The notion of global public goods, which originated in economic theory, has been on the verge of being accepted by legal systems over the last ten years. In this context, a dialogue is needed between economists and jurists on the meaning and role of this notion in the globalization process. The economic section focused first on terminology and its role in analysis: an examination of climate negotiations on the one hand, and the interactions between climate policy and the exploitation of fossil fuels on the other, highlighted the tensions between economic and legal considerations, as well as the complexity of political-economic analysis. Legally speaking, the notion of global public goods, unlike that of the common heritage of mankind, has not been enshrined in legal texts. Even if it is not directly operational, and despite the obstacles encountered by this notion, it cannot be ruled out that it can be used as a dynamic process, the implementation of which calls for critical evaluation. In the absence of any real synergy between the economic and legal approaches, the seminar identified an institutional perspective (in the absence of a world government, the notion of GPG opens up new areas for negotiation and monitoring) and a substantive perspective (the only acceptable conception of the notion of common good is a pluralist common that allows values to be ordered, and actors to be given responsibility in a differentiated, non-uniform way). The search for a pluralist common good imposes two conditions: in practice, it must be based on both international and domestic law; and, in theory, it requires us to move beyond the traditional vision of a hierarchical, stable legal order, to develop the means to design and implement an interactive, evolving order.
Seminar