Common Heritage of Humanity PDF

# COMMON HERITAGE OF HUMANITY ## Climate Change and Remedial Climate Policy Architecture ### References * Baer, Paul, Tom Athanasiou, Sivan Kartha, and Eric Kemp-Benedict. 2009. "Greenhouse Development Rights: A Proposal for a Fair Climate Treaty". Ethics, Place and Environment 12(3): 267-281. *...

# COMMON HERITAGE OF HUMANITY ## Climate Change and Remedial Climate Policy Architecture ### References * Baer, Paul, Tom Athanasiou, Sivan Kartha, and Eric Kemp-Benedict. 2009. "Greenhouse Development Rights: A Proposal for a Fair Climate Treaty". Ethics, Place and Environment 12(3): 267-281. * Caney, Simon, 2005. "Cosmopolitan Justice, Responsibility, and Global Climate Change". Leiden Journal of International Law 18(4): 747-775. * French, Duncan. 2000. "Developing States and International Environmental Law: The Importance of Differentiated Responsibilities". International and Comparative Law Quarterly 49(1): 35–60. * Page, Edward. 2012. "Give it Up for Climate Change: A Defense of the Beneficiary Pays Principle". International Theory 4(2): 300-330. * Shue, Henry. 1999. "Global Environment and International Inequality". International Affairs 75(3): 531-545. * Vanderheiden, Steve. 2008. Atmospheric Justice: A Political Theory of Climate Change. New York, Oxford University Press. ## COMMON HERITAGE OF HUMANITY ### Scott J. Shackelford **Indiana University, United States** In 1968, during the 22nd session of the UN General Assembly, Arvid Pardo, the Maltese delegate, called for an international regime to "govern the deep seabed" under international waters (Viikari 2002: 33) (see also Ocean protection). He proposed that the seabed should be declared the common heritage of humanity (CHH), which it eventually became in 1970, leading to Pardo being called the "Father of the Law of the Sea conference." What made the CHH concept so revolutionary is that it was the first codification of a common property rights concept that transcended national sovereignty. Instead of countries, the CHH dealt directly with humanity as a whole in a way that "transcends national boundaries and unites all peoples under the flag of universalism," a form of cosmopolitan global governance (Baslar 1998: 25). The CHH arose from two observations. First, some valuable natural resources, such as the ones managed under the fisheries governance, were close to exhaustion, and developing nations wanted to ensure that they had some degree of access before they were depleted. Second, the technological divide between developing and developed nations prohibited developing states from reaping the rewards that the developed nations would enjoy as technological advances enabled access to valuable new resource domains, unless technology transfer was enforced. The notion was to create a level playing field or, short of that, to share benefits equitably (Baslar 1998: 301). Neither scholars nor policymakers have agreed on a common understanding of the CHH, but a working definition would likely comprise five main elements (Frakes 2003: 411-413). 1. There can be no appropriation of a common heritage space, though some scholars have argued that this prohibition should not necessarily be viewed as a significant impediment to regulation (Baslar 1998: 90, 235). 2. "It required a system of management in which all users have a right to share" (Goldie 1983: 87). As collective management is impractical, though, a specialized agency must be created to aid in coordination, such as the International Seabed Authority (ISA) that manages deep seabed mining. 3. All nations must share in the benefits derived from exploiting global common pool resources in common heritage regions. 4. These spaces should be used for peaceful purposes. But what constitutes "peaceful" differs depending on the common heritage region in question; the Antarctic Treaty System, for example, equates peaceful use with barring "any measures of a military nature" (Baslar 1998: 106), which differs from the more permissive definition in the 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. The latter accord, commonly known as the Outer Space Treaty, preserves space "exclusively for peaceful purposes" and even addresses the "harmful contamination" of outer space, but it has not directly led to the sustainable, peaceful use of space, in part because of ambiguity in the treaty language (see Space debris). 5. Common heritage regions must be protected for posterity, highlighting the intergenerational equity considerations at the heart of the CHH (see Justice). The CHH concept has been the subject of debate in disciplines ranging from archaeology and economics to public international law, including space law and international environment law. It is now treaty law in the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention of the United Nations, the 1983 International Understanding on Plant Genetic Resources, and has found expression in the controversial 1979 Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. However, the amorphous CHH concept that has in large part governed global commons areas since the 1960s is under stress (Baslar 1998: 372-373). For example, international environmental treaties have avoided CHH terminology to describe the atmosphere (Boyle 1991: 1-3). What, then, is the future of the CHH concept and its ability to ward off a tragedy of the commons? Some legal scholars such as Professor Kemal Baslar have argued for a return to common property regulation through recognizing the CHH in environmental governance as a human and environmental right and general principle of international law, which could foster greater acceptance of the concept by the international community (1998: 368-369). Others prefer incorporating the core tenets of the CHH concept into the sustainable development movement and its pillars of economic and social development, as well as inter- and intra-generational equity and environmental conservation and preservation (Ellis 2008: 644). Although sustainable development suffers from some of the same ambiguities as the CHH concept, by avoiding the controversies surrounding the CHH concept, sustainable development may help carry the core CHH element of the equitable, sustainable use of global common pool resources into the twenty-first century. ### References * Baslar, Kemal. 1998. The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law. The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff Publishes. * Boyle, Alan E. 1991. "International Law and the Protection of the Atmosphere: Concepts, Categories and Principles." In International Law and Global Climate Change, Eds. Robin R. Churchill and David Freestone, 7-19. London, Kluwer Law International. * Ellis, Jaye. 2008. "Sustainable Development as a Legal Principle: A Rhetorical Analysis". In Select Proceedings of the European Society of International Law, Eds. Hélène Ruiz Fabri, Rüdiger Wolfrum, and Jana Gogolin, 641-660. Oxford, Hart Publishing. * Frakes, Jennifer. 2003. "The Common Heritage of Mankind Principle and the Deep Scabed, Outer Space, and Antarctica: Will Developed and Developing Nations Reach a Compromise?" Wisconsin International Law Journal 21: 409-434. * Goldie, L.F.E, 1983. "A Note on Some Diverse Meanings of the 'Common Heritage of Mankind.'" Syracuse Journal of International Law and Commerce 10(1): 69-112. * Viikari, Lotta. 2002. From Manganese Nodules to Lunar Regolith: A Comparative Legal Study of the Utilization of Natural Resources in the Deep Seabed and Outer Space. Lapland, Lapland University Press.