Trade, Money, and Finances
Expanding and Reinforcing the Objectives of the Kyoto Protocol: Inciting International Stakeholders to Engage in Greenhouse-gas Transparency
Setting up an Arbitration Tribunal on Debt: An Alternative Solution?
Political Oversight of the ICANN: A Briefing for the WSIS Summit
China Sustainable Development Strategy Report 2011. Greening the Economic Transformation
Swords into Plowshares
People’s Food Sovereignty Statement
Nairobi World Parliamentary Forum Resolution
The Extraterritorial Scope of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
Final Declaration of the Sixth World Parliamentary Forum - Caracas 2006
Proposals for a Fair and Sustainable Economy
From Westernization to Globalization. A Brief History of Chinese Modernity
Alternative World Water Forum
Oil slicks: An Ocean of Profits
Alterglobalization, a Long-term Process Leading to Alternatives
Rio + ???
Post-2015: Global Action for an Inclusive and Sustainable Future
Rio+20: Failed Diplomacy, Feeble Democracy
Proposals for a New World Governance
Moving Toward a New World Governance
Building Consensus on Food Safety Programs among Consumer and Public Health Organizations
After Copenhagen, Some Light on the Horizon
Henceforth, the Keys to the Future are Responsibility, Solidarity, and Courage
Basic Food Income: Option or Obligation?
The UN and World Governance
The economist John Maynard Keynes came to the postwar table with an innovative project for the future of world trade, which he called the International Trade Organization (ITO), supported by an international central bank, the International Clearing Union (ICU). The ICU was meant to issue a world currency for trade, the "bancor." Why the ITO and the ICU never materialized, and what would have changed if they had, is a sobering story from which we have a lot to learn.
It tells us that, in a rational world, it would be possible to build a trading system serving the needs of people in both the North and the South. With an ITO and an ICU, we could have had a world order in which no country could run a huge trade deficit (the US deficit stood at $716 billion in 2005) or the huge trade surplus of contemporary China.
Under such a system, crushing the third-world debt and the devastating structural-adjustment policies applied by the World Bank and the IMF would have been unthinkable, although the system would not have abolished capitalism. If we could resurrect Keynes’s concept, another world really might be possible: he figured out how to make it work more than 60 years ago. His plan would have to be dusted off and fine tuned, but its core remains relevant.