Centre for Space Futures has released a white paper aimed at shaping global rules for space activity, signalling a push from Riyadh to influence debates on how the rapidly expanding space economy should be governed. Issued at the start of the year, the document places legal and regulatory frameworks at the centre of future space development, as commercial launches accelerate and more states and private operators seek access to orbit and beyond.
The knowledge paper, titled The Future of Space Law, frames governance as an urgent policy challenge rather than a theoretical exercise. It argues that existing international space law, largely anchored in treaties drafted during the Cold War, is under strain from new realities such as satellite mega-constellations, private lunar missions and the prospect of space resource utilisation. By releasing the paper now, the Centre for Space Futures positions itself as a contributor to global policy thinking at a moment when space is increasingly treated as an economic domain rather than a purely scientific or strategic one.
According to the paper, the global space economy is on a trajectory of sustained expansion, driven by falling launch costs, advances in satellite technology and growing demand for space-based services ranging from communications to Earth observation. Governance gaps, it warns, risk translating into commercial uncertainty, environmental damage in orbit and heightened geopolitical friction. The paper does not advocate for a wholesale replacement of existing treaties but instead calls for adaptive regulatory approaches that can coexist with established international law.
A central feature of the study is its comparative review of governance models from other shared or global commons. The paper examines the Antarctic Treaty System as an example of how competing national interests can be balanced through cooperative frameworks that prioritise peaceful use and scientific collaboration. It also looks to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, highlighting how layered jurisdictions and dispute-resolution mechanisms have been used to manage access, exploitation and environmental protection in international waters. The regulatory role of the International Telecommunication Union is cited as a practical model for allocating scarce resources, in this case radio spectrum and orbital slots, through multilateral coordination.
By drawing on these precedents, the Centre for Space Futures argues that space governance need not start from scratch. Instead, it suggests that principles such as transparency, equitable access, sustainability and dispute settlement can be adapted to the space domain. The paper notes that while space differs technically and legally from oceans or polar regions, the underlying challenge of managing a shared environment with both public and private actors is comparable.
The document places particular emphasis on the role of national regulators in bridging global norms and domestic implementation. As more countries develop space strategies and licensing regimes for private operators, inconsistencies between national rules could create regulatory arbitrage or conflict. The paper calls for greater alignment with international standards, warning that fragmented regulation could undermine safety and long-term investment.
Commercial activity features prominently in the analysis. The paper recognises that private companies now account for a significant share of launches and satellite operations, making them de facto stakeholders in space governance. It argues that effective legal frameworks should provide clarity for investors while imposing responsibilities related to debris mitigation, collision avoidance and responsible behaviour. Without such balance, it suggests, economic growth in space could be accompanied by rising operational risks.
Environmental sustainability in orbit is treated as a governance priority rather than a secondary concern. The paper points to congestion in low Earth orbit and the accumulation of space debris as issues that transcend national boundaries. Drawing parallels with maritime pollution regimes, it suggests that binding norms or incentive-based mechanisms may be required to ensure compliance, particularly as launch rates increase.
Geopolitical considerations also shape the paper’s tone. While avoiding direct references to specific rivalries, it acknowledges that space is becoming more strategically contested. Governance frameworks, it argues, can serve as confidence-building tools by establishing shared expectations and reducing the scope for miscalculation. The paper positions multilateral dialogue as essential, particularly as emerging spacefaring nations seek a voice alongside established powers.
The knowledge paper, titled The Future of Space Law, frames governance as an urgent policy challenge rather than a theoretical exercise. It argues that existing international space law, largely anchored in treaties drafted during the Cold War, is under strain from new realities such as satellite mega-constellations, private lunar missions and the prospect of space resource utilisation. By releasing the paper now, the Centre for Space Futures positions itself as a contributor to global policy thinking at a moment when space is increasingly treated as an economic domain rather than a purely scientific or strategic one.
According to the paper, the global space economy is on a trajectory of sustained expansion, driven by falling launch costs, advances in satellite technology and growing demand for space-based services ranging from communications to Earth observation. Governance gaps, it warns, risk translating into commercial uncertainty, environmental damage in orbit and heightened geopolitical friction. The paper does not advocate for a wholesale replacement of existing treaties but instead calls for adaptive regulatory approaches that can coexist with established international law.
A central feature of the study is its comparative review of governance models from other shared or global commons. The paper examines the Antarctic Treaty System as an example of how competing national interests can be balanced through cooperative frameworks that prioritise peaceful use and scientific collaboration. It also looks to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, highlighting how layered jurisdictions and dispute-resolution mechanisms have been used to manage access, exploitation and environmental protection in international waters. The regulatory role of the International Telecommunication Union is cited as a practical model for allocating scarce resources, in this case radio spectrum and orbital slots, through multilateral coordination.
By drawing on these precedents, the Centre for Space Futures argues that space governance need not start from scratch. Instead, it suggests that principles such as transparency, equitable access, sustainability and dispute settlement can be adapted to the space domain. The paper notes that while space differs technically and legally from oceans or polar regions, the underlying challenge of managing a shared environment with both public and private actors is comparable.
The document places particular emphasis on the role of national regulators in bridging global norms and domestic implementation. As more countries develop space strategies and licensing regimes for private operators, inconsistencies between national rules could create regulatory arbitrage or conflict. The paper calls for greater alignment with international standards, warning that fragmented regulation could undermine safety and long-term investment.
Commercial activity features prominently in the analysis. The paper recognises that private companies now account for a significant share of launches and satellite operations, making them de facto stakeholders in space governance. It argues that effective legal frameworks should provide clarity for investors while imposing responsibilities related to debris mitigation, collision avoidance and responsible behaviour. Without such balance, it suggests, economic growth in space could be accompanied by rising operational risks.
Environmental sustainability in orbit is treated as a governance priority rather than a secondary concern. The paper points to congestion in low Earth orbit and the accumulation of space debris as issues that transcend national boundaries. Drawing parallels with maritime pollution regimes, it suggests that binding norms or incentive-based mechanisms may be required to ensure compliance, particularly as launch rates increase.
Geopolitical considerations also shape the paper’s tone. While avoiding direct references to specific rivalries, it acknowledges that space is becoming more strategically contested. Governance frameworks, it argues, can serve as confidence-building tools by establishing shared expectations and reducing the scope for miscalculation. The paper positions multilateral dialogue as essential, particularly as emerging spacefaring nations seek a voice alongside established powers.
Topics
Saudi Arabia