В Папуа — Новой Гвинее демографический взрыв превращает страну в «бомбу замедленного действия»

THE Tragedy of the Commons refers to a scenario when individuals deplete a shared resource by acting in their own self-interest, resulting in the supply being unable to keep up with the demand. The phenomenon was first described by British writer and economist William Forster Lloyd in 1833, discussing of the overgrazing of cattle on village common areas. More than a century later, American ecologist Garrett Hardin revived the concept to describe what happens when too many individuals all share a limited resource, like grazing land, fishing areas, living space, even clean air. Hardin argued that these situations pit short-term self-interest against the common good, and they end badly for everyone, resulting in overgrazing, overfishing, overpopulation, pollution, and other social and environmental problems. It can be applied to a thought experiment, where one can imagine living in a small village with four persons that depends on the local fish pond for food. If anyone takes more than one, the number of reproductive pairs drops, and the population of fish cannot be restored. Eventually, the fish in the lake will be gone, leaving all four villagers to starve. This fish pond scenario is just one example of a classic problem called the Tragedy of the Commons highlighted by the aforementioned academics more than 100 years ago. Consider another term “behavioural sink” that was dubbed by American ethologist John Calhoun after conducting experiments on rats as a future population model for humans. During the experiments, Calhoun and his research team had created environments where rats were given unlimited access to food and water which eventually led to uncontrolled population growth. Their findings have now been used by researchers and academics as models for sociology and human behaviour. Key among the issues raised included the inevitability of overpopulation. In Papua New Guinea, a similar issue could arise due to the undeniable fact that its population is growing at an uncontrollable rate. The country’s population officially stands at 10,185,363, following the census conducted by the National Statistical Office (NSO) in 2024. The 2024 population census report by NSO indicated that of 10,185,363 persons in the country, 5,336,546 are men and 4,848,817 are women. Of this, 5,827,441 persons were over the age of 18, while 4,357,922 were below. Before the national headcount, Professor Glen Mola had described the increasing population as a “time bomb” that could become detrimental to the development of the country. Mola, the head of obstetrics and gynaecology at the University of Papua New Guinea’s School of Medicine and Health Sciences and at the Port Moresby General Hospital, said the annual increase of 300,000 (or more) persons needed to be classified as a national emergency as it would become a looming threat for the next generation. “There are population pressures faced by the people each day such as women that are now delivering on the floor in the labor wards of hospitals and people are dying on the floor of emergency departments because of a lack of space,” he said. “Many people are struggling to survive and won’t be able to make it. “Time is running out and the time bomb of population could explode.” During an event to commemorate World Population Day last year, he urged Papua New Guineans to seriously consider proper family planning methods given the current socio-economic state of the country. “The right number should be two children to a family,” Mola said. “We are seeing that many women are giving birth to about six babies nowadays. “There needs to be more awareness done about family planning, especially to young girls. “This will allow them to make better choices in the future.” Obviously overpopulation cannot automatically lead to the destruction of the country, but it is a clear indicator of the phenomenon because more people making small, rational, self-interested choices can quickly overwhelm shared resources. The decision to have a child can be seen as a personal benefit to a couple, however, when a million others make the same choice, it only adds to the burden of sharing a limited amount of resources among an unlimited amount of people. Therefore, we would all do well to look at this issue through the lens of the Tragedy of the Commons.