Europe–Japan Strategic
Partnership: the Space Dimension
Report 40 April 2012
Jana Robinson
Short title: ESPI Report 40 ISSN: 2076-6688 Published in April 2012 Price: €11
Editor and publisher: European Space Policy Institute, ESPI Schwarzenbergplatz 6 • 1030 Vienna • Austria http://www.espi.or.at Tel. +43 1 7181118-0; Fax -99
Rights reserved – No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose with- out permission from ESPI. Citations and extracts to be published by other means are subject to mentioning “Source: ESPI Report 40; April 2012. All rights reserved” and sample transmission to ESPI before publishing.
ESPI is not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by negligence, product liability or otherwise) whether they may be direct or indirect, special, inciden- tal or consequential, resulting from the information contained in this publication.
Design: Panthera.cc
ESPI Report 40 2 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Table of Contents
Executive Summary 4
1. Introduction 10
2. Space in Europe and Japan: Key Institutions, Policies and Budgets 12 2.1 General Structure of Institutions Involved in Space 12 Europe 12 Japan 12 2.2 Space Policies: Latest Developments 13 Europe’s Space Policy 13 Japan’s Space Policy 15 2.3 Space Budgets 17 Global Overview 17 Europe’s Space Budgets 18 Japan’s Space Budget 20
3. Europe–Japan Space Cooperation in Select Areas 22 3.1 Access to Space and Space Exploration 22 3.1.1 Launchers 22 Status of Europe’s Launchers 24 Status of Japan’s Launchers 26 Europe–Japan Space Transportation Cooperation 30 3.1.2 Space Exploration 31 Europe’s Space Exploration Activities 33 Japan’s Space Exploration Activities 36 Cooperation in Space Exploration 37 3.2 Earth Observation and Related Applications 39 3.2.1 Europe’s Key Earth Observation-Related Activities 40 3.2.2 Japan’s Earth Observation-Related Activities 46 3.2.3 Europe–Japan Cooperation in the Field of Earth Observation 49 3.3 Industry-To-Industry Cooperation 51 3.3.1 Europe’s Space Industry 52 3.3.2 Japan’s Space Industry 54 3.3.3 Europe–Japan Space Industry Cooperation 58 3.4 Space Security 61 3.4.1 Europe’s Objectives for Space Security 62 3.4.2 Japan’s Objectives for Space Security 66 3.4.3 Europe–Japan Space Security Cooperation 69
4. Conclusion 71
List of Acronyms 72
Annex 76 A.1 Project Methodology 76 A.2 Agenda of the Europe–Japan Space Workshop Organised by ESPI 78
Acknowledgements 79
About the Author 79
ESPI Report 40 3 April 2012
Executive Summary
This report entitled “Europe-Japan Strategic sive manner. This Summit occurred a decade Partnership: the Space Dimension” seeks to after adopting a ten-year “Joint Action Plan introduce how cooperation could be strength- for EU-Japan Cooperation” in 2001. ened in four prospective areas of space- In June 2011, the EU and Japan held their related activities which could, in turn, con- first Joint Committee on EU–Japan Scientific tribute to the Europe-Japan strategic partner- and Technological (S&T) Cooperation stem- ship more broadly. The four areas examined ming from the new bilateral S&T Cooperation include: exploration and access to space; Agreement of March 2011. With the goal of Earth observation and related applications; intensifying gradually S&T cooperation, the industry-to-industry cooperation; and space Committee addressed two issues at the first security. The report argues that inserting key meeting: low carbon societies/technologies space issue areas into existing EU - Japan and critical raw materials. Space technologies venues for bilateral consultations and deci- can contribute significantly to both of these sion-making has the potential to bolster the areas. overarching objective of deepening further political, economic, commercial, societal and With regard to European space policy, ESA cultural relations. Space can also serve as a and its predecessors have engaged for over powerful enabler of certain priority foreign four decades in space programmes for sci- policy objectives of both the EU and Japan. ence, Earth observation, telecommunications, navigation, human spaceflight and explora- The report first provides an overview of the tion, and launchers. ESA–EU cooperation is key space-related institutions and players of based on a 2004 Framework Agreement both sides, recent developments in their re- which coordinates the activities of ESA and spective space policies, and budgetary con- the European Commission through a Joint siderations as a lead-in to exploring ex- Secretariat. With the entry into force of the panded cooperation in space. Lisbon Treaty in December 2009, the EU was The EU and Japan represent the world’s larg- granted, for the first time, an explicit compe- est and fourth largest economies and account tence in the space domain. Its Article 189 for 33% and 11% of world GDP, and 17% formalised the status of space activities and and 6% of world trade, respectively (as at stated that appropriate relations should be February 2011). Both Europe and Japan established with ESA. In short, Europe is now share the basic principles of democracy, free positioned to pursue and invigorate current market economies, multilateralism and sev- space efforts for the benefit of mankind and eral other characteristics that serve as the Europe’s overall global standing. With regard back-bone of this long-standing partnership. to Europe’s position as a space-faring power, the European Space Policy of 2007 empha- The formal bilateral relationship between the sises the direct connection between space- EU and Japan dates back to 1991 when both related capabilities and the EU’s ability to partners signed the “Joint Declaration be- exercise influence regionally and globally. tween Japan and the European Community and its Member States”. The Declaration in- For its part, Japan enacted a “Basic Law on stituted a consultation framework for annual Space” in May 2008. The law seeks to regu- meetings between the EU and Japan. At the late all space activities, public and private, 2010 EU-Japan Summit, a High-Level Group and establishes the strategic direction for was established to examine jointly ways to Japan’s space programme. After the enact- strengthen and integrate the EU-Japan eco- ment of the Basic Space Law, the Strategic nomic relationship. In May 2011, the 20th EU- Headquarters for Space Policy was estab- Japan Summit took place in Brussels with the lished at the Cabinet level, with the Prime goal of deepening further mutual political and Minister as Chairman, with a view toward economic relations. During the meeting, the consolidating Japan’s space activities. In June summit leaders agreed to launch negotiations 2009, the Strategic Headquarters released on a Free Trade Agreement (FTA)/Economic the Basic Plan for Space Policy with an over- Partnership Agreement (EPA) as well as a arching goal of implementing a comprehen- binding agreement that would address politi- sive strategy for space. The Basic Plan repre- cal and sectoral cooperation in a comprehen- sents a shift from research to civilian and
ESPI Report 40 4 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
military applications and serves as Japan’s ture of space exploration. Many experts as- fundamental space policy document for im- sert that international cooperation in space plementation of the recent law. It also pro- exploration is essential and that Europe and vides a comprehensive roadmap for pursuing Japan have a number of opportunities to en- space activities. gage in closer dialogue concerning future joint endeavours. BepiColombo or Astro H are Concerning space budgets, the EU’s 2010 concrete expressions of this kind of coopera- budget for space-related programmes was tion. Space exploration will also always have €1.33 billion ($1.63 billion). The EU budgeted a strong human dimension. In the near term, for space research some €212.85 million ESA and JAXA might explore new angles of ($261.63) in 2010 to support the develop- bilateral cooperation with respect to ISS op- ment of European space applications, includ- eration and utilisation within the overall ing the Global Monitoring for Environment framework of the multilateral project. and Security (GMES). Security-related re- search was allocated €215.05 million Europe and Japan also share many key policy ($264.33 million) for the development of priorities that involve use of Earth observa- space-related technology and knowledge to tion satellites and derived information. These advance security-oriented activities (e.g. include space for societal and economic bene- disaster management, anti-terrorist opera- fits, environmental protection and climate tions, etc.). For satellite navigation, the EU’s change monitoring, and security (including budget earmarked €896.04 million ($1.1 disaster management). Accordingly, enhanc- billion) for deployment of the Galileo pro- ing Earth observation capabilities are a prior- gramme. ESA’s 2010 budget was €3.74 bil- ity for both Europe and Japan. Societal and lion ($4.6 billion), it being noted that France, economic benefits, as well as security, includ- Germany, Italy and other European space ing through international cooperation, will be agencies also conduct very significant space derived from Europe’s GMES and Japan’s activities with separate funding. By way of Sentinel Asia Project. Active engagement of comparison, Japan’s national budget alloca- both Europe and Japan in Earth observation- tion for space was $3.83 billion (¥339 billion, related undertakings is based on solid na- €3 billion) in FY 2010. Of this amount, JAXA tional foundations and accomplishments. received $2.03 billion (¥180 billion, €1.6 bil- Europe and Japan have also embarked on a lion).1 joint EO project. EarthCARE, which is the largest and most complex of ESA’s Earth With regard to access to space, there have Explorer missions, is being developed as a been a number of comparable launcher pro- joint venture between ESA and JAXA. There is grammes and goals (i.e. Hermes–HOPE, Ari- also a cooperative mechanism established ane 5–H-2A and ATV–HTV). At the same within the International Charter Space and time, there has been relatively little effort Major Disasters, where both a number of made to promote expanded Europe–Japan European actors and Japan are involved. cooperation at a governmental level as both Using EO-derived information effectively of- sides have sought autonomous capabilities. fers fertile ground for enhancing key foreign Industry has been at the forefront of promot- policy objectives via bilateral and multilateral ing business relations between the two sides cooperation. in the launcher sector. Arianespace and The Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) have a The industrial dialogue between the EU and mutual backup agreement for commercial Japan has been conducted through various satellite launches. Space development, in- channels. The goal of these dialogues has cluding launcher technology, is a long-term, been to establish a transparent, open and costly endeavour. Accordingly, it might be stable business environment and contribute, worth considering cooperation in the area of through better cooperation between the EU human launch capability, particularly if this and Japan, to an overall stronger economic would be part of an overall transportation situation. The success or failure of any coop- strategy relative to space exploration. erative endeavour depends, to a large extent, on industrial capabilities. This needs to be Concerning space exploration, Europe and accompanied by shared understandings con- Japan, through the ESA–JAXA partnership, cerning the practices, culture and methodol- have demonstrated that both sides share ogy of the partner. Mitsubishi Electric Corpo- similar visions of their research and develop- ration (MELCO) and Astrium, for example, ment efforts. Decisions made in the nearer have successfully pursued a Rendezvous- and future, although framed during times of eco- Docking Sensor (RVS) for ATV and HTV. nomic/financial uncertainty, will, however, European and Japanese companies are also play a significant role in determining the fu- already engaged in various institutional and commercial programmes and both partners 1 “The Space Report 2011“. Space Foundation (2011): 42, can provide world-class technical quality and 43 and 54.
ESPI Report 40 5 April 2012
management skills. Venues such as the • Consider cooperation on a joint return Europe-Japan Business Roundtable (EU-Japan manned vehicle: ESA and EADS con- BRT) and the broader EU-Japan Summit can ducted a feasibility study concerning the serve as important platforms for promoting development of a re-entry capsule for the space industries of both sides. the ATV, an ATV Return Vehicle (ARV). It was envisioned as the basis for develop- Both Europe and Japan view space as an ing either a cargo return capacity or a important strategic asset and seek maximum manned version of the ATV, but never autonomy in a number of space activities. materialised. In 2011, ESA announced With regard to space security, they actively the possibility of collaborating with NASA participate in diplomatic exchanges on the on an ATV successor, involving the NASA future governance of space, including via the MPCV capsule. In 2010, Japan, for the UNCOPUOS and initiatives such as the Inter- first time, began to study plans for a national Code of Conduct for Outer Space manned space vehicle. An improved ver- Activities and enhanced Space Situational sion of HTV-R would serve as the plat- Awareness (SSA). The space debris issue form for a manned Japanese spacecraft area is also high on the agendas of both for the ISS. Such vehicles, however, are partners. They are likewise in the process of costly and complicated and require a establishing more comprehensive space secu- clear strategic goal and political vision rity policies. With regard to leveraging space concerning the benefits. Given the suc- for security-related activities on Earth, the EU cess of the ATV and HTV and more re- emphasises counterterrorism, combating cent ideas to build a return vehicle, both piracy, and international peace activities, all Europe and Japan should consider care- areas of increased interest to Japan. fully the prospect of collaborating on a To conclude, Europe and Japan are well- joint return man-rated spacecraft. positioned for a new level of space-related • Contemplate the benefits of a backup cooperation provided that both sides have the agreement for government launches: right mix of patience, persistence, budgetary Currently, all government launches in capabilities, administrative coordination and Europe and Japan are conducted by do- political will. To maximise the benefits and mestic launch capabilities, on the Ariane capabilities of space cooperation, the follow- 5 in Europe and on H-2A in Japan. Ari- ing recommendations should be considered anespace and MHI have in place a for each of the four areas covered in this backup agreement for commercial mis- report: sions. Taking the long view, Europe and Japan should consider the potential Access to Space and Space Exploration benefits of a back-up agreement for gov- ernment launches. It would be especially Access to Space relevant if both governments are con- templating man-rated rockets. • More affordable human access to space through collaboration: Europe is cur- Space Exploration rently deciding on an Ariane 5 successor, known as the Next-Generation Launcher • Continue to strengthen cooperative ef- (NGL) or Ariane 6. Europe is also devel- forts in space exploration: The global oping the Ariane 5 Midlife Evolution (ME). space community is at a watershed, hav- In Japan’s case, JAXA and MHI plan to ing to decide whether to truly pursue upgrade the H-2A and H-2B rockets to space exploration, and if so whether this improve their performance and enhance would be in a coordinated or competitive their competitiveness on the commercial fashion. By coordinating well Europe and launch market. The first launch of the so- Japan can help set the agenda for the called H-2A Upgrade is planned for early long-term future in this domain. 2013. The development of the Ariane 6 • Seek to forge a joint vision for space ex- and Japan’s next flagship launch vehicle, ploration and support the high-level in- H-X, are going to be costly, long-term ternational platform/forum established in endeavours. Accordingly, Europe and Ja- November 2011 in Lucca, Italy: Europe pan could contemplate to expand consid- and Japan should seek common ways to erably cooperation with regard to the maintain the positive momentum created next launch vehicle of each side to re- by the Third International Space Confer- duce cost, strengthen industrial coopera- ence and first high-level international tion and share promising, non-strategic platform/forum that took place in Lucca, technologies for mutual benefit. Italy, in November 2011, including ef- forts to shape the policy issues for the next string of meetings.
ESPI Report 40 6 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
• Strengthen arguments for space explora- collection. Gaps remain, however, be- tion by including the benefits of such ac- tween having access to unique EO- tivity for the overall domestic and foreign derived data (including environment and policies of Europe and Japan: Existing bi- climate change-related) and the ability to lateral policy exchanges should include effectively utilise it. Such international on their agenda a full evaluation of how coordination, which seeks to, among space exploration promotes economic other things, avoid duplication and re- growth through scientific and technologi- dundancy, facilitate data sharing and cal progress, innovation and competi- raise awareness of EO potential in other tiveness. It should also explore how communities, requires a special, sus- greater social prosperity can be ad- tained diplomatic and executive effort. vanced through joint space-related re- Closer mutual coordination of Europe’s search and undertakings (including in the and Japan’s activities and priorities in area of life sciences, joint robotic mis- these venues has the potential to bolster sions, etc.), and enhanced ISS coopera- their role as international leaders in re- tion, including joint space transportation. sponding to environmental, climate Space exploration is also an iconic hu- change, and disaster management is- man endeavour, with geopolitical signifi- sues, to name only a few. cance (as demonstrated by the Chinese • Advance commercialisation of EO/remote posture), and engenders all the scientific sensing through steady institutional sup- benefits of basic research. port: Although remote sensing has yet to become a fully viable commercial busi- Earth Observation (EO) and Related Applications ness, as the users become more familiar with the benefits of using space-derived • Promote EO-related cooperation that data with other sources of geographic in- supports Europe’s and Japan’s broader formation, EO is poised for considerable policies, including at EU-Japan Summits: growth in the coming years. Commercial Europe and Japan share many key policy data revenue alone is expected to in- priorities (identified, for example, in crease more than threefold in the next “Europe 2020” strategy and Japan’s 10 years.2 A more robust commercial “New Growth Strategy” and “Compre- market will also result in improved deci- hensive Partnership Policy”) that involve sion-making processes for both govern- use of Earth observation systems. These ments and commercial users. Joint dia- systems possess, in some cases logue should involve issues ranging from uniquely, the capability of supplying con- how to bolster awareness of satellite ob- tinuous and comprehensive information servation capabilities, accelerate the about the Earth, including over extended transition of satellite use from research periods. The priorities identified by the to operations, improve capacity-building EU and Japan include space for societal investments in user communities, en- and economic benefits, environmental courage investment in applications and protection, climate change monitor- services, and reduce the gap between ing/mitigation, and security (including users and suppliers of data. disaster management). Enhanced EO- focused cooperation would strengthen support for EO utilisation and its greater Industry-to-Industry Cooperation commercialisation, and improve imple- • Level the playing field for investment and mentation of broader objectives such as industrial involvement: Space is, per innovation, competitiveness, environ- definition, transcending borders. The mental protection, sustainable energy benefits of globalisation experienced in and sustainable management of natural many other fields should also increas- resources. ingly be harvested in the space domain. • Promote strengthened position of Europe Europe and Japan should be trail-blazers and Japan in multilateral EO-relevant in allowing and fostering Europe/Japan venues: Existing fora or venues, such as cross-boundary investment in space in- the Committee on Earth Observing Satel- dustries, and should actively seek mutual lites (CEOS), the Group on Earth Obser- engagement of European and Japanese vation (GEO) and its 10-year implemen- industry in both commercial and gov- tation plan (GEOSS), the ESA-EU “GMES ernmental ventures. Space Component” programme, ESA’s
Climate Change Initiative (CCI), Interna- 2 tional Charter Space and Major Disasters, “Asia Pacific Satellite-based Earth Observation Market”. 25 Mar. 2011. Frost & Sullivan 23 Feb. 2012 and regional Sentinel Asia all seek to en-
ESPI Report 40 7 April 2012
• Provide cooperative institutional support prises (SMEs). This can be partially com- for space applications to enable greater pensated for by the larger downstream utilisation of space: High-level institu- industrial sector that can generate sub- tional dialogue can assist in shaping the stantial revenues with lower barriers for strategies of both partners to advance the SME entrants. Accordingly, Europe their respective space-related industries. and Japan should actively explore coop- Given the large volume of official docu- eration on specific, high-profile space ments dealing with space policy, industry projects that are emblematic of the policy, science and technology policy, large-scale contributions space assets etc. it is often difficult to identify the can offer their respective societies, as relevant activities of both sides that war- well as stimulate the growth of the space rant specific discussion, much less con- industries of both sides (e.g. small satel- nect them. Commercialisation, closely lites or space-based solar power). connected with advancing space indus- tries, needs to attract strong government support. Determining space objectives, Space Security enabled by collaboration, can drive inno- • Add agenda item on space security into vation and competitiveness for each the broader foreign and security policy side’s space industry. Joint pursuit of agendas of the EU and Japan: Europe such objectives will strengthen the prac- and Japan share a number of views on tical utilisation of space (e.g. offering in- space policy as well as associated goals. ternational competitive space systems They both view space as an important with improved performance, reduced strategic asset and seek maximum costs and shorter development periods). autonomy in a number of space activi- There would also be benefits associated ties. With regard to space security, they with better penetration of overseas mar- actively participate in diplomatic ex- kets and their respective domestic com- changes on the future governance of mercial markets. The improved integra- space via various bilateral and multilat- tion of satellite communications, Earth eral mechanisms and initiatives (e.g. the observation and position, navigation and UNCOPUOS, the International Code of timing (PNT) could constitute promising Conduct for Outer Space Activities etc.). areas for such enhanced industrial coop- Space Situational Awareness (SSA) and eration. the orbital debris issue area are also high • Stimulate innovation policies of Europe on the space agenda. Indeed, both and Japan through space collaboration: Europe and Japan are in the process of EU-Japan relations are already well- establishing more comprehensive space established through a number of existing security policies. Good space governance fora. Innovation, a priority growth area requires clear guidance, informed deci- for both sides, is closely linked to inter- sion-making, comprehensive manage- national collaboration and can address ment, and consistent policies. To achieve possible bottlenecks as observed by the a predictable and stable space environ- EU’s “Innovation Union” programme. ment where all actors behave responsi- Space activities require cutting-edge bly, there is a need to facilitate interna- technologies that stimulate innovative tional cooperation, closer interaction be- ideas. Space-related research and devel- tween the private and public sectors, and opment fuels open innovation for greater the political will to address the degrada- global competitiveness. A strengthened tion of the environment of Earth orbits EU-Japan industrial partnership, beyond due to space debris. Accordingly, adding the current framework, can have broad, the most pressing space security chal- durable benefits, particularly in the areas lenges to the broader bilateral foreign of research and development, skill and and security policy agenda would dem- knowledge transfer, sharing resources onstrate heightened awareness and pri- and information, and enhancing capabil- ority accorded this rapidly growing issue ity development. portfolio. • Provide support for competitive European • Pursue cooperative strategies for im- and Japanese space industries on the proved space debris mitigation and re- world market: The space industry is a moval supported by upgraded Space growing source of economic growth and Situational Awareness (SSA) and trans- competitiveness. The upstream industry parency and confidence-building meas- is highly centralised in both Europe and ures (TCBMs): The alarming increase of Japan and presents challenges to the en- space debris in Earth’s orbits has been trance of small and medium-sized enter- recognised as one of the most challeng- ing threats to secure space operations.
ESPI Report 40 8 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
With the adoption of the IADC Space De- various humanitarian and rescue under- bris Mitigation Guidelines at the UN in takings, peacekeeping operations and 2008, there is a continuing need for po- crisis management. Enhanced coopera- litical endorsement of, and support for, tion can help fill existing gaps in crisis these guidelines. Both Europe and Japan management operations, including should strengthen further their existing through the establishment of more re- engagement in various efforts to pre- sponsive multinational forces. Space as- serve space sustainability, including sets are indispensable to the effective through space debris remediation efforts, operations of such forces. Joint participa- SSA and transparency and confidence- tion of Europe and Japan in crisis man- building measures (TCBMs). agement exercises, actual missions and the sharing of space-based information, • Increase cooperative opportunities for can improve prospects for mission suc- the EU and Japan in the area of crisis cess and more effective exploitation of management: Both sides are involved in the benefits of available space systems.
