Between heaven and earth: Norwegian space policy for ... · issues affecting the High North, climate policy, the environment, security-related matters, trans-port and research. Chapters

Published by:Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry

Internet address: www.government.no

Cover photo: Norsk Romsenter/FFI/Seatex Printed by: 07 Aurskog AS 12/2013

Meld. St. 32 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper)

Between heaven and earth: Norwegian space policy for business and public benefit

MILJØMERKET

241 Trykksak 379



Translation from the Norwegian. For information only.

Contents

1 The Government’s goals for Norwegian space activity .......... 7

1.1 Profitable companies, growth and employment ............................ 7

1.2 Meeting important needs of society and user groups ............................. 9

1.3 Greater return on international space collaboration ........................ 10

1.4 High-quality national administration of space activity .............................. 11

2 On space activity ........................ 132.1 From space race to critical

infrastructure: 50 years of the Space Age ....................................... 13

2.2 Global space activity in 2013–actors and driving forces .... 15

3 Development of space activities in Norway .................... 21

3.1 Norway’s space-based service needs ............................................... 21

3.2 Development of high-tech Norwegian industry ....................... 26

3.3 PwC’s evaluation of some Norwegian space activities ........... 29

3.4 Research in Norwegian space activity ............................................. 31

4 How space activity benefits society and contributes to key policy areas .................................. 34

4.1 The High North ............................. 344.2 Climate and environment .............. 374.3 Civil protection, preparedness

and crisis response ........................ 384.4 Safe, efficient transport ................. 394.5 Research ......................................... 41

5 The European Space Agency ... 445.1 Context for Norway’s ESA

participation .................................... 445.2 ESA’s organisation ......................... 455.3 ESA programmes and industrial

policy ............................................... 465.4 Norwegian ESA participation

over time ......................................... 46

6 The European Union .................. 486.1 The EU’s role in European space

activity – background and trends . 486.2 EU space programmes – common

infrastructure, common goals ....... 496.3 EU satellite navigation

programmes: Galileo and EGNOS 506.4 The EU earth observation

programme: Copernicus ................ 526.5 Norwegian participation in Galileo,

EGNOS and Copernicus ................ 546.6 What does the EU’s expanded

role mean for Norway? ................... 56

7 Norway’s space-related ground infrastructure ................ 58

8 Space activity in Norwegian public administration ................ 63

8.1 Norwegian Space Centre ............... 638.2 State companies active in space .... 648.2.1 Andøya Rocket Range AS (ARR) .. 658.2.2 Norwegian Space Centre

Properties AS .................................. 668.2.3 Kongsberg Satellite Services

(KSAT) ............................................ 678.2.4 Opportunities and challenges in

state administration and ownership 688.3 Ministries and agencies ................. 698.4 Inter-ministerial coordinating

committee for space activities ....... 72

9 The Government’s commitment to space .......................................... 74

9.1 Profitable companies, growth and employment ............................. 74

9.2 Meeting important needs of society and user groups ................. 75

9.3 Greater return on international space collaboration ......................... 76

9.4 High-quality national administration of space activity .............................. 76

10 Financial and administrative implications .................................. 78

Appendix 1Abbreviations .................................................... 79

Between heaven and earth: Norwegian space policy for business and

public benefitMeld. St. 32 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper)

Recommendation from the Ministry of Trade and Industry on 26 April 2013, and approved the same day in the Council of State.

(Stoltenberg II Government)

Introduction

The previous time the Government asked theStorting to review an overall strategy for Norwayin space was in St.meld. nr. 13 (1986–87): Omnorsk romvirksomhet (On Norwegian space activ-ity). In the 26 years that have passed since thatwhite paper, our society’s relationship to spacehas changed greatly. Satellite-based services havebecome an important part of Norwegian daily life,from ordering a taxi to operating advanced off-shore petroleum facilities. In 2012, the consultingfirm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) evaluatedkey aspects of Norwegian space activity. The firmconcluded that some aspects have worked asintended, but that improvement is needed in oth-ers. The Government therefore believes the timehas come once more to anchor the broad guide-lines of Norwegian space policy in the Storting.

Practical benefits have always been the chiefaim of Norwegian space policy. Space activity hasnot been an end in itself, but a means to serveNorwegian interests. For this reason, most ofNorway’s public-sector undertakings have beenintended to create value in high-technology indus-tries and to meet specific national needs in com-munication, navigation and earth observation.

Often, the technology has been high-flying; butthe goals have always been down-to-earth.

Our participation in the European SpaceAgency (ESA) has put us in a position to developindependent national technological capabilitieswhile contributing to advances that have benefit-ted Norwegian and other European users alike.Norway has supplemented its ESA involvementwith nationally focused development support,bilateral agreements and an ever-stronger part-nership in recent years with the European Union.The international collaboration, like the domesticinitiatives, has contributed to the development ofimportant infrastructure and services.

The Government intends to maintain Nor-way’s down-to-earth orientation in space activities.The trends – with space infrastructure growing asa factor in everyday life and Norway relying onspace to address key national interests such as theHigh North, the environment and climate policy –suggest that space policy in the years to comeshould focus even more directly on the practicalneeds of public administrators, businesses andprivate citizens. Today, a well-functioning societydepends on technology that exploits space. Gov-

6 Meld. St. 32 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper) 2012–2013Between heaven and earth: Norwegian space policy for business and public benefit

ernment policy must therefore seek to ensure thatspace activity can continue to be an instrument ofNorwegian interests.

Norwegian space activities have always been –and will remain – dependent on international col-laboration. To achieve results, we must be good atplaying the cards we are dealt as technology, mar-kets and international partnerships evolve. Todaywe can see that the game is changing, and that itmay be necessary to adjust elements of Norwe-gian policy to better secure our interests.

There are three primary factors that couldmake policy adjustments necessary. The first istechnological change. Technological advances inrecent years have dramatically expanded therange of applications for space-based technology.The second factor that will help shape Norwegianspace policy in the years ahead is a change in Nor-way’s own needs. Space-based technologies pro-vide cost-effective options for addressing Norwe-gian policy challenges that have assumed centralimportance in the past few decades, such as man-agement of the High North and climate and envi-ronmental issues. The third factor that will affectour scope of opportunity in the years ahead ischange within the international organisations thathave long represented the framework for Norwe-gian investment in space activity. Without interna-tional collaboration, a robust and efficient Norwe-gian space sector would be unthinkable. The bestway to approach such collaboration in the futurewill depend on developments within the interna-tional forums to which we have access.

Those involved in Norway’s space effort canpoint to many success stories in the years sincethe previous white paper on space activity wassubmitted. Examples include the growth of com-petitive high-technology companies, the develop-ment of Norwegian AIS satellite technology, thebroad phase-in of satellite-based services acrossNorway’s public sector and the development ofNorwegian infrastructure. It would be an exagger-ation, however, to say that Norway is a majorspace nation. Our strengths lie in certain indus-trial niches and in the application of space-basedservices. Compared with leaders in space like theUnited States and France, we will always be small.A small country must prioritise its resources, andthere would be little point in attempting to create amajor national space industry or to resolve tosend Norwegian astronauts into space. Yet thereis no alternative to increased space activity if weare to maintain our role as a leading nation inocean shipping, High North stewardship, technol-

ogy and the environment. Norwegian space activi-ties contribute greatly to economic growth, sus-tainability and the ability of Norwegians to livesafe and comfortable lives. In the years ahead, theGovernment will continue to work hard to maxim-ise the benefits that Norway receives from its par-ticipation in space. This white paper forms thebasis of the country’s continued involvement inspace.

Structure of this White Paper

Chapter 1 lays out the Government’s goal for Nor-wegian space activity. Chapter 2 provides a histori-cal overview, and identifies the global actors anddriving forces behind modern space activity.Chapter 3 describes the emergence of Norwegianspace activity, with emphasis on the country’sneeds in space-based services, scientific researchand high-technology businesses development.This chapter also reviews the most important find-ings from the 2012 evaluation of Norwegian spaceactivities by PwC. Chapter 4 shows how spaceactivities may help Norway to solve current andfuture challenges in key policy areas. Particularemphasis is placed on the importance of space toissues affecting the High North, climate policy,the environment, security-related matters, trans-port and research. Chapters 5 and 6 cover issuesrelated to collaboration with ESA and the EU. InChapter 5, the focus is Norwegian participation inESA. ESA’s organisation, programmes and indus-trial policy are discussed, along with Norway’smembership over time. Chapter 6 discusses theEU’s role as a European space actor. After anaccount of the rise of the EU in space, focus shiftsto the satellite navigation programmes EGNOSand Galileo, and to the earth observation pro-gramme Copernicus. The chapter concludes bydescribing Norway’s participation in these twoprogrammes along with the significance and con-sequences of the EU’s expanded role. Chapter 7provides an overview of Norway’s ground-basedspace infrastructure, including facilities located inSvalbard, on Jan Mayen Island and in the Antarc-tic. Chapter 8 is devoted to state administrativeresponsibilities and ownership roles in organisa-tions such as the Norwegian Space Centre, theAndøya Rocket Range, Norwegian Space CentreProperties and Kongsberg Satellite Services AS.Chapter 9 explains the Government’s active spacepolicy measures. The white paper concludes, inChapter 10, with administrative and financialimplications.

2012–2013 Meld. St. 32 (2012–2013) Report to the Storting (White Paper) 7Between heaven and earth: Norwegian space policy for business and public benefit

1 The Government’s goals for Norwegian space activity

The Government will work to ensure that spaceactivity remains a means to advance Norwegianinterests. Four goals have been set: profitablecompanies, growth and employment, meetingimportant needs of society and user groups,greater return on international space collabora-tion, and high-quality national administration ofNorwegian space activity.

1.1 Profitable companies, growth and employment

Today, space-based applications are important toall sectors of the economy. The domain of spacetechnology extends well beyond companies thatproduce satellite and rocket components. Weobserve it spilling into other technology areas,through the development of products and ser-vices that rely on satellite-based services, and weobserve it facilitating economic activity more gen-erally. To assess the full impact of space activitieson value creation, our perspective must encom-pass more than traditional space technologyindustry. The Government will work to ensurethat public investment in space activities strength-ens wealth creation and business development.

When Norway joined ESA in 1987, there wereno satellite navigation services for civilian users.Most earth observation was the product of mili-tary intelligence satellites. The satellite communi-cations market was still in its infancy. Today, satel-lite-based services reach into every corner of soci-ety, from Google Earth and automobile navigationsystems to landslide monitoring and advancedcontrol systems for offshore petroleum opera-tions. The proliferation of satellites in combinationwith increased data processing capacity, theglobal spread of the Internet and the rise ofmobile communications infrastructure make sat-ellite services increasingly relevant to all aspectsour lives. A large and growing industry has conse-quently evolved to offer services and equipmentmade possible by satellite communications, navi-gation and earth observation. Such downstreamservices and equipment in turn contribute impor-

tantly to value creation throughout the valuechain, facilitating business activity in sectors rang-ing from natural resources to transportation. TheGovernment intends to facilitate the competitivestrength and export potential of Norway’s down-stream industry. In addition, it may be useful toformalise collaboration between actors in certaintechnological niches, such as satellite navigation,satellite communications or earth observation.The Government will therefore assess, in com-mon with other business areas, whether an Arenaproject is needed for space-related research andbusiness development, and in the longer termwhether a Norwegian Centres of Expertise pro-gramme is needed.

Norway’s commitment to space has helpedpromote business growth and development inlarge part through technology development, mar-ket access and system insight. The Governmentwill work to ensure that these three mechanismscontinue to contribute to development in Norwe-gian industry. Norwegian companies that haveparticipated in ESA development programmeshave seen their technological capabilitiesimprove. Norwegian ESA membership has alsomade it possible for companies to conduct valua-ble trials of newly designed technical components.The national development support funding pro-gramme for space innovation, Nasjonale følgemid-ler, has been used actively to strengthen the posi-tive effects of ESA membership on Norwegianindustry. Nevertheless, much of the value of ourESA participation has come in the form of spillo-ver to other technology areas, such as defence,aviation, offshore petroleum and ship transport.The Government will seek to ensure that privatesector participation in ESA programmes contin-ues to generate spillover effects in other technol-ogy areas.

Norwegian participation in the EU’s Galileo,EGNOS and Copernicus space programmesallows Norwegian businesses to compete for con-tracts on an equal footing with companies based inEU countries. Similarly, Norwegian participationin ESA has expanded market access for Norwe-gian companies with space-related products and


services. The Government will work to ensurethat Norwegian businesses take advantage ofopportunities provided under ESA’s principle ofguaranteed industrial return, and that Norwegianbusinesses are sufficiently competitive to obtaincontracts in EU space programmes.

Early insight into satellite-based infrastructuresystems is a key to success when developing asso-ciated products and services. Such insight hasbeen an important objective of Norway’s publiccommitment to space, and normally it can beobtained only by taking active part in the develop-ment of the systems in question. Norwegianauthorities and businesses have gained valuablesystem insight from Norway’s participation in EUand ESA programmes. This has strengthened thecompetitiveness of Norwegian products and ser-vices designed to exploit satellite-based navigationand earth observation systems. Through activeparticipation in European space programmes, theGovernment will work to ensure that Norwayobtains insight into systems under developmentas early as possible in the process. ESA activitiesare primarily focused on the upstream industry, inparticular the development of satellite and launchtechnologies. But companies whose main focus isdownstream report that they, too, see value inESA participation, because of the technologicalinsight they stand to gain. The Government willwork to ensure that Norwegian firms in the down-stream sector see greater benefit from participa-tion in ESA programmes.

The 2012 PwC report supports the contentionthat important aspects of Norway’s public-fundingmodel for the space sector are working asintended. Space activities have positive rippleeffects in the Norwegian economy, and the coun-try’s various support instruments are synergisti-cally linked. Commercial activities account for alarger portion of the space industry in Norwaythan they do in many other countries, and Norwe-gian industry has achieved substantial marketshare in segments of the space-based servicessector, particularly those related to satellite com-munications and earth observation. On the otherhand, the PwC report points out growth chal-lenges within the sector. To fully exploit the poten-tial for value creation, it may be necessary to mod-ify the policy instruments whose purpose is toensure that benefits return to the Norwegianeconomy. In the Government’s view, it is impor-tant that space-sector investments made to satisfynational needs also contribute to value creation in

Norwegian industry. Apart from our participationin EU and ESA development programmes, the pri-mary tool for promoting value creation so far hasbeen the national development support pro-gramme for innovation, Nasjonale følgemidler. Thegrowing importance of space activities outside thetraditional space technology sector increases theurgency of assessing whether existing industrialpolicy instruments can be adjusted to better reachenterprises that stand to benefit from space activi-ties despite having no direct link to the productionand operation of space infrastructure.

