Space Governance Structures: Interplanetary, Global, and National Frameworks

Space Governance version 1.pdfDownload

Key Takeaways

• Global space governance is shifting from state-centric monopolies to hybrid ecosystems where national agencies function as enablers for commercial innovation.
• Major powers and emerging space nations are enacting specialized legislation to clarify liability, resource ownership, and debris mitigation in the New Space era.
• International cooperation relies on a complex mesh of foundational treaties like the Outer Space Treaty and modern, non-binding frameworks like the Artemis Accords.

Introduction

The governance of extraterrestrial activities has shifted dramatically from the bipolar standoff of the mid-twentieth century to a multifaceted global ecosystem. Where the Soviet Union and the United States once monopolized the orbital domain, a diverse array of nations now asserts sovereign capability. This expansion drives a fundamental reevaluation of how humanity manages the cosmos. National space agencies are no longer solely prestige projects for superpowers; they are economic engines, regulatory bodies, and strategic assets for countries ranging from the Netherlands to Thailand.

The architecture of these institutions varies as much as the nations themselves. Some governments retain strict, centralized control, viewing spaceflight as an extension of military power and statecraft. Others have decoupled regulation from operation, creating agile frameworks designed to attract commercial investment and foster the NewSpace economy. This divergence creates a dynamic tension between the need for strict national oversight and the desire for rapid industrial growth.

International frameworks are struggling to keep pace with this acceleration. The foundational treaties of the 1960s, designed to prevent nuclear proliferation in orbit, now sit alongside modern, non-binding agreements focused on resource extraction and lunar base operations. As private entities launch mega-constellations and plan planetary settlements, the line between state responsibility and commercial liberty blurs. This analysis explores the distinct governance models employed by nations across the globe, examining how legal structures, agency mandates, and international alliances shape the future of human activity beyond Earth’s atmosphere.

The Netherlands Space Ecosystem and Implementation

The governance of space activities in the Netherlands operates through a highly interconnected system often referred to as the “Golden Triangle,” linking government policy, knowledge institutions, and industrial actors. At the strategic level, policy determination is a collaborative effort involving multiple ministries. The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy takes a leading role, working alongside the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. These bodies convene within the Inter-Ministerial Steering Committee for Space to align national interests with international obligations.

Execution of these policies falls to the Netherlands Space Office (NSO). As the executive agency, the NSO implements national space policy and manages funding schemes. It serves as the primary point of contact representing the Netherlands in forums such as the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Union. The NSO also focuses on stimulating collaboration and innovation, particularly regarding the use of satellite data.

The Dutch ecosystem is supported by robust scientific institutes. The SRON Netherlands Institute for Space Research acts as the national research institute, developing instruments and providing scientific advice. Meanwhile, the Royal Netherlands Aerospace Centre (NLR) conducts applied research focused on defense, society, and secure space solutions. The implementation layer features the NL Space Campus, which serves as a central meeting point to connect the ecosystem. Industry associations like SpaceNed provide a collective voice for upstream and downstream companies, ranging from infrastructure developers to data service providers. The presence of international centers, such as the European Space Research and Technology Centre (ESTEC), further cements the Netherlands’ position as a technical heart of European space activities.

Turkey’s Space Governance Structure

Turkey has established a centralized governance model driven by the Turkish Space Agency (TUA). The structure begins with the Presidency of the Republic of Türkiye, which sets the National Space Program. Strategic vision and coordination are managed through the Ministry of Industry and Technology. The TUA serves as the primary agency responsible for executing the national program, which includes ambitious goals such as a human spaceflight mission, a lunar mission, and the development of a regional positioning and timing system.

Research and development are anchored by the TÜBİTAK UZAY Space Technologies Research Institute, which focuses on satellite design and technology development. Operational capabilities are supported by Türksat, the satellite operator handling communications and broadcasting. The industrial base includes major defense and aerospace companies. Roketsan and Aselsan provide rocketry and launch systems, while Turkish Aerospace Industries (TUSAŞ) focuses on aerospace systems. Delta V contributes through hybrid rocket technology.

Turkey actively engages in international cooperation and diplomacy. It maintains membership in the Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization (APSCO) and has cooperation agreements with the European Space Agency. The nation also participates in the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA). Academic institutions support this ecosystem through research and human capital development, contributing to satellite projects like GÖKTÜRK and İMECE.

Belgium Space Governance Structure

Belgium employs a governance structure that balances federal authority with regional competencies. The central federal body is the Belgian Science Policy Office (BELSPO). BELSPO coordinates the federal scientific institutes and manages the overall space policy, including budget management and representation at the ESA, EU, and UN. The legal framework is grounded in the Act of 17 September 2005, which ensures the safety of operations and authorizes space activities.

Regional actors play a significant role in the Belgian ecosystem. In Flanders, the Department of Economy, Science and Innovation coordinates with VLAIO for innovation and entrepreneurship. The Flemish Space Industry (VRI) cluster focuses on technological development. Wallonia operates through its own government structures and the Wallonie Espace industry association, promoting professional collaboration. The Brussels-Capital region supports aerospace industries through the Brussels Aerospace & Defence Group.

Federal scientific institutions provide critical technical support. The Royal Belgian Institute for Space Aeronomy (BIRA-IASB) researches planetary atmospheres and space weather. The Royal Meteorological Institute of Belgium manages meteorological satellites and climate research. The Royal Observatory of Belgium focuses on astronomy and space geodesy. International engagement is maintained through strong contributions to the European Space Agency and adherence to the EU Space Programme.

Qatar Space Governance Structure

Qatar’s space governance aligns with the Qatar National Vision 2030, focusing on strategic oversight and high-level policy. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs handles international diplomacy, while the Supreme Council for Economic Affairs & Investment oversees economic alignment. The Communications Regulatory Authority (CRA) manages satellite licensing, spectrum management, and liaison with the International Telecommunication Union.

The Qatar Aeronautics and Space Agency (QASA) serves as the core performance agency. QASA is responsible for developing the national space strategy, promoting the sector, and coordinating research and development. Security aspects, including Space Situational Awareness (SSA), are managed by the Ministry of Defense and the Qatar Armed Forces.

Operational entities include Es’hailSat, a satellite operator providing regional communications. The research ecosystem involves the Qatar Foundation and the Qatar Science & Technology Park (QSTP), which foster human capital development. Qatar actively participates in international partnerships with agencies like NASAand adheres to international treaties such as the Outer Space Treaty and the Liability Convention.

Kuwait Space Governance Structure

Kuwait’s space sector is characterized by a mix of state leadership and scientific research bodies. The Ministry of Defense manages the National Space Program under Law No. 79 of 2018, focusing on national security. The Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Sciences (KFAS) provides major funding and strategic direction, with the Emir serving as Chairman.

A central coordinating body, the Kuwait National Space Research Center (KNSRC), was established in 2024 to serve as an innovation hub within the KFAS network. Kuwait University collaborates on research and capacity building, hosting facilities such as a muon detector. Regulation is handled by the Communication & Information Technology Regulatory Authority (CITRA), which manages satellite spectrum and licensing.

Kuwait participates in international treaties like the Outer Space Treaty and the Moon Treaty. It maintains partnerships with entities such as the Mohammed Bin Rashid Space Centre in the UAE and is a member of UN COPUOS.

