Cosmic stewardship

Humanity is no longer confined to Earth. We’ve sent spacecraft to every planet in our solar system, landed robots on Mars, built a space station, and left footprints on the Moon. Private companies are launching satellites by the thousands. We’re planning to return to the Moon, establish bases on Mars, and mine asteroids.

We’re becoming a spacefaring civilization. This is extraordinary—a species evolving to exist beyond its planet of origin. But with this expansion comes new responsibilities. We’re exporting human activity into the cosmos, and we must ask: How should we behave in space?

Space isn’t an infinite frontier we can exploit without consequence. It’s a shared environment, and already we’re creating problems—orbital debris, potential contamination of other worlds, unregulated resource extraction, militarization. We’re making the same mistakes we’ve made on Earth: rushing ahead without thinking about long-term consequences, prioritizing short-term gain over collective wellbeing.

From a universal perspective, cosmic stewardship is about recognizing that space belongs to no one and everyone. Our generation’s decisions about space activity will shape whether humanity becomes a responsible cosmic citizen or exports Earth’s worst tendencies into the solar system.

Why cosmic stewardship matters

Space might seem distant from daily life, but how we behave beyond Earth reveals and shapes who we are as a species:

1. Space as the commons

Space is the ultimate commons—shared by all nations, all peoples, and potentially all life in the universe. The 1967 Outer Space Treaty declared space “the province of all mankind,” not subject to national appropriation.

But like all commons, space faces tragedy of the commons risks. When everyone can use a shared resource but no one fully owns it, individuals are incentivized to exploit it before others do—leading to degradation that harms everyone.

We’ve seen this with Earth’s oceans, atmosphere, and fisheries. Now we’re seeing it with orbital space (debris), lunar resources, and asteroid mining. Without stewardship, we’ll repeat Earth’s mistakes on cosmic scales.

2. Planetary protection

We might not be alone in the universe. Even if we are, other worlds might contain past or potential life. Planetary protection is the practice of preventing:

Forward contamination: Bringing Earth microbes to other worlds (could contaminate potential life, ruin scientific discoveries)
Backward contamination: Bringing alien microbes to Earth (could be biohazard)

This isn’t science fiction. We’ve already found microbes that survive in space. Earth bacteria have been detected on the Moon (from Apollo missions). If Mars has microbial life—even extinct life—Earth contamination could destroy evidence before we find it.

From an ethical perspective: Do we have the right to potentially destroy alien biospheres for our convenience? Should we preserve other worlds in their pristine state?

3. Space debris and orbital sustainability

Low Earth orbit (LEO) is becoming crowded. Thousands of satellites operate there—and tens of thousands more are planned. Dead satellites, spent rocket stages, and debris from collisions create a hazardous environment.

Kessler Syndrome is the nightmare scenario: debris collisions create more debris, triggering a cascade that makes LEO unusable for decades or centuries. We could render space inaccessible to ourselves.

Already, the International Space Station must occasionally dodge debris. Satellites are hit. As more actors launch without coordination, collision risk grows exponentially.

This is a tragedy of the commons in action. Each launch benefits the launcher but contributes to collective risk. Without governance, we’re on track for disaster.

4. Space resource exploitation

Asteroids contain trillions of dollars worth of metals. The Moon has helium-3 (potential fusion fuel), water ice, and rare earth elements. Mars could be terraformed and colonized.

Questions:

Who owns space resources? Can companies or nations claim them?
What environmental standards apply? Can we strip-mine asteroids?
What about indigenous rights? If we find microbial life on Mars, does it have any rights?
How do we prevent space colonialism—wealthy nations exploiting resources while excluding others?

The 2015 US Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act allows American companies to own extracted space resources. This contradicts the Outer Space Treaty’s non-appropriation principle. Other nations are passing similar laws.

We’re heading toward a space resource rush with no global governance. This could lead to conflict, environmental destruction, and extreme inequality.

5. Militarization of space

Space is increasingly militarized. Militaries rely on satellites for communication, GPS, surveillance, and intelligence. Several nations have anti-satellite weapons (ASATs). The US has a Space Force.

Concerns:

ASATs create debris when they destroy satellites
Space warfare could trigger Kessler Syndrome, denying space access to everyone
Weapons in space violate the spirit (if not letter) of the Outer Space Treaty
Arms race dynamics: one nation developing space weapons pressures others to do the same

The 1967 treaty bans nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction in space—but not conventional weapons. There’s no treaty banning ASATs or preventing space-based weapons platforms.

Without governance, space could become another domain of great power competition and potential conflict.

