Oldal 161 [161]
THE TRAGEDY AND COMEDY OF THE COMMONS 159
attempts to change the attitude of the people to the problem). The second part of
the process is to describe the possibilities of action so as to promote the solution
of the problem (informing).'* The dissemination of information may be personal
or occur via the media (television, radio, internet, printed press, books, etc.).
Education cannot effectively help the spreading of environment-friendly
behavioral forms unless it is hindered by internal factors and not external
circumstances. In vain do our attitudes change and in vain do we know alternative
ways of facilitating a solution to the problem, if the social-economic institutional
system forces us to carry out actions which undermine our attitude. (A trivial
example: in vain are we persuaded to buy drinks in returnable bottles when there
are none available and we are forced to buy throwaway bottles). Moreover, what
is at issue here is individual action and self-restraint. Therefore, when the individual
does not notice change anywhere else, he/she might draw conclusions similar to
the zero-sum game: the action of a single person can’t achieve much, or might
even be detrimental, so he/she easily gives up . Actually, achieving profound, radical
change merely through providing information is hardly possible, for it is almost
impossible to get people to act in ways which oppose their value systems or
worldviews.
Changing the value systems and worldviews
Noticing the deterioration of the quality of the pasture, a herdsman began to point out
passionately to his fellows that their thinking was fundamentally mistaken, and if they
failed to change it, they would meet a tragic fate because of overgrazing. In long
conversations and disputes, he tried to persuade them that they should not be so
materialistic in their thinking, and growth had its limits. He convinced several farmers
fairly quickly, who joined him in trying to influence the rest.
Though the process was very slow, eventually all the cattle farmers order of values
and worldview changed to some extent, and the majoritys view changed fundamentally.
The new mentality brought about new behavioral norms. The most important one
was: “Keep as many animals as are necessary to maintain your family and yourself
modestly.” As a result, most herdsmen radically decreased the number of cows, which
was enough to avoid the tragedy. Though the material welfare of nearly everybody
decreased, the farmers and their families lived happily ever afier for many generations.
This approach is similar to the previous one (the goal being the change of
mentality), but it is more radical. It aims at a more profound and general
transformation than education does. Several thinkers proclaim that the root of
environmental problems lie in the dominant values (value system) and basic
convictions (the aggregate of which is termed worldview or cultural paradigm)
(e.g. Quinn 1992; McDaniel — Gowdy 1999). These need to be changed and
It is a frequent shortcoming of environmental education that this second part is often omitted.
They frighten people with the problem, but fail to present alternative options for action. This is
a serious issue because the feeling of helplessness they cause often (usually subconsciously) leads
us to use deterring mechanisms: for instance, we begin to deny or belittle the problem, instead of
making efforts to solve it (Winter — Koger 2004).