УДК 339.13.017:629.78

АНАЛИЗ ЭВОЛЮЦИИ МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЙ СОСТАВЛЯЮЩЕЙ НАЦИОНАЛЬНЫХ КОСМИЧЕСКИХ ПРОГРАММ

Омельяненко Виталий Анатольевич
Сумский государственный университет
Аспирант кафедры экономической теории

Аннотация
Данная статья посвящена обзору основных глобальных тенденций космической деятельности и факторов, которые стимулируют и препятствуют международному сотрудничество в различных направлениях создания и использования космических технологий.

Ключевые слова: инновации, конкуренция, космическая деятельность, международное сотрудничество, трансфер технологий


EVOLUTION OF INTERNATIONAL COMPONENT OF NATIONAL SPACE PROGRAMS ANALYSIS

Omelyanenko Vitaliy Anatolievich
Sumy State University
PhD-student of Economic Theory Department

Abstract
Thе aim of the article is to the review of basic global tendencies of space activity and factors, that stimulate and prevent the international collaboration in different directions of creation and use of space technologies.

Keywords: competition, innovations, international cooperation, space activity, transfer of technologies


Рубрика: 08.00.00 ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКИЕ НАУКИ

Библиографическая ссылка на статью:
Омельяненко В.А. Evolution of international component of national space programs analysis // Современные научные исследования и инновации. 2013. № 11 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://web.snauka.ru/issues/2013/11/29056 (дата обращения: 01.10.2017).

The era of active development of near-Earth space began in 1957 with the launch of the first artificial Earth satellite. This event marked the beginning of the destruction of the past and build a whole new political, technical, military stereotypes rooted in international relations, and qualitatively changed the scale of our civilization.

The aim of this article is to analyze changes in approaches to international cooperation in the development of national innovation policy of space industry.

In the 1960-1970 strategy of development and using of near-Earth space were developed mainly in satellite projects of the USSR and the USA. The strategies of these countries great importance was given to the military – strategic and geopolitical aspects of the development of near-Earth space. Often, the purpose of these strategies have been ahead of the curve on the space race rivals. This led to extreme fragmentation interests of the superpowers and strategies of space exploration, which is not allowed to create a basis for the use of space for the benefit of all mankind.

Previously each of the “Big space club” member develop space technology for their own reasons [1].

For the USSR championship in the development of near space was primarily a demonstration of the success of the socialist system in the world arena and has greatly increased the country’s geopolitical influence.

U.S. perceived Soviet satellite launch as a blow to his power and prestige. With the development of national astronautics American government tried to regain the status of a world leader in science and technology. The European Union considered the implementation of independent projects in space exploration as care under political influence in the United States. Japan’s space exploration has become a symbol of rebirth and power in the post-war phase of history. The Chinese leadership through the development of astronautics sought to bring the country among to the world leaders.

After the collapse of the USSR and the end of the “Cold War” world community faced to problem concerning creating a global strategy space activities, which implies that the interests of states, national policies and programs of space exploration. However, the attempts of the cooperative space exploration undertaken during the 90s of the ХХ century have been unsuccessful. Moreover, an increasing trend of militarization of near space and the increased threat of starting a new arms race in space. In this connection in the last two decades interest in international political
issues of mastering and use of circumterrestrial space rises continuously.

The dynamics of the starting segment of the space market in the context of the analyzed 18-year period for the world economy shows that the space economy does not directly dependent for global economic trends, but is strongly dependent for political factors. 25% decline in 1990 was objectively caused by the collapse of the Soviet Union, the geopolitical discharge and a sharp decline in military activity, a 25% drop in 2001, probably was caused by the start of the global campaign against terrorism under the auspices of the United States, increasing the safety factor and a strong outflow of funds in the military and defense sector.

However, during the global financial crisis of 1997-1998, the starting segment showed a calm development without any recession, and against the background of a complex (financial, mortgage, food and energy) global crisis of 2007-2008 we can see sustainable growth [2].

