The future ups and downs of government spending in space


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

A new report says that government spending on space will flatten worldwide over the next five years. Some key quotes from the news story however suggest all is not going downhill:

A total of 692 satellites will be launched by governments in the coming decade, up 43% from the previous decade. This is a direct reflection of the increasing number of new space-capable countries across the globe. Civil agencies will launch roughly 75% of these satellites, a significant increase compared to the last decade during which they accounted for 67% of all government satellites launched.

Also, while certain areas will show a decline (the U.S. manned program) others appear robust.

Access to space (launch capability) investments reached $4.6 billion in 2010, and should be sustained in the coming years as more governments see independent access to space as a top priority of their space programs.

In both of the above examples, the areas where space activity will increase is because of the arrival of new space-faring nations (India, Japan, China to name only the most obvious), what I have been calling the new colonial movement. I also believe that as these new countries begin to show their stuff in space, their success will further fuel the competition, and the older space-faring nations will come back to life in order to stay in the game.

Share

One comment

  • Kelly Starks

    >..the older space-faring nations will come back to life in order to stay in the game

    ?\
    You advocating bigger gov programs?

    ;)

    Certainly nothing in this suggests any commercial growth or incentive for commercial growth. With even SpaceX laying off big time, the nidustry is not optimistic.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *