- Email: [email protected]
The Societal Impacts of a Mars Mission in the Future of Space Exploration
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 p
Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum - 2012
The Societal Impacts of a Mars Mission in the Future of Space Exploration Azam Shaghaghi *a, Konstantinos Antonakopoulosb
b
a International Space University, SSP09 Alumni, NASA Ames Research Center Research Fellow, Dept. of Computer and Information Science, NTNU, Sem Selandsvei 7-9, Trondheim, 7491, Norway
Abstract
The human race has evolved, grown and expanded through the exploration of Earth. After initial steps on the Moon, our next challenge is to explore the solar system. From the Mars mission viewpoint stepping on this planet will bring social impacts which may influence the society to a great extent. Never before have there been so complex mission settings. This implies as an inherent impediment for the future of space exploration since it is most likely to be scrutinized and challenged by the public. The goal of this paper is to outline the societal impacts of a Mars mission in the future of space exploration by first introducing the existing challenges and then identifying the primary groups that form public opinion and concludes where efforts should be focused. © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Institute for Advanced Studies in the Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences
© 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Integrity Research Institute. PACS: Keywords: Societal impacts, Mars mission, space exploration
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: Azam Shaghaghi Varzeghani
1875-3892 © 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Integrity Research Institute. doi:10.1016/j.phpro.2012.08.021
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
1. Introduction Myriads of experiments have confirmed the possibility of life on Mars, e.g., canyons carved by water on the landscape [1]. On the other hand, in the recent years, the search for past or present microbial life has been intensified with the robotic rovers Spirit and Opportunity dispatched to the Red Planet in 2004 and the Mars Phoenix Lander in 2007. End of 2011, NASA launched the Mars Science Laboratory to investigate the Mars habitability, before sending humans for exploration and ultimately colonization. The space exploration endeavour first requires a strategy that will actively plan both the generation and the subsequent management of all critical information to ensure that key audiences can obtain the necessary information in a timely fashion. Possible ignorance when it comes to societal issues, especially for mission planning may increase the frustration or opposition of the public, project budgets and missed launch windows. Martian missions are inevitably more complex from technological, human spaceflight and most importantly socio-economic and socio-political point of view. It will take the most of each nation towards human space exploration. In addition, public attitudes about health, safety and environment (HSE), have changed considerably since the Apollo program. Society has grown more risk averse over time and a trend that is expected to increase in the future. In a democratic society, technological policy making can be viewed in two different ways; by technical considerations and by democratic and social values. What that means is that traditionally NASA experts have been accustomed to reaching decisions through a highly technical process with minimal input from the public [2], and since society is actually the part of the world we live in, to be able to identify and characterize the parts of our everyday life that will be influenced (towards for better), is crucial. 2. Identifying the stakeholders of this endeavor An initial human settlement on Mars is a venture that can only be enabled by international collaboration. This enterprise involves not only the crew, or the thousands directly working for the success of a mission, but it also involves all people on Earth. Furthermore, the different cultural aspects must be taken into account to stimulate public opinion [3]. A stakeholder analysis was undertaken in [4], identifying the primary groups that form public opinion and concludes where efforts should further be focused. The analysis was performed in terms of a stakeholder matrix. The purpose of the stakeholder matrix is to determine the importance of each interest for the type of stakeholder. The significance of each interest relative to a specific stakeholder and the overall importance of that interest to the mission were determined. This was done by allotting an opinion based interest value to each stakeholder and weighting these values by multiplying by a power value for each stakeholder. These results are summarized in the stakeholder matrix of Table 1. A description of the stakeholders involved in the analysis is essential to better identify and define responsibilities and jurisdiction: Governments: Governments have a unique opportunity to ensure that this generation is remembered as pioneers of human exploration of the solar system. For this reason, government interest in undertaking a human mission to Mars is to gain votes and support from their citizens, to establish stable international alliances to ensure freedom, and to support the exploration vision. Involving governments from all over the world will help to discourage short-term thinking by government officials for personal political gains. Non-Government Organizations (NGOs): NGOs will generally be in favor of a mission that expands mankind’s horizons. However, some mission aspects such as nuclear propulsion may raise concerns from environmental policies of NGOs.
177
178
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
Space Agencies: Space agencies act to transform the goals of the space science community into reality, while succeeding to the political will of their supporting nations. Their main interest is to conduct space missions in accordance with their space rationales, within budgetary constraints, and to safeguard jobs within national space industries. With international cooperation space agencies can profit in many ways. Large Aerospace Companies: Large aerospace companies are the integrators of future missions to Mars, directly delivering the mission for the space agencies. Their interest in the success of such missions relates to new business opportunities and job creation. Small and Medium Aerospace Companies: Small and medium sized aerospace companies will be indirectly involved in the mission. They will be mostly subcontractors for the integrators. Their interest in the success of human missions to Mars relates to new business opportunities, job creation, and access to knowledge through technology transfer from the integrators. Private Entrepreneurs: There is a unique window of opportunity for private entrepreneurs from different business areas to use their participation as a showcase for worldwide exposure. Furthermore, the outlook for future spin-ins and spin-offs will certainly be interesting for this stakeholder group, as space technology is already an inducer of cutting-edge technological advancements. Taxpayers: A program such as human missions to Mars will have costs of such magnitude that will impact taxpayers to a great extent. Taxpayers will desire that their money be spent rationally and with visible results. Space Lobbyist Organizations: Space lobbyist organizations, such as, The Mars Society actively advocate for a human mission to Mars. They have high interest in the complete success of this mission. On the other hand, the stage for the liaison officers should broaden to ease communication. Scientific Foundations: Scientific foundations collect funding from governmental budgets or private donations and allocate these resources through researchers in the scientific community. The success of a human mission to Mars will provide scientific foundations with increased funding and negotiating power. Academia: The scientific and technical community is the main advocate for a human mission to Mars. Mars is the prime location for seeking answers to the question of whether there is or was extraterrestrial life. The technical community will benefit from the challenge of developing new technology for this mission. Entertainment Industry: The entertainment industry has great potential to influence large sectors of the public opinion through their products. Their main interest is to be inspired and acquire stories for their projects and sell them worldwide. Also, entertainment industry celebrities have the potential to become effective advocates for space exploration.
