Final answer:
A political party may benefit from having limited access to resources by forming strategic alliances with special interest groups, which can provide support and influence. However, such relationships may also harm the party's image and lead to resource depletion if not managed well, illustrating the complexity of resource access and political dynamics.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering what a political party gains from having limited access to resources, it is important to understand the dynamics of resource allocation and political influence. Limited access can create incentives for a party to align with special interest groups that might control these resources. This can lead to a symbiotic relationship where the party gains support and resources needed to influence legislation or win elections. However, this dynamic also has the potential to harm the party if the relationship appears too exclusive to the electorate.
Furthermore, the concept of the tragedy of the commons illustrates how over-exploitation of resources can lead to depletion, where eventually no one benefits. In democratic institutions, there is an ebb and flow of political parties, offering opportunities to obtain resources from the commons but also requiring a balance to prevent exploitation. Privatization of resources is another solution that comes with its own set of challenges including proper pricing and preventing over-exploitation without creating disadvantages for the community.
Overall, having limited access to resources can force a party to engage in trade-offs and strategic alliances, which could both empower and limit the party's actions and success.