Preface

It is with great pleasure that the Co-Chairs present to you this volume entitled “Governing Our Commons: What Matters to Us Today.” It contains the proceedings of selected papers from the McGill Graduate Law Conference 2017 (“Conference”), organized by the Graduate Law Students Association in collaboration with the McGill University Faculty of Law (“McGill Law”) Graduate Studies Office and Dean Maxwell and Isle Cohen Doctoral Seminar Series in International Law. What do the Co-Chairs mean by “commons” in this volume? In common parlance, the term “commons” denotes “a resource—usually referred to as a common-pool resource—to which a large number of people have access.” Samuelson makes a distinction between commons and public goods, stating that unlike the commons, public goods are not diminished by use. However, this distinction is perhaps artificial, because if no one contributes to public goods (examples of which may be public radio stations and scientific knowledge) and bears their costs, such goods cannot be produced or supplied. Hence, in this volume, we use the term “commons” in a far broader sense, as meaning anything or anyone in which the public at large has a common interest. Governing the commons involves more than just avoiding the “tragedy of the commons,” a popular subject of discussion around the commons. The term “governing” refers to the proper management of “common-pool resources,” a concern which does not always have to do with the problem of depletion, and may also cover other conflicts surrounding the commons, such as claims of appropriation and the need for protection. The term is also associated with the regulation of the commons, with the aim of improving the benefit obtained by every user. The commons that this volume deals with in detail are the rule of law and democracy; human rights; children’s right to education; the right to self-defense; human resources as employees; legal education; indigenous artefacts; the sea; and sovereign rights over the sea. The “global commons” that international law generally has as one of its concerns are the high seas; the atmosphere; Antarctica; and outer space. However, other commons, too, have an international dimension, particularly because the study and analysis of commons in one state or region could have implications for other states or regions. In other words, what is at stake is often the same, regardless of location. For example, Professor Sajal Lahiri’s research on children’s right to education and the welfare of children in South Asia is relevant to other regions of the world. It is possible to see children as the future of the world; thus, we all have a broad interest in welfare of the children. Problems of child welfare often come down to a lack of infrastructure and of policy initiatives to educate children, and to the fact that children may present an economic interest to the family, if they are old and strong enough to work. Whereas Lahiri gives the example of the situation in South Asia (where 1.9 billion of the current world population of 7.7 billion resides), the lot of the children in the region as it is today will affect the future of the globe. In relation to the education to children, the questions arising in South Asia are not too different from those arising elsewhere in the world. In fact, the underlying questions related to different types of commons are often similar throughout the world, though the gravity of issues may differ. The introductory article to this volume takes the form of the keynote speech that was delivered at the Conference by Professor Noah Weisbord. He talks about the climate of fear that we are …