179
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
Cultural Institutions: Artists reflect the different cultures on Earth, and culture is the only rationale for space exploration [5]. Artists are stakeholders in the sense that they will want to translate the first missions to Mars into a shared human experience. Mass and Social Media: A human mission to Mars has the potential to become the greatest story of its generation and the main interest of mass media. Journalists will report on every aspect of the mission. Mass media have a major role in influencing public opinion. Furthermore, social media like blogs, micro-blogs (e.g., Twitter), social networks and social news have the potential to become the primary influence on public opinion as they acquire news in real-time and spread it though their networks.
Governments
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
Space Agencies
Large aerospace companies
Small space companies
Private entrepreneurs
Taxpayers
Space lobbyist organizations
Scientific foundations
Academia
Entertainment industry
Cultural institutions
Mass & social media
Table 1. Stakeholder Matrix
37
14
62
37
14
1
23
22
27
24
36
6
31
37
7
62
62
34
3
35
22
27
24
27
2
21
62 62 49 25 49 62 49 62
34 34 27 27 7 21 14 27
49 62 49 37 37 37 37 49
25 49 25 25 62 62 49 37
21 21 14 14 34 34 27 21
2 2 1 1 3 3 2 2
58 47 47 47 47 47 23 12
22 27 16 16 11 5 11 27
22 11 22 16 11 11 5 5
10 10 24 14 10 10 10 10
45 9 18 36 45 27 9 9
10 4 8 10 4 6 2 2
51 31 21 41 21 41 21 10
Environmental impact
37
34
37
25
21
1
35
16
22
19
18
8
41
Total
530
247
518
456
253
23
419
197
181
163
276
64
329
Interest\ Stakeholder
Science discovery Technology engineering Social impact Political Educational Cultural Financial Economical Legal/insurance Regulatory / policy
From Table 1, it concludes that the main focus should be given to Governments (sum 530), Space Agencies (sum 518), Large Aerospace Companies (sum 456), Taxpayers (sum 419), and Mass and Social Media (sum 329), especially in the areas of technology engineering, economic prosperity and social impact. These results show the areas of society that have the most influential impact on the Mars mission; thus further time and effort need to be dedicated to these stakeholders to ensure a successful mission. 3. Societal impacts from a stakeholders view In this section, we deepen our analysis by exposing the involvement of each stakeholder in the view of society is essential to be able to identify the impact of each stakeholder taking into account several societal factors mentioned in [6]. Table 2, holds the cross-impact matrix of stakeholders’ impact in
180
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
societal parameters. The societal parameters considered herein are: Taxpayers, Special-interest Groups, Education/Research & Development, Economy/Growth, Culture, and Health. Table 2. Cross-impact matrix of stakeholders impact in society. Social Parameter/ Stakeholder
Governments
NonGovernment Organizations
Space Agencies
Large Aerospace Companies
Taxpayers
Specialinterest Groups (SiG)
Promote human-space exploration benefits
Understand and take action for SiG's concerns on society
Promotion of societal benefits in science and technology from human space exploration
Create common a understanding and promote SiG interests for society
Share scientific space-based knowledge, expand our understanding of Cosmos
Education / R&D Promote human-space exploration benefits Civilian & military advanced projects [7] New political gate system & strategy to deal with the space treaties in a vast global level Increased investment in basic R&D, promotion of education in science and technology
Economy / Growth Economic expansion in technological sector Space economy Agricultural resources Industrial productivity Government & Commercial inventions
Create spacebased technological innovations
Health
Invest on more broad projects on cancer, heart Public safety
Culture
Promote human-space exploration benefits
Boost worldwide programs in multicultural aspects in the society
New worldcompetition perspective [8] Minimize scientific and technological interdependence
Create spacebased technological innovations
Manned flights as a marketing tool
Kick off advanced technology to boost the economy& quality of life [10]
Investing on commercial services in space exploration for the cultural institutes [9]
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 Create spacebased technological innovations
Small/Medium Aerospace Companies
Space technology directed at applicable commercial spin-offs, Technological innovations
Private Entrepreneurs
Taxpayers
Space Lobbyist Organizations
Cooperated programs to leverage individuals efforts
Leading the money stream into effective investments towards society growth
Space commercialization [11]
Spin-offs for biomedical & medical use
Sub-orbital flights & hotels [12] Extraterrestrial intelligence projects
Advanced lifestyle Renewable efficient energy sources; energy conserving consumer products
Leave developing countries in modernity era
Education coordinator to encourage the outreach
Negotiate technology enhancement project between space agencies & private entities
Environmental hazards using satellites on critical weather less than billion light years
Experience space flights for every individual
Escalate the international relations culture
Pharmacological and mechanical prevention treatments.