The range of potential policy actions is large.An example would be to ensure that Norwegiancompanies that exploit earth observation data areable to gain access to the data they require. ThePwC report points out that public agencies aremajor customers of earth observation data ser-vices. This customer role may trigger furthertechnology development and ensure continueddemand for services. A commercialisation strat-egy together with a strong domestic market mayboost value creation. Norwegian participation inmultinational satellite projects, coordination ofnational public-sector data procurement and anopen data policy for state-owned raw data are pos-sible means to achieve this. The Government willseek to ensure that businesses and other users ofearth observation data have access to the datathey require. The Government will also evaluatethe measures mentioned above.

Another important policy tool for wealth crea-tion will be active participation in European infra-structure programs like Galileo and Copernicus.Already this has provided early insight into sys-tem capabilities and limitations, helping to posi-tion Norwegian companies in the market for prod-ucts and services that exploit such systems. Pub-lic procurement in the space sector shouldinclude an assessment of how intended purchasescan help generate growth and development inNorwegian industry. It may also be necessary toadjust public development support so that itreaches companies further out in the value chainthan the companies that produce satellites, launchvehicles and ground infrastructure. It will beimportant to inform all relevant actors of theopportunities inherent in Norwegian space activ-ity. The Government will use policy mechanismsstrategically to promote service development andcommercial success in market segments with sig-nificant growth potential and comparative advan-tages.


1.2 Meeting important needs of society and user groups

Space-based applications affect most aspects ofdaily life these days. The use of space technologyhas become a precondition for the safe and effi-cient functioning of our society, including the pur-suit of key policy objectives regarding the HighNorth, climate and the environment. The Govern-ment will work to ensure that space activities helpmeet important needs of our society and of vari-ous user groups, and to do so cost-efficiently.

Space-based infrastructure is growing morestrategically significant by dint of its increasingimportance to critical services and the exercise ofgovernmental authority. A certain degree ofnational control and independent capability isrequired to secure our interests, even in the caseof commercially obtainable services. Norway hasspecial needs in the High North and it cannot beassumed that actors outside of Norway will havethe ability or interest to develop good solutions.The ability to influence the development of essen-tial infrastructure will have consequences for pub-lic safety and crisis management. It is thereforeimportant that Norwegian research and technol-ogy communities possess the insight and exper-tise required to identify workable solutions; suchexpertise is also necessary to be a competentcounterpart in procurement transactions andinternational partnerships and, when appropriate,to develop and implement national systems. TheGovernment will help to provide framework con-ditions in which Norwegian actors can developand implement space-based systems geared toNorwegian user needs, whether through nationalinitiatives or international collaboration. In sodoing, the Government wishes to encourage acontinued flow of expertise from Norway’sresearch and educational institutions to Norwe-gian space programmes and enterprises. A deepunderstanding of space is an important part of thisexpertise. The Government intends to continuethe Research Council of Norway’s space researchprogramme.

Satellite monitoring is already a very impor-tant tool for understanding the complex interplayof factors that affects our climate, for assessingthe extent of pollution transported over long dis-tances and for monitoring other damage to thenatural environment. The importance of suchmonitoring will in all likelihood increase furtheras new, more sophisticated environmental moni-toring satellites enter operation, as exemplified byESA’s Sentinel programme. Environmental moni-

toring, especially of northern regions and for cli-mate study, must provide stable and continuousdata access and adequate areal coverage. Satellitemonitoring itself cannot solve our climate andenvironmental challenges, but it has become auseful tool in preparing decision makers to makeinformed decisions. For Norway, one key priorityis to ensure data access for Norwegian expertsand environmental authorities. Another is to con-tribute in a spirit of solidarity to systems that willinform the global debate on climate and the envi-ronment. The Government will work to realise thepotential of satellite observations to advance cli-mate and environmental policy.

Good satellite systems to cover Norwegianneeds in the High North are one of the key objec-tives of Norwegian space activity. In a few years,thanks to Galileo and Copernicus, good systemswill be in place for navigation and earth observa-tion in the High North. The biggest remainingchallenge is the need for communication systems– in particular, broadband services for ships.Existing satellite communication systems providelittle or no coverage north of 75 degrees latitude.Communications satellites moving in polar orbitcan solve this challenge. Several countries withinterests in the High North have begun studyingpolar-satellite communications options, but so far,no immediately realisable plans exist. As recentlyas a few years ago, the problems associated withnavigation and communications in the central Arc-tic Ocean were of purely theoretical interest. Fewif any ship owners wanted to sail into the massiveice flows north of 80 degrees. Today, Norway’sfishing fleet operates regularly at 82 degreesnorth, and the offshore petroleum industry, too, ismoving steadily into the Arctic. Within a fewyears, we may witness a significant increase inship traffic in the Northeast Passage. The steadyrise of human activity in the area intensifies theneed for good systems to aid navigation, commu-nications, weather forecasting, sea rescue andmonitoring. Experience shows that space-basedsystems can solve such challenges cost-effec-tively. Norway is determined to be a responsiblesteward of the far north. A major challenge in theyears ahead will be to see that Norwegian authori-ties and users have access to the space-basedinfrastructure required for safe, sustainable, effi-cient High North operations. The Governmentwill actively consider how best to address Nor-way’s need for satellite communications in theHigh North, and will facilitate the implementationof good, robust satellite navigation coverage.


Transport is one of the sectors that haveundergone the greatest change in recent years asa result of the increasing use of satellite-basedinfrastructure. It is also the sector whose use ofsatellite systems is most obvious on a daily basis.Satellite-based infrastructure in the transport sec-tor includes technology for navigation, communi-cations and earth observation. Satellite-based ser-vices are important aids to maritime, aviation andland transport. The Government will work toensure that satellite-based services can be used asimportant elements in transport policy.

Because of technological advances in recentyears, Norwegian authorities face fewer limita-tions on their ability to act on their own. Thisapplies in particular to the emergence of relativelyinexpensive small satellites. The launch of AISSat-1 in 2010 showed that the Norwegian authorities,with modest effort, are able to finance and operatehighly effective space infrastructure at thenational level. The operation of small national sat-ellites will never replace multilateral collaborationon large, complex systems such as Galileo andCopernicus, but it can be a useful supplement.More information is required on the potential fordomestic space infrastructure to support Norwe-gian users in government and business. The Gov-ernment will actively use supplementary nationalinitiatives as a means of addressing Norwegianuser needs.

As with all systems that society makes itselfdependent on, the increased reliance on satellite-based systems represents a potential vulnerability.As satellite systems gain importance to criticalapplications in aviation, civil preparedness andactivities related to national defence, they may ofcourse become targets for hostile attack. Naturalphenomena, such as space weather, can also dam-age satellite infrastructure, as can space debris.Addressing vulnerabilities has become an impor-tant task for the authorities. The EU and theUnited States are leaders in the effort to establishinternational guidelines aimed at reducing theincreasing amount of space debris in key satelliteorbits. The Government will continue its efforts toaddress vulnerabilities associated with the use ofsatellite systems, and it will contribute to the taskof establishing international guidelines to reducespace debris.

1.3 Greater return on international space collaboration

International collaboration has always been – andwill remain – the backbone of Norwegian involve-ment in space. ESA membership has served Nor-way well as we developed our own competitivegroup of space-related businesses, expanded ourspace technology expertise and internationalisedour research programmes. In the years to come,the Government will extend Norway’s participa-tion in ESA as a key way of promoting Norwegianinterests in space. At ESA’s ministerial-level coun-cil meeting in November 2012, Norway declared acommitment of 144.4 million euros to optionalESA programmes.

In addition to participating in ESA, however, itincreasingly will be necessary to collaborate withthe EU. Galileo and Copernicus will play roles insolving some of the key challenges that Norwayfaces. Norway should take an active approach toEU space policy in order to gain influence overinfrastructure projects of significance to this coun-try as well as to protect the interests of Norwe-gian industry, researchers and user groups whilepositioning Norway for a future in which the EUincreasingly determines the broad outlines ofEuropean space policy. The Government will pur-sue proactive policies to secure Norwegian inter-ests in EU space programmes, and it will work toensure that Copernicus and Galileo perform wellin Norwegian areas of interests.

Today, significant changes are coming intoview that will require Norwegian policy adjust-ments if we are to ensure that our needs are effec-tively addressed in the future. For years, ESA hasbeen the mainstay of Norwegian space activity.ESA participation will remain indispensable, butas time passes, that participation will no longer besufficient to protect Norwegian interests. EUspace programmes have emerged as necessarysupplements to those of ESA.

ESA has its role to play as an arena for collabo-ration in research and development. The EU hasthe financial and political weight to build and oper-ate large, costly infrastructure systems. Galileoand Copernicus will help Norway address keyissues related to the High North, the climate andthe environment. Active Norwegian participationin these programmes has already helped ensurethat they address Norway’s special needs; it hasalso given Norwegian participants early insightinto opportunities linked to the programmes.

The EU’s rise as a key player in European (andNorwegian) space activity presents Norwegian


authorities with a new set of challenges regardinginternational collaboration in space. Until recently,most relevant matters were settled in ESA – anorganisation focused on research, developmentand technology, in which Norway enjoys fullmembership. Norwegian interests have beenaddressed through Norwegian participation inESA governing bodies. Increasingly, key mattersare now resolved at the EU. As a result, Norwe-gian space policies are becoming increasinglysimilar to the country’s general European policy.Norwegian interests must increasingly be cham-pioned in forums where we are not a member, orwhere our right to participate is limited. Thatmakes it more urgent to strengthen the diplo-matic dimension of Norwegian space activity. Wemust be good at promoting our interests inforums other than ESA, and particularly withinthe EU system. The Government will thereforeseek to make sure Norwegian authorities arecapable of successfully pursuing Norwegian inter-ests in international space forums.

Norway’s longstanding collaboration withCanada on radar satellites has demonstrated thatNorway can achieve substantial benefits frombilateral cooperation in specific topic areas. TheGovernment will maintain a pragmatic approachto the use of such agreements and will use themactively when appropriate to advance Norwegianinterests. The Government will continue Nor-way’s commitment to international collaborationin space-related research.

1.4 High-quality national administration of space activity

If space activities are to serve Norwegian inter-ests, expertise is required in crucial segments ofthe Norwegian bureaucracy as well as in technol-ogy centres and user groups. Whether servicesand infrastructure are to be developed nationally,internationally or through commercial procure-ment, Norwegian authorities must be able to iden-tify national needs, to judge the quality of techni-cal proposals and to ensure their effective imple-mentation. The demand for expertise is height-ened by the fact that the technologies in questionare often highly advanced, with user benefits thatcut across traditional sector lines in public admin-istration. The importance that Norway places oninternational cooperation and international pro-jects heightens the demand for expertise further.To ensure that effective solutions can be properlydeveloped and implemented, and that Norway’s

interests are protected in the international part-nerships that may be required, we must drawtogether the expertise available in administration,technology and international relations. The Gov-ernment intends to strengthen interaction andcoordination among the relevant ministries.

The Norwegian Space Centre (NSC) isresponsible for administering public appropria-tions on space activity, advancing Norwegianinterests in international space programmes andadvising Norwegian authorities and businesses onspace matters. The NSC’s advisory function willgain importance in the years ahead. Our society’sgrowing dependence on space-based infrastruc-ture systems increases demand for structuredanalysis of user needs and proposed technicalconcepts – analysis that is necessary to ensurethat public investment in the sector is carried outin the most efficient manner. Public- and private-sector user groups will also be requiring morecounsel, because they will want to make sure thatthe systems receiving investment are utilised opti-mally. The Government wants the NSC to remainthe state body in charge of strategy, coordinationand implementation, making efficient use of spacefor the benefit of Norwegian society. The Govern-ment will therefore strengthen the NSC’s analyti-cal and advisory capacities.

Norway’s geographical advantages for space-oriented ground infrastructure on the mainlandand elsewhere has enabled the country, since the1960s, to scale up activities that have achievedworld class standing in certain space-sectorniches. Balloon releases and sounding rocketlaunches from Andøya are among them. Othersinclude the ground stations in Svalbard, on JanMayen Island and in Antarctica for communicat-ing with satellites in polar orbit. The Governmentwill seek to ensure that operators of space-relatedground infrastructure can continue to take advan-tage of Norway’s favourable geographical loca-tion.

Since 2004, when the Norwegian Space Centrewas converted from a foundation to an administra-tive agency, the state has had a 90 per cent owner-ship stake in the Andøya Rocket Range AS(Kongsberg Gruppen owns the remaining 10 percent) and 100 per cent ownership of NorwegianSpace Centre Properties, which in turn owns halfof Kongsberg Satellite Services AS (KongsbergGruppen owns the remaining half). The Norwe-gian Space Centre manages the state’s ownershipinterests on behalf of the Ministry of Trade andIndustry. These companies have been importanttools in developing key aspects of Norway’s space


effort. The investments have created a commer-cial basis for strong industrial growth in the com-panies, which increasingly derive their revenuefrom international markets.

The companies’ growth and their increasingearnings from market activities make it necessaryto examine the structure and degree of state own-ership. Clearer distinctions may be needed

between the administrative, political and commer-cial aspects of the state’s involvement in spaceactivities. The Government will seek to deter-mine, by evaluation, the most appropriate organi-sational structure for public-sector space pro-grammes, and will take the necessary steps torealise that structure.


2 On space activity

Space activity is an umbrella term for all activitiesassociated with the development, construction anduse of infrastructure in space. For many of us, theterm brings to mind the space race, astronauts androckets. It is probably less typical to associatespace activities with weather forecasting, offshorepetroleum operations, live broadcasts of WorldCup football matches or ordering a taxi. The fact isthat space-based activities enter our lives mostdirectly through ordinary services like those. Overthe last 25 years, services that rely on space infra-structure have become so seamlessly integratedinto our lives that we reflect barely at all on the factthat they are made possible by space activity.