ESPI Report 40 9 April 2012
1. Introduction
The EU and Japan are the world’s largest and ers agreed to launch negotiations on a Free fourth largest economies and account for Trade Agreement (FTA)/Economic Partnership 33% and 11% world GDP, and 17% and 6 % Agreement (EPA) as well as a binding agree- of world trade, respectively.3 Both Europe ment that would address political and sec- and Japan share the basic principles of de- toral cooperation in a comprehensive man- mocracy and multilateralism and several ner. The annual Regulatory Reform Dialogue other characteristics. At the same time, the (RRD), where both sides present specific full potential of the economic relationship proposals for deregulation, has been in place leaves considerable room for new opportuni- since 1994. Other important issues are to be ties to be exploited. discussed at the next EU-Japan Summit scheduled for May 2012, including the poten- The European Union (EU) identifies Japan as tial launch of negotiations for a free trade one of its “strategic partners” and recognises agreement. Strong high-level commitment that Japan basically shares Europe’s views on and firm leadership in Brussels and Tokyo will a number of key foreign policy issues (e.g. be key to building-out this important partner- promoting effective multilateralism, the rule ship. of law, etc.). EU–Japan relations date back to 1991, when both partners signed the “Joint Space-related systems and derived applica- Declaration between Japan and the European tions have the potential to advance and ex- Community and its Member States”.4 The pand the bilateral dialogue as well as the Declaration established common principles broader strategies of both partners (i.e. and shared objectives in the political, eco- “Europe 2020” strategy and related flagship nomic, cooperation and cultural areas and initiatives, and Japan’s “New Growth Strat- instituted a consultation framework for an- egy” and its “Comprehensive Partnership nual meetings between Japan and the EU. Policy”). Both partners need to develop a Subsequently, the basic structures of EU- coherent strategy concerning their future Japan collaboration have been established. At space relations that can contribute to mutual the 10th EU-Japan Summit in 2001, a ten- political, economic and security interests. year Action Plan set a number of cooperative This should be accomplished in parallel with objectives, including promoting peace and discussions on the goals of Europe’s and Ja- security, encouraging bilateral trade and in- pan’s respective space programmes as well vestment partnerships, and coping with as their approaches to the rapidly changing global and societal challenges.5 Japan was geopolitical environment of the 21st century. later invited to participate in the EU’s 6th and Understanding the character and context of 7th Framework Programmes for Research. The each other’s space efforts will aid the ad- 2001 “EU-Japan Action Plan” laid out ambi- vancement of broader Europe-Japan collabo- tious goals, but needs to be populated with ration. concrete implementation milestones. This study addresses a range of views on At the 2010 EU-Japan Summit, a High-Level Europe–Japan cooperation and evaluates Group was established to examine jointly opportunities for expanded space-related ways to strengthen and integrate the EU- cooperation. The primary focus of the report Japan economic relationship. In May 2011, is on four select areas of space activities and the 20th EU-Japan Summit took place in Brus- how these areas can be enhanced by joint sels with the goal of deepening further politi- undertakings, and, in turn, how such coop- cal and economic relations between the two eration can advance broader common objec- sides. During the meeting, the summit lead- tives of Europe and Japan. These include: access to space and space exploration; Earth observation and related applications; indus- 3 Sunesen, Eva et al. “Assessment of Barriers to Trade try-to-industry cooperation; and space secu- and Investment Between the EU and Japan: Final Report”. DG Trade 30 Nov. 2009: 6. rity. The study first provides an overview of
ESPI Report 40 10 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
above and how collaboration could of the four issue areas examined. Among the strengthen these activities. This section also report’s findings is the view that identifying reviews the nature of cooperative missions common objectives with respect to space already undertaken and seeks to delineate policy and implementation of same should be the main factors that can shape successful included as a more prominent agenda item collaboration. Chapter five of the study offers for the broader bilateral relationship. a set of recommendations germane to each
ESPI Report 40 11 April 2012
2. Space in Europe and Japan: Key Institutions, Policies and Budgets
The EU and Japan are both protective of their address issues concerning the practical imple- global stature and seek recognition for noble, mentation of the European space policy.6 far-sighted causes or policies. Space can serve With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in as a powerful enabler of foreign policy objec- December 2009, the EU was granted, for the tives of both sides, including successful coop- first time, an explicit competence in the space eration that touches on the overarching bilat- domain. Its Article 189 formalised the status of eral objectives of promoting peace and secu- space activities and stated that appropriate rity, strengthening the economic and trade relations should be established with ESA. The partnership, tackling global and societal chal- task will now be to clarify how space can best lenges, and bringing together people and cul- be integrated into broader policy objectives of tures as laid out in the 2001 Action Plan for EU- the EU. Japan Cooperation. In summary, Europe is now positioned to pur- In the interest of providing a broader context in sue and invigorate current space efforts for the which to view cooperation between Europe and benefit of mankind and Europe’s overall global Japan, including in the four space-related areas standing. Space is perceived as an engine and addressed in this report, below is a brief over- a sound space policy, together with robust in- view of their institutional structures and actors ternational cooperation, can realise the over- involved in space policy decision-making, as arching objectives of the EU. well as noteworthy developments in this issue portfolio. Japan There are two agencies that have been respon- 2.1 General Structure of sible for Japan’s space policy: the Space Activi- Institutions Involved in ties Commission (SAC) and the Council for Science and Technology Policy (CSTP). The SAC Space was established in 1968 under the Prime Minis- ter’s Office to plan Japan’s comprehensive space policy. It produced Japan’s national space Europe policy, entitled “Outlines of Space Development Europe undertakes its space activities through Policy”, in 1978, 1984, 1989 and 1996. The individual MS, ESA, Eumetsat and the EU. SAC’s last space policy document, “Mid-to-Long European nations, ESA, Eumetsat and the EU Term Strategy for Space Development,” was are all seeking to advance research and devel- released in December 2000. In January 2001, opment of various space programmes to pre- the SAC was moved from the Prime Minister’s serve, and further strengthen, their global Office to the Ministry of Education, Culture, space standing. For over four decades, ESA and Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT). Sub- its predecessors have engaged in space pro- sequently, the SAC’s policy scope was limited to grammes for science, Earth observation, tele- JAXA’s space development and use. Still the communications, navigation, human spaceflight SAC’s “Japanese Long-Term Program for Space Activities”, endorsed in June 2001, was consid- and exploration, and launchers. ESA–EU coop- 7 eration is based on a 2004 Framework Agree- ered a comprehensive national space policy. ment which coordinates activities of ESA and The SAC was discontinued in 2012 and a space the European Commission through a Joint Se- policy advisory panel of experts was created to cretariat. The ESA/EU member states also meet support the Cabinet Affairs Office and Cabinet at the ministerial level in the Space Council, Ministers. prepared by the representatives of the Member States, ESA and the EU in the High-level Space Policy Group (HSPG). The High-level Space Policy Group consists of representatives of the 6 The European Space Policy. Belgian High Representa- 29 ESA and/or EU member states, ESA and the tion for Space Policy.
ESPI Report 40 12 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
The CSTP, chaired by the Prime Minister, was a through its National Institute of Information product of the 2001 central governmental re- and Communications Technology (NICT) man- form, and given the mandate to create a com- ages the development of space communica- prehensive national science and technology tions, in cooperation with JAXA. The NICT de- strategy. The CSTP’s members, a maximum of signs, develops and operates Japan’s advanced fourteen officials and experts, are appointed by communications satellites. The MIC, together the PM. The CSTP published in 2002 and 2004 with MEXT, co-supervises JAXA with regard to documents entitled a “Basic Strategy of Space” its telecommunications activities. Besides the addressing a comprehensive space policy as it above-referenced ministries, there are also related to science and technology to advance others relevant for space activities (see figure national goals. Accordingly, it can be said that 1). the CSTP focuses on more immediate science The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and technology goals, while the SAC has fo- (METI) plays a key role in promoting space cused on the long-term plans to advance scien- industrialisation and is also involved in space tific knowledge and innovative space technol- research and development, mainly through its ogy. It is also useful to note that the CSTP is New Energy and Industrial Technology Devel- not authorised to request appropriations and opment Organisation (NEDO) and its founda- does not supervise JAXA.8 tion, the Institute for Unmanned Space Experi- Organisation of space activities in Japan ment Free Flyer (USEF). changed in October 2003, when the Institute of The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport Space and Astronautical Science (ISAS), the and Tourism (MLIT) co-supervised, until August National Space Development Agency of Japan 2006, JAXA. The Meteorological Agency, which (NASDA), and the National Aerospace Labora- is part of the MLIT, used to develop and oper- tory of Japan (NAL), were merged to create the ate meteorological satellites in cooperation with Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA). NASDA/JAXA. JAXA is Japan’s primary space research and development (R&D) organisation. The ISAS, The Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy founded in 1964, had managed scientific mis- was established under the Cabinet Office in sions. NASDA, founded in 1969, was in charge August 2008 in order to reorganise Japan’s of developing rockets and satellites, building space management structure. The Prime Minis- the Japanese Experimental Module, and the ter serves as the Chairman. The Chief Cabinet training of Japanese astronauts. JAXA has a Secretary and the Minister of State for Space number of research centres across Japan. The Policy serve as the Vice Director-Generals (see ISAS is now a sub-unit devoted to science. The figure 2). In the spring of 2012, the Secretariat ISAS and NAL had been under the manage- for the Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy ment of the Ministry of Education, while NASDA was relocated to the Cabinet Affairs Office. was under the auspices of the Science and Technology Agency (STA). The Ministry of Edu- cation and the STA were merged to form the present Ministry of Science, Culture, Sports, 2.2 Space Policies: Latest Science and Technology (MEXT) in January Developments 2001.9 MEXT is in charge of JAXA and controls approximately 60% of Japans total space budget.10 Europe’s Space Policy Besides MEXT there are three other main minis- The first European Space Policy (ESP) was for- tries involved in space-related research and mally introduced in April 2007 as a joint Com- development: METI, MIC, MLIT. The Ministry of munication from the European Commission to Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC), as the European Council and Parliament and as a well as the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, proposal from the ESA Director General to the Transport and Tourism (MLIT), have been con- ESA Council. It was formalised on 22 May 2007 ducting space development and utilisation ac- in a Resolution on the European Space Policy tivities with JAXA. As of April 2009, JAXA has adopted at the EU-ESA Fourth Space Council. It operated under the supervision of MEXT for all is considered an important milestone for Europe its activities and the MIC retains limited control as it includes, for the first time, the EU in space over certain of those activities. The Ministry of policy decision-making. An EC Staff Working Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC), paper entitled “Preliminary Elements for a European Space Programme”, and prepared in cooperation with the High-Level Space Policy 8 Ibid: 373-374. 9 Group, accompanied the ESP and outlined the Ibid: 375-376. 10 Kallender-Umezu, Paul. “Guest Blog: With Kan Canned, first strategic guidelines for Europe’s future What’s Next for Japan?” Space News 26 Aug. 2011 activities in space.
ESPI Report 40 13 April 2012
Figure 1: Japan’s Space-Related Ministries (as of September 2011). (Source: Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy)
Figure 2: Organisational Chart of the Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy (Source: Strategic Headquarters)11
11 Kunitomo, Hirotoshi. “Update on National Space Policy Development of Japan and Space Security.” PPT Presentation at the Europe-Japan Space Workshop. ESPI, Vienna, Austria. 17 January 2012.
ESPI Report 40 14 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
The May 2007 Resolution on European Space tion strategy; and use of space to bolster the Policy emphasised, among other items, the partnership with Africa.12 contribution of space to CFSP and the EU’s The European Commission adopted in April Sustainable Development Strategy, as well as 2011 a Communication entitled “Towards a Europe’s standing as a major space-faring space strategy for the European Union that actor. Moreover, a decision was taken (under benefits its citizens”. Three main imperatives the Finnish Presidency) that a thematic area, driving the current space policy in Europe “Space”, was to be included in the EU’s Sev- are: societal (benefits for citizens); economic enth Framework Programme (FP7) for Re- (knowledge-building and driver for innova- search and Innovation for the period 2007– tion); and strategic (Europe as a global ac- 2013 with a budget of €1.43 billion over 7 tor). Space infrastructure is seen as critical years (out of some €50 billion for the entire infrastructure that needs to be protected FP7). Roughly 85% of the budget was ear- from space-based threats. To that end, Space marked for the GMES programme. The Ger- Situational Awareness (SSA) capability is man Presidency followed up with another seen as critical. This communication is seen conference on GMES in 2007 to address the as a first step toward an integrated space governance and operational funding issues. policy to be developed in conformity with the With regard to Europe’s position as a space- Lisbon Treaty. faring power, the ESP emphasises the direct In December 2011, the Council of the Euro- connection between the space capabilities pean Union adopted a resolution on “Benefits and the EU’s ability to exercise influence re- of space for the security of European citi- gionally and globally. It asserts that if the EU zens”. The document highlights the role of wants to be a leading global actor, it has to the GMES as a tool for broader European possess credible space assets, educate top- policies, specifically for agriculture, environ- tier engineers and scientists, and invest in ment, transport, energy, health, civil protec- space research and development to build a tion, humanitarian aid and security, as well knowledge society. Moreover, a credible ESP as a major European contribution to the can also advance Europe’s objectives in other global efforts concerning climate change. It areas of interest (e.g. environment). Finally, also acknowledges the need to enhance secu- space systems are a strategic asset for any rity, safety and sustainability in space and nation, or group of nations, with global ambi- the need for effective European Space Situ- tions and can contribute substantially to ational Awareness (SSA), as well as impor- Europe’s autonomy and independence. tance of the draft Code of Conduct for Outer The ESP under the Lisbon Treaty still awaits a Space Activities. Concerning exploration, it more defined work programme. There exist takes into account the discussion of the third many space projects, but a clear, integrated Exploration Conference in Lucca (Italy) in and coherent space policy is still in the proc- November 2011 and invites the European ess of being developed. To accelerate this Commission, ESA, MS and international part- process, Europe is seeking to generate the ners to pursue discussions about an explora- proper amount of political will, long-term tion strategy beyond 2020.13 commitments, and financial, technological and other resources to realise its vision for space. Japan’s Space Policy The current strategic objectives of the Euro- Japan enacted a “Basic Law on Space” in May pean Space Policy were defined by the 7th 2008. The Basic Space Law is the first com- European Space Council (the first “Lisbon prehensive national space law that seeks to Treaty era” Space Council) of November regulate all space activities, public and pri- 2010. The adopted resolution was entitled, vate, and establishes the strategic direction 14 “Global challenges: taking full benefits of for Japan’s space programme. The basic European space systems”. It describes the following elements of a space strategy for 12 Robinson, Jana. Advancing Europe’s Key Foreign Policy Europe: maintaining independent, reliable Objectives via Space. ESPI Report 30. Vienna: Springer. and cost-effective access to space; contribut- 2011: 18-19. ing to the monitoring of climate change with
ESPI Report 40 15 April 2012
principles of the new law are: peaceful use of strategy until 2013 prioritising nine projects: space; improvement of citizens’ lives; im- five systems for utilisation (i.e. Land and provement of human security and creation of Ocean Observing Satellite systems to monitor a safe and secure society; improvement of Asia and other regions); environment moni- national security; development of a human toring and weather forecasts by meteorologi- society through advanced space science and cal satellites; advanced satellite telecommu- technology; promotion of international coop- nications; navigation by the global positioning eration; enhancement of space diplomacy to system; and national security satellite sys- advance Japan’s national interests interna- tem; and four research programmes (i.e. the tionally; and protection of the outer space space science programme; the human space environment to achieve sustainable develop- activity programme; the space solar power ment and use of space.15 programme; and the small demonstration satellite programme).19 Measures to be taken to implement the basic principles of the Basic Space Law include: The Basic Plan represents a shift from re- maintaining and improving of the space infra- search to civilian and military applications, structure, including satellite networks and including the development of high-resolution autonomous launching capability; promoting reconnaissance satellites and further research space development and use to contribute to on sensors for a ballistic missile early warning national and international security; promoting satellite. The Japanese government likewise private space business; developing launching announced a determination to promote more sites and other facilities; promoting rapid private-sector space development by increas- technology transfer to private space sectors; ing spending for commercially-oriented pro- encouraging space commercialisation; finan- grammes, as well as crafting a law to permit cial measures to attract investments by pri- commercial launch services.20 vate operators; facilitating international co- The Basic Plan for Space Policy serves as operation to preserve the space environment; Japan’s fundamental space policy document and the development of detailed regulatory for implementation of the Basic Space Law measures.16 and provides a comprehensive roadmap for The Basic Space Law also lifted the ban on space activities. At the same time, the Japa- the use of space technology for national se- nese government continues administrative curity activities. The law implies that Japan reorganisation of space activities with the interprets the peaceful use of outer space in above mentioned aim to consolidate authority accordance with the Outer Space Treaty as under the Japanese Cabinet Office. Among “non-aggressive”, but within the limits of other items, the new Basic Space Law stated Article 9 of the 1946 Japanese Constitution. the requirement to form a new space agency. Accordingly, Japan’s Self Defence Force Due to political reasons, the configuration of (JSDF) can develop, manufacture, own and such an agency has not, as yet, been deter- operate defence-related satellites to support mined. its terrestrial operations, including ballistic With regard to JAXA, the new Japanese space missile defence, within the scope of individual law potentially gives JAXA a bigger role in self-defence.17 national security space activities. However, After the enactment of the Basic Space Law, the legislation governing JAXA activities has the Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy not been modified and mainly focuses on civil was established at the Cabinet level, with the space. Accordingly, JAXA continues to be Prime Minister as Chairman, with a view to guided by its March 2005 Vision 2025 plan making the government space bureaucracy that envisions JAXA to achieve world-class more efficient. The Strategic Headquarters status in aeronautics and space science, se- released, in June 2009, the Basic Plan for curity, infrastructure and industry. Space Policy with the overarching goal of Japan is active in a number of international seeking to implement a comprehensive strat- space fora, including the UNCOPUOS; Com- egy for space.18 It introduces a five-year mittee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS); the Group on Earth Observation 15 (GEO); or the International Charter “Space Aoki, Setsuko. “Current Status and Recent Develop- ments in Japan’s National Space Law and its Relevance to and Major Disasters”. In Asia, the most im- Pacific Rim Space Law and activities”. Journal of Space portant cooperation platform for Japan is the Law, Vol. 35 (2009): 386. Asia-Pacific Regional Space Agency Forum 16 Ibid: 388-389. 17 Ibid: 387. 18 “Wisdom of Japan Moves Space” June 2009. Secretariat 19 “Basic Plan for Space Policy”. Secretariat of Strategic of Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy, Tokyo 10 Oct. Headquarters for Space Policy, Tokyo (June 2009): 3. 2011 20 “Non-European Space Expenditures: Japan”. European
ESPI Report 40 16 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 3: Global space economy in 2010 (Source: the Space Report 2011)
(APRSAF), established in 1993. In 2005, the services are comprised of three applications: annual APRSAF meeting established a volun- Direct Broadcasting Services (DBS), Fixed tary initiative called Disaster Management satellite Services (FSS) and Mobile Satellite Support System (DMSS), for the Asia-Pacific Services (MSS). Remote sensing services region. Its pilot project is called Sentinel Asia, offer three different products: Very high followed by an Earth observation and com- Resolution (VHR) optical imagery; Medium munications system and, eventually, a com- Resolution (MR) optical imagery; and Syn- prehensive DMSS using regional satellites. thetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery. Naviga- Japan’s contribution has been its remote tion and positioning services are the third sensing satellite ALOS-1 (Daichi) and the downstream market.21 Wideband InterNetworking engineering test In 2010, the global space economy grew by and Demonstration Satellite (WINDS, or Ki- 7.7% and totalled $276.52 billion. Govern- zuna). ment spending accounted for $87.12 billion (32% of the global space economy). The U.S. government’s spending amounted to $64.63 2.3 Space Budgets billion (74% of global government spending) and non-U.S. $22.49 billion. Commercial telecommunications, Earth observation and Global Overview positioning products and services constituted the largest portion of expenditure amounting Governments play a central role in space to $102 billion (a 9% increase from 2009). activities, as they fund a large portion of the Commercial infrastructure and support indus- research and development, are the largest tries amounted to $87.39 billion (a 13% in- purchasers of space products and services, crease from 2009). Commercial space trans- and regulate private sector activities. A num- portation services totalled approximately $10 ber of challenges exist in the space business, million (see figure 3).22 including the high cost of access to space, long development cycles, and high fixed costs Although it is difficult to make precise calcu- in the upstream sector (i.e. launch services, lations concerning the military space budgets, satellite manufacturing, ground equipment and insurance), and the dual-use nature of 21 Venet, Christophe. “The Economic Dimension” in “Outer many space technologies. The downstream Space in Society, Politics and Law”, Christian Brunner and sector (i.e. user end of the space market) Alexandr Soucek, eds., Studies in Space Policy, Vol. 8, produces the highest revenue share in the SpringerWienNewYork (2011): 61-69. 22 space economy. Satellite communications „The Space Report 2011“. Space Foundation (2011): 32, 42.
ESPI Report 40 17 April 2012
Figure 4: ESA 2011 Budget by Programme (Source: ESA)23
due to national security and dual-use nature (€5.2 billion for the period 2007–2013).25 of many space programmes, it is estimated The largest national civilian space budgets in that global military space spending amounted 2011 include those of France with €720 mil- to $46 billion in 2010 with the U.S. account- lion; Germany with €460 million; Italy with ing for approximately 95% of this total (i.e. €400 million; and Spain €300 million.26 $43.7 billion). The annual value of European The EU activities are implemented by the EC. military programmes, as indicated by Euro- The EC’s 2010 budget for space-related pro- pean industry figures (with the exception of grammes was €1.33 billion, representing dual-use programmes), was $1.6 billion 0.9% of the EU’s overall €141.5 billion (€1billion) in 2008. 24 budget for 2010. The budget includes the following areas: space research with a 2010 Europe’s Space Budgets budget of €212.85 million; security research with an allocation of €215.05 million; and Government space activities in Europe are European satellite navigation programmes funded by ESA, the EU and individual Euro- with a budget of €894.04 million. The 2010 pean countries. ESA receives payments from combined appropriation of the first two areas its member states, the European Commission increased by approximately 70% over the (EC) for their programmes managed by ESA 2009 total.27 (i.e. Galileo and GMES), and other organisa- tions (e.g. Eumetsat) and so-called European The area of space research supports the de- Cooperating States. ESA’s 2010 budget was velopment of European space applications, about €3.7 billion. In 2011, fourteen of the including the Global Monitoring for Environ- ESA’s then-18 member nations agreed to ment and Security (GMES) programme. The raise their contributions and the ESA’s budget category of security research supports the increased to approximately €3.99 billion, a development of space-related technology for 6.7% increase from 2010 (see figure 4). The civil safety and security applications (e.g. 2012 budget is set at €4.02 billion (see figure man-made and natural disasters, border con- 5 and 6). trol, crisis management, etc.). The category of satellite navigation funds the European The three largest funding targets are Earth Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service observation (21% of the total 2011 budget), (EGNOS), non-autonomous infrastructure navigation (16.7% of the total 2011 budget), that improves GPS performance for European and launchers (15.3% of the total 2011 countries, and the deployment of the Galileo budget). From the member states, France system, the planned fully autonomous infra- and Germany are ESA’s largest contributors. structure with global coverage.28 The EC’s 2011 payment to ESA was about €778 million for 2011. The EU’s budget for space averages about €750 million annually 25 European Parliament. European Parliament resolution on Space and security. 2008/2030(INI) of 10 July 2008. Brussels: European Union.
ESPI Report 40 18 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 5: ESA’s 2012 Budget (Source: ESA)
Figure 6: ESA 2012 Budget per Programme (Source: ESA)
Funding of EU space programmes has been a funding of a sustainable long-term space challenging political issue for some time, now programme remains in the process of being exacerbated by the current financial crisis. configured. The stable continuation of Moreover, there are no specific indications in EGNOS/Galileo and the GMES programmes as the Lisbon Treaty concerning industrial policy operational systems beyond 2013 is closely for space system-related contracts in Europe. connected with the establishment of the Mul- ESA operates under the geographical return tiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for the model and the EU is based on open “competi- period 2014–2020, from which GMES is cur- tive dialogue”. Accordingly, a vision for the rently excluded.
ESPI Report 40 19 April 2012
Japan’s Space Budget JAXA, funded through the Ministry of Educa- tion, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Japan’s FY 2010 national space budget was (MEXT), had a budget of €1.6 billion (¥180 €3 billion (¥339 billion), a decrease of some billion), 53% of Japan’s overall space spend- 1.7% from the previous year’s €3.05 billion ing. JAXA’s request for a budget increase of (¥345 billion). The budget is distributed €1.68 billion (¥190 billion) for the fiscal year among several government ministries (see 2011 was not successful as a government table 1) under the oversight of the Cabinet- cost-cutting panel urged MEXT to keep the level Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy. budget unchanged.29
Table 1: Japan’s 2010 Space Spending (Source: the Space Report 2011)30
32 2 The main civilian space activities funded in China, Japan, France, Russia and Germany. 2010 included the Daichi Earth observation In 2010, governments spent approximately satellite, a Quasi-Zenith GPS augmentation $87.12 billion on their space programmes, a system satellite, and the new Advanced Solid third of the total global space economy (see Rocket for launching small payloads. De- table 2). The U.S. dominates the field by a fence-related expenditures included funding wide margin in terms of total institutional for Space Situational Awareness (SSA) devel- space budgets of individual countries (i.e. opment, a dedicated military telecommunica- 74% of global government space spending).33 tions satellite, research on infrared missile warning sensor technology and microsatel- lites.31 In 2009, only six countries worldwide spent more than $1 billion on space (i.e. the U.S.,
29 “Non-European Space Expenditures: Japan”. European Space Directory 2011, 26th Edition, ESD Partners: Paris (2011): 106. 30 “The Space Report 2011“. Space Foundation, Colorado 32 Venet, Christophe. “The Economic Dimension” in “Outer Springs (2011): 52. Space in Society, Politics and Law”, Christian Brunner and 31 Schrogl, Kai-Uwe, Spyros Pagkratis and Blandina Alexandr Soucek, eds., Studies in Space Policy, Vol. 8, Baranes, Eds. “Yearbook on Space Policy 2009/2010: SpringerWienNewYork (2011): 63. Space for Society”. Springer WienNewYork/European 33 “The Space Report 2011“. Space Foundation (2011): 42, Space Policy Institute: 57. 43 and 54.