Entertainment Industry
Distributing multi-cultural packages & info
Promote space technology at scientific / research level
Scientific Foundations
Academia
Presence of the media / entertainment industry in space [13]
Promote space technology at scientific / research level
Promote space technology and exploration benefits at school/ university levels
New variety of shows & programs
New version of scientific and educational film industry
Brain-drain prevention
The multi-million dollar industry in a huge dimension
Prevention, detection, and treatment of illnesses ranging from osteoporosis to cancer [14]
Creates a more understanding ground to pursue the terrestrial bodies
New era of sports programs & microgravity sports
181
182
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
Cultural Institutions
Mass and Social Media
Promote and reflect the different cultures
Providing new principles & course studies
Influence through public media
World-wide participatory activities in space science through instant data & information [15]
Promote culture through space tourism
Up raising new outlook towards space culture
From Table 2 we see that there is a strong inter-correlation among the stakeholders and the social parameters investigated. Almost each and every stakeholder can potentially influence (at a different capacity), almost all of the social parameters. In order for this ‘scheme’ to work best and become successful, one should think on a massive scale: international cooperation. 4. Towards an International Cooperation The scale of a program that would allow for an initial human settlement on Mars is unprecedented. For this reason it is very likely that only a worldwide cooperation effort within a concerted international exploration strategy could succeed. This section assesses the potential of countries to contribute to an international human mission to Mars, in terms of technical capabilities. An overview of the relevant technical space capabilities for current space-faring nations is shown in Table 3. While most of the capabilities listed in Table 3 already exist or are anticipated, some are missing. Some capabilities, like cargo transportation to LEO, are available worldwide; other capabilities, such as an Entry, Descent and Landing on Mars, are limited to a small number of space faring nations. In addition, some countries may offer specific expertise, such as space robotics in Canada, which is another factor to take into consideration for international cooperation. Table 3. Overview of Relevant Technical Space Capabilities as of 2011 Capacity
USA
Russia
China
Europe
Japan
India
Access To LEO
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Earth Re-Entry
Yes
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Life Support System
Yes
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
No
No
LEO Rendezvous Transfer to Moon/Mars Orbit Mars EDL
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Anticipated
No
No
No
Anticipated
No
No
No
No
No
Moon Landing
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Surface Habitat Rover/Mobility Capability Moon Surface to Low Lunar Orbit
Anticipated
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
HUMAN
183
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 Mars Surface to Low Mars Orbit
No
No
No
No
No
No
ROBOTIC Access To LEO Transfer to Moon/Mars Orbit Earth Re-entry
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Moon Landing
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Mars EDL Rover/Mobility Capability Autonomous Rendezvous Moon Surface to Low Lunar Orbit Mars Surface to Low Mars Orbit
Yes
Yes
No
Anticipated
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Anticipated
No
No
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
These factors demonstrate that international cooperation is absolutely required to ensure a safe voyage and landing on Mars. International cooperation can provide the redundancy needed in the mission critical path to achieve the high level of safety required for such a mission. For example, redundancy in the ISS transportation architecture (having the Shuttle and Soyuz), has proven to be vital to the program. Likewise, a concerted global exploration strategy should be established for a human Mars mission, where responsibility for each part of the mission is assigned to a given country, or countries, when redundancy is deemed necessary and financially viable. 5. Conclusions In this work, we investigated the societal impacts of a Mars mission from a stakeholders’ viewpoint, where the stakeholders were previously identified in [4]. It is the authors’ belief that the realization of successful Mars missions is linked to the following three factors: a. International cooperation, b. Economic growth & development for sustained stability in funding and resource allocation and c. enabling technologies. While the technology exists, the first two factors remain the most critical. This is because resources are not always unlimited (or a priority) and secondly because international cooperation entails the unstable factor of society. In addition, the quality of living increase and economic growth to a great extend depends also on scientific and technological awareness and on our ability to incorporate this knowledge in the economy and lives of the people. Finally, it should be the stakeholders’ responsibility to play their role towards the advancement of human space exploration with ‘societal awareness’ in mind.
