Sustainability Of Space Activities Research Articles

Tanggung Jawab Negara Peluncur Terhadap Pengelolaan Sampah Antariksa Dalam Kerangka Hukum Internasional

This research discusses the responsibilities of launching states in the management of space debris within the framework of International law. The advancement of technology has given rise to a new form of technology known as space technology, or commonly referred to as human-made space objects. The presence of these space objects has had a positive impact on human life on Earth, but it has also undeniably created new challenges in the form of environmental changes in outer space due to the accumulation of space debris resulting from space activities. With an increasing number of human-made space objects being launched into space, there is a risk of space debris accumulation in Earth's orbit, potentially threatening the safety and sustainability of space activities. Currently, there is no specific international regulation governing the management of space debris, which can lead to ambiguity in the responsibilities of states regarding space debris management. Therefore, this research employs a normative approach by examining various legal documents related to space activities, with a focus on the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Uses of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, 1967 (Outer Space Treaty 1967) and the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (Liability Convention 1972). The objective of this research is to determine whether states bear responsibility for the management of space debris.

Towards a new French Technical Regulation adapted to the newspace – orbital systems

In the current context of the multiplication of space actors and orbital projects, the French space ecosystem is fully aware that the challenge ahead will be to ensure the safety and sustainability of space activities. Within the framework of France national law governing space operations and its Technical Regulation, CNES Space Safety Office has been working since 2020 to implement new technical requirements adapted to the NewSpace for the control and return to Earth of space objects.The process of elaboration of these new technical requirements is broken down into several steps: identification of the problematics/themes, translation of these problematics into macroscopic needs and then into specific technical requirements, justification by appropriate studies, implementation through handbooks or tools, and definition of an applicability milestone.On the one hand, the technical aspects are assessed thanks to the support of CNES technical services in the framework of specific working groups, studies ordered by the Space Safety Office, or analysis of international publications. On the other hand, the operators’ views and their programmatic constraints are taken into account – in parallel with the monitoring of international standards – in order to maximize the operators’ acceptance and to minimize the risks of competition bias for the French ecosystem while not losing sight of the objective of safety and sustainability in space. In this context, the awareness of these private actors and their consultation are at the heart of the process of elaborating new technical requirements and their implementation schedule.

Red Light or Green Light?: Legal Considerations for Regulating Traffic in Orbit

The number of functional and non-functional satellites, and other pieces of orbital debris, is constantly increasing due to new space activities, including use of large constellations of small satellites, and the growth of commercial space missions. Congestion in space challenges the ongoing safety, security and sustainability of space activities and space assets. There are now more than one million debris items larger than 1cm orbiting the Earth, and this number may grow exponentially as more than 100,000 additional satellites are planned for launch over the next ten years. These will only add to the increasing risk of damage and destruction to any satellite involved in case of a collision in space. In this context, there is a necessity to develop a Space Traffic Management (STM) regime that encompasses the means and the rules to safely access, conduct activities in, and return from outer space. It would also aim to protect the Long-Term Sustainability (LTS) of space activities by ensuring that space remains a secure environment, even as global society relies ever more on space-based applications such as communications, navigation and Earth observation. This article examines those rules present in the current space legal framework that are relevant to the regulation of space traffic and analyses two key concepts for establishing a comprehensive STM regime, namely the monitoring of space activities through data access and information sharing, and appropriate coordination mechanisms between states, Space Agencies and private operators. space law, regulation, traffic in orbit, space debris, space situational awareness, information sharing, coordination, international cooperation

Implementing the Long-Term Sustainability Guidelines: What’s Next?

In June 2019, following an eight-year process, the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UN COPUOS) adopted twenty-one voluntary, non-binding consensus Guidelines for the Long-Term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities. These guidelines are intended to support states in developing their space capabilities in a manner that enhances the safety of space operations and avoids causing harm to the outer space environment. The guidelines are relevant to both governmental and non-governmental entities. They address all space activities, whether planned or ongoing, and apply to all phases of a space mission, from prelaunch mission design through to operation and end-of-life disposal. The guidelines will only achieve their intended purposes if they are implemented as widely as possible. Successful guideline implementation will both rely on and strengthen international cooperation in space activities. Implementation of the guidelines will also be facilitated by improved coordination and information exchange among space actors from government, the private sector and civil society. This article discusses the roles and recent contributions of each of these types of actors in promoting guideline implementation and the sustainability of space activities in general. The article concludes with some observations on the second phase of the LTS discussions in UN COPUOS and the connection between space sustainability and sustainable development on Earth. LTS Guidelines, soft law, space sustainability, UN COPUOS