Thailand Space Governance Structure

Thailand’s governance structure is anchored by the National Space Policy Committee (NSPC), chaired by the Prime Minister. This body formulates national policy and approves master plans. The Cabinet of Thailand serves as the final approval body for policy, law, and budget.

The Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (MHESI) oversees the Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA). GISTDA acts as the primary space agency and implementer, drafting the National Space Act and developing technology such as the THEOS satellites. The Ministry of Digital Economy and Society manages the National Space Affairs Division, focusing on landing rights and digital economy integration.

Defense aspects are managed by the Ministry of Defence through the Defence Information and Space Technology Department and the Royal Thai Air Force Space Operations Center. The National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission (NBTC) regulates satellite telecommunications and spectrum.

Algeria Space Governance Structure

The Algerian space sector functions under the supreme authority of the Presidency and Government. The Algerian Space Agency (ASAL) is the central executive body, directed by a Board of Directors representing 15 ministries. ASAL is responsible for designing and implementing national space policy, promoting socio-economic development, and ensuring national security.

Operational entities within ASAL include the Space Techniques Center (CTS), the Space Applications Center (CAS), and the Satellite Development Center (CDS). The Telecommunications Systems Operating Center (CEST) manages satellite operations. Algeria has achieved significant milestones with its AlSat satellite series and maintains a long-term plan stretching to 2040.

Algeria actively participates in international cooperation, hosting the UN-SPIDER Regional Support Office and contributing to the African Space Policy as a member of the African Union.

African Union Space Policy and Strategy

The African Union (AU) has established a continental space policy to leverage space science for sustainable development, aligning with Agenda 2063. The vision is to create an integrated and prosperous Africa that utilizes space technology as a dynamic force in the global arena. The mission focuses on coordinating the development of African space resources to support socio-economic integration.

Core policy objectives include addressing user needs by focusing on applications, ensuring access to space services and data, and developing a regional market for indigenous industry. Governance is a priority, with a push to establish regulatory frameworks and coordinate the African space arena to avoid duplication.

Strategic pillars of the policy cover Earth observation for resource management, satellite communication for connectivity, navigation and positioning for transport safety, and space science exploration. The African Space Agency (AfSA), headquartered in Cairo, Egypt, is mandated to implement this strategy. Key initiatives include GMES & Africa for earth observation and the Pan-African University Institute for Space Sciences.

Bahrain Space Governance Structure

Bahrain’s space activities are overseen by the Supreme Council of Defense. The National Space Science Agency (NSSA), recently transitioned to the Bahrain Space Agency (BSA), serves as the focal point for all space activities. Established by Royal Decree, the agency aims to promote Bahrain to a position of international prominence.

The agency operates across four main pillars: Policy and Regulation, Research and Development, Operations and Services, and Capacity Building. It is currently drafting a National Space Law and adhering to international treaties like the Artemis Accords. Research efforts include satellite development projects like AlMunther and Light 1.

Operations focus on ground station infrastructure and providing satellite image data. Capacity building involves academic partnerships and public awareness programs. Bahrain collaborates with numerous international partners, including NASA, ESA, and the UK Space Agency.

Chilean Space Governance Structure

Chile’s space governance is led by the President of the Republic. The Space Policy Council and Space Executive Committee, established in 2022, act as the central bodies for policy formulation and coordination. Multiple ministries, including Science, Foreign Affairs, National Defense, and Transport, contribute to the governance framework.

Operational implementation is handled by the Chilean Air Force (CAF) and the National Space System. A new National Space Center (CEN) is under construction to serve as a hub for satellite manufacturing and data science. The country previously operated under a Chilean Space Agency, which was dissolved in 2014.

Chile utilizes its unique geographic advantages for astronomy and space observation. It is a signatory to the Outer Space Treaty and the Artemis Accords, emphasizing international cooperation.

Chile’s National Space Strategy

Chile’s strategy focuses on socio-economic growth, sustainable development, and national security. A key component is the National Satellite System (SNSat), which replaces the FASat-Charlie mission. The new system involves a constellation of ten satellites, including mini-satellites and micro-satellites built in collaboration with universities.

The National Space Center in Santiago will feature facilities for mission control, geospatial data analysis, and entrepreneurship. Three ground stations located in Antofagasta, Santiago, and Punta Arenas will support real-time satellite monitoring.

Chile leverages its status as a global astronomy capital and a data hub to drive the new space economy. The strategy emphasizes connectivity, disaster management, and climate monitoring, using space capabilities to improve public policy and services.

Argentina Space Governance Structure

In Argentina, the Presidency oversees a structure where the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation plays a central role. The National Commission on Space Activities (CONAE) functions as the national space agency, responsible for the National Space Plan. This plan covers earth observation missions like SAOCOM and international cooperation.

Defense space activities are managed by the Ministry of Defence and the Joint Aerospace Command. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs handles international space policy and treaties. Argentina relies on state-owned enterprises for industrial execution. ARSAT operates telecommunications satellites, while INVAP serves as the primary satellite manufacturer and technology integrator.

CONAE operates the Teófilo Tabanera Space Center, which includes ground stations and testing facilities. The Mario Gulich Institute provides advanced space studies and capacity building.

Norway Space Governance Structure

Norway’s governance structure is evolving to accommodate New Space activities. The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries acts as the lead ministry for space policy and commercial development. It oversees the Norwegian Space Agency (NOSA) and the state-owned company Space Norway. The Ministry of Defence handles national security aspects, while the Ministry of Transport regulates airspace via the Civil Aviation Authority.

NOSA serves as the strategic and executive body, managing participation in ESA and EU programs. The Civil Aviation Authority of Norway is emerging as the regulator for launch activities. Space Norway develops strategic infrastructure, including owning a stake in Kongsberg Satellite Services (KSAT).

Andøya Space is a key operational entity, providing launch services for sounding rockets and small satellites. Norway is modernizing its legal framework with a new draft Space Act to support commercial expansion and ensure safety.

Brazil Space Governance Structure

Brazil operates a dual-track governance system under the National System for the Development of Space Activities (SINDAE). The civilian track is led by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, which oversees the Brazilian Space Agency (AEB). The AEB coordinates policy execution and international cooperation. The National Institute for Space Research (INPE) conducts satellite development and space science research.

The military track falls under the Ministry of Defense and the Brazilian Air Force. The Department of Aerospace Science and Technology (DCTA) coordinates military technical activities, while the Institute of Aeronautics and Space (IAE) develops launch vehicles. Brazil utilizes two main launch centers: Alcântara and Barreira do Inferno.

The National Program for Space Activities (PNAE) guides civilian efforts, while the Strategic Space Systems Program (PESE) focuses on defense. The AEB also plays a role in the commercial use of launch centers, bridging the gap between state and private sectors.

Egypt Space Governance Structure

Egypt’s space sector is directed by the Presidency, with the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research playing a supervisory role. The Egyptian Space Agency (EgSA), established in 2018, is the premier authority. Its Board of Directors is headed by the Prime Minister. The National Authority for Remote Sensing & Space Sciences (NARSS) functions as a key research institute.

EgSA operates from the Egypt Space City, which also hosts the headquarters of the African Space Agency. The infrastructure includes a Satellite Assembly, Integration and Test (AIT) center and a technology park. Strategic goals align with Egypt’s Sustainable Development Strategy 2030, focusing on space science, human capital, and commercialization.

Egypt maintains diverse international partnerships, cooperating with agencies like Roscosmos, CNSA, and ESA. It is also a member of the Arab Group for Space Cooperation.

