Outline for June 8 Newton Dialogue on Economic Alternatives

The Starting Place for a Civil Revolution: Citizens' Everyday Concerns

The Problem with Capitalist Markets and Empire Building

 

Guidelines for Action

 

1.     Establish a Council of Social Advisors: Put this idea in a Party Platform

 

2.     Support Public Accountability Systems in the Private Sector

Chart 1: The Structure of Accountability Systems

Chart 2: Examples of Public Accountability Systems in the Private Sector

 

3.     Establish a Civil Market in Capitalist Industries

How Government builds a New Market Structure for Industry

 

4.     Support Policies for Local Control: CDCs, CLTs, CFCs, Co-Housing

Example 1: Community Development Corporations (CDCs)

Example 2: Cambridge Cohousing: Justice, Democracy, and Freedom

 

5.     Create Global Markets for Peace with Justice.

 

6.  Develop Civil Regimes in the Global Economy.

Summary Sketch 1 The Aluminum Industry: US Commerce Policies

Develop a Civil Economy through UN Agencies

 7.  Demand that the U.S. Support Current Civil Regimes

1)    Law of the Sea (LOS)

2)   International Standards Organizations (ISO)

3)    CERES Standard Making

             4. The Forest Stewardship Council

 

8.  Join the struggle to create civil markets local to global

Table 1 The Struggle in the Wearing Apparel Industry

Table 2 Other Third Sector Activists: Non-governmental Organizations

 9. Support a Nonprofit Sector that can regulate the Profit Sector

10.  Create New Financial Institutions with Global Stakeholders

Support a New Bretton Woods Conference to Reform Global Finance

11.  Create a New UN Environmental Program

12.  Support Social (Civil) Investment: Local to Global (Sketch 1)

13.  Support Fair Trade and Justice-Oriented Markets

14.  Support a Public (NGO) Media System. Figure 1 & 2

15.  Think about a new vision (paradigm) for the Economy

Illustration 1 Two Ideal Markets: Attributes

Illustration 2: Imaging a New Market System

 

A Working Paper For Newton Dialogues on Peace and War

How to Transform Capitalist Markets into Civil Markets

A short summary on ways to overcome capitalism

Severyn Bruyn

The Starting Place for a Civil Revolution: Citizens' Everyday Concerns

Business leaders are worried about financial markets. Civic leaders are concerned about the expansion of business into the Third Sector, fields where they do not belong, as in science, the professions, religion, and education.[1] Grass roots organizations are concerned about consumerism and the commercialization of culture. International leaders are worried about the lack of a governing system for the economy. And people everywhere are worried about war and terrorism.

The entire history of social improvement has been a series of transitions, by which one custom or institution after another, from being a supposed primary necessity of social existence, has passed into the rank of a universally stigmatized injustice and tyranny. John Stuart Mill.

 

The Problem with Capitalist Markets and Empire Building

The expansion of communism and empire building was a problem for the 20th century. Now, the expansion of capitalism and empire building is a problem for the 21st century. The challenge is to create civil markets and a new system of global governance.

Capitalist markets are more destructive than constructive. They help liberate societies from fascism and communism but they produce social problems that repeatedly require government to solve. When businesses lay off workers, the government must take care of the problem, pay the bill for the unemployed through expensive welfare systems and job-training programs. When corporations exploit labor, the government creates labor departments and labor legislation. When business produces hazards in the workplace, the government sets rules for safety and health on the job. When business harms or lies to customers, the government establishes consumer agencies and legislation to regulate product safety, truth in lending and precise labels on product ingredients, as well as hundreds of other regulations to protect buyers. When big business destroys its weaker competitors by  underpricing and making monopolistic mergers, governments create agencies and laws to establish fair competition. When markets widen the gap between the rich and poor, governments raise wage standards nationwide and establish a progressive tax system. When business destroys the environment, governments create environmental protection agencies to stop the devastation. And so on, ad infinitum.

Top business leaders agree. Multi-billionaire George Soros denounces capitalism.

Although I have made a fortune in the financial markets, I now fear that the untrammeled intensification of laissez-faire capitalism and the spread of market values into all areas of life is endangering our open and democratic society. The main enemy of the open society, I believe, is no longer the communist but the capitalist threatŠ.[2]

 

Soros is not alone among prominent U.S. business leaders upset with capitalism. Felix Rohatyn, a financier, speaks of ³The Betrayal of Capitalism.² He had once lauded ³capitalism² but he knows now that the system is not working. The collapse of markets overseas (e.g. the Asian market collapse), major disasters in banking (e.g. the Savings and Loans), the costly collapse of hedge funds (e.g. Long Term Capital Management), corporate fraud and tragedies (e.g. Enron), and dozens of other market-system problems ­ is enough evidence for him. The capitalist system needs to be changed.[3]

 

Thus, the market economy fails to self-regulating and is self-destructive, generating big government. Government expands its power to monitor and intervene in the name of justice and welfare. Market freedom erodes and governments become bureaucracies. What can citizens do about it?

The Alternative

The alternative is to create civil markets, not capitalist markets. A civil market combines the conservative (Republican) hope for a productive, free, self-regulating, profitable, and efficient economy with the liberal (Democratic) hope for a fair, just, equitable and responsible economy. Conservatives say, "get the government out of the private economy, reduce government bureaucracy, spend money, and save for private retirement." Liberals say, "develop a market system that is accountable, equitable, and transparent to stakeholders and provide for a safe retirement."

Could the basic principles in both political outlooks be combined? Could there be a synthesis of liberal and conservatives principles that produces a new market system?

Guidelines for Action

1. Establish a Council of Social Advisors: Put this idea in a Party Platform

A Council of Economic Advisors was established by Congress to gather information and advise the President of the U.S. on economic issues. Today legislation is needed to establish a Council of Social Advisers to gather information and advise the President on how to develop civil markets. This Social Council would assist the President in the preparation of a Social Report by gathering ³timely and authoritative information² concerning civil development in the economy. The Council of Social Advisors would develop indicators in tandem with indicators of the Council of Economic Advisors. Many years ago this proposal was introduced into the U.S. Congress by Senator Walter Mondale and almost passed. It is still feasible.

This Social Council would gather statistics on changes in demography, urban density, poverty, health, education, science and technology related to the development of a civil economy. It would analyze information to determine whether such trends would interfere with the achievement of public policies. It would submit to the President studies relating to civil (social) investment. It would appraise programs of the Federal Government to assess the extent to which they contribute to a self-governing economy.

This Council (newly conceived) would help build civil (not capitalist) markets, build on the idea that a market is based on a concept of justice as well as on a concept of freedom. It would assume that a market should work for the common good. It would study the degree to which profit making is advanced with public standards in markets that become self-sustaining. It would examine how a ³public domain² is developed through a ³private domain.²  How could this happen?

2. Support Public Accountability Systems in the Private Sector

Public Accountability systems have developed in the private sector to operate for the good for all stakeholders and citizens. They work for the common good by contracts, standards, monitors, and regulators to whom enterprises are answerable. This quiet (relatively unknown) system development should be supported by government policies.

Chart 1 The Structure of Accountability Systems

1. Contracts are written agreements between people that set standards for civil conduct in the marketplace.

2. Standards are guidelines (norms, rules, and principles) for conduct, which are written into contracts. By contracts, we include broadly corporate charters, bylaws, constitutions, mission statements, and corporate codes of ethics.

3. Monitors are "watchdogs" and countervailing organizations that keep the stakeholders and the public informed on how well the standards are maintained. We have argued that monitors cannot do their job adequately without transparency. Monitors include NGOs, social-financial auditors, public interest groups, consumer federations, social investment firms, and UN agencies.

4. Authorities are judges and rule-enforcers in the private sector. They operate at different levels of organization and can be called tribunals, arbiters, courts, judiciaries, boards of directors, final decision-makers, and enforcement groups that are empowered by stakeholder agreement to make judgements and issue penalties for misconduct. They are designated groups who judge offenders, and issue fines or specific punishments against offenders and help bring toward conformity with the agreed standards. A national government has been the traditional regulator, using courts and judges to decide on penalties such as probation, restitution, fees, jail and prison sentences, but the private sector has developed a different tradition.

 

The capitalist system is becoming "civil" slowly because of government and non-governmental organizational (NGO) pressures. These pressures create changes that fit with "developing public accountability" in the private sector. These public (non-state) systems need support from government and political parties. (See Chart 2)

Chart 2  Current Examples of Public Accountability Systems in the Private Sector

(Source: A Civil Economy)

I Accountability to Buyers

 

Example: Grading of Lumber Quality

 

A. Contract: democratic agreement among competing members of a lumber association

            B. Standard: grading code for wood products.

            C. Monitor: buyers in construction firms and customers who are affected by grading.

            D. Authority: lumber associations with tribunals to hear cases about offenders breaking the rules.

            E. Example: Southern Pine Lumber Association[4] (See chapter 1)

            F. Civil function: the system eliminates the need for a state agency to make lumber standards.

 

II Accountability to Employees

 

Example: Enterprise Self Management

 

            A. Contract: labor agreement on democratic (electoral) structures inside the firm.

            B. Standard: written principles on types and degrees of participation/ownership.

            C. Monitor: the governing board of employees, watchdogs are trade unions and ombudsmen.

            D. Authority: representative board of directors chosen by employees.

            E. Example:  Mondragon co-op boards; Milwaukee Journal board.[5] (See chapter 2 & 3)

            F. Civil function: employee self-management reduces the need for government labor departments.

 

III  Accountability to Residents

 

Example: Community Corporations (CDCs, CDFCs, and CLTs)

 

            A. Contract: bylaws for elections and distribution of authority.

            B. Standard: written constitution/bylaws on community norms.

            C. Monitor: citizens act through periodic elections.

            D. Authority: a resident board and judiciary in the community corporation.

            E. Example: San Bernadino CDC, CA:.[6] (See chapter 2)

            F. Civil function: CDCs reduce the need for government protection agencies for local citizens.

 

IV  Accountability to Customers

 

 Example: Consumer Co-ops and Customer Boards

 

            A. Contract: bylaws and elections

            B. Standard: member and public norms written in bylaws.

            C. Monitor: customer owners

            D. Authority: elected board powers, and due process in decision-making.

            E. Example: (customer-owned) Cleveland Electric Utility, Ohio; also Seikatsu. (See Chapter 3)

            F. Civil function: Consumer governance reduces need for government utilities and bureaucracies.

 

IV   Accountability to the Public

 

Example:   Public (Non-governmental) Corporations

 

         A. Contract: social constitution/bylaws.

            B. Standard: professional codes of member associations and standards in bylaws.

            C. Monitor: elected NGO groups on board of directors tempered by audience polls.

            D. Authority: elected board deciding on programs; power to judge and fire executives.

            E. Example: German Television Station, Second Channel.[7] (See chapter 5)

            F. Civil function: societal governance on board avoids private oligopoly and government media.

 

VI Accountability to Students and Parents

 

Example: Colleges and Universities

 

 

A. Contract: accrediting agreements between institutions and professional associations.

B. Standard: academic excellence, accreditation norms.

C. Monitor: watchdogs: students, teachers, parents, alumnae associations.

D. Authority: elected boards of associations of colleges and universities, guided by state charters.

D. Example:  American Council on Education, Assoc. of American Colleges (See Chapter 4)

E. Civil function: professional associations avoid the need for state accreditation agencies.

 

 

3.  Establish a Civil Market in Capitalist Industries

Below is an example of how to establish a civil market in capitalist industries.

Willamette Industries was destroying the environment a decade ago. The government ignored it. The EPA and the State of Oregon were tied to business interests and refused to let citizens get vital information from the company. When civil society groups finally documented the pollution and pressed for solutions, the federal government began to act.

Willamette Industries agreed in July 2000 to pay a $11.2 million fine to the federal government to settle pollution claims, according to the Justice Department and EPA. EPA Administrator Carol Browner called the settlement on violations of the Clean Air Act  involving factory emissions the largest in agency history. Under the plan, Willamette will also be required to spend $74 million to install new pollution-control equipment at its 13 factories in Oregon, Arkansas, Louisiana and South Carolina.  Browner estimated that cleaning up the emissions from the Willamette plants would keep an average of 27,000 tons of pollution out of the air. She said that is the equivalent of taking 287,000 cars off the road.[8]

So, this is how governments work at best in capitalist markets with pressure from non-governmental organizations (NGOs). But how would a government handle this case differently by following a (civil market) model?

Government builds a Civil Market: Mutual Self-Governance with NGOs

What could the government create a civil market?

First, the money from this public fine for Willamette Industries should have be given to those Third Sector organizations (NGOs) that exposed the problem. It cost them a lot to do the investigation -- against both business and government interests. The money would reward them as whistleblowers and strengthen their associations. In this case, the money would be given to the Northwest Environmental Defense Council, its parent EDC, and the Plumbers Local 290. The reward would pay for their work to expose the problem.