Article: Recycling the Outer Space Treaties: Analysing the Potential for On-Orbit Servicing Agreements

On-orbit servicing (OOS) has continued to gain popularity as a possible solution to improving the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of space activities. However, the novel notion of this space activity, coupled with its several implications, raises questions and concerns as to its status within the international legal framework. The Corpus Juris Spatialis addresses states and their outer space activity, but on-orbit services will likely be carried out by private entities. In this regard, bilateral contracts between companies offering on-orbit services will need to consider obligations and rights under the current international legal framework. In so doing, the spirit of the provisions of the space treaties can be easily implemented into agreements between private parties. on-orbit servicing, contracts, commercial space activities, outer space

The Evolving Role of the Environmental Impact Assessment as a Valuable Legal Tool for the Protection of Outer Space and the Sustainability of Space Activities

Proceedings of the International Institute of Space Law is een online tijdschriftenplatform van Boom uitgevers Den Haag (Boom juridisch, Boom criminologie, Boom bestuurskunde en Eleven International publishing)

Миссии и вызовы безопасности и долгосрочной устойчивости космической деятельности

The paper dwells upon the security and long-term sustainability of space activities and introduces the main guidelines, approved by the UN General Assembly, as well as the guidelines, which did not receive consensus approval in the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. The challenges of the long-term sustainability of space activities for achieving the goals, objectives, and means of developing world cosmonautics and maintaining the status of the Russian Federation as a world space power are reflected. The study focuses on the problems and challenges associated with the man-made debris of near-Earth space, the delimitation of air and outer space, the need to organize space traffic control, which is inextricably linked with the deployment of multi-satellite orbital constellations. The issues of counteracting the asteroid-cometary hazard are touched upon. The research findings given in the paper should help representatives of the Russian space industry understand the problems, challenges, and essence of the long-term sustainability of space activities in conjunction with issues of ensuring its security.

Empowering the UAE Space Sector Through an Attractive Regulatory Framework

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) leadership has realized the increasing importance of space. Hence, it has been investing in space science and technology since the 90s, and has been able to develop a diverse space sector, and compete globally. Recognizing this importance, the UAE developed its legal framework to regulate the UAE space sector. This article will highlight the establishment and mandate of the UAE Space Agency (UAESA), the local and global growth of the space economy, the UAE’s regulatory approach, and the objectives of Federal LawNo. 12 of 2019 on the Regulation of the Space Sector (the UAE Law). It will address the UAE’s regulations regarding space activities and other activities related to the space sector, the initiatives to attract more space activities and investment, transparency and sustainability of space activities, the scope of the UAE law, and the scope of regulated activities and space-related activities. In addition, some fundamental topics covered by theUAE Law will be discussed, such as authorization, registration, third-party liability and insurance. Lastly, some new subjects covered by the law will be highlighted, like space debris mitigation, extraction and utilization of space resources, human spaceflight and tourism, and nuclear power sources. the UAE Space Law, attractive regulations, space economy, UAESA, sustainable space activities

Common but Differentiated Responsibilities for Space Debris Removal

ABSTRACT Expanding the concept of sustainability from Earth to outer space is a recent, yet inevitable development, which originates in the comprehension that the Earth’s orbital space is a finite resource. The growing number of actors and operations in outer space have led to the proliferation of space debris, posing numerous risks to the long-term sustainability of space activities. Against this background, the Guidelines for the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities adopted by the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS) in 2019 call for enhanced international cooperation, effectively addressing such challenges. UNCOPUOS Member States agreed on the fact that international cooperation is required, however, what has not been agreed upon is the nature of such cooperation. The following paper elaborates on the concept of responsibility for space debris removal, looking for analogies in climate change law, namely the principle of Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR). Reviewing the literature on space debris regulations, this paper proposes a system based on the correlation between space activities of states and the responsibility for space debris removal. Acknowledging the principles of international space law and the Guidelines for the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities, key obstacles regarding space debris removal and recommendations strengthening international cooperation are discussed.

