Introduction:

At the most fundamental level, outer space is considered a vast area of the unknown. This notion coincides with a belief that it consisted of nothing, suggesting that it was an empty wasteland. However, through the revelations of the 20th and 21st century as well as the 44 year and continuing journey of the Voyager 1 Space Probe, this assumption has been disproved. Instead, all the data indicates a universe of galaxies, planets and resources which cannot be quantified and has not been explored yet. During the 20th century, exploring space may have been driven by the allure of adventure and exploration, gathering a glimpse of what may be out there. But the increased knowledge collected from Voyager 1 and the consistent scientific, technological and mechanization of the 21st century have brought upon a resurgence in interests of outer space. This arises at the same time as an acceleration of crises on Earth, which many hope the discoveries in space may solve, especially in the context of finite resources. What makes this an even more interesting predicament are concerns with the future implications that outer space development might give the current conditions on Earth, such as the rise of privatisation, prevalence of new types of conflict and the question of what space exploration may mean for inequality, which is already exacerbated in the neoliberal global economy. Thus, there are extremely vast and unknown implications of the expansion and space race of the 21st century. 

The Resources:

Before understanding the implications and possibilities of space exploration in the 21st century, it is important to grasp an understanding of the resources that have been discovered which drive the allure to touch the stars in the face of a growing scarcity problem on Earth. At the most simplistic level, the resources which can be found in space can be divided into minerals, gases and liquids. 

Concerning minerals, these include gold, iron, platinum, nickel and cobalt among others. Most of these metals are found in asteroids as they are accreted from the same initial elements and inorganic compounds as Earth, while such resources may vary between planets. It is estimated by the US space agency NASA that the minerals lying in the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter hold a wealth equivalent to 100 billion USD for every person on Earth, making it a highly lucrative enterprise if successful. In addition, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson claims that the world's first trillionaire will derive their wealth from space minerals as it would be the only area which could provide such a valuation. This has been a great motivation for corporations and even governments to invest and develop space mining capabilities.

When considering the gases in outer space, the most prominent include Hydrogen and Helium. Specifically Helium-3 is a major noteworthy isotopic gas, with national agencies and research groups from China and India both identifying it as a possible clean and efficient energy source. The fission or fusion of the Helium-3 isotope would yield a high amount of energy without any of the typical radioactive by-products associated with the current fission and fusion processes on Earth. This has been calculated to be around the total kinetic energy of 18 megaelectronvolts (MeV) which would be compounded by a large coefficient representative of the number of Helium-3 reactants in the reaction. This makes it potentially a revolutionary and feasible solution to the unsustainable energy processes currently utilised. In addition, the Moon’s top most layer is believed to have enough oxygen for 8 billion people for over 100,000 years.

Another major concern that the resources of space can possibly address is that of water. While finding the liquid form of water may prove to be a challenge due to the vastly different climates on planets, the gaseous form is abundant as well as the elements, oxygen and hydrogen, that make up the compound, insinuating possibilities to easily facilitate the synthesis of water. On an extended level, the resources of space may in the future also include planets which can be inhabited, solving further issues of overpopulation. Thus, presenting an opportunity for designing sustainable futures for millions, showing the incredible potential value of space. 

The Private Sphere:

With this availability of resources, one of the greatest questions of the future implications of space is the role of the private sphere. On April 12, 1961, the Russian cosmonaut Yury Gargarin became the first human in space. On July 20, 1969, American astronaut Neil Armstrong became the first man on the moon. Both of these seismic events were driven by governments, with NASA and the Soviet Space Program the two main players backed by their respective nations. It is often argued that the space race of the 20th century served as one of the many proxies for the ongoing Cold War. However, since the events of the 1960s and 1970s, there has been a stagnation in the “space craze”, highlighted by the ratification of space treaties, such as the “Outer Space Treaty” of 1967, and eventually the collapse of the Soviet Union. Since these events, the privatization of space exploration and space flight has been increasing, correlating with a change in the objectives of the industry, with a more commercial direction. Names such as SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Virgin Galactic have become synonymous with the recent breakthroughs in the industry and have even become the suppliers to national and international space agencies in space associated resources. This suggests a redistribution of the traditional roles of actors in this sector. The words of the current CEO of SpaceX and world's richest man Elon Musk also reaffirm this notion, with him stating after a new rocket success of SpaceX in April of 2021, “I think we are at the dawn of a new era in commercial space exploration.” Highlighting the growth of the private sector which he then affirmed may have the “greater potential in the industry” than the traditional national and international agencies. This may also be a result of the differing ambitions of the private sector which ranges from colonization of Mars, autonomous asteroid mining systems, and even suborbital or orbital transport systems to increase world connectivity. Mirroring such ambitions, even in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, space companies invested a record amount of 8.9 billion USD into research and development, highlighting their expanding ambitions. Space investment is expected to increase exponentially with recent successes stimulating greater financial flows. In comparison, NASA has a yearly investment of around 20 billion dollars, which is predicted to decrease because of the effects of the Covid-19 recession. Thus, the stage is being set for a new era of human presence in space, in which the private sector is expected to play a larger role, and possibly even a dominant one. It raises questions as to how the privatisation of space and the monetization of the industry will occur and whether it will be possible to create a self-sufficient industry.

