- Email: [email protected]
The potential of space tourism for space popularisation: An opportunity for the EU Space Policy?
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Space Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/spacepol
The potential of space tourism for space popularisation: An opportunity for the EU Space Policy? Antonella Forganni ESSCA School of Management, EU-Asia Institute, 1 Rue Joseph Lakanal, BP 40348, 49003, Angers Cedex 01, France
A B S T R A C T This article examines space tourism in the perspective of popularisation of space, to determine its potential role, with a special focus on the possible implications for the development of the EU Space Policy. After a preliminary analysis of space tourism and an overview of the technology required to make it possible, distinguishing between orbital and suborbital flights, the article outlines some legal and political issues related to this emerging sector and discusses the possible consequences of space commercialisation. The positive trend and the progress made in this domain suggest that space tourism could actually become a factor of space popularisation. At the same time, the existing legal framework does not seem to efficiently respond to the challenge. Rather than adapting the current air space and outer space rules, it would be preferable to establish a comprehensive special regulation for space tourism. In the European context, in particular, space tourism could contribute to the evolution of the EU Space Policy, which is still at an early stage, and thus it could have a positive impact on the European integration process.
1. Introduction Space travellers have constituted, up to now, a limited group of persons that, crossing the traditional barriers, have pushed the experience of tourism beyond the known horizons. Thus, space has become a new attractive and elitist destination; this phenomenon, although still marginal, may nonetheless contribute to a radical change of the perception of space in the public opinion. Can space tourism drive space popularisation? In other words, is it possible to popularize space by ‘populating’ space with tourists? Especially in the European Union (EU), where the Lisbon Treaty has recently enshrined Space Policy as a shared competence of the Union, this domain represents an area of increasing interest. In particular, as Hörber [1] pointed out, it is a policy at an early stage of development, compared to others, and it could give fresh impetus to the further progress of European integration. If space tourism becomes a reality soon, it will likely affect the forthcoming evolution of space law and policy in the EU, indirectly contributing to the European integration process. An extended version of the initial research question could be the following: could space tourism become a strategic factor for bringing the larger public closer to space activities? Could that assure public support to space policies and the huge investments that they imply? Space tourism (also called personal spaceflight [2] or private
spaceflight [3]), can be qualified under a subjective point of view (the person concerned) and an objective point of view (the activity carried out or the kind of service provided). With regard to the first approach, a space tourist is a person that undertakes a travel to space for leisure purposes. Firstly, it is opportune to clarify the meaning of “space tourists” and “space flight participants”. The second expression is used by NASA to identify nonprofessionals that participate in space programs. Federal regulations, in particular, define space flight participant as “an individual, who is not crew, carried aboard a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle” [4]. It refers to persons that take part in an existing space program to make an extraordinary experience in outer space. The NASA Space Flight Participant Program [5] creates a win-win situation. On the one hand the space agency benefits from the dissemination to the large public of this experience. On the other hand, private citizens without specific professional skills are included in space programs as spaceflight participants and have the privilege to go to outer space, an experience previously reserved to astronauts. Space tourists can be considered as a kind of space flight participants, with a special emphasis on the reasons of the travel. The space tourist indeed is a person that travels to outer space for recreational purposes thanks to a service that is conceived specifically for that. Secondly, space tourists are different from payload specialists that are persons “who have specialized onboard duties” [6]. From the objective point of view, it is necessary to take into
E-mail address: [email protected]. URLS: http://www.essca.fr, http://www.essca.fr/EU-Asia/. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2017.04.005 Received 30 September 2016; Received in revised form 13 April 2017; Accepted 14 April 2017 0265-9646/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Forganni, A., Space Policy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2017.04.005
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
mean “democratisation” of space, in the sense of making space accessible to a large number of people. Thus, in the long term, space tourism should not be conceived as a new luxury product for a few privileged individuals [11], although at the initial stage it is necessarily like that. Furthermore, technological development is essential not only to make space tourism more accessible, but also to increase its safety standards [2,7]. With regard to the legal background, Von der Dunk [3] has identified three main stages in the development of outer space activities: during the first one, governments were the only protagonists and private companies had a subordinate role. In this context the legal framework was established through international agreements. In the second phase, private companies gained ground, but the system of state responsibility and liability was adequate to deal with the limited activities concerned, mainly private launches and operation of space objects. That is not the case anymore for the current third stage, where private activities are complex and demand new legal solutions, more adapted to the interests at stake. On the one hand, scholars have highlighted the lack of specific regulations on space tourism and the need of a clear legal framework for the further development of this sector [2,8]. Apel affirms that « “National and international laws regulating spaceflight must be adapted to allow a commercial business” [7, 283]. On the other hand, serious ethical and environmental concerns have been raised about space tourism. Scholars have launched debates on fundamental questions, e.g. do space and the celestial bodies such as planets and stars belong to humankind? Can we use outer space for leisure purposes? [7,11]. Ethical questions come also from the classification of outer space as res communis and the fact that, therefore, it cannot be object of appropriation. Article II of the Outer Space Treaty affirms that “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means” [12]. If this is not necessarily an obstacle to tourist activities in space, it is however important to determine which activities should be considered appropriate [10]. An adequate legal framework should also take into consideration these aspects. From the environmental point of view, Brown highlighted a sort of paradox: if it is true that space tourism could represent, to some extent, an answer to the problems that an increasing number of tourists are creating on our planet, it is also possible that it will produce similar negative effects on the environment in air space or outer space [13].
