned into dirt.

The way to keep this from happening is simple, allow people to own their own portion of land. For instance, had everyone in the community owned a piece of the grazing land, the land would have never been degraded because everyone would take care of their small piece of land. When the land was communal, nobody cared about the health of the land because it wasn’t really theirs; they didn’t feel a sense of obligation nor did they have a real incentive to take care of the land. What’s the point in doing your part in keeping the land healthy when someone else is going to come by and overgraze because they can? In short, not allowing people to have ownership of the land created a domino effect of people overgrazing because they didn’t want to allow someone else to allow their cattle to take all the grass while they were doing the right thing. When you give each person a piece of land to own, you then create an incentive to keep the land healthy because it’s the only land you have, and it’s yours.

This problem with Tolstoy’s idea is extremely prevalent in the world today. Humanity is killing the environment because of this same issue. The oceans and skies are being polluted with toxins. The oceans are being overfished to the point of extinction for many species. Habitats are being destroyed everywhere to make way for more “important” things. These issues don’t have easy answers; for example, how would we distribute ownership of the skies? Some countries have taken the initiative and claimed ownership of waters near their cost, and this has played out amazingly due to their extra care and supervision of the waters. This however is still rare and most of the parts of the earth we share are being ruined by our actions. What do you think? Do you think the “Tragedy of The Commons” is in the future for the earth if we don’t make drastic changes, or do you think there are more pressing matters than this?