We can illustrate this with a thought experi-ment: What would happen if all satellite-based ser-vices suddenly disappeared? It’s certainly the casethat much of what we take for granted in everydaylife would come to a stop. The quality of weatherforecasts, especially long-term forecasts, woulddecline sharply. Many of us would lose our TV sig-nals altogether, and others would have to make dowith fewer channels. Modern shipping operationswould be set back many years, to when cost effi-ciency, safety and crew welfare were of lower stand-ard. The ability to summon emergency help and theeffectiveness of search-and-rescue missions wouldbe dramatically reduced. Official oversight of shiptraffic, fisheries and sources of pollution off thecoast would become more difficult and expensive toexercise. Researchers, meanwhile, would have aharder time understanding the factors that governclimate and other aspects of our environment. With-out satellite navigation signals, private individuals,public emergency services and taxi companieswould lose the use of electronic maps for navigationand fleet management. Land surveyors and con-struction planners would have to fall back on time-consuming manual processes, while airport direc-tors would see punctuality and capacity decline.

The last time the Storting was presented witha comprehensive look at the role of space activityin Norway was in St.meld. nr. 13 (1986–87): Omnorsk romvirksomhet (On Norwegian space activ-ity). Already then, space activities were describedas affecting many aspects of society. It is no exag-

geration to say that the importance of such activi-ties has increased tremendously in the more than26 years that have elapsed since publication ofthat report. The proliferation and refinement ofsatellites – in combination with increased dataprocessing capacity, the global spread of Internetservices and the emergence of mobile communi-cations equipment on earth – have given satellite-based services an ever-greater impact in daily life.In policy fields like climate research, the environ-ment and the High North, which have risen to thetop of the political agenda in recent years, satelliteusage has become a prerequisite for efficientinformation gathering and public administration.The importance to security policy, the traditionalpinnacle of applied space technology, remains atleast as great as it was during the Cold War.

Space activity has quite simply become essen-tial to modern society. It is inconceivable that wecould live as we do today without the help of satel-lites in orbit. Space activity is not some peripheral,albeit fascinating, branch of basic scienceresearch. It is a basic part of our everyday lives,and a necessary element in government strategyto ensure competitiveness, security and sustaina-ble development.

2.1 From space race to critical infrastructure: 50 years of the Space Age

The launch of the Soviet test satellite Sputnik 1 inOctober 1957 is generally regarded as the open-

Box 2.1 Key terms

Space activity: All activities related to theexploration and exploitation of space.

Space-based infrastructure: Technology onthe ground or in space required for the pursuitof space activities; examples include satellites,launchers and ground stations.

Space-based services: Services based on theuse of satellites.


ing of the Space Age. Since then, humanity hasbeen capable of placing objects in orbit around theearth – an ability that is the basis for all the practi-cal applications of space-based systems we seetoday. However, a good many years would passbefore space activities with any practical signifi-cance to civilian society began to appear. In theearly years, advances were motivated by and largeby military and geopolitical considerations, aspart of the Cold War arms race.

The first decade of the Space Age was markedby a rivalry between the United States and theSoviet Union, with each superpower seeking to bethe first to boast new achievements in space.Soviet citizen Yuri Gagarin’s orbit of the earth in1961 and the first steps on the moon, by the Amer-ican Neil Armstrong in 1969, were spectacularmilestones in the struggle for hegemony in space.Driving the space race was each country’s desireto demonstrate its technical skill, in part toimpress its opponent and in part to impress itsown population. Inherent in the rivalry was anunderstanding that rocket technology from thetwo competing space programmes also had analternative use: to propel missiles with nuclearwarheads between continents in the event of aglobal armed conflict between the superpowers.

By the early 1960s, space technology wasbeing adopted, if gradually, for practical purposeson the ground. Yet military needs still took prior-ity. In 1964 the United States inaugurated itsTRANSIT military satellite navigation system, aforerunner of the GPS global navigation satellitesystem. Satellite communications were employedfor both military and civilian purposes throughoutthe 1960s, first in the United States and later inmany other countries. Earth observation satellitesbecame a valuable tool for the intelligence ser-vices on both sides of the Iron Curtain. Such satel-lites provided a good overview of installations onthe ground and made it possible to observe theterritory of other states without committing air-space violations. Eventually, this military functionand an increase in civilian applications causedother countries to desire space programmes oftheir own, allowing them to develop their owncapabilities in a field increasingly seen as strategi-cally important. In the late 1960s, China beganmaking substantial investments to develop itsspace skills. In Europe, France took the lead indeveloping space technology and became a driv-ing force in the establishment of European spacecooperation.

Space activity continued as an arena for super-power competition through the 1970s and 1980s.

Its significance to civilian life gradually becamemore apparent, however, especially in areas likemeteorology and communications. The growingimportance of satellite-based services for civilianpurposes led to expanded international coopera-tion in developing and employing satellite sys-tems. For small states, this was an opportunity togain access to infrastructure they would not havebeen able to develop on a national level. For largestates with substantial capabilities, i nternationalcooperation made it possible to split the bill withothers, without losing user privileges. Key mile-stones included the creation of INMARSAT, theinternational organisation for maritime satellites,in 1979, and EUMETSAT, the European organisa-tion for meteorological satellites, in 1986. Theinternational organisation for telecommunicationssatellites, INTELSAT, had been established wayback in 1964 but expanded its membership andactivities on a large scale throughout the 1970sand 1980s. The most comprehensive internationalcollaboration on space activity to date came intobeing in 1976, with the founding of ESA.

In the 1990s, civilian use of space-based ser-vices began to increase sharply. The change canbe attributed to several factors. Two of them arerelated to the end of the Cold War. First was therelaxation of international tensions as the super-powers stood down from their long rivalry. It wasnow tenable to loosen controls on technologiesand systems that previously had been reservedfor military use. That was the case with high-reso-lution satellite imagery, which had once been con-sidered so strategically important that informationabout the best resolution achieved was keptsecret. In the 1990s and 2000s, improved access togood satellite images opened the way for a grow-ing business exploiting such images – the mostprominent example being Google Earth. Sec-ondly, the end of the Cold War brought with it areduction in military budgets. The cuts were ablow to many strategic technology companies,which responded by turning to new civilian mar-kets. Another important factor that helped boostcivilian use of space technology was the informa-tion technology revolution in the 1990s and 2000s,which led to a rapid increase in data-processingcapacity, Internet connections and mobile tele-communications equipment. The new informationtechnologies made it possible to deploy satellite-based navigation, communications and earthobservation systems in a far more comprehensiveway than would have been technically feasiblebefore.


Developments since the 1990s have been char-acterised by the accelerating integration of space-based technologies into everyday life. To put itanother way, space activity has been «normal-ised». It is no longer a spectacular sector cut offfrom the rest of the economy, but is instead asource of critical infrastructure services along thelines of electricity generation and water supply.This change in character has had several differenteffects. The emphasis on socially beneficial spaceactivities has become more explicit. To a greaterextent than before, public expenditures on spaceactivities are expected to return measureable ben-efits to the public. Satellites have become highlyimportant tools to military and civilian authoritiesalike. Commercial interests that rely on the use ofsatellite-based services have grown quite largeover time. The role of private actors in space-based infrastructure like satellites and launchers

has begun to grow, though most global invest-ments in this part of the space sector are still pub-licly funded. Cost-cutting demands, particularlyamong traditionally dominant players like theUnited States, have led to increased emphasis oninternational cooperation and innovative financingmethods. Nonetheless, the approach to spaceremains intensely strategic, if in a somewhat dif-ferent way than during the Cold War. Control overspace-based infrastructure has become moreimportant to security and national independence.

2.2 Global space activity in 2013–actors and driving forces

Space activity today is far more complex than everbefore. The number of fields affected by space-based infrastructure has increased. Likewise, the

Box 2.2 Apollo

The US Apollo programme of the 1960s wasessentially a political project. The goal was torestore the United States as the world’s leadingtechnological and economic superpower. Themeans: a moon landing.

The moon programme was treated as a soci-etal call to action. The price tag was USD 25.4billion, equal to about USD 160 billion today.Some 20,000 industrial companies, 200 universi-ties and colleges and nearly 400,000 people tookpart in the project.

On the technology side, the programme ledto major advances. The most important was thetransformation of computers from colossalmachines, each the size of a house, into smallerand lighter machines with greater computingcapacity, memory and reliability.

The other major legacy of the Apollo era wasthe concept of programme management. Whilethe required technological leaps were formida-ble, a far greater challenge lay in programmemanagement of the planning, manufacturing,testing, training and logistics involved. A funda-mentally new concept for programme manage-ment was developed. It was subsequently usedin the management of everything from urbanplanning to industrial processes, leading toimproved profitability, safety and quality stand-ards in other fields.

With less fanfare, a number of unexpectedby-products of the Apollo mission – from

improved medical monitoring equipment to new,fireproof textiles – slipped into services andproducts that we now take for granted. Animportant «spin-off» has been the very imagewe all have of the earth. A photograph of ourplanet titled «The Blue Marble», taken from themoon against an infinite black background, hasbeen of great importance to environmentalawareness.

Figure 2.1 The Blue Marble

Photo: NASA


number of actors actively involved in space on aglobal basis has increased. States are still the pri-mary actors. States, or international organisationswith states as members, are the main force behindlarge public infrastructure systems, and they arethe primary funders of research and development.The number of states actively involved in spacehas grown in the past 25 years, while the balanceof the various state actors has shifted to somedegree. The other main actor is industry. Much ofthe traditional space industry has undergonemajor structural change since the end of the ColdWar. Meanwhile, a large commercial sector hasarisen to exploit satellite data and services. Space-related activity has increasingly become a tool tosatisfy needs in other sectors in society. As aresult, the main public drivers of space-sectordevelopments are mainly to be found in economicpolicy, security policy and environmental and cli-mate policy.

The dominant state actor is still the UnitedStates, although new entrants in recent years haveincreasingly challenged US dominance. TheUnited States has leading capabilities in all areasof the space sector, and it aims to maintain its roleas the dominant space nation. At the same time,the country’s public investments in space have notbeen exempted from overall budget-cuttingdemands. The Obama administration’s space pol-icy has been characterised by attempts at reform,including the adoption of new space strategies forboth the civilian and military sectors. The purposeis to reconcile a desire to maintain US hegemonyin space with the need for economic tightening.Practically speaking, this has had three maineffects. The first is that NASA and NOAA, the pri-mary US space organisations, now face a require-ment to return demonstrable benefits to society. Astronger emphasis is being given to applied tech-nology in navigation, communication and earthobservation, as well as to space technology thatwill provide spillover effects to the rest of theeconomy. Second is a continuous effort to estab-lish public-private cooperation in the space sector,both as a means of cost control and a way toensure that public investment filters into the pri-vate sector. Since the discontinuation of the SpaceShuttle programme in 2011, the intention hasbeen that private contractors will fulfil the demandfor transportation services to the InternationalSpace Station. Steps have also been taken tostrengthen international competitiveness withinthe US space industry by softening strict USexport controls (ITAR). Third is a greater empha-sis on international collaboration. The United

States has initiated long-lasting collaboration withEurope on the shared use of weather satellites,and has been a major force in the global initiativeGroup on Earth Observation (GEO), which seeksto ensure open and free access to environmentalmonitoring data from satellites.

Russia’s position as a world leader in spacewas weakened by the collapse of the Soviet Union.The harsh economic situation of the 1990s put theRussian space programmes in a powerful budgetsqueeze, and Russian authorities lost direct con-trol over important industries and infrastructurein places like Kazakhstan and Ukraine. Russianeconomic growth in recent years has once againmade it possible to make space a priority. ThePutin administration is working hard to restoreRussia as a leading space nation, through suchprojects as the modernisation of the GLONASSsatellite navigation system, which deteriorated inthe years after the Soviet Union’s fall. New groundinfrastructure is being established on Russian soilto replace the infrastructure in other formerSoviet republics. The space sector is considered

Figure 2.2 Ariane 5 at Kourou

Photo: ESA/S. Corvaja, 2012


strategically important to Russia’s technological,economic and geopolitical goals. Russia has par-tially opened the door for international collabora-tion in space activities, primarily as a source oftechnology transfer. Cooperation between ESAand Russia on the use of Russian Soyuz rockets atthe European launch base in Kourou, French Gui-ana, has so far proved highly successful.

China has for years invested heavily in its ownspace capabilities, and has ambitions to becomethe leading space nation in the 21st century. Itsees the space sector as a catalyst for economicdevelopment and growth, with strategic impor-tance for the country’s goal of becoming a geopo-litical leader. Space also plays a significant role inthe building of national self-esteem and demon-strating Chinese expertise to the rest of the world.A major priority is the Beidou satellite navigationsystem, which is to be a global system corre-sponding to GPS, Galileo and GLONASS. The sys-tem is already operational in China and is sched-uled for completion in 2020. Beidou is designed toensure control over strategic military infrastruc-ture as well as to boost Chinese industrial know-how. Also in progress is the development of anearth observation system (something similar toEurope’s Copernicus programme), launch vehi-cles and a Chinese space station. Chinese authori-ties aspire to execute a manned Chinese moonlanding by 2030.

Indian efforts in space technology are primar-ily intended to meet specific national user needsrelated to economic development, resource man-agement and military purposes. The country cur-rently has its own satellite systems providing com-munication, television, meteorology and resource-mapping services, and it is in the process of devel-oping its own regional satellite navigation system.Because of incomplete property records and poorinfrastructure on the ground, India has benefittedgreatly from the use of earth observation satel-lites for environmental and resource mapping.The wide availability of skilled engineers at lowcost makes India highly competitive in some seg-ments of the space sector. India in recent yearshas established itself as a competitive commercialprovider of satellite launch services. Norway’sAISSat-1 satellite was launched from India in 2010.

Elsewhere in the world, more and morenations have ambitions of building their own capa-bilities in space. Iran and North Korea are alreadyable to loft satellites using their own launch vehi-cles. Japan, South Korea, Brazil, Argentina, Israel,Canada and Taiwan all have significant nationalspace programmes. France and Germany, for

their part, have mounted large national effortsthat supplement their participation in ESA and EUprogrammes. For the vast majority of countries,however, international cooperation is the only wayto play an active role in space. The largest andmost comprehensive collaborations are in Europe,through ESA and increasingly the EU as well.Latin American and African nations are attemptingto gain access to space infrastructure throughbilateral agreements with the United States,China, ESA and others. The International SpaceStation (ISS) has been completed jointly by theUnited States, Russia, Japan, Canada and ESA.

