Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

This paper extends J. Schwartz’s proposal on common governance of near-Earth material resources, which involve regulating access and benefits. I contrast deep-sea mining regulation, which I tend to favor, with Schwartz’s state-based mining rights modeled on the International Telecommunication Union.

Paper long abstract

In this contribution—whose title deliberately echoes Governing the Commons by Elinor Ostrom—I seek to extend the proposals advanced by James Schwartz regarding what a common governance framework for space resources might look like. The paper is situated within normative political philosophy and builds on recent work in space ethics.

The focus is on near-Earth resources, understood as material resources in celestial bodies near Earth whose extraction could become plausible within the next fifty years. These include: (1) rare and valuable minerals—platinum, gold, iron, lithium, cobalt, nickel, or titanium—found in asteroids; (2) lunar regolith, i.e., the Moon’s dust and soil; and (3) water in the form of ice at the lunar poles.

Governance involves two dimensions: regulating access and regulating the benefits of exploitation. Concerning the latter, Schwartz proposes taxation to redistribute benefits in countries that allow private appropriation, such as the United States. However, few proposals exist for countries, like France, that have not legislated on space resources ownership.

I argue that the signature of the Artemis Accords should not lead to legal implementation. Instead, governance could draw on the regulatory framework for deep-sea mining under the authority of the International Seabed Authority (UN).

The paper also considers an alternative approach, advocated by Schwartz, inspired by geostationary orbit regulation under the International Telecommunication Union, which would involve transferable state-based mining rights. While this model offers a clear institutional mechanism, it risks reinforcing national appropriation of space resources, contrary to the principle that such resources belong to all humanity.