6. Acknowledgment In the context of the International Space University (ISU) Space Studies Program, NASA Ames Research Center in 2009, 56 individuals from 15 different countries and various backgrounds took on the task of presenting a feasibility analysis of cave habitation for an initial settlement on Mars, from which this paper stems. The ACCESS Mars team members are: A. Al Husseini, L. Álvarez Sánchez, K. Antonakopoulos, J. Apeldoorn, K. Ashford, Jr., D. Atabay, I. Barrios, Y. Baydaroglu, K. M. Bennell, J. Chen, X. Chen, D. Cormier, P. Crowley, G. de Carufel, B. Deper, L. Drube, P. Duffy, P. Edwards, E. Gutiérrez Fernandez,
184
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
O. Haider, G. Kumar, C. Henselowsky, D. Hirano, T. Hirmer, B. Hogan, A. Jaime Albalat, E. Jens, I. Jivănescu, A. Jojaghaian, M. Kerrigan, Y. Kodachi, S. Langston, R. MacIntosh, X. Miguélez, N. Panek, C. Pegg, R. Peldszus, X. Peng, A. Pérez-Poch, A. Perron, J. Qiu, P. Renten, J. Ricardo, T. Saraceno, F. Sauceda, A. Shaghaghi Varzeghani, R. Shimmin, R. Solaz, A. Solé, R. Suresh, T. Mar Vaquero Escribano, M. Vargas Muñoz, P. D. Vaujour, D. Veilette, Y. Winetraub, O. Zeile The ISU SSP09 and the work on this Team Project were made possible through the generous support of NASA Ames Research Center and the NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) and ISU for the opportunity to conduct this research with the support of dedicated experts and resources at the Space Studies Program 2009 (SSP09). Special thanks to the ACCESS Mars project faculty Rene Laufer, Beatriz Gallardo, Alfonso Davila and Jhony Zaveleta. The authors gratefully acknowledge the generous guidance, support and direction provided by the following individuals during the course of this work: Khalid Al-Ali Carnegie Mellon University; Cristina Borrera del Pino, CRISA Astrium; Penny Boston, New Mexico Tech, Nathan Brumall, NASA Ames Research Center; Natalie Cabrol, NASA Ames Research Center; Axelle Cartier, Excaliber Almaz; James Chartres, NASA Ames Research Center; Ed Chester, CTAE; Stephen Clifford, Lunar and Planetary Institute; Marc Cohen, Northrop Grumman; Cassie Conley, NASA HQ; Joseph Conley, NASA Ames Research Center; Joy Crisp, Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Pascale Ehrenfreund, GWU; Alberto Fairen, NASA Ames Research Center; Lauren Fletcher, NASA Ames Research Center; Steve Frankel, NASA Ames Research Center; Arthur Guest, MIT; Felipe A. Hernandez, Universidad Central Santiago de Chile; Scott Hovland, ESA/ESTEC, Donald James, NASA Ames Research Center; Hajime Jano, JAXA; Dave Kendall, CSA; Mark Kliss, NASA Ames Research Center; Larry Lemke, NASA Ames Research Center; Gary Martin, NASA Ames Research Center; Tahir Merali, International Space University; Chistopher McKay, NASA Ames Research Center; David Miller, University of Oklahoma; John M. Olsen, NASA HQ; Laurie Peterson, NASA Ames Research Center; Ricardo Amils Pibernat, Centro de Astrobiologia; Florian Selch, Carnegie Mellon University; Raj Shea, NASA Ames Research Center; Michael Sims, NASA Ames Research Center; Paul Spudis, Lunar Planetary Institute; Carol Stoker, NASA Ames Research Center; Jim Thompson, The Explorers Club; and S. Pete Worden, NASA Ames Research Center.
References [1]
Martian chronicles, Economist 2001;359(8216):85–98.
[2]
Race MS. Societal issues as Mars mission impediments: Planetary protection and contamination concerns, Adv. Space
Res, 1995;15(3):285-92. [3]
Ehrenfreund P, Peter N, Schrogl KU, Logsdon JM. Cross-cultural management supporting global space exploration, Acta
Astronautica, 2010;66(1-2):245-56. [4]
ACCESS MARS team, Final Report, International Space University, Space Studies Program, NASA Ames, 2009.
[5]
Dator J. Cultural rationales for space activities. International Space University, NASA Ames, 2009.
[6]
Sadeh E. Societal Impacts of the Apollo Program. The Astrosociology of Space Colonization session, AIAA Space, 2006.
[7]
Blamont J, Stetson D, Farquhar R, Zimmerman J, Clark B, O'Neil W, Bourke R, Foing B. International Space
Exploration: Cooperative or competitive?, Space Policy, 2005;21:89–92. [8]
Huntress W, Stetson D, Farquhar R, Zimmerman J, Clark B, O'Neil W, Bourke R, Foing B. The next steps in exploring
deep space. Acta Astronautica, 2006;58(6-7):304-77. [9] http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Space_Exploration_Strategy/SEMKTM0YUFF_0.html [10] Jasentuliyana N. Basic space science and developing countries, Space Policy, 1995:11(2):89-92
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 [11] Ehlmann BL, Chowhury J, Marzullo TC, Collins RE, Litzenberger J, Ibsen S, Krauser WR, DeKock B, Hannon M, Kinnevan J, Shepard R, Grant FD. Humans to Mars: A feasibility & cost benefit analysis, Acta Astronautica, 2005;56:851-8. [12] Wilson JR, http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/benefits.html [13] Ehrenfreund P, Peter N. Toward a paradigm shift in managing future global space exploration endeavours, Space Policy, 2009;25(4)244-56. [14] Ocampo A, Friedman L, Logsdon J. Why space science and exploration benefits everyone, Space Policy, 1998;14(3)137143.