The Next Conflicts:

With the inevitable space expansion, another major question will be how future conflicts will play out. Will they be economic wars or some types of material conflict in space? What will be the roles of the private sector in conflicts? One thing that many predict is that the movement of wars away from Earth will limit human casualties as well as environmental degradation, especially if they take place in the voids of outer space. However, while the cost for lives will decrease significantly, the economics of fighting distant highly technological wars may prove to be very expensive. Additionally, if the reliance of outer space resources were to increase, such conflicts may ruin supply chains and cause further economic damages. To argue against such claims, Colonel Eric Adams and Kelly Hammet, officials from the US Air Force Research Laboratory, suggest that the expansion into space would actually lead to the decrease in direct conflicts in a similar fashion to that of the Cold War. They predict the nature of Space Conflicts would be fashioned to an “offensive or first-mover advantage” which would have devastating capacities in their executions, with severely limited defence and response rates. But such offensive actions would be possible by all major parties involved in the expansion into space and so would always incur a risk if performed. This would create a deterrence policy which would maintain a form of stability. The deterrence policy can be reinforced by the presence of corporations, which do not have political agendas but instead are entirely focused on economic activity in the domain. Therefore, it may be possible that the expansion of space may lead to greater cooperation between countries, agencies and possibly between corporations. The specializations of different companies and their cooperation would lead to short term innovations and development, while the combined efforts of countries would ensure stability and clarity over proceedings into space, especially as Space Law is ambiguous and may not be extensive enough. However, from a long-term economic perspective, cooperation may reduce the extent of economic rents as well as not be perceived favorably due to the drop in value of innovation rents, which will cause a decrease in incentive for innovation and development in this industry in the long term. 

Inequalities

While much of the discussion so far has focused upon the implications for those involved and at the forefront of this expansion into space. It is important to understand the effects to those who may not have the abilities to compete. While there is clear inequality already evident in the 21st century, it may be possible that the developments into space and the gains may only apply to the more developed and affluent nations. This will then highly likely lead to further rapidly concentrated economic growth, furthering the unequal divide already present, with the wealthy becoming wealthier. To contextualise this, the major space agencies and corporations are found in Europe, North America and among other select large economies such as China and India. Even though there are space programmes in more than 60 countries, such as in Nigeria, Thailand and even in Bolivia. Only 14 have space launch capabilities, and 7 with extraterrestrial landing capabilities, demonstrating how narrow this industry is. In most cases, the largest and most developed space corporations have better capabilities in comparison to developing nations. As most of these programmes are government funded, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is an indicator of the possible fraction of funding a country may provide. Thus, a higher GDP may insinuate a better programme. For example, the annual funding of NASA is equivalent to the annual funding of the sum of all agencies, not accounting China. Correlating to this, NASA has been considered as one of the foremost parties in space exploration and expansion over the last half century. With this disparity in wealth and the commodification of products in this industry by corporations, this also allows wealthier countries to establish exclusive and lucrative deals. This is already the case between SpaceX and NASA, with SpaceX winning a contract to supply rockets, specifically modified versions of their Dragon, Dragon XL and Falcon-9 rockets for supply missions to the International Space Station. As of 2021, SpaceX has also received a 2.9 billion USD contract from NASA to build Moon Landers, besting Blue Origin for the deal, in an effort to bring astronauts back to the moon and possible even Mars. This trend is expected to continue, and we will see a concentration of power in the more affluent countries and corporations, exacerbating a new form of space inequality. 

Conclusion

What is clear and inevitable is that at some point of the 21st century there will be a space revolution, with the allure of the resources available instrumental in satiating human needs. What lacks clarity are its implications, who will be the major players, how conflicts will play out and how this will contribute to inequality. The answers to such highly intriguing questions will play a dominant role in reshaping the international system as well as its economic systems. Only time will tell what the real consequences will be.