Volume 7, Issue 3

The protection and enforcement of property rights both at the national and international levels is mostly taken for granted so that the importance of this issue for the smooth flow of international transactions is not always fully realized. One has to remember that about 200 years ago, large scale piracy still constituted a major impediment to international trade, and that both internal and inter-country commerce were unsafe due to the presence of bandits on the highways. Moreover little protection was available for what we call now intellectual property. Today the discussions and controversies surrounding the Internet where neither transactions nor intellectual property rights are yet completely safe are there to remind us of the importance of this question. It is remarkable that international cooperation in terms of the current trade regime has managed to achieve enough protection of property rights to insure relatively smooth trade flows. As the previous example of the Internet or the emergence of new trades in more complex financial instruments and new rights (such as for instance emission trading) shows, a safe future for such transactions is far from guaranteed. This paper intends on the one hand to emphasize the importance of the proper attribution and then protection of property rights at the international level to insure a continuous flow of international transactions. On the other hand, the paper also wants to draw attention to the problems associated with the recognition and protection of property rights when productive processes under the influenced of new opportunities and technologies show increasing returns to scale. More generally however, the paper also intends to stress the importance of cooperative processes in shaping state structures and ultimately the international system.

This working paper speaks of "art and science" of nuancing conflicts in an unusual manner. We use the word "art" specifically to designate non-scientific factors. But when we employ the term "art and science" we have in mind the use of non-economic factors, for example diplomatic know-how and negotiation skill, that can be added to and, even more, intertwined with that which emanates from a rigorous scientific analysis of a conflict. We use the word nuancing to signify small, gradual shifting in positions that parties to a conflict make. The senior author of this paper has had close to 60 years of work with scientific economics and regional science. In the 1940s he was one of the first readers of the monumental work of von Neumann and Morgenstern on game theory — a work that was expected to solve many significant conflicts. Unfortunately, that work and numerous other works by economists, regional scientists and others who have improved and greatly extended game and related theory has had little effective application. Why is this so? The answer lies in the fact they have given only lip-service to non-economic factors such as politics, social conditions and culture. They have in general failed to integrate effectively both the scientific and nonscientific factors. We, too, in Peace Science have failed at effective application. What do we have to say on the Arab/Israel conflict, the Kashimir conflict, the possible forthcoming China/Taiwan conflict? Hence, our thrust in this paper is to urge that we move in the direction of bringing into our studies more of the key nonscientific factors and into our fold scholars who have ability at communication to develop ways to call to the attention of decision makers, political figures, negotiators, mediators and others the findings of our advanced scientific studies modified by such non-scientific factors.

Development trends in the second half of the 20th century reflect two contrasting features. The first is sustained improvement in the living conditions in many countries captured by declining mortality rates, rising percapita incomes, better nutrition, improved education levels, a more impartial judicial and legal system and broader civil and political freedom. It is being increasingly recognized that development is about the quality of people's lives and expansion of their ability to shape their own futures. This generally calls for higher per-capita income via economic growth. It involves more equitable education and job opportunities, greater gender equality, better health and nutrition, cleaner and more sustainable natural environment and expansion of civil liberties (World Bank Report on Quality of Growth, 2000). The second feature consists of periodic setback to the development indicators as a consequence of armed conflict in countries like Sri-Lanka, Afghanistan, Iraq, Angloa, Cambodia, Congo, El Salvador, Guatemala, Lebanon, Sierre Leone, Somalia, Vietnam, Former Yugoslavia, Croatia and former Yugoslavia among others. These armed conflicts have adversely affected social progress leaving behind them a long trail of violence, destruction and misery.