Stiglitz defines the “tragedy of the commons” as situation that negatively affects common properties. “When there is a common resource that can be used freely by all, each user fails to think about how his actions might harm others; each loses sight of the common good.” (Stiglitz, pg 162) I will present how factory farming and the process of a t-shirt production both contribute to this issue by tying it back to the solutions proposed by Stiglitz.
The first and less probable solution Stiglitz proposed is privatization. Privatization of the commons offers a solution by requiring each country to be responsible for their own boundaries. Instead of damaging the whole earth, a country is limited to its own common and therefore will control the rate of damage it inflicts. The challenge is the practicality of setting boundaries that countries would not only take into consideration, but try and control. In Eating Animals, a factory farm built a facility to hold six thousand hogs. Paul, a neighbor to the factory farm, and his family had to endure the unpleasant stench of hog feces that was emitted in to the air. Stiglitz proposed solution to privatization of the commons is unlikely because confinement to things such as air, are nearly impossible to do. However, it is possibility to propose that countries be responsible for their emissions of pollutions, such as carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.
The second solution Stiglitz suggests that government’s involvement in managing and regulation of the commons is necessary. When we purchase a factory-farmed chicken from a local supermarket or purchase a t-shirt from a department store down the street, we fail to think about how our purchases affect the world on a global level. Since we purchase these products, we become proxies to the negative side effects that are involved in their productions. If the government were to incorporate taxes on such products, we would we see the externalized costs show up on the register...