Description
The dominant paradigm of Astropolitics continues to be inspired by the worldview of Political Realism. The transformations due to the involvement of private corporations raise certain normative queries, which the dominant framework considers irrelevant. Although Critical Astropolitics has begun to incorporate such concerns, it doesn’t reflect much on the fundamental aspects of distributive justice. This paper enquires whether the distribution of the benefits from space exploration aligns with the conception of justice, and if the existing models of space governance are sustainable.
The first aspect elaborates upon the criterion of accessing the means and benefits of space exploration. While on paper, the 2015 U.S. Space Act allows any individual to set up their company and fulfil its commercial objectives in space, the question of relevance is, who can invest in such expensive projects? Private wealth today has become the criterion for accessing the potential benefits of exploring space, leading to a denial of agency for those who cannot afford the cost. The structural constraints exclude certain people from the benefits of such endeavours.
The second aspect elaborates upon the unfair obligations towards the negative externalities. While the developed nations of the global north, who had previously amassed wealth through colonialism, are today able to benefit from space ventures; the global south—without similar advantages—bears an equal burden from the impacts of climate change. This does not provide a level playing field for the poorer nations. It raises the larger question of who is to stop the rich from escaping to some other planet, due to climate change on Earth. Such perspectives enable us to analyse the systemic injustices, within which, the global space sector operates.
Keywords: Astropolitics, Distributive Justice, Space Governance, Global Inequality
