Feature

Tragedy of the Commons- Dacca is Dead. Long Live Dhaka!

Asrar Chowdhury

THE Founding Father of economics, Adam Smith, introduced the “invisible hand” in Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759) the book prior to his magnum opus Wealth of Nations (1776). The notion of the “invisible hand” is simple. When individuals behave in self-interest the society benefits. Behaviour at the micro level translates to behaviour at the macro level. This simple observation formed one of the foundations of mainstream economics: optimisation- the lust to maximise benefits. Societies need their agents (buyers and producers) to behave in self-interest if societies want to enjoy economic growth, a pre-condition for development.

The “invisible hand” was a need of its time. By the 18th Century the Ottoman Empire was waning. The Americas was truly a land of opportunity. As would Australia and unknown areas of Africa also later prove to be. Adam Smith and later David Ricardo laid the ideological foundations of capitalism. Europe was ready for “take off”. Capitalism would be the order of the day throughout the world for centuries to come. The lust for profits would dictate the course of history. This lust transformed Western societies for the good like never before. No benefit has ever come without a price. By the middle of the 19th Century social exponents like Charles Dickens and Karl Marx were voicing their resent over uncontrolled capitalism. “Please Sir, can I have some more?” was the outcry of Oliver Twist and his generation of working class children who were exposed to inhuman working and living conditions to finance the lust for the profit of capitalists. Karl Marx made lines like “workers of the world unite” and many other hymns for groups that saw revolution as a means towards an end for decades to come.

It was not an economist or a social scientist who formally articulated the potential threat of uncontrolled growth based on individual optimisation. Two centuries after Smith's Moral Sentiments (1759) and one century after Marx's Das Capital (1867), the ecologist Garrett Hardin wrote a powerful essay in the Science Journal in 1968. The title could not have been more apt “Tragedy of the Commons”. When multiple agents act independently and rationally out of self-interest, they can end up depleting a shared natural resource where it was not in the original interest of any of the agents for this to happen in the first place. Hardin's hypothesis was based on resources that are used by a community e.g., common grazing land for livestock. The hypothesis can be extended to whole societies. The central theme of Hardin's model is that every system has a capacity within which it can provide benefits. Beyond this, individual optimisation can lead to a catastrophic disaster that is worse than a Greek Tragedy.

Mainstream economics as taught in classrooms, fails to address morality and ethics. It is inherent in human nature for individuals and societies to seek avenues where they can get advantage from their actions. Adam Smith and future generations of economists rightly identified this. What mainstream economics does not teach is that demand works well as long as demand is based on needs. The world has always had enough resources for our needs, but never did the world ever have enough resources for our greed. When a system approaches its capacity it will cease to provide benefits. The market, the “invisible hand”, is a wonderful mechanism to allocate resources. Sadly, markets also have their limits. Every song has to come to an end.

The greatest lesson of history is, nobody learns from it. Maybe that is why history has a tendency to repeat itself. Looking at recent tragic events in Dhaka City makes me a cynic. Is greed becoming uncontrollable? Is the pursuit towards self-interest leading Dhaka to become a Greek Tragedy of the Commons? Will the young of today pay for the greed of their predecessors? Raising questions is the first step towards constructive thinking and reasoning.

As Dhaka celebrates 400 years of its existence much needs to be said to tomorrow's inheritors of Dhaka and Bangladesh. The time has come that today's young base their demands on needs and not on greed like their predecessors. Whether Dhaka will survive another 400 years or experience a Greek Tragedy of the Commons is a matter of speculation. One thing is for certain. History has records of cities and civilisations destroying themselves. As a wake up call for the young of today. When mainstream thought and practices reach their limits or become obsolete, it is time to re-think and be pragmatic. If you are pragmatic, Adam Smith's individual self-interest can be translated to collective social-interest. The beautiful Dacca of yesteryears is dead. Long live the Dhaka, you will inherit.