ESPI Report 40 20 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Table 2: Government space budgets in 2010 (Source: the Space Report 2011)
ESPI Report 40 21 April 2012
3. Europe–Japan Space Cooperation in Select Areas
This section of the report will seek to exam- ernment support and emergence of commer- ine in some detail four select areas of space cially-developed rockets, Europe and Japan activities and how these areas could enhance will likely face increased competition in the Europe–Japan cooperation. These include: launch market. access to space and space exploration; Earth With regard to ISS-related human transpor- observation and related applications; indus- tation, Russia’s Soyuz capsules are the only try-to-industry cooperation; and space secu- means for astronauts to access the ISS for rity. It will review, in specific terms, Europe’s the foreseeable future. Concerning cargo, and Japan’s priority space activities in these after the retirement of the U.S. space shuttle, areas, including the nature of the cooperative international ISS partners have configured missions already undertaken and seek to other means to deliver cargo to the space understand better the main factors that can station with a range of smaller cargo-hauling lead to successful collaboration. vehicles from Europe, Japan and Russia. Be- yond Europe’s Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), Japan’s H-2 Transfer Vehicle (HTV) 3.1 Access to Space and and Russia’s Progress cargo hauler, NASA supports the development of privately built Space Exploration cargo vehicles, including the Space X Dragon capsule and the Cygnus cargo module devel- A prerequisite for space exploration are reli- oped by Orbital Sciences. There have also able launch systems. Launch-related activi- been proposals to adopt a common transpor- ties include production of operational launch tation policy to advance space exploration. systems and launcher development. These Under current financial constraints, it remains include systems that are primarily relevant to to be seen whether these countries would be the operations of the International Space open to such a proposal.35 Station (ISS) such as Europe’s ATV and Ja- pan’s HTV. There are a variety of capable Space exploration involves activities, manned government launch systems from the U.S., and unmanned, that investigate the Universe Russia, Europe, Japan, China and India.34 Of in order to enhance human knowledge about these countries, only Russia and China can the areas beyond Earth’s atmosphere and presently transport humans to space. Besides employ this knowledge to advance humanity. the development of launchers by govern- Space exploration had captured peoples’ ments, privately developed space transporta- imagination well before development of the tion systems (both unmanned and manned) first rockets that could enter space. Since are expected to become operational in com- 1957, satellites and robotic spacecraft have ing years, contingent on sustained public and been gathering valuable information about private funding for these ventures. The com- our Sun and solar system, as well as the pany Space X of the US, for example, is de- more distant Universe. veloping a launch vehicle called Falcon 9 and a reusable space capsule, Dragon. The com- pany conducted the first flight of Falcon 9 in 3.1.1 Launchers June 2010 and the first test flight of the The launching business is fiercely competi- Dragon spacecraft (attached to Falcon 9) in tive. Globally, institutional demand is larger December 2010. than that for commercial launches with the strongest demand coming from the U.S., All major spacefaring nations, including 36 Europe and Japan, have a strong interest in Russia and China. possessing indigenous launch capabilities and support their launcher industry. Russian, Chinese and Indian launchers also benefit 35 Svitak, Amy. “Cooperative Kerfuffle: Europe Seeking from low-wage labour. Given continued gov- Common Policy to Harmonize International Space Explora- tion Activities”. Aviation Week&Space Technology (27 June 2011): 41. 34 Koudelka, Otto. “The Technical Dimension of Space” in 36 Veclani, Anna, Sartori, Nicolò and Rosanelli, Rosa. “The Outer Space in Society, Politics and Law, Christian Brun- Challenges for European Policy on Access to Space.” 22 ner and Alexander Soucek, eds. ESPI Studies in Space Jul 2011. IAI Working Papers 1122. 7 Mar 2012 Policy, Vol 8, Vienna: SpringerWienNewYork (2011): 53.
ESPI Report 40 22 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Suppliers compete to offer the best price, Other commercial launch companies began reliability and availability of service, as well operations between 2000 and 2010, including as technology-related security. Beyond price the United Launch Alliance (ULA), Orbital and considerations, reliability of the mission is a Space X in the U.S. The ULA, a joint venture top priority. Availability and minimum delays established in 2006 by Lockheed Martin and are likewise important. In this connection, Boeing, dominates the U.S. institutional mar- the ability to launch on short notice is in- ket. It launches, on Delta II, Delta IV and creasingly important, especially for military Atlas V, the U.S. government’s heavy- and customers. Successful integration of the pay- medium-weight launches. Accordingly, the load with the launcher, and technology- company does no longer compete for com- related security is also essential. mercial launches (although it launched nine commercial missions in its five-year exis- With regard to the commercial market, the tence).38 Yet Boeing retains the right to mar- U.S. and Europe constructed robust commer- ket Delta IV commercially, as does Lockheed cial launch industries in the 1980s stimulated Martin for Atlas V. by the growth of the commercial communica- tions satellite industry. The Soviet Union en- China entered the commercial launch market tered the commercial market in 1983. in 1985 and India conducted its first com- Europe, especially France, grasped the oppor- mercial launch in 2007. Japan’s H-2 launcher tunity and established the Arianespace Cor- was considerably more expensive than coun- poration, a public-private corporation, to terpart vehicles, impeding Japan’s competi- market Ariane launches to commercial cus- tiveness. Japan was eventually able to enter tomers. In the U.S., the government offered the commercial market with its more suc- to transfer ownership of existing launchers cessful and less expensive H-2A launcher in (e.g. Delta, Atlas and Titan) to the private 2008.39 Chinese entities now compete with sector for commercial use and, at the same Europe’s Ariane 5 and America’s Atlas V and time, marketed the space shuttle (after its Delta IV. The ability of India, Brazil and first four flights) as a commercial launcher. South Korea to penetrate the commercial market is currently limited. After the 1986 Challenger accident, however, the space shuttle was prohibited from launch- Unduly optimistic projections regarding the ing commercial payloads and the Delta, Atlas growth of the telecommunications satellite and Titan manufacturers, in competition with industry resulted in an oversupply of launch Arianespace, marketed the launchers to services in the 1990s. Some 23 commercial commercial customers (The Titan attracted launches worldwide in 1997 declined to 12 an insufficient volume of commercial custom- launches in 2003, despite launch capacity of ers). almost 60. Demand today still lags behind supply.40 In the 1990s, various multinational commer- cial launch services emerged, including the In 2010, 118 payloads were carried to space International Launch Services (ILS), a U.S. on 74 orbital launches (51 non-commercial company founded in 1995 by Lockheed Mar- launches and 23 commercial launches), rep- tin to market Proton and Atlas launch ser- resenting a 5% decrease from 2009 (see vices for commercial and civil satellite pro- figure 7). It is estimated that total launch grams (which since 2006 has sold only Proton expenditures totalled some $7.35 billion (with launches and in 2008 became a subsidiary of launches to ISS amounting to some $1.98 Khrunichev); Starsem, a European-Russian billion). Russia, with 13 commercial launches entity established in 1996 by Astrium, Ari- (57% of launches) remained the leader of the anespace, the Samara Space Center (TsSKB global commercial launch market, followed by Progress) and the Russian Federal Space Europe with six Ariane 5 launches (26% of Agency to market the Soyuz commercial the global commercial market) and the U.S. launch services; and Sea Launch, founded in April 1995 as a consortium of four companies from Norway, Russia, Ukraine and the U.S. 38 “United Launch Alliance Marks Five Years of Mission (i.e. Aker Solutions, RSC-Energia, SDO Success with 56 Launches in 60 Months”. Space- Yuzhnoye/PO Yuzhmash, and Boeing Com- travel.com 8 Dec. 2011
ESPI Report 40 23 April 2012
Figure 7: Orbital launches in 2010 (Source: the Space Report 2011)
with 4 launches (17% of the global commer- Ariane 1–5, has been for more than thirty cial market). years the symbol of Europe’s autonomy for a variety of institutional and commercial mis- In the commercial launcher sector, European sions, for both civilian and military purposes launch provider Arianespace is the largest (see figure 8).42 actor in the field with revenues of more than $ 1 billion (42% of the total launch revenues) The Ariane-5 rocket now competes in the and won more than 50% of the commercial global market. As referenced above, in 2008 launch contracts worldwide over the past two and 2009, for example, Arianespace, won years. Arianespace’s CEO Jean-Yves Le Gall more than 50% of the commercial launch announced at the beginning of 2012 that the contracts worldwide.43 Arianespace also mar- company’s backlog stands at a record €4.5 kets the Russian-built Soyuz rocket launched billion ($5.9 billion) for Ariane 5 and the from Europe’s spaceport in French Guiana, as Soyuz vehicle. It includes €2.5 billion in or- well as the smaller Vega launcher. ders for commercial launches aboard the Ariane 5, a heavy-lift launcher operating Ariane 5, €1 billion for government launches since 1999, has two configurations, one for aboard the Ariane 5, and €1 billion in back launches to geostationary transfer orbit orders for Soyuz launches.41 (GTO) with the launch capacity of 10 tons and another for launches to low-Earth orbit Status of Europe’s Launchers (LEO) with the launch capacity of 20 tons. The development of launchers in Europe The latter configuration is used for the launch originated with the creation of intergovern- of the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) mental entities, the European Launcher De- cargo spacecraft to the ISS. Ariane 5 is capa- velopment Organization (ELDO) in 1962 and ble of providing a single launch or a double- the European Space Research Organisation launch (i.e. two satellites launched simulta- 44 (ESRO) in 1964. After the merger of ELDO neously). and ESRO into a newly-established European Space Agency (ESA) in 1975, the Ariane 42 launcher was developed with an inaugural Veclani, Anna, Nicolo Sartori, and Rosa Rosanelli. “The Challenges for European Policy on Access to Space”. IAI launch in 1979. Arianespace (a French com- Working Papers 11/22, Instituto Affari Internazionali (July pany) was then established to manage and 2011): 4.
ESPI Report 40 24 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Additionally, a decade ago the European EADS-Astrium and ELV are among the share- Space Agency (ESA) began the diversification holders of Arianespace. of launchers through the development of the Europe is presently debating a successor for Vega small launcher and the adaptation of the Ariane 5, known as the Next-Generation the Russian Soyuz launchers to ESA’s launch Launcher (NGL). The issue to be resolved is site in Kourou, French Guyana. These activi- whether to build another heavy-lift launcher ties took place under the auspices of the for double launches or a medium-lift launcher ESA-Russia agreement of 2005.45 The Vega for single launches. The decision on the type programme is an optional new small launcher and funding of the NGL is to be made at the programme of ESA that began in 1998, initi- next ESA Ministerial Council in 2012. Mean- ated by Italy. It is designed to place 300– while, Europe is developing the Ariane 5 Mid- 2500 kg satellites in LEO orbits. Vega’s life Evolution (ME) featuring a new, re- maiden flight took place in February 2012 ignitable upper stage that would increase the from ESA’s French Guyana spaceport. What payload-carrying capacity by about 20%. This separates Vega from most other small would enable the launch of two extra tons to launchers is that it will be able to handle a geostationary orbit, the destination of most range of payloads, from a single satellite to telecommunications satellites. The GEO mar- one main satellite plus six microsatellites. It ket is crucial for the current Ariane 5 to main- will have strong competitors in Orbital Sci- tain financial stability. The Ariane 5 ME pro- ences’ Pegasus, the Minotaur series, and the gramme received initial funding in 2008 and Russian Kosmos 3M). it is envisioned that the cost will not exceed In 1996, Europe and Russia founded the that of today’s Ariane 5 ECA, the latest ver- Starsem company to market commercial sion of the Ariane 5 launcher. The cost of the launches with the Russian Soyuz, a medium first qualification flight of the ECA version was launcher. The launches were originally con- €185 million (2003 e.c.), involving launch ducted from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in vehicle manufacturing (€130 million) and Kazakhstan and later Soyuz launch facilities operations and other costs (€55 million).48 were constructed at the Guyana Space Cen- The first launch is currently planned for 2016- tre. The European version of the Russian 2017 provided that funding is secured at the launcher Soyuz was adapted to launch satel- 2012 ESA Ministerial Council. lites up to 3.2 tons into medium-Earth orbit (MEO) and LEO, including a constellation of two or more satellites. Soyuz-ST was launched for the first time in October 2011 from the Guiana Space Centre. The European Space Agency (ESA) manages the development and production of the Ari- ane and Vega launchers. Arianespace is re- sponsible for operating the launchers and their commercialisation. The European space
industry is concentrated in a relatively small Figure 8: Ariane launchers (Source: ESA) number of companies, including in the launcher sector, where EADS Astrium Space Like other countries, Europe faces challenges Transportation is the prime contractor for concerning its future independent access to Ariane. Safran leads development of the pro- space, including the need for launcher mod- pulsion system. There are approximately 40 ernisation and the ability to compete with other European suppliers, 25 of which are 46 traditional, as well as emerging, rivals in the highly dependent on Ariane business. In the sector. Germany is, together with France, the case of Soyuz, the Russian Federal Space largest investor in Europe’s launchers. Ger- Agency is responsible for operating the many currently favours funding an upgrade of launchers and for Vega it is the Italian com- 47 the Ariane 5 ME programme over work on its pany, European Launch Vehicle (ELV) . successor rocket as it also wishes to ensure that it will receive the maximum value for its investment in the ISS, in which it holds a 45 Morring, Frank. “Aligning the Axis: France, Germany 38% share.49 France, on the other hand, is agree on ESA launcher and ISS strategy as both unveil ambitious agendas”. Aviation Week and Space Technol- ogy, Vol. 173, No. 5 (7 February 2011): 35. 48“Access to space today and tomorrow: what does Europe 46 Hayward, Keith. “The Structure and Dynamics of the need?” 16 May 2003. European Space Agency. 8 Mar. European Space Industry Base”. ESPI Perspectives 55. 2012 Vienna: European Space Policy Institute (December
ESPI Report 40 25 April 2012
pushing for the next-generation rocket envi- of 2000 a working group on RLV development sioned to be operational by 2025.50 due to the “fragmented” nature of previous European efforts in this area. The group pro- With regard to ISS-related transportation, posed a “Program for European Advanced ESA developed a highly capable expendable, Reusable Launchers” (Pearl) to coordinate the unmanned resupply spacecraft called the various efforts into a joint programme.52 Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV). It is de- signed to deliver propellant, water, air, pay- load and experiments to the ISS. Two ATV Status of Japan’s Launchers vehicles, “Jules Vernes” and “Johannes Ke- The Japanese launcher program was origi- pler”, have successfully flown to the Space nally closely linked with that of the U.S. Station (see figure 9). ESA’s second Auto- which provided Japan, based on a 1969 Ex- mated Transfer Vehicle (ATV) was launched change of Notes between the two countries, from Kourou, French Guiana, to the ISS in access to U.S. technology in exchange for February 2011. The ATV-2 was a vital part of control over its use. Accordingly, Japan’s the Station’s post-shuttle era supply chain, launch vehicles N-1 (1975-1982), N-2 (1981- together with Japan’s H-2 Transfer Vehicle 1987), and H-1 (1986-1992) were developed (HTV) and Russia’s Progress. The third ATV, through licenses of American technology and named “Edoardo Amaldi”, is to be launched served as Japan’s primary platforms until the 51 to the ISS in the first half of 2012. Two mid-1980s. A decision was made to develop more ATVs are expected to be flown by 2015. the next generation vehicle, the H-2, indige- As Europe is currently not contemplating its nously with an ability to bring a two-ton pay- own manned spaceflight capability, it is look- load to a geostationary orbit. Accordingly, ing for best ways of capitalising on their in- whereas the H-1 was a license-built version vestment in the ATV. of the U.S. Delta rocket, the H-2, H-2A, and H-2B are entirely Japanese in design and construction.53 The first solely Japanese rocket, the H-2, was successfully launched in 1994. It turned out to be costly and experienced a high failure rate when launched during the 1990s.54 Due to these technical issues, the H-2 was aban- doned in 1999 for the development of a much more capable version, the H-2A, launched for the first time in 2001. The H-2A serves as Japan’s current launch vehicle. The rocket can carry up to four tons to geosynchronous orbit. Although the core vehicle is similar to the H-2, the H-2A uses new boosters (solid and liquid) to improve payload performance. In 2007, H-2A rockets were transferred from JAXA to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI)
Figure 9: Automated Transfer Vehicle (Source: ESA) which successfully conducted its first com- mercial launch of a private communications With regard to reusable launch vehicle devel- satellite, Superbird-7, in August 2008. In opment (RLV), the French space agency January 2009, MHI concluded a contract for CNES proposed a Hermes spaceplane for the the commercial launch of a Korean satellite, first time in 1975. In 1985, France offered to the Kompsat-3. Although the production and develop Hermes under the auspices of ESA as management of the H-2A rocket has been part of a manned space flight programme (to privatised, the government is active in the be launched on Ariane 5). Although the pro- development and use of the new launcher, ject was approved in 1987 and the pre- the H-2B (see figure 10). development phase took place in 1988-1990, the project was cancelled in 1992 due to the funding issues. ESA established in the spring
52 Morring, Frank. “Europe and Japan Have RLV Research
ESPI Report 40 26 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 10: Japan’s Launch Vehicles H-2A and H-2B (Source: Society of Japanese Aerospace Companies55)
The H-2A’s successor, the H-2B, uses a lar- Aeronautical Science (ISAS). The first two ger first stage than the H-2A and is also successful launches were conducted in 1997 equipped with larger propellant tanks. The H- and 1998, with a third failed launch in 2000. 2B rocket was built to carry Japan’s expend- This was followed by three more successful able cargo transporter to the ISS. Both sys- flights (including a launch of Hayabusa in tems were built by MHI. The Japan Aerospace 2003). The initial version, known as E-X, is Exploration Agency (JAXA) and MHI plan to estimated to cost some ¥21 billion ($270 upgrade the H-2A and H-2B rockets to im- million) to develop and ¥3.8 billion to launch. prove their performance and enhance their In comparison, the M-5 cost approximately competitiveness on the commercial launch ¥8 billion per launch. The E-X is slated to market. The first launch of the so-called H-2A launch 1.2 metric tons to LEO and its im- Upgrade is planned for early 2013. The proved version, the E-1 (with a first flight launcher upgrade corresponds with the Basic currently scheduled for 2017) should carry Plan for Space Policy that calls for improved 100 kg more than the E-X (see table 3). The commercial competitiveness and better per- estimated development cost for the E-1 is formance and safety of the H-2A.56 about ¥10 billion.57 JAXA’s Epsilon space transportation develop- ment program, conducted by IHI Aerospace, is due for an initial launch in 2013. It is de- signed to be a successor to the M-5 rocket. The M-5 (also known as Mu-5) was a solid- fuel rocket designed to launch scientific satel- lites operating in the years 1997–2006. It was developed by the Institute of Space and
55 „Data Information of Aircraft and Space“. Society of Japanese Aerospace Companies: 30.
ESPI Report 40 27 April 2012
Table 3: Epsilon Launch Vehicle Launch Capacity (Source: JAXA48)
Figure 11: Japan’s HTV (Source: JAXA)
Japan’s H-2 Transfer Vehicle (HTV) is an un- automatically at the ISS, the HTV has to be manned cargo transfer spacecraft about 10 grabbed by the robotic arm “Canadaarm 2”, meters long and 4.4 meters wide that can the Space Station Remote Manipulator Sys- deliver supplies to the ISS weighing up to tem (SSRMS) which berths it to the ISS (see 59 6,000 kg. 5 The HTV is launched from the figure 11). JAXA spent approximately $680 Tanegashima Space Center on an H-2B million to develop the HTV spacecraft.60 The launcher. Unlike the automated cargo vehi- first HTV (HTV-1) arrived at the ISS in Sep- cles of Russia and Europe which can dock tember 2009 delivering five tons of cargo.
58 http://www.jaxa.jp/projects/rockets/epsilon/design_e.html 60 Malik, Tariq. “Japan’s First Space Cargo Ship Ready to 59 “HTV (H-II Transfer Vehicle)”. Mitsubishi Heavy Indus- Fly“. Space News (7 September 2009) tries website.
ESPI Report 40 28 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 12: HTV Components (Source: JAXA51)
The HTV-2, also called Kounotori-2 was suc- can, therefore, carry larger objects.65 (e.g. 62 66 cessfully launched in January 2011. 6 experiment devices). Among the unmanned cargo-carrying space- Japan also studied reusable launch vehicle craft (i.e. Russia’s Progress and ESA’s ATV), (RLV) concepts and the Japan’s former space the HTV is the only vehicle capable of carry- agency, NASDA, initiated the H-2 Orbiting ing both pressurised and unpressurised cargo Plane (HOPE) program. The programme was (see figure 12). The Unpressurized Logistic moved through a series of developmental Carrier (UPLC) has an Exposed Pallet that can steps and progressed though two major test be directly taken out to space and replace beds, the HYFLEX (Hypersonic Flight Experi- used experiment devices. The HTV’s cargo ment), which consisted of a lifting body air- capacity is smaller than that of the ATV, but craft used to study hypersonic flight following has a larger (square) 1.2x1.2 m2 hatch and launch from a rocket booster, and the ALFLEX can, therefore, carry larger objects.63 (e.g. (Automatic Landing Flight Experiment), which experiment devices).64 consisted of a 1:3 model of the HOPE space plane performing automated landing tests. Among the unmanned cargo-carrying space- The Japanese government, however, cut the craft (i.e. Russia’s Progress and ESA’s ATV), HOPE budget significantly in 1997 and Mitsu- the HTV is the only vehicle capable of carry- bishi Heavy Industries, the prime contractor ing both pressurised and unpressurised cargo for the Hope-X, dropped most of its research (see figure 12). The Unpressurized Logistic in the field of RLV development in 2001, and Carrier (UPLC) has an Exposed Pallet that can focused on preparing the then-new H-2A be directly taken out to space and replace expendable launch vehicle for its first flight.67 used experiment devices. The HTV’s cargo capacity is smaller than that of the ATV, but JAXA has explored other designs for an un- has a larger (square) 1.2x1.2 m2 hatch and manned cargo return vehicle capable of re- turning supplies from the ISS. Three different designs are being contemplated: equipping the HTV with a small capsule; equipping the HTV with a 2.6 meter diameter capsule simi- 61“Overview of the Kounotori(HTV)”. Japan Aerospace lar to Soyuz return spacecraft; or remodelling Exploration Agency website. HTV’s cargo are to create a large capsule of
ESPI Report 40 29 April 2012
measuring 4x3.8 meters. The two latter op- launch dates for commercial satellites.70 This tions would have an advantage of the possi- was a step toward a genuine cooperative bility of converting them into manned space- venture, as Arianespace would market the H- craft. The first HTV-R could be launched be- 2A launchers and, in return, gain better mis- tween 2016 and 2018.68 sion assurance. Although no backup mission has, as yet, taken place, this agreement has Europe–Japan Space Transportation Coopera- been viewed as a useful model. From the tion beginning, both partners – Europe repre- sented by Arianespace and Japan represented As evident by the referenced European and by NASDA – agreed that such cooperation is Japanese programmes in the area of space technically feasible and beneficial for both launchers, there have been a number of partners. comparable programmes and goals, espe- cially the Hermes–HOPE, Ariane 5–H-2A, and The European Space Agency (ESA), the Japa- ATV–HTV. At the same time, there has been nese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, relatively little done to expand Europe-Japan Science and Technology (MEXT), Arianespace cooperation at a governmental level. and Japan's JAXA space agency have been working together to broaden this accord. Industry has been at the forefront of promot- Japanese companies have launched a number ing better business relations in the launcher of satellites with Arianespace, including B- sector. Arianespace–Japan relations go back SAT Corporation, JSAT (the largest satellite to the company’s establishment of a Tokyo operator in Asia), and the Space Communica- office in 1985 and launch of the first Japa- tions Corporation (SCC). The main question is nese commercial satellite in 1989. That year, whether to extend a backup agreement for all Arianespace offered Japan an Ariane-4/H-2 missions, commercial and government. Al- back-up agreement. Although Japan was not though there were agreements between ESA ready to accept such an undertaking at that and MEXT on the possibility of mutual time, a “commonality study” was launched launches under the condition that national under a general cooperation agreement be- launchers remain a priority, such launches tween NASDA and CNES. never materialised due to availability of na- In 2003, Arianespace signed a mutual backup tional launchers. Today, all government agreement for commercial satellite launches launches in Europe and Japan are conducted with Japan’s MHI and Boeing Launch Services with domestic launch capabilities, on Ariane 5 in the U.S. The agreement among Ari- in Europe and on H-2A in Japan. anespace, Boeing Launch Services and MHI Longer term, however, both Europe and Ja- established the Launch Services Alliance pan should consider the potential benefits of (LSA) that involved the Ariane 5 launcher, a major back-up agreement at a governmen- the H-2A launcher and Sea Launch. Prior to tal level to take the existing agreement to a this agreement, Arianespace had been nego- new level. Such a decision cannot be made tiating compatibility issues with MHI since the by commercial entities, but must be based on 1990s to enable an equivalent mounting sys- high-level policy decisions in Europe and Ja- tem and flight environment for Arianespace’s pan. clients. Such cooperation results in risk- reduction for both partners as it increases the Space development, including launcher tech- launch provider’s reliability. The backup nology, is a long-haul, costly endeavour. agreement does not involve manufacturing.69 Accordingly, although privatisation of the launch business is viable, the development After the bankruptcy of the Sea Launch, in has, thus far, been lead by governments. 2006 Arianespace and MHI signed an agree- There is also the reality that both Europe and ment which combines the satellite launch Japan will most likely continue to seek offerings for Ariane 5 and the H-2A and both autonomous launching capabilities. At the companies can jointly propose launch ser- same time, both Europe and Japan are now vices with the flexibility of launching a satel- debating their next generation launcher, the lite on either of the two vehicles to guarantee Ariane 6 in Europe and H-X in Japan. These debates inevitably include not only the launchers themselves, but also their opera-
68 tion and services (i.e. the launch site-related “JAXA Improving Plans for Unmanned Cargo Spacecraft issues). This creates a common window of To Bring Back Supplies from ISS [The Mainichi Daily News]“. Space News 16 August 2010
ESPI Report 40 30 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
opportunity to consider bolder cooperative benefits of a back-up agreement for gov- undertakings in the space transportation ernment launches. It would be especially arena. relevant if both governments are con- templating man-rated rockets. Relevant recommendations appear below: • More affordable human access to space through collaboration: Europe is cur- 3.1.2 Space Exploration rently deciding on an Ariane 5 successor, Prior to space travel and the technological known as the Next-Generation Launcher tools to study it, scholars, searched the skies (NGL) or Ariane 6. Europe is also devel- and stars to better understand our place in oping the Ariane 5 Midlife Evolution (ME). the universe. Galileo’s discoveries by the use In Japan’s case, JAXA and MHI plan to of a telescope, including identification of cra- upgrade the H-2A and H-2B rockets to ters and mountains on the moon and spots improve their performance and enhance on the surface of the Sun, constituted the their competitiveness on the commercial beginning of “frontier research“.71 Space launch market. The first launch of the so- exploration, enabled by astronomy and space called H-2A Upgrade is planned for early technology, is a driver for innovation, devel- 2013. The development of the Ariane 6 opment of new technologies and source of and Japan’s next flagship launch vehicle, new scientific discoveries. It requires high- H-X, are going to be costly, long-term level political support at a global level. The endeavours. Accordingly, Europe and Ja- Apollo program succeeded in landing humans pan could contemplate to expand consid- on another celestial body six times and paved erably cooperation with regard to the the way for future such endeavours. The next launch vehicle of each side to re- main discussion is how cooperation, unlike duce cost, strengthen industrial coopera- the competition of the Apollo days, can tion and share promising, non-strategic achieve the next milestones for future explo- technologies for mutual benefit. ration, including human missions to the • Consider cooperation on a joint return Moon, asteroids, Mars and beyond. manned vehicle: ESA and EADS con- Space exploration, as agreed by many, needs ducted a feasibility study concerning the to be an international undertaking given the development of a re-entry capsule for required funds, expertise, technology and the ATV, an ATV Return Vehicle (ARV). It need for long-term vision and commitment. was envisioned as the basis for develop- The United States has been at the forefront ing either a cargo return capacity or a of space exploration since the beginning of manned version of the ATV, but never the Space Age. More recently the U.S. civilian materialised. In 2011, ESA announced space programme had to face a number of the possibility of collaborating with NASA challenges, including the retirement of the on an ATV successor, involving the NASA space shuttle and cancellation of the Constel- MPCV capsule. In 2010, Japan, for the lation program. This stimulated a debate in first time, began to study plans for a Europe concerning potential downsides con- manned space vehicle. An improved ver- nected to reliance on any one country as the sion of HTV-R would serve as the plat- main decision-maker on future exploration form for a manned Japanese spacecraft undertakings. for the ISS. Such vehicles, however, are costly and complicated and require a Space exploration has also been symptomatic clear strategic goal and political vision of the intense competition between national concerning the benefits. Given the suc- and commercial interests, ideologies and cess of the ATV and HTV and more re- motivations. No human being has travelled cent ideas to build a return vehicle, both beyond Earth orbits since the Apollo days. Europe and Japan should consider care- Accordingly, policy-makers worldwide face fully the prospect of collaborating on a the challenge of making crucial decisions joint return man-rated spacecraft. concerning the long-term destiny of human space travel. This involves deciding how they • Contemplate the benefits of a backup will distribute funds for the often rugged and agreement for government launches: uneven path of humans in space as well as Currently, all government launches in robotic missions to advance space science. Europe and Japan are conducted by do- mestic launch capabilities, on the Ariane The International Space Station (ISS), a 5- 5 in Europe and on H-2A in Japan. Ari- partner project, is the largest-ever space anespace and MHI have in place a backup agreement for commercial mis- 71 Lago, Maria Teresa. “Knowledge: Understanding Our sions. Taking the long view, Europe and Place in the Universe” in “Threats, Risks and Sustainability Japan should consider the potential – Answers by Space”, Schrogl, Kai-Uwe at al. Vienna: Springer (2009): 25-26.
