Outer Space and Private Companies
Consequences for Global Security
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.14.2017.50.06Keywords:
space security, privatization, space powerAbstract
The paper focuses on sectors, methods, and spheres of the space activity of private companies, to provide empirical analysis of space applications and implications for global security. Special emphasis has been given to private companies offering access to satellite imagery and satellite remote sensing, as well as companies entering outer space with new and prospective capabilities as space mining. The article explains the rising importance of geo-intelligence, space surveillance and telecommunication for global security and new kind of security challenges and vulnerabilities such as environmental problems in outer space or technological challenges to security. The author argues that profit-oriented companies play crucial role in new security environment in the US, efficiently changing the law and practice. Finally he points out that new and growing market for subcontractors in space applications raises questions on growing dependence on private resources in traditional sphere of state activity, namely security, in this case provided from and through the outer space.
Downloads
PlumX Metrics of this article
References
Abrahamsen R., Williams M.C., Security beyond the State. Private Security in International Politics, Cambridge–New York 2011.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511974441
Google Scholar
Al-Ekabi C., “European Space Activities in the Global Context”, in C. Al-Ekabi et al. (eds.), Yearbook on Space Policy 2011/2012. Space in Times of Financial Crisis, Wien 2014.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1649-4
Google Scholar
Al-Ekabi C., “European Space Activities in the Global Context”, in C. Al-Ekabi et al. (eds.), Yearbook on Space Policy 2014. The Governance of Space, Wien 2016.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1899-3
Google Scholar
ASD-Eurospace, The European Space Industry in 2015, Paris 2016.
Google Scholar
Blamont J., “US Space Exploration Strategy: Is There a Better Way?”, Space Policy, vol. 28, no. 4 (2012), at <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2012.09.009>.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2012.09.009
Google Scholar
Brachet G., “The Origins of the ‘Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities’ Initiative at UN COPUOS”, Space Policy, vol. 28, no. 3 (2012), at <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2012.06.007>.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2012.06.007
Google Scholar
Chesterman S., Fisher A., “Conclusion: Private Security, Public Order”, in S. Chesterman, A. Fisher (eds.), Private Security, Public Order. The Outsourcing of Public Services and Its Limits, Oxford 2009.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199574124.001.0001
Google Scholar
Dolman E.C., Astropolitik. Classical Geopolitics in the Space Age, London–Portland 2002.
Google Scholar
Donahue J.D., The Privatization Decision. Public Ends, Private Means, New York 1991.
Google Scholar
European Commission, Study to Examine the Socio-economic Impact of Copernicus in the EU. Report on the Copernicus Downstream Sector and User Benefits. Written by PwC, Brussels 2016.
Google Scholar
Finarelli P., Pryke I., “A New Paradigm for International Cooperation in Space Exploration”, Space Policy, vol. 21, no. 2 (2005), at <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2005.02.006>.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2005.02.006
Google Scholar
“First SpaceDataHighway Laser Relay in Orbit”, ESA, 30 January 2016, at <http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Telecommunications_Integrated_Applications/EDRS/First_SpaceDataHighway_laser_relay_in_orbit>.
Google Scholar
Fitzsimmons S., “The Market for Force in the United States”, in M. Dunigan, U. Petersohn (eds.), The Markets for Force. Privatization of Security across World Regions, Philadelphia 2015.
Google Scholar
Fortheau M., “Space Law”, in J. Crawford, A. Pellet, S. Olleson (eds.), The Law of International Responsibility, New York 2010.
Google Scholar
Gangale T., The Development of Outer Space. Sovereignty and Property Rights in International Space Law, Santa Barbara 2009.
Google Scholar
Haanappel P., “Enforcing the Liability Convention: Ensuring the Binding Force of the Award of the Claims Commission”, in M. Benkö, K.-U. Schrogl (eds.), Space Law. Current Problems and Perspectives for Future Regulation, Utrecht 2005.
Google Scholar
Hitchens T., Future Security in Space. Charting a Cooperative Course, Washington 2004.
Google Scholar
Kellman B., “On Commercial Mining of Minerals in Outer Space: A Rejoinder to Dr Ricky J. Lee”, Air and Space Law, vol. 39, no. 6 (2014).
Google Scholar
Kleinberg H., “On War in Space”, Astropolitics, vol. 5, no. 1 (2007), at <https://doi.org/10.1080/14777620701544600>.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14777620701544600
Google Scholar
Link A.N., Scott J.T., Public Goods, Public Gains. Calculating the Social Benefits of Public R&D, New York–Oxford 2011.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199729685.001.0001
Google Scholar
Lyall F., Larsen P.B., Space Law. A Treatise, Farnham 2009.
Google Scholar
Mayence J.F., “Space Security: Transatlantic Approach to Space Governance”, in J. Robinson et al. (eds.), Prospects for Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures in Space Report, Vienna 2010.
Google Scholar
Moltz J.C., Crowded Orbits. Conflict and Cooperation in Space, New York 2014.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.7312/columbia/9780231159128.001.0001
Google Scholar
Moltz J.C., The Politics of Space Security. Strategic Restraint and the Pursuit of National Interests, Stanford 2008.
Google Scholar
Mourre A., “Arbitration in Space Contracts”, Arbitration International, vol. 21, no. 1 (2005), at <https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/21.1.37>.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/arbitration/21.1.37
Google Scholar
Prado M.M., “Regulatory Choices in the Privatization of Infrastructure”, in S. Chesterman, A. Fisher (eds.), Private Security, Public Order. The Outsourcing of Public Services and Its Limits, Oxford 2009.
Google Scholar
Risse T., Börzel T.A., “Public-Private Partnerships: Effective and Legitimate Tools of Transnational Governance”, in E. Grande, L.W. Pauly (eds.), Complex Sovereignty. Reconstituting Political Authority in the Twenty-First Century, Toronto 2005.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442684201-011
Google Scholar
Sadeh E., “Obstacles to International Space Governance”, in K.-U. Schrogl et al. (eds.), Handbook of Space Security, New York 2015.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2029-3_55
Google Scholar
Schmidt-Tedd B., Hedman H., Hurtz A., “The 2007 Resolution on Recommendations on Enhancing the Practice of States and International Intergovernmental Organisations in Registering Space Objects”, in S. Hobe et al. (eds.), Cologne Commentary on Space Law, vol. 3, Köln 2015.
Google Scholar
Schradin R., “Government Space Leaders Look to Commercial Satellites for More Resilient Communications”, GovSat, 5 January 2016, at <http://www.ses-gs.com/govsat/defense-intelligence/government-space-leaders-look-to-commercial-satellites-for-more-resilient-communications/>.
Google Scholar
Selding P.B. de, “For DigitalGlobe, Government Business Steady but Commercial Disappoints”, Space News, 30 October 2015, at <http://spacenews.com/for-digitalglobe-government-business-steady-but-commercial-disappoints/>.
Google Scholar
Sheehan M., “Defining Space Security”, in K.-U. Schrogl et al. (eds.), Handbook of Space Security, New York 2015.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2029-3_47
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