The United Nations has long played a role inregulating the use of space and developing rele-vant international legislation. In addition, theorganisation has itself become a major user of sat-ellites. The UN’s legislative work on space issuestakes place within the framework of the UnitedNations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of OuterSpace (UNCOPUOS), which was created in 1958.The committee currently serves primarily as aforum for information exchange and internationaldebate on issues related to regulation of spaceactivities. In the 1960s and 1970s, UNCOPUOSplayed a central role in the preparation of fiveinternational treaties governing the use of space.Norway is not a member of UNCOPUOS but hasendorsed four of the international space treaties.In addition to UNCOPUOS, space-related issuestoday are discussed in arenas such as the Confer-ence on Disarmament, the UN General Assembly,UNESCO, the International TelecommunicationUnion (ITU) and the World MeteorologicalOrganisation.

Apart from its involvement in internationalspace law and regulation, the UN is a major userof space-based systems to reach internationalgoals related to climate change, crisis manage-ment and humanitarian aid. The value of satelliteservices is particularly high to developing coun-tries, due to their relatively poor ground infra-structure. Satellite observation has also becomean important way of viewing military conflicts andnatural disasters from above, allowing more pre-cise deployments of humanitarian assistance. Sus-tainable development efforts, meanwhile, havegained from satellite monitoring of phenomenasuch as deforestation, desertification and environ-mental factors that affect the spread of disease-carrying insects. The UN agency UNOSAT worksto acquire satellite data and make it available foruse in disaster management as well as environ-mental and development policy-making.


The other main group of global space players,apart from the states, is the business community.Space-related businesses are generally dividedinto two categories: upstream and downstream.

Upstream industry manufactures satellites andlaunch vehicles. Most companies in this part ofthe space industry are set up as a strategic matter,with financial returns normally limited in scale.Major technological challenges, low productionvolume and extremely stringent quality assuranceneeds combine to drive up costs relative to earn-ings potential. For reasons of strategy, technologyand investment, upstream space actors are oftenclosely tied to the aerospace and defence sectors.Such ties make it possible to benefit indirectlyfrom space-related technological advances,through spillover into related sectors; technologi-cal spillover is in fact one reason companiesengage in the upstream space industry. Publicprocurement and development support budgetsare the main source of upstream funding. Thisreliance on the public sector is partly due to thesubstantial risks and small margins involved, andpartly to the fact that many satellite types, includ-ing those for navigation and earth observation,can best be understood as public assets, with lim-

ited prospects for receiving income from users.Publicly funded satellites are important not leastfor the opportunity they represent to provide«flight heritage» for new technologies. Because ofthe risk that equipment sent aloft may performunsatisfactorily, few commercial satellite ownersare willing to deploy technology that has notalready proved itself in space. Even for communi-cations satellites, where there is more of a com-mercial market, public development programmesplay a key role in the testing of new systems.Major players in the global upstream industryinclude Lockheed Martin, Boeing, OHB, Astriumand Thales. Since the end of the Cold War, trans-national mergers and acquisitions have played amajor role in the industry’s evolution, particularlyin Europe.

Downstream industry provides equipment andservices that require satellite data and signals.Examples of such products include satellite navi-gation receivers, satellite-based telecommunica-tions services and information services based onsatellite images. The structure of the downstreamindustry is completely different from that of theupstream industry, with many start-up companiesand small and medium-sized businesses in addi-

Figure 2.3 International Space Station

Photo: NASA


tion to larger players. Development costs relativeto earnings potential are similar to those found in«normal» high-tech businesses – and far from thepeculiar conditions prevailing in the upstreamindustry. Downstream activities have benefittedgreatly from developments in modern informationtechnology, with expanding opportunities for dataprocessing applications, Internet-based communi-cations and mobile telecommunications equip-ment. Although downstream and upstream activi-ties are completely different, the two segments ofthe space sector are closely linked. One key factorfor downstream success is a clear understandingof how satellite systems work, so as to foresee

technical, end-user and commercial opportunities.Often, the only way for a company to gain suchinsight is to take part in major satellite infrastruc-ture projects. Downstream players, therefore, arenot just passive users of technology developedupstream; they are active participants in the devel-opment of new satellite infrastructure. A key rea-son for the establishment of Galileo and Coperni-cus, the EU’s major space programmes, was adesire to position Europe’s downstream industryin the competitive international market for satel-lite-based products and services.

To understand what is driving the changes wesee in global space activity, it’s helpful to examine

Box 2.3 Dynamic positioning

Figure 2.4 Dynamic positioning

Photo: Kongsberg Maritime

Dynamic positioning is a technology employedto keep vessels and floating offshore installa-tions in fixed position above the seabed withoutthe use of anchors, and to manoeuvre them withprecision during transport. To determine cor-rect positioning, the technology relies on naviga-tional satellites. Industries that require dynami-

cally positioned vessels include offshore petro-leum, ocean shipping and cruise travel. Divingboats, shuttle tankers, supply vessels, cable-lay-ing ships, pipe-laying ships, rock dumpers,crane vessels, drilling rigs and drillships allmake extensive use of the technology. Norwayis a leader in dynamic positioning.


what motivates countries and organisations toinvest in it. Apart from the objectives of pure basicresearch, which remain important for Norwayand many other countries, the rationales may begrouped roughly in three dimensions: economicvalue creation, independent strategic capabilityand sustainability.

Value creation has been a factor in space activ-ity from the very beginning, in the 1950s and1960s. The Apollo programme ushered into exist-ence a space sector of comprehensive scale,which in turn lifted the technological level of theentire US economy – a boost with long-lastingeffects. In the maritime and media industries, totake two examples, satellite communications havecontributed to value creation since the 1970s. Inthe past two decades, though, the effect of spaceactivities has changed. Instead of being importantto only a few distinct sectors, what goes on inspace now has implications for all parts of theeconomy, an influence so extensive that it is diffi-cult to imagine how today’s globalised economycould function without it. Value creation occurswell outside the traditional production of satel-lites, launch vehicles and ground infrastructure. Itoccurs on an even larger scale through the sale ofsatellite-related products and services, throughspillover into other technologies and through thestimulation of economic activity in such fields astransport and natural resources. Space activitiesadd a great deal of value to businesses involved inoil and gas exploration, transport, agriculture androad and rail tunnelling. As the economic impactof space activities has widened, value creation hasbecome a stronger and more explicit rationale forpublic investment in the sector everywhere in theworld.

Independent strategic capability was the origi-nal rationale for space operations. From the 1950sonwards, it was the primary reason for the bigspace programmes of countries like the UnitedStates, the Soviet Union and France. During theCold War, space programmes were tools for devel-oping missile technology, gathering intelligenceand demonstrating technological strength to rivalpowers. Although the geopolitical situation haschanged a lot since then, the strategic importance

of space has not diminished; more likely, it hasgrown. Space-based infrastructure today affectsvital civilian and military activities. Critical aspectsof civil preparedness such as emergency commu-nications, sea-rescue capability and disaster man-agement depend on satellites for communication,navigation and surveillance. The same can be saidfor modern network-based military operations.Countries and organisations as diverse as the EU,the United States, Russia and China feel com-pelled for strategic reasons to invest heavily in thedevelopment and control of their own space infra-structure. Such control is deemed important toshoring up their security and independence.

Sustainability is a more recent consideration,but in recent years it has become an increasinglyimportant rationale for public investment in spaceactivities. That’s because observation satelliteshave proved very effective in measuring phenom-ena that affect our climate, such as greenhousegas emissions, deforestation, forest degradation,ocean currents, melting ice, wind systems andcloud cover. By monitoring the flow of industrialpollution or spilled oil, for example, these satel-lites help us to understand and mitigate its effects.Satellite-based communications and navigationare essential to the prevention of accidents andspills associated with shipping and offshore oiland gas activities. In arid regions, precision farm-ing techniques based on data from navigation sat-ellites help reduce water consumption. The use ofsatellite data in development policy is widespreadand growing, as seen in UN-directed projects. Sev-eral major international initiatives, such as theEU’s Copernicus earth observation programme,are primarily motivated by the need for informa-tion to support sustainable development policies.

The influence of space operations on modernsociety is intricate, with ramifications in fields thatare not always obvious. Comprehensive policiesare therefore warranted. To get the most out ofour space activities, we must coordinate policiesand skill sets that are not always perceived asclearly linked. These include technology, valuecreation, security, communications, transport,international relations and the environment.


3 Development of space activities in Norway

Norwegian space policy has always been pragmat-ically oriented. Public investment in space-relatedactivities has never been an end in itself, but a toolfor meeting important national priorities in otherpolicy fields. The requirement of tangible socialbenefit, which today has become a part of spacepolicy everywhere in the world, has always been aprerequisite for space activities in Norway.

Most Norwegian space activities have beenmotivated by geographic factors. Norway is anelongated country, reaching far to the north, witha sea area more than six times larger than its landarea. We have a scattered population, ruggedtopography, long distances to cover and harsh cli-matic conditions. In addition, Norway’s economyincludes heavy elements of natural-resourceextraction and maritime transport. The applieduse of navigation, communication and earthobservation satellites has been emphasised inaddressing needs related to ship traffic, fisheries,agriculture, offshore petroleum and the publicsupervision of maritime activities. Another impor-tant objective for space investment has been tostimulate growth and innovation in Norway’shigh-tech economy.

As a small country, we have had limited abilityto invest in space activities on our own. Interna-tional cooperation has always been the mainstayof Norwegian efforts in space, first through ESAand later, to an increasing degree, in agreementswith the EU. The cost of shared satellite systemsis usually divided in accordance with the size ofeach participating country’s economy. A country’scost share does not necessarily reflect the extentof its use of a particular system. A small country,therefore, gets off with a relatively low portion ofcosts, while gaining access to the infrastructureon par with countries that pay a great deal. Nor-way may be seen as potentially receiving an extralarge return on its investments in space infrastruc-ture. Norwegian infrastructure positioned in Sval-bard, on Jan Mayen Island and in Antarctica hasmade N orway an attractive space partner. Totake advantage of the international collaboration,supplementary national measures have been insti-tuted, the foremost example being the national

development support programme Nasjonale følge-midler.

More detail on Norway’s international collabo-ration, national policy support instruments andnational infrastructure will be presented in Chap-ter 5, 6, 7 and 8. In this chapter, we examine thepolitical priorities that have fuelled Norway’s risein space. These priorities can be grouped roughlyinto three categories: Norway’s need for space-based services, the development of its high-techeconomy and the strengthening of its researchcapabilities.

3.1 Norway’s space-based service needs

The desire to meet national user needs, both pub-lic and private, has been an important motivationbehind Norwegian space efforts for as long asthey have existed. Since the 1960s, Norwegianauthorities have been willing to invest strategi-cally to obtain space-based infrastructure, with thegoal of meeting national user needs cost-effec-tively. Most Norwegian efforts have stemmedfrom challenges relating to the country’s businessinterests and geography. Maritime communica-tions and ocean monitoring fit that description, asdo other challenges more specific to the HighNorth.

The first major challenge that prompted Nor-way to check out satellite-based technology wascommunications – specifically, the need to com-municate with Norwegian ships, the Svalbardarchipelago and oil platforms in the North Sea.Prior to satellites, high-frequency radio (HF) wasthe best technology for that purpose, but its utilitywas limited by variable signal coverage and capac-ity constraints. In the late 1960s, Norwegianauthorities began studying various ways to estab-lish national satellite communications capacity.This result, in 1976, was that Norway became thefirst country in western Europe to have a nationalsatellite system, in the form of the NORSAT A sat-ellite system. It was based on the rental of satellitechannel capacity through the International Tele-


communications Satellite Organisation (INTEL-SAT), and accommodated communications withSvalbard and with offshore oil platforms. Shipcommunications remained an unsolved problem.

In the 1970s, Norwegian authorities assumed anactive role in the International Maritime Organisa-tion (IMO) and in the collaborative European pro-ject MAROTS, whose aim was to create a global

Figure 3.1 Norway’s maritime boundaries

Source: Norwegian Mapping Authority


maritime satellite communications system. Thiseffort led to the 1979 establishment of the Interna-tional Maritime Satellite Organisation (INMAR-SAT), which operated a satellite system of thesame name. Norway’s active involvement gave itinfluence over INMARSAT’s system design, per-formance specifications and coverage areas, andled indirectly to the emergence of a competitivesatellite communications industry in Norway inthe 1970s and 1980s. Given strong industry anduser interests, satellite communications haveremained an important priority for Norwegianindustry and the Norwegian authorities, asdemonstrated by heavy Norwegian participationin ESA development programmes in this area.

Maritime monitoring has for many years beenanother important priority for Norwegian spaceactivity. Norway’s management responsibilitiesextend across vast ocean areas that are difficult tomonitor satisfactorily by way of aircraft, ships or

land-based installations. Early on, it became clearthat observation satellites would be a cost-effec-tive aid in enforcing Norwegian sovereignty atsea. The need to monitor maritime areas has beena major factor in many of the key decisions andpolicy measures that have helped shape the Nor-wegian approach to space. The chance to gainexpertise and exert influence over the develop-ment of earth observation technology was a signif-icant incentive for Norway to join ESA in 1987.

Norway began to employ observation satel-lites for operational monitoring of Norwegianwaters in the mid-1990s. The need for improved

Figure 3.2 ESA satellite CryoSat measures the topography of the Arctic ice

Illustration: ESA

Box 3.1 Radar satellites and Radarsat

Radar satellites transmit microwaves andmeasure what is reflected back from theground or sea. These signals pass rightthrough cloud cover, and measurements canbe made day or night. Radar satellites are thusan important tool for monitoring sea ice, oilspills, ship traffic and landslide danger. Due totheir high power consumption, the satellitescannot operate continuously. Norwegian par-ticipation in international radar satellite pro-jects helps ensure that high-priority areas forNorway are scanned. ESA’s planned radar sat-ellites Sentinel-1A (2013) and Sentinel-1B(2015) will permit additional surveillance ofNorwegian maritime areas.

Norway’s 2002 Radarsat agreement withCanada gives Norway the right to order about2,000 images per year from Canada’s Radarsat-2 satellite. The agreement follows up on a pre-vious partnership between the two countriesdating back to Radarsat-1, which was launchedin 1995, and also gives Norway access to radarimages over Norwegian areas that other coun-tries or organisations order. The PwC evalua-tion of 2012 (see 3.3) attests to the agree-ment’s benefits and cost-effectiveness for Nor-way. The current Radarsat agreement securesdata access through 2014.

