Economics of Ocean Resources

Commons problems are the problems that face the common people. They could be said to be local commons when they involve a limited group of people such as a community of a smaller group of people such as a village. The problems of the common are the distinct issues that they face that are localized to them.  Most often common problems arise from the ownership of common property such as tanks, irrigation schemes, and community land among other properties that are collectively owned by a small number of people. Since most of the commons problems arise from the fundamental reason that they collectively shared a resource of property, the same property can be used in a good manner to address the issues that are faced by the commons altogether. 

Seabright (1993) writes that commons problems can be necessarily said to be the problems that face a common group of people. One thing that disturbs the common group is that they control and manage their common resources collectively. A local group could together own property such as grazing fields, lands and inshore fisheries that they are required to handle and run by themselves without the intervention of outside forces such as the government. A common problem thus as the author proposes arises from the fact that the leadership on how to use the common resource is by the group alone and not influenced from outside (Seabright 1993). The mechanisms of utilizing the resource depend on the arrangement of the group alone and their collective commitment to use the resource. The disorganized nature of management of the common resource is therefore likely to cause a commotion in management which ends up as a common problem. 

Before a common problem arises, there have to be common interests that are shared by the local group. Being owners of a resource or property collectively, the local community or delocalized members of the community all aim at ensuring optimal management of the property. Everyone in the group has their own opinion regarding how the property could be managed. Conflicts, therefore, arise as everyone tries to push their agenda regarding how the utility should be managed. Nobody is willing to give up on their opinion since everyone believes that their idea is the best opinion and thus need to be taken into consideration (Seabright 1993). The members of the local group, however, resolve to conflict instead of understanding that everyone focuses on the best use of the property. They, therefore, plunge into a conflict without realizing that their shared interest is the best use of the property. 

To resolve a common problem, members of the small community need to understand that they are all contributors to the course. The social choice theory shows that members of a common group have to agree on how to use the common property in unison. Hardin (1968) proves that there is no way a finite world can fulfill the desires of a finite population. The statement seeks to approve the fact that members of the group need to understand that each of their interests cannot be served. The common property is limited and hence it cannot solve the desires of each of them. They also need to acknowledge the fact that each of the solutions regarding the use of the common property that is presented by each member is weighty (Hardin, 1968). It is not up to a member to compare the opinion of another member to their belief to support or reject the opinion. It should instead be about trying to establish the best technical approach that can be used to utilize the common good best.

Deciding on which is the best approach to make use of the common property deserves to be one that can lead to production. The outlook of all the members while thinking about the common property is to find the best utility for the property. As such, they should desire to a production plan that can make the public utility to be more productive than it currently is. The approach is a management based approach that requires each of the members to throw away personal opinions and compromise on the opinion that seems to bring production to their shared good. In actual sense, they need to look at two or three plans and see the one that offers optimal production. On that plan, the members of the common property need to settle.

Solving the common problem can however not end with a production plan. A production plan is just an opinion or just written on paper until it is implemented. After comprising on the optimal production plan, the owners of the common property ought to now decide on the best approach that they can use to make their common good productive. They ought to come up with a reasonable assumption of how the production plan can be achieved with a definite plan that should be guided by timelines (Seabright, 1993). Risk-sharing at this point needs to be unanimously agreed on such that the owners of the property agree that in case a risk erupts, they are ready to share the cost other than seeing the common resource just lay unutilized. Close follow-up on a production plan using a well-designed implementation plan is always successful and offers the best results to the commons thereby helping each of them as opposed to the case if they never compromised on how to use the common property.

Though there are narratives that common property cannot be used to alleviate common problems, there are places where they have been successful and the members of the groups have made instrumental strides in prosperity. Cinner (2005) considers the way that communities in the Western Pacific have made use of a wide range of resources in the Indo-Pacific. The author shows communities have consistently applied management techniques such as periodic reef closures and entry limitations to limit the use of the marine resources using a control process that they call the Customary Marine Tenure (Cinner, 2005). The communities consequently benefit equally from the management techniques and have seen the marine resources help every member of the population equally.

In conclusion, common property is mostly the cause of common problems which should not be the case. The reason that common property brings about common problems is due to disagreements which make the community lack a common plan towards the utilization of the common property. However, communities and groups need to realize that common properties are essential properties which they should agree on how to use, formulate production and implementations plans to see their expedited use without depletion and with equal benefit being realized. With a common production and implementation plan, common property, therefore, can be used to solve common problems.

References

Cinner, J. (2005). Socioeconomic factors influencing customary marine tenure in the Indo-Pacific. Ecology and society, 10(1).

Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. science, 162(3859), 1243-1248.

Seabright, P. (1993). Managing Local Commons: Theoretical Issues in Incentive Design. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7(4), 113-134.