Nigeria Space Governance Structure

Nigeria’s space governance is headed by the National Space Council, which develops policy guidelines. The Federal Ministry of Science, Technology & Innovation supervises civil activities through the National Space Research and Development Agency (NASRDA). NASRDA coordinates satellite development and space application programs.

The Federal Ministry of Defence supervises the Defence Space Administration (DSA), which implements security aspects of the national policy. NIGCOMSAT operates as a state-owned commercial enterprise providing satellite communications services.

NASRDA oversees several specialized centers, including the Centre for Basic Space Science & Astronomy, the National Centre for Remote Sensing, and the Centre for Satellite Technology Development. These centers focus on distinct areas such as earth observation, rocket manufacture, and capacity building.

Kenya Space Governance Structure

The Kenya Space Agency (KSA), established in 2017, is the central body for promoting and regulating space activities in Kenya. It operates under the oversight of the Ministry of Defence. The governance framework includes the Kenya Space Policy of 2015 and a draft Space Bill.

KSA’s mandate covers coordination, regulation, and the promotion of space for socioeconomic development. Strategic focus areas include enhancing space utilization, developing national capability, and fostering a healthy legal environment. Key programs involve the Taifa-1 satellite and nanosatellite projects like 1KUNS-PF.

Kenya engages regionally through the African Space Agency and internationally with partners such as the Italian Space Agency, which manages the Luigi Broglio Space Centre in Malindi.

Ireland Space Governance Structure

Ireland’s space governance is driven by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (DETE), which shapes policy and creates the business environment. Enterprise Ireland acts as the key implementing agency, coordinating participation in the European Space Agency and supporting companies bidding for contracts.

The strategy focuses on an economically sustainable space-active industry. Ireland contributes to ESA and EU space programs like EUSPA and EUMETSAT. The academic sector involves universities and institutes like the Tyndall National Institute, which support research and skills development.

The Irish Space Association represents the industry, fostering collaboration and networking. Key capabilities in the Irish sector include earth observation, secure communications, and data analytics.

Luxembourg Space Governance Structure

Luxembourg has positioned itself as a leader in the commercial space sector, particularly in space resources. The Ministry of the Economy sets the overarching policy, while the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs handles space diplomacy. The Luxembourg Space Agency (LSA) implements the strategy, fostering collaboration and supporting the private sector.

The legal framework is defined by the Space Law of 2017 and 2020, which provides legal certainty for the ownership of space resources. The SpaceResources.lu initiative promotes sustainable exploration. Innovation is supported by the European Space Resources Innovation Centre (ESRIC) and the Luxembourg Institute of Science and Technology.

The commercial sector is robust, featuring established companies like SES alongside a vibrant ecosystem of startups. Luxembourg actively collaborates with international partners like ESA and NASA.

Finland Space Governance Structure

Finland’s space governance is led by the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment (TEM), which handles policy leadership and international representation at ESA and the EU. The Finnish Space Committee operates under TEM’s auspices to coordinate national activities and guide strategy implementation.

The legal framework is based on the Act on Space Activities of 2018. The Finnish Transport and Communications Agency (Traficom) serves as a regulatory body, managing ground station permits and frequency management. The Ministry of Defence supervises defense-related space activities.

Finland’s ecosystem is characterized by a strong New Space sector, with companies focusing on commercial satellites and radar technologies. Research institutes and universities participate in scientific missions and data analysis.

Sweden’s Space Governance Structure

Sweden’s governance involves multiple ministries. The Ministry of Education and Research oversees the civil space sector and is the parent ministry of the Swedish National Space Agency (SNSA). The Ministry of Defence coordinates security strategy, while the Ministry for Foreign Affairs handles diplomacy.

SNSA implements the national strategy, funds R&D, and represents Sweden in ESA. The Swedish Space Corporation (SSC) is a state-owned company that operates the Esrange Space Center. SSC provides launch services for sounding rockets and balloons and is developing orbital launch capabilities.

Sweden’s strategy balances civil research and societal benefits with defense and security needs. The country is a major partner in ESA and participates in EU programs like Galileo and Copernicus.

Africa’s Ascent: Mapping the Continent’s Space Organizations & Ambitions

Africa is experiencing a rapid expansion in its space sector, coordinated centrally by the African Space Agency (AfSA). Established as an organ of the African Union, AfSA is headquartered in Egypt and mandates the implementation of the African Space Policy. The policy framework emphasizes addressing user needs, accessing space services, and developing a regional market.

Key national agencies include the South African National Space Agency (SANSA), known for its deep space tracking capabilities, and the Nigerian National Space Research & Development Agency (NASRDA), which focuses on disaster monitoring. The Algerian Space Agency (ASAL) and the Egyptian Space Agency are also major players with established satellite programs.

The “NewSpace” revolution is evident in Africa, with over 270 companies driving innovation in data analytics and commercialization. Strategic objectives focus on agriculture, connectivity, and climate change monitoring to spur socio-economic development.

Structure of European Space Governance

European space governance is a complex interplay between the European Union (EU), the European Space Agency (ESA), and national governments. The EU provides political direction and funding for major programs like Galileo and Copernicus. The European Commission’s DG DEFIS manages the space program budget and regulatory aspects. EUSPA (EU Agency for the Space Programme) handles operational management and service provision.

ESA is an intergovernmental organization with 22 member states, separate from the EU but closely linked through a Financial Framework Partnership Agreement. ESA acts as the technical development and procurement agent for EU programs while also running its own mandatory and optional programs in science and exploration.

Member states contribute to both frameworks through their national agencies. This structure supports major initiatives in navigation, earth observation, and secure communications, such as the IRIS2 constellation.

The Artemis Accords and the Evolution of Norms

The Artemis Accords represent a significant evolution in international space governance, establishing a practical framework for the civil exploration of the Moon, Mars, and beyond. Launched by the United States and signed by a growing coalition of nations, the Accords are a non-binding set of principles that reinforce and operationalize the obligations of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty. They are designed to increase safety and transparency in an era where multiple nations and commercial entities are planning missions to the lunar surface.

Key provisions of the Accords focus on peaceful purposes, requiring all activities to be conducted for peaceful ends in accordance with international law. Transparency is another pillar, mandating that signatories publicly disclose their exploration plans and policies to avoid confusion and conflict. The Accords also emphasize interoperability, encouraging the use of open international standards to ensure that hardware and systems from different nations can work together – a vital feature for safety and emergency assistance.

A critical and distinct aspect of the Artemis Accords is the approach to space resources. Section 10 affirms that the extraction and utilization of space resources does not constitute national appropriation under Article II of the Outer Space Treaty. This provides a diplomatic green light for the utilization of lunar regolith and water ice to support sustainable habitats, a concept central to long-term exploration. The Accords also introduce the concept of “Safety Zones,” temporary areas around operations where notification and coordination are required to prevent harmful interference, effectively creating a mechanism for deconfliction on the lunar surface.

The Outer Space Treaty of 1967: The Constitution of Space

The Outer Space Treaty, formally the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, serves as the cornerstone of international space law. Negotiated during the height of the Cold War and entering into force in October 1967, it reflects the geopolitical necessity of preventing space from becoming a new theater of conflict.