Second, some of this money would be spent to change the market structure. The government would work with Third Sector stakeholders and the industry to establish a public accountability system in this domain. Public accountability systems are established by a formal contract among businesses and stakeholders.

The government in this alternative would support (or mandate) a process in which stakeholders (business and Third Sector) agree on public standards, neutral monitors, and juridical authorities. This process guarantee the right of stakeholders to sit on public boards of inquiry, which are given free access to accurate data about social problems, like toxins in chimney emissions. It permits stakeholders like the EDC and Plumbers Local the right to monitor corporate activities that might be a risk to public health. It could provide civil procedures that lead to compliance of those standards. [9] 

Such a system would be established in the smokestack industry as type of ³self-regulation² that includes the Third Sector as watchdogs. Such a civil arrangement would vary according to the structure of each industry. For example, independent arbiters and professional mediators could be assigned as part of industry structure. The government then helps create an independent arbitration commission to settle disputes between Third Sector associations and the industry trade association. It would provide guidelines for transparency and propose proper penalties in accord with the seriousness of an offense.[10]

In other words, the government changes the market structure so that it becomes fair and justice-oriented. The practice would apply in this case to the whole smokestack industry and serve as a model for other industries. The government then mandates a stakeholder right to get information in the public interest. Third Sector organizations should not be prevented from getting accurate data on chimney emissions. Citizens should be able to make an appropriate inquiry on all matters that are for the common good.

This type of public access -- this mandate for proper arbitration, transparency, joint monitoring, and civil enforcement -- become stakeholder rights. In this case, stakeholders include the Northwest Environmental Defense Council, the Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 290, but in other cases it might include professional associations (e.g. physicians and civil engineers) and scientific associations (e.g. biologists and chemists.)[11] 

4. Support Policies for Local Control: CDCs, CLTs, CFCs, Co-Housing

Community development corporations (CDCs), Community Land Trusts, and Community Finance Corporations (CFCs) are not in the capitalist tradition. They work in the private sector for the common good of their locality. But they can contract with global firms to maximize local wealth and obtain new technology for their common good.

Example 1 below describes the purpose of CDCs that are owned and managed by local citizens in their neighborhood. (This is not a city government.) They do something different from the capitalist market -- they optimize profits for the whole neighborhood.                           

 

Example 1 Community Development Corporations (CDCs)

 

Community development corporations (CDCs) are democratically-organized and run by staff and citizen boards, who take responsibility for negotiating with outside businesses. Members of these boards live in the community they serve, and have a personal interest in improving their lives according to their own standards. The board members are elected from the local populace. CDCs invite big corporations to contract with them for local development and write a contract fitting their needs.

People in a village or a city neighborhood then create a special blend of what could be commercial, industrial, residential, and cultural values for local development. If local leaders do their job well, using their own skills, and using the knowledge of outside entrepreneurs, they advance public standards and build a local marketplace. They build core values drawn from the whole village into development programs.[12]

 

Notice how this CDC is a ³civil corporation,² not a ³capitalist corporation.² A corporation competes in the world market to enter a local economy but in this case competition is based on standards shaped by local citizens. A CDC requires outside firms to advance the well being of the community. Citizens in the CDC represent the local ³commonwealth.² A CDC is a civic structure in which local people maintain autonomy in the growing power of global markets.

Notice how this civil model (the CDC) integrates (conservative and liberal) attributes for the common good. The CDC cooperates with corporations in competition in a world market, but it utilizes the system so that competition will serve its ends, not just the global firm. A local community that is underdeveloped in Appalachia, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, Iraq, or India, says to an American (earth resource) company that it wants to organize a CDC. The foreign company must contract with the local CDC to share profits. If the CDC cannot negotiate a suitable contract with an American (say, copper) Company, it asks a Swedish or Japanese copper company to contract with it. Global firms all compete for rich ore, but the corporate winner must meet local standards to get that contract.[13]

The CDC emphasizes local cooperation and civic engagement. Citizens elect their own board, emphasize standard making (e.g. health, safety, and environment) while promoting profit (wealth) for the whole community. In other words, it synthesizes the attributes of both conservatives and liberals as it creates a new corporate structure.

Observe how new norms are created in this mix. A global (capitalist) corporation emphasizes efficiency, productivity, and competition. This is supported by the CDC, which emphasizes cooperation, self-reliance and self-sufficiency in the locality.

Now let's look at another civic corporation that emphasizes local control.

 

Example 2: Cambridge Cohousing: Justice, Democracy, and Freedom

In the Cambridge Cohousing community, the Managing Board is composed of elected ³apartment community owners.² The owners run their own community as a democratic association. They define the meaning of ³democracy² based on ³consensus.² They define justice in the bylaws of their organization.

The members see ³justice² as important because the organization operates in a capitalist market. The capitalist market emphasizes freedom but not justice in the system. The Cohousing Bylaws members link the ³justice idea² with the ³freedom idea.² They discuss the meaning of freedom in terms of ³open space for play and food-growing.² And they integrate this idea with concepts of justice and fairness in their local organization.

They discuss justice in terms of equal ³rights² to a parking place and use of ³utilities.² They specify ³fair rights² that are just for themselves as ³community owners,² and state ³equal responsibility² to each other in terms of ³consensus.² The Managing Board defines justice in terms of ³how to collect expenses fairly, distribute profits equitably, manage the property impartially, rent office space on even terms, obtain insurance with probity. They also agree to rely on national standards of justice (i.e. ³fairness² and ³equity²) set by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. They follow the justice-oriented standards defined by their nationwide cohousing organization. Thus they work with standards of fairness outside their organization, as required in a public audit of their books.[14]

 

In sum, these are a few examples -- among many -- on how to create local economic alternatives to the capitalist system.

5. Create Global Markets for Peace and Justice.

First, what is the problem?

A nation state can regulate markets within its own boundaries but it cannot regulate global markets. There is no world government that has the authority to regulate business across national boundaries. One nation with military power like the United States can try to control commerce in its own interest, but not successfully, and not for the common good.  There is no global Environmental Protection Agency to keep markets from destroying the environment. There is no global Securities Exchange Commission to regulate the sale of stocks. There is no global ³Communications Commission² to regulate the mass media. There is no global ³Reserve System² to provide nations with a safer, more flexible and more stable monetary system. There is no higher order of government to regulate global arms sales, stop the spread of dangerous chemicals, etc.

World leaders celebrated the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) to regulate free trade but they ignore the increasing gap between rich and poor, the alienation of people in developing countries, climate change, ozone depletion, massive species loss, and growing levels of pollution in air, soil, and water. The proclamation of a New World Order does not eliminate the danger to the environment by capitalist markets. The euphoria behind free trade and deregulation could destroy civil society.[15]

The alternatives for action  on peace-with-justice are briefly the following.

First, support world law and a new system of world governance, looking toward UN revision. Second, create an independent financial base for the UN. Third, develop a permanent multilateral peacekeeping force by diplomacy through the United Nations. Fourth, support international courts that are professionally established with judges from all nations. Fifth, build a program for disarmament, slowly, carefully destroy weapons of mass destruction. These steps require strong inspection teams. They should be the big, complex, hot issue for political parties today.[16]

In sum, global peace and justice is based on the development of international law, which supports public accountability systems in the private sector and the formation of civil corporations in civil regimes. How is this done?

6. Develop Civil Regimes in the Global Economy.

³Common law² is a system of jurisprudence based on social norms and administered by secular tribunals, different from statutory and ecclesiastical law. ³Social norms² and ³legal norms² govern society and its economy.

Notice. The conduct of people is governed more by social norms than by legal norms, statutory law. Social norms include etiquette, folkways, customs, conventions, traditions, decorum, codes, manners, protocols, agreements, and mores. (Delinquents break the law but not their gang norms; global corporations break the law but not their trade association agreements.) Studies show how people follow social norms (conventions and ³mores²) with greater consistency and certainty than statutory laws.[17]

The question is how social norms that underpin great values like democracy, equality, and justice become the pattern for doing business. The proposal here is that social (institutional) norms help develop a civil regime.[18]

Every regime depends upon norms of common law -- conventions, custom and contractual agreements. Common law is a body of shared rules and principles in an field of exchange. A civil regime develops through ³bodies of authority² that are based on such norms. (See the Forest Stewardship Council  below.) It links Third Sector values with capitalist state values. It develops a public commons with the help of International Business Associations (IBOs), International Governmental Organizations (IGOs), and Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs.) In other words, three sectors of the economy (business, government, and the Third Sector) develop a civil regime. A civil regime develops as stakeholders see rules (norms) to be in their self-interest. It matures through agreements, like the ³Law of the Sea² and the ³Kyoto Protocol.²

Below we look at civil regimes advancing norms based on core values like democracy and justice inside markets today.[19]

Civil regimes develop in global markets like democratic governments develop, slowly. They generally require an elected ³board of directors,² ³political representation,² ³electoral procedures,² and ³autonomous judiciaries.² In the case of the Aluminum industry we see how planners work and advance a civil regime inside the business sector.

The Aluminum Industry

We look at the Summary Sketch 1 below on aluminum to see how the industry developed with a measure of civil (democratic) governance. It is one trade association among some 25,000 in the United States.

Summary Sketch 1 The Aluminum Industry

A Partially Civil (Capitalist) Regime: Some Core Values of Society

1) Aluminum competitors collaborate to establish a democratic organization.

The Aluminum Association, Inc. is a democratic confederation of U.S. producers of primary aluminum, recyclers and semi-fabricated aluminum products. Member companies operate more than 200 plants in 35 states. The U.S. aluminum industry is the worldıs largest, annually producing about $35 billion in products and exports. Top markets for the industry are transportation, beverage cans and other packaging, and infrastructure.  The U.S. industry produces more than 22 billion pounds of metal annually and employs 143,000 people with an annual payroll of $4.8 billion. Aluminum is one of the few industries left in America that impacts every community in the country, either through physical plants and facilities, recycling, heavy industry, or consumption of consumer goods.

 Headquartered in Wash., D.C., the Association provides leadership to its member competitors through its programs and services, which aim to enhance aluminumıs position in a world of proliferating materials of comparable kind. It lobbies the government. The Association wants to increase its ³material of choice² and remove all "impediments to its fullest use." In the process, it pays attention to its reputation. It wants to avoid social problems in the production and distribution of aluminum.

The aluminum industry holds periodic elections for its board of directors. It has a written set of bylaws, maintains a magazine, keeps statistical reports for production and export, and does not share price information to avoid antitrust action. It collaborates with other trade groups like the National Association of Aluminum Distributors, allows foreign firms to be members, etc.

2) Trade associations develop public standards for their industry.

Industry competitors develop public standards in their market sector. For example, aluminum is alloyed with small amounts of one or more elements such as copper, manganese, silicon, magnesium or zinc to enhance desired characteristics such as increased strength, corrosion resistance and weldability. The Aluminum Association, Inc. (AAI) promotes the American National Standard (ANSI) alloy designation systems for aluminum wrought and cast alloys and other aluminum products. AAI registers chemical composition limits of alloys, assigns alloy designations and publishes registration records. The market structure in aluminum is organized to maintain standards out of its own self-interest as well as for the common good. It seeks to maintain a solid reputation and states its aim to achieve "environmental, societal, and economic objectives."  

3) The Association develops civic goals and internalizes norms.

The trade association in the aluminum industry promotes the goals of environmental protection as set by government regulatory agencies. It goes further on its own to support research and education that addresses other environmental issues that are ³pertinent to the American public." It organized an Environmental Committee and "Work Groups" to respect civic goals. Its promotion of ³environmental performance² includes managing workshops and membership meetings to assist in regulatory compliance, thus, internalizing civil norms. It has a "proactive voluntary emission reduction programs" and research programs that cultivate better environmental performance in the industry. The Association collaborates with governments to advance environmental protection.

Examples of two projects in the association are the Voluntary Aluminum Industrial Partnership (VAIP) program with EPA, and the Pollution Prevention program. The Association claims that the ³aluminum can is solid value, not solid waste.² The aluminum industry association seeks to advance a recycling system that benefits the environment as well as the industry. It works with governments to include energy and natural resource conservation as well as landfill savings. The aluminum industry benefits because the recycling system serves as an above-ground mine, a critical component of the industryıs metal supply. The industry reports an investment of hundreds of millions of dollars to develop a system of more than 10,000 recycling centers nationwide.

4) The Association promotes profit and public values together.

The Aluminum Association, Inc. officially advocates environmental protection. It wants "every package to pay its own way in the recycling stream² and ³encourages market-based incentives for recycling programs.² It makes a claim that most of the aluminum cans produced today are already recycled. "The industry wants every can back and will continue to drive the rate of return higher." The demand for used cans is "strong and virtually guaranteed."[20]

5) The Aluminum Association plans to join the global economy to advance public values such as safety and health.

