.
Earth Day:
2% Royalty Plan for Sharing Resources |
[Reprinted from Land
and Liberty, July-August, 1981]
|
EARTH DAY 1981 was internationally celebrated on March 20,
the Spring Equinox when day and night are of equal length everywhere on
the globe. The first Earth Day was celebrated in San Francisco in 1970,
the brainchild of John McConnell and his Earth Society Foundation. Since
then, Earth Day has gained wide recognition. This year in San Francisco,
Mayor Dianne Feinstein, at the urging of the World Citizens Assembly,
proclaimed March 20 as World Citizens Day. She encouraged "all
citizens to participate in the festivities linking people of our city to
people of all the earth, acknowledging our common humanity."[1]
The World Citizens Assembly is a non-governmental organisation that
works in cooperation with the United Nations.
At the United Nations in New York, the Peace Bell was rung at 12.30
p.m., the exact moment of the Equinox. Several persons spoke to the
outdoor assembly, including UN Ambassador Arvid Pardo of Malta, the "father"
of the Law of the Sea Treaty, and John McConnell.
McConnell and Pardo were also among the guest speakers at "Economics
of Peace: An Earth Day Conference" held at the Henry George School
of Social Science, located not far from UN headquarters. McConnell
pointed out that humanity is at a point in its evolution when it must
decide to "grow up or blow up!" He related how, looking to the
past as well as to the future, he based his choice of the Equinox for
Earth Day on the ancient Earth-culture of Stonehenge, which was built to
mark the occurrence of the Equinox and other astronomical phenomena.
One of the tools used by McConnell's Foundation to promote Earth Day is
the Earth Charter.[2] Its
preamble opens with the statement that
We are the first generation to
determine the life or death of the planet we have inherited. The care
of Earth is now our most important task. ...We believe that a vigorous
united effort to understand. protect and revive our planet will at the
same time promote mutual trust and accommodations needed for creating
a peaceful future.
The Charter goes on to outline its principles of "Earth Care,"
"Earth Rights," "Stewardship," and "Guidelines
for Action." It urges the development of technologies "that
will increase rather than destroy Earth's renewable bounty."
A detailed exposition of the principles of Earth Rights is found in the
Foundation's Planetary Inheritance Declaration.[3]
The Declaration.'s central point is
That among the equal rights of
men is the right to an equal share in nature's bounty; a right of each
man to his planetary inheritance. ...No one can, by any compact.
deprive or divest their posterity. or any other man's posterity, of
the right to his portion of Earth. All natural resources belong
equally to every living person. ...To this end each nation should
collect a two per cent royalty each year for all use (including its
own) of any land or other resources. These royalties would be based on
the selling price of the natural Earth materials sold or used. These
royalties would be separate from taxation for government needs. and be
distributed equally to all citizens.
In this way within a
fifty-year life span there would be full and just compensation to each
person for any use of his portion of Earth's natural riches.
The Declaration extends this principle to the use of the sea and sea
floor: the royalties from such uses would be collected by the United
Nations and distributed equally as with the other royalties. The
difference among nations relative to natural resources could be further
equalized via a global Natural Resource Royalties Pool. The Declaration
also recognises that
The benefits of nature's bounty
can only be realised through man's constructive effort and the wise
use of his accumulated knowledge Therefore. no individuals. or groups.
should be deprived of any just benefits obtained from the industrious
use of Earth's resources. so long as they meet their obligations to
Earth and Earth's people.
These obligations, according to the document, include the payment of
the two per cent royalty and non-pollution of the environment. Polluters
would forfeit their right to receive royalties for specified periods of
time, depending on the damage done.
Paralleling the developments of Earth Day, from small obscure
beginnings to international recognition, is that of the Law of the Sea
Treaty. For 12 years the UN has been seeking to draw up a legal
framework within which all people can conduct activities within the
marine environment. Ambassador Pardo, who first proposed the idea,
traced the development thus far, going back to the early legal status of
the sea. While there had been attempts by powerful governments to claim
the sea as their own (e.g., the Pope at one. time divided ownership of
all ocean water between Spain and Portugal), it has been generally
accepted that, in the words of the Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius, "the
sea is free", i.e., beyond the jurisdiction of any nation-state.
Modern times have seen the eroding of this principle. The discovery of
off-shore oil in the '40s led US policy makers to claim a "contiguous
zone" which extended national jurisdiction beyond the traditional
three miles to 12 miles out from shore. This trend has continued, with
other nations following suit and escalating the claims. Today only 40
per cent of the marine environment remains unclaimed.