ESPI Report 40 31 April 2012
Figure 13: International Space Station (Source: Merriam-Webster73)
cooperation programme that followed eight sion; a global partnership; and inspiration other space stations launched into a low and education. Earth orbit since 1971.72 In the middle of the The document also called for the establish- last decade of the 20th century, some 500 ment of a voluntary, non-binding interna- people from 30 different countries had flown tional coordination body, named the Interna- to space. At that time, the U.S. and Russia tional Space Exploration Coordination Group possessed human-rated launch capability. (ISECG), which would facilitate the interac- Today it is Russia and China. The ISS enables tion on mutual interests, plans and objectives a range of research-related activities, includ- with regard to space exploration. The main ing in the field of biomedical, psychological purpose of this body is the overall improve- and sociological research; space science; ment of both individual exploration pro- solar and space physics; solar system explo- grammes and collective initiatives.74 Since its ration; exploration of the universe; micro- inception, the Group has been releasing An- gravity research; and Earth observation. Par- nual Reports outlining the main achievements ticipating countries are presently seeking the of previous years, as well as highlighting the optimal use of the now-completed Station exploration activities of participating agen- (see figure 13). cies. In 2008, the Group established an In- Beyond the ISS, international coordination ternational Standards Working Group now exists concerning key exploration priori- (ISWG), later renamed the International Ar- ties for the future. In 2006, fourteen major chitecture Working Group (IAWG), the task of space agencies, ESA, Australia, Canada, which was to identify a lunar exploration ar- China, Germany, France, India, Italy, Japan, chitecture that would enable extensive inter- Republic of Korea, Russia, Ukraine, United national cooperation based on an “open ar- Kingdom, and the United States sought to chitecture” environment.75 map future robotic and human space explora- In 2010 the IAWG published a document tion within the Solar System. They worked entitled the “ISECG Reference Architecture out a set of main space exploration themes for Human Lunar Exploration”. It lays out that were introduced in a May 2007 docu- how space-faring nations can collaborate on ment entitled “The Global Exploration Strat- complex human exploration scenarios that egy: the Framework for Coordination”. The involve using assets of various space agen- themes included: new knowledge in science cies. It has been recognised as a concrete and technology; sustained presence – ex- step in materialising a Global Exploration tending human frontiers; economic expan- Strategy where the Moon is a key destination for future human exploration and involves
72 The ISS predecessors were the Salyut 1, Skylab, Sa- 74 “International Space Exploration Coordination Group”. lyuts 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, and Mir. International Space Exploration Coordination Group web- 73 “International Space Station”. Merriam-Webster, visual site.
ESPI Report 40 32 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 14: Exploration scenarios involving Lagrange Points, Moon, Near-earth Asteroids and Mars (Source: NASA76)
continuous robotic and human exploration goals and objectives; long-range human ex- activity in multiple locations on that celestial ploration scenarios; and coordination of ex- body. The document also suggested that the ploration preparatory activities. The latter is Moon Architecture can also serve as a model to facilitate understanding of how near-term for different destinations, including Near- decisions of individual agencies influence Earth Objects (NEO), Lagrange points, and long-range exploration scenarios.79 Mars and its satellites (see figure 14).77 The ISS serves as a model for the govern- In September 2011, the ISECG prepared a ance of the Global Exploration Road Map. new Global Exploration Road Map. It builds International partners would be responsible on the Group’s lunar architecture work. The for “critical path” hardware, now that the evolving 25-year strategy lays out pathways Obama Administration has cancelled the Con- to Mars via the Moon or a near-Earth asteroid stellation program. There are also ideas for (see figure 15).78 The Road Map offers a the ISS serving as a test-bed for advanced framework for inter-agency discussions con- life support and other technologies needed sisting of three main elements: common for exploration beyond the low-Earth orbit (LEO).80
76 Olson, John. “The Big Picture: Space Explora- Europe’s Space Exploration Activities tion&Operations Planning, Integration and Partnerships”. PPT Presentation at the Human Space Exploration Com- Transatlantic cooperation drove the begin- munity workshop, San Diego 14-16 November 2011. nings of human spaceflight activities in
ESPI Report 40 33 April 2012
Figure 15: Optional Routes to Mars in an ISECG’s Global Exploration Road Map (Source: ISECG)
lumbus Laboratory, the contribution of ESA to Level in 1985 and 1987 and participation in the Space Station Freedom and the Interna- the International Space Station (ISS), and tional Space Station. Today, the debate in the development of Hermes and a Man- Europe focuses on how to promote explora- Tender Free Flyer (the latter two did not ul- tion and human spaceflight through “interde- timately materialise).83 In 2001, Europe’s pendence and partnership”.81 Aurora programme outlined the possibility of exploration of the Moon, Mars and the plane- In the debate concerning why Europe should tary system. The Aurora Programme is part engage in space activities, including explora- of Europe’s strategy for space exploration, tion, two main justifications can be distin- technology innovation, and inspiration to guished: one anchored in pragmatism (also encourage young students and scholars to labelled “utilitarian”), and a more visionary study science and technology. The main tar- and abstract one (also labelled “trans- get of the Aurora has been to establish a utilitarian”). Pragmatic arguments focus long-term European plan for exploration (ro- mainly on tangible benefits, including eco- botic and human) of the solar system, as well nomic progress, development of new tech- as the search for life beyond the Earth.84 nologies, job creation, and space applica- tions. The trans-utilitarian debate involves Although Europe does not possess an inde- the benefits of greater understanding of our pendent human space transportation capabil- solar system and the Universe, as well as ity, it trains a European astronaut corps and conquering new frontiers. Often times, how- actively participates in the ISS with the Co- ever, arguments from both sides a spectrum lumbus module and the Automated Transfer are required to inspire support and funding of Vehicle (ATV). Aurora involves two sizable space activities. This is also true for the hu- missions, the ESA ExoMars programme and man spaceflight.82 Space systems not only Mars sample return. ESA’s highly successful enable expanding human knowledge about Mars Express mission was launched in 2003 our planet and the Universe, but also contrib- and will be operational until 2014. The scien- ute to human progress and enable new op- tific payload of the Mars Express comprises erational services for the benefit of people surface and subsurface instruments, atmos- worldwide. It also enables scientific advances pheric/ionospheric measurement devices, and which drive the development of new tech- High Resolution Stereo Camera delivering nologies, thus supporting Europe’s competi- images of Mars. ESA also participated in an tiveness in global markets. international study called “Mars500” that conducted full duration stimulation of a Europe aspired to become the third one, after manned flight to Mars in 2010–2011. the U.S. and Russia, to gain the ability to send a human into space as evident by the Funding of space exploration projects is es- plans adopted by ESA Council at Ministerial pecially challenging at a time when European countries are dealing with the financial crisis.
81 Agenda 2015: A Document by the ESA Director Gen- eral“. Paris: European Space Agency (November 2011): 83 Schrogl, Kai-Uwe. “The Political Context for Human 11. Space Exploration” in Humans in Outer Space – Interdisci- 82 Schrogl, Kai-Uwe. “The Political Context for Human plinary Perspectives, Ulrike Ladfester, Nina-Louisa Re- Space Exploration” in Humans in Outer Space – Interdisci- muss, Kai-Uwe Schrogl, and Jean-Claude Worms (eds.). plinary Perspectives, Ulrike Landfester, Nina-Louisa Re- Vienna: SpringerWienNewYork (2011): 7-8. muss, Kai-Uwe Schrogl, and Jean-Claude Worms (eds.). 84 “European Space Exploration Programme Aurora”. ESA Vienna: SpringerWienNewYork (2011): 3-9. website. < http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Aurora/index.html>.
ESPI Report 40 34 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Accordingly, European countries seek ways …; and enabling economic expansion and new how to expand their existing cooperation, as business opportunities”.86 well as how to better leverage international The Third Conference on Space Exploration in partnerships. Europe took the initiative to Lucca was called the First High-Level Interna- organise international conferences on explo- tional Exploration Platform to demonstrate an ration in 2009 in Prague and 2010 in Brus- evolution from deliberations that placed em- sels, followed by a third conference in Lucca, phasis on Europe, to a global perspective. Italy, in November 2011. The nature of the The Declaration emphasised the need for an conferences evolved from being mainly Euro- international exchange that would support centric to active involvement of international space exploration efforts worldwide, including partners. Accordingly, the third conference the implementation of the ISECG’s Global sought to transform the proceedings into a Exploration Roadmap.87 high-level global discussion. In March 2011, the ESA Council approved The Second International Conference on funding for the International Space Station Space Exploration in Brussels in October (ISS) through 2020 in the amount of € 550 2010 was co-organised by the Belgian Presi- million for Europe’s share of station opera- dency of the EU, the European Commission, tions, logistics and transportation using the Italy (as the Chair of the ESA Ministerial Automated Transportation Vehicle (ATV). Council) and ESA. Many of the conference Overall, Europe is to spend some € 4 billion participants emphasised the need for Europe on the Station in the period 2008–2020.88 to take immediate steps to assure that Europe maintains a significant role in future Europe was the lead advocate for extending space exploration. The main areas of discus- ISS funding until 2020, in part, to gain an sion were: technologies as enablers for space adequate return on its investment in the exploration; space transportation for explora- European Programme for Life and Physical tion (i.e. secure and reliable access to Sciences (Elips) that takes advantage of mi- space); exploitation of the International crogravity for a variety of research projects. Space Station (ISS) as a platform for further ESA receives 75 hours of crew time for sci- exploration; international high-level coopera- ence every six months and can expand it by tion; and specific actions for Europe.85 30-50% through collaboration with other partners. Europe has nine User Support & In November 2011, representatives from 28 Operation Centers (USOCs) where scientists countries met in Italy for the Third Interna- can oversee experiments on the ISS. The tional Conference on Exploration. The so- USOCs receive information through the Co- called “Lucca Declaration”, endorsed at the lumbus Control Centre in Oberpfaffenhofen meeting, emphasised that space exploration (Germany) which oversees the laboratory’s provides a direct benefit to humankind and operations.89 that achieving sustainable space exploration will depend on the intensity of high-level, The European Commission (EC) stated in its structured policy dialogue. The benefits in- 2011 Communication, entitled “Toward a clude “fuelling future discoveries; addressing Space Strategy for the European Union that global challenges in space and on Earth Benefits its Citizens”, that Europe “is not through the use of innovative technology; making the most of its potential because its creating global partnerships by sharing chal- actions are too piecemeal and because of the lenging and peaceful goals; inspiring society lack of linkage between space exploration and the political, economic and social chal- lenges” that Europe faces. Accordingly, it emphasises: the development of critical tech- nologies (cross-sectoral); working more
85 Actions for Europe included: examining the feasibility of 86 “Declaration of the Third International Conference on a European space exploration strategy building on existing exploration and First meeting of High-level International competences, strengths and priorities; supporting the Space Exploration Platform”. Lucca 10 Nov. 2011 extension of ISS at least until 2020 and strive for its exploi-
ESPI Report 40 35 April 2012
closely on the International Space Station Within Kibo, JAXA controls half of the re- (ISS); assuring independent access to space; sources and NASA the other half, based on and the development a high-level interna- U.S.-supplied services such as power from tional platform to facilitate international co- the Station’s solar arrays. The Japanese operation through strengthening the political module is equipped with four science racks dimension of this endeavour.90 The Lucca inside and three more experiments racks Conference of November 2011 is a concrete outside on the exposed facility. It includes an manifestation of these efforts. astronomical camera called the Monitor of All- sky X-ray Image, an external mount to gauge Japan’s Space Exploration Activities the effects of the space environment on a variety of materials, hardware called the JAXA is guided by its 20-year plan released in Space Environment Data Acquisition Equip- March 2005 entitled “JAXA Vision 2025” that ment-Attached Payload, and a Superconduct- envisions world-class status for JAXA in aero- ing Cub-millimetre-wave Limb-Emission nautics and space science, security, infra- Sounder which has already finished its obser- structure and industry. It also places signifi- vation and will be replaced by a high-energy cant emphasis on lunar exploration. The U.S. space observatory. JAXA not only promotes has been Japan’s leading space partner. scientific research in Kibo, but also in-orbit Based on a decision by U.S. President George activities in the humanities and social sci- W. Bush to build a lunar base by about 2020 ences, including dance and visual art possible with the assistance of international partners only in microgravity. Japan’s government and use it for the human exploration of Mars, called Kibo the “gateway to ISS in Asia” and Japan has actively engaged with other space- seeks to accommodate non-Japanese Asian faring nations to develop an architecture for participants through JAXA’s “Kibo Utilization lunar exploration. Office for Asia”. The APRSAF has established Like Europe, Japan wants to extend the utili- a task force to plan joint ISS utilisation mis- 93 sation of the ISS at least until 2020. JAXA sions. controls 12.8% of the ISS capacity under the The Japanese scientific gear on the ISS con- government-to-government barter arrange- sists of: the Saibo Rack carrying the Cell Bi- ments that govern ISS operations. With the ology Experiment Facility and a clean bench retirement of the Space Shuttle, also Japan for handling life-science materials; the Ko- depends on Russia’s Soyuz crew capsules to bairo Rack with the Gradient Heat Furnace for deliver astronauts to the ISS. Currently, Ja- materials processing; and the Ryutai Rack pan’s Kounotori, second H-2 Transfer Vehicle with the Fluid Physics Experiment Facility; the (HTV-2), can deliver cargo to the ISS. Over Image Processing Unit; the Solution Crystalli- time, Japan may well wish to have its own zation Observation Facility; and the Protein 91 capability to fly astronauts to space. Crystallization Research Facility (PCRF). The The Japanese Kibo laboratory (meaning last facility advances research on medications “hope” in Japanese), also called the Japanese for Alzheimer’s disease and influenza. Al- Experiment Module (JEM), is the largest and though Japan can carry its own materials to most flexible module on the ISS, including an the ISS on the HTV, it relies on Russia to get outside “porch” for exposed experiments, a its experiments back to Earth. To retrieve robotic arm and airlock to move gear in and space-grown crystals from the PCRF to Earth, out of the pressurised volume, and an “attic” for example, Japan concluded a bilateral for storage. The Kibo laboratory was the first agreement with Russia to share its protein significant piece of Japanese hardware to be crystal growth equipment in exchange for incorporated into the ISS. It was launched to transport to and from the station in Russian 94 the ISS by the Space Shuttle in 2008 and vehicles. 2009 and can accommodate up to four crew Japan’s space science programme focuses, 92 members. among other activities, on lunar research and planetary science through the following pro- jects: PLANET-C (a Venus exploration mis- 90 “Towards a Space Strategy for the European Union that sion), BepiColombo (a Mercury exploration Benefits its Citizens”. Brussels: European Commission mission jointly planned with ESA), Hayabusa Communication COM (2011) 152 (4 April 2011):7-8.
ESPI Report 40 36 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 16: JAXA’s Roadmap for Exploration (Source: JAXA)95
(an asteroid explorer), and Kaguya (a lunar Mission in ESA’s long-term space science explorer to acquire data necessary for the programme. The goal is to rendezvous with development of technology for future moon Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko in exploration). JAXA also conducts research on 2014. The mission is expected to be com- space plasma, X-rays and infrared rays, and pleted in 2015. On its 10-year journey to the various space technologies (e.g. electric pro- comet, the spacecraft has passed close to pulsion, solar electric sail, lunar-planetary two asteroids: 2867 Steins (in 2008) and 21 exploration rovers and reusable transporta- Lutetia (in 2010). The long mission duration tion systems) .96 has required the introduction of extended hibernation periods.97 Japan’s Hayabusa mis- Cooperation in Space Exploration sion was launched to asteroid Itokawa in 2003, stayed three months at the 500-m Exploring the universe requires highly reliable large asteroid in 2005, and brought back the components and protection of delicate elec- samples from the surface of the asteroid in tronics and mechanics from the harsh space 2010. JAXA hopes to launch a Hayabusa-2 environment. For long-duration probes that asteroid sample-return mission in 2014 and can take years, or even decades, autono- would reach its target in 2019 and return to mous operations is an essential element. Earth in 2020. Hayabusa-2 is to visit 1999 Europe and Japan, through the ESA–JAXA JU3, a 920-meter-diameter object similar to partnership, have demonstrated that both Itokawa. The project is to receive $38 million sides share similar visions for their research (¥3 billion) budget for FY 2012.98 and development. These include, for exam- ple, the Rosetta and Hayabusa missions. The Decisions made during times of economic Rosetta Mission, approved in November uncertainty will play a significant role in de- 1993, represents the Planetary Cornerstone
97 “Rosetta: Summary”. ESA website. 95 Sato, Naoki. “JAXA Status of Exploration and Human
ESPI Report 40 37 April 2012
termining the future of space exploration. panded cooperation on a non-scientific pro- Many people assert that international coop- ject such as human space exploration. Ar- eration in space exploration is essential and guably, for the best results, Europe and Ja- Europe and Japan have a number of opportu- pan would decide to enhance their coordina- nities to engage in close dialogue concerning tion on key positions prior to multilateral and possible future joint endeavours. other gatherings as their joint interventions could prove more persuasive than uncoordi- BepiColombo is a joint mission of ESA and nated solely national positions. Another bene- JAXA, executed under ESA’s leadership. The fit of a more unified position on select priority project was re-affirmed in November 2009 by issues would likely improve the possibility of the Science Program Committee (SPC) which placing such items on the agendas of relevant sets Europe’s space science agenda based on official and other fora. the ESA budget. The project received re- affirmation despite much larger costs for ESA Relevant recommendations appear below: than originally envisioned. BepiColombo is a • Continue to strengthen cooperative ef- mission to Mercury planned for departure in forts in space exploration: The global 2014 and arrival in 2020. The mission is space community is at a watershed, hav- comprised of two spacecraft: the Mercury ing to decide whether to truly pursue Planetary Orbiter (MPO) and the Mercury space exploration, and if so whether this Magnetospheric Orbiter (MMO). would be in a coordinated or competitive Astro H, an X-ray astronomy mission initiated fashion. By coordinating well and early by the Institute of Space and Astronautical Europe and Japan can help set the Science of JAXA, will provide unique meas- agenda for the long-term future in this urements in a number of fields such as the domain. structure of the Universe and its evolution, • Seek to forge a joint vision for space ex- extreme conditions of the Universe, dark ploration and support the high-level in- matter and dark energy. Astro-H is the sixth ternational platform/forum established in X-ray astronomy mission developed by November 2011 in Lucca, Italy: Europe ISAS/JAXA. Astro-H is to be launched in 2014 and Japan should seek common ways to on H-2A launcher. JAXA invited ESA to ap- maintain the positive momentum created point three European members to the Astro-H by the Third International Space Confer- Mission Science Working Group (SWG) which ence and first high-level international will provide guidance through the mission platform/forum that took place in Lucca, execution. This mission can also be perceived Italy, in November 2011, including ef- as a precursor to the International X-ray Ob- forts to shape the policy issues for the servatory/Athena mission proposed in the next string of meetings. framework of ESA’s Cosmic Vision program.99 Space science cooperation is one of the areas • Strengthen arguments for space explora- that has a strong foundation and will continue tion by including the benefits of such ac- in the future. A joint ESA-JAXA mission tivity for the overall domestic and foreign (SPICA), a JAXA-led astronomical missions policies of Europe and Japan: Existing bi- with ESA contribution (through the provision lateral policy exchanges should include of the cryogenic telescope assembly), is cur- on their agenda a full evaluation of how rently being discussed (see figure 17). space exploration promotes economic growth through scientific and technologi- Space exploration will always have a strong cal progress, innovation and competi- human dimension. In the near term, ESA and tiveness. It should also explore how JAXA can explore new angles of bilateral co- greater social prosperity can be ad- operation with respect to ISS operation and vanced through joint space-related re- utilisation. Moreover, active exchanges of search and undertakings (including in the information and coordination of architectural area of life sciences, joint robotic mis- studies for future space exploration should be sions, etc.), and enhanced ISS coopera- pursued. ESA and Japan can also explore tion, including joint space transportation. ways to develop the robotic possibilities. Ro- Space exploration is also an iconic hu- botic missions to other planets deliver precise man endeavour, with geopolitical signifi- in-situ data and can reach far-away destina- cance (as demonstrated by the Chinese tions. Certain dimensions of exploration, posture), and engenders all the scientific however, can only be delivered by humans. benefits of basic research. A debate needs to be stimulated at a senior policy level concerning the prospects of ex-
99 “The Astro-H Mission”
ESPI Report 40 38 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 17: History of Japanese and European Infrared Astronomy Missions (Source: JAXA)100
ter management. It will also review briefly commercial EO-related activities. 3.2 Earth Observation and Space-based assets have been recognised as indispensable in providing essential data for Related Applications environmental research, disaster manage- ment, security and related political decision- Space-based Earth observation (EO) is capa- making. EO satellites play a special role in bility increasingly recognised as having global cooperation as evidenced by the existence of importance. For example, during the devas- EO-related organisations such as the Com- tating 3/11 earthquake of 2011 in Japan, 14 mittee on Earth Observation Satellites different countries were able to deliver as (CEOS) and the Group on Earth Observation many as 5,000 images of the affected areas (GEO). Other efforts include, the European from 27 different satellites, which provided Space Agency’s (ESA) Climate Change Initia- crucial information to accelerate rescue and tive (CCI) and the International Charter, 101 recovery missions. “Space and Major Disasters” (initiated by ESA The following section of the report will focus and CNES after UNISPACE III in 1999). The on EO as it relates to the environment, in- CCI seeks to take advantage of data from cluding climate change monitoring and disas- ESA and Member State (MS) EO space assets to analyze long-term global records of essen- tial climate variables. The International Char- 100
ESPI Report 40 39 April 2012
ters.102 The CCI and Charter’s mechanism is tion and mitigation of disaster-induced dam- described in more detail below, as well as in age, improved resource and energy man- section 3.4. of this report. agement, climate change-related forecasting, improved weather forecasting, conserving The Committee on Earth Observation Satel- biodiversity and other key issues. lites (CEOS) was established in 1984 and involves 28 space agencies and 20 other na- Commercial EO has been slow to develop due tional and international organisations. The to the fact that there was a substantial se- Committee coordinates and plans civilian crecy surrounding intelligence-gathering sat- satellite missions for EO. Its mission is to ellites during the Cold War and there were make the best use of EO satellites interna- limits on the capabilities that could be offered tionally and coordinate the procedures of on a commercial basis. Governments have, calibration, validation, data management and however, generally encouraged greater un- information systems for EO. It undertakes the derstanding of the benefits derived from mul- complex task of meeting the needs of mission tispectral observation sponsored by private operators (space agencies) that involve na- investment for some time. In 1986 France tional interests, costs and schedules, and launched the first of its SPOT remote-sensing those of the end-users of the data. The goal satellites and created a marketing organisa- is to avoid duplication and secure all impor- tion, Spot Image, to promote use of its im- tant measurements. ESA, EUMETSAT and the agery. In the 1990s, when some of the tech- European Commission (EC) became members nology used for reconnaissance satellites was of CEOS in 1984, 1989 and 1994, respec- declassified, commercial remote sensing sat- tively. Japan joined in 1984 though ellites began to be launched. The first com- MEXT/JAXA. mercial high-resolution satellite, Ikonos 1, was launched in 1999. The Group on Earth Observation (GEO) joins 88 governments (as of September 2011) and Major customers for high-resolution imagery the EC in a voluntary partnership with a goal are governments, many of which lack their of developing a Global Earth Observation own reconnaissance satellites. Although re- System of Systems (GEOSS). Another 64 mote sensing has yet to become a fully viable organisations (international, intergovernmen- commercial business, as the users become tal and regional) with an EO mandate have more familiar with the benefits of using the status of Participating Organisations. The space-derived data with other sources of Executive Committee consists of 13 represen- geographic information, there is the opportu- tatives from the Americas (three), Asia nity for significant commercial success.103 In (three), Europe (three), Africa (two), and the 2010, Earth observation-related global reve- CIS (one). The Russian Federation is part of nue, constituting data sales and value-added its Executive Committee, where it represents services (i.e. new products and services gen- the CIS countries. The committee oversees erated from existing raw satellite data), GEO’s activities when the Plenary (i.e. the amounted to $2.01 billion (a 6% increase Members and Participating Organisations) is from 2009) and was driven mainly by gov- not in session. It likewise steers the Secre- ernment requirements (civilian and military). tariat. At the GEO Summit in Tokyo on 16 This number is expected to increase to $7.7 February 2005, a 10-year implementation billion per year by 2019.104 plan was approved for the development of a coordinated and sustained architecture to achieve a better understanding of Earth sys- 3.2.1 Europe’s Key Earth Observation-Related Ac- tems. The document was signed by 47 coun- tivities tries and more than a dozen international Earth observation (EO) has been recognised organisations (e.g. ESA, UN, EUMETSAT, EC, as a priority space activity in Europe as it can ISCU, WMO, etc.). Europe’s GMES constitutes generate high socio-economic returns on its contribution to the GEOSS Plan. investment. Among the areas for which EO is The purpose of GEOSS is to improve observa- especially beneficial are the environment and tion of the Earth’s atmosphere, oceans, land, security (including disaster management). ecosystems and their functions on a “com- The EU’s environment policies have been prehensive, coordinated and sustained” basis. structured around so-called Environmental It targets nine “Social Benefit Areas”. Infor- Action Programmes (EAP). The latest of th mation derived from these observations can them, the 6 EAP, provides a framework for improve the decision-making on key issues related to sustainable development, preven- 103 Logsdon, John M. “Space Applications”. Encyclopedia Britannica.