The aluminum industryıs executives see problems to solve in global markets as they move into the 21st century. Alcan Inc. executive vice president Richard Evans said at a May 2001 meeting of the International Aluminum Forum that it is time to rethink basic beliefs about aluminum as an industry. His key initiatives for the aluminum industry are to: 1) aggressively adopt global best practices for environment, safety, and health, 2) maintain credible and accessible databases, 3) promote market efficiency and transparency, 4) promote global industry exchange, especially by bringing Russia and China fully into the group, and 5) position aluminum on the ³sustainability map.² [21]

 

Global firms and trade associations can dominate and control small countries. Many countries do not have the same power as trade associations and acquiesce to their interests. They want more capital and technology. But here we see how global associations are partly democratic within the womb of capitalist markets and they have a certain civility even as their member businesses can be dominating and destructive.

So, below I note how this capitalist aluminum industry could develop further as a civil regime. This happens by bringing the trade association into a "working relationship" with non-governmental organizations (e.g. science) in the Third Sector. The Department of Commerce should help in this endeavor.

The task of IGOs and the UN is then to support the positive side of this connection (spreading capital and appropriate technology) and to eliminate the negative (spreading corporate dominance and exploitation.) Establishing public accountability systems eliminates the negative.

Develop Global Regimes through the UN Agencies

In a trade-association like aluminum we see core (democratic) values emerging, but the industry could do more for the common good. It could do more by collaborating with civil society organizations (CSOs). CSOs include environmental organizations (e.g. scientific associations) and IGOs (e.g. the UNıs Environmental Program.)[22]

A civil regime begins when business and Third Sector associations work together. For example, the aluminum industry can learn from the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG).  IUGG is dedicated to the promotion of scientific studies of Earth (physical, chemical, and mathematical) and its environment in space.[23]

Global business regimes like the aluminum industry should find a connection with scientific associations like IUGG. Business leaders in the aluminum industry then dialogue about ³mineral resources, the mitigation of natural hazards and environmental preservation.² Aluminum leaders would consult and contract with IUGG on modes of environmental protection. Governments and leaders in the industry want to learn more about the connection of the rain and the sunıs energy to aluminum, about the protection of the earthıs resources, and about global warming.

7. Demand the U.S. Support Current Civil Regimes

Many examples of (relatively) civil regimes exist today. The United States government does not support them. Below are examples of civil regimes that are models for future development.

A. Law of the Sea (LOS): A Civil Regime Developing with IGO Support

The ³regime² that governs the use of the worldıs oceans is based on social norms, a network of international agreements. (No world government exists to enforce these agreements.) The compendium of those agreements and programs relating to oceans is too long to describe but below we can see how they concern impacts on the environment, fisheries, transportation, and the Polar Regions.[24]

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOS) was opened for signature on December 10, 1982 in Montego Bay, Jamaica. This marked the culmination of more than 14 years of work involving participation by more than 150 countries representing all regions of the world, all legal and political systems and the spectrum of socio/economic development. The Convention entered into force on 16 November 1994, and enshrines the notion that all problems of ocean space are closely interrelated and need to be addressed as a whole.

The Convention authorizes a ³territorial sea² of up to 12 nautical miles; a Coastal State sovereign rights over fisheries and other natural resources in an Exclusive Economic Zone that may extend to 200 nautical miles from the baseline. It also accords Coastal States sovereign rights over the nonliving resources, including oil and gas, found in the seabed and subsoil of the continental shelf, which is defined as extending to 200 nautical miles from the baseline.

The LOS has become the basis for advancing ³effective global, regional, sub-regional, and national measures for sustainable ocean use.² Global leaders say it is a ³living constitution² for the oceans. To date, over 120 countries have ratified or acceded to the 1982 Convention.[25]

An international tribunal was established as the central forum for settling disputes arising from the interpretation of the Convention. Established by the Convention, the tribunal is comprised of 21 judges whose appointments reflect ³equitable geographical representation.² They serve under a system of rotation, which ensures that seven seats are vacated for election every three years. On 24 May 1999, the ³States Parties² re-elected six members to the court for nine-year terms; a seventh, from the African Group of States was newly elected.[26]

The Secretary-General is required to convene meetings of States (i.e. nation states) to deal with issues arising out of the implementation of the Convention. These issues include the election of members of the bodies established by the Convention and other administrative and financial matters. The States Parties to the Convention meet to elect the judges of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, elect members of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and deal with various administrative matters relating to those two bodies. A State Party to the Convention, which has indicated its consent to be bound by the Convention, in most cases through ratification of the ³law.² There are presently 124 States parties. The European Community has also formally confirmed the Convention, bringing the total number of parties to 125. The United States has been the one major country that has refused to sign.[27]

Today, many Convention provisions are held to be binding on nation states as common law (or ³international law²) even though the rules are not enforceable by a world government. In other words, the Convention establishes ³compulsory binding settlements² of ocean disputes based on global agreements among these States and their IGOs.

B. International Standards Organizations (ISO)

In the United States, business leaders organized uniform standards for products in manufacturing through the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), and now world leaders work on environmental standards for the global economy. ANSI is an American ³federation of federations² that helps enterprises standardize thousands of products (like nails and shoes) in the market.  It is a forum for negotiation as well as a regime that has legitimacy and authority in capitalist markets. It is a body of organizations that base their work on agreements and standards fixed on custom and convention. The purpose is to create public standards that work for the common good. For ANSI, ³standards² are ³documented agreements containing technical specifications² to be used consistently as ³rules, guidelines, or definitions of characteristics, to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for common use.²[28]

ANSI now works with national organizations from other nations on public standards. They have together created the International Standards Organization (ISO). ISO is composed of groups that are ³most representative of standardization in its country² and currently writing standards for environmental protection. ISO by its own count represents more than 85 percent of the worldıs industrial production, has more than 200 technical committees and almost 3,000 technical bodies that are developing standards. Governments have an observer status at ISO committee meetings. An environmental management system is being developed to establish third party certification as a method for monitoring compliance. [29]

ISOıs "standard making" is a tri-sectored activity integrating the core values of IGOs, IBOs, and NGOs. ISO aims to integrate different value orientations of these three sectors. When it succeeds, the standards become an economic advantage for global business to accept and institute. A corporation is put at an economic disadvantage were it not to accept these standards in global competition. Over 260, 000 registrations to ISO 9000 (product standards) have been made worldwide thus far, and over 10, 000 ISO 14001 (environmental protection) registrations have been established. Over a quarter of a million firms around the world have invested financial and staff resources to improve their quality systems based on global agreements.[30]

ISO standards are already becoming applied by individual nation-states. It has become a basis for official endorsement and legal enforcement within certain nations, but it is developing a public commons in which custom and convention are becoming like "the rule of law" for world commerce.

C. CERES Standard Making: Developing a Civil Polity with Monitoring

The Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies (CERES) is a coalition of 70 organizations that includes environmental groups, advocacy groups, and global businesses that have committed to ³continuous environmental improvement.² The CERES Principles is a ten-point code of environmental conduct, which is developing a basis for guiding corporate conduct. Here we see business and Third Sector groups with widely different backgrounds and assumptions searching for specific solutions to environmental problems.

The CERES coalition includes NGOs like Environmental Advocates, Earth Island Institute, Friends of the Earth, Green Seal, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Rocky Mountain Institute, Sierra Club, Union of Concerned Scientists, and World Wildlife Fund. It has investors, advisors, and analysts representing over $300 billion in invested capital. They include the Calvert Group, Friends Ivory & Sime, Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility; Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini & Co., the New York City Comptrollerıs Office, the Presbyterian Church (USA), Shorebank, Trillium Asset Management, public interest and community groups, AFL-CIO, Alternatives for Community and Environment, Center for a New American Dream, Co-op America, Council on Economic Priorities, Fair Trade Foundation, New Economics Foundation, and Redefining Progress. 

The Coalition has 50-plus companies endorsing the CERES Principles, which include multinational corporations like American Airlines, Bank of America, Baxter International, Bethlehem Steel, CocaCola USA, Ford Motor Company, General Motors, ITT Industries, Nike, Northeast Utilities, Polaroid, and Sunoco. But it also includes small and medium-sized companies like the Aveda Corporation, The Body Shop International, Green Mountain Energy Company, Harwood Products Company, Interface, Inc., Timberland, and Wainwright Bank.

CERES Principles include ³protecting the biosphere² (making progress in ³eliminating the release of any substance that may cause environmental damage²), making sustainable use of renewable natural resources, reducing waste by recycling through safe methods. The Principles emphasize energy conservation, minimizing health and safety risks to employees, eliminating (or reducing) the sale of products that cause environmental damage, correcting conditions that endanger the environment, and more.

The endorsing companies pledge to make ³self-evaluations² of their progress in implementing these Principles. CERESıs staff agrees to not formally rate compliance, instead, it asks corporations to enter into dialogue about what ³compliance² should entail in the context of their operations.

The Principles are thus a ³model² for business to follow, but they are also a corporate commitment for members, hopefully serving as a guide for other industry sectors. Certain ³Principles,² such as Protection of the Biosphere, are mainly guideposts to inform the direction of corporate policies. By using guidelines, CERES hopes to make progress on environmental protection ³based on a non-bureaucratic, voluntary relationship.² CERES staff asks for an annual report on progress. Participating companies agree to submit an annual public environmental status report as part of their contract.

Given the broad scope of the Principles, corporations at some points ³violate² the Principles. CERES in these cases has asked for explanations of particular events and patterns of conduct beyond that which would be disclosed in a companyıs annual CERES Report.

Thus, the CERES agreement is made for companies to volunteer information ³in the spirit of ongoing trust-building disclosure and dialogue.² The purpose of the agreement is not to assign blame punitively, but ³to identify a way to make progress.² This is an agreement to set standards, but is not a global civil regime in the full sense. It does not have a public accountability system. Yet, leaders could develop it.

CERES focuses on educational and consulting programs to generate standards. For example, it promotes initiatives to catalyze a ³market demand for environmentally responsible and sustainable programs.² It initiated a ³Green Hotel Initiative,² which would increase ³green lodging and meeting options² by catalyzing ³market supply and demand.² CERES has thus established an inter-sector (multi-stakeholder) program that involves business and NGOs (businesses, the hotel industry, non-governmental organizations, labor, academia, and environmental advocates) to advance environmental principles in the hotel market. It pushes for ³environmentally responsible hotel services,² encourages conference planners and travel buyers to stimulate a market in the hotel industry that is based on environmental principles. It is developing standards that become the etiquette and custom of the ³hotel service sector² of markets.[31]

D. The Forest Stewardship Council: A Civil Polity with Global Authority

The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is a non-profit organization founded in 1993 by representatives from environmental and conservation groups, the timber industry, the forestry profession, indigenous peoplesı organizations, community forestry groups and forest product certification organizations from 25 countries. The FSC supports "environmentally appropriate," "socially beneficial" and "economically viable" management of the worldıs forests. It promotes responsible forest management by evaluating and accrediting assessors, and by encouraging high management standards for national and regional forests. It has a public education program and provides information about independent, third party certification as a tool for ensuring that the worldıs forests are protected for future generations.

The FSC works on the premise that forest resources should be managed to meet "the social, economic, ecological, cultural and spiritual needs of present and future generations."  Members see a growing public awareness of forest devastation and degradation. The FSC says that consumers are demanding that their purchases of wood and other forest products be based on sound environmental principles. In response to these consumer demands, certification programs of wood products have proliferated in this market sector. [32]

The FSC works to accredit organizations in a way that "guarantees the authenticity of their claims." Members assert that the process of certification must be initiated voluntarily by forest owners and managers who request the services of a certification organization.

In sum, the goal of the FSC is "to promote environmentally responsible management of the worldıs forests, by establishing a worldwide standard of recognized and respected Principles of Forest Management. The FSC wants to ensure that all ³endorsed forests² are globally managed in an ecologically sound, socially responsible and economically viable manner.  Global ³principles² are translated as regional standards, which are adjusted to local standards.  FSC-endorsed regional standards ³reflect a balance between the latest science, the best known forest management practices, and current public values.² Below are a few specifications that illustrate this worldwide forestry practice.[33]

Table 4  Forest Stewardship Council: Examples of Standards and Policies[34]

Forest management shall respect all applicable laws of the country in which they occur, and international treaties and agreements to which the country is a signatory, and comply with all FSC Principles and Criteria.

1.1 Forest management shall respect all national and local laws and administrative requirements.

Have legal rights to harvest

Respect indigenous rights

Maintain community well being

Conserve economic resources

Protect biological diversity

Have a written management plan

Engage in regular monitoring

Maintain high conservation value forests

Manage plantations to alleviate pressures on           natural forests

Respect tenure and use rights, and the responsibilities that go with them..

2.1 Clear evidence of long-term forest use rights to the land (e.g. land title, customary rights, or lease agreements) shall be demonstrated.

 

2.2 Local communities with legal or customary tenure or use rights shall maintain control, to the extent necessary to protect their rights or resources, over forest operations unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies.