consideration not only the travel to space, but also the possible accommodation, for example in an orbital or space hotel [7,8], and the leisure activities that can be offered, such as partial or full experience of weightlessness, space and earth observations, or space walks [2,7,8]. Von der Dunk [3] provides a larger definition that is founded on the fact that the technologies developed for space tourism could be used also for assuring quick transportation from one side of the world to the other. As a consequence, the larger public could in the future use this means of transportation not only for holidays, but also for professional or other personal purposes. Thus the issues that will be discussed in the next sessions with reference to space tourists can be extended to space travellers in the broad sense, without making distinction on the basis of the travel purposes. 2. Peculiar aspects of space tourism and consequent challenges To some extent, today a new “space race” is taking place: it differs from the well know space race that took place during the cold war, because it does not primarily involve governments, but rather private companies. In the “privatized space age” (or “new space race”) new tourism agencies appear and the companies that operate in this sectors are making quick progress in reusable rocket engines and other technologies, e.g. XCOR Aerospace's “Lynx rocket plane”, Virgin Galactic's “SpaceShipTwo”, Space X's “Dragon spacecraft”, Reaction Engines' “Skylon spaceplane”, EADS Astrium's “Phoenix”. In particular, entities such as Virgin Galactic or SpaceX work at a fast pace and are in fierce competition to first achieve the technology allowing the launch of commercial space flights. The phenomenon of space tourism is characterized by the fact that, up to now, only a few persons have had this opportunity, because the costs are massive and the risks are also high (accidents do occur in this early phase: in 2014 the crash of the SpaceShipTwo of Virgin Galactic occurred, and a pilot died [9]). Therefore, it becomes the new extreme adventure for those who have the financial means and the courage. Indeed, “The 'World' is larger than planet Earth. Space is a part of the world” [7, 279]: from the myth of the far west adventurers we move to the current “far away from earth” adventurers. Apel pointed out that “real spaceflight does not fascinate humans in a comparable way as 'travel to the stars', as shown in the very popular science fiction adventures in movies and television, does” [7, 279]. However, this may change: “Space tourism has been a dream up to now. However difficult, every achievement is a dream at first” [8, 136]. Recent surveys have demonstrated that space tourism is gaining more and more popularity: “There can be no doubt that the prospect of commercial space tourism flights has captured widespread imagination” [10 , 2]. This new reality is going to have considerable implications. Space tourism is not a recent idea, already in the 1960s the perspective of future hotels in space, for example, was mentioned [11], but only recently it has become an actual business project. A technical/commercial barrier currently exists: to become economically interesting, space tourism needs to reach a large public of potential users. To this purpose, a further technological progress is necessary and several companies are currently working on that. In particular, reusable launch vehicles are the key in order to make accessible to the public what, up to now, is still an activity very expensive that only a limited number of persons can afford [8]. As underlined by Loizou, “The success of space tourism depends upon a mass demand from potential travellers and the participation of industrial and financial partners throughout the world” [2, 289]. In considering the feasibility of space tourism, assessing the potential market allows providing information on the potential scale of the demand in different price segments. Market studies have showed that a relevant market does exist [7]. Consequently, the economic potential of this service is enormous, it is just a matter of costs and capabilities. “Popularisation” of space should also
3. Orbital and suborbital flights: legal issues Suborbital flights have been defined as flights “in which a transport vehicle enters outer space but does not reach an orbit” [14, 263], while on the contrary orbital flights do. When comparing orbital and suborbital flight, scholars have pointed out their complementarities: the former requires the development of vehicles for semi-regular flights, with lower development costs, whereas the latter requires vehicles for regular flights, with higher development costs. Suborbital flights would be less performing, compared to orbital flights, but their progress is believed to be necessary for providing the technology and market infrastructures for orbital flights [15]. Specifically, suborbital flights create more problems, from the legal point of view, because the vehicles used in this case have a hybrid nature, due to the exploitation of both aviation and space know-how, therefore the determination of the applicable law is difficult [2,10]. Currently air space rules and outer space rules apply, but their coordination is not easy. As clearly explained by Gerhard [14, 265]: “those vehicles may take off and/or land horizontally and are designed to perform some parts of the flight with support in the atmosphere from the reactions of air against the earth's surface (that is using lift in the air), while other parts of the flight are supported by rocket-power (that is using thrust)”. His analysis is based on the distinction between the 2
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
the resources of the seabed and its subsoil [19]. This issue was addressed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) [20] establishing the International Seabed Authority, which is responsible for the common organization and control of the activities in the “Area”, i.e. the seabed, the ocean floor and the subsoil, which do not fall within the national jurisdiction of the states. Article 136 of UNCLOS defines the seabed as Common Heritage of Mankind and this system aims to assure that the exploitation of the natural resources would benefit everybody. The key-concept of this regime is the “access to the region, rather than ownership of it” [21, 194]. However, the New York Agreement of 1994 relating to the implementation of part XI of UNCLOS modified the convention and created an unbalanced system, more favourable to private business activities and, therefore, to the developed countries [22]. Article I of the Outer Space Treaty affirms that “the exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development, and shall be the province of all mankind” [12]. This principle has been associated to the concept of Common Heritage of Mankind [23], even if in this field the principle is considered more flexible [24]. However, up to now an equivalent institution to the International Seabed Authority has not been established. Such a model of international cooperation seems appropriate to guarantee a balanced access to space and to avoid abuses, and to this regard several proposals were advanced [25–27]. Although this mechanism presents several shortcomings (among others, the US, one of the states with major capacities to exploit the Area, has not yet ratified the treaty), it could be improved and transposed for the organization of the exploitation activities in outer space, including space tourism. Yet, other scholars do not share the same point of view. In particular, Gruner points out that “Although cooperation is optimal in principle, it is not ideal way to rapidly develop outer space, especially as the law of outer space has developed through the United Nations” [28, 355].
functional and the spatial approach. The functional approach implies the application of the relevant rules depending on whether the vehicle is an aircraft, or a space object, or a hybrid. The spatial approach, on the contrary, leads to the application of the relevant rules depending on whether the activity concerned takes place in the air space, or in the outer space, or in both. The lack of coordination among the different systems implies that in some cases the functional approach prevails (for example to identify the relevant rules for airworthiness or the authorisations for space operators to comply with international rules), while in other cases the spatial approach prevails (for example for the air pilots' licences or the space worthiness requirements). Hobe refers to the functional and spatial approach as well. In addition to the boundary issue concerning air space and outer space, he identifies as problematic legal issues the “authorization to conduct space tourism, registration of the aircraft or spacecraft, liability to passengers and third parties, and the status of passengers” [16, 440]. Also Freeland addresses the question of the legal status of space tourists. This is important in order to consider whether to apply the existing international rules concerning the rescue of astronauts to other individuals in space and specifically to space tourists [10]. With regard to the authorization mechanism, different systems are established by air space and outer space rules. International law of outer space is based specifically on the principle of responsibility of the states for the activities undertaken in outer space, enshrined by Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty, and the principle of liability of the states for the damages caused by such activities, established by Article II of the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects. The former provides that “States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space” and that “The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty” [12]. The latter affirms that “A launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the earth or to aircraft flight” [17]. These principles led to the establishment of an authorization system that attributes the power to control the launch activities carried out by private companies to public authorities. These considerations show that numerous legal issues should be addressed with regard to space tourism, and the adaptation of the existing legal framework will not be easy. Freeland highlights the importance of “A comprehensive and uniform legal regime that specifically envisages the complete launch and return journey of private individuals” [10, 9]. A legislation that regulates specifically all the aspects of space tourism could allow avoiding doubts related to the interpretation of the existing rules and their adaptation to the specific case of space tourism. The U.S. have already adopted a first regulation on space tourism, i.e. the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004 [18], which deals with licensing systems and liability. That is not the case of the EU. An additional example that illustrates the interests and values at stake concerns the non-appropriation principle of outer space. In order to adapt the existing international legal framework to space tourism, a form of derogation of such principle has been suggested [8, 139]. The proposal raises serious concerns, because at a later stage it could open the door to the exploitation of space resources for the benefit of those countries that have the financial means to carry out this kind of activities and to the detriment of countries that do not, or for the benefit of certain businesses and to the detriment of others. A similar problem concerned the regime of the High Seas, which is founded on the same principle of non-appropriation. The ‘freedom of the seas’, established in the XVII century, has a double implication: the positive right (all countries have the same right to use) and the negative right (a country cannot prevent the others from using the high seas), which corresponds to the ancient concept of ‘res communis omnium’. The negative right is relevant especially with regard to the exploitation of