Anti-satellite warfare and the case for an alternative draft treaty for space security

ABSTRACTOn 27 March 2019, the Indian Government destroyed one of its own satellites with a missile interceptor, reminding the world that States consider “counterspace capabilities” to be an essential part of a modern military and are actively developing such weapons. Some of these capabilities, however, are highly destructive and can pose a threat to other objects in orbit through the creation of space debris. As space grows in importance for the military and the rest of society, it is becoming increasingly necessary to better define the limits of conflict, even in the space environment. One option for ensuring the long-term sustainability of space activities is a two-step approach: the development and adoption of “anti-satellite test” guidelines, followed by the negotiation of a treaty on the prohibition of the destruction of objects in orbit.

A gradual approach towards space traffic management: The contribution of UNISAPCE+50

The year 2017 as the year of the 50th anniversary of the Outer Space Treaty witnesses ongoing discussions about the governance of space activities. The UNISPACE+50 process directly addresses relevant topics in this context, in particular through its thematic priority 2 “The legal regime of outer space governance”. In parallel to and interconnected with the UNISPACE+50 process, the Long-term Sustainability (LTS) Working Group of the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNCOPUOS) continues to discuss different guidelines, thereby representing an ongoing effort for a normative development. Also the Legal Subcommittee of UNCOPUOS has a relevant item on its agenda: the topic of space traffic management. Such a traffic management system is composed of a coherent set of rules assuring a safe conduct of space activities free from harmful interference. The need for more adequate regulation is obvious: The safety, security and sustainability of space activities are today challenged by an accelerated proliferation of space debris and a corresponding increase in the risk of in-orbit collisions. The lack of appropriate regulation is complemented by a weak degree of institutionalization of the space law regime as a comparison with other international legal regimes illustrates. It is submitted in this paper that a further norm development would have to be accompanied by the formation of a coherent and institutionalized international legal regime, in short a space traffic management system. UNISPACE+50 offers the opportunity for a new impetus to this debate: Its substantive work on global space governance issues should be used to further promoting and strengthening the conceptual and substantive understanding of space traffic management.

Common benefit from a perspective of “Non-traditional Partners”: A proposed agenda to address the status quo in Global Space Governance

It is presupposed that there is a dominant position in interpreting the freedom of Outer Space which has not given much real significance to the idea of common benefit. The reason that this causes difficulty is that there is an ambiguity to common benefit. This dominant position however sees the issue of benefit sharing in the context of the perceived tension between established space faring nations and emerging and aspirant States and the idea that freedom could take on a different meaning depending on where one is on the scale of development. It fails to recognize that solutions to contemporary and historical governance challenges have been much less oriented towards the interests of less developed States or new entrants, making the accrual and sharing of benefits dependent on the free will of those States able to carry out a variety of space activities independently. As a result of this, the debate around common benefit is exploited to seek individual benefit derived for a State as opposed to what our effort to use space collectively can generate. In recent times, the issue has not received much attention. This is because it is believed to be partly resolved through normative frameworks such as Article 1 of the Outer Space Treaty and the Space Benefits Declaration. While an attempt to re-address historical contentious issues, asserted to be resolved, may appear illusory or futile; such analysis can be useful depending on the account that the reader believes should be given to the normative character of human nature. To this end, the writings of legal, political and social theorists and methodologies from Critical Legal Schools may prove insightful for a deeper contextualization of the historical debate, the current understanding of the freedoms of Outer Space as well as unearth future perspectives to aid in addressing the current pressing space related issue of our time: Sustainability of Space Activities. This article proposes three main issue areas to investigate to find solutions to some of the perceived tensions prevalent in space governance:(1)Who are the “Non Traditional Partners”, who is speaking for them and what are their actual issues if any?(2)The Potential of Space for “Non Traditional Partners” and others.(3)Assessment of South–South cooperation, regional cooperation and other forms of collective collaboration.The article concludes that that the central issue is the need for stronger central institutions. This takes nothing away from polycentrism, but to get polycentrism to work there is a need for functioning and not static global institutions. We must see how networks effects to produce in maximizing space benefits and this can only be achieved through the connection between strengthened global institutions and local initiatives.