The need for additional Norwegian accessto other kinds of radar satellite is under study.One alternative is for Norwegian agencies,acting independently, to buy high-resolutiondata as required in the «spot market». Experi-ence from the Radarsat agreement suggeststhat collective access through the NorwegianSpace Centre may hold advantages.


coverage area led to long-term bilateral collabora-tion with Canada on the use of Canadian radar sat-ellites.

Developments since then have shown earthobservation satellites to be increasingly indispen-sible as tools for monitoring Norwegian maritimeareas. Satellites provide an overview of large

Box 3.2 AISSat-1

Figure 3.3 AISSat-1

Photo: Norwegian Space Centre/Norwegian Defence Research Establishment/Seatex

The small maritime observation satellite AISSat-1is the first satellite owned and operated by theNorwegian state. The Norwegian Coastal Admin-istration uses data from the satellite to track civil-ian ship traffic in waters off Norway and Svalbardleft uncovered by the country’s land-based Auto-matic Identification System (AIS) stations.

All large vessels are required to have an AIStransmitter on board that broadcasts informationabout their identity, destination and cargo. Alongthe Norwegian coast there is a chain of AIS sta-tions, but they cannot track ships travellingbeyond 40–60 nautical miles from shore. AISship signals now travel via Norway’s AISSat-1satellite to the Vessel Traffic Service monitoringcentre at Vardø, in northern Norway, and to thecountry’s rescue coordination centres. AIS infor-mation obtained by satellite makes it easier andfaster for the vessel-traffic and rescue centres to

monitor maritime activity, locate ships in need ofassistance and identify vessels in the vicinity thatmay be able to help. Satellite-based AIS servicesalso make it easier to identify vessels responsi-ble for oil spills in Norwegian waters.

AISSat-1 is a nano-satellite measuring 20 cmx 20 cm x 20 cm. It moves in a polar orbit about600 km above the earth’s surface, bearing along-range identification and tracking system. Itpasses over the waters off Norway and receivesAIS data from ship traffic every 90 minutes. Thelifespan of such satellites is estimated at two orthree years. The satellite was launched fromIndia in 2010 and represents a joint effort of theNorwegian Coastal Administration, the Norwe-gian Space Centre, the Norwegian DefenceResearch Establishment and Kongsberg Seatex.Its successor, AISSat-2, is to be launched in2013.


areas, enabling officials to direct more costly mon-itoring resources, such as aircraft and ships, toareas where closer scrutiny is required. Norwayhas regularly mounted new initiatives to maintainand enhance the national capacity for ocean moni-toring, especially related to vessel traffic and oilspills. The Norwegian vessel-monitoring satelliteAISSat-1 was lofted into orbit in 2010. Primarilymonitoring areas where Norway has stewardshipresponsibility, it has also become an importantresource in international collaboration, includingthe fight against piracy off the Horn of Africa. Amajor goal of Norwegian participation in the EU’sCopernicus earth observation programme hasbeen the need to secure future ocean-monitoringcapacity over Norwegian areas.

Norway’s investment in satellite navigation isanother example of how national user needs havedriven the development of Norwegian space activ-ity. A major goal has been to address needs associ-ated with maritime activity and the offshore oiland gas industry, but challenges in aviation andland-based operations have also been motivatingfactors. Norway’s decision to join the EU satellitenavigation programmes Galileo and EGNOS in2009 may be the clearest example of national navi-gation needs helping to shape Norwegian spacepolicy. The desire to satisfy such user needs, espe-cially relating to maritime navigation in the HighNorth, was a key motivation.

However, Norwegian involvement in satellitenavigation extends quite a bit further back intime. A cornerstone of Norwegian expertise inthis area was laid in the early 1990s. A NATOexchange agreement made it possible forresearchers from the Norwegian DefenceResearch Establishment (known best by its Nor-wegian acronym, FFI) to work in the GPS JointProgram Office, which was responsible for devel-oping the American GPS satellite navigation sys-tem. The technology skills and system insightthese researchers brought home with themallowed Norwegian engineering experts toaddress special navigational challenges. In Nor-way’s offshore oil and gas industry, the expertisewas used to develop GPS-based technology forprecision navigating, positioning and localisationduring operations like seismic surveying and testdrilling. Lower costs, greater accuracy and simpli-fied procedures were the result.

Avinor, which operates Norway’s airports, wasquick to develop GPS-based airport flightapproach procedures. This early adoption of GPStechnology stemmed from a recognition that Nor-wegian navigation procedures needed improving,

especially after tragic aircraft accidents atTorghatten (1988) and Namsos (1993). Avinor isnow in the process of introducing the world’s firstsatellite-based airport approach system (SCAT-1),which is to ensure safer approaches to Norway’sregional airports. The system is based in part onthe Norwegian-developed technology.

With regard to land-based tasks, the Norwe-gian Mapping Authority has long been engaged indeveloping satellite-based services for geographi-cal surveys. These efforts have led to simplifica-tion and cost savings in mapping and surveyingfor construction, property delineation and othertasks that require accuracy down to the decime-tre, centimetre and millimetre. In order to providesuch precision, the mapping authority operates anetwork of reference stations across the country.

Straightforward satellite communications,ocean monitoring and satellite navigation are notthe only space policy areas where user interestshave helped determine the way forward. Theobjective of improving search-and-rescue opera-tions at sea gave rise to one of the first interna-tional projects that Norway joined: the satellite-based emergency warning system COSPAS-SAR-

Box 3.3 COSPAS-SARSAT

COSPAS-SARSAT is a collaborative interna-tional search-and-rescue system. Using satel-lites in polar orbit, it relays distress beaconsignals to ground stations. The system is thusable to pinpoint the site of emergencies tran-spiring in the northern seas.

Box 3.4 EUMETSAT

EUMETSAT is the European Organisation forthe Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites.The organisation’s main goal is to provideinformation applicable to weather forecastingand climate research. ESA and EUMETSAThave established a partnership in which ESAdevelops new-generation satellites andEUMETSAT prepares the way for their opera-tional use. Norway is a member of EUMET-SAT, and Norwegian agencies and researchinstitutions are among the end-users of theinformation provided. Norwegian companieshave supplied technology for many of the sat-ellites in EUMETSAT’s fleet.


SAT (see Box 3.3). Weather forecasting is anotherfield in which national user needs have been cru-cial to the shaping of Norwegian space policy.Since 1986, Norway has been a member ofEUMETSAT, the joint European programme forweather and climate satellites, and the countryhas long participated in a wide variety of ESAweather satellite programmes.

3.2 Development of high-tech Norwegian industry

Business development considerations have longplayed a major role in Norwegian space activity.Business development has occurred partly as aby-product of measures implemented chiefly tofind solutions to Norwegian user needs, but also aresult of conscious efforts by the Norwegianauthorities to use space activities to help developthe country’s industrial sector. Since 1970, Nor-way has created a niche-oriented, but competitive,array of space-oriented businesses. In some fields,the country is a global leader. Sales of Norwegian-produced goods and services related to spacetotalled about NOK 6 billion in 2011, with anexport share of almost 70 per cent.

The most prominent policy instruments in thedevelopment of space-related industry in Norwayhave been the country’s participation in ESA, itsparticipation in the EU’s Galileo and Copernicusspace programmes, and the national technologysupport programme (Nasjonale følgemidler). Adetailed account of how these contributing activi-ties are organised will follow in Chapters 5, 6, 7and 8. The theme of this chapter is how businessdevelopment objectives have helped shape Nor-wegian space policy. There are three main mecha-nisms through which Norwegian investment inspace has helped to promote growth and develop-ment in Norwegian industry. These can be desig-nated as technological advancement, marketaccess, and system insight. For 30 years, thedesire to exploit those mechanisms to promotebusiness development has been behind many ofthe key strategic actions of the Norwegian spaceeffort.

The goal of technological advancement in Nor-wegian industry was a key motivation for Nor-way’s accession to ESA in 1987. ESA is an indus-try-oriented organisation in which technologicaldevelopment is carried out in close collaborationwith industry. Most development tasks are con-tracted out to suppliers based within the memberstates. A high degree of industry involvement is

also traditional in development projects executedinternally by ESA. Member states are thus quiteable to use their membership to boost their ownindustries. Norway’s ESA priorities have beenguided in part by its ambition to develop technol-ogy relevant to Norwegian user needs and in partby its growth and development goals for Norwe-gian industry. Norwegian ESA participation hasbeen especially strong in technology areas wherewe have large business interests, such as satellitecommunications. Norway has deliberately usedits Nasjonale følgemidler support programme toenhance the positive effects of ESA membershipon Norway’s business community.

ESA’s value as a tool for Norwegian technolog-ical advance has been largely twofold. First, par-ticipation has helped raise the technological levelof Norwegian companies that provide goods andservices to ESA development programmes. Thishas been possible through direct ESA funding ofdevelopment projects, and through the transfer oftechnology to Norwegian companies from theirESA programme partners. Second, the provisionof supplies to ESA test satellites has made i t pos-sible to test out new technological components.Flight heritage, documenting that a company’stechnology has already served aboard a satellite,is normally a prerequisite for the company becom-ing a candidate to provide operational satellitecomponents in the institutional or commercialmarkets. However, much of the benefit that Nor-wegian companies gain from ESA participation isa matter of technological spillover – the repurpos-ing of space-related technologies for use in othersectors. There are few companies in Norway thatoperate exclusively in the space sector. Interna-tional competition in the sector is formidable, andthe markets to which Norway has access (primar-ily ESA, the EU and the commercial satellite seg-ment) are relatively limited. Many companies,though, combine their space-related activitieswith other high-tech business pursuits. Most ofthese companies use their participation in ESAprogrammes as a means to develop technologythat can also be applied elsewhere in their opera-tions. The spillover effect from space activity ismost notable in the realm of advanced technolo-gies suitable for extreme conditions. Likely bene-ficiaries include the defence, aerospace, offshorepetroleum and maritime industries.

Market access has been a considerable moti-vational factor for Norwegian participation in theEU space programmes Galileo, EGNOS andCopernicus. EU space programme supply con-


tracts have been reserved for bidders from coun-tries participating in the programmes. ThroughNorway’s programme participation, Norwegiancompanies have been granted the same opportu-nity to compete for contracts as EU-based compa-nies. Norwegian actors have proven themselvescompetitive, obtaining EU space-programme con-tracts valued at some 130 million euros throughFebruary 2013. In addition to direct sales income,those contracts represent high-profile referenceprojects for the companies concerned. Naturally,Norway’s ESA participation has also opened up amarket for Norwegian businesses. But the aggre-gate direct value of ESA supply contracts is rela-tively low in relation to ESA’s value as a tool fortechnology development, partly because the vol-ume of any single product purchased by ESA isnormally rather limited.

System insight has been a motivating factor forNorway with particular regard to the EU spaceprogrammes, though ESA participation has led toa certain degree of system insight as well. Insight– as early as possible – into the technical, practicaland commercial aspects of a satellite-based infra-structure system is a key to succeeding as a pro-vider of products and services that exploit thatsystem. Such insight can normally be achievedonly through active participation in the develop-ment of the system. Norwegian authorities and

business representatives have acquired a solidunderstanding of Galileo, EGNOS and Copernicusthrough participation in the governing bodies andworking groups of these programmes. Gaininginsight into those systems has been regarded asan important factor in Norway’s competitivestrength as a supplier of products and servicesthat exploit satellite navigation and earth observa-tion data. For that reason, it has been a majorobjective of Norwegian space policy. Norwegiancompanies have also gained insight into ESAspace systems. ESA activities are relevant primar-ily to upstream companies. That agency’s focus ison developing new technologies for satellites andlaunch vehicles; less attention is paid to buildingand operating infrastructure systems that may befavourable to value creation downstream. None-theless, Norwegian companies active mostly inthe downstream sector report that they, too, bene-fit from participation in ESA programmes, by gain-ing insight into the technology that will underpinthe next generation of operational satellite tech-nology.

Norway’s purposeful efforts to develop space-based industry by participating in EU space pro-grammes and in ESA have been complemented bymeasures designed in the first instance to accom-modate national user needs. That applies espe-cially to business activities in the downstream sec-tor, such as satellite communications and special-ised satellite navigation services, where earlyinvolvement has paved the way for system insight,technology development and early testing ofspace-based services. Today, Norwegian suppliersare global leaders in services related to satellitecommunications and satellite navigation for theoffshore sector. The Norwegian satellite commu-nications industry grew in large part out of exper-tise built up in the 1970s in connection with efforts

Box 3.5 Technology spillover

Products and product improvements thatbuild on technology or expertise from ESAcontracts and from Norway’s own nationaldevelopment support (Nasjonale følgemidler)contracts:– Receiver for AIS vessel detection (Kongs-

berg Seatex)– Gas detector for measuring explosive gas at

oil installations (SINTEF GasSecure)– Calibration-free pressure sensor for extreme

environments (Presens)– Technology for radiation detection (Ideas)– Technology for efficient transfer of images

and video (Ansur)– Software for large, complex development

projects (Jotne)– Data processing for ground stations (Kongs-

berg Spacetec)– Methodology for software validation (DNV)– Synergy effects between space and defence

sectors (Kongsberg Gruppen and Nammo)

Box 3.6 Norwegian satellite communications industry

Norwegian companies involved in satellitecommunications had sales of NOK 4.2 billionin 2011, accounting for two thirds of space-related revenue in Norway. By far the largestportion consisted of communications servicesto the maritime sector, and to the broadcastingof television signals. Maritime communica-tions service providers have proven to be veryattractive as acquisition candidates, and mostof them are now foreign owned.


to provide satellite communications for Norwe-gian ships. Development of high-precision naviga-tion services for the Norwegian offshore petro-leum industry gave rise to the emergence of com-petitive Norwegian technology companies – oneexample being Fugro Seastar, which today is theleading supplier of high-precision navigation ser-vices to the offshore industry. Telenor SatelliteBroadcasting, which by revenue is clearly thelargest Norwegian business player in the space

sector, is a prime example of how investmentsmotivated by national user needs have sparkedcommercial success. In the 1980s, Norway’s chal-lenging topography, large expanse and sparse set-tlement pattern made it difficult and expensive todevelop a nationwide terrestrial network for televi-sion broadcasting. So Televerket, the state-ownedforerunner of today’s Telenor, pursued the devel-opment of satellite broadcasting – a business thathas since become a major commercial success.