Today all the leading countries of the world have a strategic documents in the field of space exploration and development of space technologies. In the approach to space activities face at least six different views on its organization [3]:

1. Space activities as a pride of pseudo-sovereign country. Lifting people (and animals in space) – is a matter of prestige and pride of the nation

2. Space activities as a profitable business – million people (space tourists) into space at a high price is the efficient frontier of space commercialization

3. Space activities as a principal activity of the post-industrial information systems and new gadgets and variety of electronic devices.

4. Space activities as a neo-industrial system based on the design of new life support systems, the use of new materials, energy development as a knowledge-based economy.

5. Space activities as neo-industrial intellectual activity for the development of human consciousness.

6. Space activities as a neo-industrial activities reproduction of life in different systems, a breakthrough in the life sciences and the creation of real life practices playback.

Of course the development of specific strategies of space activities can be considered different combination of dedicated ideal types. But each type sets its centerline orientation.

Space activities in varying degrees are engaged by all world leading countries and a lot of developing countries. It should be noted that the range of the degree of participation in space activities in different countries is very large – from using separate channels to a full and inclusive application of space assets for a wide range of civil and military tasks. And if the individual tasks (eg, communication) solved a large number of states, multilateral space activities covering military, economic, scientific, social and other spheres of life have the opportunity to engage in a few states.

Countries that develop space programs or taking their first steps in its formation are actively developing international cooperation in space in order to attract the necessary technologies and additional funding.

Today only 19 countries have manufacturing and research base, enabling them to develop and produce its own space devices. But most of them are able to create only small space devices experimental purposes. Thus, of the 23 countries that have their own space telecommunications, 17 using space devices developed by foreign firms [4].

Most countries use space assets to address civilian tasks, but many of them have the ability to use space assets for security and military needs. This applies to data received from devices to explore Earth’s natural resources, which have access to dozens of countries and verbose, which is constantly increasing. Space communications and meteorological support are no less accessible to dozens of countries and can also be used for military activities.

Developed space infrastructure to independently solve complex problems of development and practical use of space is only in U.S., Russia, France, China, Japan, India. Therefore, the possibilities of a wide use of space, both real and potential, it is advisable to speak primarily in relation to these countries. Furthermore, UK and Germany show the activity in matters of military use of space. On formal criteria Israel, which has now launch vehicles and spacecraft of its own production, can be attached to this list.

Therefore, international cooperation in space is objectively necessary, because the scale of the problem and space activities proportionate civilization, its overall needs. Space inherently planetary. Giant concentration of effort and money required and international cooperation, and the international division of labor. Gaining strength the process of using the achievements of astronautics developing countries, the emergence of new national space agencies.

Based on these factors we offer to share international participation into the following groups:

1) research focus;

2) commercial focus;

3) military focus.

But between these directions there are inextricably links through convergence and technology transfer. Space for peculiar intertwining of fundamental and applied problems, relatively rapid transition of the fundamental problems in the application.

But for all the fundamental importance of the fundamental problems the main driving force of modern astronautics is the necessity to solve practical problems. Sufficiently strong correlation nature of satellite communications systems with the actions of the armed forces can detect even the elements of immediate preparation for active combat operations.

Space activities, combining the newest research and development to their widespread use in the economy, science and security, requires the creation of certain conditions to ensure its effective development [5].

For this purpose the state as a priority within the scope of its interests in space complement national legal framework of new rules which directly determine the mechanisms and collaboration in solving problems related to space activities.

Development of international space market occurs rapidly. For 5 years it has grown from $ 170 billion to 250 billion, and these trends will be traced and then (according to Satellite Industry Association, Futron Corp.). Moreover, different kinds of space technologies significantly differ in the degree of profitability. If telecommunications are considered almost the commercial sector of the market, the manned program is entirely subsidized.

Global information services, which include navigation and satellite imagery, are extremely important in terms of catalyzing the modern geoinformation processes that include elements of public-private cooperation.

Human presence in space for scientific purposes, for long-term research – a matter of enormous socio-cultural significance. But timely monitoring and forecasting of various processes, events, using space data are no less important and have the applied nature.

