Flying in the Face of Uncertainty: Human Risk in Space Activities

I. INTRODUCTION Although the idea remains exceedingly controversial, momentum is building in the US space program for an ever-increasing role of humans in space. This momentum is evident in the renewed emphasis on human exploration of the moon and Mars. It is also evident in the private sector's growing interest in space tourism. Even if the move to greater involvement of humans in space is gradual, space exploration and tourism are attracting the government and private funding necessary to underwrite initial steps in this direction. The largely overlooked public policy issue of managing human risk in space is an important aspect of these activities. Such risk may be borne by first parties-the actual space travelers themselves. It may also be borne by third parties, such as those positioned on the ground beneath the flight path of a space launch vehicle. Critics of manned flight often argue for robotic exploration, claiming that samples from Mars and other environments could instead be collected by unmanned probes and returned to Earth for study. Human risk, however, is not avoided. Biological contamination associated with the introduction of extraterrestrial materials to the Earth's environment remains an issue. Managing risk is complex in space activities that can substitute robots for humans and can pose risks to first and to third parties. In addition, space activities and attendant risks involve both the government and the private sector. Sound risk management calls for appropriate application, balancing, and coordination of regulation, legislation, and other forms of policy intervention. The increasingly large private-sector role in space also calls for greater consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of relying on conventional practices, such as tort liability and insurance, as alternatives to government intervention in designing public policy. The purpose of this article is not to define this balance-largely because the precursor analyses of this wide range of issues have yet to take place within the regulatory, legal, and policy communities. Rather, the purpose is to offer a foundation for future analyses by offering background on the types of risks associated with possible loss of life in space projects. It is important to note that zero risk in space activity is unattainable and is an unreasonable policy objective as long as any space projects take place. The objective is not to eliminate risk but to accept it: to manage it through incentives, regulation, and legislation and to rationally decide how much to accept based on commensurate, expected benefit. This article is also not intended to be alarmist about human risk in space activities. Instead, the article seeks to provoke dispassionate public policy discourse about these risks. An implicit theme in the article is that, to the extent the public supports space projects, attitudes must become much more accepting of risk. The next section describes risk in four activities selected to illustrate risks to humans in space projects. The concluding section draws out general themes and poses questions for designing a framework for policy, regulatory, and legislative management of space risk. II. SPACE ACTIVITIES AND POSSIBLE HUMAN RISKS The most prominent space activities that represent the range of risks to first and third parties and the spectrum of risks from private and government space projects are human space exploration, space tourism, planetary protection, and space transportation. A. HUMAN EXPLORATION OF SPACE Sending humans into space unquestionably involves risk. Perhaps the most notable manifestations of this risk were the fatal accidents that occurred with Apollo 1 and with the shuttles Challenger and Columbia. The policy response to these events is illustrative of as-yet-unresolved problems in risk management. After each incident, investigations by Congress, Presidential commissions, and NASA led to engineering redesign-a technological fix. …