Box 3.7 Norwegian space players

Figure 3.4 Geographical overview of Norwegian businesses engaged in space

Source: Norwegian Space Centre

Norwegian actors in space include a wide vari-ety of companies, scientific research institutes,public agencies and educational institutions, ofwhich a selection is presented here. They eithersupply products and services related to space-based activity or are active users of satellite data.

They are spread throughout the country andtheir range of activities is quite large – from mar-itime satellite communications and rocketengine production to managing fish resourcesand tracking sheep.

Sør-Trøndelag CIRiS NTNU Samfunnsforskning findmysheep.comKongsberg SeatexMARINTEK SINTEF NTNU SINTEF Møre og Romsdal

Ship EquipHøgskolen i Ålesund

RogalandEik jordstasjon (Astrium Services) Mars Institute Stavanger Prekubator TTO

HordalandCMR Prototech EUROCOM Havforskningsinstituttet Nansensenteret NERSC Telenor Maritim Radio Universitetet i Bergen

BuskerudHTS Maskinteknikk Høgskolen i Buskerud Jotron avd. SatcomKongsberg Defence & Aerospace Norsk Titanium Components Statens Kartverk

AkershusAnsuRAstrium Services AV SatcomCanal Digital Det Norske Veritas EIDEL Forsvarets forskningsinstitutt IdeasKongsberg Defence Communications Norsk institutt for luftforskning Norsk institutt for skog og landskap Nittedal Teleport (Astrium Services) STM Norway Telenor Satellite Broadcasting T&G ElektroUniversitetet for miljø- og biovitenskap VeriSat

Oppland Nammo Raufoss

VestfoldJotronKongsberg Norspace Kongsberg Norcontrol IT MemscapOSI OptoeletronicsSensonor

TelemarkBandak Group

Nordland Andøya Rakettskytefelt Hovedredningssentralen Nord-Norge Høgskolen i Narvik NAROM

TromsDualogGlobesarKongsberg Satellite Services Kongsberg SpacetecNorsk Polarinstitutt NorutSenter for fjernmåling Telespor AS Universitetet i Tromsø Værvarslinga for Nord-Norge

FinnmarkVardø trafikksentral/Kystverket Globus 2

OsloConaxFugro SeastarIndra NaviaJotne EPM Meteorologisk institutt Norsk Regnesentral Norges vassdrags- og energidirektorat Norsk institutt for vannforskning Presens Science [&] Technology SINTEF Oslo Universitetet i Oslo

Aust-AgderMCP UNEP/GRID Arendal Post- og teletilsynet

Svalbard EISCAT Svalbard Ny Ålesund forskningslandsby SvalSatUNIS

Antarktis TrollSat


Since 1992, Televerket and then Telenor SatelliteBroadcasting have acquired altogether six com-munications satellites. The company sells satellitecapacity for broadcasting and for broadband ser-vice to shipping and offshore operations, and iscurrently the sixth largest satellite operator inEurope.

3.3 PwC’s evaluation of some Norwegian space activities

Under assignment with the Ministry of Trade andIndustry, the consulting firm Pricewaterhouse-Coopers (PwC) in 2012 conducted an evaluation ofNorway’s participation in the European SpaceAgency (ESA), the Radarsat agreement and Nor-way’s own national funding support programme,Nasjonale følgemidler. The evaluation did notcover scientific activities or Norway’s participa-tion in Galileo and EGNOS. As a result, the evalua-tion does not provide a complete picture, but con-tributes helpfully to further space policy develop-ment. The review process was anchored in a refer-ence group with input from relevant ministries,agencies and industrial players, and it was con-ducted in dialogue with the Norwegian SpaceCentre.

The report describes Norwegian space activi-ties and the international framework in whichthey occur. It notes that important aspects of Nor-wegian space policy are working well, providingsignificant benefits to society; but the report alsocasts light on structural factors that may makepolicy adjustments necessary. It also makes sev-eral specific suggestions for the future design ofNorway’s policy apparatus. A complete and thor-ough review of PwC’s comments and proposals isnot possible in this white paper. We do presentPwC’s assessment of the strengths and weak-nesses it found in various segments of the spacesector, along with its strategic and operational rec-ommendations. Those recommendations formsome of the basis for the analyses presented inChapter 1 of this white paper. Recommendationsnot included in Chapter 1 are not a part of theGovernment’s policy.

The PwC evaluation focuses on Norway’s par-ticipation in ESA as well as the country’s nationaldevelopment support funding programme and theRadarsat agreement with Canada. The main con-clusion is that Norway has benefitted greatly fromall three. The report asserts that key aspects ofthe model for public support to the sector areworking as designed, and that progress is being

achieved towards the objectives of value creation,innovation, knowledge development, environmen-tal protection and public security.

Norway’s space industry is more commercialin nature than its counterparts in many othercountries. It has large market share in segmentsof the space-based services sector, particularlythose related to satellite communications andearth observation. Several companies in this sec-tor have experienced rapid growth in recent years.Certain companies that produce space-relatedtechnological equipment have also seen growingrevenues and market share, albeit to a lesserextent than companies in the service sector.

Box 3.8 PwC’s assessment of strengths in the Norwegian space

activities it examined

– Important aspects of the model for publicsupport to the sector work as intended.These public policy instruments reinforcepositive developments that contribute tothe achievement of goals on wealth crea-tion, innovation, knowledge development,environmental protection and publicsecurity.

– Norwegian industry has large market sha-res in segments of the space-based servicesector, particularly in connection with satel-lite communications and earth observa-tion. Certain companies that producespace-related technical equipment havealso seen revenues and market share grow,albeit to a lesser extent than the servicesector.

– Space activities create positive ripple effe-cts across Norwegian industry. Positivesynergies exist between the country’svarious support mechanisms. The propor-tion of national space industry that is devo-ted to commercial activity is greater in Nor-way than in many other countries.

– Norwegian space efforts have resulted incost-effective systems that meet user needsin the public sector. The development ofspace-based systems for maritime surveil-lance, such as the AIS satellite, has been aparticular success.

– The Norwegian Space Centre’s expertadvisory services and leadership arehighly regarded by the authorities and byindustry alike.


The report also documents positive spinoffeffects elsewhere in the economy, as well as posi-tive synergism between the country’s various sup-port mechanisms. Participation in ESA strength-ens Norwegian industry in general, with rippleeffects in the form of increased sales for compa-nies that have participated in ESA programmes.The report suggests there is positive interactionbetween support mechanisms – between, forexample, the national development support fundsfor industrial development (Nasjonale følgemidler)and ESA programme participation.

Likewise, the national development supportfunds in combination with initiatives like Radarsatand the AIS satellite development programmehave resulted in cost-effective systems that meetspace-related needs in the public sector. Thedevelopment of space-based systems for maritimemonitoring, such as the AIS satellite, is cited as aparticular success. The PwC report also pointsout promising projects associated with space-based systems for surveillance of land areas. Lastbut not least, the report says that the Norwegian

Space Centre’s expert advisory services and lead-ership are held in high regard by both the author-ities and private industry. The NSC is also said tocontribute to positive synergy among Norway’sdifferent support mechanisms.

On the other hand, the evaluation mentions anumber of overall weaknesses, challenges andongoing change processes that, according to

Box 3.9 PwC’s assessment of weaknesses and challenges in the

Norwegian space activities it examined

– Indicators are declining for Norwegianspace-related industry as a whole. Totalsales volume has not increased in recentyears and the global market share for Nor-wegian companies is falling.

– Space-related companies are being boughtup and incorporated into foreign-ownedconcerns. In some cases this has led to ope-rations being moved out of Norway.

– Internationally, the sector is increasinglydominated by commercialisation and theemergence of new service segments. Nor-way’s set of policy instruments is somewhatout of alignment with this development.

– Support mechanisms for industry are lar-gely directed towards the production ofspace-related technology, while much ofthe international growth potential lies inservice development.

– Structural changes in international spaceprogrammes, including the EU’s enhancedrole and increased activity by countriessuch as China, India and Brazil, pose a chal-lenge to Norway’s position.

Box 3.10 PwC’s strategic recommendations

1. Support should be reoriented towards marketsegments with significant growth potentialand comparative advantages.

2. Earth observation data services have largepublic-sector customers that can triggerfurther technology development anddemand for services. A commercialisationstrategy for government procurement ofearth observation data services should beconsidered. A strong domestic marketcould fuel growth in new value-added seg-ments.

3. Support for space-related business develop-ment should increase in scope across thevalue chain and reach a larger numbercompanies in order to ensure a level play-ing field among competing actors andsolutions. Recruitment of new businessesin IT and telecommunications may help toincrease the number of participants.

4. Further support to segments whosegrowth is stagnating should be carefullyweighed to maker sure support corre-sponds to the potential for value creationand growth. Companies offering space-related ground equipment have anchorcustomers in the maritime sector but limi-ted growth and market share. Certainupstream sub-segments have achievedstrong results. However, there are strongobstacles to upstream industry growth, andno national anchor customers.

5. Other tools to encourage service expansionmust be developed, a process that mayinvolve national or bilateral programmes. InPwC’s view, ESA programmes are less use-ful for service development. National pro-grammes may have to be expanded todevelop support mechanisms for thecommercialisation of near-market-readydownstream technologies.


PwC, might make it necessary to adjust the publicpolicy apparatus that supports Norwegian spaceactivity. The report cites declining indicators forthe industry as a whole in Norway. Overall, publicexpenditures on space-related activities are risingfaster than commercial sales. Even though somecompanies and segments are growing, the spacesector’s share of Norwegian GDP is falling. Totalsales volume has not grown in recent years, andthe global market share of Norwegian companiesis sinking. Ground equipment manufacturers inparticular have lost a great deal of sales volumeand market share.

Furthermore, few new companies have arisenin the past decade, and among the companies thathave received support, there has been no growthin space-related employment. The report assertsthat public funding has long been concentrated ina small number of actors – in particular, upstreamcompanies that produce ground equipment andequipment for use in space. Meanwhile, the indus-

try has experienced a prolonged period of consoli-dation, with space-related companies beingbought up and incorporated into larger concerns.Some of these concerns have foreign owners,leading in some cases to the movement of opera-tions out of Norway. Industry support pro-grammes are largely geared towards the produc-tion of space-related technology, while much ofthe international growth potential lies in servicedevelopment.

The report also cites challenges stemmingfrom major structural changes in internationalspace activities. Political processes in the EU andthe United States will affect access to decision-making arenas in Europe and market access forNorwegian enterprises. The EU’s strengthenedrole is highlighted as a possible challenge for Nor-way, especially in view of an accelerating EU-ESAconvergence. Intensified activity in space by coun-tries such as China, India and Brazil signals geo-political changes underway. Internationally, the

Box 3.11 PwC’s operational recommendations

1. The Ministry of Trade and Industry shoulddevelop a comprehensive policy on space-related activities that assigns relative weightsto industrial development, public-sector pro-grammes and scientific research.

2. Increased investment in national program-mes should be conditioned on broader econ-omic options analyses, along with normalassessments of life-cycle cost and marketoptions.

3. Bilateral agreements and industrial returnschemes should be subject to a greaterdegree of evaluation, pitting the benefits toparticular companies against the state’scosts. The processes should be open, withcompetition conforming to normal practice.

4. Clearer separation is needed between spaceprogramme development support and theacquisition of specific services from publicbodies, such as Radarsat and AIS. Such sepa-ration will help to clarify objectives, prioritiesand costs. An expanding marketplace,meanwhile, is able to meet the state’s operati-onal requirements for data, and market opti-ons should be reviewed with regard to furt-her investment in AIS. Procurements andsupport schemes should also be reviewed tomake sure they accord with legal and regula-tory codes.

5. The Ministry of Trade and Industry and theNorwegian Space Centre should revise theirhierarchy of goals and priorities and link itmore closely to governance dialogue andorganisational strategy. The system of mana-gement by objectives and results should besimplified, clarified and made relevant to theNorwegian Space Centre’s strategic plan.

6. Transparency with regard to support sche-mes and awards within the ESA frameworkcan be improved. The information is notpublicly available at present, which is a pro-blem, given that so few companies are invol-ved.

7. The Ministry of Trade and Industry shouldconsider a reorganisation of corporate gover-nance at KSAT to reduce the potential forconflict of interest.

8. The Ministry of Trade and Industry shouldconsider strengthening capacity and supportfor changing ESA’s budget process andIPSAS accounting principles.

9. If a further scale-up of national programmesis desired, the Norwegian Space Centreought to be strengthened.

10. If the EU and ESA roles converge further, theNorwegian Space Centre ought to be strengt-hened.


market is increasingly characterised by commer-cialisation and the emergence of new service sec-tors. This poses challenges to the commercialisa-tion strategies of Norwegian companies. Accord-ing to PwC, the Norwegian public support appara-tus for space activity is somewhat out of step withsuch developments.

According to PwC, there is also room forimprovement with regard to public-sector govern-ance issues. The Ministry of Trade and Industryand the Norwegian Space Centre could be clearerin their dialogue about goals and priorities. Clari-fying and operationalising objectives, the reportsays, would be a step towards a more robust spacestrategy. In addition, strategies should be devel-oped to improve the balance between national pro-gramme development and compliance with regu-lations, with the goal of avoiding risky practicesrelated to procurement and competition. Thereport notes a potential conflict of interest in thestate’s partial ownership of Kongsberg SatelliteServices (KSAT). Given the strength inherent inthe company’s solid growth, it is possible thatclose relationships with the Norwegian SpaceCentre and blurred roles could contribute to apotential conflict of interest and to the exclusion ofmarket competitors.

On the basis of its analysis, PwC also recom-mends improvement measures, some of themstrategic and some operational. A complete andthorough assessment of PwC’s recommendationsis not possible here. However, PwC’s recommen-dations do form some of the basis for the analysesmade in Chapter 1 of this white paper.

