NASA, Astropreneurs and future markets: new models of the U.S. innovation policy for space industry

Article analyzes the changes in the space economy, as well as the U.S. federal policy for preserving American domination in this area. The evolution of the space economy in the United States is briefly considered, including formation of venture businesses since late  1990s (due to the computer and Internet revolution and development of space technologies). Of particular importance is  a so-called Astropreneurship – growth of startups, developing space  launch systems and spacecrafts. Amid technological factors, the  main driver for the rise of Astropreneurship was a suboptimal  technological and market strategy of Boeing and Lockheed Martin  duopoly. It created conditions for disruptive innovation development  in the industry and transition to a new, more open model of  innovation processes there. Although in the 1980–1990’s federal  government enacted a business-friendly regulations for the commercial space sector and set measures to support it through  public procurement, a new situation in the markets and in sectoral innovation system has become a challenge for national  policy, enforced by budget constraints and other factors. Catastrophe of the Columbia space shuttle in 2003, which raised the  issue of maintaining independent U.S. access to the International Space Station and, in the future, to other orbital  operations after shuttles’ phase-out, triggered changes in federal  policies for the industry. As a result, since 2006 NASA (with some  DoD support) initiated several programs to develop new space  launch and delivery systems. These programs were based on the  public-private partnerships with active involvement of small and  medium innovative enterprises, primarily startups. The results  turned out to be more significant than originally intended: formation of a new model of federal industrial and technological  policy in the space sector, almost similar to the DARPA principles. The new policy assumes the role of NASA and, more  broadly, the federal government as an equal (rather than a  dominant) participant in space industry innovative processes and as  a more active organizer of the industry`s innovation system (considering changes in its nature). Despite all activities are  mission-oriented, more attention is paid to the development of  complex partnerships, ecosystems, etc. – with an emphasis both on  satisfaction of government needs and on ensuring market leadership  of the U.S. companies. However, this new model faces  sever al problems: ambiguity of federal expenditures on space- related research and development; need to restructure NASA science and technology organization; efficiency of federal efforts in support  of new partners and processes – taking into account specifics of  available policy instruments. The future of federal efforts will be  determined by the solution of these problems and by the need to  extend new model and practices to the key (in terms of market size  and technology advances) segments of space economy – satellite  manufacturing and the use of space data.

1. Bonvillian W.B. (2007) Advanced Manufacturing: A New Policy Challenge. Annals of Science and Technology Policy, vol. 1, no 1, pp. 1–131.

2. Canis B. (2016) Commercial Space Industry Launches a New Phase. Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. Order Code R44708. Available at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/space/R44708.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

3. Carayannis E.G., Roy R.I. S. (2000) Davids vs Goliaths in the Small Satellite Industry: the Role of Technological Innovation Dynamics in Firm Competitiveness. Technovation, no 20, pp. 287–297.

4. Commercial Orbital Transportation Services. New Era in Spaceflight (2014). NASA. Available at: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/SP-2014-617.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

5. Commercial Space Launch Industry Developments Present Multiple Challenges (2015). U.S. Government Accountability Office. Report to the Chairman, Committee on Science, Space and Technology, House of Representatives. GAO-15-706. Available at: https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/672144.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

6. Cornell A. (2011) Five Key Turning Points in the American Space Industry in the Past 20 Years: Structure, Innovation,and Globalization Shifts in the Space Sector. Acta Astronautica, vol. 69, no 11–12, pp. 1123–1131.

7. Christensen C., Raynor M. (2014) Reshenie problemy innovatsij v biznese [Solving the Problem of Innovation in Business]. Moscow: Аl’pina Didzhital. DiBello F.A. (2003) Space Industry Overview: The Outlook For Space Finance. The Space Congress Proceedings. Paper 12. Paper Session II-B. Available at: http://commons.erau.edu/space-congressproceedings/proceedings-2003-40th/may-1-2003/12/, accessed 21.04.2018.