 

2.3 Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed to resolve disputes over tenure claims and use rights. The circumstances and status of any outstanding disputes will be explicitly considered in the certification evaluation. Disputes of substantial magnitude involving a significant number of interests will normally disqualify an operation from being certified.

 

Uphold the rights of indigenous peoples.

 

The legal and customary rights of indigenous peoples to own, use and manage their lands, territories, and resources shall be recognized and respected.

3.1 Indigenous peoples shall control forest management on their lands and territories unless they delegate control with free and informed consent to other agencies.

3.2 Forest management shall not threaten or diminish, either directly or indirectly, the resources or tenure rights of indigenous peoples. Indigeneous peoples shall be clearly identified in cooperation with such peoples, and recognized and protected by forest managers.

3.4 Indigenous peoples shall be compensated for the application of their traditional knowledge regarding the use of forest species or management systems in forest operations. This compensation shall be formally agreed upon with their free and informed consent before forest operations commence.

Uphold the rights of communities and workers. Forest management operations shall maintain or enhance the long-term social and economic well-being of forest workers and local communities.

4.1 The communities within, or adjacent to, the forest management area should be given opportunities for employment, training, and other services.

4.2 Forest management should meet or exceed all applicable laws and/or regulations covering health and safety of employees and their families.

4.3 The rights of workers to organize and voluntarily negotiate with their employers shall be guaranteed as outlined in Conventions 87 and 98 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO).

4.4 Management planning and operations shall incorporate the results of evaluations of social impact. Consultations shall be maintained with people and groups directly affected by management operations.

 4.5 Appropriate mechanisms shall be employed for resolving grievances and for providing fair compensation in the case of loss or damage affecting the legal customary rights, property, resources, or livelihoods of local peoples. Measures shall be taken to avoid such loss or damage.

 

8. Join the struggle to create civil markets local to global

Students on university campuses heard about ³deplorable conditions² in sweatshops, and went overseas to see ³with their own eyes.²  When they discovered the  deplorable situations firsthand in 1997, they organized United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS). The USAS then took an activist role along with textile unions. (I note the role or function of an organization in bold.) They wanted better labor standards in these factories. So, this was the beginning of a struggle to uplift those standards.

Students complained publicly about the practices of companies such as The GAP in El Salvador, and the production of Kathie Lee Gifford apparel in Honduras, and Nike in Indonesia. The campaigns soon had their effect. The U.S. Congress and members of the federal government, including Robert Reich, the Labor Department Secretary, became involved. The government was in effect a mediator enabling change to happen. Government officials by their action also became legitimizers of the grass roots movement, giving these activists some acceptability in the public eye. In August 1996, fearing legislation and its impact on free trade, the Clinton administration established The White House Apparel Industry Partnership (AIP) to resolve the problems.[35]

Below we see the participants in this struggle. They need your help.

Table 1 The Struggle in the Wearing Apparel Industry

Standard Making and Monitoring Structure

Stakeholder Organizations (Roles)

Business Sector

Third Sector

Government Sector

Principal Civic Overseer (Task Force, Legitimizer)

Fair Labor Association (FLA)

Business Monitors

PricewaterhouseCoopers and KPMG

Background Player

National Association of Manufacturers (NAM)

Background Player

The American Apparel Manufacturers Association (AAMA)

Principal Civic Monitor

Verité

Activist/Monitor

Worker Rights Consortium

Background Global Player

International Labor Organization (ILO)

Background Player

The American Council on Education (ACE)

Background Player

American Federation of Labor - Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO)

Mediators and Legitimizers

U.S. Labor Department

Occupational, Health, and Safety Administration (OSHA)

 

Background Player

The United Nations

 

In Table 2, I describe other non-governmental grass roots organizations (NGROs) that have a part in the action. They are Third Sector activists offering leadership and support. They could increase their engagement and take a more active role at any time.

Table 2 Other Third Sector Activists: Non-governmental Organizations

Global Exchange www.globalexchange.org

Global Exchange is a non-profit research, education, and action center dedicated to promoting people-to-people ties around the world. Since its founding in 1988, they have been striving to increase global awareness among the U.S. public while building international partnerships around the world.

UNITE www.uniteunion.org

Representing 250,000 members in North America, Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees (UNITE) is known for aggressive organizing and fighting for workersı rights. Members work in apparel, garment and textile industries.

Clean Clothes Campaign www.cleanclothes.org

The Clean Clothes Campaigns aim at improving working conditions in the garment industry, world-wide. The campaigns are coalitions of consumer organizations, trade unions, researchers, solidarity groups, world shops and other activists.

Campaign for Labor Rights www.summersault.com/~agj/clr/

Campaign for Labor Rights mobilizes local support in the United States and Canada for the campaigns of their partner organizations. They build bridges between local activists and many of the major organizations around the world.

 

Sweatshop Watch www.sweatshopwatch.org

Sweatshop Watch is a coalition of labor, community, civil rights, immigrant rights and womenıs organizations, attorneys and advocates committed to eliminating the exploitation that occurs in sweatshops. They believe that workers should be earning a living wage in a safe and healthy working environment, and that those who benefit the most from the exploitation of sweatshop workers must be held accountable.

United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) is an international coalition devoted to stopping sweatshop labor. United Students Against Sweatshops is an organization of 200 campuses working on a national campaign to stop sweatshops. Their members focus on using their power as students to support issues of economic and social justice both on campuses, and in their cities and globally. They formed in 1998 as a loose coalition of students from campus groups working on the Sweat-Free campus campaign, to facilitate communication and coordination among the campus groups working on the campaign; to give students a unified voice in taking on national targets; and to provide a national network and base.

Public Citizen Global Trade Watch www.citizen.org

Global Trade Watch is the Public Citizen division that fights for international trade and investment policies promoting government and corporate accountability, consumer health and safety, and environmental protection through research, lobbying, public education and the media. Global Trade Watch conducts research and advocates in the field of international trade and investment. Public Citizen is a national consumer and environmental organization founded by Ralph Nader in 1971.

International Forum on Globalization www.ifg.org

 The International Forum on Globalization (IFG) is an alliance of sixty leading activists, scholars, economists, researchers, and writers formed to stimulate new thinking, joint activity, and public education in response to the rapidly emerging economic and political arrangement called the global economy.

 

Alliance for Democracy www.afd-online.org/index.htm

THE ALLIANCE is a ³Populist movement.² It ³is not designed to be a political party² that seeks to end the domination in the economy, the government, the media and the environment by large corporations. Its members aim to promote democracy in the country and help achieve a just society with a sustainable, equitable economy. They work together with other organizations that share these goals.

Democracy 180 www.corporations.org/democracy/home.html

The 180 Movement for Democracy and Education is dedicated to helping students and youth build a movement for political empowerment and participatory democracy. Through education and organizing they hope to

encourage a radical political presence in the schools to transform communities into democratic spaces.

National Labor Committee (NLC) www.nlcnet.org. The NLCıs mission is to educate and actively engage the U.S. public on human and labor rights abuses by corporations. Working with a strong network of local, national, and international groups, the NLC builds coalitions that use campaigns to pressure companies to adhere to labor and human rights standards.

Other Support Organizations. Campus Action Network, In Fact, United for a Fair Economy, Mobilization for Survival, As You Sow, Campaign for Labor Rights, the Council on Economic Priorities, the Farm Labor Organizing Committee, Global Survival Network, Human Rights Watch, Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, Investor Responsibility Research Center, Child Labor Coalition, Resource Center of the Americas, International Youth Foundation, Social Accountability International (SAI)

 

Create New Social Contracts: Production to Retail

Let's look at what is happening here.

In the field of economics, Third Sector universities would be buyers, the businesses are sellers and students are consumers. But they look more carefully. Universities are also retailers as they sell products in their campus shops. Businesses are producers as they write the critical contracts with overseas host affiliates; they are also distributors in supplying products to universities. Together this profit/nonprofit field of exchange represents the whole cycle of market organization from producer to consumer. The FLA and WRC are in the middle as civic organizations that compete to set standards and settle conflicts of interest.

Notice the economics of this buyer/seller conflict. Businesses want low production costs and high profits. Universities want high quality products and low prices. The consumers in this case want low prices and humane standards. New industry standards could become humane, with government and retailer pressure, by raising production costs. This would be a ³conflict resolution² between buyers and sellers. The consumers agree to higher product (wearing apparel) costs, if the market structure becomes public and accountable. The market must allow transparency and professional (neutral) monitoring.[36]

Trade associations (like aluminum or wearing apparel) are partial oligarchies and partial democracies. When enough leaders see ³too much control by a few² in their association they can officially act on the problem through the courts. They have a constitution and can call for their right to participate and increase the ³level² of democracy.[37]

The best leaders in any large association want the standards they have established to represent their craft, as in computers, housing, agriculture or construction. In the aluminum industry, members want (at best) to advance safer and sounder aluminum. So, we should likely see some ³dominance² in the organization of any industry like aluminum. But if we studied these associations in detail, but we should also see some degree of ³democracy.²

When trade associations go global, they continue to advance their own interests, but in planning for civil regimes, the UN (or an affiliate IGO) would (at best) charter them, based on principles of fairness, democracy, and human rights. Civil global regimes would be chartered with UN bodies and associated with Third Sector groups. A national trade structure like aluminum, for example, should reconcile its economic interests with standards from other world bodies like the UNıs International Labour Organization.

A business corporation is (typically) a ³command system² but a group of corporations as competitors create a ³confederation.² A trade confederation is relatively civil even when it is a cartel. Common rules are established and a sense of right and wrong is created. A sense of fairness and justice emerges in rules that are bound up in their organization. (This happens in every autonomous group whether a church corporation or a city gang.) This sense of relative ³justice² is part of the development of a ³society,² but one corporation does not designed for the common good of all.

Trade associations (i.e. confederations) establish rules that carry a sense of right and wrong, a moral order in this limited sense. Business are typically based on a command system but when they organize a trade group they form a relatively democratic corporation.  In Table 2, we see how competitor corporations will move to a trade association to become a more democratic body based on rules. These first two steps in organization then precede the development of civil regimes.

Table 2: Economic Actors: Developing Toward Civil Regimes

Business Corporations Þ

Þ Confederations Þ

Þ Civil Regimes

Competitors  Þ

(Corporate command systems)

Trade Associations Þ

(A Democratic Organization)

Public Accountability Systems (Business-NGO Partnerships

 

 The International Labour Organization (ILO) is one of those INGOs that helps civil regimes develop on behalf of workers. The ILO has global standards of safety and health for the workplace. It maintains a regular system of inspection to oversee the application of those standards. It makes some 6,500 ratifications on standards and nearly 1500 reports each year. Reports on compliance are carried out by a ³Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations.² The Committee consists of 20 independent persons ³of the highest standing, with eminent qualifications in appropriate legal or social fields, with an intimate knowledge of labour administration.² Members of the Committee are drawn from all parts of the world, appointed for a period of three years by the Governing Body of the ILO upon the proposals of the Director-General.[38]

We are talking about trade associations developing contracts with the ILO and other INGOs. The development of a civil economy should be the goal for the UN and its affiliated agencies. This means aiming for an economy that is competitive, safe, responsible, cooperative, transparent, profitable, and accountable. It is a system of exchange that promotes a culture of respect, patience, and tolerance. And this requires social actors taking a role in the construction of civil regimes.

9. Support a Nonprofit Sector that can regulate the Profit Sector

Case Study A (below) illustrates how public standards are developed in healthcare. Other nonprofit associations like this should be advanced in the economy to help markets become self-regulating. Here we see how standards are set democratically and monitored for compliance by the Third Sector.

A public domain is cultivated in a market sector when stakeholders create standards that are ethically right and are legitimated in the nonprofit sector. The board of Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) is composed of stakeholders -- representatives of non-governmental organizations in civil society.

Below we see how a nonprofit association can regulate healthcare organizations.

Case Study A: Hospitals and Public Health

A voluntary association called the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) sets public standards for hospitals in the United States. It is an independent, not-for-profit corporation and the main standard setting and accrediting body in this field of healthcare. It employs roughly 1,000 people and its surveyor cadre numbers more than 400.

The Commission evaluates and accredits more than 17,000 health care organizations and programs in the United States. Since 1951, it has developed up-to-date professional standards and monitors them in mainline healthcare organizations. It evaluates compliance against its professional benchmarks. In other words, JCAHO is a parliamentary body for hospital management.

JCAHO accreditation is voluntary. It cannot force all hospitals to comply with its standards. It does not levy fines. It cannot strip licensure, but it can revoke accreditation for non-compliance. And this is critical for healthcare organizations. The Commission claims not to accept what a healthcare organization says it does, but examine what it actually does. JCAHO sets performance standards for the quality of patient care and then goes into the field to observe what really happens in a healthcare center. Its monitoring power comes from its authority to give accreditation. The Commission develops its standards for conduct in consultation with healthcare experts, providers, measurement experts, purchasers, and consumers. More than 400 physicians, nurses, health care administrators, medical technologists, psychologists, respiratory therapists, pharmacists, durable medical equipment providers, and social workers are employed by the Joint Commission to administer accreditation surveys.

