U.S.-European Collaboration in Space Science (1998) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Historical Context of U.S-European Cooperation
2 Historical Context of U.S-European Cooperation
Pages 14-41
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 14... ...
Most of the early international cooperation in the space sciences was between the United States and Europe. Between 1958 and 1983, 33 of the 38 National Aeronautics and Space Adminstration (NASA)
|
From page 15... ...
During the Cold War there was significant political goodwill to be gained by the United States through cooperation with Europe vis-a-vis the former Soviet Union. The NASA Task Force on International Cooperation in fact stated in 1987 that "international cooperation in space from the outset has been motivated primarily by foreign policy objectives."5 Competition in space (including the space sciences)
|
From page 16... ...
12. 9 Bonnet, R., and Manno, V., International Cooperation in Space: The Example of the European Space Agency, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1994, p.
|
From page 18... ...
The historic European Ministerial Conference in December 1972 sealed a package deal including four decisions: (1) the merger of ESRO and ELDO into a single European Space Agency (ESA)
|
From page 19... ...
aspired to technological domination of the Old Continent.''l8 Initially, 18 Krige, J., and Russo, A., Europe in Space 1960-73 (ESA-SP1172) , European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 1994, p.
|
From page 20... ...
Spacelab, which was eventually approved by the United States, was, from the European perspective, "a project not without interest but, as far as technological sharing was concerned .
|
From page 21... ...
Subsequently, he initiated multiple new large-scale space efforts, including the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in 1983, the Space Station in 1984, and the National Aerospace Plane in 1986.
|
From page 22... ...
However, during this latter period of U.S.-European cooperation, the balance also changed, with ESA becoming, for the first time, the lead partner with NASA, rather than European national space agencies, as had been the norm in the past. In this case, ESA was the lead partner with the United States and the former Soviet Union in the planetary sciences mission Giotto.
|
From page 23... ...
83-91; Wilford, I.N., "Pentagon Wants Space Station for Missile Study," New York Times, December 29, 1986, p. Al; NASA Advisory Council, Task Force on International Relations in Space, International Space Policy for the 1990s and Beyond, NASA, Washington, D.C., October 12, 1987, p.
|
From page 26... ...
Emphasizing these factors means that the current era 1992 to the present is distinctly different from previous ones. Acknowledging this fact is critical to planning future international cooperative efforts, and such
|
From page 27... ...
27 Testimony by Mr. Daniel Goldin, Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, given to the Science, Technology and Space Subcommittee of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing on the International Space Station, Washington, D.C., September 18, 1997.
|
From page 28... ...
This gap may also affect cooperative projects because the specific focus and time constraints presented in NASA's Announcements of Opportunity (AOs) for "smaller, faster, cheaper" missions make it difficult for Europeans to respond and participate.28 During this period, ESA has also restructured its Earth observation programs to accommodate science and applications.
|
From page 29... ...
Depending on the discipline, the link between scientific goals and mission platforms varies. National Aeronautics and Space Agency Advisory System.
|
From page 30... ...
SOURCES: NASA, Office of Legislative Affairs; Bill Green, former member, U.S. House of Representatives, Appropriations Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies.
|
From page 31... ...
Though there is typically a good bit of debate about how spending is to be divided among the 19 functional categories, this portion of the budget resolution is not binding. The House and Senate Appropriations Committees are bound by the budget resolution's limit on total appropriated spending, but they are free to allocate this sum among their 13 subcommittees as they wish.3i Moreover, the appropriations subcommittee jurisdictions are not is This is true except insofar as Congress adopts changes in entitlement programs (programs, such as Social Security, which do not require appropriations because their statutory authorizations say that anyone who meets certain requirements gets paid automatically)
|
From page 32... ...
Typically such a large, long-term project has an initial "wedge," a midprogram "bulge" as the space vehicle is designed and built, and a declining "tail" dealing with transmission and receipt of data (although in the Office of Earth Science, data transmission, analysis, and provision of access to the larger Earth science community may be a major expense of the program)
|
From page 33... ...
A 1992 estimate indicates that about 2,000 western European scientists are directly involved in space activities. The European Space Science Committee (ESSC)
|
From page 34... ...
34 I'm ~ ~ ~,2 \ \\ I ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ .m oil i bat / Allot on zip mi#= ~ ; / Airs 3 I t~ g C &~-m j1 ~ 1 ~ \J JO \ ~ CHIP JO P" c ~ 0 u, c ~ ,qO ~ 0 0 ~ t cur ~ c o arc .
|
From page 35... ...
.37 The European Space Agency (ESA) Within the European Space Agency, the scientific program concerns only space science; scientific research in Earth observation, microgravity, and life sciences, as well as Earth observation applications, has different structures and processes.
|
From page 36... ...
This principle has profound implications for relations between the scientific community and ESA and explains the determining influence that ESA's advisory structure has on the definition and evolution of the scientific program. Currently, the advisory bodies in space science are the Space Science Advisory Committee (SSAC)
|
From page 37... ...
program. Earth Observation and Microgravity Research and Life Sciences: Optional Programs.
|
From page 38... ...
These recommendations are submitted for consideration by D/SCI to the Programme Board for Earth observation, which includes representatives of ESA member nations. Unlike the mandatory program, there is not yet a multiyear scientific program for Earth science in ESA, which makes the programmatic and the prioritization processes difficult.
|
From page 39... ...
This raises the issue of how to reconcile scientific priorities in the scientific programs of member states with ESA' s priorities. The situation is different for microgravity and Earth observation.
|
From page 40... ...
In Europe, ESA's space science projects are recommended by the Space Science Advisory Committee and selected by the SPC according to a long-term plan and within a funding envelope established by the council. Each part of the Earth observation and microgravity and life science programs has to be funded by the member states willing to contribute.
|
From page 41... ...
In the area of Earth observation from space, where commercial interests are strongest, NASA' s present priority is science first and commercial interests second. At ESA, with the currently proposed Earth Explorer program, which is primarily scientifically oriented, and the Earth Watch program, which is more oriented to applications and service, the situation will be different.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.