Tragedy of the Cognitive Commons: AI Could Destroy Collective Expertise of Entire Professions

Nolan Lovett from NATO Special Operations University, in a paper published in the Human Resource Development Review, argues that the widespread adoption of AI in companies follows the logic of the tragedy of the commons. Each company that replaces entry-level positions with AI gains 100% of the efficiency benefits, while the costs of expertise erosion are distributed across all organizations that rely on the common pool of skilled workers. Lovett identifies two mechanisms that undermine the pipeline of new professionals: direct elimination of entry-level positions, and a subtler effect where AI support allows juniors to reach high productivity without the cognitive effort that builds deep expertise. This creates a 'validation leash' problem: the ability to supervise AI depends on the very deep expertise that AI use undermines. The full impact may lag by 5 to 20 years, becoming visible only between 2030 and 2045, which Lovett calls the 'Human Reserve Paradox.' Some fields, such as software engineering, financial analysis, and legal research, are highly vulnerable, while medicine and engineering are somewhat protected by regulation and professional bodies. Studies cited in the paper show that AI use can weaken neural connectivity (MIT EEG study), reduce test scores by 17% among software developers (Anthropic), and negatively correlate with critical thinking in a Swiss study of 666 participants. However, economic studies are inconclusive: some show employment declines in AI-affected occupations, especially among young workers, but causality is not clear. Desired solutions include AI-free learning spaces, phased AI introduction, and minimum human performance requirements.