PRELIMINARY DRAFT OF THE MANDATE OF THE FOUR COMMISSIONS AGREED ON BY THE PLANNING MEETING OF JUNE 14-16, 1991, AT STONY POINT.
Please note: This is only my interpretation of the results of the discussion, subsequently amended somewhat by my own preferences. It definitely needs further input before it is finalized. But I would like to have it circulated.
COMMISSION I – GLOBAL STRUCTURES FOR GLOBAL SECURITY.
This is a merger of the previous Commission I (Global Security) and IV (Global Structures). “Security” is to be interpreted in the wide sense: not only military security, but also economic and ecological security; i.e. the lessening or removal of any threat to human survival in dignity. The Commission is to consider only the global aspects of this wider security, and the global structures (governmental and non-governmental) needed to achieve global security.
COMMISSION II – ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT.
Some clarifications are needed: 1. “Development” does not mean GNP growth, which, for the world as a whole, would not be sustainable (though the poorer countries could grow if the richer ones shrink). “Development” should mean social, cultural, ethical, and spiritual development, and also qualitative economic improvements (such as greater equity) without further quantitative economic growth.
2. “Sustainable” means capable of lasting indefinitely, not only for the next 10 or 100 or 1000 years. This requires as a precondition the use of renewable energy and renewable material resources EXCLUSIVELY, as well as the actual renewal of the material resources (through reuse or recycling or regrowth). (Energy resources are replenished by nature from the Sun.)
3. To consider environmental issues properly, certain insights from physics, especially the concept of ENTROPY, is essential. A cross-disciplinary link between physics and economics, which might be called “ecological economics”, as already pioneered by economist Georgescu-Roegen, is recommended. (Someone remarked recently that ecology and economy are now united in holy wedlock until death do them part.)
COMMISSION III – GLOBAL EDUCATION AND GLOBAL ETHICS.
“Education” should be interpreted here as involving not only formal schooling, but also public media and other social instruments for influencing the attitudes of citizens or adding to their store of knowledge or skills. The desired direction of the influence on attitudes is: 1. towards global rather than selfish or parochial or merely national values, and 2. towards ethical principles which favour the survival in dignity of individual persons, of humanity as a whole, of separate human cultures and subroups, and of as many non-human species as possible.
COMMISSION IV – HUMAN RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
Questions arising should include: 1. How best to implement and enforce the rights already proclaimed in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the later Human Rights Covenants. These documents include 3 classes of rights: civil and political rights, social, economic and cultural rights, and non-discrimination on the basis of race, colour, nationality, religion, gender, or any other differences. This would include new structures and procedures, such as courts, arbitration tribunals, etc.
2. What new rights should be added to the 3 classes of rights named above? Suggestion have been group rights (preservation of language, national self-determination, etc.) and universal rights, such as the right to peace, to a healthy environment, and to development.
3. What responsibilities of world citizens should accompany these rights? No benefits will be available unless a sufficient number of persons contribute to the common good. Benefits (such as clean water and air) cannot be denied to anyone, whether that person is a contributor or a violator or a free-rider. How do we convince enough people of their responsibility to contribute? Parables such as “The Tragedy of the Commons” illustrate this paradox.
The above are the 4 Commissions that we said we would have next year. However, another one was mentioned, while its establishment was postponed. It is described below.
COMMISSION V – CONVERGENCE OF ECONOMIC SYSTEMS AND ALTERNATIVE ECONOMIC SYSTEMS.
Communism, socialism, mixed economy, and capitalism each have advantages and disadvantages. Can we merge the advantages and discard the disadvantages, to produce a better system than each separate one? Or would it be better to resort to alternative economic systems, such as cooperatives, local currency systems, or so-called Green or Buddhist or Gandhian economics?
There are some overlaps in the mandates of the Commissions, e.g. Green economics belongs to both Commissions II and V. Also, the wide definitions of security, development, and human rights begin to overlap. However, this need not be a drawback; the relevant commissions should cooperate on these tasks, coordinate their work, and arrive at some useful division of labour.
Submitted by Hanna Newcombe, 25 Dundana Avenue, Dundas, Ont., Canada, L9H 4E5. Telephone 416 628-2356. I would appreciate receiving your comments.