Program goals for the NASA/NOAA Earth Observation Program derived from a stakeholder value network analysis

The 2007 US National Research Council Decadal Survey for Earth Science and Applications from Space was the first consensus perspective produced by the US Earth Science community of the relative priorities among a sequence of 17 satellite missions over the course of the next decade. However, the Decadal Survey only captured the perspective of the science community, leading to questions about the inclusion of broader priorities from constituent communities and stakeholders. We present a stakeholder value network analysis for the NASA/NOAA Earth Observation Program. The analysis includes a rigorous articulation of the needs and objectives of 13 major stakeholders and a complete stakeholder value network with 190 individual “value flows” that capture the interactions between all the stakeholders. It produces a novel stakeholder map, graphically indicating the outputs most likely to create a lasting Earth Science program. The most important value loops and program outputs are used to derive a set of high-level program goals that suggest what NASA and NOAA should do, as well as how they should conduct business. The analysis concludes that international partnerships represent a strong potential partner for certain science missions with greater potential value delivery than currently-prioritized efforts with defense stakeholders and concludes that weather and land-use missions, in addition to climate missions, should be given highest priority; water, human health, and solid Earth missions should be given lower priority based on each science category's potential for delivering value to the entire stakeholder network.     

Needs in space education for the 21st century

There is increasingly broad concern in the USA today about the quality, vibrancy and appeal of science and technical education in general and space education in particular. There needs to be a robust link between the educational community (i.e. the primary and secondary schools as well as colleges and universities) and a well-defined space research and exploration agenda that is strongly supported by the space industry, NASA and other relevant US governmental agencies. Without such a renewal of mission and new goals it will be difficult to re-invigorate and expand quality space education programs. A workshop was therefore convened in 2003 to analyze the problem, discuss new initiatives, organize a survey inviting suggestions from a range of relevant players and draw conclusions on what the USA needs to do to improve space education in the 21st century. Although the focus of this workshop was on space education in the USA the international dimensions of this problem were also addressed and the firm conclusion was reached that similar issues and concerns apply in Europe, Canada, Japan and other spacefaring nations. This article is an edited version of a White Paper subsequently produced to highlight the problem, summarize the proceedings of the workshop and present the results of the survey. Greater clarity in the definition of national space goals, the upgrading of teachers’ skills and an increase in technical scholarships are among the steps recommended.     

Activities of the COSPAR Panel on Exploration supporting the Global Exploration Roadmap

The Global Exploration Roadmap (GER) is driven by several goals and objectives that include space science, the search for life as well as preparatory science activities to enable human space exploration. The Committee on Space Research (COSPAR), through its Commissions and Panels provides an international forum that supports and promotes space exploration worldwide. COSPAR's Panel on Exploration (PEX) investigates a stepwise approach of preparatory research on Earth and in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) to facilitate a future global space exploration program. We summarize recent activities and workshops of PEX in support of the GER.     

Human spaceflight and an asteroid redirect mission: Why?

The planning of human spaceflight programmes is an exercise in careful rationing of a scarce and expensive resource. Current NASA plans are to develop the new capability for human-rated launch into space to replace the Space Transportation System (STS), more commonly known as the Space Shuttle, combined with a heavy lift capability, and followed by an eventual Mars mission. As an intermediate step towards Mars, NASA proposes to venture beyond Low Earth Orbit to cis-lunar space to visit a small asteroid which will be captured and moved to lunar orbit by a separate robotic mission. The rationale for this and how to garner support from the scientific community for such an asteroid mission are discussed. Key points that emerge are that a programme usually has greater legitimacy when it emerges from public debate, mostly via a Presidential Commission, a report by the National Research Council or a Decadal Review of science goals etc. Also, human spaceflight missions need to have support from a wide range of interested communities. Accordingly, an outline scientific case for a human visit to an asteroid is made. Further, it is argued here that the scientific interest in an asteroid mission needs to be included early in the planning stages, so that the appropriate capabilities (here the need for drilling cores and carrying equipment to, and returning samples from, the asteroid) can be included.     

