|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
136887
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
It has only been since 2007 that the European Union has had a common space policy. Dependent as any other developed region on space-based assets, Europe has sought a space policy that will ensure that the EU retain a leading role in the strategic policy areas, such as business applications, communications, and weather forecasting. Moreover, in addition to long-standing competition from Russia and the United States, the emerging space actors of China and India, as well as growing economic powers like Brazil, require that the EU reassess its strengths and understands the challenges to implementing a successful pan-European space policy. To address these challenges, for the past seven years the European Space Policy Institute has hosted its Autumn Conference, which brings together space policy scholars from a variety of disciplines to explore those space policy aspects that most affect the European Union. Held on 11e12 September 2013 at ESPI's headquarters in Vienna, Austria, the conference's theme was “Space in a
Changing World.” Hosted by Peter Hulsroj, Director of ESPI, and Herbert Allgeier, Chair of ESPI's Advisory Council, the presentations covered a variety of perspectives, ranging from security, superpower cooperation, international law in space weaponization, and the emergence and impact of new space actors, especially in emerging economic powers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
136880
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
It is time to think about the rationales of space exploration, more than 50 years after the beginning of human space flight. Between J.F. Kennedy words (“landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth”) and the Mars One, what means today the dangers of exploration, or the concept of “representative of mankind” applied to the astronauts? Beyond the financial, technical and human risks, exploration, and today space exploration, belongs always to the human identity, the way to confront human nature (especially imagination) to the reality of time and space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
136886
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Although existing international instruments such as the Outer Space Treaty and Moon Agreement generally express sentiments for minimizing missions' extraterrestrial environmental impacts, they tend to be limited in scope, vague and generally unenforceable. There is no formal structure for assessing how and to what extent we affect those environments, no opportunity for public participation, no uniform protocol for documenting and registering the effects of our actions and no requirement to mitigate adverse impacts or take them into consideration in the decision-making process. Except for precautions limiting forward biological contamination and issues related to Earth satellites, environmental impact analysis, when done at all, remains focused on how missions affect the Earth and near-Earth environments, not how our actions affect the Moon, Mars, Europa, comets and other potential destinations. Extraterrestrial environmental impacts are potentially counterproductive to future space exploration, exploitation and scientific investigations. Clear, consistent and effective international protocols guiding a process for assessing such impacts are warranted. While instruments such as the US National Environmental Policy Act provide legally tested and efficient regulatory models that can guide impact assessment here on Earth, statutory legal frameworks may not work as well in the international environment of outer space. A proposal for industry-driven standards and an environmental code of conduct based, in part, on best management practices are offered for consideration.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
136885
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper examines the age old question of the basis of moral value in the new context of astrobiology, which offers a fresh perspective. The goal is to offer the broad outline of a general theory of moral value that can accommodate the diversity of living entities we are likely to encounter beyond the confines of Earth. It begins with ratiocentrism, the view that the possession of reason is the primary means by which we differentiate entities having moral value in and of themselves from those having moral value merely by virtue of the uses to which they can be put. I broaden this basis to include sociality and culture, arguing that these three attributes tend evolve as a “package deal.” Because of this, it's really the sociality-reason-culture triad (SRCT) which should be the criterion for intrinsic moral value. If the SRCT linkage is sufficiently strong, it follows that this sort of moral valuation would be shared by any non-human entities capable of reflection on the nature of such things, granting it a curious kind of objectivity. I then suggest that the unfolding of complexity produced by SRCT species may be the best means to realize the manifest destiny (manifest complexity) of all life, which could provide an ultimate, metaphysical foundation for ethical value. Finally, I outline how this new theory can be applied to different types of entities that we may encounter beyond Earth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
136884
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
I argue that the moral justification for space science is more compelling than the moral justification for space development. Thus, we ought to reemphasize the status of science as a major stakeholder in space, especially when entertaining policies which might encourage the kinds of space development activities (e.g. resource exploitation) that are liable to conflict with the scientific uses of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
136882
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On June 10, 2014, a bill proposing to establish and protect (private) property rights on asteroid resources was introduced in the US House of Representatives.
Regardless of its effective chances to become law, the presentation of the Bill raises numerous legal questions, particularly concerning the status of extraterrestrial natural resources and the consistency of what the Bill suggests with international space law.
The purpose of the present viewpoint is to address and clarify the above questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
136883
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
I am sympathetic to the view that, given the likelihood of massive natural disasters, such as collisions between the Earth and large asteroids, we should engage in large-scale space exploration and colonization so as to hedge our bets against extinction. I will consider several criticisms of this view. For example, some philosophers may raise objections against the notion of long-term human survival as a value. How can we have obligations towards beings who have not even been conceived yet and thus cannot be properly said to have rights? On a different note, Wendell Berry argues that the abundance of resources in space will produce bad character, for good character requires the discipline of finitude. Others challenge the connection between space exploration and survival, for they fear that by entertaining the promise of new Earths in the heavens we are more likely to neglect our planet, thus leading to our downfall. Presumably, we should instead increase our efforts to restore and preserve the balance of nature. I will advance a variety of replies. For example, we do decide for posterity to a great extent. We may plant the trees from which “our” descendants will receive nourishment and shade, or we may destroy what could have given them a fighting chance against drought and famine. We have an obligation not to plant a bomb that will go off two years from now in a hospital nursery, and another to ensure that the buildup of chemicals in the hospital water tank will not reach critical mass and kill most of the newborns in ten years. The “balance of nature” involved in another objection is a myth that cannot be justified by natural history, whether astronomical or biological. Moreover, the inevitable changes in the environment, independent of asteroid impacts, will make the Earth uninhabitable in a few hundreds of millions and years. In addition, in order to act wisely we need an understanding of the Earth as a planet, and this requires the exploration of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
136888
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
We are witnessing a fundamental change in the perception of space-related issues. Once a symbol of technological competition between opposing political systems, space activities have become a part of everyday life and an indispensable means for states to achieve economic, scientific, political and social goals. This Report addresses the space activities of Turkey, a latecomer to space challenge but a country rapidly progressing in this field. In this context, major space-related policies and projects are first discussed. The current status of the Turkish space industry is then defined through SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats). The analysis is informed by a May 2012 workshop was held in Turkey at the Defense Sciences Institute, which brought together a range of interested actors to discuss Turkey's space policy. The workshop was followed up six months later with a survey of a larger group of participants. This Report lays out the findings of these two events, articulating the strengths and weaknesses for Turkey's space aspirations, and also a proposal for the country's future space ambitions. Strategies and policies that will be supportive in achieving the proposed space vision are also introduced.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
136881
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The external and internal environments of NASA have been shifting, necessitating new approaches to problem solving and innovation. Based on a strategic alignment analysis, and an understanding of NASA's internal and external contexts, we have two modest proposals: First, give NASA flexibility to manage its human resources and infrastructure based on market-based, competitive, performance-oriented principles. Second, it is time for NASA to become a real network organization. One that is properly integrated both internally (across NASA centers) as well as externally with whatever organizations have superior space-related knowledge and technology, wherever they are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
136889
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Russia
Missile
Missile Defence
Missile Policy
Nuclear Policy
Russian Missile Defence
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|