The quest for sustainability in lower orbit: Conceptual models for space tourism

Abstract

From the day Dennis Tito became the first private citizen to travel to space for no other reason but the sake of the experience itself, space tourism stops being a chimaera and became a reality, albeit an elitist one. And if only seven passengers flew to the International Space Station (ISS) on board of Russian Soyuz rockets during the new millennium's first decade, other modalities of space tourism—such as sub-orbital travel—are increasingly getting commercialised due to its growing technological and financial accessibility (Chang, 2020). After years of hiatus, the sub-orbital commercial flights resumed in 2019, propelled by the combined contribution of the public (e.g., NASA) and private companies (such as Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin) in the main spacefaring countries. New entrants in the launching segment, even countries with no previous spacefaring history, such as New Zealand, have enhanced the potential for further development (Zhang & Wang, 2020). 2021 saw the record number of 14 civilians who experienced space travel (Space Foundation, 2022), almost doubling the number of all previous years combined. The vision of SpaceX (2020) to commercialise space flights to Mars by 2050 is regarded a distant but increasingly possible with the recent technological development and economic interest in space. Other endeavours, such as the building of orbiting space hotels (the Voyager Station due to open as early as 2027; CNN, 2021) are other, visionary on-going efforts to expand the remit of extreme tourism. And if until recently the market dimensions were limited, they are rapidly peaking up pace. A report from Northern Sky Research (2021) estimates at US $ 385 million revenues from orbital tourism, projected to grow as high as US$ 605 million by 2029. The suborbital segment looks even more dynamic, with an estimated compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 24.5% in the decade 2021–2031. All this raises important questions about its sustainability and even the case for space tourism in the first place. Some consider it environmentally costly when not ethically unsavoury (Cohen, 2017; Guerster et al., 2019), and requiring overcoming formidable regulatory challenges (Padhy & Padhy, 2021). Especially for what concerns the costing side of space tourism, there is no breakthrough in sight, even though reusable rockets have done considerable progress in lowering the budget requirements for space missions (CSIS, 2020). Until the entire space adventure is dominated by the so-called ‘tyranny of the rocket equation’ (Petitt, as cited by Young, 2015, p.45), which translates in 90% of the weight of a rocket being just the fuel to lift it off the planet's surface, the economic burden will remain, and so will the associated environmental costs. Hence, the need to critically evaluate whether space tourism can indeed be made sustainable and ethical and, if so, what are the preconditions for making this happen. Interestingly, while any sustainability discourse for space is derived from the sustainable tourism frameworks, the applicability of sustainability indicators to space tourism remains unclear and never clearly defined before, a clear gap in the knowledge we have identified in this study. Although most authors are optimistic about the economic sustainability of space tourism, the predictions for social and environmental sustainability are not as promising. The moral dilemma of the equal distribution of space tourism generated wealth and its environmental impact are sensitive areas that require robust conceptualisation and empirical analysis. Moreover, the growing interest in space tourism research makes the absence of a theoretically grounded and robust analytical framework to enhance sustainability even more remarkable. This is the second, evident knowledge gap this article intends to address: devise a conceptual model that, building on the sustainable tourism framework and Dubin's (1970) theory building two-stage approach, is adapted to space tourism as an example of ‘frontier’ tourism with unique peculiar characters. Section 2 offers a working definition of space tourism, discusses how it fits in the overall debates about ethical tourism and sustainability, and is instrumental for what comes next: a systematic review of the literature of sustainable tourism from Dennis Tito's travel in 2001 up to 2021, aiming at identifying relevant indicators for sustainable tourism and evaluate their applicability to space tourism. Section 3 briefly covers the methodological aspects of both systematic reviews and conceptual models and identifies the above-mentioned indicators. Building on the critical analysis of 101 indicators, Section 4 designs a brand-new conceptual model for sustainable space tourism. As it stands, there is a fourth field (technology) altogether missing in the traditional model by White et al. (2006) and derived studies. Adopting Industry 4.0 (I4.0 afterwards; Sun et al., 2012; Baldwin, 2019; Schwab, 2015; Kagermann et al., 2011; Lasi et al., 2014) framework in relation to the space sector (Cristians & Methven, 2017; Forcina & Falcone, 2021; Vaidya et al., 2018), the analysis demonstrates why technology represents the cornerstone of the conceptual model presented in this article. Section 5 concludes that sustainability can be fully achieved in space tourism only when technology takes the front seat, with Industry 4.0 and its nine pillars unleashing their revolutionary capabilities. Due to the nature and scope of this study, we have focused mainly on sub-orbital tourism, although its conclusions can be