Redefining safety in commercial space: Understanding debates over the safety of private human spaceflight initiatives in the United States

In 2009 President Obama proposed a budget for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that canceled the Constellation program and included the development of commercial crew transportation systems into low Earth orbit. This significant move to shift human spaceflight into the private sector sparked political debate, but much of the discourse has focused on impacts to “safety.” Although no one disputes the importance of keeping astronauts safe, strategies for defining safety reveal contrasting visions for the space program and opposing values regarding the privatization of U.S. space exploration. In other words, the debate over commercial control has largely become encoded in arguments over safety. Specifically, proponents of using commercial options for transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) argue that commercial vehicles would be safe for astronauts, while proponents of NASA control argue that commercial vehicles would be unsafe, or at least not as safe as NASA vehicles. The cost of the spaceflight program, the technical requirements for designing a vehicle, the track record of the launch vehicle, and the experience of the launch provider are all incorporated into what defines safety in human spaceflight. This paper analyzes these contested criteria through conceptual lenses provided by fields of science and technology policy (STP) and science, technology, and society (STS). We ultimately contend that these differences in definition result not merely from ambiguous understandings of safety, but from intentional and strategic choices guided by normative positions on the commercialization of human spaceflight. The debate over safety is better considered a proxy debate for the partisan preferences embedded within the dispute over public or private spaceflight.     

The future of space medicine.

In November 2000, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and its partners in the International Space Station (ISS) ushered in a new era of space flight: permanent human presence in low-Earth orbit. As the culmination of the last four decades of human space flight activities. the ISS focuses our attention on what we have learned to date. and what still must be learned before we can embark on future exploration endeavors. Space medicine has been a primary part of our past success in human space flight, and will continue to play a critical role in future ventures. To prepare for the day when crews may leave low-Earth orbit for long-duration exploratory missions, space medicine practitioners must develop a thorough understanding of the effects of microgravity on the human body, as well as ways to limit or prevent them. In order to gain a complete understanding and create the tools and technologies needed to enable successful exploration. space medicine will become even more of a highly collaborative discipline. Future missions will require the partnership of physicians, biomedical scientists, engineers, and mission planners. This paper will examine the future of space medicine as it relates to human space exploration: what is necessary to keep a crew alive in space, how we do it today, how we will accomplish this in the future, and how the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) plans to achieve future goals.     

Humans and robots: hand in grip

As we move boldly forward into the 21st century, there has rarely been a more exciting time in which to contemplate the future of space exploration. The President of the United States has made a new and ambitious commitment to exploration of the solar system and beyond. Robotic partners will play a vital role in ensuring that the Vision is truly "sustainable and affordable". Relevant science and technology will be discussed with particular emphasis on expertise from NASA Ames Research Center of which the author is Director. The likely evolution of the balance between human explorers and robotic explorers will be addressed.     

Resources of free space vs. flags and footprints on Mars

Human space exploration since Apollo appears to lack an overall context. There has been an overall context for the world's space efforts. But it is an unofficial one and it is outmoded, because it was based on a false assumption. This is the space exploration plan articulated by Von Braun in the 1950s and restated as the Integrated Space Program - 1970–1990, whose principal aim is to send humans to explore Mars. The critical underlying assumption of this plan was that Mars is a planet much like Earth, with an active biosphere. This Program has persisted nearly two decades after this underlying assumption has been shown to be false. There is a competing context re-emerging for human space exploration and development which is better fitted to the needs of human society in the post-Cold War era than the Mars program embraced by NASA and, to a large extent, the USSR during the period of US-Russian competition. The original space program uses the resources of free space and provides an economic rationale for human space activity.     

Interdisciplinary Odysseys: The ESF/ESA/ESPI Vienna Conference on Humans in Outer Space

An interdisciplinary approach to discussing the human presence in outer space was undertaken on 11–12 October 2007 by the European Science Foundation (ESF), ESA and the European Space Policy Institute (ESPI). At the ‘Humans in Outer Space—Interdisciplinary Odysseys’ conference space experts and scholars from the area of humanities as well as social sciences discussed the roles disciplines such as law, philosophy, ethics, culture, art and psychology will increasingly play in space exploration. Conference output took form in the ‘Vienna Vision’, which provides a unique European perspective on the various needs and interests of humanities and social sciences linked with space exploration. This report presents the goals and outcome of the conference, as well describing the analysis leading to the creation of the Vienna Vision.     