185
Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 p
Space, Propulsion & Energy Sciences International Forum - 2012
The Societal Impacts of a Mars Mission in the Future of Space Exploration Azam Shaghaghi *a, Konstantinos Antonakopoulosb
b
a International Space University, SSP09 Alumni, NASA Ames Research Center Research Fellow, Dept. of Computer and Information Science, NTNU, Sem Selandsvei 7-9, Trondheim, 7491, Norway
Abstract
The human race has evolved, grown and expanded through the exploration of Earth. After initial steps on the Moon, our next challenge is to explore the solar system. From the Mars mission viewpoint stepping on this planet will bring social impacts which may influence the society to a great extent. Never before have there been so complex mission settings. This implies as an inherent impediment for the future of space exploration since it is most likely to be scrutinized and challenged by the public. The goal of this paper is to outline the societal impacts of a Mars mission in the future of space exploration by first introducing the existing challenges and then identifying the primary groups that form public opinion and concludes where efforts should be focused. © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Institute for Advanced Studies in the Space, Propulsion and Energy Sciences
© 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Integrity Research Institute. PACS: Keywords: Societal impacts, Mars mission, space exploration
* Corresponding author. E-mail address: Azam Shaghaghi Varzeghani
1875-3892 © 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the Integrity Research Institute. doi:10.1016/j.phpro.2012.08.021
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
1. Introduction Myriads of experiments have confirmed the possibility of life on Mars, e.g., canyons carved by water on the landscape [1]. On the other hand, in the recent years, the search for past or present microbial life has been intensified with the robotic rovers Spirit and Opportunity dispatched to the Red Planet in 2004 and the Mars Phoenix Lander in 2007. End of 2011, NASA launched the Mars Science Laboratory to investigate the Mars habitability, before sending humans for exploration and ultimately colonization. The space exploration endeavour first requires a strategy that will actively plan both the generation and the subsequent management of all critical information to ensure that key audiences can obtain the necessary information in a timely fashion. Possible ignorance when it comes to societal issues, especially for mission planning may increase the frustration or opposition of the public, project budgets and missed launch windows. Martian missions are inevitably more complex from technological, human spaceflight and most importantly socio-economic and socio-political point of view. It will take the most of each nation towards human space exploration. In addition, public attitudes about health, safety and environment (HSE), have changed considerably since the Apollo program. Society has grown more risk averse over time and a trend that is expected to increase in the future. In a democratic society, technological policy making can be viewed in two different ways; by technical considerations and by democratic and social values. What that means is that traditionally NASA experts have been accustomed to reaching decisions through a highly technical process with minimal input from the public [2], and since society is actually the part of the world we live in, to be able to identify and characterize the parts of our everyday life that will be influenced (towards for better), is crucial. 2. Identifying the stakeholders of this endeavor An initial human settlement on Mars is a venture that can only be enabled by international collaboration. This enterprise involves not only the crew, or the thousands directly working for the success of a mission, but it also involves all people on Earth. Furthermore, the different cultural aspects must be taken into account to stimulate public opinion [3]. A stakeholder analysis was undertaken in [4], identifying the primary groups that form public opinion and concludes where efforts should further be focused. The analysis was performed in terms of a stakeholder matrix. The purpose of the stakeholder matrix is to determine the importance of each interest for the type of stakeholder. The significance of each interest relative to a specific stakeholder and the overall importance of that interest to the mission were determined. This was done by allotting an opinion based interest value to each stakeholder and weighting these values by multiplying by a power value for each stakeholder. These results are summarized in the stakeholder matrix of Table 1. A description of the stakeholders involved in the analysis is essential to better identify and define responsibilities and jurisdiction: Governments: Governments have a unique opportunity to ensure that this generation is remembered as pioneers of human exploration of the solar system. For this reason, government interest in undertaking a human mission to Mars is to gain votes and support from their citizens, to establish stable international alliances to ensure freedom, and to support the exploration vision. Involving governments from all over the world will help to discourage short-term thinking by government officials for personal political gains. Non-Government Organizations (NGOs): NGOs will generally be in favor of a mission that expands mankind’s horizons. However, some mission aspects such as nuclear propulsion may raise concerns from environmental policies of NGOs.
177
178
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
Space Agencies: Space agencies act to transform the goals of the space science community into reality, while succeeding to the political will of their supporting nations. Their main interest is to conduct space missions in accordance with their space rationales, within budgetary constraints, and to safeguard jobs within national space industries. With international cooperation space agencies can profit in many ways. Large Aerospace Companies: Large aerospace companies are the integrators of future missions to Mars, directly delivering the mission for the space agencies. Their interest in the success of such missions relates to new business opportunities and job creation. Small and Medium Aerospace Companies: Small and medium sized aerospace companies will be indirectly involved in the mission. They will be mostly subcontractors for the integrators. Their interest in the success of human missions to Mars relates to new business opportunities, job creation, and access to knowledge through technology transfer from the integrators. Private Entrepreneurs: There is a unique window of opportunity for private entrepreneurs from different business areas to use their participation as a showcase for worldwide exposure. Furthermore, the outlook for future spin-ins and spin-offs will certainly be interesting for this stakeholder group, as space technology is already an inducer of cutting-edge technological advancements. Taxpayers: A program such as human missions to Mars will have costs of such magnitude that will impact taxpayers to a great extent. Taxpayers will desire that their money be spent rationally and with visible results. Space Lobbyist Organizations: Space lobbyist organizations, such as, The Mars Society actively advocate for a human mission to Mars. They have high interest in the complete success of this mission. On the other hand, the stage for the liaison officers should broaden to ease communication. Scientific Foundations: Scientific foundations collect funding from governmental budgets or private donations and allocate these resources through researchers in the scientific community. The success of a human mission to Mars will provide scientific foundations with increased funding and negotiating power. Academia: The scientific and technical community is the main advocate for a human mission to Mars. Mars is the prime location for seeking answers to the question of whether there is or was extraterrestrial life. The technical community will benefit from the challenge of developing new technology for this mission. Entertainment Industry: The entertainment industry has great potential to influence large sectors of the public opinion through their products. Their main interest is to be inspired and acquire stories for their projects and sell them worldwide. Also, entertainment industry celebrities have the potential to become effective advocates for space exploration.