opportunely expanded to include outer space activities. The final section also explores the potential of the conceptual model herein developed for empirical research, paving the way for next steps, future research, and proof of concept. There is still ambiguity about what qualifies as space tourism (Johnson & Martin, 2016). The European Space Agency (ESA 2008, p. 19) defines it as an “activity that will encompass the execution of sub-orbital flights by privately-funded and/or privately-operated vehicles and the associated technology development driven by the space tourism market”. Chang (2017) and Cohen and Spector (2019a) define commercial space travel as leisure and recreation, allowing tourists to experience zero-gravity and celestial observation. Spector (2020b) categorises space tourism into three broad subcategories, i.e. sub-orbital, orbital, and beyond-orbital (ie, outer space, such as in a lunar base or a Martian outpost) and so do Friel (2020), Cohen and Spector (2019a), Chang (2015) and Webber (2013). On the other hand, Ma et al. (2020); Soleimani et al. (2019), and earlier Weaver (2011) include spacecraft launching observation as such. Damjanov and Crouch (2018), Frischauf et al. (2018) Weeks and Faiyetole (2014) add digital components (EVR, enhanced virtual reality) to the definition. From a legal point of view, that the definition of an astronaut (there is still no legal counterpart to ESA's industry definition of a space tourist; Failat, 2012) consist of two main aspects: the training required for the task and distance from Earth's surface they reach. Requirements vary a great deal, and if 6 months are generally considered necessary to visit the ISS (UNOOSA, 2022b), Virgin Galactic asks for only 1 week of preparatory training for suborbital flights (Virgin Galactic, 2022). Still, the non-professional personnel in space are considered ‘visiting crewmembers’ by the Inter-Governmental Agreement (‘IGA’) in an agreement reached between the space agency's participating to the ISS project (NASA, 2002). Although without binding legal value beyond the ISS, it constitutes nonetheless a ‘trendsetting, if not an industry standard’ (Von der Dunk, 2013). This matters, because the definition of the phenomenon affects its perception as feasible, ethically sustainable, and economically viable. Tourism is a significant contributor to many national economies, directly contributing on average 4.4% of national GDP and 21.5% of service exports in OECD countries (OECD, 2020). Even as a niche subsector (Friel, 2020), space tourism is rapidly becoming attractive for its high-skill job creation and revenue spillovers (Zhang & Wang, 2020). The economic multiplier of such developments will be higher than other industries (Cole, 2015), whereas the knowledge and skill base will facilitate space infrastructure construction (Komerath et al., 2007; Zhang & Wang, 2020). Friel (2020) and Spector (2020a) predict that space tourism will benefit terrestrial tourism destinations in the launching countries, facilitating all types of space flights and (Webber, 2013) becoming a pivotal sector of the economy due to economy of scale. space as a the of as the by and the during the of astronaut Space tourism can and public have a new from the traditional space research 2012) private is even in the is infrastructure private economic growth with potential for for while such as space Space tourism will still from to and models on the potential of the space tourism market (Chang, Cohen & 2015; et al., 2007; & 2013) are of in of (Zhang & Wang, 2020). (Komerath et al., a for the space tourism et al. identified training of of the as the most critical is et al., and Crouch with such recent & et al., et al., who perception also a and The industry will require a to tourists in an of space et al., and that and as important areas of research in the next The so-called space (the of the from the not to to companies but only to is for commercial tourism as the analysis of between national and their and 2015; and of & The only the commercial or extreme tourism (the and adventure & A legal in its will a and the legal of commercial the for the space tourism & and (2013). outer space and traditional in future studies. 2017; & and the economic sustainability of space tourism with the legal and for and tourists & of the space tourism and 2013) for the sector will also need in about relevant at the tourism sector in that research in sustainable p. Still, years the the industry is not to and systematic literature review have the of sustainable tourism et al., 2018), and their et al., 2015), indicators et al., 2017; & et al., 2020), challenges and to sustainability and et al., et al., 2021). (2018), and et al. (2018) and et al. (2018) have such to the tourism from to the and A is the need for a of sustainable indicators, which have in number and the a et al., for the industry and making it to and their & and et al., 2015, the of and as the for such and (2014) and et al. (2018) empirical that sustainability concerns and and There is the and of what constitutes a for sustainability, from from to for & And when it comes to space tourism, sustainability a The of the space sector 2019; are the of the space missions and their environmental are in the of a interest of the space and progress orbiting have due to 2018), when it comes to such as tourism, A the of private space both in of of and social the ethical dilemma for commercial space the (2018) discusses the moral of for space Other the for the of outer space and of tourists in space and the of an equal distribution of from space tourism 2020). Weeks and Faiyetole (2014) a to space to public and on sensitive social The impact of space