Regime setup by UNCLOS to govern deep seabed mining would stifle innovation with regulations
[ Page 3 ]
The LOST’s fundamental premise is that all unowned resources on the ocean’s floor belong to the “people of the world”—effec- tively the UN. But an international regulato- ry system would likely inhibit development, depress productivity, increase costs, and discourage innovation, thereby wasting much of the benefit to be gained from mining the oceans. The Byzantine regime created by the LOST was, and remains, almost unique in its perversity. In the original agreement, the UN would have asserted its control through the International Seabed Authority, ruled by an Assembly dominated by poorer nations and a council that would regulate deep seabed mining and redistribute income from the indus- trialized West to developing countries. The ISA would employ as its chief subsidiary to mine the seabed a body called the Enterprise, which would enjoy the coerced assistance of Western mining companies.
Don’t Resurrect the Law of the Sea Treaty . Cato Institute: Washington, D.C., October 13, 2005 (1-20p). [ More (16 quotes) ]
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
The UNCLOS treaty was originally concieved as a way to redistribute wealth on a global scale and the international regulatory structure that remains will likely inhibit development, depress productivity, increase costs, and discourage innovation.Related Quotes:
- Worst problem with the Law of the Sea treaty is its resource management regime which establishes a cartel, squashes innovation, and redistributes revenues to non-state actors
- Anti-production and anti-competitive bias of UNCLOS evident in its establishment of cartels and quotas
- Regime setup by UNCLOS to govern deep seabed mining would stifle innovation with regulations
- US accession to UNCLOS would place mining interests directly under regulatory regime of the Authority
- UNCLOS based on outdated and discredited redistributionist ideas from the 1970s