KEY POINTS:
The climate change debate seldom explicitly examines the interesting human psychology that underlies the problem. This psychology features two conundrums of human interaction that play out in a variety of contexts both globally and locally. They are called the Tragedy of the Commons and the Prisoner's Dilemma. Understanding the nature of these riddles of human behaviour is essential to appreciating the difficulties of addressing climate change.
The Tragedy of the Commons refers to a situation in which the ownership of a resource is not clearly defined. Because of the lack of defined ownership or property rights the resource is over-exploited or abused resulting in depletion or degradation. With global warming the resource being affected is the earth's environment. The Tragedy of the Commons takes its name from the historical practice of common land that was available for communal use by villagers in rural England up until the emergence of the enclosure movement.
The Tragedy of the Commons occurs frequently in human interactions. The overfishing of migratory fishing stocks such as the blue fin tuna is an example. The near depletion of many whale species is another. This common paradox is also played out within households. Examples include teenage daughters using all the hot water for showers or a flatmate eating all the groceries from the communal food supplies.
At an individual and national level, the Tragedy of the Commons is largely addressed by some form of government or authority and the resulting implementation of laws and rules controlling behaviour. These laws and rules usually establish clear property rights that regulate the use of the resource. It could be argued that the development of systems of government since the emergence of early civilisations is largely a reaction to the need to address this Tragedy of the Commons.
The effective management of the resources of a society requires clearly defined property rights through a legal code and a means of enforcement. This can only be provided by some form of government that supersedes the individual and can impose restraints on his or her behaviour.
Herein lies the problem of addressing global warming. Effective remedies require some form of supra-national government because the solutions are larger than the capabilities of any particular nation. Humans and therefore countries are notorious for acting in their own self interest. Unfortunately, in the case of global warming, individual and national self interest does not add up to global well being. Although this is widely recognised, effective immediate action is stymied by the second conundrum of human interaction.
This paradox is the Prisoner's Dilemma. This situation arises when participants in an activity are unsure about the intentions and actions of other participants. Each participant therefore acts in their own self interest. The result is that all participants end up worse off.
There are many historical examples of the Prisoner's Dilemma on the international stage. The lead-up to World War I was characterised by the European powers' suspicion of each others' motives. Each country embarked on a military build-up and joined opposing alliances until war was virtually inevitable. After the war the formation of the League of Nations and later the United Nations after World War II was an attempt to end this mutually destructive pattern of mistrust and alliance building.
During the 1930s Great Depression, many countries sought to protect their local producers by erecting trade barriers against imports. The US introduced the Smoot Hawley Act raising tariffs on imports, and other countries quickly followed. World trade fell dramatically causing even greater unemployment and more business failures and economic hardship throughout the world. Each country was acting in its own self interest by using protectionism and all suffered as a result.
During the Cold War, the US and the USSR embarked on a nuclear arms race. Each side was highly suspicious of the intentions and capabilities of the other. Billions of dollars were spent on developing destructive nuclear capacity and delivery systems in a tit-for-tat race that became known as MAD, or mutually assured destruction. The deadweight costs to both economies were enormous.
Historically the international environment has been plagued by mistrust and suspicion about the motives of other countries. Attempts to overcome this through international forums such as the United Nations and the WTO are still largely embryonic and faltering.
The Prisoner's Dilemma reduces the willingness of countries to adopt meaningful measures to combat global warming. Lobby groups within countries argue that to take a lead in reducing emissions will give other countries a competitive advantage in the global market place.
There is mutual mistrust about the intentions of other nations in honouring their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol or subsequent agreements. Even within countries there is suspicion that some industries will bear the brunt of implementation costs therefore favouring resource allocation in other sectors.
The Protestant Reformation in Europe and the bloody and bitter fighting that ensued provided the impetus for the emergence of the modern system of nation-states from the 16th and 17th centuries. The concept of state sovereignty lies at the heart of this system. It is unlikely that an issue such as global warming can be effectively resolved under such a system, largely due to the two paradoxes described above.
So far, attempts at an international level to resolve global issues such as war, genocide, refugee flows and poverty have largely floundered when confronted with national self interest. Maybe global warming will provide the impetus for real advancements in human co-operation beyond the constraint of national self interest. The alternative is pretty bleak.
* Peter Lyons teaches economics at Saint Peters College in Epsom, and has written several economics texts.
