The basis for a new institutional framework
Environmental “collective action” at the global level demands a high degree of cooperation. Out of pragmatic considerations, one may work in reforms that take the current status quo as a basis, but we should not forget that the current global environmental problems require a profound reconfiguration of the international environmental regime. The objective of pursuing the common interest cannot be obtained without building new foundations previously.
If on one hand, an increased performance on the local and regional level only makes sense if they are properly measured and framed on a global scale, on the other hand, the ambitious management of the interest of all humanity, also known as global governance is in itself considered as a “threat” to the traditional concept of sovereignty. To qualify the climatic and oceanic systems as Common Heritage of Mankind as to provide a conceptual basis to this new institutional framework will not only allow to construct an accounting system of the different contributions of each state to the common interest, but it will also allow to structure the various roles between the traditional tasks of the State and the pursuit of interests common to all mankind.
The global ecological interdependency results out of a new context: the interest of each state resides primarily in realization of the common interest. Only by clarifying the different roles and responsibilities, can we guarantee the management of the conditions for human life, which no single state can guarantee for its citizens on itself. The global governance of the global natural systems should therefor be carried out by a specialized institution under the the United Nations umbrella.
The Heritage between sovereignties
Applying the fundamental principles of the Common Heritage of Mankind to the climatic and oceanic systems constitutes a formalization of the interest of humanity through the recognition of a heritage which is autonomous relative to the state. This gives origin to the need to manage the common heritage, implies the institutionalization of an international authority that would manage the global natural systems.
Transferring the exertion of sovereignty over environmental or simply climate matters to an international authority in conjunction with other countries will never be easy. But if it would proof not to be possible to eliminate the confrontation between sovereignties the existence of a Common Heritage could have a mediating effect and appease many of the current tensions.
The establishment of a practical multilateral framework with a basis in a common heritage, a shared metric and value, could alter many of the actual presumptions of negotiations. Within an institutional framework where the rules and the instruments are clear to everyone, each actor will have access to sufficient information in order to foresee the choices of the others, and will with this information be able to start conditioning its own choices. Within a context of a structured system of mutual dependency, each actor understands that a collective action can attribute value to its own short term costs, since everyone understands the benefits for themselves and for the others.
It is necessary to look for a system that captures the global nature of the problem, and that by assigning certain roles to an international authority, which transcends short term individual interests, can bring advantages to all involved.