3.4 Research in Norwegian space activity

Space activities have always been closely linkedwith scientific research. The technologies thathave underpinned practical applications and valuecreation in the private and public sectors oftenstem from basic research at research institutions.Society’s increasing dependence on advancedelectronic infrastructure has strengthened theneed for knowledge about solar storms and othernatural phenomena that can interfere with elec-tronics on the ground, in aircraft and on satellites.Satellites have become an important tool forresearching phenomena on the earth’s surfaceand in the atmosphere, including ocean currents,weather systems and ice cover. Observation ofdistant stars and planets helps enhance our under-standing of fundamental principles of physics.

Although national user needs and businessdevelopment goals have been the main factorsdriving Norwegian public investment in space, sci-entific research has influenced Norwegian spaceactivity as well. For many years, Norway has par-ticipated in international space-related researchthrough ESA and EU framework programmes. Inaddition, bilateral and multilateral agreementshave been signed with a number of countries,including Japan, Germany, France, Switzerland,the United States, Sweden and Canada. TheResearch Council of Norway’s space research pro-gramme has contributed to national funding ofspace-related research for many years.

Norway has a long tradition of space-relatedresearch, particularly in fields relevant to theHigh North. Norwegian scientists have longplayed a pioneering role in aurora research; in1899, they set up an observatory on Haldde moun-tain near Alta. Since 1962, Norwegian and foreignresearchers have taken m easurements in theatmosphere and near space using sounding rock-ets launched from the Andøya Rocket Range(ARR). Over the years, Norwegian universitieshave developed advanced capabilities in fieldssuch as solar research, cosmology and astrophys-ics. Largely due to its commercial interests andgeographical location, Norway has long had lead-ing research organisations active in such fields asocean science, meteorology, polar research andclimate and environmental research. Increasingly,such research relies on data from earth observa-tion satellites. Norwegian universities, researchinstitutes and public bodies are at the global fore-front in exploiting earth observation data. Exam-ples are the Norwegian Meteorological Institute,the Institute of Marine Research, the NorwegianForest and Landscape Institute, the GeographicalSurvey of Norway, the Norwegian Institute for AirResearch, the Norwegian Institute for WaterResearch, the Northern Research Institute(NORUT), the Norwegian Computing Centre andthe Nansen Environmental and Remote SensingCentre (NERSC).

Through ESA programmes, Norway partici-pates in the development of satellites and spaceprobes to observe the sun and outer space. Nor-wegian researchers utilise data obtained throughESA to investigate basic questions about the uni-verse’s origin, the possibility of life on other plan-ets and the fundamental forces of the solar sys-tem. Norway also contributes to scientificresearch by way of a small financial stake in theInternational Space Station. This gives Norwegianresearchers access to the space station’s on-board


laboratories. Materials technology and biologicalprocesses are Norway’s priorities in space-stationresearch. Such knowledge is applicable to aqua-culture, plant breeding and the development ofnew materials, among other things. The technol-ogy behind Norway’s AIS satellite was testedaboard the space station. The control centre forESA’s space-station plant experiments is located inTrondheim. The Norwegian University of Scienceand Technology (NTNU) has been a pioneeringenvironment for research into plant behaviour inweightless conditions and under varying light andradiation conditions. The University of Oslo hasworld-class expertise in solar research, and ithouses the European data centre for Japan’sHinode solar research satellite and for an upcom-ing NASA satellite called IRIS. Research con-ducted with data from such satellites helps us tounderstand the fundamental laws of physics aswell as pressing matters like the sun’s effect onclimate change and the phenomenon of spaceweather, which can disturb critical electronic sys-tems.

Several Norwegian educational institutionshave developed centres of learning with a focuson space. Narvik University College and NTNUoffer engineering programmes in space technol-

ogy. The University of Stavanger has research andeducational programmes related to the synergybetween space activities and the oil and gas sec-tor. Most Norwegian universities offer educa-tional programmes involving space-related phys-ics.

The Tromsø Centre for Remote Sensing at theUniversity of Tromsø is a hub of important Nor-wegian research actors in the field of earth obser-vation. Participants in the centre collaborate onresearch, technology development, servicesdevelopment and the establishment and operationof earth observation infrastructure.

In 2013, the Birkeland Centre for Space Sci-ence was established as a Centre of Excellence inresearch. Its mission is to increase knowledge ofelectrical current flows around the earth, particleshowers from space, auroras, gamma-ray burstsand other links between the earth and space. Thework will lay a foundation for improved space-weather forecasting and heightened security forsatellite navigation and positioning systems, TVsignals, payment systems and other satellite-based services. The centre is operated by the Uni-versity of Bergen and will receive a total of someNOK 160 million from the Research Council ofNorway over a 10-year period.

The Research Council funds space researchprimarily through its 2011–2018 Romforskning(space research) programme. It was set up to fundfollow-up research exploiting Norwegian spaceactivities within ESA, EISCAT (European Incoher-ent Scatter Scientific Association) and NOT (Nor-dic Optical Telescope) organisations. The pro-gramme follows on the heels of prior program-matic commitments to basic research in prioritysegments of Norwegian space research. It aims toimprove fundamental knowledge of space byexamining important physical processes anddeveloping the necessary technological tools. Theresearch programme also encompasses nearspace, where cosmic radiation, solar wind andother solar processes interact in the earth’s upperatmosphere.

The Centre for Earth Evolution and Dynamics(CEED) at the University of Oslo conductsresearch into mechanisms at work near theearth’s surface and their connection to processesdeep within the earth. The centre is to be fundedby the Research Council of Norway as a Centre ofExcellence from 2013 through 2023.

Box 3.12 Space weather

The sun is a variable star. Space weatheroccurs where solar radiation and the solarwind encounter the earth’s magnetic field andatmosphere. The aurora borealis (northernlights) is a visible manifestation of this. Satel-lites and astronauts in orbit are more vulnera-ble to solar storms and space weather thanpeople on the ground, but technical systemsdown below can be affected too. Spaceweather affects radio communications, naviga-tional precision and radiation levels for aircraftpersonnel. The sun can also trigger geomag-netic storms, which can disturb power gridsand increase corrosion in pipelines. Govern-ment, industry and tourism would all benefitfrom improved space weather forecasting. AEuropean space weather service is underdevelopment, with participation by severalNorwegian actors.


4 How space activity benefits society and contributes to key policy areas

The number of sectors touched in some way byspace activities has been increasing in the pastfew decades. Norwegian authorities use satellitesto address key public responsibilities related tosustainability, security and national sovereignty.Satellite-based infrastructure has become a signif-icant factor in value creation across much of theeconomy, not least by facilitating safe, efficientoperations in fields like transportation and naturalresource extraction.

Norwegian space policy has been based inlarge part on finding concrete solutions to soci-ety’s needs. Because of the country’s geographyand business interests, it became apparent longago that Norway, more than many other coun-tries, faced national challenges best addressedthrough space-based technology. Norwegianauthorities, researchers and technology compa-nies have often been quick to identify the opportu-nities represented by new space-related technolo-gies. Today’s advanced satellite systems for shipcommunications, ocean monitoring and high-pre-cision navigation demonstrate how early-phaseNorwegian involvement in promising new tech-nology projects can result in beneficial servicesand commercial success.

More and more tasks these days can beaccomplished cost-effectively by using space-based infrastructure. Moreover, many of the chal-lenges that space-based technology may be help-ful in solving have grown in significance in recentyears. While Chapter 3 dealt with the political pri-orities that have shaped Norway’s currentapproach to space, this chapter will look ahead tothe role space activities may play in solving thecountry’s present and future challenges. In somedetail, it examines five policy areas where the useof space-based systems may be particularly costeffective: the High North, climate and environ-ment, security, transport and research.

4.1 The High North

For several decades, the High North has been acentral focus of Norwegian space policy. The Gov-ernment’s space efforts are also discussed inReport No. 22 (2008–2009) to the Storting:Svalbard and Meld. St. 7 (2011–2012) The HighNorth: Visions and strategies. Our needs in theHigh North have been a key reason for Norway’scommitment to the advancement of ocean moni-toring technology through ESA, Copernicus andour radar collaboration with Canada. One of themost important goals of Norwegian participationin the EU satellite navigation programmesEGNOS and Galileo has been to make sure theprogrammes are able to perform satisfactorily inthe High North. The satellite ground operations atJan Mayen Island and Svalbard are representativeof Norway’s continuing involvement in the Arctic,and they help secure the deployment of satellitesystems that perform capably over Norway’socean expanses.

There are few if any alternatives to satellite-based systems when addressing the communica-tion, navigation, surveillance and preparednessneeds of the High North. Distances are too vastand human activities too scattered for land-basedinfrastructure, aircraft and ships to be effective.Satellite-based infrastructure provides coverageacross wider areas. Once such infrastructure isrolled out, the cost of adding users to a service isvery low. Radar satellites and AIS satellites canperform their observations day and night regard-less of visibility conditions – an obvious advantagein harsh environments far to the north. Still, theHigh North poses special space-based infrastruc-ture challenges. For some kinds of infrastructure,being on top of the world is an advantage. Satel-lites in polar orbit provide particularly good cover-age near the poles. That’s why ocean monitoringof the High North is one of their strong suits. Forother types of infrastructure, northern geographyis a challenge. Satellites that move in geostation-ary orbit, as most communications satellites do,


have limited coverage north of 75 degrees lati-tude. Communicating by satellite in the HighNorth therefore poses special demands to theinfrastructure employed.

Activity in the High North and the Arctic is onthe rise. Norway’s fishing fleet has been rangingfarther and farther northward, and boats off Sval-bard have crossed 80 degrees latitude on severaloccasions. Cruise tourism around Svalbard hasgrown in scope over the years. The offshore oiland gas industry is moving ever further into theArctic, while the retraction of Arctic sea ice isincreasing the feasibility of long-distance centralArctic Ocean shipping routes. Safe, efficient andsustainable shipping and natural resource extrac-tion in the High North and Arctic will depend inlarge part on the use of satellite-based infrastruc-ture. The great distances to be traversed and thelack of land-based infrastructure make satellite-based surveillance, navigation and communica-tion essential to safe, efficient ship traffic and searescue operations. Advanced offshore petroleumexploration and drilling projects depend on navi-gation and broadband services available only bysatellite. Norwegian authorities already have sub-stantial experience using satellites to monitor oilspills and oversee fisheries. Now, High Northshipping is on the rise, the operational radius ofthe fishing fleet is expanding, and oil and gas com-panies are entering sensitive environments as theauthorities open new zones in and around the Arc-

tic to petroleum activity. The need for improvedmonitoring is thus likely to intensify, underliningthe importance of having high-quality communica-tions and surveillance systems in place.

The EU satellite navigation programmes Gali-leo and EGNOS, in combination with the Ameri-

Figure 4.1 Ship traffic north of 60 degrees latitude (1 Oct. 2010–1 Oct. 2012)

Source: Norwegian Space Centre/Norwegian Coastal Adminis-tration

Figure 4.2 Fishing north of 60 degrees latitude (1 Oct. 2010–1 Oct. 2012)


Figure 4.3 Fishing north of 60 degrees latitude (1 Oct. 2010–1 Oct. 2012)



can GPS system and Russia’s GLONASS, will pro-vide robust satellite navigation coverage on landand at sea in the High North and Arctic. Norway’sparticipation in Galileo’s early phase has helpedensure that the system will perform better in theHigh North than had originally been planned. Asto earth observation capacity in the region, theEU’s Copernicus programme in combination withNorway’s AIS and Canada’s radar satellites shoulddo an adequate job in the years ahead. Good com-munication systems for the High North, however,remain unprovided for; lacking in particular are

broadband services for ships. Existing satellitecommunication systems offer little or no coveragenorth of 75 degrees latitude. Communication sat-ellites orbiting over the poles can solve this chal-lenge. Several states with High North interestshave started to study options for polar satellitecommunications, but for now, no plans are readyto implement. In Norway, the Norwegian SpaceCentre and Telenor have begun the Arctic Satel-lite Communications project (Norwegian acro-nym: ASK). The project will examine potentialcommercial demand and Norwegian governmen-

Box 4.1 Satellites

Satellites are the foundation of all applied ser-vices that take advantage of space. More than6,500 satellites have been launched since 1957.About 2,500 satellites currently orbit the earth,and between 800 and 1,000 of them are in activeuse. There are three main types of satellites, cat-egorised by function. Communication satellitesrelay signals for TV, telephone and broadbandservice. Navigation satellites determine position,speed and precise time. Earth observation satelli-tes register data on sea, land and air conditions.The satellites make use of different types oforbits:

Figure 4.4 Illustration of different satellite orbits


Satellites in geostationary earth orbit (GEO)move at the same velocity as the earth’s rota-tion, some 36,000 km over the equator. Theircoverage area on earth ranges in latitude from75 degrees south to 75 degrees north. The polarareas are left uncovered. From the earth’s sur-

face, such satellites appear to be stationary.They are used for TV broadcasting, telecommu-nications and earth observation.

Navigation satellites occupy medium earthorbit (MEO). These satellites move some 20,000km above the earth’s surface. Their orbit isinclined at an angle of about 60 degrees from theequator. Circling the earth takes 12 to 14 hours.A minimum fleet of 24 satellites is needed toensure that four or more satellites have line-of-sight to a given surface location, so that geo-graphical position can be calculated.

Satellites moving in low earth orbit (LEO)have almost circular paths at altitudes of 200 kmto 1,500 km. Due to this low altitude, each satel-lite covers only a small area, whose boundariesshift continuously with the motion of the satel-lite. Each orbit takes 90 to 120 minutes, and thesatellite stays within a user’s line of sight for lessthan 20 minutes. Many satellites are required toachieve continuous coverage over a fixed area.LEO satellites are used for research, earthobservation and communications.

A low-altitude satellite in polar orbit passesover or near the poles. Because of the earth’srotation, such a satellite can cover the entire sur-face of the earth in the course of relatively feworbits. At northern latitudes, each orbital pas-sage can be observed.

Satellites in highly elliptical orbit (HEO)move around the earth at varying altitudes.These satellites are used for communicationsduring the long orbital segment when they arefurthest from earth. Those that spend most oftheir time over northern latitudes provide goodcoverage of the High North. Such orbits typi-cally take 12, 16 or 24 hours.


tal needs as well as the relevant communicationstechnologies, organisational structures, costs andfunding needs. Such a development may generateactivity in northern Norway while reinforcing theGovernment’s High North strategy.