The Joint Commission offers public healthcare accreditation, and it also provides services that ³support performance improvement in health care organizations.² It meets Medicare certification requirements, although not every accreditation program has Medicare status. It formulates public standards for hospitals, healthcare networks, home care, long-term care, behavioral (mental) health care, and clinical laboratories. JCAHO also accredits ambulatory care organizations, surgical centers, clinics, etc. and has launched a Disease-Specific Care Certification (DSCC) program. The DSCC program certifies disease management services, such as asthma or diabetes care, and it, too, is standards-based. The Commission assumes that when an organization conducts itself properly‹does the right things and does them well‹there is a strong probability that patients will experience good outcomes. [39]

The Commission is a democratic ³stakeholder corporation² governed by a 28-member Board of Commissioners, made up of nurses, physicians, consumers, medical directors, administrators, providers, employers, labor representatives, health plan leaders, quality experts, ethicists, health insurance administrators, and educators. Thus, it fits the civil market model. Its Board brings together a diverse group of leaders across all civil orders‹not only in healthcare, but also in business and public policy.

The ruling authority in the Commission comes primarily from the Third Sector. The Joint Commission is governed by board members representing the American College of Physicians, the American Society of Internal Medicine, the American College of Surgeons, the American Dental Association, the American Hospital Association, and the American Medical Association. These are core nonprofit organizations in the field of healthcare. This board composition fits the logic of civil development. The Commission represents all civil orders of society connected to healthcare. Stakeholders in different professional cultures are able then to set their own standards and monitor compliance. The goal of the Commission is to maximize healthcare in both sectors of the economy for the common good.

 

The Joint Commission does a lot more than I can summarize in Case Study A. It expedites third-party payments, fulfills state licensure requirements, and strengthens liability insurance premiums. It strengthens bond ratings for members and provides a positive influence on financial markets by its considered assessments. The point is that the Commission is developing inside capitalist markets, and goes beyond the old capitalist model. It adds core values to the economy from civil orders in the Third Sector. It integrates health values with economic values. And it adds stability to the market.[40]

There are strong reasons for businesses (e.g. for-profit hospitals) to join this non-governmental organization and get accreditation. Its core values and norms aim to prevail over business norms alone as it shapes this sector of the market. The Commission is designed to advance public accountability and is a basis for advancing the common good.

JCAHO has limits. It is a voluntary association whose purpose is to sustain and improve the safety and the quality of healthcare organizations in this sector. The whole field of healthcare is much bigger than this sector but this is where civil planning begins. Civil planners conceive how a national health plan is developed with the participation of Third Sector organizations.

In other words, here we see how a Third Sector organization shapes business standards, not the other way around. The "other way around" occurs when business shapes standards in the Third Sector and then core values decline. This can happen if for-profit corporations (e.g. hospitals and universities) continue to develop in the economy.

10. Create New Financial Institutions with Global Stakeholders

Global finance is falling short on performance. The combination of ³stabilization, structural and sectoral adjustment policies² at the World Bank and especially at the International Monetary Fund (conditions attached to Fund and Bank credits) have had ³a devastating impact on societies.² A review of data from official and academic sources on a total of 83 Third World countries that have received substantial IMF financing during the past 20 years supports what civil society leaders argue. In most of the countries studied, unemployment increased, real wages fell; income distribution became more unequal, and poverty rose. The data show that food production per capita declined, external debt grew, and social expenditures were cut between 1978 and 1997 in which these countries received resources from the Fundıs General Resources Account (GRA) and loans from its Structural Adjustment Facility (SAF), Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility (ESAF) and Trust Fund.[41]

Civil society leaders like Walden Bellow (from the Philippines) call for a complete re-modeling of financial institutions. Bellow argues that these institutions are dysfunctional as well as destructive. He does not think that the IMF should be reformed to bring about financial stability, or that the World Bank should be altered to reduce poverty, nor that the World Trade Organization (WTO) should be revised to bring fair trade.

 Are they not, in fact, imprisoned within paradigms and structures that create outcomes that contradict these objectives? Can we truly say that these institutions can be reengineered to handle the multiple problems that have been thrown up by the process of corporate-led globalization?[42]

 

Bellow argues that the WTO ³institutionalized² the priority of free trade above every other good ‹ above the good of the environment, above justice, equity, and community. The WTO makes decisions in ³non-transparent backroom sessions² where ³majority voting² is dispensed with in favor of a process by which ³a few big trading powers impose their policies on the majority of the member countries.²

For many civil-society leaders, the WTO and NAFTA are capitalist-state regimes that extend the power of global corporations. During the Asian market crisis, the future of local (and national) governments was in the hands of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Governments were required to follow rules based on capitalist markets, not civil markets. Business scholars call economic development ³alliance capitalism² where IGOs and IBOs collaborate to make the ³free market² dysfunctional across the world.

Support a New Bretton Woods Conference: Reform Global Finance

Civil society leaders like Bellow argue that the Bretton Woods Institutions and the World Trade Organization (WTO) should be totally revised. At the present time, the WTO does not advance the flow of capital investment with the consent of stakeholders. Civic leaders suggest that world finance institutions should at least be connected to the UNıs ECOSOC to place them under stakeholder authorities.

They believe that the UN should convene a conference like Bretton Woods (1944) to discuss a new financial architecture that brings core values into decision making. For example, the World Bank should foster democracy and pay attention to rural areas and poor urban areas. It is essential for local people to develop control over their local economy and natural resources, and establish their own system of public communications (or mass media).

Different groups have proposed a new ³architecture of finance² through the UN. These groups include a 37-citizen Globalization subgroup of the international UN Millennium Forum, a 12-multi-NGO Hemispheric Social Alliance, and the 14-expert International Forum on Globalization.[43]

11. Create a New UN Environmental Program

The UN Environmental Programme (UNEP) today encourages partnerships between business and Third Sector organizations to treat environmental problems. UNEP wants to achieve sustainable development with the participation of business, the scientific community, NGOs, youth, women, and sports organizations. Each Division of UNEP works in partnership with industry, and has projects of direct relevance to market sectors. UNEP wants global business to protect the environment, but how could UNEP help civil regimes develop with inter-sector self-regulation?[44]

In my opinion, UNEP should launch initiatives to help associations change the structure of markets. ³A civil market² should avoid further contamination of the environment with toxic chemicals. UNEP should:

7)    Consult with trade associations on how to create bylaws that express environmental principles and standards. It should have support from the UN Assembly.

8)    Support trade associations that work with Third Sector scientific associations and professional monitors to report on how firms follow the principles expressed in association bylaws.

9)    Work with business on tribunals in trade associations and suggest international lawyers who can help develop ³procedural justice² on compliance with environmental standards. (Trade associations then determine how to bring the ³facts of noncompliance² in accord with environmental charters and a final disposition.)

10) Publish models for effective business/NGO partnerships, models for arbitration and models on the effective tribunals.

If UNEP were to follow such steps with global business, it would change the structure and tone of markets. It would build civil market regimes designed for environmental protection.[45]

UNEP now prepares training manuals on the ³valuation² of Environmental Goods and Services and Economic Policy Instruments. It helps leaders in post-socialist nations and post-dictatorships (³economies in transition²) to develop free-market economies. This is where a civil-regime prototype should be introduced. UNEPıs training manuals should describe ³models² for social partnerships, tribunals, dispute resolution; i.e. settling cases of noncompliance based on a trade groupıs bylaws and charter norms.

UNEP works closely with commercial banks, investment firms and insurance companies to encourage the incorporation of environmental concerns into business priorities. Leading insurance companies and commercial banks have pledged to integrate environmental factors into core business operations by signing a UNEP brokered Statement. But UNEP should work equally with global banking associations, investment and insurance associations. The impact is worldwide when big associations develop charter principles on environmental protection and set up justice oriented market sectors. [46]

Letıs look at some particulars. UNEP is working at the industry level on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). (POPs are industrial chemical products such as PCBs, and byproducts such as dioxins and furans, and pesticides such as DDT.) Negotiations concluded in March 1998 on a UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) agreement to address POPs. It began negotiations on a legally binding global agreement on POPs in June 1998.  Members of the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA) have demonstrated their commitment to sound chemicals management, and to the goal of reducing the potential human health and environmental risks that may be associated with POPs. This is a beginning.[47]

Many POPs are subject to voluntary risk management by chemical companies, and the uses of most substances identified as POPs have been discontinued or limited by chemical companies within the countries represented by ICCA member associations. The chemical industry supports a legally binding international agreement to establish a process to identify and characterize the potential risks of POPs, and to apply appropriate risk management to POPs. But UNEP has not brought scientific associations to work with trade associations. [48]

In a civil market plan, science associations (not just individual scientists) would help define criteria for identifying POPs as candidates for international action. Criteria for including chemicals have to be ³risk-based and scientifically justified,² but global science associations (not single experts) should be involved as the Third Sector. These associations need to take responsibility with business for designing a civil policy in market sectors. Dangerous chemicals should be evaluated within a science-based, transparent risk assessment process.[49]

In sum, UNEP could work decisively to develop civil markets, not capitalist markets. It could encourage trade associations to collaborate with Third Sector professional and scientific associations. UNEP then asks business-Third Sector partnerships to write environmental principles into global charters and bylaws. As more core values are introduced into trade group bylaws and more partnerships are created with monitoring and judicial arrangements, we see the development of civil associations. Business firms pledge to stand by their principles and core values, agreeing (as competitors) to act jointly with outside monitors and arbiters. Monitors, in turn, report to UNEP on progress and problems of compliance and provide annual reports on the advancement of environmental values in market sectors.[50]

Letıs add more to this picture.

Few people realize that UNCTAD helps to organize stock markets and commodity exchanges in developing countries. Following conventional models, UNCTAD does not encourage civil (social) finance. Social investment should be one model for training financial analysts. It is about how to manage social/economic accounts. In its publications, it should describe how social (civil) investment is developing in the U.S. It should say that during 1999, financial investors allocated $2.16 trillion with ethical guidelines. Those trillions represent about $1 out of every $8 under professional management in the U.S. going into screened portfolios. This should be described in the publications for global finance.

12. Support Social (Civil) Investment: Local to Global

 In Summary Sketch 1, we see principles guiding The Advocacy Fund of Trillium Asset Management. Trillium is like other social funds that introduce core values into the allocation of capital. (Check your Pension Fund for this civil alternative.)[51]

Summary Sketch 1 Bringing Core Values into Financial Market Structures

Trillium Asset Management Corporation

4)     Support sound environmental practices and policies.

5)     Support global human rights.

6)     Support positive labor practices

7)     Support positive labor-management relations.

11)   Support corporate philanthropy and investment in local communities.

12)   Avoid military contracting with the U.S. or foreign governments.

13)   Respond to product safety issues.

14)   Support ethical management practices.

15)   Support alternatives to animal research and testing.

16)   Balance the interest of company constituencies such as shareholders, employees, communities, suppliers, and customers.

17) Respond to shareholder activism.

 

UNCTADıs Reports analyze global trends and develop policy recommendations useful for governments and business, not civil society. UNCTAD supplies ³optimal policy frameworks² that local and transnational enterprises can develop but says nothing about community development corporations or procedural justice  (i.e. due process) in trade associations that become essential to civil markets.

13. Support Fair Trade and Justice-Oriented Markets

Global corporations have been defining their role as ³corporate citizens² but this is a farce. Real citizens have elections and access to ³procedural justice² and due process. Since there is no world government or due process for ³corporate citizens,² what can be done?

A program in civil development can begin through the UN and the US Department of Commerce. The Department should help trade associations and civic groups work together. In this logic, "due process" then includes the following mandates for global trade associations:

18)   No citizens (i.e. members of global associations) should be accused of violating a rule of behavior unless they have known about the rule before their misconduct.

19)   The accused (i.e. members of global associations) are entitled to know the charge against them, to know the evidence adduced in support of the charge, and to have a fair opportunity to collect and present their own evidence.

20)   The judge or arbiter in a global contract must be disinterested, unbiased, and attentive.

 

The United States and Europe have ³due process² requirements for trade groups but it is not publicized. It is possible for UNCTAD to publicize ³procedural justice² in ³fair trade² as part of its ³educational materials.²[52]

UNCTAD has hosted conferences on the oil industry in Africa and in Russia. It promotes Russian science and technology products together with US business. Business leaders regularly serve as observers in intergovernmental sessions and work on UNCTAD Commissions (e.g. the Commission on Trade in Goods and Services, and Commodities, the Commission on Investment, Technology and Related Financial Issues, and the Commission on Enterprise). This is where they should learn about ³due process² and mechanisms of conflict resolution. In a civil market plan, such conferences should include NGOs in establishing a basis for civil regimes.[53]

The UN should build civil regimes, not capitalist regimes.