The Other Triangle in European Space Governance: The European Union, the European Space Agency and the United Nations

In European space governance, the term ‘governance triangle’ usually refers to the cohabitation in space matters of the European Union, the European Space Agency and their respective member states. This contribution explores another, less well-known and less clearly structured space governance triangle: that between the EU, ESA and the UN. Its specific focus is on their respective regulatory activities in guaranteeing the sustainability of space activities. Initiatives with this objective have been taken by each of the organisations mentioned. The contribution examines the institutional preconditions for their coherence and complementarity. With the on-going debate surrounding the future institutional arrangements between ESA and the EU and the EU’s emerging actorness in space law matters (cf. the EU-championed International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities), the question arises as to the future institutional constellation between these three players for regulatory activities pertaining to space.

Application of Ostrom’s Principles for Sustainable Governance of Common‐Pool Resources to Near‐Earth Orbit

AbstractNear‐Earth orbit is a key global resource, hosting assets critical to governments, militaries and commercial entities and providing services for global communications, remote sensing, national and international security, and accurate positioning and timing. It is also an increasingly crowded, congested and contested environment, at risk from both intentional and unintentional activities and events, and threats natural and human‐made. Ensuring the long‐term sustainability of the space environment is an increasingly recognized need by all users of space. This article considers the viability of principles regarding sustainable common‐pool resources (CPRs) established by Elinor Ostrom for space governance. In this initial consideration, we focus specifically on the issues of boundaries, collective choice arrangements and monitoring. Within those contexts, Ostrom’s principles appear most useful for identifying gaps in the current space governance system and mechanisms. Further, while Ostrom provides multiple success stories for her model, they typically include common‐pool regimes functioning at a local level, with success stories on a larger scale elusive. Near‐Earth orbit is perhaps the largest‐scale CPR to consider. Consequently, not only is additional work needed to relate Ostrom’s model specifically to space, but to determine the limits of applicability of Ostrom’s model and other models that should be considered.Policy Implications The global commons of outer space, particularly the region where satellites orbit around the Earth, faces a collective action problem of how to ensure the long‐term sustainability of space activities. The current governance mechanisms for outer space activities were largely developed during the cold war, and are not sufficient to deal with the collective action problems stemming from the growing number of space actors and users. Space actors exist with varying levels of capabilities, which complicates defining resource appropriator rights and responsibilities. Common agreement is needed among space actors on the bounds of the space domain to allow resource appropriators to set the governance limitations, who has the right to make use of it and what governance regime applies. Existing institutions for debating, creating and modifying space governance regimes fall short of the requirement that most actors affected by the rules can participate in their creation. Space situational awareness will play a crucial role in monitoring the status of the space commons, adherence to rules and norms, and creating transparency and confidence among space actors.

In Brief

It is presupposed that there is a dominant position in interpreting the freedom of Outer Space which has not given much real significance to the idea of common benefit. The reason that this causes difficulty is that there is an ambiguity to common benefit. This dominant position however sees the issue of benefit sharing in the context of the perceived tension between established space faring nations and emerging and aspirant States and the idea that freedom could take on a different meaning depending on where one is on the scale of development. It fails to recognize that solutions to contemporary and historical governance challenges have been much less oriented towards the interests of less developed States or new entrants, making the accrual and sharing of benefits dependent on the free will of those States able to carry out a variety of space activities independently. As a result of this, the debate around common benefit is exploited to seek individual benefit derived for a State as opposed to what our effort to use space collectively can generate. In recent times, the issue has not received much attention. This is because it is believed to be partly resolved through normative frameworks such as Article 1 of the Outer Space Treaty and the Space Benefits Declaration. While an attempt to re-address historical contentious issues, asserted to be resolved, may appear illusory or futile; such analysis can be useful depending on the account that the reader believes should be given to the normative character of human nature. To this end, the writings of legal, political and social theorists and methodologies from Critical Legal Schools may prove insightful for a deeper contextualization of the historical debate, the current understanding of the freedoms of Outer Space as well as unearth future perspectives to aid in addressing the current pressing space related issue of our time: Sustainability of Space Activities. This article proposes three main issue areas to investigate to find solutions to some of the perceived tensions prevalent in space governance:(1)Who are the “Non Traditional Partners”, who is speaking for them and what are their actual issues if any?(2)The Potential of Space for “Non Traditional Partners” and others.(3)Assessment of South–South cooperation, regional cooperation and other forms of collective collaboration.The article concludes that that the central issue is the need for stronger central institutions. This takes nothing away from polycentrism, but to get polycentrism to work there is a need for functioning and not static global institutions. We must see how networks effects to produce in maximizing space benefits and this can only be achieved through the connection between strengthened global institutions and local initiatives.