Space exploration enthusiasts tend to overlook the regulatory aspects of their desired goals. They focus on technologies and the science we can do with them rather than mundane things like property rights or environmental considerations. However, in the long run, those enthusiasts will have to grapple with all aspects of exploration programs as they begin to affect more and more of the public. With such foresight, various groups have started putting forward ideas for frameworks of how to holistically think about how to utilize the Moon, as that seems the most likely first stepping stone out to the wider solar system. A new paper from Ekaterina Seltikova and her colleagues at the Space Generation Advisory Council (SGAC) and the University of Toronto puts forth one such framework, with a particular focus on how to develop a lunar economy that is open for everyone.
The latest paper, described as the LUNEX PROSPER framework, is part of the work product of one of SGAC’s project teams. SGAC is a professional organization for young professionals in the space industry to frequently provide content to the United Nations on topics such as space policy and economics, with an eye to preserving space for the next generation of explorers. LUNEX PROSPER certainly takes that to heart in its suggestions.
It describes four major drivers of the lunar economy - tourism, resource extraction, manufacturing, and Earth-based technological benefits. Tourism, though self-explanatory, is one of the areas that has seen the most growth as of late. Despite the fact that no tourist has yet set foot on the Moon, it is only a matter of time before one does. Understanding what the expectations of such tourists are is key to ensuring those that get their first don’t ruin it for everyone that would come later.
Fraser discusses ISRU - how we would utilize lunar resources on the Moon and elsewhere in the solar system.Resource extraction is another area that has the potential to complicate future uses of the Moon. While resources on the lunar surface, such as water and metals, are undeniably valuable given the much smaller gravity well they would have to leave to be utilized in space, considerations of how quickly those resources can be extracted and what environmental concerns should be dealt with before large scale resource extraction should begin.
Lunar manufacturing and Earth-based technology improvement might go hand-in-hand in the overall development of space, with manufacturing processes that could utilize the unique gravitational environment on the Moon (or on orbiting space stations constructed by lunar resources) contributing components and materials that would otherwise be unproducible on Earth. But once again, use considerations and environmental impacts have to be taken into account before large-scale production should begin.
Unfortunately, as the paper points out, there are no binding agreements that regulate these use cases. Several UN treaties attempt to do so, but none have so far gained widespread support (and most were written almost 50 years ago). In that vacuum, the Artemis Accords, managed by NASA, has stepped in, but their provisions are non-binding, leaving a gap in the operating space even of countries who sign up to them.
Fraser discusses the future of Moon mining with Dr. Phil Metzger.According to the paper, existing UN agencies, such as the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs could be beefed up and provide that regulatory framework. Right now they lack an enforcement and inspection agency, equivalent to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for nuclear facilities, but that structure could be developed and scaled as necessary. One particularly important oversight role that must be in place before long is a debris mitigation enforcement mechanism - otherwise both Earth and even potentially the Moon could be locked into a Kessler-syndrome-like fate.
Environmental factors, such as dust mitigation and electrical power considerations, provide additional applications where a binding regulatory framework would be useful. Technologies and mitigation strategies exist to deal with these problems, but without some sort of management in place there could be significant issues with the consequences of early users actions.
Ultimately, the paper describes four potential long-term scenarios, only one of which would probably sound appealing to most space advocates. Two geopolitical camps (probably led by the US and China) could engage in a great-power struggle over the control of space resources - while this could advance development quickly it could also lead to a period of either conflict or stagnation after the struggle is over. Space could become an exclusive military zone, with state actors controlling access strictly. On the other hand, it could become a market-driven bonanza of opportunity, but without the regulatory restrictions in place to ensure that bonanza would last more than a few decades.
Ultimately, the one that the paper things its is critical to achieve, and the one that sometimes feels the farthest from doing so, is a scenario where space is “truly for all”, and state actors are bound in a agreed framework, at least partially laid out in the paper, to ensure the human development is the foremost consideration when developing space, rather than the benefit of only one group. Whether or not the UN, or any regulatory body, will be able to see that dream through to fruition remains to be seen. But papers like those produced by the SGAC are necessary steps on that path to that future, whatever it may someday look like.
Learn More:
E Seltikova et al - LUNEX PROSPER: The Next Generation’s Blueprint Towards a Sustainable Human Presence on the Moon
UT - How To Resolve Conflicts Over Lunar Resources
UT - How to Handle Resource Waste from ISRU on the Moon
UT - Modeling Lunar ISRU Extraction Can Help Plan Future Prototypes
