Innovators, policymakers, ASU community tackle the space regulatory frontier

When James Dunstan, senior counsel at TechFreedom and an Arizona State University adjunct professor, thinks about regulatory systems, he thinks of a continuum.

On one end of the spectrum is an idea of “permissionless innovation,” a concept often tied to the core identity of American success and its bold innovative projects. On the other end of the spectrum is “precautionary innovation,” the notion that innovation should not bring harm and should, to a certain extent, be permitted by the government.

Finding a regulatory system that fits within that spectrum — that both promotes fearless innovation while following legal standards — is challenging and complex. It is especially complex when applying the spectrum to innovating space-related infrastructure.

The future of space infrastructure, and how it can be effectively regulated, was the focus of Navigating the New Space Regulatory Frontier, an event held by ASU's Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at the Barrett & O’Connor Center in Washington, D.C.

The future economy and national defenses will be built on space infrastructure, said Jay Schwarz, chief of the Federal Communications Commission Space Bureau, who opened the event in a keynote address.

“Space infrastructure will be a central platform upon which industries, both on and off the earth, will be built in the coming decades,” said Schwarz. “Space infrastructure, I expect, will serve as the platform for (an) unimaginable array of businesses.”

But balancing the ideas of thrilling innovation within regulatory policy creates roadblocks.

Some roadblocks identified during the discussion include the FCC’s vote on enhancing low Earth orbit operators to deliver better satellite broadband service. The vote, if passed, would serve as a major update on rules originally developed in the 1990s, rules that no longer reflect modern-day technology innovation.

“We think America should always lead when it comes to technological innovation, and we think that's especially true in this instance,” said Schwarz, regarding the vote and the Space Bureau’s future agenda. “We believe that American companies are building the space platforms upon which the future is going to be built, and so that's why we are going big and going to win.”

The event also featured a panel discussion between leaders across prevalent roles in policy, law and tech, including Dunstan; Mary Guenther, head of space policy at the Progressive Policy Institute; Derek Hanson, attorney-advisory at the Department of Commerce for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and Priscilla Argeris, the Domestic Regulatory Satellite Affairs lead at Amazon Leo. The panel, which was moderated by Senior Global Policy Counsel at ACT Brian Scarpelli, encouraged panelists and attendees to consider America’s future in regulation of space innovation — and where to go next.

“We're at a pretty important moment for the commercial space and satellite industry, with major regulatory chain proposals and changes happening on both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere in the U.S.,” said Scarpelli.

Another key area of focus throughout the event was the proposed EU Space Act, which has garnered concern from U.S. policymakers and business leaders over its proposed regulatory burdens, many of which “would disproportionately or exclusively impact American companies,” said Schwarz.

Guenther shared hope over the proposed legislation, noting that there have been several versions since its original release, each reflecting slight improvements. While not a perfect initiative, or not even something she would necessarily support as it exists currently, Guenther noted, the legislation reflects the necessity of a strong relationship between the EU and U.S.

“I am hopeful that that improvement will continue and that we will see, ultimately, a draft that is productive and that is not a substantial trade barrier,” said Guenther.

The conversation throughout the panel was wide-ranging, from the United States’ relationship with China, to trade complications and differing opinions on what America can be doing right now to make positive change toward a stronger space regulatory system.

“A lot of the biggest challenges about our regulatory system is that it's outdated and that it was designed for very distinct applications. ... Yes, our regulatory system is fragmented — it's problematic, it's heavily burdensome, but we are one step in front of the other, working to improve it," said Guenther, "and I think that there is a bright future ahead as we all pitch in to try to make the space regulatory environment permissive, while still protecting American interests and ... the interests of the uninvolved public.”