Article I of the Treaty declares that the exploration and use of outer space shall be the “province of all mankind,” ensuring that space remains free for exploration by all states without discrimination. Article II is perhaps the most significant restriction, stating that outer space is not subject to “national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.” This prevents any nation from colonizing or claiming territory on the Moon or planets, a principle that continues to shape modern debates over property rights and resource extraction.

The Treaty also imposes strict liability and responsibility on states. Under Article VI, states bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space, whether carried out by governmental agencies or non-governmental entities. This clause effectively makes nations the gatekeepers and regulators of their private commercial space sectors, requiring authorization and continuing supervision of all private spaceflight. Furthermore, Article IV explicitly prohibits the placement of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction in orbit, cementing the status of space as a domain for peaceful purposes.

The Rescue Agreement and Liability Convention

Complementing the Outer Space Treaty are several subsequent UN treaties that flesh out specific legal obligations. The Rescue Agreement of 1968 elaborates on the duty to assist astronauts in distress. It mandates that any state party that discovers personnel of a spacecraft in distress or making an emergency landing in its territory must take all possible steps to rescue them and return them to the launching authority. This agreement emphasizes the humanitarian aspect of space exploration, treating astronauts as envoys of mankind regardless of geopolitical tensions.

The Liability Convention of 1972 establishes a robust regime for handling damages caused by space objects. It creates a two-tiered system of liability. A launching state is absolutely liable for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the Earth or to aircraft in flight – meaning the victim does not need to prove fault. For damage caused elsewhere, such as in orbit, liability is based on fault. This convention is critical for determining financial responsibility in the event of satellite collisions or re-entry accidents, providing a legal recourse for aggrieved parties.

Global Organizations for Space Sustainability

Space sustainability has emerged as a critical governance challenge due to the rapid proliferation of satellite constellations and the resulting accumulation of orbital debris. The governance of this domain involves a loose network of international bodies, national regulators, and private standards organizations. The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) facilitates the Working Group on the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities, which produces voluntary guidelines for best practices.

The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) plays a vital, albeit indirect, role in sustainability. By managing the allocation of radio frequencies and orbital slots in geostationary orbit, the ITU ensures that satellites can operate without harmful radio interference. While its mandate is technical, the scarcity of orbital slots forces a degree of order. However, the ITU lacks strong enforcement powers regarding physical debris or end-of-life disposal for satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO).

To fill the regulatory gap, national agencies and intergovernmental bodies are stepping up. The European Space Agency (ESA) has adopted a “Zero Debris” approach, aiming to stop the generation of new debris by 2030. Private sector initiatives are also gaining traction, with the Space Safety Coalition publishing “Best Practices for the Sustainability of Space Operations.” These industry-led norms often move faster than international treaties, addressing issues like collision avoidance maneuvers and post-mission disposal timelines (e.g., the move from a 25-year rule to a 5-year rule for deorbiting).

UN Organizations With Space Responsibilities

The United Nations system integrates space science and technology into a wide array of its operations. Beyond UNOOSA, which serves as the secretariat for the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), other specialized agencies rely heavily on space assets. The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) coordinates the space-based component of the Global Observing System, ensuring that meteorological data from various national satellites is shared globally to improve weather forecasting and climate monitoring.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) utilizes satellite remote sensing to monitor crop conditions, water usage, and the spread of agricultural pests like locusts. This data is essential for early warning systems that prevent famine. Similarly, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) uses space technology to monitor World Heritage sites, tracking threats from natural disasters or conflict.

The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is increasingly involved in space governance as the boundary between aviation and suborbital spaceflight blurs. ICAO is working on standards for space traffic management to ensure that rocket launches and re-entries do not endanger civil aviation. This cross-agency integration highlights how space governance has moved beyond pure exploration to become an integral part of global infrastructure management.

Pakistan Space Governance Framework

Pakistan’s space governance is anchored by the National Space Policy, which prioritizes socio-economic development and national security. The ultimate oversight authority rests with the National Command Authority (NCA), reflecting the strategic nature of the country’s space assets. To separate regulation from operation, the Pakistan Space Activities Regulatory Board (PSARB) was established. This body is responsible for licensing operators, ensuring compliance with international obligations, and managing the registration of space objects.

The Pakistan Space & Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO) serves as the national executive agency. Established in 1961, SUPARCO manages the entirety of the national space program. Its responsibilities include the design, development, and launching of satellites, such as the PakSAT communication series and the PRSS remote sensing satellites. SUPARCO also oversees ground control infrastructure and atmospheric research facilities.

Pakistan actively engages in international diplomacy as a member of UN COPUOS and is a signatory to the major UN space treaties. The governance framework emphasizes the application of space technology for agriculture, urban planning, and disaster management, important for a country facing climate-related challenges. Cooperation with China is a cornerstone of its external space policy, including collaboration on the Tiangong space station and lunar exploration.

Poland Space Governance Structure

Poland has rapidly modernized its space governance to integrate with the European ecosystem and capture a share of the global market. The governance hierarchy is led by the Ministry of Economic Development and Technology (MRIT), which acts as the supervising body for the space sector. Recognizing the dual-use nature of space assets, the Ministry of National Defence plays a substantial role, appointing a Plenipotentiary for Space Matters to coordinate military requirements and security strategy.

The Polish Space Agency (POLSA), established in 2014, is the executive arm. POLSA’s mandate is to support the development of the Polish space industry, promote the use of satellite data in public administration, and represent Poland in international organizations. A key function of POLSA is the management of the National Satellite Information System, which aggregates data for national needs. The agency also maintains the National Register of Space Objects, fulfilling Poland’s obligations under the Registration Convention.

Poland is an active member of the European Space Agency, participating in optional programs that align with its industrial strengths, such as robotics and earth observation. The industrial ecosystem comprises over 400 entities, ranging from large subsidiaries of European primes to agile startups. The governance strategy focuses on specializing in niche technologies like microsatellites and optical instruments to integrate into global supply chains.

France Space Governance Structure

France maintains one of the most comprehensive and autonomous space governance structures in Europe, reflecting its historical status as a space power. Strategic direction flows from the President of the Republic, underscoring the sector’s importance to national sovereignty. The governance model is characterized by a strong civil-military partnership. The Ministry of the Economy supervises the budget and industrial policy, while the Ministry of the Armed Forces, through the Space Command (Commandement de l’Espace), directs military space strategy and operations.

The National Centre for Space Studies (CNES) acts as the central pivot of the French system. Uniquely among agencies, CNES has deep technical competence and program management authority for both scientific missions and defense procurement. It designs and executes the national space program and serves as the primary technical advisor to the government. CNES also operates the Guiana Space Centre, Europe’s spaceport, ensuring independent access to space for France and its European partners.

France’s governance is adapting to the New Space era through initiatives like “Connect by CNES,” which supports startups and fosters venture capital investment. The country is a leading contributor to the European Space Agency and plays a dominant role in the Ariane launcher program. The industrial base includes global heavyweights like Airbus Defence and Space and Thales Alenia Space, which are integrated into national strategic planning.

Germany’s Space Governance Structure & Ecosystem

Germany’s space governance is decentralized, relying on coordination across federal ministries rather than a single vertical authority. The Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action (BMWK) is the lead ministry for civil space policy, focusing on industrial competitiveness, technology development, and the commercialization of space. The Ministry of Defence manages the military space portfolio, recently establishing a Space Command (Weltraumkommando) to protect national assets and monitor the orbital environment.

