EditorialOpen AccessCreative Commons license

Inspired by Africa: A New Approach to Global Space Governance

    Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1089/space.2021.0011

    So far, the story of the Global South in space has been written not as they have told it, but how it has been heard by the Global North1 and global institutionalists.2 Efforts have been made to address this,3 but the editorial perspective has still been largely European. Although this special issue of the New Space journal is itself published in America, it has prioritized the perspectives of African youth, and its guest editor, Timiebi Aganaba, a Nigerian, Canadian, British scholar, started her career at the Nigerian space agency in the department of legal affairs and international cooperation. Also as a former legal counsel representing the Nigerian Ministry of Finance in the establishment of the Nigerian Sovereign Wealth Fund and investment authority, she saw first hand how colonial and imperial relationships between Global North and Global South have caused and affected law's structure and substance, which set her on a path to study how international law replicates these power dynamics to the Global South's continued disadvantage.4 In response, she sought to investigate a perspective through her doctoral studies called Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL),5 which “seeks to formulate an international law that might hold good to its ideals and serve the cause of global justice.”6 In short, TWAIL reconstructs international law to center hope—that the past can be healed, that international law could be better.7. By retelling international law's origin story to include the Global South,8 TWAIL scholars hope to reshape its future.9

    This introduction’s coauthor, Cristian van Eijk, is an American-Dutch international lawyer whose (self-)critical approach is situated in allyship, but also in his queerness, neurodivergence, youth, and third culture background. After nearly seven years of space law research in three degrees, he hopes to further develop this approach in a doctoral dissertation.

    From this collaboration of diverse perspectives, we hope to build within TWAIL III a new approach to space law analysis. Historically, TWAIL critiques in space have been limited by the need for agreement. To quote a TWAIL maxim, “if you don't do international law, international law will do you.”10 For the more contentious issues, pragmatism has often forced the Global South to compromise to secure U.S. and U.S.S.R. agreement.11

    We consider this to be a hurdle, not a hamartia. Rather than force Global South states to compromise principles or complicate progress, let us re-examine the fundamental values at stake. We propose to supplement and develop TWAIL in space through a cosmopolitan approach to international law (CAIL).12 Cosmopolitanism, though itself a term with colonial history, frames humanity as “overlapping communities of fate”—an enmeshed system of interdependent people, distinct but fundamentally similar.13 Cosmopolitans see the world as a planet of individuals who possess a “diversity within sameness.” Asymmetries in geopolitical power, resources, and capacities have not disappeared, but addressing them requires underscoring our fundamental commonality.14 CAIL recognizes the reciprocal, though not identical, obligations all stakeholders have—states and otherwise—and holds these obligations to be prerequisite to real progress for all parties.

    Because European cosmopolitanism has been used to ‘universalize’ Eurocentric ideals, we must also look to cosmopolitanisms from beyond Europe. The African philosophy of Ubuntu, a relative of strict moral cosmopolitanism,16 considers the duty to relate humanely with others as prerequisite to one's own personhood. From the outset, this philosophy precludes divisions between “us” and “them,” or between “I” and “we.”17 Where Kantian cosmopolitanism examines law, Ubuntu speaks of justice, where Kantian cosmopolitanism relies on the (Eurocentric) concept of the individual, Ubuntu addresses the collective.18 Considering these diverse stakeholders, CAIL then asks who is able to participate in global governance, and tasks those with greater capacity to take concrete steps to ensure access for those without access.19 This “requires beginning, not ending, with relationships and asking who the stakeholders in dark skies and space are, followed by soliciting their input in an equitable way so we can understand what fair participation in space might look like without appropriation or assimilation.”20

    By understanding indigenous and subaltern cosmopolitanisms such as Ubuntu, we can better understand Global South positions and priorities, as well as the law more generally.21 For example, the modern formulation of international legal principles such as the common heritage of mankind has been deeply limited by the Global North's failure to consider African ideas of community and ownership.22 By recognizing African legal cultures and African agency in international relations, CAIL helps strike a balance between the premise and promise of TWAIL.23 Our dual approach relies upon this cross-pollination of TWAIL and CAIL. CAIL alone risks universalizing or prioritizing Eurocentric concepts, ideals, and categorizations—recreating the disadvantages TWAIL critiques.24 A dual approach incorporates these systems of law, governance, and values to create an international law that reflects, rather than restricts, the world it governs.25 Third World Cosmopolitanism formalizes the place of the now popular stakeholder-centric approaches to space within TWAIL. Together, this dual approach helps us reconsider notions such as equity and distributive justice in space in more hopeful register.

