Assuring the sustainability of space activities

The growth of new space systems and the continued creation of orbital debris could in a few years make activities in Earth orbit unsustainable, so finding cost-effective ways to sustain space activities in Earth orbit is essential. Because outer space activities serve the needs of the military–intelligence, civil, and commercial communities, each with their own requirements, creating the necessary international agreements for reaching and maintaining a condition of sustainability will not be easy. This paper summarizes the primary issues for the international space community regarding our future ability to reap the benefit of space systems in Earth orbit. It explores several of the efforts to develop international agreements that would lead to or support the sustainability of space activities and examines the benefits and drawbacks of each approach. In particular, it reviews progress within the UN COPUOS, and examines the EU's proposal for an international Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities. It also notes the need for states to establish or expand their own space legal infrastructure to conform to the UN treaties and guidelines for space activities.     

US space policy assessed

Recognizing that, in the wake of major geopolitical changes, technological developments and global recession, the US space programme needed to change, then Vice President Dan Quayle commissioned a review of the USA's space policy which was completed at the very end of 1992. Its findings — in summary form — and recommendations are reprinted here.     

The CPR approach to space sustainability: Commentaries on Weeden and Chow

Space sustainability is emerging as a core element of national policy and international initiatives. At this time, however, a coherent strategy and supporting policies have not been developed. To initiate a conversation to develop such a strategy, the authors have applied the principles developed by Elinor Ostrom for terrestrial common-pool resource (CPR) governance to near-Earth orbit in space. A concern arises as to whether Ostrom's eight principles are a good “fit” for application to space CPR because of the unique physical characteristics of space and the legal underpinnings of our presence there. This commentary will address selected issues raised by Weeden and Chow, and suggest alternative ways to approach near-Earth orbit sustainability.     

Reconstituting the US space programme

This response to Alex Roland's article, ‘Priorities in space for the USA’, argues that his analysis and conclusions are based on shaky historical evidence. Professor Roland's interpretation of NASA's priorities since 1959 is challenged, and it is pointed out that the manned spaceflight programme has widespread support in the USA. The most important issue, raised by the article but not treated extensively enough, is whether the pursuit of the widely accepted emphasis on manned spaceflight is a large-scale societal mistake.     

Setting priorities in US space science

Two new long-range US space science strategy studies are notable not only for what the new reports say and do for their respective discipline areas but also for what they demonstrate in terms of shared conclusions and in terms of the feasibility of forging consensus on community priorities. Both studies engaged a broad segment of the research community to survey their respective fields, recommend top priority scientific goals and directions for the next decade, provide recommendations for programmatic directions and explicit priorities for government investment in research facilities, and address issues of advanced technology, infrastructure, interagency coordination, education, and international cooperation. The two studies demonstrate that cross-program priorities can be established when a community sees the effort as being beneficial to the long-term health of the field.     

Taking a common-pool resources approach to space sustainability: A framework and potential policies

This paper examines Nobel Prize Winner Elinor Ostrom's principles for sustainable governance of common-pool resources (CPR), capturing the best practices of CPRs over the years, which avoid the “Tragedy of the Commons” without being either completely privatized or controlled by a Leviathan entity. Ostrom's principles highlight, inter alia, the need for clear boundary definitions, rules tailored to fit the domain, who has a say in formulation of collective-choice agreements and operational rules, monitoring of behavior, graduated penalties, and conflict resolution mechanisms. In the context of the space domain they highlight issues such as the definition of where space begins, gaps in the existing liability regime, the concept of collaborative space situational awareness, and how best to include emerging and developing space actors in negotiations and decision making. The paper concludes that Ostrom's principles highlight specific areas on which to focus initial space sustainability efforts and national and international policy. It also recommends further analysis into how best to translate her principles to the space domain, where they may not be wholly applicable because of the unique nature of space, and how to evolve space governance institutions and mechanisms to best suit the unique environment of outer space.     

The space exploration initiative Perspective from the US space science community

As NASA struggles to fund and execute its ambitious Space Station Freedom and Mission to Planet Earth programmes, President Bush has pledge the nation to a programme to return humans to the Moon to stay and to explore Mars. While not predicted on scientific grounds, this Space Exploration Initiative welcomes the support and participation of the scientific community. Success in establishing this relationship will depend on how the initiative is structured, sold and managed within the context of scientists' past experience with large, manned flight programmes.     