The German Aerospace Center

Germany emphasizes international cooperation, channeling a significant portion of its budget through ESA. It is a key partner in the International Space Station and the Artemis program. The governance strategy prioritizes Earth observation for climate protection, telecommunications, and robotics. The industrial landscape is diverse, featuring large system integrators like OHB SE alongside a vibrant “New Space” startup scene in Munich and Berlin, supported by government-funded incubators.

Spain Space Governance Structure

Spain recently reorganized its governance landscape to reduce fragmentation and enhance strategic focus. The creation of the Spanish Space Agency (AEE) in 2023 marked a major milestone. The AEE serves as a single interface for the sector, unifying competencies that were previously scattered across multiple ministries. While attached to the Ministry of Science, Innovation & Universities, the agency operates with a Governing Council that includes representatives from the Ministries of Defence, Transport, Industry, and Foreign Affairs, ensuring a whole-of-government approach.

The AEE is tasked with managing the national space strategy, allocating the budget, and representing Spain in international forums. It collaborates closely with the Centre for the Development of Industrial Technology (CDTI), which continues to play a vital role in funding industrial R&D and managing industrial returns from ESA programs. The National Institute for Aerospace Technology (INTA) remains the technical authority for certification and research, providing test facilities and specialized expertise.

Spain’s governance structure supports a strategy focused on increasing the technological maturity of its industry. The country hosts significant European infrastructure, such as the European Space Astronomy Centre (ESAC). Spain is actively participating in the PERTE Aerospace program, a post-pandemic recovery plan investing heavily in the sector to develop capabilities in small satellites and sustainable propulsion.

Italy’s Space Governance Structure

Italy’s space governance is directed at the highest political level by the Interministerial Committee for Space and Aerospace Research Policies (COMINT), which is chaired by the Presidency of the Council of Ministers. This ensures that space policy is aligned with broader national strategic goals. The Ministry of Enterprises and Made in Italy (MIMIT) serves as the delegated political authority, responsible for issuing authorizations and supervising the sector’s economic development.

The Italian Space Agency (ASI) is the technical and executive arm. ASI defines the National Space Strategy, implements national programs, and coordinates Italy’s substantial participation in ESA and EU initiatives. Italy is the third-largest contributor to ESA, giving it significant influence over European programs. The agency focuses on key areas such as Earth observation, exemplified by the COSMO-SkyMed radar constellation, and launch propulsion through the Vega rocket program.

Italy is currently developing a new Space Economy Law to modernize its regulatory framework. This legislation aims to provide clear rules for private operators, liability insurance, and spaceport operations, facilitating the growth of a commercial space ecosystem. The Ministry of Defense remains responsible for national security space activities, often operating dual-use systems in partnership with ASI.

Philippines Space Governance Structure

The Philippines modernized its space governance with the passage of the Philippine Space Act of 2019, which established the Philippine Space Agency (PhilSA). Before this, space activities were fragmented among various agencies. PhilSA now serves as the central government body for all national space programs, policy formulation, and international cooperation. It operates under the Office of the President but is overseen by the Philippine Space Council (PSC), a high-level advisory body chaired by the President.

PhilSA’s mandate is broad, covering national security, hazard management, space industry capacity building, and space education. The agency implements the National Space Development and Utilization Policy (NSDUP), which outlines the country’s strategic roadmap for the next decade. Key priorities include the development of indigenous satellites for disaster management and maritime monitoring, important for an archipelago nation.

The governance structure emphasizes the societal benefits of space. PhilSA coordinates with the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) and the Department of National Defense to ensure that space data is effectively used for weather forecasting, agricultural monitoring, and territorial defense. The country is also building international ties, ratifying space treaties and collaborating with Japan on satellite projects.

New Zealand Space Governance Structure

New Zealand has pioneered a governance model specifically designed to facilitate commercial space launch. The framework is built around the Outer Space and High-Altitude Activities Act 2017 (OSHAA). The Minister for Economic Development holds the portfolio for space, providing strategic direction. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) acts as the primary regulatory and policy agency, housing the New Zealand Space Agency (NZSA).

The NZSA manages a streamlined licensing regime for launches, payloads, and facilities. This regulatory efficiency was a key factor in attracting Rocket Lab to establish its launch complex on the Mahia Peninsula. The agency assesses applications based on national security, public safety, and international obligations. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) works in tandem with the NZSA to integrate high-altitude activities and rocket launches into the civil aviation system, ensuring airspace safety.

New Zealand’s governance is outwardly focused, emphasizing international partnerships. The country is a signatory to the Artemis Accords and cooperates closely with the United States, notably through the Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA) which protects US technology used in New Zealand. The government actively funds R&D to diversify the sector beyond launch services, supporting projects in methane tracking and space situational awareness.

Russia Space Governance Structure

Russia’s space governance is highly centralized, reflecting the strategic heritage of the Soviet space program. The State Corporation for Space Activities, known as Roscosmos, serves as the unitary body responsible for the entire space sector. Unlike Western agencies that separate regulation from industry, Roscosmos acts as the state regulator, the primary customer, and the owner of the industrial base. It manages a vast network of design bureaus, manufacturing plants, and research institutes, effectively controlling the supply chain from end to end.

Roscosmos reports directly to the Government of the Russian Federation. It is responsible for the federal space program, the maintenance of the GLONASS navigation system, and the operation of the International Space Station’s Russian segment. The Ministry of Defense maintains a distinct but overlapping role, coordinating military launches and operating the Plesetsk Cosmodrome. Civil launches are primarily conducted from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan (leased) and the newer Vostochny Cosmodrome in the Russian Far East.

Recent governance shifts have focused on attempting to commercialize the sector and reduce reliance on state funding, though this remains a challenge. Russia is pivoting its international cooperation strategy, strengthening ties with China through projects like the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) while managing the eventual transition away from the ISS. The governance model remains characterized by deep state control and a focus on maintaining sovereign launch and human spaceflight capabilities.

South Africa Space Governance Framework

South Africa’s governance framework is rooted in the Space Affairs Act of 1993, which established the Council for Space Affairs (SACSA) as the regulatory body under the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition. SACSA is responsible for licensing space activities and supervising compliance with international treaties. The operational and promotional aspects are handled by the South African National Space Agency (SANSA), established by the National Space Agency Act of 2008.

SANSA operates under the Department of Science & Innovation and is organized into key programs: Earth Observation, Space Engineering, Space Operations, and Space Science. The agency leverages South Africa’s geographic advantage to provide world-class tracking, telemetry, and command services for global satellite operators. It also hosts the only Space Weather Regional Warning Centre in Africa, providing critical data for aviation and power grid management.

South Africa is currently reviewing its legislation to better accommodate the emerging commercial space sector. The governance strategy focuses on using space for societal benefit, particularly in resource management and housing planning. As a host of the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) radio telescope, the country also plays a leading role in global astronomy governance.

UAE Space Governance Framework

The United Arab Emirates has constructed a modern, forward-looking space governance framework to support its transition to a knowledge-based economy. The UAE Space Agency (UAESA) is the federal authority responsible for organizing, regulating, and supporting the space sector. It sets the National Space Strategy 2030, which aims to establish the UAE as a major global partner. The agency is also responsible for issuing licenses for space activities and negotiating international agreements.

