If copyright, and patents can be protected at international law, surely it would not be unreasonable to give freedom from starvation the same attention.

Noel wrote" planet earth requires policies based on global democracy and justice".

Couldn't agree more. That there are no historical precedents for this policy should not hold us back. The establishment of the UN seems such a long time ago.

It seems we live in a world where a realisation that global and glocal policy are disconnected appears so improbable (for the majority) Or am I wrong? It all seems like a race to the bottom.

A world democratic forum based on one vote one value assumes that each participating government is also democratic. Fat chance.

By far the easiest and effective way to reduce poverty is to ensure democratic systems comply with minimum standards and that, of course, means elimination of corruption and tyranny. That is the only way to ensure that 3rd world debt is properly accounted for and invested wisely. A big ask?

Not as hard as one may think. All it would take is a UN resolution to the effect that the only legitimate government debts that are payable by the citizens of a country are those debts incurred by a legitimately elected government that has complied with accepted international standards of governance and accountability.

In this way the banks and government lenders will know that the "government debts" of a dictator remain the just debts of that individual and his heirs. They would not revert to a debt payable by the victims of the dictatorship once the dictator has died or has been deposed.

And from that point, anyone stupid enough to loan money to a dictator will assume all of the risk associated with such a decision. Potential dictators will see and understand the immediate consequences of their actions and live much shorter lives. At present it is the victims of tyranny who bear the major risk burden associated with 3rd world debt. If that situation was present in any developed country it would clearly fall within the definition of unconscionable conduct.

The world's poor don't need so-called "Rock Icons" or NGO's. They need booring old Auditors. They need electoral auditors, policy auditors and financial auditors. And lots of them.

If only it was that easy What constitutes a acceptable democratic system? One based on one vote one value many democracy's don't follow that(US for example) and some dictatorships are quite friendly and treat their people well. should stop dealing with place's like Monaco? The path to democracy is economic growth so your right the key people here are accountants and governments holding countries to account.
PS it might help if the first world stopped selling arms to them as well.

It is a fascinating reflection on the existence and conduct of this forum that we can be holding simultaneous debates on Christian/Muslim conflict, and on such 1960's style love-in material as the Earth Charter.

On the one topic we find a bunch of hard-core fundamentalists building a case for the eradication, or at least removal from our shores, of a religious group that they disapprove of. But here we find ourselves talking about a document that begins with the assertion "that we are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of peace."

I hate being cynical about such well-meaning efforts, but my absolute conviction is that they are a source of comfort only to those who concoct them, with a spin-off "warm-and-fuzzy" for the save-a-seal-puppy brigade. As far as solving world poverty is concerned, it is about as valuable as a UN resolution.

The really sad part is that it will almost certainly fulfil Mr Preston's wish that "it will become as significant in the 21st century as the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human rights became in the 20th century."

That document http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html was ratified in 1948. Take a look through its pious posturing, and measure it against Vietnam, Rwanda, the Balkans, Iraq and so on, ad nauseam.

I suspect that the Earth Charter will have a similar impact on the world.

World poverty is not going to be solved by railing at globalization or prattling on about "Nurturance [sic] of the human spirit and will to maintain a commitment to eco-justice". It will be solved when those holding the political power deem it in their interests, and in the interests of the people they represent and who elect them, to do something about it. Just as it always has. Sorry.

Great article, Noel.

Perseus, Dictators are just a small part of the corruption problem. Corruption exists within democratically elected governments too and besides it is never down to governments alone. It requires a network, driven as much by mercenary transnationals and profit-crazed financial institutions as it is by the stereotypical tin-pot dictator.

Pericles, Why dismiss a unifying, positive and forward-looking document like the Earth Charter as "1960's style love-in material"? I could just as easily dismiss the trading solution proposed by Bush, Howard et al as a return to an 1800's laissez faire free-for-all.