ESPI Report 40 40 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
environmental policies in the period 2002– waves and swell are primarily driven by the 2012. The 6th EAP also represents an envi- wind. Meanwhile, ocean circulation plays an ronmental dimension of the Europe 2020 important role in the distribution of heat and strategy. water vapour in the atmosphere. Monitoring the wind and other variables, such as air The Living Planet Programme pressure, air temperature and water vapour, gives us valuable information about how the ESA’s Living Planet programme constitutes an ocean and atmosphere interact to produce important contribution to understanding and changes in our weather and climate. ESA’s addressing global environmental challenges. Earth Explorer Atmospheric Dynamics Mission Five of the missions are displayed in figure (ADM-Aeolus), to be launched in 2013, will 18. Three of the missions have already been seek to provide global observations of three- launched. The Gravity field and steady-state dimensional wind fields to improve atmos- Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE), the first pheric modelling and analysis techniques for of a series of Earth Explorer satellites operational weather forecasting and climate launched in March 2009, is designed to pro- research.107 vide information on critical variables of the Earth system. Gravity and its variation in The Climate Change Initiative (CCI) space are fundamental for every dynamic process on the Earth’s surface and in its inte- ESA has repeatedly demonstrated the useful- rior. A better understanding of how gravity ness of long-term satellite data for better affects the interaction among these processes understanding and managing climate change, can offer valuable knowledge.105 ESA’s Soil including through its Climate Change Initia- Moisture and Ocean Salinity (SMOS) mission, tive (CCI). The CCI seeks to take advantage launched in October 2009, examines how of data from ESA and MS EO space assets climate change may be affecting evaporation that go back three decades to analyze long- patterns over land and sea. The CryoSat-2, term global records of essential climate vari- launched on 8 April 2010, measures the ables. These data, together with new mis- thickness of floating sea-ice in order to detect sions, produce new information on GHG con- seasonal and multi-annual variations. It will centrations, sea-ice extent and thickness, likewise observe the surface of continental ice sea-level rise, sea-surface temperature and sheets for elevation change detection. For salinity, etc. example, it will determine the contribution of Due to the complexity of the climate system, the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets to the only tools that provide quantitative esti- mean global sea level rise.106 mates of future climate change are sophisti- cated numerical models. Climate models, or “general circulation models” (GCMs), are simplified, mathematical representations of the climate system. The ESA Sea Level CCI Project, for example, will advance the pre- ciseness of climate models used for sea-level projections. Another project, ESA’s Fire CCI, will seek to provide quality evaluations of burned areas globally to fine-tune climate- vegetation models for better assessment of Figure 18: ESA’s Earth Explorer missions (Source: ESA) global vegetation and atmospheric conditions related to fire. These examples demonstrate The monitoring of wind and other variables how ESA works to improve climate model can serve as another example of the benefits predictions through satellite datasets.108 of space-based assets. Wind is a global transportation system for heat, moisture and Satellite systems offer unique capabilities for airborne particles. Since over 70% of the climate change research and management. Earth is covered by water, the interaction They can provide sound data on the state of between the ocean and atmosphere is a the environment. Earth observation and me- complex, but critical, part of our climate. teorological satellites have contributed sig- Surface ocean circulation, coastal currents, nificantly to scientific understanding of the environment. EO satellites can monitor global 105 Looking into the Forces that Shape Our Planet. Euro- pean Space Agency Website.
ESPI Report 40 41 April 2012
Table 4: Charter Activations Statistics (Source: EM-DAT)
stratospheric ozone depletion, including at • To provide a unified and coordinated sys- the Earth’s poles, and detect tropospheric tem of space data acquisition and data ozone (e.g. ERS 2, Envisat, etc.). They gen- delivery to those affected by disasters erate synoptic weather imagery and assimi- • To promote cooperation between space late data for numerical weather prediction agencies and space system operators in (e.g. MetOp weather satellite, etc.). They the field of disaster management help discover the dynamics of ice sheet flows in Antarctica and Greenland (e.g. ERS-1, The Charter is open to space agencies and ERS-2, Envisat, etc.). They can also detect space system operators who participate on a mesoscale variability of ocean surface topog- voluntary basis with no exchange of funds. raphy and its importance in ocean mixing and The members commit to make satellite re- observe the role of the ocean in climate vari- sources (including acquisition planning) avail- ability (e.g. Topex/Poseidon, ERS-1, ERS-2, able without delay during period of crisis Envisat, etc.).109 (with the exception of those restricted by provider’s data policy) and supply emergency The International Charter “Space and Major Dis- organisations with coordinated and free ac- asters” cess to space systems and derived data and information. As referred to above, the International Char- ter was initiated by ESA and the French In 2003, the United Nations’ Office for Outer Space Agency (CNES) based on their pro- Space Affairs (OOSA) was accepted as a co- posal during the UNISPACE III gathering in ordinating body for the Charter. The OOSA 1999. The Charter reflects international co- established a 24/7 hotline in July 2003 operation among space agencies which make through which various UN agencies can re- their resources available to emergency and quest data through the Charter to address rescue operations. Its objectives are: emergency situations. • To support, by means of space assets In 2011, the Charter was activated by Japan and the associated information and ser- a number of times, including the September vices, the organisation of emergency as- flood and landslide in the Kinki and Shikoku sistance or subsequent operations regions (as a result of a typhoon) and July floods in the Niigata and Fukushima prefec- tures in Japan. One of the future goals for improving the scope of the Charter’s work is 109 Space Technologies and Climate Change: Implications to make it accessible to more countries (in- for Water Management, Marine Resources and Maritime cluding in Africa) and investigate options to Transport. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and make the offered space-based solutions sup- Development. 2008: 73.
ESPI Report 40 42 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
porting disaster management activities more months, intense discussions will take place efficient. among European countries on whether GMES will be funded within, or outside, the EU’s The Global Monitoring for Environment and Se- MFF 2014-2020. Adopting a long-term view curity (GMES) on an investment such as GMES will be key to supporting this forward-looking initiative. The GMES programme represents an effort on the part of the EU to ensure the provision Years of reliable and sustainable Earth observation GMES funding data and services over the long term by 1998–2013 seeking to: provide better access to existing EU funding for the service €520 million assets; strengthen existing capabilities; and component accelerate the development of operational services. GMES has been recognised as the ESA funding for the service €240 million European contribution to building the Global component Earth Observation System of Systems EU funding for the space €780 million (GEOSS) developed within the framework of component (FP7 and GMES the Group on Earth Observation (GEO). The Initial Operation) programme was launched in 1998 by the European Commission (EC), ESA, and a num- ESA funding for the space €1,650 million ber of national space agencies. In 2005, the component EU declared GMES a flagship programme along with the Galileo satellite navigation Table 5: GMES funding for the period 1998–2013. system. The EU has the overall programme management responsibility. ESA offers multi- The GMES is designed to build upon existing mission facilities and ground segment opera- scientific research based on EO from space tions, as well as the GMES space component and to advance environmental research and (the Sentinel satellites). MS provide contrib- climate change studies, including at an inter- uting missions, both in situ and from space. national level. As the thematic areas within the so-called “GMES service components” The programme has, in the period of 1998– include climate change information, beyond 2013, been allocated approximately € 3.2 coordinating the current efforts of individual billion to be used for development and initial actors, it will offer new capabilities. One of operations of services, space and in-situ in- the functions of the GMES programme, which frastructures (see table 5). For the period of will integrate Earth observation (EO) satel- 20142020, an estimated budget of € 5,841 lites and ground-based sensors, is to support million (€ 1,091 million for the services, € the EU’s external actions. It will also be able 350 million for the in situ component, and to assist in the prevention and mitigation of €4,400 million for the space component) is disasters such as flooding, forest fires and oil envisioned for the full deployment, mainte- spills that all require timely and precise in- 110 nance, evolution and upgrades. formation. The GMES Space Segment will deliver land, sea and atmosphere data from In the European Commission Communication, 113 “A Budget for Europe 2020” of June 2011, it space. GMES has a number of pre- was proposed that GMES be financed outside operational services, including the following the EU’s Multiannual Financial Framework projects: Geoland2, MyOCEAN, SAFER- (MFF) 2014–2020 through a specific GMES security oriented system, GMOSAIC, and fund. This fund would be managed by the MACC (see figure 19). Commission, with financial contributions from The space segment of Europe’s GMES com- all 27 EU Member States based on their gross prises existing satellites (i.e. Spot and 111 national income (GNI). An agreement to Cosmo-Skymed), as well as new satellites that effect would have to be ratified by the (the Sentinel series). ESA has funded most of 27 MS, as the EC plan would shift the burden the R&D work on the dedicated Sentinel sat- of GMES operations funding to individual ellites. Specifically, ESA is developing five 112 member states. Over the upcoming six families of Sentinel missions specifically for the GMES space component. The first is to be launched in 2013 (provided funding for its 110 Communication for the Commission to the European operations and maintenance is secured be- Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and yond mid-2014). A preoperational phase of Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the European Earth monitoring programme (GMES) and its operations (from 2014 onwards). COM (2011) 831, Brus- sels (30 November 2011): 4. Aviation Week&Space Technology (7 November 2011): 111 Ibid. 5. 35. 112 Svitak, Amy. “Flagging Flagship: Europe’s Showcase 113 GMES: Observing Our Planet for a Safer World. Euro- Environmental-Monitoring Project Twisting in the Wind”. pean Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/gmes/index_en.htm
ESPI Report 40 43 April 2012
Figure 19: GMES Pre-operational Services (Source: General Secretariat of the EU Council114)
Table 6: Preliminary Launch schedule of the Sentinel Satellites (Source: EC COM(2009)589 final115)
114 Burianek, Jiri. “Japan-EU Cooperation in Space: Earth Observation and Related Applications.” Presentation.Europe-Japan Space Workshop. European Space Policy Institute, Vienna, Austria.17 January 2012. 115 Communication from the Commission to the European Pariament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Commit- tee and the Committee of the Rregions "Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES): Challenges and Next Steps for the Space Component". Brussels: European Commission (28 October 2009): 49.
ESPI Report 40 44 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
GMES was launched in 2008 and initial opera- and security (see table 7). Advanced optical tions are expected to begin by 2014 (see and radar sensors of the remote sensing sat- table 6). ellites can produce accurate analyses of the Earth environment and human development. The GMES programme has substantial poten- They can also offer a permanent global per- tial to advance Europe’s key policy objec- spective and upgrade continuously Geo- tives, including in the areas of environment graphic Information Systems (GIS).
Table 7: EC’s Policy Priorities in the Context of GMES Services (Source: EC COM(2009)589 final) 116
116 COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIALCOMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS "Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES): Challenges and Next Steps for the Space Component". Brussels: European Commission (28 October 2009): 49.
ESPI Report 40 45 April 2012
Figure 20: Japan’s Earth Observation Programme (Source RESTEC117)
serving Satellite ALOS (also called Daichi). In 3.2.2 Japan’s Earth Observation-Related Activi- 2006, the Japan Meteorological Agency started ties to use microwave radiometer sensors (includ- ing the AMSR-E the Japanese sensor aboard Japan had been involved in remote sensing the NASA satellite Aqua for the global numeri- activities since the 1970s with initial focus on cal prediction model). JAXA also provided the scientific research. Japan launched its first Light Particle Telescope (LPT) for the 2008 satellite, the Marine-Observation Satellite Jason-2 satellite of the French Space Agency Momo-1, in 1987. Based on the Basic Plan for (CNES).118 Space Policy of June 2009, Japan now consid- ers Earth observation capabilities as an indis- Currently, the “Global Change Observation pensable element in its social and economic Mission” (GCOM) is to establish and demon- development, as well as environmental pres- strate a global, long-term satellite system to ervation. Concerning the latter, it provides measure essential geophysical parameters for essential information concerning global warm- better understanding of world climate change ing worldwide and its potential impact on Ja- and water cycle mechanism. The GCOM sys- pan. Earth observation is also considered an tem will be comprised of two satellites and essential element of national security. Since three consecutive generations are foreseen to the Taepodong-1 missile launch by North Ko- sustain a 13-year observation period. GCOM- rea in 1998, Japan had sought to acquire in- A1 was launched in January 2009, together dependent remote sensing capabilities for with the Greenhouse Gasses Observing satel- national security. In March 2003, Japan lite (GOSAT, also known as Ibuki), and several s.119 launched its first two reconnaissance satellites. microsatellite Japan has a distinguished tradition of Earth After JAXA terminated efforts in May 2011 to observation activities. Its first observation recover the Advanced Land Observing Satellite satellites were Marine Observation Satellites (ALOS) that operated for five years after being MOS-1a and MOS-1b launched in 1987 and launched in January 2006, Japan is planning 1990. Subsequently the Japanese Earth Re- the launch of ALOS-2 (with radar L-band) to source Satellite-1 (JERS-1, also known as sun-synchronous orbit in 2012 and ALOS-3 (a Fuyo) and the Advanced Earth Monitoring multispectral, high resolution satellite) in satellite (ADEOS, also called Midori) were de- 2013. With regard to weather satellites, Japan veloped, followed by the Advanced Land Ob- launched the Multi-Functional Transport Satel-
117 Matsuura, Naoto. “Japan’s Earth Observation Activi- 118 2011 European Space Directory. Paris: ESD Partners ties”. Presentation. Europe–Japan Space Workshop. ESPI, (2011): 106-107. Vienna. 17 Jan 2012. 119 Ibid:107
ESPI Report 40 46 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
lite 1R (MTSAT-1R) in February 2005 and national security (pillar 2); and protecting MTSAT-2 in February 2006 (see figure 20).120 humans from natural threats (pillar 3). Two of the five systems are “Land and Ocean Sat- The Basic Space Plan prioritises six “Basic ellite System to contribute to Asia and other Pillars”, five Systems and four Programs. regions” (see figure 21) and “Global Envi- Earth observation is especially relevant for ronmental Change and Climate Observing the first three pillars: 1) “rich, secure and Satellite System” (see figure 22). The priori- safe life”; 2) “security through utilisation of ties delineated for Earth observation activities space”, and 3) “space diplomacy”. EO satel- are, as in other areas, emblematic of a shift lites contribute to: societal needs (pillar 1); from research to utilitarian applications.
Figure 21: Land and Ocean Observing Satellite System to contribute to Asia and other regions (Source: Japan’ Strategic Head- quarters for Space Policy121)
Figure 22: Global Environmental Change and Climate Observing System (Source: Japan’ Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy122)
120 Ibid. 121 Kunitomo, Hirotoshi. “Update on National Space Policy Development of Japan and Space Security”. Presentation. Europe- Japan Space Workshop. ESPI, Vienna. 17 Jan 2012. 122 Ibid.
ESPI Report 40 47 April 2012
Japan is actively involved in all of the main EO- Observation Promotion Strategy” in December relevant international fora, including the CEOS, 2004 to lay out Japan’s general policy concern- GEO/GEOSS (see figure 23), and International ing Earth observation. The Council stated that Charter “Space and Major Disasters”. an integrated observation and monitoring sys- tem represents a key national technology.123 Based on international activities concerning the Japan places emphasis on global warming, need for a global coordinated Earth observation climate change and natural disasters (see fig- system (GEOSS), Japan’s Council for Science ure 24). and Technology Policy (CSTP) issued the “Earth
Figure 23: Japan’s main Earth observation capabilities for GEOSS (Source: RESTEC124)
Figure 24: Japan’s Contribution to the 9 GEOSS Societal Benefit Areas (Source: RESTEC125)
123 “Japan’s Earth Observation Satellite Development Plan and Data Utilization Strategy”. Special Subcommittee on Earth Ob- servation of the Space Activities Commission (July 2005): 2. 124 Matsuura, Naoto. “Japan’s Earth Observation Activities”. Presentation. Europe–Japan Space Workshop. ESPI, Vienna. 17 Jan 2012. 125 Ibid.
ESPI Report 40 48 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 25: Framework for Sentinel Asia (Source: Sentinel Asia website)
The International Charter, “Space and Major mate change monitoring, and security (in- Disasters”, is a prime example of interna- cluding disaster management). tional cooperation in the field of natural dis- Societal and economic benefits, as well as asters. In February 2005, JAXA joined the security, including through international co- International Charter during the third Earth operation, will be derived from Europe’s Observation Summit. GMES and Japan-initiated Sentinel Asia Pro- At a regional level, Japan has been instru- ject. Climate change is one of the four priori- mental in launching the Sentinel Asia initia- ties delineated in the EU’s 6th Environmental tive, a voluntary activity led by the APRSAF Action Plan (EAP). The 5th Space Council rec- (Asia-Pacific Regional Space Agency Forum) ognised climate change as a new priority area to support disaster management activity in within the European Space Policy. The third the Asia-Pacific region by use of the WEB-GIS pillar of Japan’s Basic Space Plan calls for technology and space based technology, in- “utilisation of space for diplomatic policy” to cluding EO data (see figure 25). There are protect humans from the threat of climate three main steps to establish a comprehen- change, disasters, etc. Internationally, both sive dissemination system that include: “im- Europe and Japan have been actively in- plementation of the backbone 'Sentinel Asia' volved in the goals of the UN Environment data dissemination system and associated Programme (UNEP) and the UN Framework Nodes, to showcase the value and impact of Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the technology using standard internet dis- which provides an overarching structure for semination systems (February 2006 - De- intergovernmental efforts to deal with climate cember 2007); expansion of the dissemina- change. tion backbone with new Satellite Communica- Thanks to the large amount of available envi- tion Systems (2008–2012); and establish- ronmental data generated on a daily basis by ment of a comprehensive DMSS (2013 and space-based and other sensors, international onwards)”.126 environmental conventions, and similar gath- erings, can be supported by more informed 3.2.3 Europe–Japan Cooperation in the Field of decision-making. At the same time, due to Earth Observation the complex mechanisms driving global cli- mate change, international cooperation on Europe and Japan share many key policy making reliable predictions concerning the priorities that involve use of Earth observa- long-term consequences of climate change tion satellites and derived information. These for human development is essential. More- include, space for societal and economic over, international conventions and other benefits, environmental protection and cli- environmental-related agreements can be successful only when backed by solid verifica- tion and compliance.