The Mohammed Bin Rashid Space Centre (MBRSC) in Dubai functions as the primary implementation arm for science and technology. It executes high-profile missions such as the Emirates Mars Mission (Hope Probe) and the Astronaut Programme. The centre focuses on satellite manufacturing and data analysis. Another key player is the Telecommunications & Digital Government Regulatory Authority (TDRA), which manages the allocation of orbital slots and radio frequencies, a critical asset for the country’s satellite operators like Yahsat.

The UAE has created a favorable legal environment for commercial space, enacting the first national law in the region to regulate space resources and debris mitigation. The governance model encourages private sector participation through the “Space Economic Zones” program, offering incentives for startups. The UAE is also a signatory to the Artemis Accords, aligning its governance with international norms for exploration.

Saudi Arabia Space Governance Structure

Saudi Arabia’s space governance has undergone a major transformation to align with Vision 2030, the Kingdom’s roadmap for economic diversification. In 2023, the Saudi Space Commission was elevated to the Saudi Space Agency (SSA). The SSA is responsible for executing the national space strategy, managing the human spaceflight program (evidenced by the Ax-2 mission), and fostering international partnerships. It focuses on building national capabilities in research, manufacturing, and mission operations.

Regulatory functions are handled by the Communications, Space & Technology Commission (CST). The CST is the licensing authority for space activities, managing spectrum allocation and ensuring fair competition in the market. It plays a critical role in attracting foreign investment by providing a clear and stable regulatory environment.

The governance structure also involves the Public Investment Fund (PIF), which acts as a strategic investor. PIF established the “Neo Space Group” to invest in commercial space ventures, signaling a move towards a profit-driven space economy. The Kingdom emphasizes the development of local talent and technology transfer, aiming to become a regional hub for the space industry. Saudi Arabia is a signatory to the Artemis Accords, reinforcing its commitment to peaceful and cooperative exploration.

UK Space Governance Structure

The United Kingdom has refined its governance to drive its ambition of capturing 10% of the global space market by 2030. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) holds the central policy portfolio, ensuring that space strategy aligns with broader science and economic goals. The UK Space Agency (UKSA) is the executive agency, responsible for delivering the National Space Strategy, managing the budget, and overseeing major programs like the ESA contribution.

A key feature of the UK model is the separation of regulation from promotion. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) acts as the independent regulator for spaceflight activities. Under the Space Industry Act 2018, the CAA licenses launch operators, spaceports, and range control services, ensuring high safety standards. This regulatory framework enabled the development of spaceports in Cornwall and Scotland.

Defense space activities are consolidated under UK Space Command, a joint command within the Ministry of Defence, which coordinates closely with the UKSA on dual-use technologies. The governance ecosystem also relies on the “Catapult” model, specifically the Satellite Applications Catapult, which bridges the gap between research and commercial application. The National Space Council, a cabinet committee, provides high-level coordination to ensure a “whole-of-government” approach.

Japan’s Space Governance Structure

Japan’s space governance is characterized by strong centralization at the strategic level and robust implementation agencies. The Cabinet Office houses the Strategic Headquarters for National Space Policy, which formulates the Basic Plan on Space Policy. This headquarters coordinates the activities of various ministries and manages the budget for key national systems like the Quasi-Zenith Satellite System (QZSS).

JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) is the primary implementing body. JAXA is a powerhouse of R&D, responsible for launch vehicle development (H3, Epsilon), human spaceflight, and planetary exploration. While administratively supervised by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), JAXA works with other ministries on specific applications. The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) supports the industrial base and promotes the export of space systems.

Japan has updated its legal framework with the Space Activities Act of 2016 to facilitate commercial ventures. This law allows the government to license private launch and satellite operations, paving the way for companies like ispace and Astroscale. The governance model emphasizes economic security and the resilience of supply chains. Japan is a key partner in the Artemis program, with an agreement to provide a pressurized rover for the lunar surface.

South Korea Space Governance Structure

South Korea has recently overhauled its governance to leapfrog into the ranks of top space powers. In May 2024, the country established the Korea Aerospace Administration

KASA oversees the Korea Aerospace Research Institute (KARI), which continues to focus on technical execution, such as the development of the Nuri launch vehicle and the Danuri lunar orbiter. The Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute (KASI) contributes to scientific research. The governance reform aims to foster a private-sector-led ecosystem, transferring technology from government institutes to companies like Hanwha Aerospace.

The National Space Committee, chaired by the President, provides the ultimate strategic direction. South Korea’s strategy involves the “Moon to Mars” vision, with plans for a lunar lander by 2032. The country actively participates in the Artemis Accords and strengthens alliances with the US to enhance its missile guidelines and space capabilities.

Australia Space Governance Structure

Australia’s governance structure focuses on leveraging its unique geographic position in the Southern Hemisphere and its strong alliance network. The Australian Space Agency (ASA), established in 2018, is the central civil space body. Housed within the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, the ASA is responsible for setting strategy, coordinating civil space activities, and facilitating international engagement. It acts as the regulator under the Space (Launches and Returns) Act 2018, licensing launches and high-power rockets.

Defense space is managed by the Defence Space Command, established in 2022 to secure access to space and protect national interests. Geoscience Australia plays a critical role in Earth observation, managing the Digital Earth Australia platform which provides satellite data for land and water management. The governance model relies on a “whole-of-government” approach, coordinating with the states and territories which often host launch infrastructure.

A significant governance development is the Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA) with the United States. This treaty allows US technology to be launched from Australian spaceports, facilitating a commercial launch market. The ecosystem is supported by the SmartSat Cooperative Research Centre (CRC), which brings together industry and academia to solve technical challenges.

India’s Space Governance Structure

India is in the midst of a historic transformation of its space governance, moving from a monolithic state-run model to an open, hybrid ecosystem. The Department of Space (DoS), reporting directly to the Prime Minister, remains the apex administrative body. ISRO (Indian Space Research Organisation) continues to be the crown jewel of R&D, focusing on complex national missions like Chandrayaan (Moon), Gaganyaan (Human Spaceflight), and Aditya-L1 (Sun).

The pivotal reform was the creation of IN-SPACe (Indian National Space Promotion and Authorization Centre). As an autonomous single-window agency, IN-SPACe acts as the regulator and promoter for the private sector. It authorizes private launches, facilitates the sharing of ISRO’s facilities with startups, and ensures a level playing field. This has unleashed a wave of private activity in launch vehicles (Skyroot, Agnikul) and satellites (Pixxel).

NewSpace India Limited (NSIL) functions as the commercial arm of the DoS. It is responsible for commercializing ISRO technologies, producing launch vehicles through industry consortiums, and operating communication satellites on a commercial basis. The Indian Space Policy 2023 formalized these roles, clearly demarcating the responsibilities of ISRO (R&D), IN-SPACe (Regulation/Promotion), and NSIL (Commercialization), while also allowing for 100% Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the satellite establishment sector.

Canada’s Space Governance Structure

Canada’s space governance is designed to maximize the benefits of its niche capabilities in robotics, satellite communications, and earth observation. The Canadian Space Agency (CSA) is the central coordinator, reporting to the Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry. The CSA manages the civil space program, negotiates international partnerships (primarily with NASA and ESA), and contracts Canadian industry to deliver mission-critical hardware like the Canadarm3 for the Lunar Gateway.

Regulatory oversight is distributed. The Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development (ISED) manages spectrum licensing under the Radiocommunication Act. Transport Canada is developing a modern regulatory framework for commercial space launch activities in Canada, intended to enable domestic launch capabilities. Global Affairs Canada ensures compliance with international treaties and manages export controls.

