Garrett Hardin

The social arrangements that produce responsibility are arrangements that create coercion, of some sort.

But as population became denser, the natural chemical and biological recycling processes became overloaded, calling for a redefinition of property rights.

No one should be able to enter a wilderness by mechanical means.

A technical solution may be defined as one that requires a change only in the techniques of the natural sciences, demanding little or nothing in the way of change in human values or ideas of morality.

Continuity is at the heart of conservatism: ecology serves that heart.

However, I think the major opposition to ecology has deeper roots than mere economics; ecology threatens widely held values so fundamental that they must be called religious.

Education can counteract the natural tendency to do the wrong thing, but the inexorable succession of generations requires that the basis for this knowledge be constantly refreshed.

A coldly rationalist individualist can deny that he has any obligation to make sacrifices for the future.

Moreover, the practical recommendations deduced from ecological principles threaten the vested interests of commerce; it is hardly surprising that the financial and political power created by these investments should be used sometimes to suppress environmental impact studies.

Of course, a positive growth rate might be taken as evidence that a population is below its optimum.

A finite world can support only a finite population; therefore, population growth must eventually equal zero.