It was to halt this trend towards total nationalisation of the ocean
that led Pardo to develop the concept of the Law of the Sea. Under the
proposed draft treaty, the UN would create a Seabed Authority to oversee
and manage the exploitation of undersea fisheries and such resources as
hydrocarbons, algae, petroleum and manganese. The waters above the
international seabed (the unclaimed 40 per cent) would remain "high
seas", i.e., free for all to navigate upon.
The draft treaty is currently being held up for review and possible
rejection by the Reagan Administration. Parts of the draft treaty
propose mandatory transfer of financing and technology from those
willing and able to mine the ocean floor to the Seabed Authority. The US
and other industrialised nations see this as a form of taxation imposed
on their citizens for the benefit of "Third World dictatorships."[4]
And there are other unresolved issues: the use of the sea for military
purposes; conflicts of interest between coastal and inland states; and
whether or not the revenue collected by the Seabed Authority should be
divided among all nations according to some formula, or used by the
Authority itself to finance and extend its own operations (the method
advocated by Pardo).
In his address to the conference, Robert Clancy, president of the
International Union for Land-Value Taxation and Free Trade, stressed the
ethical imperative underlying the need for reforms that implement the
idea of "common heritage". He used some basic statistics to
bring home his point. The total surface of Earth is 196,938,000 square
miles (with 640 acres per sq. mile), the total dry land area being
57,500 square miles. With 4.1 billion people inhabiting the globe, the
dry land could be divided into 36 acre lots per family of four.[5]
Of course, since land is not of equal quality, situation or value, and
since some people require more or less land than others, it would be
impossible to divide up Earth equitably among all people. Yet there is a
solution, said Clancy, and that is to take the rental values that attach
to sites and resources and distribute them in equal shares to every
person. This could be done on a global level, as proposed by the
Planetary Inheritance Declaration or the Law of the Sea; on a regional
level, as proposed in Alaska and practised in Alberta; or on a local
level, via a "single tax" on land-values as proposed by Henry
George.
An alternative voluntarist method of land reform, the community land
trust, was detailed by Dan Sullivan of the Henry George Foundation. The
land trust, of which there are over thirty in operation in the US, is a
legal entity that acquires land by gift or purchase. The land is then
leased out in parcels to tenants, but it is never again sold or
otherwise taken out of "trust." The rent collected by the
leases is used to defray property taxes and other community expenses,
with any surplus distributed as dividends to the original "investors"
in the trust, or to the tenants themselves.
The voluntarist spirit was manifest in several of the other guest
speakers at the Conference, as well as in many of the participants among
the audience. Conference co-ordinator Mildred J. Loomis of the
decentralist School of Living, Jack Schwartzman, editor of the
individualist quarterly Fragments, and Mark Brady of the Students for a
Libertarian Society, each criticised militarism and governmental
intervention.
One of the more controversial speakers was Kirkpatrick Sale, noted
author of Human Scale. Speaking on the advantages of localism and
appropriate technology, Sale also correlated peace and decentralism by
using statistics showing that, throughout history, periods of inflation
and periods of war coincide with periods of growth of the large-scale
nation-states.
The evils of nationalism were also criticised by Dr. Harry Lerner of
the World Citizens Assembly. According to Dr. Lerner, a world economy
geared to the production of nuclear armaments, to the detriment of both
the taxpayers and real human needs, now poses the grave threats of "omnicide,
the killing of us all; and terracide, the killing of the Earth."
And the present costs of the misallocation of financial and agricultural
resources (into the hands of military and corporate elites, both in
industrial and developing countries) was outlined in Lynn Stone's talk
on the world crisis in food production.
While the problems presented were apparent and interrelated, the
solutions presented sparked much discussion and disagreement among the
conferees. Not all could accept the desirability of nuclear disarmament,
or of governmental measures to effect more equitable access to land and
natural resources. Anti-statists shared the platform with
world-govenmentalists. There was, however, a general agreement that what
is good for planet Earth is also good for the individual human being. A
world at peace would be one where each individual had access to Earth on
an equal basis with others, where special privileges and destructive
powers had been eliminated, allowing global cooperation to flower and
transcend the artificial barriers of political geography and ideology.
REFERENCES
1. The "Proclamation" was published and
distributed by the Henry George School, 833 Market Street, San
Francisco, CA 94103.
2. Published by the Earth Society Foundation, 919 Third Ave., New
York, NY 10022.
3. As above.
4. Prof. Karl Brunner, reported in Fortune, April 6, 1981.
5. Statistics from The Heritage of Earth, Dr. Samuel Scheck,
Woodbury, NY.
|