6. Long-term thinking and cosmic perspective

Space exploration forces us to think long-term. Voyager 1 will travel for tens of thousands of years. If we establish Mars colonies, they’ll evolve independently over millennia. Our decisions now set trajectories for the deep future.

Space also provides perspective on Earth. The “overview effect” (seeing Earth from space) transforms consciousness—revealing our planet as a fragile, unified whole. Astronauts often return with deepened environmental commitment and reduced nationalism.

Cosmic stewardship, then, isn’t just about space—it’s about cultivating the long-term, planetary thinking we need to solve Earth’s challenges.

Principles of cosmic stewardship

What would responsible cosmic stewardship look like? Here are key principles:

1. Space as shared heritage

Principle: Space and celestial bodies are the common heritage of all humankind, not the property of any nation, corporation, or individual.

Implication:

No one can claim sovereignty over space or celestial bodies
Benefits from space resources should be shared equitably
All nations should have access to space
Future generations have rights in space, not just present actors

Current status: The Outer Space Treaty embodies this principle, but national laws allowing resource appropriation undermine it. Need stronger international consensus.

2. Sustainability and preservation

Principle: Space activities should be sustainable—not degrading the space environment for future use—and should preserve celestial bodies in their natural state where possible.

Implication:

Orbital debris mitigation (deorbit dead satellites, avoid creating debris)
Planetary protection protocols (sterilize spacecraft, avoid contamination)
Environmental impact assessments before large-scale resource extraction
Preserve scientifically valuable sites (lunar landing sites, Mars valleys, etc.)

Current status: Some debris mitigation guidelines exist but aren’t binding. Planetary protection is policy, not law, and weakly enforced. No environmental standards for space mining exist.

3. Peaceful purposes and demilitarization

Principle: Space should be used for peaceful purposes, not warfare. Military activities should be minimized and subject to international oversight.

Implication:

Ban on weapons in space (all weapons, not just WMDs)
Ban on anti-satellite weapons
Transparency about space capabilities
Conflict resolution mechanisms for space disputes

Current status: Outer Space Treaty bans WMDs but not conventional weapons. Russia and China have proposed treaty banning space weapons; US rejected it. Space is increasingly militarized.

4. Planetary protection and respect for potential life

Principle: Protect other worlds from contamination and preserve the possibility of discovering alien life. If life exists elsewhere, respect its right to exist.

Implication:

Strict sterilization of spacecraft going to potentially habitable worlds
Quarantine for returned samples from Mars, Europa, etc.
If we find life, preserve its habitat and avoid interference
Consider moral status of alien life (even microbial)

Current status: COSPAR (Committee on Space Research) has planetary protection guidelines. NASA and ESA follow them, but they’re voluntary. Commercial missions might not comply. As more actors enter space, enforcement weakens.

5. Equitable access and benefit sharing

Principle: All nations and peoples should benefit from space activities, not just wealthy countries or corporations. Space shouldn’t reproduce Earth’s inequalities.

Implication:

Developing nations should have access to space technology
Benefits from space resources should be shared (not fully privatized)
Space governance should include all nations, not just spacefaring ones
Prevent space colonialism

Current status: Highly unequal. A few nations dominate space activity. Commercial actors are mostly American and Chinese. Outer Space Treaty calls for international cooperation, but this is weakly implemented. Need stronger benefit-sharing mechanisms.

6. Long-term governance and intergenerational responsibility

Principle: Space decisions should consider impacts over centuries and millennia. We’re stewards for future generations, not just pursuing short-term gain.

Implication:

Require long-term impact assessments
Avoid irreversible decisions (e.g., contaminating Mars)
Create governance bodies that think in deep time
Preserve options for future humans

Current status: Most space policy is short-term (driven by electoral cycles and market pressures). Little institutional capacity for long-term thinking.

7. Transparency, cooperation, and peaceful conflict resolution

Principle: Space activities should be transparent. Nations should cooperate and resolve disputes peacefully.

Implication:

Public reporting of satellite launches, orbits, and capabilities
International cooperation on space missions
Binding arbitration for space disputes
Prevent secret military space programs

Current status: Some transparency (satellite registries), but also much secrecy (military programs). Cooperation exists (ISS, scientific missions) but competition is growing. No effective dispute resolution mechanism.

Current challenges in cosmic stewardship

Challenge 1: Space debris crisis

The problem: Over 34,000 tracked debris objects orbit Earth. Millions more are too small to track but still dangerous (even paint flecks travel at 17,500 mph in LEO). Debris risk grows as more satellites launch.

Kessler Syndrome risk: If debris density reaches critical threshold, collisions cascade, creating more debris exponentially. This could render LEO unusable for decades.