179
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
Cultural Institutions: Artists reflect the different cultures on Earth, and culture is the only rationale for space exploration [5]. Artists are stakeholders in the sense that they will want to translate the first missions to Mars into a shared human experience. Mass and Social Media: A human mission to Mars has the potential to become the greatest story of its generation and the main interest of mass media. Journalists will report on every aspect of the mission. Mass media have a major role in influencing public opinion. Furthermore, social media like blogs, micro-blogs (e.g., Twitter), social networks and social news have the potential to become the primary influence on public opinion as they acquire news in real-time and spread it though their networks.
Governments
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
Space Agencies
Large aerospace companies
Small space companies
Private entrepreneurs
Taxpayers
Space lobbyist organizations
Scientific foundations
Academia
Entertainment industry
Cultural institutions
Mass & social media
Table 1. Stakeholder Matrix
37
14
62
37
14
1
23
22
27
24
36
6
31
37
7
62
62
34
3
35
22
27
24
27
2
21
62 62 49 25 49 62 49 62
34 34 27 27 7 21 14 27
49 62 49 37 37 37 37 49
25 49 25 25 62 62 49 37
21 21 14 14 34 34 27 21
2 2 1 1 3 3 2 2
58 47 47 47 47 47 23 12
22 27 16 16 11 5 11 27
22 11 22 16 11 11 5 5
10 10 24 14 10 10 10 10
45 9 18 36 45 27 9 9
10 4 8 10 4 6 2 2
51 31 21 41 21 41 21 10
Environmental impact
37
34
37
25
21
1
35
16
22
19
18
8
41
Total
530
247
518
456
253
23
419
197
181
163
276
64
329
Interest\ Stakeholder
Science discovery Technology engineering Social impact Political Educational Cultural Financial Economical Legal/insurance Regulatory / policy
From Table 1, it concludes that the main focus should be given to Governments (sum 530), Space Agencies (sum 518), Large Aerospace Companies (sum 456), Taxpayers (sum 419), and Mass and Social Media (sum 329), especially in the areas of technology engineering, economic prosperity and social impact. These results show the areas of society that have the most influential impact on the Mars mission; thus further time and effort need to be dedicated to these stakeholders to ensure a successful mission. 3. Societal impacts from a stakeholders view In this section, we deepen our analysis by exposing the involvement of each stakeholder in the view of society is essential to be able to identify the impact of each stakeholder taking into account several societal factors mentioned in [6]. Table 2, holds the cross-impact matrix of stakeholders’ impact in
180
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
societal parameters. The societal parameters considered herein are: Taxpayers, Special-interest Groups, Education/Research & Development, Economy/Growth, Culture, and Health. Table 2. Cross-impact matrix of stakeholders impact in society. Social Parameter/ Stakeholder
Governments
NonGovernment Organizations
Space Agencies
Large Aerospace Companies
Taxpayers
Specialinterest Groups (SiG)
Promote human-space exploration benefits
Understand and take action for SiG's concerns on society
Promotion of societal benefits in science and technology from human space exploration
Create common a understanding and promote SiG interests for society
Share scientific space-based knowledge, expand our understanding of Cosmos
Education / R&D Promote human-space exploration benefits Civilian & military advanced projects [7] New political gate system & strategy to deal with the space treaties in a vast global level Increased investment in basic R&D, promotion of education in science and technology
Economy / Growth Economic expansion in technological sector Space economy Agricultural resources Industrial productivity Government & Commercial inventions
Create spacebased technological innovations
Health
Invest on more broad projects on cancer, heart Public safety
Culture
Promote human-space exploration benefits
Boost worldwide programs in multicultural aspects in the society
New worldcompetition perspective [8] Minimize scientific and technological interdependence
Create spacebased technological innovations
Manned flights as a marketing tool
Kick off advanced technology to boost the economy& quality of life [10]
Investing on commercial services in space exploration for the cultural institutes [9]
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 Create spacebased technological innovations
Small/Medium Aerospace Companies
Space technology directed at applicable commercial spin-offs, Technological innovations
Private Entrepreneurs
Taxpayers
Space Lobbyist Organizations
Cooperated programs to leverage individuals efforts
Leading the money stream into effective investments towards society growth
Space commercialization [11]
Spin-offs for biomedical & medical use
Sub-orbital flights & hotels [12] Extraterrestrial intelligence projects
Advanced lifestyle Renewable efficient energy sources; energy conserving consumer products
Leave developing countries in modernity era
Education coordinator to encourage the outreach
Negotiate technology enhancement project between space agencies & private entities
Environmental hazards using satellites on critical weather less than billion light years
Experience space flights for every individual
Escalate the international relations culture
Pharmacological and mechanical prevention treatments.