Public-private partnership is developing, but very slowly. The initial momentum in the implementation of space programs must come from the state. In matters of operation can play a primary role for the private sector. For example, the EU is trying to develop a new scheme of public-private partnership. Ground segment should remain public and service sector, data users, we want to open up to private initiatives.

UK space program concentrates on studies using radio telescopes, satellite telecommunications, participation in GPS and Galileo.

The French government supports “Très grands infrastructures de recherche» (TGIR) – large-scale research infrastructure, such as in space or nuclear research. Among the major French institutions involved in scientific research the most important place is taken by Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) – National Center for scientific Research. Innovation activities in the context of the main tasks of these infrastructures must facilitate technology transfer and innovation in the industry concerned.

International Association of Space Explorers (ASE), which includes the space explorers from around the world presented in the American Museum of Natural History its strategy to protect our planet from asteroids.

UN is also currently discussing possible ways to prevent such unwanted meetings in the future. ASE representatives reported that at this stage you need quite a bit: in the first place, a good telescope that will track the trajectory of asteroids and meteorites exclusively. According to the founder of the ASE, astronaut Russell Shveykata, monitoring and other protective measures will cost the world cheaply, about 1% of the budget of NASA. Amount seems even more insignificant, given that in the ASE involved about 70 countries. It is planned that the observatory, which will be installed in the telescope will start its work in 2018.

Space is becoming increasingly competitive environment. While the U.S. continues to be the leading state in space, their competitiveness in recent years has decreased slightly, as some market space sectors are occupied by other countries. Their development of space technologies and the emergence of the international market of their products pose to Washington task is to improve the system of export control of space vehicles, to preserve the benefits of America’s space industry and provide a superior level of its space industry, as the sector of the U.S. economy plays a crucial role in ensuring national security.

U.S. suppliers of space products, especially second and third tier, are involved in the development of components for spacecraft are on the threshold of risk prolonging periods of development, production and procurement of components of space technology, the growth of monopoly suppliers of finished space products and the risk of growth of the number of competitors in overseas markets.

Currently in the U.S. industry the number of suppliers of space components has been declining. This reduces opportunities for the development of the U.S. critical technologies for space purposes and to maintain the necessary level of independence from foreign manufacturers. This situation makes it difficult to create the necessary economic incentives for U.S. space industry for the development of innovation in the space sector and maintaining America’s leadership position in this area of the world production. Situation is also complicated by a number of difficulties in recruitment , training and professional technicians [6].

In a comparative analysis of the features of development of space programs and space-rocket technology in these countries, specific features that appear in the commonality of approaches to the development strategy of the national space programs in China, India and Japan were identified.

First of all its “catching up” character development with continued dependence on imported rocket and space technology in certain areas, as well as strong practical and applied policy orientation in space activities, more pronounced in India and Japan, to a lesser – in China. Secondly, rocket and space technology in all three countries is seen as an important part of the national strategy of scientific and technological development, the tool of conquest or retention of scientific and technical leadership. Third – it is important to note the growing trend in recent years, increasing the military component of the space activities in China, India and Japan. And finally, the characteristic policy space activities between the top three Asian countries – commitment to the self-sufficiency of rocket and space technology and autonomy in the field of space activities.

Despite limited resources, they tend to absorb virtually all the important areas of space activities, including a complicated and expensive as manned space flight.

The analysis of tendencies and prospects of development of the space programs of three investigated countries allowed to make next conclusions [7; 8]:

1. Interconection and intercommunication in development of space-rocket industry of China, India and Japan is the relations of collaboration-rivalry between China and Japan, India and China are in a great deal carried and in the sphere of space, gaining character on the modern stage keen competition; success of one of the examined countries here initiates an immediate answer in two other, that is expressed in year-on-year growth of the budgetary financing and development of the new scale scientific, applied and soldiery programs.

2. Since the beginning of this decade in China and India is a growing trend towards a single technology base and integration of military and civilian sectors. The most important factor in strengthening the interaction of military and civilian component is to focus on dual-use technologies and double innovation. In addition , the importance of the creation of new organizational structures , primarily the so-called ” centers of excellence “, created on the basis of combining the efforts of universities and military and academic sectors in the creation of high technologies , including in the aerospace field.