8. Emerging Space: The Evolving Landscape of 21st Century American Spaceflight (2014). NASA. Report by Office of the Chief Technologist. Available at: https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/Emerging_Space_Report.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

9. Figliola P.M., Behrens C.E., Morgan D. (2006) U.S. Space Programs: Civilian, Military, and Commercial. Congressional Research Service. Order Code IB92011. Available at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/space/IB92011.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

10. Frick A. (2010) Future of the American Space Programme. Space Research Today, vol. 178, pp. 24–26.

11. Global Space Industry Dynamics (2017). Bryce Space and Technology Research Paper for Australian Government, Department of Industry, Innovation and Science. Available at: https://www.industry.gov.au/industry/IndustrySectors/space/Documents/BRYCE- Australia-Global-Space-Industry-Dynamics-Paper.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

12. Hampson J. (2017) The Future of Space Commercialization. The Niskanen Center. Research Paper, January 25, 2017. Available at: https://science.house.gov/sites/republicans.science.house.gov/files/documents/TheFut ureofSpaceCommercializationFinal.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

13. Handberg R. (2014) Human Spaceflight and Presidential Agendas: Niche Policies and NASA, Opportunity and Failure. Technology in Society, vol. 39, pp. 31–43.

14. Hertzfeld H.R. (2007) Globalization, Commercial Space and Spacepower in the USA. Space Policy, vol. 32, no 4, pp. 201– 220.

15. Lambright W.H. (2015) Launching Commercial Space: NASA, Cargo, and Policy Innovation. Space Policy, vol. 34, no 1, pp. 23–31. DOI: 10.1016/j.spacepol.2015.05.005.

16. Logsdon J.M. (2011) Change and Continuity in US Space Policy. Space Policy, vol. 27, no 1, pp. 1–2.

17. MacDonald A., Riley A. (eds.) (2014) Public-Private Partnerships for Space Capability Development. Driving Economic Growth and NASA’s Mission. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.Available at: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/33107192-public-privatepartnerships-for-space- capability-development,accessed 21.04.2018.

18. Mazzucato M., Robinson D.K.R. (2017) Co-creating and Directing Innovation Ecosystems? NASA’s Changing Approach to Public-private Partnerships in Lowearth Orbit. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, April 27, 2017, pp. 1–12. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.03.034.

19. Morgan D. (2011) The Future of NASA: Space Policy Issues Facing Congress. Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. Order Code R41016. Available at: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/space/R41016.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

20. NASA`s Strategic Direction and the Need for a National Consensus (2012). National Research Council of the National Academies Committee on NASA`s Strategic Direction. Washington: The National Academies Press. Available at: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18248/nasas-strategic-direction-and-the-need-for-a- national-consensus, accessed 21.04.2018.

21. National Science and Technology Council. Annual Report (1997). Office of Science and Technology Policy. The White House. Available at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/NSTCAnnualR eport1997.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

22. Noble M.J. (2008) Export Controls and United States Space Power. Astropolitics, vol. 6, no 3, pp. 251–312. DOI: 10.1080/14777620802469798.

23. Pace S., Frost G.P., Lachow I., Frelinger D.R., Fossum D., Wassem D., Pinto M.M. (1995) The Global Positioning System: Assessing National Policies. Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Available at: https://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR614.html, accessed 21.04.2018.

24. Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation (2009). NASA. Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee. Available at: https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/396093main_HSF_Cmte_FinalReport.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

25. Smith M.S. (1) (2006) Space Exploration: Issues Concerning the “Vision for Space Exploration”. Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. Order Code RS21720. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/crsdocs/70/, accessed 21.04.2018.

26. Smith M.S. (2) (2006) U.S. Space Programs: Civilian, Military, and Commercial. Congressional Research Service Issue Brief for Congress. Order Code IB92011. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.ru/&httpsredir=1&article=1005&context=crsdocs, accessed 21.04. 2018.

27. Start-Up Space: Rising Investment in Commercial Space Ventures (2016). Available at: http://www.ramseyfg.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Start_Up_Space-Rising-Investment- Tauri-Group.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

28. The Economic Impact of Commercial Space Transportation on the U.S. Economy in 2009 (2010). Federal Aviation Administration. Available at: https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/media/Economic%20Impact%20Study%20September%202010_ 20101026_PS.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

29. The Space Economy at a Glance 2014 (2014). OECD. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/sti/the-space-economy-at-aglance-2014-9789264217294-en.htm, accessed 21.04.2018.

30. Vedda J.A. (2017) Updating National Policy on Commercial Remote Sensing. Center for Space Policy and Strategy. The Aerospace Corporation. Available at:http://www.aerospace.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CommercialRemoteSensing.pdf, accessed 21.04.2018.

31. Vernile A. (2018) The Rise of Private Actors in the Space Sector. SpringerBriefs from the European Space Policy Institute.