126 “About Sentinel Asia”. Sentinel Asia website. In this connection, space-based systems are
ESPI Report 40 49 April 2012
understanding and managing of our fragile lite to users in Europe and Africa. Within the planet as well as for verification purposes. ADEN network, ESA, JAXA and other partners Closer mutual coordination of their activities cooperated in producing a wide range of envi- and priorities can advance Europe’s and Ja- ronmental datasets. Its Phased Array type L- pan’s role as international leaders in respond- band Synthetic Aperture Radar (PALSAR) ing to climate change. acquired 24/7 all-weather observations. PALSAR data also complemented ESA’s radar Active engagement of both Europe and Japan missions, such as Envisat and ERS-2, and the in Earth observation-related endeavours is European National X-band missions, such as based on solid foundations they have each the German TerraSAR-X and Italian Cosmo developed nationally. Both sides also have Skymed constellation. The Panchromatic Re- pursued opportunities to cooperate on a bi- mote-sensing Instrument of Stereo Mapping lateral basis. Concrete cooperative ventures (PRISM) onboard ALOS could observe se- include endeavours such as JAXA’s sensor lected areas in three dimensions, down to a contribution to the CNES’ ADEOS-2 satellite high 2.5-metre spatial resolution. The Ad- and the ESA-JAXA cooperation on the Earth- vanced Visible and Near Infrared Radiometer CARE mission. type-2 (AVNIR-2) charted land cover and Japan provided two sensors for the Advanced vegetation in visible and near infrared spec- Earth Observing Satellite-2 (ADEOS-2) of the tral bands. Applications of the observations French Space Agency, CNES. The satellite include the domains of forestry, global carbon acquired data to better understand the na- monitoring, oceanography, sea-ice monitor- ture of global environmental changes (includ- ing, agriculture and vegetation monitoring, ing global warming) and to support meteorol- topography and disaster mitigation. ALOS ogy and fishery activities. The JAXA sensors was launched in January 2006 and ESA was include: Advanced Microwave Scanning Radi- supporting ALOS through its ground infra- ometer (AMSR) for quantitatively observing structure and expertise to acquire, process various geophysical data concerning the wa- and distribute data from the satellite to its ter cycle; and GLobal Imager (GLI) for ob- user community (so called ‘Third Party Mis- serving oceans, land and clouds with high sion’).130 Its mission was completed in 2011. accuracy. ADEOS-II was launched in Decem- With regard to the International Charter ber 2002 by the H-2 launcher from Tanega- Space and Major Disasters, given the trend shima Space Center and was lost the follow- that reveals an increased number of natural ing year in October 2003.127 JAXA also pro- disasters such as floods, droughts, landslides, vided the Light Particle Telescope (LPT) for fires, earthquakes and tsunamis and the ef- the 2008 Jason-2 satellite of CNES.128 fects of climate change, the need for a flexi- A prime example of cooperation is ESA’s ble response system will most likely continue cloud, aerosol and radiation mission, “Earth- to grow. The International Charter is cur- CARE”. EarthCARE is the largest and most rently a voluntary regime. In the future, sup- complex of ESA’s Earth Explorer missions and port for a more binding instrument could is being developed as a joint venture be- prove beneficial. The GEO could also become tween ESA and JAXA. The mission, scheduled an entity providing operational support for for launch in 2015, will seek to gain insights delivering timely EO-related information. with regard to the role clouds and aerosols To support ongoing cooperation between play in reflecting incident solar radiation back Europe and Japan as well as to strengthen into space and trapping infrared radiation Europe’s and Japan’s standing in international emitted from Earth’s surface. This knowledge efforts utilising Earth observation capabilities is required to improve climate predictions and and derived products, both sides should con- weather forecasts.129 sider including Earth observation in the pro- Another cooperative venture involves the ceedings of the annual EU-Japan Summits ALOS satellite. Based on an ESA-JAXA and other fora. These debates can include agreement, ESA became responsible for the discussion on the ways both sides engage in ALOS European data Node (ADEN) and has GEO and identify opportunities for Europe to been delivering data from the ALOS EO satel- engage actively in the regional APRSAF. An indirect step in this direction was taken at the 2011 EU-Japan Summit which introduced 127 “Orbitography”. French Space Agency website. space into its deliberations, specifically satel-
ESPI Report 40 50 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
doors have been opened for expanding Closer mutual coordination of Europe’s space-related dialogue under the framework and Japan’s activities and priorities in of these summits. these venues has the potential to bolster their role as international leaders in re- The overarching goal is not just to gain more sponding to environmental, climate data, but rather to advance the coordination change, and disaster management is- of existing capabilities and data at an interna- sues, to name only a few. tional level. Using EO-derived information effectively and efficiently offers fertile ground • Advance commercialization of EO/remote for enhancing key foreign policy objectives sensing through steady institutional sup- via bilateral and multilateral cooperation. port: Although remote sensing has yet to become a fully viable commercial busi- Relevant recommendations appear below: ness, as the users become more familiar • Promote EO-related cooperation that with the benefits of using space-derived supports Europe’s and Japan’s broader data with other sources of geographic in- policies, including at EU-Japan Summits: formation, EO is poised for considerable Europe and Japan share many key policy growth in the coming years. Commercial priorities (identified, for example, in data revenue alone is expected to in- “Europe 2020” strategy and Japan’s crease more than threefold in the next “New Growth Strategy” and “Compre- 10 years.131 A more robust commercial hensive Partnership Policy”) that involve market will also result in improved deci- use of Earth observation systems. These sion-making processes for both govern- systems possess, in some cases ments and commercial users. Joint dia- uniquely, the capability of supplying con- logue should involve issues ranging from tinuous and comprehensive information how to bolster awareness of satellite ob- about the Earth, including over extended servation capabilities, accelerate the periods. The priorities identified by the transition of satellite use from research EU and Japan include space for societal to operations, improve capacity-building and economic benefits, environmental investments in user communities, en- protection, climate change monitor- courage investment in applications and ing/mitigation, and security (including services, and reduce the gap between disaster management). Enhanced EO- users and suppliers of data. focused cooperation would strengthen support for EO utilisation and its greater commercialisation, and improve imple- mentation of broader objectives such as 3.3 Industry-To-Industry innovation, competitiveness, environ- Cooperation mental protection, sustainable energy and sustainable management of natural The space industrial base is comprised of resources. three primary segments: space (satellites and other spacecraft), launch and ground • Promote strengthened position of Europe systems. Industry supports civilian govern- and Japan in multilateral EO-relevant ments, the military and commercial markets. venues: Existing fora or venues, such as The development and manufacturing sector the Committee on Earth Observing Satel- and space operations constitute the “up- lites (CEOS), the Group on Earth Obser- stream” sector, and a wide variety of service- vation (GEO) and its 10-year implemen- related business activities constitute “down- tation plan (GEOSS), the ESA-EU “GMES stream” activities. Although the downstream Space Component” programme, ESA’s segment represents a much larger source of Climate Change Initiative (CCI), Interna- revenues, that and the upstream segment tional Charter Space and Major Disasters, are linked at a technology and commercial and regional Sentinel Asia all seek to en- level. Development and manufacturing can able comprehensive monitoring and data create new applications and the market helps collection. Gaps remain, however, be- guide investment into the upstream sector.132 tween having access to unique EO- derived data (including environment and These markets are described in the Space climate change-related) and the ability to Foundation’s Space Report as the global effectively utilize it. Such international coordination, which seeks to, among 131 other things, avoid duplication and re- “Asia Pacific Satellite-based Earth Observation Market”. dundancy, facilitate data sharing and 25 Mar. 2011. Frost & Sullivan 23 Feb. 2012
ESPI Report 40 51 April 2012
space economy divided as follows: commer- commercial market.136 The inverse is gener- cial satellite products and services ($ 102 ally true for Europe.137 billion), commercial infrastructure and sup- Technology transfer programmes and busi- port industries ($87.39 billion), U.S. govern- ness incubators initiated by governments also ment space budgets ($64.63 billion), non- stimulate development of space products, U.S. government space budgets ($22.49 bil- services and spin-offs. ESA’s Technology lion), and commercial human space transpor- Transfer Programme (TTP), for example, tation services ($0.01 billion). The total value seeks to identify industrial needs and space of the global space economy is estimated to technology spinoffs that could meet those be some $276.52 billion.133 needs. Subsequently, the European space The Satellite Industry Association data show incubator activities support the creation of a continued, but somewhat slower, growth of start-up companies that can commercialize the satellite industry worldwide. In 2010, the the technology. Governments also promote world satellite industry revenue amounted to development of new commercial space prod- approximately $168 billion, up 4.5% from ucts and services by serving as the major 2009. Most of the revenue was derived from purchasers or tenant customers of the prod- satellite services (60%), ground system uct, guaranteeing financing (e.g. through equipment (31%), satellite manufacturing export credit agencies), as well as space- (6%) and launch services (3%).134 related regulations supporting the required level of transparency and due-diligence. Ad- Governments play a key role in the develop- vancing new ideas is also stimulated by cash ment of space products and services. Accord- prizes and competitions. The European Satel- ingly, the space business is influenced signifi- lite Navigation Competition of 2010, for ex- cantly by governments and other institutional ample, incentivized contestants by offering a actors. Over 80% of global space activities grand prize of €20,000 to offer new uses of involve public institutions as investors and the satellite positioning, navigation, and tim- operators. Governments also control market ing systems and received 357 submissions.138 access and space technology transfers.135 The U.S. continues to spend the most in This following will cover spacecraft manufac- space (its space budget is nearly 10 times turing and operations and space applications. the size of European institutional spending). Launchers are covered in section 3.1.1. of Its export control regime (i.e. the Interna- this report. tional Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and the Export Administration Regulations (EAR)), which also applies to commercial products, 3.3.1 Europe’s Space Industry has proven, however, to have an adverse The EU is the largest single market compris- impact on the U.S. industrial base. ing some 499.8 million people (as of January 139 Export controls constitute one of the foremost 2009 ) and its gross domestic product obstacles to foreign space markets for the (GDP) in market terms amounting to about 140 U.S. companies, especially affecting smaller €12 trillion in 2010 , exceeding that of the firms. At the same time, as the U.S. govern- U.S. Europe maintains the world’s second- mental space activities are closed to non-U.S. largest aerospace industry. European compa- suppliers, it has a competitive advantage and nies (mainly Thales Alenia Space, EADS As- technology developed for military pro- trium and, more recently, German OHB), grammes that have often proved the founda- together with the U.S. companies (Space tion for commercial space applications. Dur- Systems/Loral, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, ing the Cold War, the U.S. government pri- Orbital Sciences), constitute the largest satel- marily operated satellites to serve its needs. lite manufacturing firms. Gradually, it has started to offer services directly to the public (e.g. GPS, remote sens- 136 ing products and services). Public free access “The Space Report 2011: The Authoritative Guide to stimulated the development of the associated Global Space Activity.” The Space Foundation (2011): 28- 30. 137 Ibid. 138 Ibid. 139 “The EU Population Continues to Grow: Population Statistics in Europe 2008, First Results”. Eurostat 31 (2009).
ESPI Report 40 52 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
The two main markets for the European manufacturing activity is the design, devel- space industry are the institutional domestic opment and manufacturing of satellites for market (civil and military), and the external operational applications (€3 billion), launch- commercial and export market, the former of ers (€1 billion), scientific activities (€0.8 bil- which represented half of the space manufac- lion), and ground systems and activities turing industry’s final sales in 2009. The main (€0.4 billion).143 institutional customers were ESA (worth €1.8 In 2009, European manufacturers seized billion sales), space agencies (worth €0.5 50% of the accessible market for satellites. billion), and military agencies (worth €0.35 Telecommunications applications constituted billion). The total value of military systems two-thirds of the satellite sales and the com- sold exceeds the value of sales to military mercial market reflects the cyclical nature of entities due to the fact that military systems the demand for telecommunications. Euro- can be procured by certain civilian customers pean space manufacturing generates only a (e.g. civil agencies such as CNES, DLR and modest profit. Over the past ten years, only ASI as well as private operator Paradigm, 23% of space activities in Europe led to a etc.). The main commercial and export sales profit of over 3%. Nineteen companies de- were linked to commercial satellite operators clared zero profits or experienced a loss. This (€1.26 billion), primarily those in geosyn- same pattern occurred at the global level as chronous (GEO) orbit, and launch service low returns accompanied by long-term risks providers that procure launch systems from are often considered too risky for many pri- industry (€800 million). Export sales include vate investors. Accordingly, institutional a share of institutions and governmental bod- funding will continue to play a major role in ies outside Europe. Satellite applications rep- assuring a viable space industry.144 resent one sector of European industry that has significantly grown in the past twenty years.141 Satellite Operations and Services As operations in space require specific and Some eleven companies engage in satellite reliable technologies and transportation that operations in Europe, including major compa- are expensive, companies have high fixed nies such as Inmarsat, Eutelsat, and SES. costs. Accordingly, reliability and a good The majority of space-based services are in reputation play a significant role in selecting the telecommunications field that is highly suppliers. The globalisation of the supply profitable. The Earth Observation (EO) ser- chain and ownership that increasingly charac- vices are only marginally developed, as frag- terizes the aerospace sector is less common mentation of EO services decreases the level in the space sector. Small and medium en- of competitiveness in the higher value EO terprises (SMEs) constitute less than 5% of market. However, there is an increasing in- European space manufacturing employment terest on the part of upstream companies to but they are important as they are part of a engage in EO-related business due to better complex knowledge transfer chain and inno- opportunities to deliver integrated services vation network. At the same time, the SME accompanied by improved economies of 145 participation in the space sector may have scale. only limited influence on strengthening Euro- Satellite operations are more profitable than 142 pean space industry competitiveness. space manufacturing. Value added activity in this sector is double that of space manufac- Spacecraft Manufacturing turing. The European satellite operator sector enjoys direct employment of some 4,000 The European space manufacturing industry workers with a turnover of over €3 billion is part of the broader aerospace and indus- (from which €1.5 billion is traded outside the trial complex. The industry is highly concen- EU). The barriers to entry are less significant trated and vertically integrated. The four than in space manufacturing. The UK’s start- largest industrial holdings are EADS, Finmec- up, Avanti Communications, a regional UK canica, Safran and Thales together represent- satellite operator, for example, raised more ing some 70% of total space industry em- than 70% of its funding in the UK and re- ployment. The space manufacturing industry ceived the remainder from public sector R&D is distributed across all Europe. The major investment. Avanti's first satellite, called industrial sites are located in France, Ger- many, Italy, and on a smaller scale, in the 143 UK, Spain and Belgium. The core space The numbers cited are from Eurospace 2009 survey. More information at www.eurospace.org. 144 Hayward, Keith. “The Structure and Dynamics of the 141 European Space Directory 2011. ESD Partners, 26th European Space Industry Base.” ESPI Perspectives 55. Edition, Paris (2011), pp. 30-31. Vienna (December 2011):4. 142 Hayward, Keith. “The Structure and Dynamics of the 145 Hayward, Keith. “The Structure and Dynamics of the European Space Industry Base.” ESPI Perspectives 55. European Space Industry Base.” ESPI Perspectives 55. Vienna (December 2011):2-3. Vienna (December 2011):4.
ESPI Report 40 53 April 2012
HYLAS 1, was launched on 26 November the Europe 2020 strategy which seeks 2010 and is the first superfast broadband Europe’s global competitiveness without satellite launched in Europe. Avanti's second compromising environmental and social ob- satellite, called HYLAS 2, is fully funded and jectives. Horizon 2020 was adopted to sim- will be launched in second quarter of 2012. It plify RTD funding and to integrate more ef- will extend Avanti's coverage to Africa and fectively sectoral policies to improve trans- the Middle East.146 formation of knowledge into innovation.148 With regard to the space industry, the EC Institutional Considerations calls for a space industry policy that “fully reflects the specific needs of each subsector” At an institutional level, national, intergov- and promotes global competitiveness, non- ernmental and supranational entities all dependence in strategic sub-sectors (e.g. shape space policy and the funding of space launching), and the development of market programmes. Although Europe’s space indus- for space products and derived services. try is heavily influenced by national govern- ment decision-making, European-level public Horizon 2020 has funding of €80 billion and is policy is playing an increasingly important divided in four parts: excellent science, in- role in shaping the industry with the EU and dustrial leadership, societal challenges and ESA at the forefront of this dynamic. Some direct actions (non-nuclear) of the Joint Re- 40% of the funding is derived from individual search Centre (JRC). Space is included in part governments and most of the remaining two (including innovation of SMEs). The Hori- funds come from ESA. The European Com- zon 2020 strategy and international coopera- mission (EC) seeks enhanced coordination of tion are designed to: strengthen Europe’s European space actors (i.e. member states, competitiveness, non-dependence and inno- ESA, EUMETSAT and the EU). vation in space activities; enable advances in space technologies; enable more effective This is to be accomplished by a proposal for exploitation of space data; and support Euro- an EU space program linked to the EU’s pean research to facilitate international space multi-year budget. The industry views this EC partnerships. Implementation of these goals initiative overall as positive. However, there is to be guided by the space policy direction are concerns over the level of funding the EU identified in the EC’s Communication “To- will be able to provide given the tough wards a space strategy for the European Un- budget environment. The EC backs the Gali- ion that benefits its citizens” leo positioning, navigation and timing system (COM(2011)152).149 and debates are ongoing concerning the funding of the Global Monitoring for Environ- The above mentioned document is Europe’s ment and Security (GMES) effort (described space strategy. With regard to the space in more detail in section 3.2.2. of this report). industry, the policy calls for a firm techno- Europe is seeking to reconcile the needs of a logical base for competitiveness of the space complex, long-term programme with EU industry. The influence of the EU space indus- funding procedures. The EC also seeks to trial base is envisioned to be enhanced by address the gap in Europe concerning its innovation. Such innovation is, in turn, to be military and civilian space activities, although driven by determining ambitious space objec- 150 defence-related issues are outside the powers tives. of the EC. The main concerns for Europe in shaping 3.3.2 Japan’s Space Industry long-term space programmes is to establish a Japanese trade relations are concentrated comprehensive strategy and “vision” for among a few main partners (see figure 26). space and understanding the commercial They include (as at 2007): the U.S. (around needs of emerging markets (e.g. in the EO 85% of imports and 73% of exports), the EU field). Moreover, the policies need to reflect (contributes around 12% to Japanese imports the special nature of the space market where international competition is largely influenced 147 by non-commercial factors. 148 “Horizon 2020 – A Common Strategic Framework for EU Research and Innovation Fund”. PRO INNO EUROPE Horizon 2020, Europe’s new instrument for (25 August 2011).
ESPI Report 40 54 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 26: Japan’s Exports and Imports shares and values by main trade partners in 2007, in million Euros (Source: Ecorys)
and receive 4% of exports), and Canada (its is about one-tenth of that of NASA and one- share on Japanese exports constituted 15% half of ESA’s budget (see figure 28).154 and of imports a mere 2.4%).151 Japanese space activities currently involve: The Japanese aerospace industry is domi- launch vehicles, H-2 Transfer Vehicles (HTV), nated by four companies: Mitsubishi Heavy services, space science, communications Industries (MHI), Kawasaki Heavy Industries satellites, and Earth observations satellites. (KHI), Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Its path has been, however, more gradual. (IHI) and Fuji Heavy Industries (FHI). These There is limited capital invested in compari- companies do not only specialize in aero- son with, for example, the U.S., Russia and space field but are diversified across many Europe. This reality is visible in the high cost segments such as automobiles, shipbuilding, of domestic spacecraft in relation to foreign industrial machinery and power systems. products. To remedy this situation, Japan Generally space products make up some 15– seeks to establish itself as a technologically 20% of total sales (see figure 27).152 independent and self-sustained industrial base through the implementation of the 2009 The Japanese space budget is about $4 billion Basic Plan for Space Policy155, as well as re- annually. Two-thirds of the budget comes covery from some of the impediments of the from the MEXT and is transferred to JAXA and past. the remainder comes from eight other gov- ernment ministries.153 JAXA’s current budget
2010).
ESPI Report 40 55 April 2012
Figure 27: Japanese Aerospace Industry Sales FY1975-2009 (Source: SJAC)156
Figure 28: Comparative table of NASA, ESA, JAXA budget (source: JSF)
156
ESPI Report 40 56 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
The U.S.–Japan Satellite Procurement now subscribe to satellite services and watch Agreement of 1990, stemming from trade TV on their mobile phones.159 friction between the U.S. and Japan, for ex- In 2005, Japan received its first commercial ample, required Japan to open its non-R&D contract to manufacture a communications satellite procurement to foreign (mainly U.S.) satellite. Mitsubishi Electric Corp (Melco) en- satellite manufacturers which stifled the in- tered a contract with a Japanese satellite digenous Japanese satellite industry. As a communications services company, the Space result, Japan procured most of the satellites Communications Corporation (which was later from the U.S., and invested more resources purchased by SkyPerfect JSAT Corp.), to into “R&D” satellites. That is why, in many build a communications satellite, Superbird-7 respects, Japan still has a strong space sci- (renamed Superbird-C2 on orbit). It was the ence presence, but fledgling space commer- first commercial order of a Mitsubishi DC- cialization.157 A change began with the need 2000 type satellite. It was launched on to acquire independent satellite capability for Europe’s Ariane-5 ECA rocket in 2008. The national security reasons, including intelli- satellite provides television and telecommuni- gence-gathering satellites (IGS) and a legal cations broadcasts mainly for Japan. change of the 1969 Diet resolution restricting strategic implementation of space activities. Japan now operates the Wideband InterNet- This ultimately led to the new 2008 Basic working engineering test and Demonstration Space Law and 2009 Basic Plan for Space Satellite, Kizuna, which performs demonstra- Policy opening new opportunities for Japa- tions that will enlarge the capacity of infor- nese industry. mation networks. Kizuna was jointly devel- oped by JAXA and the National Institute of Space Manufacturing Information and Communications Technol- ogy. It was launched in February 2008. Be- Japanese space industry sales totalled ¥269 sides establishing ultra-high speed Internet billion for FY 2009 (approximately $3.26 bil- network, the goal is also to construct interna- lion, €2.56 billion) and employed 6300 work- tional Internet access with other Asia-Pacific ers. There has been an increase in sales for nations.160 Japan has also developed the two consecutive years as Japan elevated Engineering Test Satellite series (Kiku, mean- supplies for the ISS and national launchers. ing chrysanthemum in Japanese) with the Most of the sales, therefore, have been aim of acquiring highly capable satellite driven by domestic demand. In comparison, communications technology. Japan also oper- the European space industry is more exposed ates the KODAMA data-relay satellite which to international markets as commercial and performed successfully inter-satellite com- export sales represent almost 50% of reve- munications experiments with the Earth ob- nues. 2009 revenues amounted to €5.5 bil- servation satellite Daichi, Kibo and Europe’s lion (approximately $7.5 billion) with 31,369 Envisat. employees.158 Satellite Communications Sector Institutional Aspect The adoption of the Basic Space Law in 2008 As referenced above, satellite communica- and subsequent adoption of the Basic Plan for tions and broadcasting is the most profitable Space Policy in 2009 have been positive de- commercial space market. Revenues are velopments for Japanese industry as the gov- generated mainly through the sales of capac- ernment places significant emphasis on the ity (i.e. leasing of satellite’s transponders) practical utilisation of space, international and added value services. The bulk of busi- cooperation and scientific research and de- ness is derived from television. Direct broad- velopment. As the space industry plays an cast satellite (DBS) services have penetrated important role in Japan’s national space pro- Japan (as well as South Korea) and users can gram, the government seeks to strengthen Japanese industrial competitiveness. One of the six pillars in the Basic Plan is “fostering strategic industries for the 21st century” (see figure 29). In terms of spacecraft develop- 157 Aoki, Setsuko. “Current Status and Recent Develop- ments in Japan’s National Space Law and its Relevance to Pacific Rim Space Law and activities”. Journal of Space 159 The Space Economy at Glance. OECD, Directorate for Law, Vol. 35 (2009): 367-368. Science, Technology and Industry (22 July 2011). 158 The Space Economy at Glance. OECD, Directorate for
ESPI Report 40 57 April 2012
Figure 29: Basic Plan for Space Policy and Industry (Source: JSF)
ment, this involves creating internationally competitive space systems with improved 3.3.3 Europe–Japan Space Industry Cooperation performance, reduced costs and shorter de- velopment periods, as well as promoting The industrial dialogue between the EU and business in overseas markets and the domes- Japan has been conducted through various tic commercial market. In remote sensing, venues. The goal of these dialogues has been the focus is on greater utilisation of EO- to establish a transparent, open and stable derived information and services, growth of business environment and contribute, the satellite data market and development of through better cooperation between the EU data applications (e.g. in energy and mineral and Japan, to stronger economic relations resources).161 with third countries. Under the new Basic Space Law, the main Unlike Europe, Japan is mainly an importer of responsibility for Japan’s space strategy, in- aerospace products and services and does 163 cluding relevant programmes and projects, not rely much on aerospace exports. Com- has been transferred from JAXA (focused panies in Japan that seek to expand their mainly on R&D) to the to the Strategic Space space industry business require imports to Headquarters for Space Policy, chaired by the complement their own technology. Accord- Prime Minister. This creates new opportuni- ingly, imports for the Japanese space indus- ties to continue improvements in R&D while try have been rising (according to the Society also advancing the commercialization of of Japanese Aerospace Companies). North space technologies by Japanese companies. America and Europe are the major exporters This will create better international competi- to Japan. In 2008, 98% of Japanese imports tiveness of the space industry. According to were spacecraft out of which 72% were satel- 164 Futron Corporation (a U.S. consulting firm), lite-related. Japan ranks fourth (after the U.S., Europe The success or failure of any cooperative and Russia) in terms of its overall space com- endeavour depends, in large part, on capable petitiveness. Japan outperformed China due industry. This needs to be accompanied by to greater transparency within civil and mili- shared understandings concerning the prac- tary space organizations. This positive trend shows the potential for a robust Japanese 162 space industry. 163 “Trade”. The Space Economy at Glance 2011. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/9789264111790- en/06/03/index.html?contentType=/ns/Chapter&itemId=/co ntent/chapter/9789264113565-32- 161 Kaneko, Shuichi. “Policies on Japan’s Space Industry”. en&containerItemId=/content/book/9789264111790- Ministry of Economy, trade and Industry (METI). en&accessItemIds=&mimeType=text/html 162 “Space Industry in Japan”. GlobalTrade.net. (13 March 164 “Space Industry in Japan”. GlobalTrade.net. (13 March 2011) < http://www.globaltrade.net/f/market- 2011).
ESPI Report 40 58 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 30: Rendezvous- and Docking Sensor RVS (Source: Astrium)
tices, culture and methodology of the part- Astrium commercial satellites and vice ner. A successful partnership has been ongo- versa.167 ing, for example, through the partnership As evident from these examples, European between Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and Japanese companies are already engaged (MELCO) and Astrium which began with an in various institutional and commercial pro- exchange of engineers in the 1980s (each grammes and both partners can provide ex- staying for a period of 1–2 years). Their co- cellent technical quality and management operation was further stimulated by the part- skills. Accordingly, industry representatives of nering of the then parent companies in 1995 both Europe and Japan are well-positioned (i.e. Daimler-Benz and Mitsubishi). Although for enhanced cooperative undertakings as facing a number of security requirements their programme characteristics, capabilities with regard to military and dual-use projects, and competencies match well. Both the EU the engineer exchange programme is still and Japan are in the pursuit of new space ongoing.165 policies and are in the process of determining Another example is represented by a joint the ultimate vision for space within their do- decision by ESA and JAXA to develop a Ren- mestic and foreign policy objectives. Industry dezvous- and Docking Sensor (RVS) for ATV is the backbone of these pursuits. and HTV (see figure 30). Jena-Optronic The EU and Japan created a Business Round- served as a contractor and MELCO and As- table (BRT) in 1999 where some 50 CEOs and trium as industrial customers. In 2008, Jena- senior executives from European and Japa- Optronic received a contract from MELCO for nese firms meet annually to review business the delivery of an additional 12 RVS flight cooperation between them. They also pro- models. In large part due to this successful pose policy recommendations to the Euro- cooperation, the HTV successfully docked to pean Commission (EC) and Japanese gov- the ISS in September 2009 and, again, in ernment, representatives of which participate January 2011. The RVS, with its application in the roundtable, particularly concerning to enable fully automated approach, berthing trade promotion and regulatory means. The and docking of unmanned supply vehicles to EC and the Japanese government, in turn, the ISS, also enhanced technologies for fu- submit a Progress Report on the level of BRT ture space missions.166 implementation of recommendations of the Other cooperative missions of Astrium include previous year. The working parties (WP) of Jena-Optronic Star Sensors for Japanese cus- the BRT prepare the annual meeting. The WP tomers (for ALOS-2, Jaxa’s QZSS, and Turk- currently are on: “Multilateral & Bilateral sat), BepiColombo, EarthCare, for the supply Trade Relations, Investment and Regulatory of subsystems or equipment for commercial Cooperation”; “Life Sciences & Biotechnology; satellite programs, and critical equipment for Healthcare & Well-Being”, “Innovation; In- institutional programmes. Numerous Japa- formation & Communication Technologies”; nese companies are standard suppliers for “Financial Services; Accounting & Taxation”; and “Energy, Environment and Sustainable 165 Lindenthal, Andreas. “Industrial Cooperation Europe- Japan.” Presentation. Europe-Japan Space Workshop. ESPI, Vienna, Austria. 17 January 2012. 166 Ibid. 167 Ibid.