4. Space popularisation through space tourism - a window of opportunity for the EU Space Policy? The service sector is assuming a growing importance within the European Union, and in this context tourist activities represent a major domain, with important implications both from the economic and the social point of view. In a recent study of the European Parliamentary Research Service [29], space tourism is mentioned among the new trends. With regard to the problem of exorbitant prices and access of the wider public, the analogy with the previous development of civil aviation is evident. When commercial flights were launched they were very expensive and only the elite could afford them, but today they can be even cheaper than other means of transportation. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that a similar trend could be observed for space flights. Although space tourism is not explicitly mentioned in the European Commission's Space Strategy of 2011 [31], the priorities established in this document clearly point in the direction of a sustainable development of space activities. Space tourism seems to fit in this context, and even if it may not represent a principal centre of interest for the policymakers, at least for the moment, the multiplication of private initiatives in this sector will bring the public authorities to deal with the implications of such activity on society. Over and above that, three main reasons justify the importance of space tourism in the eyes of the legislator. First, the economic perspectives in this field raised the interests of private companies that have demonstrated to be able to attract important investments. These significant financial resources are essential to succeed in the development of the necessary technology for assuring the launch of this new market. The acquired know-how will likely serve also other projects and programs that do not present an immediate economic advantage, but that surely are of public interest, e.g. scientific exploration, security 3
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
could represent the optimal occasion to solve the potential overlapping of air law and space law rules (e.g. in terms of state liability), integrating spatial and functional approaches in a coherent system. Thirdly, it would establish common technical standards adapted to the new vehicles and their purposes, and it would assure a comprehensive legal framework for space travel, safety, insurance contracts and consumer protection. In this last domain, in particular, the EU has established advanced legal standards that could be very useful. For example, the rules concerning the right of consumers to change their mind (so called “cooling off period”) for e-commerce, could become interesting in a sector that presents a certain level of danger (see the recent case of the “postponed” mission of a potential space tourist [37]). In accordance with the existing jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU, the EU legislative framework could assure an adequate protection of passengers/tourists' rights. Finally, confident of its own solid legislation on space tourism, in the perspective of the evolution of international law, the EU could play a major role in shaping the forthcoming international rules in a better way. This is in line with the role of normative power that the EU wants to assume in the international community.
and defence. Given the limited public resources available, there is indeed a supplementary advantage in the development of space tourism: the commercialisation of space would address the problem of limited public funding. Secondly, although limited, public investments for space activities do exist, are important, and should continue to be assured because they serve the public interests above mentioned. Space tourism could make it easier to justify the huge government investments required in this sector. Thirdly, the development of space technologies needs highly qualified specialists and organisations. Therefore the European connected industries will likely benefit from the expansion of space tourism, with a consequent positive trend in terms of employment and competitiveness in the EU. It will be probable, therefore, that the public authorities in the EU will welcome and support this burgeoning sector. In this respect, the European Space Agency (ESA) explicitly calls for the establishment of an adequate legislative framework, capable of responding to the needs of the European market. As a matter of fact, space tourism will have a direct impact on the ESA's activities, in terms of development of new technologies and programs [32]. As much as air navigation rules find their origin in the pre-existing sea navigation rules, air space law has been the departure point for the evolution of outer space law [19,33]. In the opinion of Freeland, “it is clear that the existing rules of space law, which rely solely on state responsibility and liability, are not appropriate for an industry that will principally be undertaken as a private commercial venture” [10, 18]. New international legal instruments for the creation of a lex specialis for space tourism would be preferable, as well as legislative initiatives at the EU level. With this regard, the new set of rules could find a solid basis in the EU legislation concerning tourism and transportation, which should be adapted to the peculiarities of space tourism. With reference to consumer protection, in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU a fair balance between the interests of the air passengers and the air companies is achieved thanks to the high standards of protection assured by the Court to the passengers. This trend in the field of air space policy could represent an important reference point for the development of a specific legal framework for space tourism [34]. In particular, a cornerstone of the Court of Justice of the EU jurisprudence in the domain of passengers' protection is the case Queen v. Department of Transport of 2006 (ECR I-00403), where the Court was asked to solve, among others, the assumed conflict between international law (specifically, the Montreal Convention of 1999 [35]) and the EU Law (Regulation 261/2004 on flight cancellation, delays and denied boarding [36]). Although in light of a consolidated orientation of the EU case law international agreements prevail over EU secondary legislation, the Court affirmed that passengers could claim damages on the basis of both legal sources. In the opinion of the Court, a conflict between international rules and EU's rules did not occur, because the EU Law did not reduce but strengthened the legal protection of air passengers. Currently, “Space tourists themselves are unable to claim for compensation under the Liability Convention” [10, 16]. If in the future a new international agreement will regulate this possibility, the Court of Justice could be called upon again to find a reasonable coordination between international and EU rules. In light of the observations made above and in the previous sections, space tourism has the potential to produce a positive impact in the progressive space popularisation, as well as to become a driver for the development of the EU space policy. Legislative initiatives at the European level for the establishment of a lex specialis, providing a specific coherent legal framework for space tourism, would all in all present several advantages. First, a EU uniform legislation (but also just a framing legislation), would allow overcoming possible differences between the domestic regulations of the Member States and could offer shared solutions, to avoid legislative fragmentation in the internal market. Secondly, it
5. Conclusions Conventionally reserved to astronauts and scientists, in the future outer space could turn out to be increasingly accessible to persons that would like to make such an experience for leisure purposes. The number of space enthusiasts that dare to venture beyond the physical borders of Earth is increasing, as well as the investors in the sector. The direct consequence is that space is becoming more and more present in the media and attracts the interest not only of the specialists, but also of the public. Numerous issues are raised in this context, in terms of ethical concerns, environmental impact, and the legal framework. These questions need theoretical and practical answers. Before regular space flights can be scheduled, legislative initiatives should be undertaken, to tackle the major problems of the applicable law, the coordination of air space and outer space rules and the other issues mentioned in the previous sections. Space tourism thus is becoming a driver for the process of popularisation of space. At the same time, it is also an interesting field for the development of space policies. While government space agencies have registered declining budgets, firstly for lack of support from the public after the end of the cold war, and secondly because of the recent economic crisis, space tourism could open a new alternative scenario for future space activities, given the massive private financial resources that this sector is capable to attract. In this context, public-private partnerships could be an effective way to promote innovative projects. The lack of a specific legislation for space tourism in the EU could represent, however, a set-back. The establishment of a certain legal framework presents some advantages both at the internal and external level. At the external level, with the perspective of future global negotiations for the establishment of international legal instruments, the EU would be in a better position to exercise its normative power in the international community. At the internal level, it could contribute to solve the shortcomings that originate from the adaptation of the existing air space and outer space rules, providing a better environment for the exploitation of this sector's potential. Furthermore, it could allow reducing the negative effects that can possibly occur, in terms of ethical and environmental concerns, as much as in the field of consumer protection. Yet, the EU's legislative action in space policy will be possible only if the Member States do not invoke the priority of their own action, in accordance with the proportionality and subsidiarity principles, and refrain from adopting domestic legislations. As Von der Dunk pointed out, there is the risk that the new legal framework provided by the 4
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
Lisbon Treaty turns out to be an “empty shell” [38, 389]. Indeed, Article 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU refers to the shared competences of the Union and at paragraph 3 it affirms that, in the areas of research, technological development and space, “the exercise of that competence shall not result in Member States being prevented from exercising theirs”. This limit requires the need of an effective coordination between the Member States and the EU. In particular, to establish the European space policy, Article 189 of the Treaty allows the European Parliament and the Council to adopt the necessary measures following the ordinary legislative procedure, but it explicitly excludes “any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States”. In other words, the issues raised by space tourism represent a good opportunity to test the political will of the EU Member States, whether they do aim to develop a European space policy. Space tourism could be the litmus test. The legal instruments to pursue a further integration in this field are in place, but the Member States should coordinate their actions. An explicit mandate from the Member States to legislate in this domain would be useful, to avoid to launch a legislative initiative at the European level that will then encounter resistance (if not open opposition) at the national level.