13. Support a Public (NGO) Media System.

The mass media (radio, newspapers, and television) were a government monopoly in communist countries. In capitalist countries, they have become a business monopoly.

The media today are chartered to advance private profit, not chartered to advance the common good. They represent business, not the core values of society. For example, General Electric owns NBC television. NBCıs $5 billion sales revenues are less than 6.5 percent of GEıs massive $80 billion revenues from electric machines manufacturing but with the approval of GE, NBC now intends to move beyond ownership of radio and TV networks and eleven TV stations. It wants control over cable and satellite television. NBC has purchased and created cable channels, acquired shares in another twenty cable channels including Arts and Entertainment networks. All this ³growth² makes good business sense, but it is not for the common good.[54]

Note the subtle ³concentration.² The largest media firms began ³equity joint ventures² in the 1990s. Under these arrangements, media giants now share a ³silent ownership² of important media projects. Fox Sports Net, for example, is jointly owned by Rupert Murdochıs News Corporation. The Comedy Central cable channel is co-owned by Time Warner and Viacom. The nine largest American media firms have joint ventures with nearly six of the other eight giants. Murdochıs News Corp. has at least one joint venture with every one of them. In such noncompetitive markets, McChesney claims that media firms are not competing. The firms have enough market power to dictate content on the basis of what is in their interest and jointly most profitable.

What is a Public Domain?

A public domain for our purposes is where people debate and think together as a community. It is where people examine their differences and their common ground. It is where people converse about who they are and who they could be. It is where people conduct open debate and express their opinions fully and honestly. This is a space where people exchange, negotiate and settle problems, and learn from one another. It is where leaders and common folk hold ³fairness² vital and ³democracy² critical, and where they encourage dissent. It is where great human differences are urged toward resolution. It is at the very least where the news and societyıs problems can be discussed and debated without violence. [55]

How can we picture an alternative media public domain? See below.

Figure 1 Civil Governance In Public Broadcasting

Public Commons Board

Representatives chosen from Three Sectors

 

Third Sector

Business Sector

Government Sector

 

 

Civic Board

NGO Representatives

(e.g. Major associations in Religion, Education, Family, Professions, Science, Art, and special interest groups (e.g. ethnic/gender/racial groups) and corporations for public broadcasting.[56]

Trade Board

Trade Association Representatives

(e.g. The National Association of Broadcasters (NAB).

Government Board

(e.g. Government Agency Representatives with the Chair Appointed by the U.S. President, approved by Congress

 

 

The FCC should hold Public Hearings to discuss a new media system.

How could non-government organizations build a media system? See some ideas below.

Figure 2 Sources of Income for Mass Media Organizations

Questions from the Commissioners

Income for the Third Sector

1.Gifts: The constituencies of Third Sector organizations (bandwidth listeners/viewers/readers) make voluntary contributions to finance their nonprofit media corporations.

2. Endowment: Special constituencies in Third Sector organizations (e.g. faculties, parishioners, lawyers, dentists, accountants, scientists, etc.) help build an endowment for their media corporation.

 

3.Advertisers: Advertisers are selected according the principles of the respective Third Sector organization, as in science, medicine, history, therapy, law, religious, and recreational organizations. NGOs would compete for the best-screened advertisers.

 

For example, in the field of education, state and local boards select only advertisements that meet their standards as ³healthy² and ³safe² for children. Teacher associations and unions assess ³screening² for nutritious foods and reliable toys. Nonprofit organizations contract with professional social investors to make the selection based on their expert knowledge.[57]

 

4.Taxes, benefits, and Subsidies: The government supports this ³public domain² through tax arrangements deemed appropriate.

 

The FCC today should remind Congress about previous recommendations for a public broadcasting system. In 1967, the Carnegie Commission advocated a federal trust fund based on a manufacturerıs excise tax on the sale of television sets. The Communications Act of 1978 proposed that commercial television spectrum fees should support public broadcasting. The Communications Transfer Fee Act of 1987 called for the creation of a ³Public Broadcasting Trust Fund to be finance by a 2% tax on the sale price (to be paid by the seller) of the transfer of radio and television licenses. The following year, the Working Group for Public Broadcasting advocated a factory tax of 2% on sales of consumer electronic products and broadcast equipment. In 1993, the Twentieth Century Fund called for independent funding for public broadcasting based on a share of spectrum auctions or spectrum usage fees.[58]

14. Think about a new vision for the Economy

In Illustration 1 we see two market prototypes. The model on the left side is the capitalist market and on the right side is the civil market.  In developing from a capitalist market to a civil market, we develop "civil attributes" inside the market. This ³development² should produce a synthesis of conservative and liberal values. In other words the old and the civil attributes ³fuse² and lead to a newly integrated model.

 

Illustration 1 Two Ideal Markets: Attributes

Capitalist Markets (Current)

Civil Markets (Developing)

Goal:  Wealth Making

Goal:  Common Good

Theory: Formal Rationality

Theory: Substantive Rationality

Orientation: Economic Values

Orientation: Core Values

 Domain: Private

 Domain: Public

Core Value: Freedom

Core Value: Justice

Optimizing Principles

Optimizing Principles

Profit Making

Competition

Productivity

Efficiency

Privacy

Command management

Corporations

Stockholders

Standard Making

Cooperation

Accountability

Sustainability

Transparency

Democratic (self) management

Associations

Stakeholders

 

Letıs look briefly at these models with very different meanings.

Capitalist markets are systems of exchange that emphasize economic values. Economic values are expressed in the quest for efficiency, productivity, and profit making. They are allied with the ideal of competition and self-interest. All these values are deeply embedded in the business sector. The core (value) principle of capitalist markets is ³freedom,² a substantive value, while a business is grounded in formal rationality. Markets are rationalized on the core principle of freedom, not on the principle of justice.

Business corporations compete for profit and contend for power. They are organized around formal rationality, designed to produce and distribute goods (utilities) and services and measure economic returns. The overall goal of capitalist markets is to create wealth, not designed to provide for the common good. They are organized as a private system, as opposed being managed by government.

Civil markets are systems of exchange that emphasize core values and public standards. They are economically oriented but not economically determined. Their values are in the larger society, notably in the Third Sector. In civil (development) planning these core values would be linked in a new manner with economic values.

Planning Illustration 2: Imaging a New Market System

The goal of civil market planners is to increase the core values of society (e.g. democracy, justice, and freedom) in the economy in the public interest. This involves linking economic values in the profit sector with substantive values in the nonprofit sector. The aim is to create a public domain within a private (voluntary) domain, to advance of public accountability systems organized by stakeholders in the private sector.

In civil market development, competitors are encouraged to cooperate and set public standards in the economy. This is achieved through public accountability systems established by trade associations, trade unions, and other Third Sector associations. Productivity and efficiency are respected while advancing sustainable resources, transparency, and financial accountability. In civil associations, market participants increase the public character of their transactions while retaining appropriate levels of privacy for competition.

A key strategy in "civil development" is to overcome excessive oligarchy and advance ³self-management² in business and Third Sector corporations. Civil development means decentralizing authority in large-scale organization while keeping appropriate authority at higher levels for the common good. The higher authority of an association can advance core values in a sustainable self-governing economy. A civil economy develops through a responsible authority undertaken by stakeholders in local to global levels of association.

 

 

 

 

 



[1] State and federal legislators are said to have their ³price² when they meet with lobbyists and decide public policy. Universities are said to have their price when business donors create institutes and laboratories for markets that would have never otherwise been created. Lawyers are said to have their price when they advance corporate interests more than they seek justice. Physicians are said to have their price when they seek a high income more than they seek public health.

 

[2] Soros goes on to argue that economic theory has created ³an artificial world.² He sees that ³economic theory is an axiomatic system: as long as the basic assumptions hold, the conclusions follow. But when we examine the assumptions closely, we find that they do not apply to the real world.² George Soros, The Atlantic Monthly, ³The Capitalist Threat,² Volume 279, No. 2; pages 45-58. February 1997;

[3] Rohatyn agrees with Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan that ³modern market forces must be coupled with advanced financial regulatory systems, a sophisticated legal architecture, and a culture supportive of the rule of law.² Felix Rohatyn, ³The Betrayal of Capitalism,² The New York Review of Books, February 28, 2002, p.6.

[4] Edgar Heermance, Can Business Govern Itself? (N.Y.: Harper & Bros., 1933), 204.

[5] William Foote Whyte and Kathleen King Whyte, Making Mondragon (Cornell, ILR Press, 1988); Will Conrad, et. al. The Milwaukee Journal (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1964). See Chapter 3)

[6] For a review of CDCs, see Alan Twelvetrees, Organizing for Neighborhood Development (Vermont: Gower Publishing Co., 1989).

[7] H.W. Conrad, "Radio and Television in the Federal Republic of Germany," Sonderdienst, Inter Nationes, (Kennedyallee 91-103, D-53 Bonn Bad Godesberg 1, Bundesrepublik, Deutschland, So 7-77.

[8] Attorney General Janet Reno applauded the settlement, which also requires the

firm to spend $8 million on environmental projects. Terry Frieden, ³Willamette Industries settled the pollution claims with a $11.2 million fine,² July 21, 2000, Web posted at: 12:01 p.m. EDT (1601 GMT) From CNN Producer Washington (CNN).

[9] For example, the Toxic Use Reduction program in Massachusetts creates civil rules to reduce social costs. This ³public accountability system² requires firms to remain open to inspection, file annual reports, and pay fees to maintain the whole program including inspection. The fees go into a public trust that pays the University of Massachusetts to teach professionals how to conduct the inspections and administer the program. Severyn T. Bruyn, A Civil Economy (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2000), p. 166-67. For another public accountability system, see International Standards Organization, p. 213 ff.

[10] The authority for outside groups to make investigations -- and for the government to set up an arbitration commission ­ must be in accordance with public interest law. The government assumes this power is based on the law during industry violations. The right of outsiders to make an inquiry and the right to advance disciplinary proceedings by voluntary associations (e.g. trade associations and churches) must by law ³satisfy the elementary requirements of any judicial proceeding in government courts.² The requirements include ³reasonable notice of charges,² ³notice of a hearing,² the right of confrontation and cross-examination, and opportunity to refute all charges,² and a hearing before an unbiased tribunal.² See Severyn T. Bruyn, Chapter 8, A Future for the American Economy (Stanford University Press, 1991).

[11] For more on accountability systems in the private sector, see Severyn T. Bruyn, A Civil Economy (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2000), p. 205 ff. Also, see Appendix B.

[12]  For a description and a list of CDCs, see http://www.ppnd.org/cdcs.htm

[13] For a specific case on copper mining in Puerto Rico, see Severyn T. Bruyn, The Social Economy (NY: John Wiley, 1977), Appendix: ³The Social Economy of Copper Mining.²

[14]  See Cambridge Cohousing, http://www.hickoryconsortium.org/cambridge_cohousing.htm

[15]  For an expansion on these points, see Jerry Mander and Edward Goldsmith, eds., The Case Against the Global Economy (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1996).

[16] A stronger UN would involve looking at the veto power in the Security Council, the General Assembly voting structure  (e.g. a ³binding triad authorityı), an international disarmament authority, a new dispute resolution process, a monitor on the depletion of nonrenewable resources, etc. See Severyn T. Bruyn,  A Future for the American Economy, (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991) p. 449 ff.

[17] Many studies have been done on the power of mores, but here are some examples. People will not eat ³human flesh² (against the mores) but will quickly go over the speed limit (against the law) to get some place on time. People will not appear naked in front of others (the mores) but will cheat on their income taxes (the law).

[18] Ian Hurd suggests that an actor at some point will ³internalize² a rule made by an outsider like government. Internalization happens as the actorıs own interest is established in concord with the outsider. Under these circumstances, compliance becomes habitual and legitimate. Hurd also suggests that the ³legitimacy² of standards (as a mechanism of social control) should have an economic advantage over political "coercion." It has ³long-run efficiency.² There is no state or business cost required for a regime based on legitimate rules and standards.

Without enforceable world law, ³legitimacy² is an essential ingredient for civil order. No international pesticide standard can be adopted in capitalist markets, Hurd argues, until it is made legitimate. Pesticide standards become legitimate in regimes that gain civil ³authority.² Without legitimate (civil) authority, any standard will have difficulty passing through the world market. Thus, the market develops regimes (structures of authority) that are governed by norms not in the category of formal "law."

[19] The development of a civil polity changes the conventional focus on ³economic factors² as the basis for public policy. Nancy Folbre examines the excessive reliance on economic factors and the GDP while ignoring non-market work, like childcare. She speaks of the difficulty to link accountability to productivity to create a ³stakeholder society.² Nancy Folbre, The Invisible Heart (NY: The New Press, 2001). Jill Fraser, interviewing hundreds of employees (from Microsoft to General Motors) points out how ³corporate America² is overworked, neglecting the core values of society. Jill Andresky Fraser, White Collar Sweatshop (NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 2001).