ESPI Report 40 59 April 2012
Development”.168 Venues such as the cross-boundary investment in space in- Europe-Japan Business Roundtable (EU-Japan dustries, and should actively seek mutual BRT) and the broader EU-Japan Summit can engagement of European and Japanese serve as important platforms for promoting industry in both commercial and gov- the space industries of both sides. ernmental ventures. In the process of seeking to expand industry- • Provide cooperative institutional support to-industry relations, it will be important to for space applications to enable greater determine what level of access that foreign utilisation of space: High-level institu- suppliers of space equipment and technology tional dialogue can assist in shaping the have to the space infrastructures of Europe. strategies of both partners to advance Similarly, European suppliers will likely seek their respective space-related industries. reciprocal treatment should Europe allow Given the large volume of official docu- such market opening. The strategic and tech- ments dealing with space policy, industry nology-sensitive nature of national space policy, science and technology policy, programs complicates expanded space- etc. it is often difficult to identify the related trade, but with active communications relevant activities of both sides that war- and the building of greater trust such rela- rant specific discussion, much less con- tionships can become more frequent and nect them. Commercialisation, closely durable. The EU-Japan Mutual Recognition connected with advancing space indus- Agreement of January 2002169, the Agree- tries, needs to attract strong government ment on Cooperation and Anti-competitive support. Determining space objectives, Activities of June 2003170, the Agreement on enabled by collaboration, can drive inno- Cooperation and Mutual Administrative Assis- vation and competitiveness for each tance171 and the Science and Technology side’s space industry. Joint pursuit of Agreement of November 2009172 are impor- such objectives will strengthen the prac- tant steps in this direction. tical utilisation of space (e.g. offering in- ternational competitive space systems Relevant recommendations appear below: with improved performance, reduced • Level the playing field for investment and costs and shorter development periods). industrial involvement: Space is, per There would also be benefits associated definition, transcending borders. The with better penetration of overseas mar- benefits of globalisation experienced in kets and their respective domestic com- many other fields should also increas- mercial markets. The improved integra- ingly be harvested in the space domain. tion of satellite communications, Earth Europe and Japan should be trail-blazers observation and position, navigation and in allowing and fostering Europe/Japan timing (PNT) could constitute promising areas for such enhanced industrial coop- eration. 168 “EU-Japan Business Roundtable”. EU-Japan Business Roundtable website.
ESPI Report 40 60 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
growing source of economic growth and fying proper conduct for commercial, civil and competitiveness. The upstream industry military actors in space, including through the is highly centralized in both Europe and use of Transparency and Confidence-Building Japan and present challenges to the en- Measures (TCBMs) which will, among other trance of small and medium-sized enter- benefits, facilitate international cooperation prises (SMEs). This can be partially com- and interaction between the private and pub- pensated for by the larger downstream lic sectors as well as address the degradation industrial sector that can generate sub- of the environment of Earth orbits due to the stantial revenues with lower barriers for space debris (including through strengthening the SME entrants. Accordingly, Europe debris mitigation and enabling responsible and Japan should actively explore coop- debris removal). eration on specific, high-profile space Good space governance requires clear guid- projects that are emblematic of the ance, informed decision-making, comprehen- large-scale contributions space assets sive management, and consistent policies. can offer their respective societies, as Existing legal foundations, including Space well as stimulate the growth of the space Treaties and various bilateral and multilateral industries of both sides (e.g. small satel- mechanisms and initiatives (such as the IADC lites or space-based solar power). and UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines and the international Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities), represent a major 3.4 Space Security head-start in addressing 21st century space- related challenges. In addition, space security Space Security (Security for Space) governance can be encouraged by promoting self-restraint, self-control and self-discipline Space security represents a key element of through demonstrating that sustainability of overall space policy and is a concern for all the space environment is squarely in the principal users of space (i.e. commercial, interests of all space-faring nations. This can civilian and military). The Space Security be advanced by building a system of incen- Index uses the following definition of space tives and disincentives to all those that oper- security: “the secure and sustainable access ate in space. to, and use of, space and freedom from space-based threats”. Europe labelled this Space Situational Awareness (SSA) supports concept as “security for space” in its 7th the safe and secure operation of space assets Space Council Resolution of November and related services, as well as risk man- 2010.173 The resolution called for defining agement (on orbit and during re-entry) and and introducing appropriate measures to liability assessment. Increasing numbers of monitor and protect space-based infrastruc- space-faring nations and space aspirants, as ture, both through technology and diplomatic well as new and emerging space technolo- means. Japan has addressed the need for gies, complicate space surveillance and make space security as one of the fundamental comprehensive SSA of space objects a diffi- principles of the 2008 Basic Space Law that cult task. There have been a number of ef- underlines “protection of outer space envi- forts to advance space security through SSA, ronment to achieve sustainable development including a program of the U.S. to cooperate and use of space”. One of the measures de- in preventing on-orbit collisions via the shar- signed to implement this principle is to “facili- ing of SSA-derived information with commer- tate international cooperation to preserve the cial operators and other governments. Thus space environment”.174 the U.S. SSA Sharing Program offers services to users and partners. The U.S. Department To achieve a predictable and stable space of Defense has also signed bilateral SSA environment where all actors behave respon- statements of principles with Canada, France, sibly, there is a need to promote full adher- and Australia, and seeks to expand coopera- ence to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty (OST), tion with other countries as well.175 Another as well as subsequent understandings. These initiative is that of the Space Data Association include the development of Space Situational (SDA) which seeks to exchange SSA informa- Awareness (SSA) and sharing the data; clari- tion among satellite owners and operators. Indeed, broader discussions are already un- 173 Council Resolution: "Global challenges: taking full derway on the need to create a more com- benefit of European spacesystems". Council of the Euro- pean Union (26 November 2010): 9.
ESPI Report 40 61 April 2012
prehensive SSA picture and share data and mitigate, and adjust to climate change, in- information internationally. These discussions cluding through international partnerships. It are aimed at contributing to the improved also emphasized the role of space assets security of space assets for responsible (and especially GMES) for security applica- space-faring nations. tions on Earth, including maritime surveil- lance, border control and support for the EU’s For its part, Europe recognizes that SSA is external actions (including crisis manage- essential for the protection of critical Euro- ment). pean space infrastructure as well as for reli- able and safe space-based operations and In Japan, the Basic Space Law identifies the services. SSA capability is likewise viewed as use of space for security-related challenges an important element of Europe’s extensive on Earth in its provisions dealing with: “im- efforts to promote the peaceful uses of outer provement of human security and creation of space. Europe possesses some radar and a safe and secure society”; “improvement of optical capabilities for space surveillance, national security”; and “promotion of interna- often operated by different countries. Accord- tional cooperation”. These are further trans- ingly, Europe is seeking to construct a pan- lated into measures for “promoting space European SSA system that would support the development and use to contribute to na- safe and secure operations of European space tional and international security”. The Basic assets. Other counties, including Japan, are Space Law also lifted the ban on the use of also seeking to improve their space surveil- space technology for national security activi- lance capabilities. ties. Accordingly, Japan’s Self Defence Force (JSDF) can develop, manufacture, and own The growing amount of orbital space debris and operate defence-related satellites to sup- remains one of the key challenges for a safe port its terrestrial operations, including ballis- space environment. Space debris in the alti- tic missile defence within the scope of na- tudes up to 200 km are burned in the atmos- tional self-defence.176 phere within days, those in altitudes up to 800 km can orbit the Earth for years, even decades, and those above 800 and in the 3.4.1 Europe’s Objectives for Space Security geostationary orbit can remain there virtually forever. China’s destruction of its aging In Europe, space is now considered a strate- weather satellite by an ASAT weapon in gic priority and increasingly an essential 2007, and the 2009 collision of Cosmos and component of policy planning and decision- Iridium satellites, moved space debris on to making. The topic of space security has the radar screen of a global audience which, gained momentum through such develop- until that time, had not been especially sensi- ments as the European Space Policy of May tive to this issue. The U.S. Department of 2007 and the Lisbon Treaty of 2009, the lat- Defense (DOD) currently tracks approxi- ter of which gave the European Union (EU) mately 22,000 man-made objects in orbit. an explicit mandate to be involved in space About 1,100 of these are active satellites. matters, as a competence to be exercised The Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) parallel to Member States. The main Euro- of the US Air Force screens over 1,000 active pean-level institutions dealing with space- payloads against the USG’s space catalogue related issues are the European Space daily. Moreover, the US Space Surveillance Agency (ESA) and the EU. ESA is increasingly Network (SSN) performs 1.4 million sensor involved in security matters. In June 2011, taskings per week with an average of 190 for example, ESA concluded an administrative conjunction warnings and assistance to an arrangement with the European Defence average of three satellite manoeuvres Agency (EDA) that aims primarily at explor- weekly. ing the added value and contribution of space assets to the development of European capa- Space for Security bilities in the area of crisis management and the Common Security and Defence Policy Both Europe and Japan also place an empha- (CSDP). sis on the utilisation of space systems for The High Representative for Foreign Affairs various security purposes on Earth. These and Security Policy, who is also a Vice- include the use of communications, position- President of the European Commission and ing and navigation, and Earth observation President of the Foreign Affairs Council, is systems for tackling environmental issues supported by the European External Action (including climate change), disaster man- Service (EEAS) and supervises two institu- agement, and national (in case of the EU th labelled “external”) security. The 7 Space 176 Council resolution placed particular emphasis Aoki, Setsuko. “Current Satus and Recent Develop- ments in japan’s National Space Law and its Relevance to on establishing appropriate mechanisms to Pacific Rim Space Law and activities”. Journal of Space exploit effectively space systems to monitor, Law, Vol. 35 (2009): 386-388.
ESPI Report 40 62 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
tions important for space security: the Euro- Autonomous access to information derived pean Union Satellite Centre (EUSC) and the from space is thus a strategic EU asset. The European Defence Agency (EDA). EUMETSAT, EU will need to strengthen further its ability an independent intergovernmental organisa- to respond to these challenges, including in tion, is likewise important as it provides its the security and defence domains, both members and cooperating states with through improved coordination and the de- weather-related Earth observation data and velopment of indigenous capacities.177 services, a major portion of which is destined Although Europe has made great strides in for defence-related institutions. developing European space systems, there is The Resolution on European Space Policy hesitancy on the part of individual MS to (ESP) adopted in May 2007 clearly asserted pool, or share, their individual military space the strategic importance of space for Europe capabilities under the EU umbrella as the and called for a „structured dialogue on space limitations of doing so are perceived to ex- and security” involving the European Council ceed the benefits. That said, a number of (EC), the European Commission (EC), and bilateral and multilateral cooperative ar- the European Space Agency (ESA). The Euro- rangements have been forged among Euro- pean Space Policy (ESP) promotes moving pean countries. The conflicts in Bosnia, Kos- toward more interoperable, coordinated ovo, Afghanistan and Iraq contributed to space capabilities among the relevant enti- altering Europe’s approach to military space ties. and greater efforts emerged to coordinate European military space assets, particularly The Lisbon Treaty gave the European Union satellite communications and remote sens- (EU) a stronger role in space as well as the ing.178 mandate to strengthen its international en- gagement in security and defence matters. Five European countries constitute some 99% Accordingly, as it expands its international of military space expenditures. France is the role, the EU is seeking to develop a compre- most advanced in the development of military hensive approach to space-related areas, space systems. It operates communications, including space security. The 7th Space Coun- earth observation and surveillance, and elec- cil Resolution of November 2010, as well as tronic intelligence satellites and plans to European Council Conclusions of May 2011, launch a space-borne ballistic missile early acknowledged the increasing dependency of warning system by 2020. Both Germany and the European economy and policies on space Italy operate synthetic aperture radar (SAR) assets and recognized the need for an inde- satellites and Germany also launched five pendent Space Situational Awareness (SSA) medium-resolution, electro-optical satellites capability. in 2008. France, the UK, Italy and Spain op- erate geosynchronous satellites for military As the Common Security and Defence Policy communications. The Athena-Fidus and remains an intergovernmental policy under SICRAL-2 satellites are a result of coopera- the Lisbon Treaty, any meaningful space se- tion between the French and Italian govern- curity cooperation needs to involve close ments and are slated to be launched in 2013 coordination between individual European or early 2014 (SICRAL-1 was launched in countries. Most of Europe’s security-related 2001).179 space programmes have been conducted on a national level or through government-to- Concerning imaging capabilities, France took government collaboration. Accordingly, there the lead in 2001, in cooperation with Ger- is a high level of duplication and fragmenta- many, Italy, Spain, Belgium, and Greece, tion if looked at from a pan-European per- with a joint agreement on the Besoins Opera- spective. European space technology priori- tionnels Communs (BOC, or common opera- ties are also largely shaped by national pref- erences which can influence contract selec- 177 tion. Commission of the European Communities. Commis- sion Working Document – European Space Policy Pro- The European Commission has been the en- gress Report. COM(2008)561 final of 11 Sep. 2008. Brus- gine of civilian space security initiatives under sels: European Union. 15 Dec. 2010.
ESPI Report 40 63 April 2012
tional requirements). The purpose of the BOC With this non-binding, top-down, initiative, was to develop uniform requirements for a the EU sought to: European global satellite observation system • “Strengthen existing UN Treaties, princi- for security and defence purposes. The ra- ples and other arrangements, through tionale was to expand already existing ar- the subscribing parties pledging to com- rangements between France and Italy on the ply with them”;182 Orfeo system, consisting of the Pleiades opti- cal system and Italian Cosmo-SkyMed radar • “Complement UN Treaties, principles and component. In 2006, the six BOC signatory other arrangements by codifying new countries launched studies for a Multinational best practices in space operations, in- Space-Based Imaging System for Surveil- cluding through notifications and consul- lance, Reconnaissance and Observation tations that strengthen the confidence (MUSIS) with the goal of harmonising future and transparency among space actors optical and radar observation systems. It and contribute to developing good faith envisioned going beyond mere exchanges of solutions that would permit the perform- military intelligence images and provide the ance of space activities and access to users from the six countries with access to all space for all.”183 space-based assets in a transparent and co- herent manner. As EDA’s Capability Devel- After reviewing the EU’s proposal, the U.S. opment Plan includes space-based imaging decided not to sign the draft of the Code of capability for CSDP missions, the EU also Conduct in its current form, but announced became involved in March 2009. Thus EDA that it will “join with the European Union and agreed to the MUSIS project, envisioned to other nations to develop an International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activi- be launched between 2015–2017. However, 184 the future of the project has not been clear ties". The discussions will most likely bene- as the countries have struggled to agree on fit from inputs by space-faring nations react- common requirements.180 ing to the EU’s draft Code. Perceived short- comings of initiatives such as the Code of Security for Space Conduct, or global-level governance gener- ally, include that they lack definition in terms Concerning the EU, the focus has been on of an authority which can enforce the agreed efforts to enhance space security through the rules and procedures. draft Code of Conduct for Outer Space activi- The Ministerial Council of the European Space ties, building European Space Situational Agency (ESA) authorized an optional SSA Awareness (SSA) capabilities, and participat- Preparatory Programme (SSA-PP) in 2008 ing actively in multilateral venues, including with thirteen ESA Member States (MS) cur- the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of rently participating. The approval for further Outer Space (COPUOS). development of the SSA System is expected The draft international Code of Conduct for at the next ESA Ministerial Council in 2012. Outer Space Activities introduced in 2008 by This three-year Programme, formally the European Union (EU), a revised version of launched in January 2009, has sought to which was put forth in September 2010, has develop plans, architecture, and policies to been Europe’s most significant space secu- provide space surveillance, space weather rity-related initiative. The draft text of the prediction and warning, and identification and Code of Conduct included transparency and tracking of Near-Earth Objects (see figure confidence building measures and recognized 31).185 that a comprehensive approach to safety and The stated objective of this initiative has security in outer space should be guided by been to “support Europe's independent utili- the following principles: freedom of access to sation of, and access to, space through the space for all peaceful purposes; preservation provision of timely and accurate information, of the security and integrity of space objects data and services regarding the space envi- in orbit; and due consideration to the legiti- mate defence interests of states.181 182 Lála, Petr. EU Project for a Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities. Information Note, June 2009. Online available 180 deSelding, Peter B. „France Reluctant Yet Hopeful on
ESPI Report 40 64 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 31: Three segments of European SSA Programme (Source: ESA)186
ronment, and particularly regarding hazards Technical Subcommittee (STSC). The Sub- to infrastructure in orbit and on the ground“. committee set up a working group, the task The “hazards” referenced include possible of which is to identify areas of concern for the collisions, space weather, and potential threat long-term sustainability of outer space activi- of Near-Earth Objects (NEOs). The broader ties and propose measures that could en- goal is to build an autonomous SSA capability hance space sustainability for the benefit of to detect, predict, and assess threats to life all countries. A report, currently scheduled and property in space, or stemming from the for 2014, is to contain a comprehensive set of 187 space environment and activities. 1 Con- practices, operating procedures, technical cerning the SSA system’s architecture, standards and policies to advance the long- Europe envisions integrating existing as well term sustainability of outer space activi- as new assets, of private, national and inter- ties.189 During the STSC session of February governmental entities. A network of ground- 2011, the COPUOS adopted so-called “Terms and space-based sensors would provide input of reference and methods of work of the data to a set of SSA Service Centres based Working Group (WG) on the Long-term sus- on their main functions. The receiving of data tainability of space activities”, which specifies from non-European sources would be based objectives, outputs, scope, method of work on mutually-agreed cooperation conditions. and a proposed multi-year work plan. Europe The full operational phase is to be achieved actively engages in this initiative through ESA by 2019. and the member states.190 An initiative by the UNCOPUOS on “Long Term Sustainability of Outer Space Activi- Space for Security 188 ties” is focused on “ways and means of Europe has been increasingly emphasising maintaining outer space for peaceful pur- the use of space systems to enhance secu- poses”. It was introduced by France in Febru- rity. Security in this context covers not only ary 2010 in the Committee’s Scientific and the military uses of space, but space-based systems for environmental, energy security, crisis management, early warning, peace- 186 Koschny, Detlef. “Current Status of ESA’s Space Situ- keeping, civil protection, and other areas. ational Awareness Near-Earth Object Programme”. Euro- pean Space Agency, SSA-NEO-ESA-HO-028/1.0 (14 Feb Europe’s priority programmes, Galileo and 2010). < http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/pres/stsc2010/tech- GMES, are designed to enhance the man- 36.pdf> agement of security-related challenges, 187 Ibid. 188 “Long-term sustainability of outer space activities” 8 Feb. 2010. Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer 189 For further information see: Space 10 Oct. 2011
ESPI Report 40 65 April 2012
among other tasks. Once operational, Galileo • Activation by Sentinel Asia’s partner, the is envisioned to provide the armed forces of Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) the Member States, EU Battle groups and for users in the Asia-Pacific region based CSDP with navigation capabilities, although on a regional collaboration for EO-based the system is considered to be civilian. Al- emergency response in Asia-Pacific coun- though an independent global navigation tries.192 satellite system capability, Galileo will lever- October 2010 marked the tenth anniversary age the benefits of interoperability with the of the International Charter which provides American Global Positioning System (GPS). satellite data required for managing natural The operational European Global Navigation disasters-related crises. As of 2011, eleven Overlay System (EGNOSS), the wide-area space agencies worldwide are members of augmentation system for Europe, is already this initiative. deriving the advantages of cooperative ar- rangements.191 One of the functions of the Global Monitoring 3.4.2 Japan’s Objectives for Space Security for Environment and Security (GMES) pro- Japan’s foreign policy has largely been the gramme, which will integrate Earth observa- one of multilateralism. The United Nations in tion (EO) satellites and ground-based sen- particular provided the means for reintegra- sors, is to support the CSDP. It will also be tion of Japan into the international commu- able to assist in the prevention of disasters nity in the 1950s and 1960s, and an opportu- such as flooding, forest fires and oil spills that nity to exercise diplomatic independence require timely and precise information. from the U.S. At the same time, alliance poli- The International Charter, “Space and Major tics often takes priority due to Japan’s na- Disasters”, initiated by ESA and the French tional security concerns. In early 1990s, with Space Agency (CNES), represents a coopera- the passing of the peacekeeping bills, there tive structure between space agencies and was a change in Japan’s outlook toward in- space system operators in the use of space ternational peace and security. In 1990, the capabilities to assist in managing crises government introduced unsuccessfully a legal caused by natural or technological disasters. framework enabling Japan to participate in The Charter can be activated by national the international peacekeeping efforts, in- authorized bodies from the member countries cluding as part of a multinational force de- (e.g. civil protection, rescue, defence or secu- ployed in the Gulf at that time. Although con- rity agencies). They are able to mobilize troversial domestically, the Diet eventually space and related ground-based resources passed the “Law Concerning Cooperation for (e.g. satellites RADARSAT, ERS, ENVISAT, United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and SPOT, IRS, SAC-C, NOAA satellites, Other Operations” (so-called the International LANDSAT, ALOS, DMC satellites, etc.) to ob- Peace Operations Law) enacted in 1992 that tain critical information on the disaster. enabled the logistic support of the Self- Defense Forces.193 There are four mechanisms to activate the Charter. They include: The situation in the space arena has been influenced by the overall foreign and security • direct activation endorsed by bodies di- policy of Japan. Since the beginning of its rectly authorized to request the service space activities, Japan has been reluctant to for a disaster occurring in their country engage in security-related uses of space, or on their territory (so-called Authorized largely due to its Constitution. In 1969, the Users); Japanese Diet adopted a resolution called • activation by an Authorized User on be- “Space Development for Exclusively Peaceful half of a user of a non-member country Purposes” which established a limit for the in case of a major emergency; involvement of Japan’s defence authorities in investment, ownership, or operation of space • activation by the UN for UN users based systems. Accordingly, the Japanese space on an agreement among the Charter program focused exclusively on civilian re- members and UN OOSA and search and development. UNITAR/UNOSAT to provide support to UN agencies;
192 International Charter on Space and Major Disasters activation mechanisms. 191 Robinson, Jana. “Europe’s Key Foreign Policy Objec-
ESPI Report 40 66 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
