Andrew Case at Transterrestrial Musings links to a rather thin article in the CSM on space law and property rights, and observes:
It’s important for the long term future that we work out a method of assigning ownership and jurisdiction for extraterrestrial bodies that is widely accepted as fair. The alternative is to plant the seeds of future conflicts like the range wars which marred Americas westward expansion.
He expresses valid concerns that either the “common heritage of mankind” worldview will continue, or (at the other extreme) a dystopian corporate oligopoly will emerge, neither of which will maximize the potential of space settlment and development.
So, what sorts of broad provisions could be established to better ensure something more palatable and useful?
In knocking this topic around with others, I’ve come up with a few ideas for a space property rights framework, which I’m tossing out here as food for thought:
- Establish, by multilateral recognition, an authority specific to the body to be settled/developed, as a registrar for claims on that body.
- That Authority performs a survey of the body for which it is responsible.
- Based on that survey, the Authority divides the body into a number of similarly-sized tracts (the number and size dependent upon the surface features, resources, etc.), and divides each tract into a number of similarly-sized parcels (perhaps the size of a typical American county). The parcel becomes the basic unit to be claimed.
- Where a known “special feature” exists, the relevant parcel(s) is/are designated a preserve. This could include historical sites (landers) or unique/special geological sites (think National Parks).
- To prevent gerrymandering of valuable resources, the boundaries of the parcels are predefined and not set by the claimants themselves.
- To limit cherry-picking of best parcels from the start, tracts are opened up only periodically — that is, claims are limited only to tracts opened for claim. This forces development to occur in clustered areas (making trade more feasible than for widely-dispersed settlements), and can be used as an interim protection for special feature areas (e.g.: disallowing settlement in Valles Marineris or Tycho until the regions can be explored more thoroughly and a more specific preserve area designated within the related tract). Exceptions could be made for parcels rich which are located in closed tracts, if they are particularly rich in a resource vital to settlement activity (water, nitrates, or uranium, for instance).
- To prevent early concentration of ownership in a few hands, parcels to be claimed:
- must be initially occupied within a brief standard period following the registration of the claim (e.g.: two years);
- must be continuously occupied and worked for a standard period to formally vest the claim (e.g.: five years);
- can only be claimed one-at-a-time — any given entity (individual, academic, commercial, non-profit, etc.), in whatever form or incarnation or extension or subsidiary, can only participate in one claim at any given time, whether as a solo operation, a joint venture, etc. This limitation should not include subcontracting and the like, as the exchange of goods and services between the claimants would form the basis of a fledgling local economy.
- are limited to one parcel only for any national government, though the parcel size might be slightly larger for national claims in compensation for this limitation.
- As long as the parcel is continually occupied and worked during the claim period, ownership of the operations and the in-process claim may change hands without “restarting the clock”, subject to the aforementioned limitation on multiple ownership.
- Following the vesting of the claim, the claimant is freed to register another land claim, and is free to sell, trade, and/or subdivide the parcel as they wish.
Granted, these ideas don’t cover every possibility (nor would such detailed rules be desirable), and leave open many questions (e.g.: under what authority would the Authority be established, and what would prevent it from being unduly influenced by those wishing to circumvent the rules it exists to implement?). So, kick it around — what would you change, what would you add, and what kinds of things would you NOT want to see in a space property rights scheme?