[13] [14] [15] [16] [17]
[18]
[19] [20]
[21] [22] [23] [24]
Acknowledgements
[25]
The author would like to thank the program ‘Recherche-FormationInnovation Alliance Europa’ of the Region Pays de la Loire for the support provided.
[26] [27] [28]
References
[29]
[1] T. Hörber, Conclusions, in: T. Hörber, P Stephenson (Eds.), European Space Policy. European Integration and the Final Frontier, Routledge, 2015, pp. 259–263. [2] J. Loizou, Turning space tourism into commercial reality, Space Policy 22.4 (2006) 289–290. [3] F.G. von der Dunk, Space tourism, private spaceflight and the law: key aspects, Space Policy 27.3 (2011) 146–152. [4] U.S. Government Publishing Office, Federal Aviation Administration, Commercial Space Transportation, (2016) 14 C.F.R. § 401.5 https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ CFR-2015-title14-vol4/pdf/CFR-2015-title14-vol4-sec401-5.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). [5] NASA Technical Reports Service, The Space Flight Participant Program - Taking the Teacher and Classroom into Space, (1985) http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R= 19860031168 (Accessed 27 September 2016). [6] NASA, Astronaut Requirements, (2004) http://www.nasa.gov/audience/ forstudents/postsecondary/features/F_Astronaut_Requirements.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). [7] U. Apel, Space tourism — a promising future? Space Policy 13.4 (1997) 279–284. [8] Students, I.S.U. Summer Session, et al., Dreams and realities: the challenges facing development of space tourism, Space Policy 17.2 (2001) 133–140. [9] K. Chang, J. Schwartzoct, Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo Crashes in New Setback for Commercial Spaceflight, The New York Times, 31.10.2016, http://www. nytimes.com/2014/11/01/science/virgin-galactics-spaceshiptwo-crashes-duringtest-flight.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). [10] S. Freeland, Up, up and… back: the emergence of space tourism and its impact on the international law of outer space, Chi. J. Int'l L 6 (2005) 1–22 http:// chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cjil/vol6/iss1/4 (Accessed 27 September 2016). [11] L. Billings, Exploration for the masses? Or joyrides for the ultra-rich? Prospects for space tourism, Space Policy 22.3 (2006) 162–164. [12] U.N., Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, 2222 (XXI). Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. http://www.unoosa.org/
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
5
oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/outerspacetreaty.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). F. Brown, The final Frontier? Tourism in space, Tour. Recreat. Res. 29.1 (2004) 27–43. M. Gerhard, Space tourism. The auhorisation of suborbital space transportation, in: F.G. von der Dunk (Ed.), Space Legislation in Europe, Brill, 2011, pp. 263–296. R.A. Goehlich, Ticket pricing strategy for an oligopolistic space tourism market, Space Policy 21.4 (2005) 293–306. S. Hobe, Legal aspects of space tourism, Neb. L. Rev. 86 (2007) 439–458 http:// digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol86/iss2/6/ (Accessed 27 September 2016). U.N., Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, 2777 (XXVI), Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, (2016) http://www. unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/liability-convention.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). U.S H.R. 3752. Commercial space launch Amendments Act of 2004. 108th Congress (2003–2004). https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/3752 (Accessed 27 September 2016). B. Conforti, Diritto Internazionale, Editoriale Scientifica, 2013. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, (1982) http://www.un.org/ Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm (Accessed 27 September 2016). C.C. Joyner, Legal implications of the concept of the common heritage of mankind, Int. Comp. Law Q. 35.1 (1986) 190–199. S.J. Shackelford, The tragedy of the common heritage of mankind, Stan. Envtl. LJ 28 (2009) 109–169. D. Wolter, Common Security in Outer Space and International Law vol. 29, United Nations Publications UNIDIR, 2006. S.M. Williams, The law of outer space and natural resources, Int. Comp. Law Q. (1987) 142–151. S. Ervin, Law in a vacuum: the common hertitage doctrine in outer space law, B. C. Int'l Comp. L. Rev. 7 (1984) 403–431. H. Keefe, Making the final frontier feasible: a critical look at the current body of outer space law, Santa Clara Comput. High Tech. LJ 11 (1995) 345–371. S. Coffey, Establishing a legal framework for property rights to natural resources in outer space, Case W. Res. J. Int'l L 41 (2009) 119–147. B.C. Gruner, A new hope for international space law: incorporating nineteenth century first possession principles into the 1967 space treaty for the colonization of outer space in the twenty-first century, Set. Hall. L. Rev. 35 (2004) 299–357. M. Juul, European Parliamentary Research Service, Tourism and the European Union. Recent Trends and Policy Developments, (2015) http://www.europarl. europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2015/568343/EPRS_IDA(2015)568343_EN.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Towards a Space Strategy for the European Union that Benefits Its Citizens/* COM (2011) 152 final */. European Space Agency, Space tourism – ESA's view on private suborbital space flights, ESA Bull. 135 (2008), http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bulletin135/ bul135c_galvez.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). M. Leissle, (Neo-)Realism - power politics and the formation of international law - a historical comparison, in: T. Hörber, E. Sigalas (Eds.), Theorizing European Space Policy, 2016, pp. 91–104. A. Forganni, Role of the european Court of Justice in the development of EU space policy, in: T. Hörber, P Stephenson (Eds.), European Space Policy. European Integration and the Final Frontier, Routledge, 2015, pp. 114–127. Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air Montreal, (28 May 1999) http://www.iata.org/policy/Documents/MC99_en.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the european parliament and of the council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing regulation (EEC) No 295/91, Off. J. L 046 (17/02/2004) 1–8. J. Kluger, What sarah Brightman's ‘postponed’ mission says about space tourism, Time (13.05.2015), http://time.com/3857685/sarah-brightman-space-tourismmission/ (Accessed 27 September 2016). F.G. von der Dunk, The EU Space Competence as per the Treaty of Lisbon: Sea Change or Empty Shell? Space and Telecommunications Law Program Faculty Publications. Paper 66 (2011), pp. 382–392 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ spacelaw/66 (Accessed 05 March 2017).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Space Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/spacepol
The potential of space tourism for space popularisation: An opportunity for the EU Space Policy? Antonella Forganni ESSCA School of Management, EU-Asia Institute, 1 Rue Joseph Lakanal, BP 40348, 49003, Angers Cedex 01, France
A B S T R A C T This article examines space tourism in the perspective of popularisation of space, to determine its potential role, with a special focus on the possible implications for the development of the EU Space Policy. After a preliminary analysis of space tourism and an overview of the technology required to make it possible, distinguishing between orbital and suborbital flights, the article outlines some legal and political issues related to this emerging sector and discusses the possible consequences of space commercialisation. The positive trend and the progress made in this domain suggest that space tourism could actually become a factor of space popularisation. At the same time, the existing legal framework does not seem to efficiently respond to the challenge. Rather than adapting the current air space and outer space rules, it would be preferable to establish a comprehensive special regulation for space tourism. In the European context, in particular, space tourism could contribute to the evolution of the EU Space Policy, which is still at an early stage, and thus it could have a positive impact on the European integration process.