3. Strategic priorities of development of space-rocket industry and politics in area of space programs closely connected both with a public scientific and technical and innovative policy and with strategies of development of national soldiery potentials. Thus progress in area of technologies extends possibilities and accelerates development of both military industrial complex on the whole and space-rocket industry. At the same time, development of front-rank space-rocket technologies assists the increase of national scientific and technical potential.

4. The increase of space potential of China, India and Japan goes within the framework of realization of conception of providing of autonomous, all-sufficient and independent space activity. It shows up, foremost, in two major directions. Firstly, possibilities of unimpeded access broaden in space, due to development of transport space systems and pilot-controlled space programs(that is already realized in China). Secondly, new informative possibilities space communication and monitoring of the civil, military and double setting networks behave to that improve and created.

5. In the last decade to China, India and Japan the revision of role of space in soldiery preparations and going goes near a conduct space, that is expressed in the gradual strengthening to her military constituent. Orientation of China, India and Japan on creation of the modern, flexible armed forces and ability to win in modern war, provide prevailing in a region, and in a remote prospect and global presence, are basic motive force of changes in the field of military component of space activity of the investigated countries.

6. China, India and Japan efforts are directed on active development of international cooperation and co-operation in the field of space activity with foreign countries. The increase of value of China and India is marked in international cooperation to the sphere of space-rocket technologies, and also passing to the qualitatively new level of collaboration – focus is displaced from the transfer of technologies to establishment of partnership in the field of development and production. The increase of amount of joint projects of the military and double setting becomes an important tendency also, that takes on the special significance from the point of view of expansion of technological potential of the examined countries.

Space activity it is a very perspective sphere of activity already now bringing in a large contribution to the economy of different countries, in the civilization relations of world community on the whole. Its features touch are a high rate of mastering of space and quickness of receipt of practical economic effects.


References
  1. Каширин А.А. Современные тенденции международной борьбы за околоземное космическое пространство. URL:  http://vkosme.ru/kosmos346.html
  2. Рынок космических запусков: среднесрочные тенденции развития пускового сегмента. URL:  http://www.bayterek.kz/info/space_launches.php
  3. Громыко Ю.В. Реструктурация космической отрасли как насущная проблема. URL: http://www.situation.ru/app/j_art_1183.htm
  4. Большая энциклопедия космонавтики, 2007.  URL: http://libspace.narod.ru/
  5. Пайсон Д. Институциональная среда космической деятельности: тенденции развития в условиях глобализации / Д. Пайсон // Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2010. № 7.
  6. Иванов В. Америка хочет править космосом  // Независимое военное обозрение. URL: http://www.sunhome.ru/journal/536620
  7. Прокопенкова И.О. Особенности и перспективы развития космических программ в азиатском регионе – космические программы Китая, Индии и Японии // XXXV Академические чтения по космонавтике. – URL: http://www.riss.ru/index.php/analitika/157-osobennosti-i-perspektivy-razvitiya-kosmicheskih-programm-v-aziatskom-regione-ndash-kosmicheskie-programmy-kitaya-indii-i-yaponii#.UnVGT9zQnF7
  8. Крылов А. Сравнительный анализ космической деятельности России, Китая и Индии // Технологии и средства связи. 2011. №6.  URL: http://arhidoka.ru/files/2011/12/akd_rki.pdf
  9. Лузин П. Космос: перспективы сотрудничества и конфликтов// Индекс безопасности. 2008. № 4 (87), Т. 14.


Все статьи автора «sumyvit1»


© Если вы обнаружили нарушение авторских или смежных прав, пожалуйста, незамедлительно сообщите нам об этом по электронной почте или через форму обратной связи.

Связь с автором (комментарии/рецензии к статье)

Оставить комментарий

Вы должны авторизоваться, чтобы оставить комментарий.

Если Вы еще не зарегистрированы на сайте, то Вам необходимо зарегистрироваться: