The tragedy of the commons is an economic theory of a
situation within a shared-resource system where individual users acting
independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to
the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource
through their collective action. The concept and name originate in an
essay written in 1833 by the Victorian economist William Forster Lloyd, who used a hypothetical example of the effects of unregulated grazing on common land (then colloquially called "the commons") in the British Isles.[1] The concept became widely known over a century later due to an article written by the ecologist Garrett Hardin in 1968.[2] In this context, commons is taken to mean any shared and unregulated resource such as atmosphere, oceans, rivers, fish stocks, or even an office refrigerator.
It has been argued that the very term 'tragedy of the commons' is a misnomer per se,
since 'the commons' originally referred to a resource owned by a
community, and no individual outside the community had any access to the
resource. However, the term is presently used when describing a problem
where all individuals have equal and open access to a resource.
Hence, 'tragedy of open access regimes' or simply 'the open access
problem' are more apt terms.[3]:171
The tragedy of the commons is often cited in connection with sustainable development, meshing economic growth and environmental protection, as well as in the debate over global warming. It has also been used in analyzing behavior in the fields of economics, evolutionary psychology, anthropology, game theory, politics, taxation and sociology.
Although commons have been known to collapse due to overuse (such as
in over-fishing), abundant examples exist where communities cooperate or
regulate to exploit common resources prudently without collapse.
Answer:
why are we here? Why do we exist?
Explanation:
So are these just really good questions?
There needs to be a paragraph fam, unless you already read it, so give more information. -Helpful advice
Answer:
A number of different theoretical approaches to explaining prejudice dominated social scientific inquiry at different stages during the twentieth century with each having distinctive social policy implications. These different approaches seemed to emerge in response to specific historical circumstances that made particular questions about the nature or causation of prejudice salient for social scientists. The study of prejudice has therefore provided an interesting case study in how values and social milieu interact with and influence social scientific concepts and explanations.
Read more: Prejudice - Conclusion - Social, Edited, Psychology, and John - JRank Articles https://science.jrank.org/pages/10841/Prejudice-Conclusion.html#ixzz7Aew16MYo
Explanation:
Well in here the answer is the first one: <span>to present the plight of the Suffragettes who gave up their freedom as a form of protest. We knoe this because the Author's main purpose is usually be figured out what the story is all about and it depends on how it is being presented.Hope this is useful</span>