Entertainment Industry
Distributing multi-cultural packages & info
Promote space technology at scientific / research level
Scientific Foundations
Academia
Presence of the media / entertainment industry in space [13]
Promote space technology at scientific / research level
Promote space technology and exploration benefits at school/ university levels
New variety of shows & programs
New version of scientific and educational film industry
Brain-drain prevention
The multi-million dollar industry in a huge dimension
Prevention, detection, and treatment of illnesses ranging from osteoporosis to cancer [14]
Creates a more understanding ground to pursue the terrestrial bodies
New era of sports programs & microgravity sports
181
182
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
Cultural Institutions
Mass and Social Media
Promote and reflect the different cultures
Providing new principles & course studies
Influence through public media
World-wide participatory activities in space science through instant data & information [15]
Promote culture through space tourism
Up raising new outlook towards space culture
From Table 2 we see that there is a strong inter-correlation among the stakeholders and the social parameters investigated. Almost each and every stakeholder can potentially influence (at a different capacity), almost all of the social parameters. In order for this ‘scheme’ to work best and become successful, one should think on a massive scale: international cooperation. 4. Towards an International Cooperation The scale of a program that would allow for an initial human settlement on Mars is unprecedented. For this reason it is very likely that only a worldwide cooperation effort within a concerted international exploration strategy could succeed. This section assesses the potential of countries to contribute to an international human mission to Mars, in terms of technical capabilities. An overview of the relevant technical space capabilities for current space-faring nations is shown in Table 3. While most of the capabilities listed in Table 3 already exist or are anticipated, some are missing. Some capabilities, like cargo transportation to LEO, are available worldwide; other capabilities, such as an Entry, Descent and Landing on Mars, are limited to a small number of space faring nations. In addition, some countries may offer specific expertise, such as space robotics in Canada, which is another factor to take into consideration for international cooperation. Table 3. Overview of Relevant Technical Space Capabilities as of 2011 Capacity
USA
Russia
China
Europe
Japan
India
Access To LEO
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Earth Re-Entry
Yes
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Life Support System
Yes
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
No
No
LEO Rendezvous Transfer to Moon/Mars Orbit Mars EDL
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Anticipated
No
No
No
Anticipated
No
No
No
No
No
Moon Landing
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Surface Habitat Rover/Mobility Capability Moon Surface to Low Lunar Orbit
Anticipated
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
HUMAN
183
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 Mars Surface to Low Mars Orbit
No
No
No
No
No
No
ROBOTIC Access To LEO Transfer to Moon/Mars Orbit Earth Re-entry
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Moon Landing
Yes
Yes
Anticipated
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Mars EDL Rover/Mobility Capability Autonomous Rendezvous Moon Surface to Low Lunar Orbit Mars Surface to Low Mars Orbit
Yes
Yes
No
Anticipated
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Anticipated
No
No
Anticipated
Anticipated
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
These factors demonstrate that international cooperation is absolutely required to ensure a safe voyage and landing on Mars. International cooperation can provide the redundancy needed in the mission critical path to achieve the high level of safety required for such a mission. For example, redundancy in the ISS transportation architecture (having the Shuttle and Soyuz), has proven to be vital to the program. Likewise, a concerted global exploration strategy should be established for a human Mars mission, where responsibility for each part of the mission is assigned to a given country, or countries, when redundancy is deemed necessary and financially viable. 5. Conclusions In this work, we investigated the societal impacts of a Mars mission from a stakeholders’ viewpoint, where the stakeholders were previously identified in [4]. It is the authors’ belief that the realization of successful Mars missions is linked to the following three factors: a. International cooperation, b. Economic growth & development for sustained stability in funding and resource allocation and c. enabling technologies. While the technology exists, the first two factors remain the most critical. This is because resources are not always unlimited (or a priority) and secondly because international cooperation entails the unstable factor of society. In addition, the quality of living increase and economic growth to a great extend depends also on scientific and technological awareness and on our ability to incorporate this knowledge in the economy and lives of the people. Finally, it should be the stakeholders’ responsibility to play their role towards the advancement of human space exploration with ‘societal awareness’ in mind.