The roles of humans and robots in exploring the solar system

Historically, advocates of solar system exploration have disagreed over whether program goals could be entirely satisfied by robotic missions. Scientists tend to argue that robotic exploration is most cost-effective. However, the human space program has a great deal of support in the general public, thereby enabling the scientific element of exploration to be larger than it might be as a stand-alone activity. A comprehensive strategy of exploration needs a strong robotic component complementing and supporting human missions. Robots are needed for precursor missions, for crew support on planetary surfaces, and for probing dangerous environments. Robotic field assistants can provide mobility, access to scientific sites, data acquisition, visualization of the environment, precision operations, sample acquisition and analysis, and expertise to human explorers. As long as space exploration depends on public funds, space exploration must include an appropriate mix of human and robotic activity.     

NASA's integrated space transportation plan

Improvements in the safety, reliability and affordability of current and future space transportation systems must be achieved if NASA is to perform its mission and if the U.S. space industry is to reach its full potential. In response to Presidential Policy in 1994, NASA, working with our industrial partners, initiated several efforts including the X-33, X-34, X-37 and Advanced Space Transportation programs with the goal of demonstrating the technologies that could enable these goals. We have learned that emerging technologies will enable the needed advancements but that more development along multiple, competing paths is needed. We have learned that developing requirements diligently and in partnership with industry will allow us to better converge with commercial capabilities. We have learned that commercial markets are not growing as fast as projected earlier, but there are still possibilities in the near-term to pursue alternate paths that can make access to space more robust. The goal of transitioning NASA's space transportation needs to commercial launch vehicles remains the key aim of our efforts and will require additional investment to reduce business and technical risks to acceptable levels.     

The NASA astrobiology program

The new discipline of astrobiology addresses fundamental questions about life in the universe: "Where did we come from?" "Are we alone in the universe?" "What is our future beyond the Earth?" Developing capabilities in biotechnology, informatics, and space exploration provide new tools to address these old questions. The U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has encouraged this new discipline by organizing workshops and technical meetings, establishing a NASA Astrobiology Institute, providing research funds to individual investigators, ensuring that astrobiology goals are incorporated in NASA flight missions, and initiating a program of public outreach and education. Much of the initial effort by NASA and the research community was focused on determining the technical content of astrobiology. This paper discusses the initial answer to the question "What is astrobiology?" as described in the NASA Astrobiology Roadmap.     

Policy for robust space-based earth science,technology and applications

Satellite remote sensing technology has contributed to the transformation of multiple earth science domains, putting space observations at the forefront of innovation in earth science. With new satellite missions being launched every year, new types of earth science data are being incorporated into science models and decision-making systems in a broad array of organizations. Policy guidance can influence the degree to which user needs influence mission design and when, and ensure that satellite missions serve both the scientific and user communities without becoming unfocused and overly expensive. By considering the needs of the user community early on in the mission-design process, agencies can ensure that satellites meet the needs of multiple constituencies. This paper describes the mission development process in NASA and ESA and compares and contrasts the successes and challenges faced by these agencies as they try to balance science and applications within their missions.     

Considerations for development of countermeasures for physiological decrements associated with long-duration space missions

Countermeasures are necessary to offset or minimize the deleterious changes in human physiology resulting from long duration space flight. Exposure to microgravity alters musculoskeletal, neurosensory, and cardiovascular systems with resulting deconditioning that may compromise crew health and performance. Maintaining health and fitness at acceptable levels is critical for preserving performance capabilities required to accomplish specific mission tasks (e.g.—extravehicular activity) and to optimize performance after landing. To enable the goals of the exploration program, NASA is developing a new suite of exercise hardware such as the improved loading device, the SchRED. This presentation will update the status of current countermeasures, correlate hardware advances with improvements in exercise countermeasures, and discuss future activities for safe and productive exploration missions.     

