privatization of space travel

Introduction Most application of economic policy is done on either the national, supranational or subnational scales. Seldom is economic policy enacted on the non-national scale. Yet, there is the question of whether there is benefit to applying economic doctrine to space exploration. There is a corollary, in Antarctica, where various nations have signed a treaty committing to scientific activity only on that continent, and not economic activity. Yet, realistically, with space the horse is well out of the barn.

Nations all over the world have launched satellites, thus far, and the more powerful nations have engaged in a broader scope of scientific exploration. Yet, the question still exists, as to whether any economic system should be applied to space, space exploration and the terrorities that exist in space. And if so, what should that economic system look like? This paper will start to explore this concept in more detail, from an economic perspective. Space Exploration The earliest exploration of space was strictly a governmental endeavor.

If not strictly military in nature, it was close. The costs associated with space exploration in the 20th century was extraordinary, and there was absolutely no monetary gain to be had from such exploration. It was, at that time, only in the realm of science fiction that money could be made from space, aside from launching satellites.

Yet today, it is not out of the realm of possibility that money can be made in space – and certainly we can envision a point in the future, far or near, when there is a viable business venture in space tourism, if not other activities. This raises the issue of the economics of space. When there was no monetary, capitalist incentive for space travel, the exploration of space fell to governments.

The biggest leaps were made during the Cold War, when space exploration was a proxy for the scientific might of the world’s two major superpowers. The incentive was not monetary, but more ideological in nature, and therefore space was worth the cost. As the Cold War started to fade, so too did space exploration. However, in recent years, there has been a resurgence in space exploration.

A number of nations now participate in different ways, making contributions either to research on space travel, or on the International Space Station, or otherwise. All the world’s major powers make some contribution, and the underlying theory is that this is done for the good of mankind. As such, even today almost all space spending is done through government. An example, however, of a corporate firm in space is SpaceX.

This is not the only company seeking to find ways to monetize space, but it is certainly the most prominent one. An important shift has been the emergence of non-government satellites as a business, as modern telecommunications makes extensive use of this technology. Hayward (2015) hypothesizes that leaps in technology will revolutionize the economics of space in the same way that the jet engine revolutionized the economics of air travel.

SpaceX is one of the companies that is working to shift the economic paradigm of space, in such a way that space can be opened up to greater economic applications. Sweeting (2018) notes that another technological change will influence the economics of space. He points out that most satellites to this are in excess of 1000kg, but that the same way computational power on earth has resulted in much smaller devices with more power than before, the same will hold true with satellites.

At some point, the weight of a productive satellite will be minimal compared with today, and that will mean that the cost of sending a satellite into orbit is going to decrease, both in terms of the technology needed and the amount of fuel. This shift will have significant implications both for satellite-based business, and for the exploration of other bodies within the solar system, if not beyond (Sweeting, 2018). Externalities There are, of course, some externalities associated with the commercialization of space.

The fuel that is burned obviously contributes to climate change, which is a negative externality. There is also space debris, what Salter (2016) terms the orbital commons. Space is common territory, and satellites are typically positioned to crash to earth over the ocean, in case any matter survives. Otherwise, many simply stay in orbit beyond their serviceable lives. This is public waste, and as yet no system of attributing cost exists for such waste.

Yet, eventually, it stands to reason that this externality, and the climate change impacts, will need to be accounted for in some sort of economic way. The issue of course is that without any plan to price externalities, the pollution will continue to grow, without any meaningful accountability. Ethical Issues Elvis (2016) notes that overall, costs for space missions have increased substantially in recent years, holding the economic use of space in check.

That said, this also presents a challenge in that it is becoming harder to finance non-commercial uses for space. Yet, the best uses for space might still be on the scientific front. Space has the potential to solve much bigger problems than getting a better phone signal while sailing to Tahiti. If space is fully monetized, to the point where ROI is the primary driver of what happens in space, that could have substantial negative consequences for scientific ventures, which have highly uncertain payoffs and long-term time horizons at best.

A focus more on short-term returns could severely inhibit human progress, which starts to sound like a case against the commercialization of space in any way. Recommendations It is recommended that some basic rules are put into place to govern the use of space. In general, there is little that can be done about governments launching satellites or other spacecraft from their own territory, so the framework has to focus more on governance of the orbital commons.

Treaties can be in place to govern things like what to do with satellites that are out of commission, for example, or to mitigate the climate effects of launching spacecraft. Furthermore, it is recommended that a non-commercialization pact be signed among countries that contribute to space exploration. There is certainly a case to be made that ROI can drive greater levels of innovation, but as space belongs to no earthly government,.