The principle of “non-military” use of space is Japan’s Basic Plan on Space also states the being transformed by Japan’s Basic Law on importance of international cooperation on Space of 2008. The law redefined the pur- space security-related issues. In particular, poses and rationales for Japan to invest in Japan has begun to examine how it can ad- space. For the first time, the terminology of vance its SSA capabilities and promote coop- “security” appears in an official document.”194 eration on sharing Space Situation Awareness The law underscored the shift in priorities (SSA) internationally. Japan has an existing from mere scientific research and develop- infrastructure for engaging in SSA observa- ment to greater utilisation of space for indus- tions. A radar station for observation of space trialisation, diplomacy and security. With debris to support manned space missions is regard to security, it mandated the Japanese located in Okayama prefecture. The Kamisai- government to implement necessary meas- bara Space Guard Center (in Okayama) can ures that contribute to Japan’s national secu- track one-meter objects (and up to 10 ob- rity as well as the peace and security of the jects simultaneously) at a distance of 600 international community. Accordingly, the km.196 There are two optical telescopes at the Basic Law allows Japan to use space for its Bisei Astronomical Observatory for space defence in conformity with internationally- debris surveillance in GEO.197 Their work is accepted norms. supported by the National Aerospace Labora- tory of Japan (NAL) that “operates ground- The emphasis on the connectivity between based optical telescopes for the detection and security and diplomacy is significant as space orbit determination of space debris”.198 Ja- is not perceived to be used only for purposes pan’s involvement with the U.S. and Europe of defence, but is to position Japan as a on enhancing space security, including via strong regional leader to assure stability and SSA, would be an important step in enhanc- security. Setsuko Aoki, Professor at the Keio ing space security. University, believes that “the change of Ja- pan’s interpretation of the peaceful uses of outer space could be most useful in stabiliz- Space for Security ing Asian space security, and that it is not The Basic Plan for Space Policy released by likely to become a destabilizing element for the SHSP in June 2009, which constitutes the region.” She also suggests that a collec- Japan’s overall space policy for the next five tive approach to space security that would years, places national security at the fore- begin with civilian cooperation on space ap- front of space-related activities. The second plications and be accompanied by a space pillar of Japan’s Basic Space Plan calls for sustainability initiative developed under the strengthening security through the utilization framework of the United Nations could of space, while maintaining the country’s 195 strengthen stability in Asia. exclusively defensive-oriented policy. It rec- ommended that $26 billion (¥2.5 trillion) be Security for Space dedicated to civil and military space devel- opment activities from 2010 to 2014. Pro- The latter portion of the Basic Space Plan’s grams authorized for funding in this five-year third pillar calls for “diplomatic policy for period include: two to six satellites for the space” (i.e. to engage in diplomatic efforts Quazi Zenith Satellite System (QZSS), a GPS that help establish appropriate rules for space augmentation system; development of space- activities in accordance with space-related based sensor technology for detecting missile treaties). Japan has been one of the countries launches (specified further in the five-year that supported the draft Code of Conduct for FY2011-2015 Mid-Term Defense Plan); three Outer Space Activities originally proposed by small science satellites (beyond those funded the EU in December 2008. Japan is also ac- under existing budgets) and several small tively participating in the UNCOPUOS initia- satellite projects to be led by universities and tive on “Long-Term Sustainability of Outer small commercial companies. The Plan also Space Activities” described in detail in section recommended, but did not mandate, that 3.4.1. Japan develop at least two follow-on missions to the Daichi mapping and disaster monitor- 194 Logsdon, John and James Clay Moltz, eds. “Collective Security in Space: Asian Perspectives”. Washington DC: George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute 196 “Space debris radar station operational“ 9 Apr. 2004 (January 2008). Japan Times 30 Mar. 2011
ESPI Report 40 67 April 2012
ing satellite and two to four satellites with a tified five systems and four programs that support role; replacement of the Kodama and will receive high priority. Kizuna high-speed data transmission satel- The five systems include: “Land and Ocean lites; and the building of optical and radar Observing Satellite System to contribute to satellites to support the existing Information Asia and other regions,” including satellites Gathering Satellite constellation.199 such as ALOS and ASNARO; the “Global Envi- Meanwhile, the Committee on Promotion of ronmental Change and Climate Observing Space Development, established within the Satellite System” that includes GOSAT, Ministry of Defense, formulated the “Basic GCOM-W, GCOM-C and weather satellites; Guidelines for Space Development and Use of the “Advanced Telecommunication Satellite Space” (so-called Basic Guidelines) in Janu- System”; the “Positioning Satellite System” ary 2009. The Guidelines made it clear that (the QZSS); and the “Satellite System for space capabilities are beneficial for defence National Security” (i.e. the Information Gath- purposes and will serve as effective means to ering Satellites - IGS). strengthen SDF’s command, control, commu- The QZSS is a regional GPS augmentation nications, computers, intelligence, surveil- PNT system with coverage of East Asia and lance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) applica- Oceania. The first QZSS satellite, “Michibiki” tions. It also listed the main issues associated was launched in September 2010. It is also with Japan’s space capabilities in information- interoperable with Europe’s Galileo. In order gathering, warning and surveillance; commu- to cover Japanese territory, the satellite is in nication: positioning, navigation and timing a highly elliptical orbit and permanent cover- (PNT); and meteorological observations.200 age can only be achieved with three satel- In December 2010, Japan released its Na- lites. tional Defense Program Guidelines (NDPG), a With regard to the IGS, the North Korea’s ten-year defence strategy. The 2010 NDPG 1998 Taepodong missile launch in August defines peace and stability as inseparable 1998 ensured the Diet’s support for the de- from that of the international community. It velopment of a domestic intelligence satellite calls for the expanded role of Japan’s Self system (as it only received the information Defense Force (JSDF) in peace cooperation about the launch from the U.S.). The pro- activities, humanitarian assistance, as well as posed system was named the “multi-purpose non-traditional security operations such as information-gathering satellites” that could disaster relief, counter-piracy and counter- also monitor weather, natural disasters, and proliferation.201 The new NDPG of December various illegal activities. This was to ensure 2010 encouraged the development and the that it does not violate the 1969 Diet resolu- use of space to strengthen information- tion on space policy. Accordingly, it was pos- gathering, communications functions, etc. sible to proceed with the program based on The Basic Guidelines of January 2009, the an authorization from the Ministry without Basic Plan for Space Policy of June 2009, and the need to change the law. Japan approved the New Defense Policy Guideline (NDPG) of the launch of four IGS (two optical and two December 2010 serve as the instructive radar) in 2002.202 The first IGS was launched documents for Japan’s Ministry of Defence in in 2003 and the latest IGS (radar) in Decem- terms of development and use of space for ber 2011. As several radar satellites have national security. failed prematurely, the IGS fleet is left to The first part of the third pillar of the Basic three operational optical satellites. A fourth Space Plan is “utilisation of space for diplo- optical satellite, launched in September 2010, matic purposes”. Japan is to use space for its is not yet operational. Japan plans another diplomatic priorities and apply space technol- radar satellite launch in the new fiscal year ogy to tackle the threat of natural disasters, (FY2012).203 climate change, and others. Japan also iden- At a regional level, Japan has been actively engaged in the Sentinel Asia initiative, pro- 199 Kallendar-Umezu, Paul. “Missile Warning System at posed in 2004. This Asia-Pacific Regional Forefront of Japan’s New Space Policy”. Space News (9 Space Agency Forum (APRSAF)-led activity June 2009). 200 focuses on the development of a disaster “Basic Guidelines for Space Development and Use of Space.” 15 Jan. 2009. Committee on Promotion of Space management support system in Asia. JAXA Development and Use Ministry of Defense of Japan 2 Feb. 2012
ESPI Report 40 68 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Figure 32: Framework and Concept of Sentinel Asia (Source: JAXA)204
has been at the inception of this rapid re- and initiatives such as the international Code sponse system that uses satellite data and of Conduct for Outer Space Activities. Space images. The main activities include: emer- Situational Awareness (SSA) and the space gency EO in case of a major disaster; accep- debris issue area are also high on the tance of observation requests; and wildlife, agenda. Overall, both Europe and Japan are flood and glacier lake outburst monitoring. in the process of establishing a clear vision Cooperation is led by the APRSAF, ADRC, for a comprehensive space security policy. Digital Asia and international organisations. With regard to using space for security- The Joint Project Team (JPT) includes 52 related activities on Earth, Europe seeks to organisations (44 agencies from 19 countries utilise space for its Common Security and and 8 international organisations). JAXA has Defence Policy (CSDP), including crisis man- two project offices, in Tokyo and Bangkok, to agement and peacekeeping missions, as well implement this initiative (see figure 32). as for disaster management, and maritime and border surveillance (belonging to 3.4.3 Europe–Japan Space Security Cooperation Europe’s so-called “internal action”). Japan views space as a diplomatic tool to enhance Democracy, the rule of law, respect for hu- its national (and international) security, in- man rights and free market economics are cluding through providing their assets for shared values of Europe and Japan. With multilateral initiatives (e.g. Sentinel Asia). regard to security, the EU emphasizes coun- Disaster management and maritime surveil- terterrorism, combating piracy, and interna- lance are both viewed as essential aspects of tional peace cooperation activities, all areas national security space activities. Moreover, of increased interest to Japan. Accordingly, both Europe and Japan place considerable Japan’s cooperation with European countries emphasis on using space assets for tackling and the EU strengthens Japan’s role in deal- environmental issues, especially climate ing with global challenges. This is in accor- change-related effects as an effort to contrib- dance with the strategy of Ministry of De- ute to international security. fense to increase Japan’s security through “multilayered security cooperation in the in- Different efforts to address space security ternational community” stated in Japan’s and bolster security on Earth will likely con- 2011 Defense White Paper.205 tinue. The direction in which these efforts will go depends on future leadership. This will Both Europe and Japan share a number of also involve educating the public about the similar views on space as well as comparable issues connected with safe and secure opera- goals. They both view space as an important tions in space. Europe and Japan will have to strategic asset and seek maximum autonomy strike a balance between multiplying the in a number of space activities. With regard benefits of enhanced cooperation and the to space security, they actively participate in level of independence/autonomy they can diplomatic exchanges on the future govern- achieve. ance of space, including via the UNCOPUOS Relevant recommendations appear below:
204 • Add agenda item on space security into Nakamura, Takayuki. ”Sentinel Asia Project: Abstract”. the broader foreign and security policy Tsukuba: International Workshop on Information Platforms for Disaster Reduction (3-4 October 2007): 2. agendas of the EU and Japan: Europe
ESPI Report 40 69 April 2012
strategic asset and seek maximum parency and confidence-building meas- autonomy in a number of space activi- ures (TCBMs): The alarming increase of ties. With regard to space security, they space debris in Earth’s orbits has been actively participate in diplomatic ex- recognized as one of the most challeng- changes on the future governance of ing threats to secure space operations. space via various bilateral and multilat- With the adoption of the IADC Space De- eral mechanisms and initiatives (e.g. the bris Mitigation Guidelines at the UN in UNCOPUOS, the International Code of 2008, there is a continuing need for po- Conduct for Outer Space Activities etc.). litical endorsement of, and support for, Space Situational Awareness (SSA) and these guidelines. Both Europe and Japan the orbital debris issue area are also high should strengthen further their existing on the space agenda. Indeed, both engagement in various efforts to pre- Europe and Japan are in the process of serve space sustainability, including establishing more comprehensive space through space debris remediation efforts, security policies. Good space governance SSA and transparency and confidence- requires clear guidance, informed deci- building measures (TCBMs). sion-making, comprehensive manage- • Increase cooperative opportunities for ment, and consistent policies. To achieve the EU and Japan in the area of crisis a predictable and stable space environ- management: Both sides are involved in ment where all actors behave responsi- various humanitarian and rescue under- bly, there is a need to facilitate interna- takings, peacekeeping operations and tional cooperation, closer interaction be- crisis management. Enhanced coopera- tween the private and public sectors, and tion can help fill existing gaps in crisis the political will to address the degrada- management operations, including tion of the environment of Earth orbits through the establishment of more re- due to space debris. Accordingly, adding sponsive multinational forces. Space as- the most pressing space security chal- sets are indispensable to the effective lenges to the broader bilateral foreign operations of such forces. Joint participa- and security policy agenda would dem- tion of Europe and Japan in crisis man- onstrate heightened awareness and pri- agement exercises, actual missions and ority accorded this rapidly growing issue the sharing of space-based information, portfolio. can improve prospects for mission suc- • Pursue cooperative strategies for im- cess and more effective exploitation of proved space debris mitigation and re- the benefits of available space systems. moval supported by upgraded Space
Situational Awareness (SSA) and trans-
ESPI Report 40 70 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
4. Conclusion
Japan and Europe seek to exercise political prowess. Space-based systems can provide leadership on issues of strategic importance long-term monitoring of the Earth’s environ- and have acknowledged the need for en- ment and climate change, contribute to dis- hanced security and defence-related capabili- aster management operations and numerous ties (e.g. independent access to space, other important undertakings. Industry-to- Europe’s Galileo and Japan’s QZSS, etc.). The industry collaboration helps drive innovation prosperity and economic competitiveness of and generates spin-off technologies that the domestic space industry are also a prime benefit the broader economy. Space security concern. The EU seeks a solid technological seeks to protect space systems as well as base to have an independent, competitive utilise them for various security-related pur- space industry with global horizons. Strong poses on Earth. Overall, the four areas are industry is also seen as a way to strengthen loaded with scientific dimensions, often in- Europe’s standing at multilateral venues. volving creation of new technologies that fuel Innovation is the key to such competitive- industry. Space security-related projects can ness, achieved not only through funding sci- often create new commercial spin-offs, and ence, technology, engineering and math, but vice versa. also by seeking to undertake ambitious ob- Given this confluence of similar objectives for jectives in space exploration and security. space, it is only natural for these partners to Japan is basically on the same page concern- intensify space-related cooperation in various ing support for space commercialisation and forms. In an era marked by considerable economic advancements via space. Employ- international uncertainty, global eco- ing international space cooperation as an nomic/financial tensions and conflicting politi- instrument and force-multiplier for foreign cal agendas, enhanced cooperation in the policy is also identified as a strategic priority space field can shift the focus to promising by both Europe and Japan. contributions and benefits to Europe, Japan Reviewing space cooperation in four select and the broader international community. areas of space activities revealed a compel- Indeed, the modalities through which Europe ling rational for closer space ties between and Japan interact in space are likely to be Europe and Japan. Space exploration projects one of the more important arenas for poten- expand mankind’s reach and technological tial cooperation in the future.
ESPI Report 40 71 April 2012
List of Acronyms
Acronym Explanation A ADEN ALOS European Data Node ADEOS Advanced Earth Monitoring satellite ADRC Asian Disaster Reduction Center ALFLEX Automatic Landing Flight Experiment APRSAF Asia-Pacific Regional Space Agency Forum ARV ATV Return Vehicle ATV Automated Transfer Vehicle AVNIR-2 Advanced Visible and Near Infrared Radiometer Type-2 B BOC Besoins Operationnels Communs BRT Business Roundtable C CCI Climate Change Initiative CEOS Committee on Earth Observation Satellites CIS Commonwealth of Independent States CNES Centre National d'Études Spatiales COPUOS Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space CSDP Common Security and Defence Policy CSTP Council for Science and Technology Policy D DBS Direct Broadcasting Services DMSS Disaster Management Support System DOD Department of Defense E EAP Environmental Action Programmes EGNOS European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service EGNOSS European Global Navigation Overlay System ELDO European Launcher Development organization ELINT Electronic Intelligence Elips European Programme for Life and Physical Sciences ELV European Launch Vehicle EO Earth Observation EPA Economic Partnership Agreement ESRO European Space Research Organisation
ESPI Report 40 72 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Acronym Explanation EUMETSAT European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites F FLPP Future Launchers Preparatory Programme FSS Fixed satellite Services FTA Free Trade Agreement G G8 Group of Eight GCMs General Circulation Models GCOM Global Change Observation Mission GEO Group on Earth Observation GEOSS Global Earth Observation System of Systems GHG Greenhouse Gas GIS Geographic Information Systems GLI Global Imager GMES Global Monitoring for Environment and Security GNI Gross National Income GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System GOCE Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer GTO Geostationary Transfer Orbit H HSPG High-level Space Policy Group HTV H-2 Transfer Vehicle HYFLEX Hypersonic Flight Experiment I IAWG International Architecture Working Group ICT Information and Communication Technologies IFRI Institut Français des Relations Internationales ILS International Launch Services IRS Indian Remote Sensing ISAS Institute of Space and Astronautical Science ISECG International Space Exploration Coordination Group ISS International Space Station ISWG International Standards Working Group J JAMSS Japan's Manned Space Systems Corporation JEM Japanese Experiment Module JRC Joint Research Centre JSDF Japan’s Self Defence Force JSF Japan Space Forum JSpOC Joint Space Operations Center
ESPI Report 40 73 April 2012
L LEO Low-Earth orbit LPT Light Particle Telescope M ME Midlife Evolution MELCO Mitsubishi Electric Corporation MEO Medium-Earth orbit METI Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry MEXT Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology MFF Multiannual Financial Framework MHI Mitsubishi Heavy Industries MIC Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications MLIT Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism MMO Mercury Magnetospheric Orbiter MOFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs MPO Mercury Planetary Orbiter MR Medium Resolution MS Member State Multinational Space-Based Imaging System for Surveillance, Reconnaissance MUSIS and Observation N NAL National Aerospace Laboratory NASDA National Space Development Agency of Japan NDPG National Defense Program Guidelines NEDO New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organisation NEOs Near-Earth Objects NGL Next-Generation Launcher O OOSA United Nations’ Office for Outer Space Affairs OST Outer Space Treaty P PALSAR Phased Array type L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar PCRF Protein Crystallization Research Facility PNT Position, Navigation and Timing PRISM Panchromatic Remote-sensing Instrument of Stereo Mapping R R&D Research and Development RESTEC Remote Sensing Technology Center RFSA Russian Federal Space Agency RLV Reusable Launch Vehicle RRD Regulatory Reform Dialogue RVS Rendezvous- and Docking Sensor
ESPI Report 40 74 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
S SAC Space Activities Commission SAR Synthetic Aperture Radar SATCOM Satellite Communications SCC Space Communications Corporation SDA Space Data Association SFOC Space Flight Operations Contract SJAC Space Activities Commission SMEs Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises SMOS Soil Moisture and Ocean Salinity SPASEC Space and Security Panel of Experts SPI Space Policy Institute SPICA A joint ESA-JAXA mission SSA Space Situational Awareness SSA-PP SSA Preparatory Programme SSN Space Surveillance Network STSC Scientific and Technical Subcommittee SWG Science Working Group T TCBMs Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures TEU Treaty on European Union TsSKB Progress The Progress State Research and Production Space Centre U ULA United Launch Alliance UNEP UN Environment Programme UNFCCC UN Framework Convention on Climate Change UPLC Unpressurized Logistic Carrier USA United Space Alliance USEF Unmanned Space Experiment Free Flyer USOCs User Support & Operation Centers USSTRATCOM U.S. Strategic Command V VHR Very High Resolution W WP Working Parties WTO World Trade Organization
ESPI Report 40 75 April 2012
Annex
“Europe–Japan Space Cooperation” that was held on 17 January 2012. Former ESPI Direc- A.1 Project Methodology tor, Kai-Uwe Schrogl, and ESPI Resident Fel- low, Jana Robinson, met with government To address the topic of Europe–Japan coop- officials from various Ministries, including the eration in space, information and research Deputy Secretary-General of the Cabinet materials were collected through a number of Secretariat’s Strategic Headquarters for means, including in-house, open source re- Space Policy, the Chairman of the Space Ac- search and expert interviews via telephone tivities Commission (SJAC), the Deputy Direc- and in-person. The research involved a re- tor-General of the Ministry of Education view of the current status of Japan’s coopera- (MEXT), and the Director of International tion with Europe in space, including with the Science Cooperation Division of the Ministry EU, Member States (through national space of Foreign Affairs (MOFA). A scheduled meet- programmes) and participation in ESA pro- ing with the Director of the Space Industry grammes. Office at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) had to be cancelled due to Experts in the areas of space policy, civilian the devastating earthquake/tsunami that space activities and space security, from ESA, struck Japan on Friday, 11 March 2011. With JAXA, the national space agencies of Europe, regard to Japanese industry, meetings were the EU, relevant Ministries in Japan, commer- held with the President of Japan’s Manned cial entities, academia and non-governmental Space Systems Corporation (JAMSS) and the organizations were contacted to provide their President of the Japan Space Forum (JSF). expert views to augment and reinforce the study. Particular attention was paid to those On 14 March, a special meeting was arranged experts familiar with past cooperative efforts for ESPI representatives and the Director of in various fields to gain insights concerning the George Washington University’s Space the technical and practical issues that accom- Policy Institute (SPI), Dr. Scott Pace, with pany such cooperative efforts. JAXA President, Keiji Tachikawa, and JAXA Executive Vice President, Kiyoshi Higuchi. In A number of interviews with high-level offi- JAXA’s offices, ESPI gave a presentation on cials took place during a fact-finding visit to the European perspective concerning future Japan that occurred in March 2011. Prelimi- space transportation programmes and inter- nary discussions were also conducted at that national cooperation. time concerning a gathering entitled
At JAXA with President Keiji Tachikawa and Executive Vice President Kiyoshi Higuchi (third and fourth from left standing)
ESPI Report 40 76 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
On 17 January 2012, ESPI organised, on its dent, Business Division Products, Astrium; premises in Vienna, a workshop entitled Kaoru Mamiya, President of the Japan Space “Europe–Japan Space Cooperation”. Jana Forum (JSF); Naoto Matsuura, Secretary Robinson, the report’s author, was responsi- General of the Remote Sensing Technology ble for of the workshop’s organisation. Four Center of Japan (RESTEC); Giuseppe Morsillo, panels discussed the four dimensions of Director of ESA Policies, Planning and Con- Europe–Japan cooperation addressed in this trol; Jana Robinson, ESPI Resident Fellow; report. The workshop participants included Kazuto Suzuki, Professor of International Jiří Buriánek, Director of the EU Council’s Political Economy at the Public Policy School Directorate for Competitiveness, Lisbon of Hokkaido University; Gerhard Thiele, ESPI Strategy, Industry, Research, Information Resident Fellow and former astronaut; Chris- Society and Electronic Communications; Tet- tophe Venet, Research Associate at the Space suhiko Ikegami, Chairman of the Space Ac- Policy Program, Institut Français des Rela- tivities Commission at Japan’s Ministry of tions Internationales (IFRI); and Hirotaka Education, Culture, Sports, Science & Tech- Watanabe, Special Researcher at the Gradu- nology (MEXT); Hirotoshi Kunitomo, Counsel- ate School of Law and Politics, Osaka Univer- lor at the Secretariat of the Strategic Head- sity. The workshop proceedings were inte- quarters for Space Policy at Japan’s Cabinet grated into the Final Report. Office; Andreas Lindenthal, Senior Vice Presi-
Conference speakers: From top left: Gerhard Thiele (ESPI), Christophe Venet (IFRI), Andreas Lindenthal (Astrium), Kazuto Suzuki (Hokkaido Univer- sity), Peter Hulstroj (ESPI Director), Hirotaka Watanabe (Osaka University). From bottom left: Jana Robinson (ESPI), Naoto Matsuura (RESTEC), Hirotoshi Kunitomo (Japan’s Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy), Giuseppe Morsillo (ESA), Tetsuhiko Ikegami (MEXT), Jiří Buriánek (EU Council), Kaoru Mamiya (JSF)
ESPI Report 40 77 April 2012
A.2 Agenda of the Europe–Japan Space Workshop Organised by ESPI
ESPI Report 40 78 April 2012 Europe–Japan Strategic Partnership: the Space Dimension
Acknowledgements
The author would first like to express special ganised by ESPI on 17 January 2012 from thanks to Kai-Uwe Schrogl, Head of ESA Poli- which valuable insights were gained, includ- cies Department and former Director of the ing Giuseppe Morsillo, Director of ESA Poli- European Space Policy Institute who initiated cies, Planning and Control; Hirotoshi Kuni- this project. It is likewise important to recog- tomo, Counsellor at the Secretariat of the nise the high-level officials, industry repre- Strategic Headquarters for Space Policy at sentatives and space experts that took time Japan’s Cabinet Office; Jiří Buriánek, Director to meet with us during a visit in Tokyo in of the EU Council’s Directorate for Competi- March 2011. They include Hirofumi Katase, tiveness, Lisbon Strategy, Industry, Re- the Deputy Secretary-General of the Cabinet search, Information Society and Electronic Secretariat’s Strategic Headquarters for Communications; Tetsuhiko Ikegami, Chair- Space Policy, Tetsuo Ikegami, Chairman of man of the Space Activities Commission at the Space Activities Commission (SJAC), Jun Japan’s Ministry of Education, Culture, Yanagi, the Director of International Science Sports, Science & Technology (MEXT); An- Cooperation Division of the Ministry of For- dreas Lindenthal, Senior Vice President, Busi- eign Affairs (MOFA), Kazuhide Todome, ness Division Products, Astrium; Kaoru Ma- President of Japan’s Manned Space Systems miya, President of the Japan Space Forum Corporation (JAMSS), Kaoru Mamiya, the (JSF); Naoto Matsuura, Secretary General of President of the Japan Space Forum (JSF). the Remote Sensing Technology Center of Sincere appreciation is extended to the JAXA Japan (RESTEC); Kazuto Suzuki, Professor of representatives who facilitated the ESPI visit, International Political Economy at the Public especially Motoko Uchitomi and Mami Sa- Policy School of Hokkaido University; Gerhard samura, as well as a memorable meeting Thiele, ESPI Resident Fellow and former as- with JAXA President, Keiji Tachikawa, and tronaut; Christophe Venet, Research Associ- JAXA Executive Vice President, Kiyoshi Higu- ate at the Space Policy Program, Institut chi. Français des Relations Internationales (IFRI); Hirotaka Watanabe, Special Researcher at the The author is also grateful to the participants Graduate School of Law and Politics, Osaka of the “Europe-Japan Space Workshop” or- University and Peter Hulsroj, ESPI Director.
About the Author
Jana Robinson has been Resident Fellow at Asian Studies from George Washington Uni- the European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) versity’s Elliott School of International Affairs, since December 2009. She has published a in Washington DC specialising in Asia-Pacific number of articles on space security and sus- security issues and space policy, and an MA tainability in various journals. Prior to joining in Asian Studies from Palacky University, ESPI, she served as Development Director for Olomouc, Czech Republic. She received the Prague Security Studies Institute (PSSI) scholarships to attend the International from 2005–2009, a leading, Prague-based, Space University (ISU) 2009 Space Studies non-profit public policy organisation focused Program (SSP09), 2008 Summer Mandarin on security policy and studies. She was like- Training Course at the Mandarin Training wise responsible for the corporate establish- Center of the National Taiwan Normal Univer- ment of PSSI Washington, a non-profit or- sity in Taipei, and Shanghai University in ganisation in Washington D.C., closely affili- 1999-2000. ated with PSSI Prague. She holds an MA in
ESPI Report 40 79 April 2012
Mission Statement of ESPI
The European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) provides decision-makers with an informed view on mid- to long-term issues relevant to Europe’s space activi- ties. In this context, ESPI acts as an independent platform for developing po- sitions and strategies.
www.espi.or.at