As we extend our reach into space, we face a critical governance challenge: How do we manage this new frontier? What can we learn through deliberate awareness of historical frontier expansion patterns? How do we best foster innovation and commercial growth?
The space domain presents a unique, "commons" - belonging to all yet governed by none - operating in a system of international anarchy where no overarching authority exists, yet where traditional cooperation has not led to disorder and chaos.
Historical patterns of frontier expansion offer insights into likely human behaviours in space. The Victorian Gold Rush of the 1850s highlights how rapid resource discovery exposes an absence of suitable, pre-existing governance structures. Initial unregulated expansion created unmitigated environmental degradations and social pressures until the Victorian government established licensing and courts. Across several areas, today's space sector exhibits similar patterns, with commercial entities racing to secure orbital slots and spectrum frequencies prior to comprehensive and agreed international oversight.
The Oklahoma Land Run of 1889 shares some strong links with current space activities. The "Sooners" - those who entered the territory before the official start - mimic how actors will circumvent rules to gain first-mover advantage. Today, we see similar behaviours in the rush to secure valuable orbital regimes, with established space powers and companies moving quickly to stake claims even before international frameworks mature.
This situation is especially concerning for congested orbits like sun-synchronous LEO. Without established protocols for managing orbital capacity, we risk a "first come, first served" system that could effectively lock out future participants.
The question of how to manage orbital access when regions become saturated - whether through "one out, one in" policies or other mechanisms - remains unresolved. Such policies could inadvertently entrench the advantages of early movers, much like the Sooners of Oklahoma.
The Scramble for Africa demonstrates how those most powerful actors can establish de facto control of shared resources without inclusive international frameworks. As more nations develop space capabilities, we must ensure that space access doesn't become the exclusive domain of the current space-faring nations.
The challenge sits squarely in establishing effective governance without stifling innovation or disadvantaging domestic space sectors via an asymmetric regulation. Traditional government-to-government coordination mechanisms appear increasingly obsolete in an era where commercial joint ventures and private companies drive space exploration and utilisation. If we move towards an international COP-style arrangement for space, are we even going to reach agreements in the necessary timetable that the space “boom” is said to sit upon?
One potential approach could include using market access as a regulatory tool. Nations could require enhanced Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting standards for space companies seeking to operate in their markets. This could create a "race to the top" in responsible space operations, as companies seeking access to sustainability aligned markets would need to demonstrate sustainable practices and consideration for the space commons. It wouldn’t necessarily eliminate rogue actors; however, it may allow a light to be shone on those acting and working responsibly.
Some key challenges requiring immediate attention in-space include:
Active Debris Management: Beyond debris mitigation, how do we handle active debris removal across jurisdictions?
Orbital Capacity Management: Establishing fair access protocols for congested orbital regimes
Spectrum Management: Addressing strain on traditional allocation processes from mega-constellations
End of life and emergency Response: Developing clear protocols for managing potential collisions, malfunctions and end of life removal and/or retrieval
There are of course a whole host of for-space considerations too. These sit along the lines to mainstream ESG reporting for companies and supply chains that require rare-earth metals for example - where extraction with poor regulation and enforcement directly leads to environmental and social harms.
To the future, effective space governance for in-space activity might require a hybrid approach including the consideration and action around:
International baseline standards focussing on responsible space operations
Industry-led technical standards and best practices (e.g. ESSI)
National regulation focused on behaviours, outcomes, public disclosure and transparency
Development of international dispute resolution mechanisms
The space sector stands at a crucial juncture. While the absence of international government doesn't necessarily mean chaos, it does require deliberate, thoughtful and innovative governance approaches that balance commercial innovation with sustainable development of the space commons.
Understanding historical patterns of human behaviour in frontier expansion may help us proactively establish frameworks that promote responsible space utilisation while ensuring equitable access for all nations.
Note from the writer and editor:
It is important to acknowledge that the historical examples cited in this piece emerged from deeply problematic colonial contexts. While these examples provide insights into human behaviour patterns in frontier expansion, they should not be seen as legitimising or diminishing the serious negative impacts of historical colonialism, and its harms to indigenous peoples and cultures.
The space context, dealing primarily with uninhabited orbital regimes, allows us to focus narrowly on governance and access patterns while remaining mindful of history's broader lessons about inclusion and equity.
Related Posts