Current mitigation efforts:

Guidelines for deorbiting satellites within 25 years of end-of-life
Design satellites to avoid creating debris
Active debris removal (experimental—expensive and technically challenging)

Problems: Guidelines aren’t binding. Many satellites don’t comply. No economic incentive to clean up debris. As commercial mega-constellations launch (Starlink: 42,000 satellites planned), collision risk explodes.

What’s needed:

Binding international standards for debris mitigation
Economic mechanisms (tax launches, subsidize cleanup)
Active debris removal technology and funding
Orbital traffic management system

Challenge 2: Planetary contamination

The problem: Earth microbes are hardy. They’ve survived on spacecraft, in vacuum, and radiation. If we bring them to Mars, Europa, or Enceladus, we might:

Contaminate potential alien life
Destroy evidence of past life
Ruin the scientific value of pristine environments

Conversely, if we return samples from Mars without proper containment, we risk backward contamination—potentially introducing alien microbes to Earth’s biosphere.

Current protocols: COSPAR categorizes missions by contamination risk. High-risk missions (to potentially habitable worlds) require strict sterilization. Sample return requires containment.

Problems:

Protocols are voluntary, not legally binding
Commercial missions might not comply (cheaper to skip sterilization)
We don’t fully understand what level of sterilization is sufficient
As more actors (nations and private companies) go to Mars, enforcement weakens

What’s needed:

Mandatory planetary protection regulations with enforcement
Verification and inspection mechanisms
Biosafety protocols for sample return
International agreement on acceptable contamination levels

Challenge 3: Unregulated resource extraction

The problem: No international framework governs space mining. Nations are passing domestic laws allowing companies to own extracted resources, but these laws may conflict with the Outer Space Treaty.

Questions:

Can a company claim an asteroid?
What environmental standards apply?
How are conflicts resolved (two companies claiming the same asteroid)?
How do we prevent a few actors from monopolizing resources?

Current status: US, Luxembourg, UAE, and Japan have laws supporting commercial space mining. No international consensus. The 1979 Moon Agreement (which would regulate resource extraction) has been ratified by only 18 nations—none of them major spacefaring powers.

What’s needed:

International space mining treaty or regime
Environmental impact requirements
Benefit-sharing mechanisms (portion of profits goes to global fund?)
Dispute resolution procedures
Prevent monopoly and ensure equitable access

Challenge 4: Space traffic management

The problem: Thousands of satellites in LEO, with tens of thousands more planned. No central traffic control. Operators coordinate manually, but this doesn’t scale.

As mega-constellations deploy (Starlink, OneWeb, Kuiper, China’s planned constellations), congestion grows. Collision risk increases. Who has right-of-way? Who’s liable for collisions?

Current status: Voluntary coordination. No binding rules. No authority to enforce traffic management. Space Situational Awareness (tracking objects) is improving, but not enough.

What’s needed:

International space traffic management system
Rules for orbital slots, right-of-way, collision avoidance
Liability framework for collisions
Binding authority to enforce rules

Challenge 5: Militarization and weaponization

The problem: Space is strategic. Militaries depend on satellites. ASATs create debris and threaten space infrastructure. Potential for arms race in space.

Current arms control gap: Outer Space Treaty bans WMDs in space but not conventional weapons or ASATs. Proposed treaties (Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space) have failed due to lack of verification mechanisms and great power disagreement.

What’s needed:

Ban on anti-satellite weapons
Ban on space-based weapons
Transparency measures (declare space military capabilities)
Verification and enforcement mechanisms
Norms against debris-creating activities

Governance frameworks for cosmic stewardship

How can we govern space responsibly? Several models exist:

1. Strengthen existing treaties

The Outer Space Treaty (1967) is foundation of space law but has gaps. Strengthen it by:

Clarifying resource ownership rules
Adding enforcement mechanisms
Expanding membership (treaty has 112 parties but many spacefaring actors aren’t signatories)
Updating for commercial activities (treaty written when only governments went to space)

Advantage: Builds on existing consensus. Challenge: Amendment requires unanimous agreement from parties, including great powers.

2. New treaties for specific issues

Create focused treaties on:

Space debris mitigation and removal
Space mining and resource extraction
Space traffic management
Planetary protection
Prevention of space weapons

Advantage: Easier to get agreement on narrow issues than comprehensive reform. Challenge: Fragmentation—multiple overlapping treaties could create confusion.

3. International Space Authority

Proposal: Create a UN-level body (like the International Atomic Energy Agency or International Civil Aviation Organization) with authority over space activities.

Responsibilities:

License space activities
Enforce debris mitigation
Manage orbital slots
Oversee planetary protection
Regulate resource extraction

Advantage: Centralized authority, clear enforcement. Challenge: Nations reluctant to cede sovereignty. Requires creating new institution.

