This article examines NATO's evolving approach to space security in the context of renewed great-power competition. It argues that Russia's counterspace posture, along with the space and counterspace dynamics surrounding the war in Ukraine, has served as an immediate operational catalyst, accelerating NATO's efforts to integrate space into planning, exercises, and multi-domain operations. However, the longer-term institutionalization of NATO's space policy–particularly its focus on resilience, interoperability, and coordination with commercial and national providers–is more consistently explained by allied perceptions of China as a long-term structural competitor with expanding capabilities and growing global influence. Drawing on constructivist insights into norms, identity, and practice, the article demonstrates how NATO's policy statements and emerging coordination mechanisms shape shared threat perceptions, even as they remain constrained by the Alliance's institutional authorities and its reliance on national and commercial space assets. The paper concludes that NATO's governance effects are primarily indirect, shaping allied narratives and coordination without determining global space rules, which continue to be driven mainly by states and multilateral processes.
Space mining is increasingly an area of intense competition between firms and nations. It is also an industry that relies on scientific knowledge of asteroids. Knowledge generated through scientific research of asteroids can contribute to the future competitive advantage of firms and hegemony of nations seeking to secure leadership in the space mining sector. This makes scientific knowledge of asteroids valuable to market participants, conferring an advantage for them when accessed in a privileged form. We discuss the implications for policy and research of scientific efforts to learn more about asteroids given heightened geo-political tensions and polarizing national interests on Earth. At the core of this is a moral tension between greater global openness in the interests of Mertonian science and greater secrecy in the interests of nations that fund scientific capabilities.
The growing dependence on space infrastructure for global communication, navigation and defence has made it a critical target for cyber threats. This paper explores strategies to enhance cyber resilience in space systems by examining the critical intersection between space infrastructure and cybersecurity and proposes an improved space systems design approach that is more cognisant of the growing threat landscape. Drawing on two rounds of structured interviews with space designers, this research highlights the security risks exacerbated by governance challenges and uncertain legal protections for space systems, while examining how cyber resilience strategies can be employed to mitigate those risks. The study emphasises that there is a need to align legal standards and technical practices, because of the increasing potential of cyber threats that target satellites, ground stations, and communication links. By identifying key themes such as integration and adaptability, this paper provides insights into how legal protection, standards and technical measures can work together to protect critical space assets. These findings underscore the urgent requirement for robust, interdisciplinary solutions that bridge the gap between existing engineering approaches and the emerging cybersecurity landscape in space operations. The proposed new cyber resilience strategy for safeguarding space infrastructure is novel and significant in an era of increasing reliance on these essential systems.
China's planetary defense program has evolved from scattered scientific initiatives into a strategically integrated component of its space policy with the aim of contributing to the Chinese dream of becoming a recognized global power. Drawing on Chinese primary documents, UN records, and semi-official materials, this study situates planetary defense within China's broader foreign policy and security framework. While Beijing publicly frames planetary defense as a contribution to global safety and the “community of shared future for humankind,” its operational conduct reveals selective transparency, asymmetrical cooperation, and strategic insulation. We identify three recurrent logics: (1) status signaling – using UN venues and international fora to project responsible-power imagery without technical disclosure; (2) asymmetric cooperation – offering low-sensitivity data through IAWN, sharing mission parameters within SMPAG orally without sharing them in any citable documents; and (3) dual-use technology protection – embedding planetary defense under the doctrines of civil–military fusion and comprehensive national security. These patterns explain why China's planetary defense simultaneously enhances its international legitimacy and consolidates domestic control over sensitive capabilities. Ultimately, China's engagement in planetary defense is less an incomplete internationalization than a deliberate model of selective integration, reflecting its hybrid strategy of visibility without exposure – projecting cooperation while safeguarding autonomy.
Space policy has evolved from a distant diplomatic and security domain to one increasingly relevant to citizens' daily lives. However, the cognitive mechanisms through which public interest translates into concrete policy support remain underexplored, particularly in emerging space powers. We examine how general interest in space in South Korea converts into support for space budget expansion through perceived usefulness of satellite technologies. Using data from the 2023 National Perception Survey (N = 1000) and applying the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the analysis tests whether perceived usefulness (PU) mediates the relationship between space interest and policy support. Results show that while general interest directly influences policy support, the dominant pathway, accounting for 70% of the total effect, operates through pragmatic evaluation of the technology's practical benefits. This suggests that citizens' policy judgments are largely shaped by perceived utility, not by enthusiasm alone. These findings challenge conventional space policy communication strategies and highlight the importance of emphasizing tangible societal benefits rather than inspirational narratives. For emerging space nations, sustaining democratic support requires a clear demonstration of the concrete value and societal utility of space investments.