Canada’s governance relies heavily on a public-private partnership model. The government rarely builds hardware itself, instead funding a robust ecosystem of companies. This includes large primes like MDA Space and a growing sector of data analytics and component manufacturers. The Space Advisory Board provides external strategic advice to the government, ensuring policy remains responsive to industry needs.

China’s Space Governance Structure

China’s space program is a state-directed strategic priority, integrated deeply with national development and security goals. The ultimate authority lies with the Central Commission for Integrated Military and Civilian Development, overseen by the top leadership of the Communist Party. The China National Space Administration (CNSA) is the public face of the civil space program, responsible for international cooperation and the administration of non-military projects. It represents China in bodies like COPUOS and manages relations with other space agencies.

However, the military plays a pervasive role. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Strategic Support Force (SSF) is responsible for space operations, including launch sites, tracking, and control networks. The China Manned Space Agency (CMSA) manages the human spaceflight program, including the Tiangong space station. Implementation is carried out by massive state-owned conglomerates: CASC (China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation) serves as the primary contractor for launch vehicles (Long March series) and spacecraft, while CASIC focuses on missile systems and small satellite constellations.

China has recently issued “White Papers” on space activities, outlining a vision for a space power. It is promoting the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS) as an alternative to the Artemis program, gathering international partners. While a commercial sector is emerging, often referred to as “commercial space,” it remains closely aligned with state objectives and relies on dual-use technology transfer strategies known as Military-Civil Fusion.

United States Space Governance

The United States operates the most complex and expansive space governance system in the world, characterized by a clear separation between civil, military, and commercial sectors, coordinated by the National Space Council. The Council, chaired by the Vice President, harmonizes policy across the diverse agencies to ensure the US maintains its leadership.

Civil Space: NASA is the premier agency for exploration and science. It has shifted from an operator model to a partner model, exemplified by the Commercial Crew and Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) programs. NASA sets the requirements and buys services, fostering a robust private marketplace.

National Security Space: The establishment of the United States Space Force (USSF) as an independent service branch within the Department of the Air Force centralized military space activities. The Space Force organizes, trains, and equips forces, while the US Space Command (USSPACECOM) handles operational warfighting commands. The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) builds and operates spy satellites.

Regulatory & Commercial: The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) is the primary regulator for launch and reentry. It recently streamlined regulations (Part 450) to accommodate high flight rates. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulates satellite spectrum and has taken an assertive role in orbital debris regulation. The Office of Space Commerce (part of NOAA/Commerce) is growing in importance, tasked with promoting the industry and taking over civil Space Traffic Management (STM) duties from the military.

US-Canada Technology Safeguards Agreement

The Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA) between the US and Canada is a pivotal treaty that enables the development of a commercial launch sector in Canada. Because US export control laws (ITAR) strictly prohibit the transfer of rocket technology, US companies could not launch from Canada without a legal framework. The TSA provides this framework, ensuring that US technology launched from Canadian soil remains under US control and is protected from unauthorized transfer.

This agreement allows Canada to leverage its geography for polar orbit launches while giving US launch providers more site options. It requires Canadian spaceports to implement strict security protocols, effectively creating “US segregated zones” during launch campaigns. This bilateral governance tool is essential for the integration of the North American commercial space market.

Global Perspective on Sovereign Capability

The concept of “sovereign capability” is reshaping global governance. Nations no longer view space merely as a scientific endeavor but as critical infrastructure. Sovereignty in space implies the ability to access and utilize space without reliance on foreign powers. This drives the push for domestic launch sites (e.g., UK, Canada, Australia) and indigenous satellite manufacturing (e.g., Turkey, UAE).

However, full autarky is expensive and technically difficult. Consequently, governance is evolving towards “pooled sovereignty” or “strategic autonomy,” where allied nations share capabilities. The EU’s Galileo system is a prime example, providing Europe with independence from the US GPS. Similarly, the trend of “allied by design” architectures in defense allows nations to specialize in niche areas (like radar or optics) while relying on partners for other capabilities, requiring deep interoperability standards.

Elements of a National Space Policy

A comprehensive national space policy serves as a roadmap for a country’s sector. It typically consists of three pillars:

1. Civil Space: Directs scientific exploration, environmental monitoring, and public inspiration. It defines the role of the national agency and funding priorities for research.
2. National Security: Defines how space assets will be defended and how they will support military operations on Earth. It establishes rules of engagement and classification levels.
3. Commercial Space: Sets the conditions for private sector growth. This includes tax incentives, liability caps, and technology transfer mechanisms.

Successful policies also address Cross-Cutting Enablers:

• Talent Pipeline: STEM education and workforce development.
• International Partnerships: Strategic alliances and treaty adherence.
• Sustainability: Commitments to debris mitigation.
• Regulatory Environment: Clear, predictable licensing regimes that balance safety with speed.

Trade Barriers Constraining the Space Economy

The global space economy is heavily fragmented by trade barriers and regulatory friction. The most significant is the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) of the United States. ITAR classifies almost all space technology as defense-related, requiring strict licenses for export or even discussion with foreign nationals. This creates a “silencing” effect and forces non-US companies to design “ITAR-free” components to access global markets.

Export Controls & Regimes: The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) restricts the export of rockets and UAVs capable of delivering WMDs. While necessary for security, it complicates the sale of commercial launch vehicles. The Wassenaar Arrangement similarly controls dual-use goods.

Economic Protectionism: Many nations employ “Buy National” policies for government contracts, effectively locking out foreign competitors. Data Localization laws require satellite data about a country to be stored and processed within that country, increasing costs for global operators. Spectrum Filing wars at the ITU also act as a barrier, where paper satellites are filed to hoard valuable orbital slots, preventing new entrants from launching services.

Cybersecurity in Space Governance

As space systems become more digitized and integrated into critical terrestrial infrastructure, cybersecurity has emerged as a paramount governance concern. Satellites are no longer isolated systems; they are nodes in a complex network, vulnerable to jamming, spoofing, and hacking. Governance frameworks are evolving to mandate cybersecurity standards for space assets. In the US, Space Policy Directive-5 establishes cybersecurity principles for space systems, while the EU is implementing the NIS2 Directive which classifies space as a critical sector requiring strict security measures.

The challenge for governance is the dual-use nature of many satellites. A cyberattack on a commercial imaging satellite could have military implications. Consequently, nations are establishing “Space Information Sharing and Analysis Centers” (Space ISACs) to facilitate threat intelligence sharing between government and industry. Future governance will likely require “secure by design” certification for any satellite seeking a launch license, ensuring that the orbital domain does not become a soft underbelly for cyber warfare.

Space Traffic Management (STM) Regimes

With the deployment of mega-constellations involving thousands of satellites, the current regime of voluntary coordination is reaching its breaking point. Space Traffic Management (STM) refers to the technical and regulatory provisions for preserving the safety of on-orbit operations. Currently, there is no global “air traffic control” for space. The US Department of Defense has historically provided space situational awareness data to the world, but this responsibility is transitioning to the Department of Commerce to allow the military to focus on threats.

The European Union is developing its own STM approach, emphasizing technological sovereignty in tracking capabilities. Governance debates center on who has the “right of way” in a potential collision scenario and who bears the cost of a collision avoidance maneuver. Future frameworks may involve automated collision avoidance systems mandated by law, similar to TCAS in aviation. The lack of a binding international treaty on STM remains a significant risk, pushing nations to develop “bottom-up” norms through industry best practices and bilateral data-sharing agreements.

