IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v13y2022i2p247-258.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sharing the Benefits of Asteroid Mining

Author

Listed:
  • Eglė Butkevičienė
  • Florian Rabitz

Abstract

Near‐Earth asteroids (NEAs) hold metal reserves that could sustain global consumption for millennia. Unresolved questions of technological and economic feasibility notwithstanding, NEA mining could ensure the accessibility and affordability of key strategic resources, contribute to sustainability transitions and displace environmentally and socially harmful terrestrial mining. Based on implicit and explicit normative commitments towards the common heritage principle in international space law, we develop the outlines of a regime for the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits resulting from NEA mining. For doing so, we analyze the linkages between institutional design and regime effectiveness for benefit‐sharing regimes in the areas of deep‐sea mining and plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Attempting to control for differences in problem structure, we transpose this analysis to the case of NEA mining, where an effective benefit‐sharing regime would revolve around the following elements: standardized exploration and exploitation contracts, back‐end benefit‐sharing as a percentage of commercial profits, research exemptions, compliance mechanisms for preventing and reducing space pollution, as well as a reserve banking system for mining claims. For the contemporary political debate on space resources, we thus aim to provide a feasible alternative to the exclusive appropriation of space resources through private property rights.

Suggested Citation

  • Eglė Butkevičienė & Florian Rabitz, 2022. "Sharing the Benefits of Asteroid Mining," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(2), pages 247-258, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:13:y:2022:i:2:p:247-258
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.13035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13035
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.13035?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ostrom,Elinor, 2015. "Governing the Commons," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107569782, September.
    2. Wijkman, Per Magnus, 1982. "Managing the global commons," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 511-536, July.
    3. Nico Schrijver, 2016. "Managing the global commons: common good or common sink?," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 1252-1267, July.
    4. Ronald B. Mitchell, 2006. "Problem Structure, Institutional Design, and the Relative Effectiveness of International Environmental Agreements," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 6(3), pages 72-89, August.
    5. Benjamin Faude & Michal Parizek, 2021. "Contested multilateralism as credible signaling: how strategic inconsistency can induce cooperation among states," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 843-870, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Salustri, 2021. "Social and solidarity economy and social and solidarity commons: Towards the (re)discovery of an ethic of the common good?," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(1), pages 13-32, March.
    2. Fancello, Giovanna & Tsoukiàs, Alexis, 2021. "Learning urban capabilities from behaviours. A focus on visitors values for urban planning," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Tobias Böhmelt & Jürg Vollenweider, 2015. "Information flows and social capital through linkages: the effectiveness of the CLRTAP network," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 105-123, May.
    4. Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING, 2022. "Conclusions and Directions for further Research," CIRIEC Studies Series, in: Philippe BANCE & Marie-J. BOUCHARD & Dorothea GREILING & CIRIEC (ed.), New perspectives in the co-production of public policies, public services and common goods, volume 3, chapter 0, pages 259-274, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    5. Cooley, Savannah & Jenkins, Amber & Schaeffer, Blake & Bormann, Kat J. & Abdallah, Adel & Melton, Forrest & Granger, Stephanie & Graczyk, Indrani, 2022. "Paths to research-driven decision making in the realms of environment and water," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Liesbet Hooghe & Gary Marks, 2015. "Delegation and pooling in international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 305-328, September.
    7. Creutzig, Felix, 2020. "Limits to Liberalism: Considerations for the Anthropocene," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    8. Bazant-Fabre, Ondrej & Bonilla-Moheno, Martha & Martínez, M. Luisa & Lithgow, Debora & Muñoz-Piña, Carlos, 2022. "Land planning and protected areas in the coastal zone of Mexico: Do spatial policies promote fragmented governance?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    9. Abby ShalekBriski & B. Wade Brorsen & Jon T. Biermacher, 2021. "Institutional Solutions for the Economic Problem of Feral Hogs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(3), pages 970-984, September.
    10. Murunga, Michael & Partelow, Stefan & Breckwoldt, Annette, 2021. "Drivers of collective action and role of conflict in Kenyan fisheries co-management," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    11. Reetsch, Anika & Feger, Karl-Heinz & Schwärzel, Kai & Dornack, Christina & Kapp, Gerald, 2020. "Organic farm waste management in degraded banana-coffee-based farming systems in NW Tanzania," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    12. Pattarin Sanguankaew & Vichita Vathanophas Ractham, 2019. "Bibliometric Review of Research on Knowledge Management and Sustainability, 1994–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-20, August.
    13. Promberger, Markus, 2017. "Resilience among vulnerable households in Europe : Questions, concept, findings and implications," IAB-Discussion Paper 201712, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    14. Richard Perkins & Eric Neumayer, 2007. "Implementing Multilateral Environmental Agreements: An Analysis of EU Directives," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 7(3), pages 13-41, August.
    15. Zulu, Leo Charles & Adams, Ellis Adjei & Chikowo, Regis & Snapp, Sieglinde, 2018. "The role of community-based livestock management institutions in the adoption and scaling up of pigeon peas in Malawi," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 141-155.
    16. Raphaël Soubeyran & Mabel Tidball & Agnes Tomini & Katrin Erdlenbruch, 2015. "Rainwater Harvesting and Groundwater Conservation: When Endogenous Heterogeneity Matters," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(1), pages 19-34, September.
    17. Darryl S.L. Jarvis & Alex Jingwei He, 2020. "Policy entrepreneurship and institutional change: Who, how, and why?," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 40(1), pages 3-10, February.
    18. Woi Sok Oh & Rachata Muneepeerakul, 2019. "How do substitutability and effort asymmetry change resource management in coupled natural-human systems?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    19. John Holmberg & Johan Larsson, 2018. "A Sustainability Lighthouse—Supporting Transition Leadership and Conversations on Desirable Futures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-25, October.
    20. Chu Li & Wenjin Shen, 2024. "How to Perceive National Governance Networks in the Global Commons of the Earth’s Surface: A Case Study of the Antarctic," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-20, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:13:y:2022:i:2:p:247-258. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.