The tragedy of the commons is an economic theory, also utilized in other social sciences including international relations, which describes how people use natural resources or common assets to their advantage without considering the good of other individuals, groups, societies or states. When a number of individuals or states consider only their own welfare or security in this manner, this will lead to negative outcomes for everybody, including themselves, as resources become exhausted.
Even though the theory of the tragedy of the commons was developed in economics and mostly used to address natural resources and environmental problems, it is relevant for many current global political and security problems as well as economic and environmental issues. Overfishing, pollution, climate change, deforestation, overpopulation, overconsumption, depletion of gas and oil reservoirs and harm to groundwater are among major fields of the commons.
Although one of the primary roles of governments at national and international levels is to protect the commons and to manage shared resources, many governments have been trying to create the tragedy of the commons. As the world’s population rises and demands more access to resources, the issues associated with the commons become more severe. Ultimately, this may test the role and practicality of nation-states, leading to a redefinition of international governance.
However, nowadays we witness an opposite implementation by regional and global powers. Instead of searching for a general solution, they closed their eyes to the rest of the world. They do not consider the fact that even if they build abstract and concrete walls, they will be unable to isolate themselves from others who experience different environmental, economic and health problems.
It seems relatively easy to manage developments inside of state boundaries, but more problems emerge and are experienced across borders, because in many cases resources cannot be divided nationally and problems are interrelated globally. Therefore, it becomes impossible to solve part of the problem or to solve the problem in a certain region. The threat will continue as long as the source of the threat exists.
In general, solving these problems requires collaboration and cooperation as people come together to preserve resources and protect the safe and secure international atmosphere for the good of all peoples and states. Regulation by international organizations and by influential governments can only limit the negative effects of threatening developments such as shortages of resources and the spread of epidemic diseases. The strategies of collective behavior, government intervention and regulations generally deal with problems of commitment and problems of mutual monitoring. Not only the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations but also the government of the United States, the only hegemon in the world, should play a proper role to limit the effects of the disease and to find a technical solution.
However, when we look at the developments regarding the coronavirus pandemic worldwide, we see that there are significant problems regarding the management of the pandemic. First of all, the U.S. government, especially during the Donald Trump administration, has refused to take the lead in solving this problem as well as other global issues. The U.S. is reluctant to hold the responsibility of global hegemony. Unfortunately, there is no other global power willing to take responsibility and to act as a substitute for American leadership. Therefore, there is undeclared chaos in the struggle against the coronavirus; every state has to fend for itself. Even the European Union members did not cooperate with one another. The world is in a pure self-help system, which has been detrimental to all countries.
Second, we live in time when most regional and global actors have been following ultra-nationalist policies. Today, the ultra-nationalist perspective dominates world politics against the globalist approach. That is, most governments of global powers solely focus on their domestic politics and neglect transnational and global developments, which influence their national interests as well. In this respect, the governments of Russia, China, India and Brazil are no different from the Trump administration. For instance, they all largely remain indifferent to the global refugee problem, global warming and other recurring problems. These states try to take necessary steps only when the problem directly influences their respective domestic politics.
Third, global powers have not been willing to cooperate with one another during the latest pandemic. Instead, they blame one another for spreading the virus. For example, the U.S. is even trying to ask the Chinese government for compensation for the spread of coronavirus. If the global powers decide to exploit the coronavirus pandemic as an instrument for their global rivalry with other global actors, this will surely lead to a conflictual relationship, and they will all suffer. In today’s interconnected and interdependent world, all global powers need to follow a win-win policy and to build solidarity in a time of global problems; that is, a policy of cooperation and coordination is needed. Otherwise, all states, small or large, advanced or underdeveloped, democratic or authoritarian, will all lose. As the Kentucky state motto says, "United we stand, divided we fall."