1. Introduction Space travellers have constituted, up to now, a limited group of persons that, crossing the traditional barriers, have pushed the experience of tourism beyond the known horizons. Thus, space has become a new attractive and elitist destination; this phenomenon, although still marginal, may nonetheless contribute to a radical change of the perception of space in the public opinion. Can space tourism drive space popularisation? In other words, is it possible to popularize space by ‘populating’ space with tourists? Especially in the European Union (EU), where the Lisbon Treaty has recently enshrined Space Policy as a shared competence of the Union, this domain represents an area of increasing interest. In particular, as Hörber [1] pointed out, it is a policy at an early stage of development, compared to others, and it could give fresh impetus to the further progress of European integration. If space tourism becomes a reality soon, it will likely affect the forthcoming evolution of space law and policy in the EU, indirectly contributing to the European integration process. An extended version of the initial research question could be the following: could space tourism become a strategic factor for bringing the larger public closer to space activities? Could that assure public support to space policies and the huge investments that they imply? Space tourism (also called personal spaceflight [2] or private
spaceflight [3]), can be qualified under a subjective point of view (the person concerned) and an objective point of view (the activity carried out or the kind of service provided). With regard to the first approach, a space tourist is a person that undertakes a travel to space for leisure purposes. Firstly, it is opportune to clarify the meaning of “space tourists” and “space flight participants”. The second expression is used by NASA to identify nonprofessionals that participate in space programs. Federal regulations, in particular, define space flight participant as “an individual, who is not crew, carried aboard a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle” [4]. It refers to persons that take part in an existing space program to make an extraordinary experience in outer space. The NASA Space Flight Participant Program [5] creates a win-win situation. On the one hand the space agency benefits from the dissemination to the large public of this experience. On the other hand, private citizens without specific professional skills are included in space programs as spaceflight participants and have the privilege to go to outer space, an experience previously reserved to astronauts. Space tourists can be considered as a kind of space flight participants, with a special emphasis on the reasons of the travel. The space tourist indeed is a person that travels to outer space for recreational purposes thanks to a service that is conceived specifically for that. Secondly, space tourists are different from payload specialists that are persons “who have specialized onboard duties” [6]. From the objective point of view, it is necessary to take into
E-mail address: [email protected]. URLS: http://www.essca.fr, http://www.essca.fr/EU-Asia/. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2017.04.005 Received 30 September 2016; Received in revised form 13 April 2017; Accepted 14 April 2017 0265-9646/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article as: Forganni, A., Space Policy (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2017.04.005
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
mean “democratisation” of space, in the sense of making space accessible to a large number of people. Thus, in the long term, space tourism should not be conceived as a new luxury product for a few privileged individuals [11], although at the initial stage it is necessarily like that. Furthermore, technological development is essential not only to make space tourism more accessible, but also to increase its safety standards [2,7]. With regard to the legal background, Von der Dunk [3] has identified three main stages in the development of outer space activities: during the first one, governments were the only protagonists and private companies had a subordinate role. In this context the legal framework was established through international agreements. In the second phase, private companies gained ground, but the system of state responsibility and liability was adequate to deal with the limited activities concerned, mainly private launches and operation of space objects. That is not the case anymore for the current third stage, where private activities are complex and demand new legal solutions, more adapted to the interests at stake. On the one hand, scholars have highlighted the lack of specific regulations on space tourism and the need of a clear legal framework for the further development of this sector [2,8]. Apel affirms that « “National and international laws regulating spaceflight must be adapted to allow a commercial business” [7, 283]. On the other hand, serious ethical and environmental concerns have been raised about space tourism. Scholars have launched debates on fundamental questions, e.g. do space and the celestial bodies such as planets and stars belong to humankind? Can we use outer space for leisure purposes? [7,11]. Ethical questions come also from the classification of outer space as res communis and the fact that, therefore, it cannot be object of appropriation. Article II of the Outer Space Treaty affirms that “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means” [12]. If this is not necessarily an obstacle to tourist activities in space, it is however important to determine which activities should be considered appropriate [10]. An adequate legal framework should also take into consideration these aspects. From the environmental point of view, Brown highlighted a sort of paradox: if it is true that space tourism could represent, to some extent, an answer to the problems that an increasing number of tourists are creating on our planet, it is also possible that it will produce similar negative effects on the environment in air space or outer space [13].