Evolution of Governance in a Mars Colony

As humanity looks toward multi-planetary life, theorists have proposed a phased evolution of governance for a Mars colony, moving from strict survivalism to political independence.

Phase 1: Mission Command (Survival). In the early years, the colony acts as a remote base. Governance is hierarchical, militaristic, and centralized on Earth. The primary goal is survival. All resources (air, water, food) are rationed centrally. Decisions are made by a Mission Commander based on protocols from Earth control centers. Individual rights are secondary to the safety of the habitat.

Phase 2: The Colonial Council (transition). As the population grows and becomes semi-sustainable, the delay in communication with Earth (up to 20 minutes each way) makes direct micromanagement impossible. A local council is formed, perhaps appointed by Earth sponsors but including settler representatives. Governance shifts to managing internal disputes, labor allocation, and local resource expansion. A “Company Town” dynamic may emerge if the colony is corporate-owned.

Phase 3: The Martian Republic (Independence). Once the colony achieves resource independence (producing its own fuel, food, and manufacturing), political divergence occurs. A constitution is drafted, likely emphasizing the “Right to Breath” and collective stewardship of life support as fundamental human rights. An independent judiciary and elected legislature form. Trade treaties with Earth replace supply drops. The governance model might resemble a technocratic democracy, where scientific expertise is a prerequisite for political leadership due to the technical nature of survival.

Summary

The landscape of space governance is undergoing a significant structural transformation. We are witnessing a divergence between the established space powers, who are optimizing their systems for commercial competition and military resilience, and emerging nations, who are building agile, regulation-first frameworks to attract investment. The “Old Space” model of monolithic state monopolies is being replaced or augmented by “New Space” ecosystems where the government acts as a customer and regulator rather than the sole operator. While the Outer Space Treaty continues to provide the constitutional bedrock for the domain, it is being layered with modern, pragmatic arrangements like the Artemis Accords and national laws that address the realities of resource utilization and traffic management. As the global space economy expands into the trillions, effective governance – balancing sovereignty, sustainability, and commerce – will be the defining factor in determining which nations thrive in the final frontier.

Appendix: Top 10 Questions Answered in This Article

How is the governance of space activities changing globally?

Governance is shifting from state-centric monopolies to hybrid models that integrate commercial actors. Nations are creating distinct regulatory bodies to separate oversight from operation, encouraging private sector participation and innovation while maintaining national security through specialized space commands.

What is the “Golden Triangle” in the Netherlands space sector?

The Golden Triangle refers to the collaborative governance structure in the Netherlands linking the government, knowledge institutions, and industrial actors. It ensures that policy, scientific research, and commercial implementation are aligned to drive the national space ecosystem.

What is the role of IN-SPACe in India’s new governance model?

IN-SPACe acts as an autonomous regulator and promoter for the private space sector in India. It authorizes private launches, facilitates access to ISRO facilities for startups, and ensures a level playing field, allowing the state agency to focus on strategic R&D while the private sector handles commercial operations.

How does the US govern its commercial space sector?

The US uses a distributed regulatory model where the FAA licenses launches, the FCC manages spectrum, and the Department of Commerce oversees remote sensing and industry promotion. This is coordinated at a high level by the National Space Council to ensure alignment with national policy and security goals.

What is the purpose of the Artemis Accords?

The Artemis Accords establish principles for civil space exploration, focusing on peaceful use, transparency, and interoperability. They provide a framework for managing modern challenges like space resource utilization and orbital debris that were not fully addressed in earlier treaties.

Why did South Korea establish KASA?

South Korea established the Korea Aerospace Administration (KASA) in 2024 to centralize its previously fragmented space governance. Modeled after NASA, KASA aims to streamline policymaking, foster the private aerospace industry, and lead ambitious projects like lunar exploration under a unified national agency.

What is the main goal of Luxembourg’s space strategy?

Luxembourg focuses heavily on the commercial space sector, specifically the exploration and utilization of space resources. Its legal framework provides certainty for private companies regarding the ownership of resources extracted from space, positioning the country as a hub for the New Space economy.

How does the European Space Agency differ from the EU Space Programme?

ESA is an intergovernmental organization with members including non-EU states like the UK and Switzerland, focusing on R&D and exploration. The EU Space Programme (managed by the Commission and EUSPA) focuses on operational infrastructures like Galileo and Copernicus, with ESA often acting as the technical procurement agent.

What are the key trade barriers in the space economy?

Major barriers include export controls like ITAR which restrict technology transfer, tariffs on hardware, and complex licensing requirements. Data localization laws and foreign investment restrictions also constrain the global flow of capital and services in the space sector.

What constitutes “sovereign capability” in space?

Sovereign capability is the ability of a nation to independently design, launch, and operate space assets without foreign reliance. It includes having domestic launch vehicles, earth observation satellites, and secure communications, ensuring national security and independent foreign policy execution.

Appendix: Top 10 Frequently Searched Questions Answered in This Article

What is the difference between Old Space and New Space?

Old Space generally refers to an era dominated by government-led programs and cost-plus contracts with large aerospace primes. New Space is characterized by commercial companies, private investment, fixed-price contracts, and a focus on reducing costs through innovation and reusability.

What is the Outer Space Treaty?

The Outer Space Treaty is the foundation of international space law, adopted in 1967. It establishes that space is free for exploration by all nations, prohibits placing nuclear weapons in orbit, and states that celestial bodies cannot be claimed by any sovereign nation.

How much does the European Space Agency spend?

The European Space Agency has a budget of €22.1 billion for the period of 2026 to 2028. This funding covers various pillars including science and exploration, earth observation, space safety, and space transportation.

What is the function of the UK Space Agency?

The UK Space Agency acts as the executive body for the UK’s civil space program. It is responsible for strategic decision-making, funding national and international missions, and championing the growth of the UK space sector, while regulation is handled separately by the CAA.

What is the role of the US Space Force?

The US Space Force is the military service branch responsible for organizing, training, and equipping space forces. It protects US and allied interests in space, ensures freedom of action in the domain, and provides space capabilities to the joint force.

What are the main launch sites in Russia?

Russia primarily utilizes the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan for human and heavy launches. It also operates the Vostochny Cosmodrome in Russia’s Far East and the Plesetsk Cosmodrome, which is used mainly for military launches.

Who regulates space debris?

There is no single global regulator for space debris. Instead, national agencies like the FCC in the US and international bodies like the ITU and the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) set guidelines and regulations that operators must follow to mitigate debris creation.

How does Australia regulate space activities?

Australia regulates space activities through the Space (Launches and Returns) Act 2018, administered by the Australian Space Agency. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority manages airspace issues, ensuring that commercial launches integrate safely with aviation traffic.

What is the primary goal of the UAE Space Agency?

The UAE Space Agency focuses on establishing the UAE as a leading global space power and diversifying the national economy. It regulates the sector, fosters international partnerships, and oversees strategic programs like the Mars Mission to build human capital and technical expertise.

What technologies are restricted by ITAR?

ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) restricts the export of defense-related technologies, which often includes space hardware like rocket engines, guidance systems, and certain satellite components. This makes it difficult for US companies to sell these technologies internationally without strict licenses.