When we talk about sustainability in space, it’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking about hardware – satellites, rockets, materials. But just as important is the context those systems operate within. Space is not privately owned, nationally enclosed, or governed by a single authority. It is a shared domain – a commons.
On Earth, we have several such domains: the oceans, the atmosphere, and Antarctica are good examples. These spaces are used by many, regulated loosely or collaboratively, and frequently suffer from what economists call the tragedy of the commons – when individuals, acting in their own interest, collectively degrade a shared resource.
If we want to build a circular economy in space, we need to understand what circularity looks like in other commons – and what’s required to make it stick.
What Makes a Commons?
A commons is defined not by what it contains, but by how it’s used and governed. It’s a resource that many actors rely on, where access is either open or collectively managed, and where no single user holds exclusive rights or obligations.
Space fits that description. No nation owns the Moon. No company owns orbital slots in perpetuity. Low Earth orbit is shared – by hundreds of operators, agencies, and private actors, all launching hardware, transmitting signals, and creating potential debris.
This structure makes space functionally similar to the oceans. And just like overfishing or plastic pollution, the risks in orbit – and the risks in orbit – collisions, debris, congestion – stem in part from historically fragmented coordination and the lack of enforceable global oversight. Though governance efforts have improved, gaps still exist when it comes to compliance and accountability.
Circularity in a commons, then, isn’t just about design or materials. It’s about building shared responsibility into systems that don’t have a built-in mechanism for cooperation.
Lessons from Oceans and Fisheries
The ocean is perhaps the closest analogue to space. It’s vast, physically hostile, and economically essential. It’s also poorly governed when it comes to resource extraction and pollution.
Overfishing is a classic commons problem. Fish stocks in international waters are technically renewable, but if every actor fishes without constraint, the system collapses. To manage this, we’ve developed:
- Catch limits, which cap how much of a species can be harvested in total and set through international scientific bodies
- Quota systems, which divide those limits between countries, fleets, or vessels – making fishing rights assigned and tradable
- Surveillance regimes, like satellite monitoring and vessel tracking
These systems only work when actors agree on the rules and enforce them collectively. Even then, illegal fishing and enforcement gaps persist.
In terms of circularity, the ocean has seen progress in waste management. Initiatives to recover plastic waste or reuse fishing nets as raw materials are growing. But these efforts remain fragmented, and largely depend on public pressure, subsidies, and a patchwork of national laws.
The takeaway: shared domains need strong, internationally accepted governance, backed by monitoring infrastructure and real consequences for non-compliance. Without that, circularity efforts – whether it’s net recovery or satellite reuse – are unlikely to take hold.
The Atmosphere and Emissions Trading
The atmosphere is another shared system, particularly when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions. Here too, no single actor can control or protect the resource. Emissions released in one place affect the climate everywhere.
Over the last two decades, we’ve developed market-based mechanisms to manage this commons. Cap-and-trade systems, carbon taxes, and offset markets are all attempts to internalise the cost of degradation and shift behaviour.
It’s far from perfect, but it shows that economic tools can support collective outcomes, even in loosely governed spaces. These systems rely on:
- Agreed-upon limits (e.g. national emissions targets)
- Standardised measurement and reporting
- Verification and enforcement mechanisms
Could something similar support space circularity? Possibly. If satellite operators were required to offset debris risk, or rewarded for recovering or reusing components, the market could begin to shift. But this would require transparent, accountable data sharing, and agreement on the value of orbital “cleanliness”.
Antarctica: Preservation Through Consensus
Antarctica offers a different model. It’s not exploited commercially (yet), but is managed through a treaty-based framework that prioritises environmental protection and scientific cooperation.
The Antarctic Treaty System includes:
- A ban on military activity
- Strict limits on resource extraction
- Inspection and oversight mechanisms
- Shared governance by signatory nations
It shows that long-term sustainability agreements are possible, even in politically sensitive, high-value domains – but only when there’s a shared perception of risk and a willingness to prioritise non-commercial outcomes.
In this sense, Antarctica is aspirational. It demonstrates what a cooperative space commons could look like – managed deliberately, with conservation at its core. But it also highlights the difficulty of keeping commercial interests at bay, especially as climate change opens new shipping lanes and resource pressures grow.
What These Commons Teach Us About Space
Taken together, these examples reveal a few key insights:
- Voluntary coordination is not enough
Every shared domain suffers when regulation is weak, incentives are misaligned, or monitoring is inadequate. - Sustainability requires enforceable norms
Whether it’s through legal treaties, economic markets, or licensing regimes, actors need a reason to act collectively. Across shared domains, progress has only followed when there are meaningful costs for non-compliance. In space, enforcement is still the exception, not the rule. As long as bad behaviour is cheaper than compliance, circularity will struggle to scale. - Circularity must be built into governance, not just technology
Recyclable satellites won’t help if no one is responsible for recovering them, or if others gain a competitive edge by ignoring best practices. - Trust and transparency are foundational
Circular systems rely on data – what’s in orbit, what’s been recovered, what’s been left behind. Without that transparency, cooperation falters.
Space is still early in its development as a commercial and operational domain. That means we have an opportunity to learn from the mistakes made in our terrestrial commons—and to embed better practices before crisis forces our hand.
Shared Responsibility Is the First Step
Circularity in space isn’t just about materials or recovery methods. It’s about how we think of the orbital environment itself – as a shared space that demands shared responsibility.
Without global coordination, economic incentives, and enforcement mechanisms, circularity efforts will remain limited to a handful of voluntary actors. Just like in the oceans or atmosphere, the cost of inaction will eventually catch up to us.
Space is a commons. We can treat it like one from the start – or try to patch it up later, when the damage is harder to reverse.
