How Europe developed its Space Industry
The inauguration of the African Space Agency (AfSA) on January 25, 2023 heralded a decades long push for a continental agency to direct space affairs within Africa. In this series, Kwaku Sumah examines the stated aims and goals of the agency, and asks, is it possible for the AfSA to achieve its stated aims as designed?
Combining previous criticisms raised by Martinez and Aganaba-Jeanty with the concerns raised in the previous article, the main objections of the AfSA can be distilled to the following, namely the:
Undue influence and participation of a continental body in intra-African cooperation that should rather be led by regional entities. This additionally diminishes existing regional institutions.
Mismatch between Member States’ capabilities, expertise, funding, and space-readiness that dilutes cooperative abilities.
Lack of clear and direct benefits, or value proposition to participating Member States, which makes allocating funds hard to justify.
Marginalised role of the private sector which should take on the mantle of developing a vibrant, indigenous space industry and should respond to the needs of the continent; and
Use of a legacy approach where large centralised bodies coordinate all internal space affairs.
As Africa only contributes to a fraction of the global space economy, it can be instructive to look at other space regions to understand their history of space development, current industrial structure, and approach towards development and growth as a potential template for African development.
The following analysis will serve to motivate an increased role of the private sector for Africa and a reduced role for the AfSA, which has been conceived based on legacy models that I will argue are no longer appropriate in the current landscape of space applications and services. The all-encompassing scope of the AfSA is ultimately a detriment that will impede it from achieving the goals of the African Space Policy and Strategy.
1.1 Europe
As previously mentioned, the conceptualisation of the AfSA was in part built on an analysis of the European space ecosystem, making it a good starting point for this analysis. The core of Gottschalk’s argument was that after European nations merged the European Launcher Development Organisation (ELDO), and the European Space Research Organisation (ESRO) into the European Space Agency (ESA) to pool capital, countries who did not support continental cooperation ended up marginalising themselves.[1]
Martinez countered this argument by noting that ELDO and ESRO were a necessary pre-condition for ESA to be established in the first place, and that the leading countries had their own established national space programmes and human capital; joining together to cooperate primarily to compete with the space superpowers of that age – the U.S. and the former Soviet Union.[2] Aganaba-Jeanty added that the juste retour policy[3] of ESA would also likely be unsuited for the African context.[4] Both Martinez’s and Aganaba-Jeanty’s arguments reinforce the notion that the industrial capabilities of Member States in Europe were on a more equitable level. European cooperation did not stem from the creation of a continental body, rather the reverse is true. The juste retour policy also ensured clear and direct benefits to Member States who were thus incentivised to collaborate.
“European cooperation did not stem from the creation of a continental body, rather the reverse is true”
In my view, the important lesson of the formation of ESA lies in the fact that it was designed as a response to the growing influence and threat of the two space superpowers. Europe wanted to counter their efforts and establish themselves as a premier space superpower, and most of its actions since then has followed that model.
The formation of ESA was not necessary to develop capacity in Member States, but rather to pool capital to fund globally competitive space projects and missions, as well as retain European scientists who were leaving to find work in the U.S. or Soviet Union.[5] The context here being that European countries had been ravaged economically and socially by World War II. They created inter-governmental organisations to be able to keep funding complex and expensive scientific and technological research activities in specific fields of strategic importance, to remain competitive geopolitically. This had the added benefit of integrating European research activities, following the more general trend towards European integration post World War II.[6]
Additionally, the formation of ELDO, ESRO, and eventually ESA lined up with the competitive requirements of the legacy space industry, namely the need for very large investments to develop launch vehicles (previously ELDO’s remit) and capable satellites for space research (previously ESRO’s remit). In this modern age of NewSpace however, being globally competitive does not necessarily require very large investments or the need for independent launch capability; although both of course can be beneficial.
