top of page

The Ultimate Tragedy of "What's In It For Me" Cognitive Bias. Existential Threats to Human Survival.

Updated: Sep 28



Parasitic or Symbiotic? Have you ever wondered about the following hypothesis: as a matter of fact, this ultimate cognitive bias could ultimately determine the fate of humanity, possibly in this century. Compete or collaborate? Zero-sum economics or positive-sum economics? What's in it for me or What's in it for us? These questions do not matter in an age of abundance. However, if you belive human "civilization" is entering a new age of scarcity then these questions have profound implications for future generations. We are exploring in this essay a concept called "Tragedy of the Commons."


The phrase "Tragedy of the Commons" is a term used to describe a situation in which individuals, acting in their own self-interest, deplete a shared limited resource, despite knowing that it is not in the collective interest to do so. The concept was popularized by ecologist Garrett Hardin in a 1968 essay. Despite its relevance in fields like environmental science, economics, and politics in modern times, the concept was originally introduced by Aristotle, stating that people care less for shared resources when he said, "What is common to the greatest number gets the least amount of care. Men pay most attention to what is their own; they care less for what is common."


The consequences of this hugely significant and highly prevalent cognitive bias among humans will ultimately impact everyone on this planet. It is the conflict between individual interests versus the common good. The essence of the tragedy of the commons lies in the conflict between individual irrationality and rational collective well-being biases. Think "what's in it for me" versus "what's in it for us". Think "zero-sum bias" versus "positive-sum bias." These are the choices humans make today with consequences for the state of tomorrow.


Here are some examples of the tragedy of the commons in various contexts:

Imagine a hypothetical pasture that is open to all cattle farmers. Each has the incentive to graze as many animals as possible on the common land to maximize their own profit. However, when every cattle farmer pursues this self-interest without considering the consequences for the shared pasture, the resource becomes overexploited and eventually depleted. This leads to a situation where everyone suffers due to the actions of each individual. Sound familiar?


This concept extends beyond pastures to various real-world scenarios such as overfishing in the oceans, air pollution, water pollution, deforestation, and the overuse of common resources like water and energy. In each case, individuals and nations have an incentive to consume or exploit the resource as much as possible, leading to its degradation or depletion over time. For example:


1. Overfishing: One of the most well-known examples of the tragedy of the commons is the overexploitation of fisheries. Fishers acting in their self-interest often catch more fish than is sustainable, leading to the depletion of fish stocks. This can have devastating effects on marine ecosystems and the livelihoods of all fishers who depend on these resources. Hence the introduction of fishing quotas. What about fishing in international waters?


Even though there is a consensus that fish stocks should be harvested within the limits recommended by the International Council for Exploration of the Seas (ICES), individual countries continue to establish their own respective quotas. Together, these quotas consistently exceed the recommended threshold, putting fish stocks at risk of future depletion. Think "zero-sum bias" versus "what's in it for us."


2. Deforestation: In many parts of the world, forests are being cut down at an alarming rate for timber, agriculture, and other purposes. When individuals or companies engage in unsustainable logging practices without considering the long-term consequences, it can result in deforestation, loss of biodiversity, and disruption of ecosystems.


Over the past 8,000 years, deforestation, which involves the irreversible transformation of forests into other types of land, has led to the disappearance of approximately 27% of the world's forests. This equates to roughly one-third of global forest cover, equivalent to an area twice the size of the United States since the conclusion of the last ice age 10,000 years ago. Half of this deforestation took place in the industrial age, i.e., the last century.


3. Air and water pollution: Pollution of air and water bodies is another example of the tragedy of the commons. Industries and individuals often release pollutants into the air and water without considering the impact on the environment or public health. "Pollution is the largest environmental cause of disease and premature death. Pollution causes more than 9 million premature deaths, the majority of them due to air pollution... More than 95 percent of deaths caused by air pollution occur in low- and middle-income countries." (Source: World Bank Group, September 10, 2023)


4. Overgrazing: Overgrazing is a prevalent issue in pastoral communities, where herders often seek to maximize their livestock numbers for personal gain. However, this collective behavior can result in the degradation of grasslands, soil erosion, and loss of biodiversity. In some cases, farming is conducted without proper understanding of land management, leading to the depletion of resources and eventual desertification. "On a global basis, soil degradation is primarily caused by overgrazing (35%), agricultural activities (28%), deforestation (30%), overexploitation of land to produce fuelwood (7%), and industrialization (4%)." (Source: GLASOD - First United Nations Global Assessment of Human-Induced Soil Degradation, 1988-90, University of Michigan Report)


5. Global climate change: The emission of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, from human activities is a global tragedy of the commons. While individual countries or industries may benefit from cheap natural resources, the cumulative effect of these emissions is climate change, with far-reaching consequences for the planet and future generations. Of the many negative consequences of climate change, the biggest is heat. The average global temperature has been 1.5°C above the pre-industrial era for 12 successive months, according to new data issued by the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. Have you ever wondered what is the bandwidth outside of which your survival becomes questionable? You see, maintaining your body's core temperature within the survivability range, i.e., approximately 36.5°C to 37.5°C, is crucial to your survival. Yes, that is only ONE degree! Which then raises the following question: what percentage of the 8 billion of us on this “rock” without the benefit of air conditioning will be able to sustain that temperature bandwidth in the coming cascades of heat waves?


One of the main challenges in addressing the tragedy of the commons is the lack of clear regulations governing the use of shared resources. In the absence of proper management mechanisms, individuals are left to make decisions based on their immediate self-interest, often leading to the overuse of the resource. Often, the might makes right syndrome starts to dominate the economic rationale and practice. Enlightened self-interest becomes the prerequisite if sustainability is to have any chance of success. Can the advocates of wholesale deregulation assure future generations that enlightened self-interest will prevail?


Ultimately, addressing the tragedy of the commons requires a collective effort to balance individual interests with the long-term sustainability of shared resources. It calls for cooperation, coordination, and a sense of responsibility towards the common good. By recognizing the pitfalls of unregulated resource use and working towards sustainable practices, humans could avoid the tragedy of the commons and ensure the well-being of current and future generations. Will we?


Which then raises the big “elephant in the room” question: when scarcity becomes a global reality, and the epoch of abundance becomes a faint silhouette in our rearview mirrors, and inflation runs amok beyond the controls of the "wise" policymakers, and catastrophic structural failures proliferate in "cascades" and empathy morphs into apathy, will altruism prevail among humans?


Think about it!

bottom of page