As the space community debates the potential processes, fora, and instruments to create agreement on norms for responsible behavior in space, the discussion moves quickly to the barriers and weaknesses of each.
Will countries agree, how will norms be enforced, and how long will it take? However, as this debate process progressed, we saw independent action by states that should inform the space community's thinking. The lead-by-example approach illustrated by the U.S. ban on destructive direct-ascent ASAT led to quick action by numerous other states and a United Nations Resolution, “Destructive direct-ascent anti-satellite missile testing,” which overwhelmingly passed with 154 votes of endorsement for the U.S.-led moratorium. This paper examines the opportunities to create and capture norms for responsible behavior that can be achieved outside formal negotiation structures and agreements. In examining those opportunities, careful consideration is given to their verifiability, which is essential to distinguish between adherence and non-compliance.
Further, the paper enumerates a short list of candidate normative propositions that, if declared at the right place, time, and way, leads us to understand that we might be closer than we think to shaping the space-related normative behavioral landscape. Declarative regulatory norms can be a practical alternative to disarmament or arms control approaches. Harnessing this approach can develop future norms in space, including rules around registration, rendezvous and proximity operations, safety-related functions, critical infrastructure, safe zones, and right of or giving way.