    This special issue takes us through a journey of that imagination by highlighting African youth perspectives. The lead article by Aganaba et al.26 titled “African Youth Engagement with Global Space Governance Concerns in the New Space Ecosystem: The Case of the ASU Interplanetary Initiative Space Governance Innovation Contest” sets out the vision of the Arizona State University Interplanetary Initiative Space Governance Innovation Contest that sought to have an impact on African young people,27 and provided the inspiration for this special issue. The article utilizes the 8-element framework developed by Gaughen et al., which are necessary for sustainability in the context of youth engagement initiatives, to document the method and findings of the contest as an experiment of open innovation.28 These perspectives will be of interest not only to emerging actors who want to coach the next generation to think more broadly about international governance, but will also be of interest to the United States as the current administration thinks about how to operationalize equity in a whole of government approach.29

    The best submissions from the contest are published in this special issue as “Voices of the New Space Generation.” The winning submission by Haroun et al.30 titled “Towards the Sustainability of Outer Space: Addressing the Issue of Space Debris” buttresses the conclusion that environmental considerations, in the form of regulation, have philosophical and moral foundations. Coyle and Morrow argue that despite profound societal change, only a fundamental shift in thinking that re-establishes the central importance of intrinsic value can fully articulate and justify modern approaches to regulating the environment.31 That said, the moral significance of intrinsic value itself must also be considered because it is the account of a moral right that determines the acceptability of a given set of legal rights.32

    Also published in this special issue, Ishola et al. in their piece “Legal Enforceability in International Space Policy: An Appraisal of 1967 Outer Space Treaty” highlights the Outer Space Treaty's failure to provide for remedies and sanctions in case of breach and the lack of reference in the space treaties to the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Does it mean that the time has come to look at what can be done for merging actors in other appropriate bodies for global governance; perhaps that takes a more executive approach,33 like the G20?34

    In “Towards African Space Autonomy: Developmental Framework and Incorporated Synergies,” Asiyanbola et al. argue that there is a need for African space autonomy before being able to impact any of these other issues of global space governance. Other insights from unpublished submissions included that view that the current space governance regime does not make allowance for space tourists, allows for development of antisatellite tests, lacks institutional frameworks to control outer space activities, and does not adequately support or regulate private activities in outer space. The final article in the new voices section by Onwudiwe & Newton titled “Africa and the Artemis Accords: A Review of Space Regulations and Strategy for African Capacity Building in the New Space Economy” was not part of the contest, but represent perspectives from African youth on emerging issues such as the implications for Africa of the U.S. Artemis Accords. Although there are varying perspectives to the merits of the Artemis Accords, the club approach is tested in other global governance regimes,35 and there are merits if we take a CAIL perspective.

    These submissions from these first-time authors published in this special issue complement the contributions by more established authors in the field. In “Roadmap for Integrated Space Applications in Africa,” Adebola & Adebola propose a hierarchy-based roadmap for progressively growing sector capacity to advance the current models by expanding the scope and depth of applications, expanding regional and global partnerships, and establishing a plan for sustainable growth of technological capacity. The article also discusses legal and policy requirements that must be aligned to ensure the success of the roadmap. In his piece “Should Space Be Part of a Development Strategy? Reflections Based Upon the Brazil Experience,” S. Nakahodo questions whether space should be part of a development strategy with lesson learned from Brazil, recognizing that Brazil and Africa share deep historical, social, and cultural roots. The section ends with a contribution from W. Peeters of the International Space University on “The Role of Space in Education in Africa.”

