Untitled Page

Ethics and the Commercialization of Outer Space by Sandra Schuh, Ph.D. Background It has been widely publicized that the Wright Brothers' first attempted flight on December 17, 1903, was shorter than the actual length of today's space shuttle vehicle. A little more the fifty years later, on October 4, 1957, there was one man made object in space: the Russian Sputnik 1. Within twenty years, approximately 4,500 objects in space were being tracked by N.O.R.A.D., North American Air Defense. By the mid-1970s, about 25,000 objects were being tracked. Today, the number of objects in space continues to multiply. Biospherical pollution, the mounting accumulation of debris in space and the overpopulation of geosynchronous equatorial orbiting communications satellites merely scratch the surface of the important and necessary issues that underpin the need for an examination of humankinds' venture into space. Weapons in Space; the Commercialization of Space; Economic Justice in Space; Space Travel; and issues of Space Law and Sovereignty also need to be seriously investigated. An already existing business in space is the satellite business. This business is extremely profitable. In its infancy in 1985, Europe alone made over 300 billion dollars from the launching of satellites. One of the plusses for the satellite business is that short term goals are met and large profits are realized. Today, satellites are the crux of any global command and control system. Satellites see, hear, and tell what they see and hear. Will our Right to Privacy be destroyed by the satellites that spy on us? Bear in mind, that as with any technological tool, these satellites can be used for either benevolent or malevolent purposes. Outer space is special because of its many unique properties. These unique properties will be the incentive for commercializing space. In outer space we find zero gravity, sterility, "free" vacuum, control of magnetism, "free" solar energy, and the lack of oxygen. Because of the way in which these properties affect materials and processes, products that can be made on Earth only in test quantities at extraordinarily high cost might become viable commercially if produced in an orbiting space factory. (Chemical and Engineering News; (Editorial); Nov.8, 1982; p.28f). Hence, development of pharmaceuticals in space could conceivably revolutionize medicine, because conditions that can be fabricated only at great expense, if at all, in an earth bound laboratory can readily be set up in space. In the future, it may be possible that bio-medical research and commerce in space will introduce a fabulously higher quality of life for human beings and other species with which we share our planet. Certainly one of the ethical questions lurking in the background regarding the issue of pharmaceutical business in space is that of distributive justice. There is the possibility of enormous profits to be made from mining the surface of other planet(s). And of course our "cosmic beach", the moon, presents even more variegated business possibilities. But who owns the lunar surface? If we follow international law, it would seem that Russia would own the moon. However, according to Sec.1., Par.3., of the Declaration of Legal Principles (United Nations) "outer space and celestial bodies are not subject to national appropriation by claims of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by other means. Jenks, C. Wilfred; Space Law; Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, N.Y. 1965; p.20. But issues of sovereignty are not so easily settled. Questions that surround the dictum that no one ought to own "space" are not, when put to the test, easily answered. How we eventually come to grips with this issue will have bearing on such activities as the colonization of space stations, the moon, and other planet(s), and in the immediate future, on the commercialization of space. It takes little imagination to detect the ties between commercialization and sovereignty.

Ethics and the Commercialization of Outer Space

by Sandra Schuh, Ph.D.

Background

It has been widely publicized that the Wright Brothers' first attempted flight on December 17, 1903, was shorter than the actual length of today's space shuttle vehicle. A little more the fifty years later, on October 4, 1957, there was one man made object in space: the Russian Sputnik 1. Within twenty years, approximately 4,500 objects in space were being tracked by N.O.R.A.D., North American Air Defense. By the mid-1970s, about 25,000 objects were being tracked. Today, the number of objects in space continues to multiply.

Biospherical pollution, the mounting accumulation of debris in space and the overpopulation of geosynchronous equatorial orbiting communications satellites merely scratch the surface of the important and necessary issues that underpin the need for an examination of humankinds' venture into space. Weapons in Space; the Commercialization of Space; Economic Justice in Space; Space Travel; and issues of Space Law and Sovereignty also need to be seriously investigated.

An already existing business in space is the satellite business. This business is extremely profitable. In its infancy in 1985, Europe alone made over 300 billion dollars from the launching of satellites. One of the plusses for the satellite business is that short term goals are met and large profits are realized. Today, satellites are the crux of any global command and control system. Satellites see, hear, and tell what they see and hear. Will our Right to Privacy be destroyed by the satellites that spy on us? Bear in mind, that as with any technological tool, these satellites can be used for either benevolent or malevolent purposes.

Outer space is special because of its many unique properties. These unique properties will be the incentive for commercializing space. In outer space we find zero gravity, sterility, "free" vacuum, control of magnetism, "free" solar energy, and the lack of oxygen. Because of the way in which these properties affect materials and processes, products that can be made on Earth only in test quantities at extraordinarily high cost might become viable commercially if produced in an orbiting space factory. (Chemical and Engineering News; (Editorial); Nov.8, 1982; p.28f). Hence, development of pharmaceuticals in space could conceivably revolutionize medicine, because conditions that can be fabricated only at great expense, if at all, in an earth bound laboratory can readily be set up in space. In the future, it may be possible that bio-medical research and commerce in space will introduce a fabulously higher quality of life for human beings and other species with which we share our planet. Certainly one of the ethical questions lurking in the background regarding the issue of pharmaceutical business in space is that of distributive justice.

There is the possibility of enormous profits to be made from mining the surface of other planet(s). And of course our "cosmic beach", the moon, presents even more variegated business possibilities. But who owns the lunar surface? If we follow international law, it would seem that Russia would own the moon. However, according to Sec.1., Par.3., of the Declaration of Legal Principles (United Nations) "outer space and celestial bodies are not subject to national appropriation by claims of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by other means. Jenks, C. Wilfred; Space Law; Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, N.Y. 1965; p.20. But issues of sovereignty are not so easily settled. Questions that surround the dictum that no one ought to own "space" are not, when put to the test, easily answered. How we eventually come to grips with this issue will have bearing on such activities as the colonization of space stations, the moon, and other planet(s), and in the immediate future, on the commercialization of space. It takes little imagination to detect the ties between commercialization and sovereignty.