consideration not only the travel to space, but also the possible accommodation, for example in an orbital or space hotel [7,8], and the leisure activities that can be offered, such as partial or full experience of weightlessness, space and earth observations, or space walks [2,7,8]. Von der Dunk [3] provides a larger definition that is founded on the fact that the technologies developed for space tourism could be used also for assuring quick transportation from one side of the world to the other. As a consequence, the larger public could in the future use this means of transportation not only for holidays, but also for professional or other personal purposes. Thus the issues that will be discussed in the next sessions with reference to space tourists can be extended to space travellers in the broad sense, without making distinction on the basis of the travel purposes. 2. Peculiar aspects of space tourism and consequent challenges To some extent, today a new “space race” is taking place: it differs from the well know space race that took place during the cold war, because it does not primarily involve governments, but rather private companies. In the “privatized space age” (or “new space race”) new tourism agencies appear and the companies that operate in this sectors are making quick progress in reusable rocket engines and other technologies, e.g. XCOR Aerospace's “Lynx rocket plane”, Virgin Galactic's “SpaceShipTwo”, Space X's “Dragon spacecraft”, Reaction Engines' “Skylon spaceplane”, EADS Astrium's “Phoenix”. In particular, entities such as Virgin Galactic or SpaceX work at a fast pace and are in fierce competition to first achieve the technology allowing the launch of commercial space flights. The phenomenon of space tourism is characterized by the fact that, up to now, only a few persons have had this opportunity, because the costs are massive and the risks are also high (accidents do occur in this early phase: in 2014 the crash of the SpaceShipTwo of Virgin Galactic occurred, and a pilot died [9]). Therefore, it becomes the new extreme adventure for those who have the financial means and the courage. Indeed, “The 'World' is larger than planet Earth. Space is a part of the world” [7, 279]: from the myth of the far west adventurers we move to the current “far away from earth” adventurers. Apel pointed out that “real spaceflight does not fascinate humans in a comparable way as 'travel to the stars', as shown in the very popular science fiction adventures in movies and television, does” [7, 279]. However, this may change: “Space tourism has been a dream up to now. However difficult, every achievement is a dream at first” [8, 136]. Recent surveys have demonstrated that space tourism is gaining more and more popularity: “There can be no doubt that the prospect of commercial space tourism flights has captured widespread imagination” [10 , 2]. This new reality is going to have considerable implications. Space tourism is not a recent idea, already in the 1960s the perspective of future hotels in space, for example, was mentioned [11], but only recently it has become an actual business project. A technical/commercial barrier currently exists: to become economically interesting, space tourism needs to reach a large public of potential users. To this purpose, a further technological progress is necessary and several companies are currently working on that. In particular, reusable launch vehicles are the key in order to make accessible to the public what, up to now, is still an activity very expensive that only a limited number of persons can afford [8]. As underlined by Loizou, “The success of space tourism depends upon a mass demand from potential travellers and the participation of industrial and financial partners throughout the world” [2, 289]. In considering the feasibility of space tourism, assessing the potential market allows providing information on the potential scale of the demand in different price segments. Market studies have showed that a relevant market does exist [7]. Consequently, the economic potential of this service is enormous, it is just a matter of costs and capabilities. “Popularisation” of space should also
3. Orbital and suborbital flights: legal issues Suborbital flights have been defined as flights “in which a transport vehicle enters outer space but does not reach an orbit” [14, 263], while on the contrary orbital flights do. When comparing orbital and suborbital flight, scholars have pointed out their complementarities: the former requires the development of vehicles for semi-regular flights, with lower development costs, whereas the latter requires vehicles for regular flights, with higher development costs. Suborbital flights would be less performing, compared to orbital flights, but their progress is believed to be necessary for providing the technology and market infrastructures for orbital flights [15]. Specifically, suborbital flights create more problems, from the legal point of view, because the vehicles used in this case have a hybrid nature, due to the exploitation of both aviation and space know-how, therefore the determination of the applicable law is difficult [2,10]. Currently air space rules and outer space rules apply, but their coordination is not easy. As clearly explained by Gerhard [14, 265]: “those vehicles may take off and/or land horizontally and are designed to perform some parts of the flight with support in the atmosphere from the reactions of air against the earth's surface (that is using lift in the air), while other parts of the flight are supported by rocket-power (that is using thrust)”. His analysis is based on the distinction between the 2
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
the resources of the seabed and its subsoil [19]. This issue was addressed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) [20] establishing the International Seabed Authority, which is responsible for the common organization and control of the activities in the “Area”, i.e. the seabed, the ocean floor and the subsoil, which do not fall within the national jurisdiction of the states. Article 136 of UNCLOS defines the seabed as Common Heritage of Mankind and this system aims to assure that the exploitation of the natural resources would benefit everybody. The key-concept of this regime is the “access to the region, rather than ownership of it” [21, 194]. However, the New York Agreement of 1994 relating to the implementation of part XI of UNCLOS modified the convention and created an unbalanced system, more favourable to private business activities and, therefore, to the developed countries [22]. Article I of the Outer Space Treaty affirms that “the exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development, and shall be the province of all mankind” [12]. This principle has been associated to the concept of Common Heritage of Mankind [23], even if in this field the principle is considered more flexible [24]. However, up to now an equivalent institution to the International Seabed Authority has not been established. Such a model of international cooperation seems appropriate to guarantee a balanced access to space and to avoid abuses, and to this regard several proposals were advanced [25–27]. Although this mechanism presents several shortcomings (among others, the US, one of the states with major capacities to exploit the Area, has not yet ratified the treaty), it could be improved and transposed for the organization of the exploitation activities in outer space, including space tourism. Yet, other scholars do not share the same point of view. In particular, Gruner points out that “Although cooperation is optimal in principle, it is not ideal way to rapidly develop outer space, especially as the law of outer space has developed through the United Nations” [28, 355].
functional and the spatial approach. The functional approach implies the application of the relevant rules depending on whether the vehicle is an aircraft, or a space object, or a hybrid. The spatial approach, on the contrary, leads to the application of the relevant rules depending on whether the activity concerned takes place in the air space, or in the outer space, or in both. The lack of coordination among the different systems implies that in some cases the functional approach prevails (for example to identify the relevant rules for airworthiness or the authorisations for space operators to comply with international rules), while in other cases the spatial approach prevails (for example for the air pilots' licences or the space worthiness requirements). Hobe refers to the functional and spatial approach as well. In addition to the boundary issue concerning air space and outer space, he identifies as problematic legal issues the “authorization to conduct space tourism, registration of the aircraft or spacecraft, liability to passengers and third parties, and the status of passengers” [16, 440]. Also Freeland addresses the question of the legal status of space tourists. This is important in order to consider whether to apply the existing international rules concerning the rescue of astronauts to other individuals in space and specifically to space tourists [10]. With regard to the authorization mechanism, different systems are established by air space and outer space rules. International law of outer space is based specifically on the principle of responsibility of the states for the activities undertaken in outer space, enshrined by Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty, and the principle of liability of the states for the damages caused by such activities, established by Article II of the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects. The former provides that “States Parties to the Treaty shall bear international responsibility for national activities in outer space” and that “The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty” [12]. The latter affirms that “A launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the earth or to aircraft flight” [17]. These principles led to the establishment of an authorization system that attributes the power to control the launch activities carried out by private companies to public authorities. These considerations show that numerous legal issues should be addressed with regard to space tourism, and the adaptation of the existing legal framework will not be easy. Freeland highlights the importance of “A comprehensive and uniform legal regime that specifically envisages the complete launch and return journey of private individuals” [10, 9]. A legislation that regulates specifically all the aspects of space tourism could allow avoiding doubts related to the interpretation of the existing rules and their adaptation to the specific case of space tourism. The U.S. have already adopted a first regulation on space tourism, i.e. the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004 [18], which deals with licensing systems and liability. That is not the case of the EU. An additional example that illustrates the interests and values at stake concerns the non-appropriation principle of outer space. In order to adapt the existing international legal framework to space tourism, a form of derogation of such principle has been suggested [8, 139]. The proposal raises serious concerns, because at a later stage it could open the door to the exploitation of space resources for the benefit of those countries that have the financial means to carry out this kind of activities and to the detriment of countries that do not, or for the benefit of certain businesses and to the detriment of others. A similar problem concerned the regime of the High Seas, which is founded on the same principle of non-appropriation. The ‘freedom of the seas’, established in the XVII century, has a double implication: the positive right (all countries have the same right to use) and the negative right (a country cannot prevent the others from using the high seas), which corresponds to the ancient concept of ‘res communis omnium’. The negative right is relevant especially with regard to the exploitation of
4. Space popularisation through space tourism - a window of opportunity for the EU Space Policy? The service sector is assuming a growing importance within the European Union, and in this context tourist activities represent a major domain, with important implications both from the economic and the social point of view. In a recent study of the European Parliamentary Research Service [29], space tourism is mentioned among the new trends. With regard to the problem of exorbitant prices and access of the wider public, the analogy with the previous development of civil aviation is evident. When commercial flights were launched they were very expensive and only the elite could afford them, but today they can be even cheaper than other means of transportation. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that a similar trend could be observed for space flights. Although space tourism is not explicitly mentioned in the European Commission's Space Strategy of 2011 [31], the priorities established in this document clearly point in the direction of a sustainable development of space activities. Space tourism seems to fit in this context, and even if it may not represent a principal centre of interest for the policymakers, at least for the moment, the multiplication of private initiatives in this sector will bring the public authorities to deal with the implications of such activity on society. Over and above that, three main reasons justify the importance of space tourism in the eyes of the legislator. First, the economic perspectives in this field raised the interests of private companies that have demonstrated to be able to attract important investments. These significant financial resources are essential to succeed in the development of the necessary technology for assuring the launch of this new market. The acquired know-how will likely serve also other projects and programs that do not present an immediate economic advantage, but that surely are of public interest, e.g. scientific exploration, security 3
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
could represent the optimal occasion to solve the potential overlapping of air law and space law rules (e.g. in terms of state liability), integrating spatial and functional approaches in a coherent system. Thirdly, it would establish common technical standards adapted to the new vehicles and their purposes, and it would assure a comprehensive legal framework for space travel, safety, insurance contracts and consumer protection. In this last domain, in particular, the EU has established advanced legal standards that could be very useful. For example, the rules concerning the right of consumers to change their mind (so called “cooling off period”) for e-commerce, could become interesting in a sector that presents a certain level of danger (see the recent case of the “postponed” mission of a potential space tourist [37]). In accordance with the existing jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU, the EU legislative framework could assure an adequate protection of passengers/tourists' rights. Finally, confident of its own solid legislation on space tourism, in the perspective of the evolution of international law, the EU could play a major role in shaping the forthcoming international rules in a better way. This is in line with the role of normative power that the EU wants to assume in the international community.
and defence. Given the limited public resources available, there is indeed a supplementary advantage in the development of space tourism: the commercialisation of space would address the problem of limited public funding. Secondly, although limited, public investments for space activities do exist, are important, and should continue to be assured because they serve the public interests above mentioned. Space tourism could make it easier to justify the huge government investments required in this sector. Thirdly, the development of space technologies needs highly qualified specialists and organisations. Therefore the European connected industries will likely benefit from the expansion of space tourism, with a consequent positive trend in terms of employment and competitiveness in the EU. It will be probable, therefore, that the public authorities in the EU will welcome and support this burgeoning sector. In this respect, the European Space Agency (ESA) explicitly calls for the establishment of an adequate legislative framework, capable of responding to the needs of the European market. As a matter of fact, space tourism will have a direct impact on the ESA's activities, in terms of development of new technologies and programs [32]. As much as air navigation rules find their origin in the pre-existing sea navigation rules, air space law has been the departure point for the evolution of outer space law [19,33]. In the opinion of Freeland, “it is clear that the existing rules of space law, which rely solely on state responsibility and liability, are not appropriate for an industry that will principally be undertaken as a private commercial venture” [10, 18]. New international legal instruments for the creation of a lex specialis for space tourism would be preferable, as well as legislative initiatives at the EU level. With this regard, the new set of rules could find a solid basis in the EU legislation concerning tourism and transportation, which should be adapted to the peculiarities of space tourism. With reference to consumer protection, in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the EU a fair balance between the interests of the air passengers and the air companies is achieved thanks to the high standards of protection assured by the Court to the passengers. This trend in the field of air space policy could represent an important reference point for the development of a specific legal framework for space tourism [34]. In particular, a cornerstone of the Court of Justice of the EU jurisprudence in the domain of passengers' protection is the case Queen v. Department of Transport of 2006 (ECR I-00403), where the Court was asked to solve, among others, the assumed conflict between international law (specifically, the Montreal Convention of 1999 [35]) and the EU Law (Regulation 261/2004 on flight cancellation, delays and denied boarding [36]). Although in light of a consolidated orientation of the EU case law international agreements prevail over EU secondary legislation, the Court affirmed that passengers could claim damages on the basis of both legal sources. In the opinion of the Court, a conflict between international rules and EU's rules did not occur, because the EU Law did not reduce but strengthened the legal protection of air passengers. Currently, “Space tourists themselves are unable to claim for compensation under the Liability Convention” [10, 16]. If in the future a new international agreement will regulate this possibility, the Court of Justice could be called upon again to find a reasonable coordination between international and EU rules. In light of the observations made above and in the previous sections, space tourism has the potential to produce a positive impact in the progressive space popularisation, as well as to become a driver for the development of the EU space policy. Legislative initiatives at the European level for the establishment of a lex specialis, providing a specific coherent legal framework for space tourism, would all in all present several advantages. First, a EU uniform legislation (but also just a framing legislation), would allow overcoming possible differences between the domestic regulations of the Member States and could offer shared solutions, to avoid legislative fragmentation in the internal market. Secondly, it
5. Conclusions Conventionally reserved to astronauts and scientists, in the future outer space could turn out to be increasingly accessible to persons that would like to make such an experience for leisure purposes. The number of space enthusiasts that dare to venture beyond the physical borders of Earth is increasing, as well as the investors in the sector. The direct consequence is that space is becoming more and more present in the media and attracts the interest not only of the specialists, but also of the public. Numerous issues are raised in this context, in terms of ethical concerns, environmental impact, and the legal framework. These questions need theoretical and practical answers. Before regular space flights can be scheduled, legislative initiatives should be undertaken, to tackle the major problems of the applicable law, the coordination of air space and outer space rules and the other issues mentioned in the previous sections. Space tourism thus is becoming a driver for the process of popularisation of space. At the same time, it is also an interesting field for the development of space policies. While government space agencies have registered declining budgets, firstly for lack of support from the public after the end of the cold war, and secondly because of the recent economic crisis, space tourism could open a new alternative scenario for future space activities, given the massive private financial resources that this sector is capable to attract. In this context, public-private partnerships could be an effective way to promote innovative projects. The lack of a specific legislation for space tourism in the EU could represent, however, a set-back. The establishment of a certain legal framework presents some advantages both at the internal and external level. At the external level, with the perspective of future global negotiations for the establishment of international legal instruments, the EU would be in a better position to exercise its normative power in the international community. At the internal level, it could contribute to solve the shortcomings that originate from the adaptation of the existing air space and outer space rules, providing a better environment for the exploitation of this sector's potential. Furthermore, it could allow reducing the negative effects that can possibly occur, in terms of ethical and environmental concerns, as much as in the field of consumer protection. Yet, the EU's legislative action in space policy will be possible only if the Member States do not invoke the priority of their own action, in accordance with the proportionality and subsidiarity principles, and refrain from adopting domestic legislations. As Von der Dunk pointed out, there is the risk that the new legal framework provided by the 4
Space Policy xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
A. Forganni
Lisbon Treaty turns out to be an “empty shell” [38, 389]. Indeed, Article 4 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU refers to the shared competences of the Union and at paragraph 3 it affirms that, in the areas of research, technological development and space, “the exercise of that competence shall not result in Member States being prevented from exercising theirs”. This limit requires the need of an effective coordination between the Member States and the EU. In particular, to establish the European space policy, Article 189 of the Treaty allows the European Parliament and the Council to adopt the necessary measures following the ordinary legislative procedure, but it explicitly excludes “any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States”. In other words, the issues raised by space tourism represent a good opportunity to test the political will of the EU Member States, whether they do aim to develop a European space policy. Space tourism could be the litmus test. The legal instruments to pursue a further integration in this field are in place, but the Member States should coordinate their actions. An explicit mandate from the Member States to legislate in this domain would be useful, to avoid to launch a legislative initiative at the European level that will then encounter resistance (if not open opposition) at the national level.