    The story of space governance has so far been told by the Global North. This is clear in the characters involved, the issues on its agenda, and the futures it imagines.36 Our approach, like TWAIL and CAIL, aims to retell that story to inspire a more equitable “Africanfuturist” ending.37 We are not only reconsidering how we approach the law, but also reconsidering our approach to ourselves and the futures “we” seek. Including Africa, the world's most youthful and most quickly developing continent, requires us all to reconstruct historical critiques in light of their aims, and to consider the needs of more diverse global stakeholders. Most importantly, our approach asks us to reimagine our humanity as dependent on our humane relationships with others. That, we imagine, is a future to hope for.

    REFERENCES

    • 1. Schrogl K-U, Legal aspects related to the application of the principle that the exploration and utilization of outer space should be carried out for the benefits and in the interest of all states taking into particular account the needs of developing countries. In: Benko M, Schrogl K-U (eds.). International Space Law in the Making. France: Editions Frontiers, 1993. pp. 219–24. Google Scholar
    • 2. Jasentuliyana N. The role of developing countries and the formulation of space law. XX:I1 Ann Air Space Law. 1995;105. Google Scholar
    • 3. Froehlich A. Integrated Space for African Society. Cham: Springer, 2019; Miller Z. Space settlement and the celestial subjectivity model. In: Froehlich A (ed.). A Fresh View on the Outer Space Treaty. Cham: Springer, 2018. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 4. al Attar M. TWAIL: A paradox within a paradox. Int Commun Law Rev. 2020;22:166. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 5. Mutua M. What is TWAIL?. American Society of International Law, Proceedings of the 94th Annual Meeting, 31–39, 2000. Google Scholar
    • 6. Anghie A, Chmni BS. Third world approaches to international law and individual responsibility in internal conflicts. Chinese J Int Law. 2003;2:102–3. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 7. Mickelson K. Hope in a TWAIL register. TWAIL Rev. 2020;1:25–7. Google Scholar
    • 8. Rajagopal B. From resistance to renewal: The third world, social movements and the expansion of international institutions. Harv Int Law J. 2000;14:577. Google Scholar
    • 9. Okafor O. Critical third world approaches to international law (TWAIL). Int Commun Law Rev. 2008;10:373–4. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 10. Natarajan U, Reynolds J, Bhatia A, Xavier S. Introduction: TWAIL—On praxis and the intellectual. Third World Q. 2016;37:1948, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 11. As the Global South was keenly aware: ibid.; UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. Verbatim Record of the 13th Meeting. UN Doc A/AC.105/PV.13 (held September 13, 1962, published February 21, 1963), p. 7. Google Scholar
    • 12. Aganaba-Jeanty T. Introducing the Cosmopolitan Approaches to International Law (CAIL) lens to analyze governance issues as they affect emerging and aspirant space actors. Space Policy 2016;37:3–11. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 13. Held D. Democracy and globalization. Glob Govern. 1997;3:261. Google Scholar
    • 14. Jazeel T. Spatializing difference beyond cosmopolitanism. Theory Cult Soc 2011;28(5):79; Gilroy P. After Empire. Abingdon: Routledge, 2004. p. 81. Google Scholar
    • 15. Anghie A, Chimni BS. Third world approaches to international law and individual responsibility in internal conflicts. Chinese J Int Law 2003;2:102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 16. Etieyibo E. Ubuntu, cosmopolitanism, and distribution of natural resources. Philos Pap 2017;46(1):147–152. Google Scholar
    • 17. Sometimes translated as ‘humanity’, ‘I am because you are’, or ‘a person is a person because/by/through other people’. For others, see Etieyibo E. Ubuntu, cosmopolitanism, and distribution of natural resources. Philos Pap 2017;46(1), pp. 142, 146; Ramose M. African Philosophy Through Ubuntu. Harare: Mond Books, 1999. p. 75. Google Scholar
    • 18. Ngcoya M. Ubuntu. Int Polit Sociol. 2015;9(3):254, 259. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 19. Aganaba-Jeanty T. Space sustainability and the freedom of outer space. Int J Space Polit Policy. 2016;14(1):4–5. Google Scholar