This research forecasts the main trends in the sustainable development of space activities by 2040, focusing on critical areas and the influential roles of various stakeholders, including universities, space agencies, SMEs and startups, large private companies, and international organizations. The study employs a three-round Delphi methodology, engaging 63 international experts from academia, industry, and government agencies to reach consensus on the future trajectory of space sustainability. The process combined quantitative Likert-scale questions and qualitative open-ended responses, which were analyzed to assess convergence and stability across rounds. The third round, conducted one year later, captured how expert opinions evolved under changing geopolitical and economic conditions from 2024 to 2025. Key areas of focus include policies, laws, remote sensing, debris management, access to space, and planetary and deep space exploration. One key finding is the growing role that space agencies and large private companies are expected to play in the sustainable development of space activities by 2040. However, expert consensus on the role of universities, public research centers, and international organizations declined between the second and third round, reflecting a structural shift in funding priorities driven by the geopolitical changes of 2024–2025. Experts also anticipate a broad increase in both general and defense-related investment across most technological areas. Finally, the need to strengthen international cooperation through the creation of new international bodies or the reinforcement of existing ones, has emerged as a critical priority, especially in the domain of law and regulation.
The United States has reestablished momentum in civil and commercial space through a dense private sector, centrality in allied networks, and a far reaching regulatory footprint that shapes global supply chains and standards. Yet the same institutional architecture now generates frictions that slow innovation and weaken allied integration. Drawing on network evidence, legal and policy analysis, and 18 semi structured interviews with executives, investors, insurers, program managers, and current and former officials, we identify four recurring constraints on commercial partnerships: regulatory chokepoints, contracting and finance frictions, operational externalities, and coordination and trust deficits in international teaming. We show that these barriers are not merely administrative failures but structural features of a hybrid political economy in which commercialization and state power are intertwined. Export controls, civil licensing, and procurement practices function simultaneously as instruments of strategic influence and as bottlenecks that shape market entry, investment, and alliance behavior. Even minor frictions can have aggregate consequences. We translate these findings into a reform agenda: allied licensing corridors and template exemptions for trusted partners, a single front door for civil licensing with service level timelines, standardized data rights and other transaction authority model clauses, milestone based anchor tenancy and targeted insurance backstops for first of a kind missions, and pre competitive consortia for space traffic management and interoperability standards.
Europe’s space sector is vulnerable to cascading, compounding, and cross-border risks associated with pandemics and climate change. Given the importance of the space sector in European society, including economic competitiveness and security, it is important to ensure this sector is resilient to global shocks such as those caused by pandemics, as well as, natural hazards exacerbated by climate change. A step-by-step approach is presented, describing individual actions that critical infrastructure operators can use to support decision-making for cross-border business continuity resilience. In addition, several recommendations to support Europe’s growing space sector include: (i) prepare and share national pandemic plans for the EU space sector, specifically addressing cross-border disruptions; (ii) establish EU funding mechanisms under the European Union Space Services Agency to integrate cross-border climate and pandemic risk assessments into existing systems; (iii) supporting programmes for large prime integrators to co-develop and incorporate pandemic and climate risk assessments within their supply chains, especially with SMEs; and (iv) ensure pandemic and climate risk management plans are explicitly incorporated in EU space procurement frameworks.
Commercial human spaceflight is shifting the governance question from how states explore space to how multiple actors protect people in closed habitats. International instruments emphasize assistance, rescue, and return, but say little about lived experience when evacuation is delayed, constrained, or impossible. In a confined cabin, predictable events—severe nausea, dehydration, incontinence, acute pain, panic, or temporary disability—can quickly become preventable indignity with operational consequences. The United States relies on a disclosure-based informed-consent regime. While appropriate for a fast-evolving sector, informed consent cannot substitute for a minimum baseline of humane treatment when the provider controls the environment and self-rescue is not meaningful. This Viewpoint proposes an auditable Minimum Care Standard that complements informed consent. Drawing on care ethics and the Fundamentals of Care framework, it operationalizes “care” as a mission subsystem with defined resources, a trained and empowered care function, and simple audit signals. Deep space is a stress test, but the governance gap already exists for near-term commercial missions.