“NewSpace has brought into question the idea of space agency driven standards and operating speed. ”
NewSpace has brought into question the idea of space agency driven standards and operating speed. This shift is seen in newer ESA Member States who are more downstream-oriented than their legacy counterparts. Some Member States such as the United Kingdom (UK) and Luxembourg in particular have worked hard on establishing their countries as international hubs for space, aiming to attract foreign investors and start-ups.
In the past years, the European Union (EU) has moved to unify its space programmes and reduce fragmentation and duplication of efforts. The new EU Space Programme 2021–2027 has led to the creation of the EU Agency for Space (EUSPA), which replaced the former European GNSS Agency and is the user-oriented operational Agency of the EU Space Programme. ESA focuses primarily on the technical elements of the EU space programs, as well as on space research.[7]
In line with the shift towards NewSpace approaches, EUSPA’s Executive Director, Rodrigo da Costa, noted in 2021 that EUSPA was at the heart of NewSpace. He especially highlighted the key role of the private sector, emphasising that EUSPA would create opportunities for EU companies to explore new markets through dedicated procurements, grants, and prizes. These actions are meant to create new business opportunities and connect companies with private investors and venture capitalists to jump-start their business cases, and foster collaboration between space and non-space actors.[8]
Neither the African Space Policy and Strategy nor the draft statute of the formation of the AfSA aims to develop independent launch capability, or to be a global competitor in space research and technology – which would require large government investments and control, potentially justifying the pooling of capital into an AfSA. Rather, the focus is to address the needs of the African market, develop African space infrastructure and human capital, support and coordinate the African ecosystem, and promote intra-Africa and international cooperation. Given that the space industry has changed significantly since the days of the formation of ESA, it is my view that to achieve these goals, and to become competitive in the global space arena, the AfSA needs to focus on bolstering the private sector, and employing more flexible forms of governance and structure. Top-down management by a single continental entity is less relevant in the modern age due to the impact of NewSpace, which has significantly driven down costs and complexity in the industry, and introduced new innovative business models. The evolution of ESA and the EU space ecosystem is a testament to that.
What can Africa learn from other regions? Part four covers learnings from Asia for Africa.
Kwaku Sumah
Kwaku is the founder of Spacehubs Africa, and has been active in the space industry since 2016, working as a consultant for European and African space institutions and companies. He has worked on projects across the entire space value chain, including analysis on downstream markets, space debris evolution, planetary defence, and the launch market; as well as an assessment of the European financing landscape and due diligence on space companies.
[1] Keith Gottschalk, “The roles of Africa’s institutions in ensuring Africa’s active participation in the space enterprise: the case for an African space agency (ASA)”, African Skies, October 2008;(12):26-8.
[2] Peter Martinez, “Is there a need for an African space agency?”, Space policy, vol. 28. Issue 3, August 2012, pp. 142-145.
[3] Juste retour is a policy of fair return that distributes industrial contracts amongst member states, taking into account economic and geographical considerations, as well as financial contribution to the organization.
[4] Timiebi Aganaba-Jeanty, “Precursor to an African Space Agency: Commentary on Dr Peter Martinez “Is there a Need for an African Space Agency?”” Space Policy 29:3, (2013), pp. 168-174.
[5] ESA “History of Europe in Space”, https://www.esa.int/About_Us/ESA_history/History_of_Europe_in_space
[6] Fraunhofer ISI, Idea Consult, SPRU, “The Impact of Collaboration on Europe’s Scientific and Technological Performance” Final Report, 2009.
[7] Council Regulation (EU) 2021/696 of 28 April 2021 establishing the Union Space Programme and the European Union Agency for the Space Programme and repealing Regulations (EU) No 912/2010, (EU) No 1285/2013 and (EU) No 377/2014 and Decision No 541/2014/EU.
[8] EUSPA, “EUSPA at the heart of EU’s NewSpace approach” 11 June 2021 https://www.euspa.europa.eu/newsroom/news/euspa-heart-eu-new-space-approach