4. Frontier Governance Protocol

The Global Governance Frameworks project proposes a comprehensive Frontier Governance Protocol for managing space activity:

Key elements:

Orbital Commons Management: Treat LEO as shared resource, with usage fees funding debris cleanup
Celestial Body Protection: Strict planetary protection for potentially habitable worlds
Non-Appropriation Enforcement: Reaffirm that space resources are common heritage; allow use but not ownership
Prime Directive for Contact: If we encounter alien life, observe rather than interfere, exploit, or colonize
Benefit Sharing: Space resource revenues partially fund global development
Long-term Stewardship Council: Body that represents future generations in space policy

Advantage: Comprehensive, integrated framework addressing multiple challenges. Challenge: Requires political will and international coordination.

5. Polycentric governance

Rather than single authority, create network of institutions at multiple scales:

International treaties (broad principles)
Regional agreements (e.g., EU space policy)
Industry self-regulation (satellite operators)
Technical standards bodies (orbit debris guidelines)

Advantage: Flexible, adaptable, builds on existing institutions. Challenge: Complexity, potential gaps and conflicts between levels.

The role of private companies

Space is increasingly commercial. SpaceX, Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, Planet Labs, and others are driving innovation. This has positives (lower costs, faster progress) but raises governance challenges:

Accountability: Companies pursue profit, not public good. How do we ensure responsible behavior?

Regulation: National space agencies (NASA, ESA) follow planetary protection and debris guidelines. But private companies might cut corners. Need binding regulations, not voluntary guidelines.

Public goods vs. private profit: Should space resources be privatized? Or should they benefit all humanity? Market-driven approach risks concentrating wealth and reproducing Earth’s inequalities in space.

Long-term thinking: Companies operate on quarterly timescales. Space stewardship requires thinking in centuries. Need governance structures that enforce long-term thinking.

What’s needed:

License commercial space activities with conditions (debris mitigation, planetary protection, benefit sharing)
Liability for damages (if your satellite creates debris that damages another, you pay)
International coordination (not just national regulation—space is global)
Transparency requirements (disclose orbits, capabilities, etc.)

Becoming a responsible spacefaring civilization

If humanity survives long-term, we’ll likely spread beyond Earth. This could be wonderful—life and consciousness flourishing across the solar system and eventually beyond. But only if we do it responsibly.

What’s at stake:

Positive futures:

Humanity becomes multi-planetary, resilient to single-planet risks
We discover alien life and learn we’re not alone
Space resources enable prosperity without exploiting Earth
Cosmic perspective fosters global cooperation and environmental stewardship

Negative futures:

Kessler Syndrome traps us on Earth for centuries
We contaminate Mars, destroying potential life and scientific value
Space becomes another domain of inequality, exploitation, and conflict
Militarization leads to space warfare, debris catastrophe

The universal perspective: Space is the cosmos becoming aware of itself through us. We’re the first species from Earth to reach space. What we do next matters not just for humanity but for the possibility of consciousness spreading through the universe.

Will we export our best qualities (curiosity, cooperation, care) or our worst (exploitation, short-term thinking, violence)? Will we become worthy of the cosmos?

Cosmic stewardship is ultimately about recognizing that we’re not separate from the universe—we’re part of it, temporarily responsible for a small corner of it, and accountable to all future consciousness that might one day exist.

What you can do

Cosmic stewardship might seem remote from daily life, but:

Learn and spread awareness: Most people don’t think about space governance. Education is crucial.

Support responsible space policy: Vote for politicians who prioritize space sustainability, planetary protection, and international cooperation.

Advocate for space governance reform: Contact representatives. Support organizations working on space policy (Secure World Foundation, Space Generation Advisory Council).

Choose ethical companies: If investing in or working for space companies, choose those with strong environmental and ethical standards.

Think long-term: Cultivate cosmic perspective. See yourself as part of a vast story. Your generation’s choices shape whether humanity becomes a responsible cosmic citizen.

Connect to Earth stewardship: Lessons from space apply to Earth. Tragedy of the commons, long-term thinking, need for governance—these challenges exist on Earth too. Cosmic stewardship and Earth stewardship are inseparable.

Further exploration

Books:

The Overview Effect by Frank White
Dark Skies by Daniel Deudney (space and political theory)
Beyond Earth by Amanda Hendrix & Charles Wohlforth

Organizations:

Secure World Foundation (space sustainability)
Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) (planetary protection)
Space Generation Advisory Council

Frameworks:

Frontier Governance Protocol - Comprehensive space governance

Related:

Global governance - Coordination at planetary scale
Existential risks - Kessler Syndrome as risk
The overview effect - Perspective from space