tourism on and is of social space as tourism, (2020) and into the and other space the is a of and predict that space tourism and on Spector and and so do Cohen and Spector in outer space. the environmental sustainability of space tourism remains a Tourism such as Cohen (2018), et al. if space tourism can be sustainable at such as and (2018) and (2006) considered the impact of the in the space due to which have the potential to further environmental to the in space is of growing 2021; & to (2018), space tourism the Earth's and more as the of to space tourism will to the Earth's A recent by (2020) the impact of development on and of space tourism such as and (2020) and Spector that the in the which can on with space and the lunar being the to a new framework for sustainable space tourism, tourism the overall et al., 2019; components such as and Space tourism is such a and experience that to skill to et al., 2020), the of tourism & 2020). more than the for to into space tourism et al., 2012; et al., 2020), we to define in which way an experience that most as not can be and to a sustainable this we have the literature on space tourism to the tourism sustainability & et al., et al., 2018), three dimensions of sustainability, and three dimensions were for a they were derived from the theory of and as an framework to a sustainable tourism model et al., from which conceptual model for sustainable space tourism models are a in social more than et al., 2020). by the and model and et al., and have in tourism and et al., 2019; et al., 2019; although they have not to model sustainable space tourism so As as conceptual systematic reviews are The framework in this article is the et al., et al., et al., identifying all the et & 2015), for and and making about A number of have for this review on space tourism, that of and the of The in the by & social environmental & and to indicators for sustainability in and the of the framework is in the et al., also with et al. when they that sustainability is not and that the of indicators is to of and still or about and in et & and in view, it to indicators for sustainable tourism when no definition of the the of the indicators in the important of the p. et al. (2017) and et al. (2018), both identified a of sustainability indicators. and (2020) first of 101 sustainability indicators economic indicators, and indicators, to their and by empirical 1 in a 2 from the first to what as the most relevant in the review that tourism are the most economic indicators. and of of and areas and their impact on the are the more as for environmental of sustainability (the social and components have in this article White et al., conceptual such as and in the tourism development and tourism to and of such and are in studies. Some of (e.g., tourism to and of such of due to the required to for a et al., 2016). The literature that there are between and sustainability as they to have focused more on environmental and sustainability to and is critical et al., 2011; et al., for analytical framework for the space tourism while other indicators and for et al., The of such indicators for sustainable space tourism of a critical and of indicators by are of due to their high of the space which a great from tourism. are in combined in as both for in of framework and possible to a between the indicators in 2 and the developed for the conceptual framework of space tourism. The is in 3 in and in in the next Section to the conceptual model for sustainable space tourism, we have combined Dubin's theory building (1970) as by to and a model which from and And if traditional theory building between the and the empirical research as two although we are clearly on the first the proof of to future about this in Section we have developed the conceptual model at a its framework and it with the relevant also in which way have in The point is the and cited conceptual model of sustainable tourism first presented by White et al., and adapted in the presented in The first conceptual model developed on White et al. (2006) and it to the of space tourism as in 2 and there is the literature on sustainable tourism on and space tourism on the other is that there are three components and there is no agreement in the literature about which is the most the three components are for sustainable tourism as White et al. (2006) as it is not to model space tourism, and it is to a fourth is and, in its it to a sustainable for tourism, no the way sustainability 2 how to technology in the conceptual model of sustainable space tourism. Some have defined space tourism industry as a niche a of to the this will it is not possible to the of space tourism without its technological which is a of to space. we not have space tourism (the of the of there no way for to the of the of outer This is the reason why technology to be in the as the fourth to space tourism not only sustainable but even we can further than that, to sustainability, we need to the way sustainability can be by a of Space technology as of the to the on by (UNOOSA, in from to and 2022). Even of the most the environmental recently efforts to the 2015; et al., et al., 2021) to enhance the Space as it is defined in the public is by a between Industry 4.0 and if not the have in the space sector (the of et al., 2021) in a brand-new of the sector itself, which the of sustainability at its at this and the way technology the space tourism sustainability it is at the other, more traditional and their indicators. the fourth in the it is possible to and a of the indicators for sustainable tourism in 2 to the new model for space tourism and indicators. 