[13] [14] [15] [16] [17]
[18]
[19] [20]
[21] [22] [23] [24]
Acknowledgements
[25]
The author would like to thank the program ‘Recherche-FormationInnovation Alliance Europa’ of the Region Pays de la Loire for the support provided.
[26] [27] [28]
References
[29]
[1] T. Hörber, Conclusions, in: T. Hörber, P Stephenson (Eds.), European Space Policy. European Integration and the Final Frontier, Routledge, 2015, pp. 259–263. [2] J. Loizou, Turning space tourism into commercial reality, Space Policy 22.4 (2006) 289–290. [3] F.G. von der Dunk, Space tourism, private spaceflight and the law: key aspects, Space Policy 27.3 (2011) 146–152. [4] U.S. Government Publishing Office, Federal Aviation Administration, Commercial Space Transportation, (2016) 14 C.F.R. § 401.5 https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ CFR-2015-title14-vol4/pdf/CFR-2015-title14-vol4-sec401-5.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). [5] NASA Technical Reports Service, The Space Flight Participant Program - Taking the Teacher and Classroom into Space, (1985) http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R= 19860031168 (Accessed 27 September 2016). [6] NASA, Astronaut Requirements, (2004) http://www.nasa.gov/audience/ forstudents/postsecondary/features/F_Astronaut_Requirements.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). [7] U. Apel, Space tourism — a promising future? Space Policy 13.4 (1997) 279–284. [8] Students, I.S.U. Summer Session, et al., Dreams and realities: the challenges facing development of space tourism, Space Policy 17.2 (2001) 133–140. [9] K. Chang, J. Schwartzoct, Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo Crashes in New Setback for Commercial Spaceflight, The New York Times, 31.10.2016, http://www. nytimes.com/2014/11/01/science/virgin-galactics-spaceshiptwo-crashes-duringtest-flight.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). [10] S. Freeland, Up, up and… back: the emergence of space tourism and its impact on the international law of outer space, Chi. J. Int'l L 6 (2005) 1–22 http:// chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cjil/vol6/iss1/4 (Accessed 27 September 2016). [11] L. Billings, Exploration for the masses? Or joyrides for the ultra-rich? Prospects for space tourism, Space Policy 22.3 (2006) 162–164. [12] U.N., Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, 2222 (XXI). Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. http://www.unoosa.org/
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]
[38]
5
oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/outerspacetreaty.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). F. Brown, The final Frontier? Tourism in space, Tour. Recreat. Res. 29.1 (2004) 27–43. M. Gerhard, Space tourism. The auhorisation of suborbital space transportation, in: F.G. von der Dunk (Ed.), Space Legislation in Europe, Brill, 2011, pp. 263–296. R.A. Goehlich, Ticket pricing strategy for an oligopolistic space tourism market, Space Policy 21.4 (2005) 293–306. S. Hobe, Legal aspects of space tourism, Neb. L. Rev. 86 (2007) 439–458 http:// digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol86/iss2/6/ (Accessed 27 September 2016). U.N., Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, 2777 (XXVI), Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects, (2016) http://www. unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/liability-convention.html (Accessed 27 September 2016). U.S H.R. 3752. Commercial space launch Amendments Act of 2004. 108th Congress (2003–2004). https://www.congress.gov/bill/108th-congress/house-bill/3752 (Accessed 27 September 2016). B. Conforti, Diritto Internazionale, Editoriale Scientifica, 2013. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, (1982) http://www.un.org/ Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm (Accessed 27 September 2016). C.C. Joyner, Legal implications of the concept of the common heritage of mankind, Int. Comp. Law Q. 35.1 (1986) 190–199. S.J. Shackelford, The tragedy of the common heritage of mankind, Stan. Envtl. LJ 28 (2009) 109–169. D. Wolter, Common Security in Outer Space and International Law vol. 29, United Nations Publications UNIDIR, 2006. S.M. Williams, The law of outer space and natural resources, Int. Comp. Law Q. (1987) 142–151. S. Ervin, Law in a vacuum: the common hertitage doctrine in outer space law, B. C. Int'l Comp. L. Rev. 7 (1984) 403–431. H. Keefe, Making the final frontier feasible: a critical look at the current body of outer space law, Santa Clara Comput. High Tech. LJ 11 (1995) 345–371. S. Coffey, Establishing a legal framework for property rights to natural resources in outer space, Case W. Res. J. Int'l L 41 (2009) 119–147. B.C. Gruner, A new hope for international space law: incorporating nineteenth century first possession principles into the 1967 space treaty for the colonization of outer space in the twenty-first century, Set. Hall. L. Rev. 35 (2004) 299–357. M. Juul, European Parliamentary Research Service, Tourism and the European Union. Recent Trends and Policy Developments, (2015) http://www.europarl. europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2015/568343/EPRS_IDA(2015)568343_EN.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Towards a Space Strategy for the European Union that Benefits Its Citizens/* COM (2011) 152 final */. European Space Agency, Space tourism – ESA's view on private suborbital space flights, ESA Bull. 135 (2008), http://www.esa.int/esapub/bulletin/bulletin135/ bul135c_galvez.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). M. Leissle, (Neo-)Realism - power politics and the formation of international law - a historical comparison, in: T. Hörber, E. Sigalas (Eds.), Theorizing European Space Policy, 2016, pp. 91–104. A. Forganni, Role of the european Court of Justice in the development of EU space policy, in: T. Hörber, P Stephenson (Eds.), European Space Policy. European Integration and the Final Frontier, Routledge, 2015, pp. 114–127. Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air Montreal, (28 May 1999) http://www.iata.org/policy/Documents/MC99_en.pdf (Accessed 27 September 2016). Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the european parliament and of the council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing regulation (EEC) No 295/91, Off. J. L 046 (17/02/2004) 1–8. J. Kluger, What sarah Brightman's ‘postponed’ mission says about space tourism, Time (13.05.2015), http://time.com/3857685/sarah-brightman-space-tourismmission/ (Accessed 27 September 2016). F.G. von der Dunk, The EU Space Competence as per the Treaty of Lisbon: Sea Change or Empty Shell? Space and Telecommunications Law Program Faculty Publications. Paper 66 (2011), pp. 382–392 http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ spacelaw/66 (Accessed 05 March 2017).