## 7 Performance  
In the very general meaning, Performance within the S-C-P framework refers to the success of any sector in producing benefits for consumers or society as such [11, 12]. Thus, the question is \"what society wants from producers of goods and services\" [11] (p. 3); what could be seen as a good performance? The most important thing, from the Industrial Organization point of view, is that \"decisions as to what, how much, and how to produce should be efficient in two respects: scarce resources should not be wasted outright, and production decisions should be responsive qualitatively and quantitatively to consumer demands\" [11] (p. 3). Thus, the crucial terms of the classical S-C-P approach to Performance will be production (or technical) efficiency and allocative efficiency [11, 12]. However, assessing these two kinds of efficiency poses particular challenges in the context of the space economy. Technical efficiency refers to the ability of a firm or sector to maximize output from a given set of inputs (or conversely, to minimize inputs for a given level of output). Looking at Figure 12, one can easily find the general progress in lowering the cost of launching a rocket to LEO calculated per kilogram of payload in both Western and Eastern/Global South countries. Regardless of this progress, SpaceX with Falcon 9 performed a real breakthrough in the efficiency of transporting satellites into orbit. It proved the substantial positive impact of putting the market into the previously government-dominated domain. A similar, and in fact interconnected, positive impact of the New Space transformation could be observed in the satellite segment, where, due to the lowering of launching costs (Figures 12 and 13a), as well as due to the technical progress (including miniaturization) and business model innovations, the cost of launching satellites into orbit dropped from around USD 40 million to USD 2.5 million per spacecraft (Figure 13b). Again, it proves the economic gains of the structural change due to the emergence of New Space in terms of technical efficiency. Figure 12: Weighted average launching cost to LEO per kilogram of payload (in 2021 dollars) for a mediumlift rocket. Note: cost are weighted by the number of successful launches; period regards the date of the first launch of a given rocket; the Triad covers the USA, EU and Japan; the Triad’s cost for XXI c. excludes Falcon 9; only rockets with at least 10 successful launches (at 31 December 2019) were taken into account. Source: Own calculation based on [85, 114]. The second crucial category for Performance is allocative efficiency, namely the optimal distribution of resources (which are already produced in a more or less technically efficient way) following societal preferences. It refers to a state in which resources are distributed in a way that maximizes societal welfare. According to neoclassical economics, it could be secured by the equimarginal principle, which means each unit of resources is allocated in such a way that the benefits of transferring such a unit into one use are equal to the harms involved in withdrawing it from another use [117]. In a purely market-driven system, this implies that marginal benefit equals marginal cost for all goods. Thus, competitive markets are assumed to be efficient or Pareto optimal, \"when no possible reorganization of production or distribution can make anyone better off without making someone else worse off\" [118] (p. 160). Through its new approach, firms like SpaceX have demonstrated measurable gains in technical efficiency, at least in terms of partial productivity measures such as cost of launch per kilogram. However, on the other hand, market concentration and barriers to entry we observe in the case of launching services (SpaceX with Falcon 9) or satellite constellations (SpaceX with Starlink in telecommunication or Planet Lab in remote sensing) distort allocative outcomes as they fall far away from the competitive ideal.