IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v12y2021i4p568-573.html

Astro‐Environmentalism: Towards a Polycentric Governance of Space Debris

Author

Listed:
  • Jean‐Frédéric Morin
  • Benjamin Richard

Abstract

The Earth’s orbital space is increasingly threatened by debris. It is frequently described as a common‐pool resource vulnerable to a ‘tragedy of the commons’ scenario. Scholars have suggested ambitious policy proposals to tackle the tragedy of space debris and assure the sustainability of the Earth’s orbits. Their proposals can be classified into three categories: hierarchical regulations, economic incentives and property rights. All three categories require some form of central coordination. However, there might be an alternative approach to the problem and other potential solutions. Elinor Ostrom suggested that decentralized, polycentric systems are appropriate for governing common‐pool resources. Anecdotal evidence suggests that a polycentric form of governance can encourage a more sustainable use of the Earth’s orbits.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean‐Frédéric Morin & Benjamin Richard, 2021. "Astro‐Environmentalism: Towards a Polycentric Governance of Space Debris," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(4), pages 568-573, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:12:y:2021:i:4:p:568-573
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.12950
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12950
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.12950?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexander W. Salter & Peter T. Leeson, 2014. "Celestial Anarchy: A Threat to Outer Space Commerce?," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 34(3), pages 581-596, Fall.
    2. Raustiala, Kal & Victor, David G., 2004. "The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 277-309, April.
    3. Peter J Phillips & Gabriela Pohl, 2021. "Space Junk: Behavioural Economics and the Prioritisation of Solutions," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(8), pages 956-971, November.
    4. Nodir Adilov & Peter Alexander & Brendan Cunningham, 2015. "An Economic Analysis of Earth Orbit Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(1), pages 81-98, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Arpit Raswant & Bo Bernhard Nielsen & Peter J. Buckley, 2025. "Space: a new frontier for international business," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 56(5), pages 567-588, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pachankis, Yang, 2022. "Assessment of Space Junks — Organizational Origins, Current Status, and Economic Impacts," MPRA Paper 115688, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Jora Octavian-Dragomir & Roşca Vlad I. & Iacob Mihaela & Murea Maria-Mirona & Nedef Matei-Ștefan, 2023. "Small and medium enterprises shooting for the stars: what matters, besides size, in outer space economy?," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 20-35, March.
    3. Julien Guyot & Akhil Rao & Sebastien Rouillon, 2022. "The long-run economics of sustainable orbit use," Working Papers hal-03896730, HAL.
    4. Benjamin Cashore & Jette Steen Knudsen & Jeremy Moon & Hamish van der Ven, 2021. "Private authority and public policy interactions in global context: Governance spheres for problem solving," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1166-1182, October.
    5. Rakhyun Kim & Brendan Mackey, 2014. "International environmental law as a complex adaptive system," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 5-24, March.
    6. Liste, Philip, 2022. "Tax Robbery Incorporated: The transnational legal infrastructures of tax arbitrage," Global Cooperation Research Papers 30, University of Duisburg-Essen, Käte Hamburger Kolleg / Centre for Global Cooperation Research (KHK/GCR21).
    7. Stephan Hoch & Axel Michaelowa & Aglaja Espelage & Anne-Kathrin Weber, 2019. "Governing complexity: How can the interplay of multilateral environmental agreements be harnessed for effective international market-based climate policy instruments?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 595-613, December.
    8. Reinsberg,Bernhard Wilfried & Michaelowa,Katharina & Knack,Stephen, 2015. "Which donors, which funds ? the choice of multilateral funds by bilateral donors at the World Bank," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7441, The World Bank.
    9. Matias E. Margulis, 2023. "Backdoor Bargaining: How the European Union Navigates the Food Aid Regime Complex," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(2), pages 29-38.
    10. Grasl, Maximilian, 2011. "International Financial Reporting Standards and banking regulation: A comeback of the state?," TranState Working Papers 158, University of Bremen, Collaborative Research Center 597: Transformations of the State.
    11. Brigitte Weiffen & Leslie Wehner & Detlef Nolte, 2013. "Overlapping regional security institutions in South America: The case of OAS and UNASUR," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 16(4), pages 370-389, December.
    12. Zachary Grzelka & Jeffrey Wagner, 2019. "Managing Satellite Debris in Low-Earth Orbit: Incentivizing Ex Ante Satellite Quality and Ex Post Take-Back Programs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 319-336, September.
    13. Helmut Breitmeier & Sandra Schwindenhammer & Andrés Checa & Jacob Manderbach & Magdalena Tanzer, 2021. "Aligned Sustainability Understandings? Global Inter-Institutional Arrangements and the Implementation of SDG 2," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 141-151.
    14. Tom Delreux & Joseph Earsom, 2023. "The European Union as an Actor Navigating International Regime Complexes," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(2), pages 1-5.
    15. Gutner, Tamar & Heltberg, Rasmus, 2025. "Conceptualizing and evaluating how international organizations collaborate," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    16. Ronald Mitchell, 2013. "Oran Young and international institutions," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, March.
    17. Nathan, Iben & Chen, Jie & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Xu, Bin & Li, Yan, 2018. "Facing the complexities of the global timber trade regime: How do Chinese wood enterprises respond to international legality verification requirements, and what are the implications for regime effectiveness?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 169-180.
    18. Agni Kalfagianni & Oran R. Young, 2022. "The politics of multilateral environmental agreements lessons from 20 years of INEA," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 245-262, June.
    19. Ivo Križić, 2021. "Regulating public procurement in Brazil, India, and China: Toward the regulatory‐developmental state," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 561-580, July.
    20. C. Randall Henning, 2019. "Regime Complexity and the Institutions of Crisis and Development Finance," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(1), pages 24-45, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:12:y:2021:i:4:p:568-573. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.