The Oceans as a Commons

A First Step Toward Thinking of the Earth
as our Common Birthright

Edward J. Dodson

[February, 2008]

Some of us are old enough to remember the nearly-decade long United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea that met from 1973 through 1982. The resulting treaty finally took effect in 1994, when a majority of member governments became signatories. Although the Bush Administration finally agreed to U.S. participation, the U.S. Senate has yet to ratify the treaty. Opposition has come from conservative think tanks fearful of international inference with U.S. security measures and rights as a sovereign nation-state.

On the one hand, I understand and share the concerns critics have expressed regarding the transfer of legal authority over the global commons to an agency of the United Nations (the International Seabed Authority). If, as we argue, the laws of the social democracies have been structured to secure and protect entrenched privilege, the laws of other societies are even more overtly unjust. How can we be convinced that an organization of governments will ever act in the interests of all?

We in the social democracies have a very thin claim to any moral high ground. We in the United States have been a use, abuse and throw-away society from the earliest period of European settlement in this part of the world. If there is any universal moral principle, it is that the earth is the equal birthright of all persons, equally. Our acceptance of the system of sovereign nation-states makes the application of this principle extremely difficult, but within the rules of access and exploitation over the oceans of the globe is our chance to begin to dismantle the systems of law that have acquiesced to the claims of sovereignty over territory.

Despite the fact that an overwhelming majority of the world's governments have ratified the Law of the Sea Treaty, a major reason for U.S. reluctance is the structure of the bureaucracy empowered to administer the treaty provisions. The process of issuing licenses for mining of the ocean sea beds needs to be depoliticized, with one set of rules for all and licenses awarded to the highest bidders. As Ricardo would remind us today, the amount any company will bid for a license will factor in the costs of compliance with all regulations (provided, of course, they are rigorously enforced). Perhaps even more controversial is method by which collected licensing fees are to be distributed to member governments.

In October of 2007, a U.S. Senate panel finally voted in favor of ratification. Now, the full Senate must approve the treaty by at least a two-thirds vote in favor. A provision of the treaty actually guarantees the U.S. sovereign control over oil, natural gas and any other natural resources found in the ocean a distance of 200 miles from the US. coast. The mining and fishing industries in most nations with access to the oceans should be reasonably satisfied with these provisions, although there are many regions where negotiation over conflicting sovereignties is urgently needed.

A fair and effectively enforced Law of the Sea Treaty is in the interest of every nation. For one thing, our global food supply must be protected. We continue to struggle to protect the ocean's fish species from catastrophic overfishing. The ocean ecology evolved over millions of years, and human intervention is on the verge of irreparably destroying the delicate balance that supports our own survival. Land & Liberty readers in Scotland know, for example, that Cod and haddock stocks in the North Sea have collapsed, and in the process half of the commercial fishing fleet has been drydocked since 1992. We ought to call for scientists to determine what the maximum sustainable annual take is, as well the use of sustainable harvesting methods, set the number of licenses to be issued, then conduct an auction for those licenses. This revenue stream, as well as that derived from the issuance of licenses to mining companies, must then be equitably distributed under rules negotiated by members of the United Nations. This, then, would be a good beginning.