[20] The aluminum industry claims to have paid approximately $990 million in 1998 to recyclers - a direct result of the intrinsic value of the aluminum can. Trade staff say that revenues from ³aluminum can recycling² provide personal income for individuals, funds for charities, and operating revenues for municipal recycling programs. The aluminum-recycling rate (1998) was 62.8 percent. The volume of aluminum cans reaching a landfill today represents 1.1 percent of total consumer waste going to a landfill - and this continues to fall as recycling increases. The market for used cans is said to be efficient and competitive. Used aluminum cans show up as new cans in stores in about 60 days. The average aluminum can contains more than 50 percent post-consumer recycled content.  The aluminum can is recycled in a closed-loop process. No ³can² need ever reach a landfill. Closed-loop recycling saves 95 percent of the energy needed to produce aluminum from ore, not to mention valuable natural resources. Energy savings and capital expenditure avoidance give the can its intrinsic value to the industry. For more, see the home page of the Aluminum industry on the Internet.

[21]  Industry News, May 18, 2001, http://www.aluminum.org/dailya.cfm?docid=478

[22] The best trade leaders may not see not see the impact of the larger forces of globalization that act upon their organization, hence, the need for studies by international economists, sociologists, political scientists, and civil polity planners.  Universities should bring different disciplines into the study of global civil regimes. If we take the aluminum industry, for example, economists should study how European competitors in aluminum are working politically with tariff barriers by moving semi-fabrication operations out of tariff zones and sending tariff-bearing metal through non-tariff regions. The shock of a tariff reduction would then be replaced by a premium to the physical metal. Economists would also study how a shortage of primary aluminum in the US Northwest would cause Japan, China, and other Asian countries to line up with the United States for Russian, Australian, and Gulf State supplies. Sociologists would study how free trade advances the power of the largest aluminum companies in the United States, Europe, and Japan. Political scientists would study how global associations develop as a civil polity and could advance the values set by UN agencies. Civil market planners would study how large companies invest in other nations in a way that cultivates democratic principles and honors cultural diversity. Public policy analysts would study how global standards in aluminum could be established by certification through UN agencies.

[23] IUGG ³encourages the application of scientific knowledge to societal needs, such as mineral resources, mitigation of natural hazards and environmental preservation.² It is a civil federation comprised of ³seven semi-autonomous Associations,² each responsible for a specific range of themes. It establishes ³inter-Association Commissions, and relationships with other scientific bodies with similar interests.² It holds General Assemblies at four-year intervals, and each of its Associations organizes Scientific Assemblies as well as ³topical symposia in the intervening period between General Assemblies.² It is organized on principles of equity, fairness, democracy, and the core values of science in society. It is committed to ³the principle of free exchange of data and knowledge among nations, and encourages unreserved scientific participation by all peoples.² It provides data on global warming. IUGG studies include the shape of the Earth, its gravitational and magnetic fields, the dynamics of the Earth as a whole and of its component parts, the Earthıs internal structure, composition and tectonics, the generation of magmas, volcanism and rock formation, the hydrological cycle including snow and ice, all aspects of the oceans, the atmosphere, ionosphere, magnetosphere and solar-terrestrial relations, and analogous problems associated with the Moon and other planets. International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics, http://www.iugg.org/eoverview.html

[24] The Law of the Sea began through common law that originated in global commerce. The Comité Maritime International (CMI) was the first international organization to work on ³soft law² and self-regulation on the oceans. CMI began in 1897 as a private organization of maritime lawyers and insurers who wanted to promote international law on the seas. Today CMI is a nonprofit organization that deals with marine collisions, ship-owner liability, salvage, freight, navigation safety, maritime mortgages, liens, bills of lading, ship arrest, stowaways, registry of ships, and maritime arbitration. It is organized in the private sector. The national government of Belgium supports its conferences on world rules for the sea.

The CMI is a lobbyist for uniform maritime laws among nations. It has spent a century building a public commons and was in the modeling background for a Law of the Sea. It has constantly sought government support in cases where customs, etiquette, and agreements on the use of the seas needed the strength of political agreement and uniform enforcement. Source: Maritime Transport: The Evolution of International Marine Policy and Shipping Law. See, A. Claire Cutler, ³Private Authority in International Relations: The Case of Maritime Transport,² in A. Cutler, V. Haufler, and T. Porter, eds. Private Authority and International Affairs (NY: State University of New York Press,1999), p. 309. Other global associations began in the 19th century to establish customary law, such as the International Law Association in 1873.

[25] On July 28, 1994, the 48th UN General Assembly adopted an Agreement modifying the Convention's Part XI provisions on deep seabed mining beyond national jurisdiction. The Agreement concluded a four-year series of informal consultations convened by the UN Secretary-General to remove impediments to widespread adherence to the LOS Convention. Over 120 States are parties including the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Australia Russia, China, and France. The United Nations (UN) Convention on the Law of the Sea sets forth the rights and obligations of States with respect to the uses of the ocean. Its provisions guarantee a nationıs control of economic activities off its coasts, such as fishing and oil and gas development, and enhance its ability to protect the marine environment. At the same time, it preserves and reinforces the freedoms of navigation and over-flight essential to national strategic and commercial interests. The United States is not yet a party.

[26] United Nations Press Release, May 28, 1999. http://www.un.org/Depts/los/Press/SEA/sea_1617.htm.  The States Parties to the Convention on the Law of the Sea concluded their ninth annual meeting for the year 2000 by adopting the budget for the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, which reflected an increase of nearly 10 per cent above the 1999 budget.

[27] UN Press Release, May 29, 1998, http://www.un.org/Depts/los/Press/SEA/sea_1589.htm

[28] On the Internet one finds ³Standards and Standardization Bodies² that are local to global and a Worldwide Web Consortium of organizations setting standards. For example, some standard making organizations may be concerned with issues over the public use of HTML. HTML is the lingua franca for publishing hypertext on the World Wide Web. It is a non-proprietary format based upon SGML and can be created and processed by a wide range of tools, from simple plain text editors. Hundreds of codes and protocols are now being set that will affect global communications for a long time. The National Information Standards Association keeps monitoring the U.S. programs, staying in touch with international standard making organizations.

[29] Only one ³standards body² is accepted for each country, which is then entitled to exercise full voting rights on technical committees. The formats for credit and phone cards and ³smart² cards are derived from an ISO International Standard. Adhering to the standard, which defines such features as an optimal thickness (0,76 mm), means that the cards can be used worldwide. International Standards thus increase the reliability and effectiveness of the goods and services people use around the globe.

Thus, ISO is a global regime that began in 1947, and is a significant player in the global market. It is a global federation of national standard bodies from some 130 countries, one from each country. It is technically an INGO, a non-governmental organization whose mission is to promote standardization for the exchange of goods and services, and advance intellectual, scientific, technological and economic activity. ISO's work links with IBOs with IGOs and creates international agreements published as International Standards. International Standards Organization, http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/aboutiso/isomembers/index.html. Sandra George, ³ISO 1400: Solution to International Crisis or Corporate Window Dressing?² A Journal of Positions and Possibilities, Vol. 1, 1999, Department of Sociology, Boston College.

[30] This organization is now on WWW.BUSINESSSTANDARDS.COM.

[31]  CERES, http://www.ceres.org/eventsandnews/index.html

[32] Sociologist Steve Waddell describes a full system coproduction (FSC) model for developing civil markets. The Forestry Stewardship Council is an example of how stakeholders -- who were traditionally outside of the production and supply chain -- engage in the production process. These stakeholders include NGOs such as environmentalist and community development organizations, along with government agencies.  Their engagement is driven by social and/or environmental sustainability concerns. Waddell is not working simply with the logic of business development, rather, the logic of civil development. Steve Waddell, ³Societal Learning: Creating change strategies for large systems change,² Systems Thinker, 12 (10), (2001) 1. Steve Waddell, ³Core Competencies:  A Key Force in Business-Government-Civil Society Collaborations. Journal of Corporate Citizenship (7). (2002) 3 (4), 19-27.

[33] These few examples are only for illustration. The larger list can be found on the Internet.  Forest Steward Council, http://fscus.org/html/standards_policies/index.html

[34] This Table of criteria, principles, and guidelines illustrates the details, but here are a few more.

The Forest Stewardship Councilı Principles and Criteria (P&C) apply to all tropical, temperate and boreal forestsŠ Many of these P&C apply also to plantations and partially replanted forests at national and local levels. Thus, we see a worldwide Internet community developing a regime of power. The P&C are to be incorporated into the evaluation systems and standards of all certification organizations seeking accreditation by the FSC. While the P&C are mainly designed for forests managed for the production of wood products, they are also relevant, to varying degrees, to forests managed for non-timber products and other services. The P&C are "a complete package to be considered as a whole." This document is used in conjunction with the FSCıs Statutes, Procedures for Accreditation and Guidelines for Certifiers. FSC and FSC-accredited certification organizations state on the Internet that they "do not insist on perfection in satisfying the P&C. However major failures in any individual Principles will normally disqualify a candidate from certification, or will lead to decertification. These decisions will be taken by individual certifiers, and guided by the extent to which each Criterion is satisfied, and by the importance and consequences of failures. Some flexibility will be allowed to cope with local circumstances."  The scale and intensity of forest management operations, the uniqueness of the affected resources and the relative ecological fragility of the forest are considered in all these certification assessments. Differences and difficulties of interpretation of the P&C are addressed in national and local forest stewardship standards. These standards are developed in each country and are evaluated for purposes of certification, by certifiers and other affected parties on a case by case basis.  If necessary, FSC "dispute resolution mechanisms" may be called upon during the course of assessment.  Specific information about the certification and accreditation process is included in the FSC Statutes, Accreditation Procedures, and Guidelines for Certifiers. But generally speaking, the FSC P&C are used in conjunction with national and international laws and regulations. The FSC seeks to complement, not supplant other initiatives that support responsible forest management worldwide. Finally, the FSC conducts educational activities to increase public awareness on the importance of: 1) improving forest management; 2) incorporating the full costs of management and production into the price of forest products; 3) promoting the highest and best use of forest resources; 4) reducing damage and waste; and 5) avoiding over-consumption and over-harvesting. The FSC provides guidance to policy makers on these issues, including improving forest management legislation and policies. See:  http://fscus.org/fscus1.html.

[35] The college-licensed apparel market is annually a $2.5-billion industry, but it makes up only about 2 percent of the American clothing business. In spite of this small percentage in clothing, the publicity given to this case became important in determining how decisions were made by other global firms. In other words, publicity impacts on decision making in other markets and affects corporate decisions made in other industries.

[36] This case is a model for economic sociologists. Capitalist markets around the world are organized in this manner from producer to consumer. In some cases, like the dairy market in Switzerland, naturally opposing organizations (producer vs. consumer) settle their differences (on standards and the demand-supply equation) by negotiation as much as by the ³free play of market forces.² In the case of the Swiss dairy industry, a retail federation calls for standards in production and also estimates the ³demand² for milk and cheese for the coming year. The retail federation sends their message on standards and ³anticipated demand² back to producer federations. The producers then try to meet the standards and the demands in this Swiss dairy market. Swiss milk producers are organized into federations of producers, processors, and buyers. The case is discussed in Severyn T. Bruyn, A Civil Economy (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000) p. 69

[37] We noted in chapter 4 that Robert Michels studied large organizations and described ³the iron law of oligarchy.² Every sociologist and political scientist knows what Michelıs concluded,  ³He who says organizations, says oligarchy² [Political Parties, 1911]. They know that all large democratic bodies develop an oligarchy, that is, ³rule by a few.² Trade associations promote the practice of profit making, but they are chartered as nonprofit democratic associations. They are designed to express a non-profit (social) purpose. Some trade groups (e.g. Better Business Bureau) seek to fulfill that purpose by working for honesty on behalf of the whole business system.

[38] They meet each year in November/December in Geneva. Independence and objectivity are deemed vital to this international judicial inquiry. The ILO represents core values for labor in the global arena. Any trade association going global must consider how it may sustain those values (not just hire cheap labor with no human rights) and maintain its relatively democratic structure. Global competition, however, can cause national associations like aluminum to centralize their authority and lose standards in order to become more effective against competitors. The trade group can become like a cartel, a command system that moves into tough competition around the world.

The consequences of such a move from national to global markets are complex sociologically, politically, and economically. We can point here only to the importance of advancing interdisciplinary studies on the subject. Our purpose is limited to demonstrating the basis for developing civil regimes by economic actors as they move into global markets. For details, see the International Labour Organization, http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/norm/enforced/supervis/regsys2.htm#reports. The development of global civil regimes, each industry must find connections within this larger good composed of partially democratic associations. Making these connections is the beginning of a global civil polity.

[39] The facts regarding JCAHO were confirmed for me by Mark Forstneger, Media Relations Specialist of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Notice that the government is not setting standards or monitoring compliance in the case of JCAHO. For a statement about the mission and accreditation practice, see The Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Health Care Organizations, The quote can be found at http://www.jcaho.org/whatwedo_frm.html.

