Its not a tragedy of the commons. Charge market prices for water and this goes away.
It's a tragedy of the commons until you charge market prices for water.
Privatization, regulation, collectivization, adaptive fees / "market pricing" - these are solutions proposed to situations which resemble the tragedy of the commons, in order that we can avoid the worst case scenario associated with continued individually-incentivized over-exploitation.
The term refers to situations where these incentives operating on a common good line up in a way which is potentially self-destructive to the system - not strictly to situations where they've already destroyed the system.
Re:How California Is Winning the Drought
by thaumaturgy on Friday August 14, 2015 @06:06PM
(#10063283)
It's almost the definitive example of the tragedy of the commons. How do you propose charging market prices for privately pumped well water?
Re:How California Is Winning the Drought
by icebraining on Saturday August 15, 2015 @09:43AM
(#10065344)
Privatize the groundwater?
Re:How California Is Winning the Drought
by anigbrowl on Friday August 14, 2015 @07:39PM
(#10063643)
It's a tragedy of the commons because groundwater is legally a common resource that anyone can exploit as they see fit. You can't charge market prices for it without changing that picture and declaring that someone else (eg the state) has a property interest in the groundwater, at which point it's no longer in the commons.
Groundwater is not exploitable as people see fit in Oregon. http://www.water-law.com/water-rights-articles/domestic-grou...
edit: proper link
Re:How California Is Winning the Drought
by anigbrowl on Friday August 14, 2015 @08:03PM
(#10063718)
OK, but this article is about California and the article even mentions that California is exceptional among the states in having this approach. Groundwater is freely exploitable here: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/board_info/water_r...
I looked it up because I thought there was no way that it could be true, you must've missed some important detail. But no, the article says exactly what you said it does.
What a perfect example of the intersection of the free market and the tragedy of the commons.