    • 20. Venkatesan A, Lowenthal J, Prem P, Vidaurri M. The impact of satellite constellations on space as an ancestral global commons. Nat Astron 2020;4:1047. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 21. Froehlich A, Siebrits A. Space Supporting Africa, Vol. 1. Cham: Springer, 2019. pp. 69–76; Smith. Contrived boundaries, kinship, and Ubuntu. In: Tickner, Blaney (eds.) Thinking International Relations Differently. London: Routledge, 2012. pp. 311–316; Tieku. Collectivist worldview. In: Cheru, Cornelissen, and Shaw (eds.). Africa and International Relations in the Twenty-First Century. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, p. 49. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 22. Egede E. The common heritage of mankind and the Sub-Saharan African native land tenure system. J African Law 58(1):88. Google Scholar
    • 23. Smith K. Contrived boundaries, kinship, and Ubuntu. In: Tickner A, Blaney D (eds.) Thinking International Relations Differently. London: Routledge, 2012, pp. 304–305. Google Scholar
    • 24. Jazeel T. Spatializing difference beyond cosmopolitanism. Theory Cult Soc 2011;28(5):75–66; Anghie A, Chimni BS. Third world approaches to international law and individual responsibility in internal conflicts. Chinese J Int Law 2003;28(5):102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 25. al Attar M. TWAIL: A paradox within a paradox. Int Commun Law Rev. 2020;22:186. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
    • 26. Aganaba-Jeanty T. African youth engagement with global space governance cncerns in the Nnw space ecosystem: the case of the ASU interplanetary initiative space governance innovation contest. New Space 2021;9(1):xxx. Google Scholar
    • 27. Struck T. Space governance innovation contest promotes a new space economy for students of African descent. 2019. https://news.asu.edu/20191125-space-governance-innovation-contest-promotes-new-space-economy-students-african-descent. (Last accessed January 20, 2020). Google Scholar
    • 28. Gaughen K, Flynn-Khan K, Hayes C. Sustaining youth engagement initiatives: Challenges and opportunities. 2013. https://wvsystemofcare.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Sustaining-Youth-Engagement-2009-Finance-Project.pdf. (Last accessed January 20, 2020). Google Scholar
    • 29. Exec Order No. 13985, 86 C.F.R. 7009 (2020). Google Scholar
    • 30. Haroun F, Ajibade S, Igbozurike J-K, Oladimeji P. Towards the sustainability of outer space: addressing the issue of space debris. New Space 2021;9(1):xxx. Google Scholar
    • 31. Coyle S, Morrow K. The philosophical foundations of environmental law—Property, rights and nature. J Environ Law 2005;17(3):461–3. Google Scholar
    • 32. Block W. ‘‘Space environmentalism, property rights, and the law. In: Block W (ed.) Property Rights: The Argument for Privatization, Palgrave Studies in Classical Liberalism. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019. pp. 275–301. Google Scholar
    • 33. Centre for International Governance Innovation. Clubs, clubs clubs—How to lead the way to better global governance? https://www.cigionline.org/articles/clubs-clubs-clubs-how-lead-way-better-global-governance. (Last accessed January 20, 2020). Google Scholar
    • 34. KPMG International, Saudi Space Commission, and Group of Twenty. G20 voices on the future of the space economy. https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/12/g20-voices-on-the-future-of-the-space-economy.pdf. (Last accessed January 20, 2020). Google Scholar
    • 35. Weischer L, Morgan J, Patel M. Climate clubs: Can small groups of countries make a big difference in addressing climate change? Rev Eur Commun Int Environ Law. 2012;21. DOI: 10.1111/reel.12007. Google Scholar
    • 36. Ringas N. Mass media and space travel in the cold war. In: Froehlich (ed.). Outer Space and Popular Culture. Cham: Springer, 2020; Prins. Regarding influences of space on popular culture via the medium of science fiction. In: Froehlich A # (ed.). Outer Space and Popular Culture. Cham: Springer, 2020; de Waal Alberts A. The use of space as part of popular culture. In: Froehlich A (ed.). Outer Space and Popular Culture. Cham: Springer, 2020. Google Scholar
    • 37. A term coined by Okorafor N. Africanfuturism Defined. For comparison to Afrofuturism, see also Wabuke H. Afrofuturism, Africanfuturism, and the Language of Black Speculative Literature. https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/afrofuturism-africanfuturism-and-the-language-of-black-speculative-literature/. (Last accessed January 20, 2020). Google Scholar
    Back to Top