[40] The Commission is planning to move into the global economy. It is studying healthcare standards in world markets. It is assessing ³the clarity of its standards, terminology, and the format, and the applicability of the standards to organizations of different types and in different cultures and countries.² Ibid. See the Joint Commission International Standards http://www.jcrinc.com/generic.asp?durki=1235

[41] The studies reveal the destruction of domestic productive capacity, including small and medium-sized businesses, declining wages, employment opportunities, working conditions and worker rights and security, the deterioration of education, health care and other social services, and more. For a summary of these studies, see Doug Hellinger, Executive Director, the Develop Gap in a statement presented at the First Public Hearing of the International Financial institutions Advisory Commission on civil-society perspectives of the IMF and World Bank on October 20, 1999, U.S. Department of the Treasury, http://www.igc.apc.org/dgap/ifi_testimony.html

[42] See the World Economic Forum (Davos) in Melbourne, Australia, 6-10 September 2000. Walden Bello, ³From Melbourne to Prague: the struggle for a deglobalised world,²  Walden Bello is a co-director of Focus on the Global South, Bangkok, Thailand and Professor of Public Administration and Sociology at the

University of the Philippines http://www.s11.org/bello.html

[43]  Representatives of various NGOs in association with the United Nations began to hold discussions on the shape of a ³Peopleıs Assembly.² These discussions were held chiefly under the aegis of a task force of the Conference of Non-Governmental Organizations in Consultative Relationship with the UN, a group known mainly by its acronym, CONGO. CONGOıs ³Task Force on UN Reform,² as the group was formally known, began to hold ad hoc meetings in New York and Geneva in late 1997 and early 1998, focusing in on the topic of a global  ³Millennium NGO Forum.² Over the first six months of 1998, these discussions gave shape to a proposal for such a Forum. In expanded meeting of the CONGO Task Force on UN Reform held in New York on 15 July 1998, a general outline was presented to a group of more than 100 NGO representatives‹many of whom represented large groups of NGOs or NGO networks around the world. That gathering gave its consensus to the outline and approved the formation of an interim executive committee to explore the idea in further detail and to set up a method by which the Forum could be organized in a manner that was as ³democratic, transparent and representational² as possible. See International Communications Gap http://www.igc.org/igc/gateway/about.html.

The Alliance for Democracy has gone further with a model democratic regime called A Common Agreement on Investment and Society, drafted by a diverse group of 14 citizens. It proposes a network of elected ³local system organizations² with global development assistance instituted, supported by a world economic parliament to monitor global corporations, a localized economic and environmental court. All these proposals are discussion documents that are informed by a wide range of NGO input. My thanks to David Lewitt for providing me with this reference on the Alliance.

[44] For example a UNEP division called the Technology, Economics and Industry (TIE), encourages decision-makers in government and business to adopt practices that are cleaner and safer for the environment. It aims to make ³efficient use of natural resources, ensure environmentally sound management of chemicals, incorporate environmental costs and reduce pollution and risks to humans and the environment.² In particular, TIEıs International Environmental Technology Centre (IETC) in Japan facilitates the transfer of green technologies to address urban problems such as sewage, air pollution, solid waste disposal and noise, and sustainable management or lakes and reservoir basins. The Chemicals Unit of the TIE Division promotes global action on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). It supports the Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety (IFCS) whose purpose is to review the state of knowledge on 12 POPs chemicals. It asks experts to determine the measures needed to reduce the risk from hazardous chemicals. It is the global agency for developing an environmental protection system within IBOs. Persistent organic pollutants (POPs) endure in the environment for a long

time, and are toxic to humans and/or wildlife. They have a strong tendency to bioaccumulate in the food chain, and are prone to long-range transport. POPs represent a very small percentage of chemicals in commerce, and many are already strictly regulated or not currently in production. However, because of their physical and chemical properties, the regulation of POPs has become an international policy issue based upon their possible effects on human health and potential environmental risks.

[45] Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas showed sufficient awareness on the relations between standards and rules, evidence and facts, and facts and judgments -- to inquire into the principles of ³procedural justice.² Roscoe Pound, Justice According to Law (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1951).

[46] Other international treaties have been implemented under UNEPıs auspices, including those on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal (Basel Convention), on illegal trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora (CITES), on migratory species (CMS), on the conservation and sustainable use of the worldıs biological diversity and its components, and on the protection of regional seas. UNEP provides the Secretariat for these Conventions. In addition, UNEP has rendered support to the negotiation, adoption and implementation of the Convention to Combat Desertification and the UN Framework Convention on

Climate Change. UNEP and the FAO are now in the process of catalyzing negotiations for the elaboration of a Convention on the Information Exchange on International Trade in the field of Toxic Chemicals. The Energy and OzonAction Unit plays an important role in bringing government, industries and NGOs together to strengthen climate and ozone layer protection. The OzonAction Programme under the Multilateral Ozone Fund assists developing countries and countries with economies in transition for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer by providing a clearinghouse function, networking of National Ozone Units, training and institutional strengthening services. The Energy Programme facilitates implementation of the climate change treaty and promotes use of low carbon and renewable technologies. The Production and Consumption Unit works to improve worldwide awareness and understanding of cleaner and safer production issues, and to promote the use of related management tools and technologies leading to efficient use of natural resources and pollution prevention. The United Nations Environmental Programme, http://www.un.org/partners/business/unep.htm.

[47] Academic and professional associations in chemistry work on global problems. In 1962 the American Chemical Society (ACS) established the International Activities Committee (IAC) to study and encourage ACS participation and global cooperation in international chemical education, professional activities, and scientific matters of interest to chemists and chemical engineers. But they have yet to work as an organization with trade groups and UNEP. With representation from key leaders in academia and industry worldwide, the IAC is made up of four subcommittees. The International Outreach/Developing Countries Subcommittee recommends committee action with respect to emerging nations, including information transfer and professional development activities. The Inter-Society Communications and Meetings Subcommittee fosters relation-ships with other societies and organizations.  The Scientific Freedom and Human Rights Subcommittee monitors human rights net-works and proposes Society action when the human rights or scientific freedom of scientists is abridged. The International Policy Issues Subcommittee examines events that affect the chemical enterprise worldwide. For more information about ACS International Activities, contact the American Chemical Society Office of International Activities 1155 Sixteenth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20036 USA 202-872-4449 (tel); 202-872-6317 (fax) intlacts@acs.org; www.acs.org/international. The Office of International Activities and the International Activities Committee collaborates with chemical societies worldwide and with UNESCO, UNDP, and IOCD International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry National Research Council American Association for the Advancement of Science National Academy of Sciences National Science Foundation

[48] The UNECE Protocol is supported by the chemical industries in North America and Europe. The North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation (NACEC) has adopted a program on the sound management of persistent toxic substances. The UNECE Protocol and the NACEC program provide important precedent and guidance in the negotiation of a global agreement.

[49]  See the International Council of Chemical Associations. http://www.chem.unep.ch/pops/iccappops.html. According to industry associations, the process should use numerical screening criteria to identify possible POPs to determine the need for further risk assessment or a reevaluation of current risk management. In evaluating risks, separate consideration should be given to human and environmental effects. Emphasis should be given to any likelihood of exposure; itıs possible magnitude and the characteristics and size of the exposed population.

The chemical industry now supports risk assessments, but alternatives to POPs must also be subject to socio-economic and risk assessments. Risk management decisions must take into account all available management options, including production information, control techniques, and best practices. The process and methods for assessments should recognize the participation of stakeholders, including industry experts, as well as the unique needs of developing countries.

[50] Changing global rules (as in environmental protection, job safety, and health) impacts on the well being of small businesses. Small and medium sized businesses (SMEs) in the chemical industry, for example, face special difficulties with problems in management and marketing skills, uneasy access to long term finance and to relevant information sources. Given the key role of chemical industry SMEs with respect to employment and sectoral competitiveness, an action program is needed to support their development. http://www.cefic.be/Position/Tea/pp_tm016.htm#environment

[51]  Trillium Asset Management is a registered investment adviser founded in 1982, headquartered in Boston, MA. It is an employee owned firm. www.trilliuminvest.com. Religious institutions are actively engaged in social investment, including the Roman Catholic Church. Dolores Kong, ³Being Invested,² The Boston Globe, May 30, 2001, p. C.

[52] For discussion on justice principles, see Edmund Cahn, The Predicament of Democratic Man (NY: Macmillan, 1961); Giorgio Del Vecchio, Justice: An Historical and Philosophical Essay, ed. By A.H. Cambell (Edinburgh University Press, 1952).

On ³corporate citizenship,² The Conference Board of Canada released its latest research report on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) at the 1999 Corporate Social Responsibility Conference today.  Gilles Rhéaume,

Vice-president, Policy, Business and Society presented a report that identified best practices in the management of corporate citizenship in the areas of corporate practices and human resources, and community outreach. Part of the Conference Boardıs Corporate Social Responsibility Initiative, the report is the result of more than a year of intense research, and consultation with 90 individuals at 21 leading Canadian companies. The Conference Board of Canada. http://www.newswire.ca/releases/April1999/27/c6316.html. The Journal Business Ethics regularly lists its 100 ³Best Corporate Citizens. Business Ethics Magazine http://www.business-ethics.com/index.html

[53] Business leaders participate in the annual Trade and Development Board, and the quadrennial Conference. Global companies work with the secretariat on projects of mutual interest that have a development impact. UNCTAD brings together the business sector, non-governmental organizations and government representatives from 172 countries to develop operational partnerships. It is a perfect place to advance a concept of justice and democracy into free markets around the world. UNCTADıs membership consists of 188 States. Many intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, including business associations, have observer status and participate actively in its work. It has a staff of approximately 400 in Geneva, Switzerland. Its annual budget of about US$ 50 million is drawn from the UNıs regular budget. In addition, it has technical co-operation activities of about US$ 24 million a year, which are financed from extra-budgetary resources. Furthermore, business works directly with the UNCTAD secretariat to advance the goals of the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change, through the development of greenhouse gas emissions trading schemes, in the International Emissions Trading Association. It also works with the organizationıs Biotrade Initiative on promoting poverty alleviation and sustainable development among indigenous peoples. And it works on advancing investment in the Least Developed Countries through support for a series of investment guides. These are just a few examples of the many ways in which the business sector participates in this organizationıs multi-faceted work.UN Conference on Trade and Development. http://www.un.org/partners/business/unctad.htm.

[54] The assertion that the media do not represent core values could be demonstrated by empirical studies but that is not our purpose here. Such research on the mass media has been going on for a long time. Here are some examples. W. E. Adam and F. Schreibman, Television Network News: Issues in Content Research (Washington, D.C.: George Washington University Press, 1978). D. L. Altheide, (1985). Media power (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985). A. N. Crigler (Ed.), The Psychology of Political Communication (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. (1996). Elfriede Fürsich and Eli P. Lester Roushanzamir, ³Corporate Expansion, Textual Expansion: Commodification Model of Communication, Journal of Communications Inquiry 25:4 (October 2001), pp. 375-395.  For more, see the selected bibliography at Wakefield University, http://www.wfu.edu/~louden/Political%20Communication/Bibs/MEDIA.html.

[55] Critics say that lords and barons rule the air space. The ³mass media² is for them a private government. People feel controlled, indoctrinated, and ³programmed.² Big corporations govern without proper representation from the people. For this outlook, see The Center for Cognitive Liberty and Ethics, http://www.alchemind.org/issues/mass_media_index.htm.

[56] The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is a private, nonprofit corporation created by Congress in 1967. The Corporation, not a business or a government agency, promotes public telecommunications services (television, radio, and online) ³for the American people.² CPB invests in more than 1,000 local radio and television stations...their services, their programs, and their ideas. These CPB-funded stations reach ³virtually every household in the country.²

 The Public Broadcasting System (PBS), on the other hand, is a private, non-profit media enterprise owned and operated by member stations. It produces and distributes programs. It is funded by CPB and member stations. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is a private corporation created by the federal government that does not produce or distribute programs. The federal government funds it.

[57]  Social investment is a profession. Global businesses have subsidiaries that require experts to figure out in assessing the ³ethics of investment.² Peter D. Kinder, Steven Lydenberg, and Amy Domini, The Social Investment Almanac (NY: Henry Holt, 1992).

[58] See respectively, the Carnegie Commission on Educational Television, Public Television: A Program for Action (NY: Bantam, 1967). The Working Group on Public Broadcasting, ³Public Broadcasting: A National Asset to be Preserved, Promoted and Protected,² John Wicklein, ed., December 1988. Twentieth Century Fund Task Force on Public Television, Quality Time? (NY: The Twentieth Century Fund Press, 1993). In 1998, Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-LA), the chair of the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications, proposed a spectrum fee on commercial broadcasters to fund public broadcasting. My thanks go to David Croteau and John Hoynes for these sources. See David Croteau and John Hoynes, The Business of Media (Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press, 2001.), 228.