Sustainability is increasingly being discussed in the context of lunar missions. We report on a survey of individuals with an interest in lunar and space exploration to examine the different perspectives on lunar sustainability. Among the 277 participants who completed the survey, we found that there are different views on how to interpret lunar (surface) sustainability. There is consensus that all 3 constituent pillars of sustainability are important, but there are differences between those who focus on financial and operational issues and those who focus on environmental and ethical issues. In our survey, those focused on the financial and operational aspects of lunar missions tended to be from the space industry and the lunar interest community, whereas academics were more focused on environmental impacts on Earth and the Moon.We also found that general definitions of sustainability and space sustainability were widely in agreement, but lunar mission-specific definitions related to the Artemis program received less support. The differences in perspectives relate back to the level of support for long-term human presence on the Moon. Overall, these results highlight the existence of divergent perspectives on sustainability within the space exploration interest community. Future missions for limited scientific exploration, as well as for long-term human operations, should account for this difference and address concerns if they seek to derive broad long-term support.
This paper proposes a fusion of two economic paradigms, the economic goods framework and the Total Economic Value (TEV), to structure the evaluation of complex space programs. It illustrates the dynamic relationship between different types of economic goods, including the institutional integration of manufactured private goods into public goods. Drawing on methodologies from environmental economics, particularly categories such as option and existence values, the approach addresses less obvious outcomes of space activities that nonetheless significantly shape public perceptions and judgments of program effectiveness. Current institutional developments in space activities demonstrate the relevance of economic goods and value epistemology as a framework for understanding and designing space policy.
There has been a recent push by the United States federal government to streamline regulation surrounding the construction and operation of spaceports. The August 13th Executive Order, “Enabling Competition in the Commercial Space Industry”, moves these goals forward by tying commercial space operations to national security interests. In particular, the Order requires the creation of exemptions and “categorical exclusions” for commercial space exploration activities from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). This situation raises a tangle of complex ethical and political quandaries. On the one hand, national security is a compelling justification for some compromises in environmental integrity. But this does not mean that it should be used as a completely indefeasible ground for environmental degradation. Our goal in this piece is to elucidate the environmental impacts of spaceports, many of which are built in vulnerable areas, usually adjacent to or on environmental reserves. These regions, in turn, are critical to not only preserving endangered species, but their coastal nature means that degradation of these ecosystems can have broader impact on climate mitigation and severe weather resilience. We should not, in short, think of national security and environmental stability as mutually exclusive. We detail several mitigation strategies aimed at balancing short-term national security and long-term environmental preservation interests. In particular, we recommend standardized and streamlined environmental impact assessments that employ clearly defined metrics, a taxonomy and more detailed study of fuel emissions, increased funding for research into less environmentally damaging rocket fuel, and decommissionment and remediation planning.
Public preferences for spending are generally associated with government appropriations in broad policy categories. One model of this relationship is that the public attitudes serve as a thermostat for spending, supporting greater expenditures when appropriations fall and vice versa. Public opinion correlates with budgetary allocations for large policy domains regarding defense and social spending, for example, but this link is not expected to hold with expenditures for individual agencies. Public knowledge about government agencies and issue salience of smaller policy areas is often limited. One exception is NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and support for expenditures on space exploration. Public awareness and support of this agency and the policy domain is high, in part because of frequent news coverage and fictional accounts pertaining to space exploration. This research examines the relationship between public opinion and expenditures on space exploration. Survey data are gathered from the General Social Surveys over several decades (1973-2024) asking whether government spending on space exploration is too much, about right, or too little. The general thermostatic model performs well, even when controlling for supplementary factors that appear related to opinions regarding government support of science and space policy. Moreover, the thermostatic model works better for spending for NASA than for the broader domain of science policy.
One year after the launch of the Korea AeroSpace Administration (KASA) in May 2024, this paper examines the institutional impacts and strategic implications of Korea's transition to centralized space governance. The establishment of KASA marked a fundamental departure from the country's long-standing fragmented, multi-agency structure, signaling a policy shift toward more coordinated and industry-driven space development. This study analyzes the policy rationale behind KASA's creation, evaluates its organizational structure and mandate, and critically assesses early challenges in institutional consolidation and strategic implementation during its first year of operation. Special attention is given to the government-led Triangular Cluster Strategy—linking Goheung, Jinju/Sacheon, and Daejeon—as a spatial-industrial policy tool to foster a private-led space economy. The paper also identifies structural limitations in KASA's legal authority, budget autonomy, R&D role, and international engagement. Based on these findings, it offers policy recommendations to strengthen institutional effectiveness and long-term sustainability. The study contributes to broader international discussions on institutional design and governance reform for emerging spacefaring nations seeking to consolidate their space strategies.