6. Acknowledgment In the context of the International Space University (ISU) Space Studies Program, NASA Ames Research Center in 2009, 56 individuals from 15 different countries and various backgrounds took on the task of presenting a feasibility analysis of cave habitation for an initial settlement on Mars, from which this paper stems. The ACCESS Mars team members are: A. Al Husseini, L. Álvarez Sánchez, K. Antonakopoulos, J. Apeldoorn, K. Ashford, Jr., D. Atabay, I. Barrios, Y. Baydaroglu, K. M. Bennell, J. Chen, X. Chen, D. Cormier, P. Crowley, G. de Carufel, B. Deper, L. Drube, P. Duffy, P. Edwards, E. Gutiérrez Fernandez,
184
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185
O. Haider, G. Kumar, C. Henselowsky, D. Hirano, T. Hirmer, B. Hogan, A. Jaime Albalat, E. Jens, I. Jivănescu, A. Jojaghaian, M. Kerrigan, Y. Kodachi, S. Langston, R. MacIntosh, X. Miguélez, N. Panek, C. Pegg, R. Peldszus, X. Peng, A. Pérez-Poch, A. Perron, J. Qiu, P. Renten, J. Ricardo, T. Saraceno, F. Sauceda, A. Shaghaghi Varzeghani, R. Shimmin, R. Solaz, A. Solé, R. Suresh, T. Mar Vaquero Escribano, M. Vargas Muñoz, P. D. Vaujour, D. Veilette, Y. Winetraub, O. Zeile The ISU SSP09 and the work on this Team Project were made possible through the generous support of NASA Ames Research Center and the NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) and ISU for the opportunity to conduct this research with the support of dedicated experts and resources at the Space Studies Program 2009 (SSP09). Special thanks to the ACCESS Mars project faculty Rene Laufer, Beatriz Gallardo, Alfonso Davila and Jhony Zaveleta. The authors gratefully acknowledge the generous guidance, support and direction provided by the following individuals during the course of this work: Khalid Al-Ali Carnegie Mellon University; Cristina Borrera del Pino, CRISA Astrium; Penny Boston, New Mexico Tech, Nathan Brumall, NASA Ames Research Center; Natalie Cabrol, NASA Ames Research Center; Axelle Cartier, Excaliber Almaz; James Chartres, NASA Ames Research Center; Ed Chester, CTAE; Stephen Clifford, Lunar and Planetary Institute; Marc Cohen, Northrop Grumman; Cassie Conley, NASA HQ; Joseph Conley, NASA Ames Research Center; Joy Crisp, Jet Propulsion Laboratory; Pascale Ehrenfreund, GWU; Alberto Fairen, NASA Ames Research Center; Lauren Fletcher, NASA Ames Research Center; Steve Frankel, NASA Ames Research Center; Arthur Guest, MIT; Felipe A. Hernandez, Universidad Central Santiago de Chile; Scott Hovland, ESA/ESTEC, Donald James, NASA Ames Research Center; Hajime Jano, JAXA; Dave Kendall, CSA; Mark Kliss, NASA Ames Research Center; Larry Lemke, NASA Ames Research Center; Gary Martin, NASA Ames Research Center; Tahir Merali, International Space University; Chistopher McKay, NASA Ames Research Center; David Miller, University of Oklahoma; John M. Olsen, NASA HQ; Laurie Peterson, NASA Ames Research Center; Ricardo Amils Pibernat, Centro de Astrobiologia; Florian Selch, Carnegie Mellon University; Raj Shea, NASA Ames Research Center; Michael Sims, NASA Ames Research Center; Paul Spudis, Lunar Planetary Institute; Carol Stoker, NASA Ames Research Center; Jim Thompson, The Explorers Club; and S. Pete Worden, NASA Ames Research Center.
References [1]
Martian chronicles, Economist 2001;359(8216):85–98.
[2]
Race MS. Societal issues as Mars mission impediments: Planetary protection and contamination concerns, Adv. Space
Res, 1995;15(3):285-92. [3]
Ehrenfreund P, Peter N, Schrogl KU, Logsdon JM. Cross-cultural management supporting global space exploration, Acta
Astronautica, 2010;66(1-2):245-56. [4]
ACCESS MARS team, Final Report, International Space University, Space Studies Program, NASA Ames, 2009.
[5]
Dator J. Cultural rationales for space activities. International Space University, NASA Ames, 2009.
[6]
Sadeh E. Societal Impacts of the Apollo Program. The Astrosociology of Space Colonization session, AIAA Space, 2006.
[7]
Blamont J, Stetson D, Farquhar R, Zimmerman J, Clark B, O'Neil W, Bourke R, Foing B. International Space
Exploration: Cooperative or competitive?, Space Policy, 2005;21:89–92. [8]
Huntress W, Stetson D, Farquhar R, Zimmerman J, Clark B, O'Neil W, Bourke R, Foing B. The next steps in exploring
deep space. Acta Astronautica, 2006;58(6-7):304-77. [9] http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Space_Exploration_Strategy/SEMKTM0YUFF_0.html [10] Jasentuliyana N. Basic space science and developing countries, Space Policy, 1995:11(2):89-92
Azam Shaghaghi and Konstantinos Antonakopoulos / Physics Procedia 38 (2012) 176 – 185 [11] Ehlmann BL, Chowhury J, Marzullo TC, Collins RE, Litzenberger J, Ibsen S, Krauser WR, DeKock B, Hannon M, Kinnevan J, Shepard R, Grant FD. Humans to Mars: A feasibility & cost benefit analysis, Acta Astronautica, 2005;56:851-8. [12] Wilson JR, http://www.nasa.gov/50th/50th_magazine/benefits.html [13] Ehrenfreund P, Peter N. Toward a paradigm shift in managing future global space exploration endeavours, Space Policy, 2009;25(4)244-56. [14] Ocampo A, Friedman L, Logsdon J. Why space science and exploration benefits everyone, Space Policy, 1998;14(3)137143.
185