3 of indicators as in with for space tourism indicators from as from the literature considered in Section 2 and 3 and the for their A to 3 will that not all the indicators identified have as in the This is due to the of the Some indicators, such as no in the environmental of tourism, while they are an of growing in space tourism such as as in the components of to between space and in all at all as in Section as so 2 and 3 indicators, in a in the indicators are which to the still of development of space tourism an for of not a of when the number is than and their applicability is more and at this than be in the future space travel more other the between 2 and 3 indicators is tourism indicators & of 2 and the recently to sustainability et al., 2021) are to this analytical and it is not by that economy as of the of et al., are both and A of & will also in the space tourism and of the way this the in on the et al., 2021; et al., This is not without are the need to and and a and sensitive in the case of The orbital of space tourism will it to environmental and et al., et al., is not just the for the space sector as a and of the components of sustainable space tourism. the potential to the three other components of sustainable tourism in a way that is not even if we to all this into the conceptual model be and the pivotal of technology and its potential for The next how the model to for the of technology as the cornerstone of the entire The it both at a conceptual et al., 2012; Baldwin, 2019; Schwab, 2015; Kagermann et al., 2011; Lasi et al., 2014) and the of its (Cristians & Methven, 2017; Vaidya et al., Forcina & Falcone, 2021; et al., are to the sector beyond This is evident when at the way the nine pillars (e.g., and and as a are the space and, space tourism The literature on Industry 4.0 conceptualisation that, while its nine pillars et al., it is only when they are all that Industry 4.0 its potential for & this is for industry in this is even more in such as space industry space that not without which the sector the the most on space industry this The space 5 (OECD, 2019), in to for at a decade, in new space the sector from the traditional and and it a such as space and for a lunar to the of (e.g., new fuel and and have facilitating the of private into space SpaceX rockets to to while there is no to an to rocket that still the industry and all the space missions to the of 1 of for a weight into space (NASA, the by an orbiting in (the is just an example of what is to After the is of the most of space only to All the from to and even the lunar surface, are And if the of the economy is as for the sustainability of space tourism, the between space, and all working and is to even more The between Industry sustainability, and economy is still in its early et al., et al., et al., & the for a way et al., 2021). challenges do in the of models to et al., 2019; et al., as it is the case of the space the and the it have not have the as cornerstone of the 2015; and with the of Space 4.0 both by and by the 2016). have just at the & is to As by OECD (2019), 5 will the modalities space tourism takes and its to it And if the is any the only to have space tourism that environmentally sustainable, economically and is to on a technology that to space. for a more sustainable, as as the the of the Earth's all on the Industry 4.0 and can to Space the of the and on their sustainability as and p. be in as aiming for a sustainable than a sustainable this is even more in a sector in as space tourism. this will is a and more than is even though not all of or to the be and this is contribution to There are a to this study, which we fully of the on space tourism and not the and more about in outer space, be their the or Martian clear of the of in space in of the with the and what be for to & The between the to (the way intends to or the to the (the & 2007; & 2013) is way beyond the scope of this we have not considered the and aspects that to tourism of which space can be considered a (Cohen, There are many on the et al., & which we but not for a in the to for it The model only to it The important of the regulatory framework that can space tourism by legal no for the not Due to the of the which require a article by itself, the legal aspects have into the economic of an space, as for the they for the private and commercial dimensions of the most important space tourism There is important from the so is not in of scope but the conceptual in this we have not presented a case to the model itself, for two main because we that what missing in the first a conceptual model for sustainable space tourism on the of White et al. to the for the of space in such an article. This is to be in future studies. The about of a space tourism that can be both and sustainable, just is to with the itself, although of the they will both a if the even space tourism, its is and a only from the that such tourism can and be made This is with a conceptual model that the indicators of sustainable tourism with the of the space is both and that will and even the if this can the the conceptual model to a case to in which way the components identified in and which of we need for this to are the next will be to the of the model not only in an but to evaluate its value for the if that sustainable and space tourism is we into the way technology can a sustainable of the space tourism. technology the to the space adventure as a it can and also be the main to sustainable space tourism. The way we can it is to as a and, as a is a in & at a from of and two working in on the space and Industry The New of and and space for a sustainable economy from the space of is an research interest on and tourism studies. not to this article as no were generated or during the

Topics & Concepts