As the militarization and strategic importance of space continue to escalate, NATO faces an evolving security landscape characterized by hybrid threats, counterspace capabilities, and emerging and disruptive technologies. This study critically examines evolving space posture within the limits of its current policy framework and advocates for the prospective development of a formal space posture. By incorporating insights from Spacepower Theory, Deterrence 3.0, and Grey Zone Warfare, NATO's evolving space posture could seek to address emerging challenges such as AI-driven intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, quantum-secured communications, and hypersonic missile detection. The study highlights the imperative for NATO to enhance its multi-domain deterrence posture, establish cyber-resilient space architectures, and strengthen public-private partnerships to mitigate vulnerabilities arising from commercial space dependencies. Additionally, the research underscores the need for space sustainability initiatives to maintain operational security. The findings advocate for a proactive approach to space governance, ensuring NATO's pursuit of strategic coherence and collective resilience in space amid increasing geopolitical competition. By bridging theoretical rigor with policy recommendations, this study contributes to a comprehensive framework for NATO's long-term security in space, emphasizing resilience, adaptability, and strategic foresight in the era of hybrid warfare.
This paper explores the strategic importance of roads on the Moon as a foundational element of future lunar infrastructure, focusing on their implications for geopolitical influence, resource management, and international collaboration. Drawing on the concept of connectography, we argue that roads on the Moon will serve not only practical purposes but also strategic functions: enabling resource access, facilitating territorial soft power, and anchoring multinational management. Within the legal and ethical frameworks of space treaties, like the Outer Space Treaty, we examine how lunar roads could evolve from utilitarian pathways into instruments of cooperation or conflict. Finally, we assess how road networks could contribute to sustainable lunar development and open legal questions.
Blockchain technology promises to transform the management of space missions, yet its employment also risks disrupting the rule of law in outer space. Blockchain applications for coordination and peer-to-peer regulation of space activities may undermine the guiding principles of international space law, which are the authorization and supervision of private entities by their respective states. This paper views relationships between space actors as one of the three interdependent sources from which international space law derives its binding force. We analyze how public and private actors can utilize blockchain technology to alter the quality and structure of their relationships, thus affecting the relational normativity of the space legal regime. We argue that the interaction between space blockchain applications and international space law has no predetermined outcome. States can integrate blockchain applications into their regulatory frameworks, while private actors might develop decentralized governance structures that render state authorization and supervision redundant. The key variable determining either of these outcomes is the trust between state and non-state actors.
The Government of India made a new beginning in 2020 with respect to the commercialisation of the space sector in India. It opened the gate for private sector participation in all aspects of space activities. This is a departure from the earlier scenario of allowing private sector participation only in the manufacturing segment related to space but not in the space services sector. Such a move was found essential for boosting the Indian economy, which was hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. Indian National Space Promotion and Authorization Centre (IN-SPACe) was also hurriedly established by the Government of India in June 2022 for licensing private space activities. This is further followed by the Indian Space Policy 2023, which clearly unveils the intention of the Government of India to extensively commercialise and privatise space activities in India. While the 2023 Policy has been hailed as futuristic and a welcome step, its implementation in the absence of a national space law in India is on shaky grounds. With more than 150 start-ups already taking initiatives to invest in the Indian space sector, what needs to be prevented is another mega-dispute like what has been evidenced in the decade-long Antrix-Devas case. In addition to this issue of practical concern to private space investors, some provisions of the 2023 Policy also raise suspicion regarding their compatibility with international treaty obligations of India. Hence, the 2023 Policy needs a thorough review to prevent any possible domino effect.
Background In recent decades, research into food packaging has become increasingly important. Food packaging not only plays a key role in the marketing and distribution of products, but also offers significant value to both supply chain stakeholders and consumers. This role becomes even more crucial in the context of the food industry, particularly in the specialised field of Space exploration. Scope and approach The main objective of this document is to provide an analysis of the state of the art in sustainable packaging for Sspace food and to investigate the use of technology transfer models between the terrestrial and Space sectors to launch innovative projects on these issues. Key findings and conclusions Emphasizing the fundamental role of food packaging in Space applications, this study highlights how one of the most dynamic areas of development today lies in the design and adoption of sustainable packaging solutions. Unlike terrestrial packaging, that intended for Space food must comply with strict mass and volume constraints, ensure sterility and palatability, and guarantee resistance to radiation, extreme temperature variations, and microgravity conditions. The study provides evidence that technologies originally developed in the manufacturing sector, such as nanomaterials, biodegradable polymers, and high-barrier monomaterials, can be adapted and transferred to the Space context through targeted technology transfer processes, thereby contributing to the achievement of sustainability objectives in long-duration missions.