The origin of the smaller, faster, cheaper approach in NASA’s solar system exploration program

The current emphasis on smaller, faster, cheaper (SFC) spacecraft in NASA’s solar system exploration program is the product of a number of interacting – even interdependent – factors. The SFC concept as applied to NASA’s solar system exploration program can be viewed as the vector sum of (1) the space science community’s desire for more frequent planetary missions to plug the data gaps, educate the next generation of scientists, provide missions to targets of opportunity, and enable programmatic flexibility in times of budgetary crisis; (2) the poor publicity garnered by NASA in the early 1990s and the resultant atmosphere of public criticism (creating an opportunity for reform); (3) The Strategic Defense Initiative Organization’s and the National Space Council community’s desire to advance the Space Exploration Initiative and their perception that the NASA culture at the time represented a barrier to the effective pursuit of space exploration; (4) the effective leadership of NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin; and (5) the diminishing budget profile for space sciences in the early 1990s. This paper provides a summary of the origin of the smaller, faster, cheaper approach in the planetary program. A more through understanding of the history behind this policy will enable analysts to assess more accurately the relative successes and failures of NASA’s new approach to solar system exploration.     

Public opinion polls and perceptions of US human spaceflight

A belief exists in the United States about public support for NASA's human spaceflight activities. Many hold that NASA and the cause of the human exploration of space enjoyed outstanding public support and confidence in the 1960s during the era of Apollo and that public support waned in the post-Apollo era, only to sink to quite low depths in the decade of the 1990s. These beliefs are predicated on anecdotal evidence that should not be discounted, but empirical evidence gleaned from public opinion polling data suggests that some of these conceptions are totally incorrect and others are either incomplete or more nuanced than previously believed. This article explores the evolution of public support for space exploration since the 1960s. Using polling data from a variety of sources it presents trends over time and offers comments on the meaning of public perceptions for the evolution of space policy and the development of space exploration in the United States.     

Roadmap to a star

NASA is currently constructing an Interstellar Roadmap that will outline a progressive series of phased technology efforts over several decades that would enable new science beyond the solar system, leading to and culminating in robotics exploration of nearby stars. The Roadmap is structured around a decadal progression of science missions and enabling technologies in which each decadal cycle has an intrinsic value in itself. The Roadmap serves at least 5 functions: 1) it lays the foundation for the development of a broad new strategic thrust of space exploration and development; 2) it outlines a long term progressive program for which each phase has an intrinsic value and can be argued independently of a Star Mission itself; 3) it defines a phased approach that would culminate in a large- scale breakthrough beamed energy capability that would have broad planetary and terrestrial applicability; 4) it describes an endeavor that could provide the technological basis of a U.S. economic engine for the first half of the 21st century; and 5) it provides a focus and a structure around which new government/industry economic relationships may be established. This paper outlines the process for constructing the Roadmap which is due to be completed in Fall 1998. It also poses questions raised by a mission of such scale and suggests some of the strategic value of such a Roadmap.     

Exploring a structured decision approach as a means of fostering participatory space policy making at NASA

In 1996, the National Research Council's Committee on Risk Characterization argued convincingly for the implementation of more participatory approaches to improve policy making by incorporating a wide range of stakeholder values and concerns in policy decisions. Guidance about how to best carry out such an approach in an agency like NASA is less clear. To address this gap, this paper discusses how the use of a structured approach to involve expert and non-expert stakeholders in policy making can improve the quality of stakeholder involvement and resulting decisions for space policy making at NASA. Supporting this discussion are results from two recent experiments. One compared the quality and type of participants’ input in a conventional stakeholder workshop with that of a more structured participatory process. The results from this experiment showed that a structured decision approach leads to more thoughtful and better-informed decisions. A second experiment showed that structured, participatory decision processes can help to legitimize space policy decisions after they have been implemented, leading to future benefits for the space agency.     

A gateway for human exploration of space? The weak stability boundary

NASA's plans for future human exploration of the Solar System describe only missions to Mars. Before such missions can be initiated, much study remains to be done in technology development, mission operations and human performance. While, for example, technology validation and operational experience could be gained in the context of lunar exploration missions, a NASA lunar program is seen as a competitor to a Mars mission rather than a step towards it. The recently characterized weak stability boundary in the Earth–Moon gravitational field may provide an operational approach to all types of planetary exploration, and infrastructure developed for a gateway to the Solar System may be a programmatic solution for exploration that avoids the fractious bickering between Mars and Moon advocates. This viewpoint proposes utilizing the concept of Greater Earth to educate policy makers, opinion makers and the public about these subtle attributes of our space neighborhood.