Change and continuity in US space policy

2010 saw both the unveiling of a new US National Space Policy and the announcement of a fundamentally different strategy for US human spaceflight that would move from the NASA-government-led Apollo-style approach to a greater reliance on the private sector and international cooperation. This viewpoint puts forward arguments on why change in the US approach to human spaceflight is needed, while acknowledging that achieving it in the face of vested interests and threats to jobs and livelihoods is extremely difficult. It suggests that greater US recognition of the need to ensure the sustainability of space activity (by addressing debris, radio-frequency interference and potential deliberate disruption of spacecraft), and an apparent willingness to countenance international norms to govern space activities, could be the new policy’s most lasting heritage.     

Debating the future of US space policy

A briefing on the subject of US space policy was held in Washington in July 2009 by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Based around some of its recent publications, while emphasizing the US situation and direction, the briefing did not ignore the context of international space activity. In particular it considered China's spacefaring development and suggested ways of engaging more fruitfully with that country. This report presents a summary of the issues raised and recommendations made.     

The challenge of the US space station

We are on the verge of a new era of commercial and industrial expansion in space that will have a major impact on America's future and on the future of the world. It is a turning point that will set the US national agenda in space well into the 21st century, and, as such, will have an important impact on space-related activities worldwide. The USA is now gearing up to face the challenges of this new era. James Beggs, NASA Administrator, describes the US space station programme.     

A brief analysis of US space employment

Space policy is an area of industrial economic policy. The space economy would vanish without the active role of the state. Although space may appear exotic to economist, it is not impossible to provide a quick economic insight into one of the most important aspects of all economic activities - the people employed. The space industry can attract employees from other industries in two ways. First, according to individual preferences and motivations. Second, on the basis of higher wages. Statistical evidence suggests the latter is more common. Moreover wages do not reflect productivity. NASA employees earn much more than employees in law or medicine. This does not match the social importance of these activities. Space employs many more people that stated by the OECD. Taking all activities together space employs almost half a million people in the USA. $1 billion given to NASA creates up to 24 000 vacancies in the space industry and also provides room for another 40 000 in the space economy in the long run. Current changes to the US national space programme suggest a decrease of $1.6 billion per year, implying a loss of up to 39 000 jobs.     

US export controls and Canadian autonomy to collaborate on international space missions

Canada is a space power with unique technical niches that support opportunities for collaboration on space technologies. When U.S.-origin space technologies are involved Canada's ability to collaborate internationally may be conditional on US law and policy. As a result, US export control law can be directly linked to the success or failure of Canadian collaboration. This article examines the strategic impact of U.S. export controls on Canadian autonomy to collaborate on international missions, including multi-use missions. Canadian space export control policy is also examined more broadly with the goal of providing specific policy recommendations that will enhance Canada's future as an international space actor.     

The US civil space sector: alternate futures

The initiation of a new vision for exploration, as articulated by US President George W. Bush on 14 January 2004, has excited much interest. This article analyzes the dynamics and potential for changes in the processes and participants in future space policy and space exploration activities. It examines a range of possible alternative paths for NASA and the US government's space exploration activities, the international space community and the private sector in the articulation and pursuit of future space exploration endeavors. It concludes that the new vision for exploration brings about both an opportunity and indeed a necessity for movement towards new and innovative methods and institutions for the effective conduct of multidimensional and multilateral space exploration activities in the future.     

International involvement in the US space station programme

This article considers the issues surrounding the nature and extent of involvement in the US space station initiative. The motives and objectives of US cooperation with its allies are analysed from the perspective of both the USA and its potential partners. Guidelines for the forthcoming negotiations between these parties are elaborated through a review of past experience in international space cooperation. Developing a framework for collaboration will require significant trade-offs and will have to accommodate a number of not always consistent interests.     

International relations in space: A US view

A Task Force of the NASA Advisory Council was recently asked to assess whether the changing global context for space activities required any adjustments in NASA's approach to its international activities. This article presents the Task Force's major findings and conclusions. The USA must reinvigorate its civil space programme, with responsibility clearly assigned, and long-term goals and directions established. Through cooperation, it must bring other nations to share those goals and move in the same directions.     

US space commercialization — effects on space law and domestic law

This report by Harry Marshall Jr is based on a paper presented to the 27th International Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space of the International Institute of Space Law during the 35th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, Lausanne, Switzerland, 9 October 1984. It outlines US attitudes and legislation on the commercialization of space, in particular the space programme of President Reagan, LANDSAT commercialization, ELV commercialization and conflicts of space law.