BarentsWatch is a web portal that collectsinformation on coastal and marine areas from avariety of Norwegian governmental data sources,and makes it available. Though headed by theNorwegian Coastal Administration (NCA), Bar-entsWatch is beholden to no one agency. It isbeing developed in phases. The first version of theopen information portal was launched in 2012. Asservices in the open system are gradually rolledout, a closed system for operational purposes isalso to be developed. The closed system will com-bine information from various sources to improvethe situational awareness of public maritimeauthorities. Over time, BarentsWatch is tobecome a comprehensive monitoring and infor-mation system for maritime and coastal areas.

The open portal, Barentswatch.no, will assem-ble facts and documentation that exist already, butit will also develop new web services that exploitcombinations of data from numerous sources.The web portal will offer factual information of ahistoric nature – statistical data stored systemati-cally over time – but also (near) real-time datareflecting current snapshots of certain activities,phenomena or geographic locations. Users willthus be able to follow developments over time aswell as to observe what’s happening at themoment.

The portal will assemble and present materialrelevant to five major subject areas:– Maritime transport– Marine resources– Oil and gas– Exercise of public authority/sovereignty– Climate/environment

For target groups with interests in one or more ofthese areas, the portal will be a useful new tool.Information that previously was spread acrossmany sites will be available in one place, and canbe combined to achieve a new level of awareness.

4.2 Climate and environment

For years, climate and environmental issues havebeen rising on the political agenda, both in Nor-way and internationally. With greater politicalinterest follows the need for increased knowledgeto ensure that climate and environmental policy

decisions can be made on the basis of sound infor-mation. Earth observation satellites have provedto be a particularly suitable tool for obtaininginformation crucial to our understanding of cli-mate changes and other environmental issues.

The great advantage of using satellites to studyenvironmental and climate-related issues is thatthey permit observation of large areas as well asrepetitive scans of the same spots over time. Theearth’s climate is regulated by a variety of large,dynamic phenomena, including solar activity,greenhouse gas emissions, changes in snow andice cover, atmospheric soot particles, ocean cur-rents, wind systems and variations in cloud cover,to name but a few. Even a partial understanding ofthe causes and effects of climate changes requiresa sense of the complex interplay among these andother phenomena over time. Comparable observa-tions from around the globe, collected over a longperiod, are therefore necessary.

In the past 25 years, we have seen a rapidexpansion of satellite observation capability. It is

Box 4.2 The Government’s Climate and Forest Initiative

During the climate negotiations in Bali in2007, the Government decided to allocate upto NOK 3 billion annually for measuresdesigned to reduce greenhouse gases in theatmosphere by preventing deforestation andforest degradation in developing countries.The Climate and Forest Initiative was estab-lished in 2008 and is administered today bythe Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Minis-try of Environment. Verifying that recipientcountries implement what they agree to do is asignificant challenge. Satellites are a usefulway to document deforestation and forest deg-radation. From 2009 to 2012, the NorwegianSpace Centre led and coordinated Norway’sinvolvement in the Group on Earth Observa-tions’ Forest Carbon Tracking Task (GEOFCT) and the Global Forest Observations Ini-tiative (GFOI). GFOI is a platform to fostersustained access to satellite- and ground-basedobservations as well as to support the use ofsuch observations in national forest informa-tion systems. The aim is to provide systematicaccess to satellite data for countries with tropi-cal forests, enabling them to improve theirsurveillance and anti-deforestation pro-grammes.


now possible to observe most of the key factorsinfluencing the climate. A number of indicatorsand illustrations presented by the U.N.’s Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) arebased on satellite data, much of it received in Sval-bard. The overview provided by satellite observa-tion is critical to monitoring environmental prob-lems such as desertification, oil spills and thelong-range transport of pollution. Where terres-trial infrastructure is poor, as in the polar regionsand in developing countries, satellite observationsare particularly important. They are also used toverify that individual countries fulfil their bindinginternational agreements.

4.3 Civil protection, preparedness and crisis response

Satellite-based infrastructure is employed in awide range of crucial tasks. Communications, nav-igation and surveillance via satellite have becomevery important to the performance of safety- andemergency-related public services ranging fromsea rescues to oil-spill preparedness and crisismanagement. Satellite usage gives rise to new andcost-effective means of handling many of our soci-ety’s vulnerabilities. At the same time, our satellitedependence carries with it a new type of risk. Sab-oteurs and cyber attackers, for example, or natu-ral phenomena such as space weather, couldcause significant harm by knocking out criticalsatellite infrastructure. Increasingly, Norway andmajor international space powers such as the EUand the United States acknowledge the impor-tance of managing this risk.

The utility of satellite-based infrastructure incivil protection, emergency preparedness and cri-sis management stems from many of the same fac-tors that make satellites useful in addressingneeds related to the High North and climate andenvironmental policy. Satellite communicationsprovide coverage in areas where no other commu-nications systems reach. The value of satellitecommunications is also demonstrated whenstorms or other natural disasters damage terres-trial communications infrastructure. In the after-math of the big Nordic storm «Dagmar», inDecember 2011, satellite communication systemswere the only way to contact the outside world formany people in Norway’s Sogn og FjordaneCounty. Earth observation satellites provide a

Box 4.3 Oil spills, viewed from space

Figure 4.5 Satellite picture of oil spill off South Korea

Photo: ESA

Radar satellites can «see through» clouds andat night, and they cover large areas. Norwayin the 1990s was the first country in the worldto employ such satellites on a regular basis tomonitor oil spills at sea. At KSAT, in Tromsø,satellite images from many parts of the worldare analysed in a search for oil spills fromships or platforms. This form of observationhas been developed jointly by Norway’sauthorities, research organisations and indus-trial companies.

Box 4.4 Satellite-based landslide mapping and monitoring

New satellite sensors make it possible todetect movements of the earth’s surfaceamounting to just millimetres per year. Thishas made it possible to develop effective tech-niques for mapping and monitoring of unsta-ble geological formations, and potentially ofroad surfaces and railway tracks susceptibleto ground movement. Satellite data willincrease our knowledge of landslide dynamicsand triggering mechanisms, so that advancenotice of such events will become more com-mon.


quick view of disaster areas and make it easier todetermine the appropriate response. Japaneseauthorities made e xtensive use of satellite obser-vations to coordinate relief efforts after the Fukus-hima accident in March 2011. Radar satellites arebecoming very important to the mapping andmonitoring of unstable mountainsides in Norway.

As with all systems our society becomesdependent on, the increased reliance on satellite-based systems represents a potential vulnerability.As satellite systems become more and moreimportant to aerospace, emergency preparednessand security-related activities, it is to be expectedthat those systems will become attractive targetsfor hostile attack. Satellite infrastructure can alsobe damaged by natural phenomena, includingspace weather, and by space debris. Measures toaddress such vulnerabilities have become animportant governmental priority. The NorwegianSpace Centre is in the process of preparing a vul-nerability report on the civilian use of satellite nav-igation systems. The report was ordered by theMinistry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs, which isresponsible for coordinating Norway’s civilianradio-navigation policy. The development of poten-tial alternatives to the GPS satellite navigation sys-tem – Galileo, GLONASS and Beidou – will helpreduce the vulnerability that comes with depend-ence on a single system. The «Public RegulatedService» component of the EU’s Galileo pro-gramme is designed to provide national emer-gency service providers with access to encryptedsatellite navigation services. These will be lessvulnerable to attempts at sabotage or manipula-tion. With regard to space debris, the EU and theUnited States are pushing to establish interna-tional guidelines aimed at reducing the amount ofspace debris in key satellite orbits.

4.4 Safe, efficient transport

Transport is one of the sectors that has changedthe most in recent years as a result of theincreased use of satellite-based infrastructure. It isalso the sector whose use of satellite systems ismost evident in daily life. Car navigation systemsand handheld navigation devices are examplesthat come quickly to mind, but the transport sec-tor relies on satellite-based infrastructure for com-munication and earth observation services inaddition to navigation. According to the whitepaper Meld. St. 26 (2012–2013) National Trans-port Plan 2014–2023, the Government’s overallobjective for transport policy is to provide an effi-

cient, accessible, safe and environmentallyfriendly transport system that meets the transportneeds of society and promotes regional develop-ment. Satellite-based services are important tomaritime, aviation and land-based transport activi-ties, and are classified as intelligent transport sys-tems and services (ITS).

Maritime transport

In maritime transport, satellites are crucial to shipowners who require contact with their ships. Sat-ellites also let crew members to talk to their fami-lies, watch television and access the Internet.Indeed, for ship crews far from land, satellite linksare the only way to communicate with the outsideworld. To improve safety at sea, carriage require-ments mandate the installation of satellite-basedcommunications and navigation systems on largervessels. Satellite data are also important for the

Box 4.5 Space debris

The number of objects in earth orbit hasincreased significantly over the past decadedue to collisions and explosions. The orbits ofnearly 20,000 objects are followed regularly byradar or telescope. Many additional orbitingobjects are large enough to damage satellites,but too small to be tracked from the ground.The orbital speed is typically 7 km per second.With increasing frequency, operative satellitesmust be manoeuvred in their orbits to avoidcollision with space debris. That requires fueland reduces the lifespan of an orbiting satel-lite. The United States is the leading operatorof space surveillance systems, and regularlytransmits collision alerts to satellite owners inmany other countries. A European capacity tocontribute to space surveillance is under con-struction. The United Nations has alsobecome involved in this field. Radar systemsin northern Norway and Svalbard already con-tribute to efforts to obtain a clearer view of thetraffic in space. It is hoped that larger satelliteswill be steered out of orbit when their opera-tive periods end. Such end-of-life operationsare not always successful. ESA’s large environ-mental monitoring satellite ENVISAT sud-denly stopped working in the spring of 2012,and will continue orbiting for more than 100years if not removed by some other means.


design of maritime navigational charts. Satellitedata are also used to map the current status of icecover, so that ship crews in northern waters canplot cost-effective routes. Norway, an active par-ticipant in the UN International Maritime Organi-sation (IMO), built a chain of AIS (AutomaticIdentification System) receivers along the Norwe-gian coast soon after the IMO enacted its resolu-tion introducing AIS. Such coastal networks inconcert with satellite-based AIS technology pro-vide a clear overview of global traffic at sea. Datafrom the Norwegian AIS satellite and the Norwe-gian AIS receiver on the International Space Sta-tion have made v aluable contributions to thefight against piracy in the waters off Africa. Satel-lites also allow Norwegian authorities to substan-tially improve their supervision of vessel activityin the South Atlantic, including the waters aroundBouvet Island and off Dronning Maud Land.

Aviation

Many Norwegian aircraft today use GPS for hori-zontal navigation during parts of their flights. GPSis the primary source of navigational data for thehelicopter traffic that carries 600,000 passengers ayear to and from North Sea installations. Whileflying in this airspace, helicopters broadcast theirGPS-derived positions to ground stations. The useof this technology for monitoring and controllingair traffic halves the cost in comparison with con-struction of radar systems. The Norwegian airambulance helicopter service uses GPS-basedprocedures on approach to bases and hospitals.

Satellite-based landing systems allow aircraftcrews to land and take off in curving trajectories,to plan the most direct flight paths, to save energy,and to modify approach paths so as to minimisethe noise burden for airport neighbours. Runway-length needs can also be reduced – a benefit forairports in northern Norway in particular. Of late,GPS has been used increasingly to provide verti-cal navigational assistance, especially during air-port approach and departure and other situationswhere the system provides operational and envi-ronmental benefits. Satellite technology is an ele-ment of initiatives like Performance Based Navi-gation, which is being phased in here in Norwayand elsewhere.

Satellite-based infrastructure assists aviationin many ways. When Iceland’s Eyjafjallajökull vol-

Box 4.6 ITS (intelligent transport systems and services)

The acronym ITS (intelligent transport sys-tems and services) has evolved into a genericterm for a wide range of technologicalapproaches to improving transportation, inparticular those focused on information andcommunications technology. Examplesinclude systems for road-traffic informationdissemination, satellite navigation, electronicticketing and logistics. ITS can help increasecapacity utilisation and efficiency across theentire transport sector: roads, rail, sea, andaviation.

Source: Ministry of Transport and Communications, Stra-tegy for intelligent transport systems, 2010)

Box 4.7 Volcanic eruption at Eyjafjallajökull

Figure 4.6 Eruption at Eyjafjallajökull

Photo: ESA

The April 2010 eruption of the Eyjafjallajökullvolcano in Iceland had a major impact on airtravel across Europe. In May 2011, however,during the eruption of Grimsvötn, Norwegianairspace could be held open. The country wasthus spared major economic losses. Satelliteimagery and weather models were key to theoperational decision-making in 2011.


cano erupted in 2010, airborne volcanic ash cre-ated major problems for aircraft. Millions of pas-sengers experienced delays, and even air ambu-lance services were grounded. The eruptioninflicted major economic losses on airlines. Butthe following year, when Iceland’s Grimsvötn vol-cano erupted, Norwegian authorities were able tohold large swaths of airspace open. By analysingdetailed satellite observations and weather mod-els, they were able to minimise travel delays andeconomic losses.

Land transport

Satellite-based infrastructure for navigation isvery important to land transport. In 2010, 32 percent of vehicles in the EU made use of satellitenavigation. The Norwegian Public Roads Adminis-tration relies on satellite-based navigation anddata services to perform road construction andmaintenance. New forms of road pricing that relyon satellite navigation sensors are potentiallymore accurate than those that use existingground-based tolling systems. Satellite navigationis also employed in fleet management and pack-age tracking, enabling freight companies to plantheir loading and unloading operations in advanceand to alert customers when to expect delivery.

For rail systems, GPS data is more valuablethan physical detection systems for calculatingtrain speed and station arrival and departuretimes. Such positioning data is also used in combi-nation with energy data to accurately invoice trainoperators for their energy consumption on routescrossing national boundaries. GPS devices fittedinto locomotives are also used in maintenanceplanning; they let planners and workshop person-nel know at all times where particular equipmentis located and how far it has travelled since priormaintenance.

4.5 Research

In a relatively short period, researchers acrossnearly the whole spectrum of natural scienceshave put satellite data to use in important ways.They use satellites to observe everything fromwind systems and ice cover to air pollution andforest conditions. Among the great advantages ofsatellite-based technology are the ability toobserve large areas in a cost effective manner andthe ability to make many commensurate observa-tions over time. Information obtained from satel-lites is particularly important to understanding

large, dynamic phenomena such as weather sys-tems, long-range migration of pollution and cli-mate changes. Scientific research into the HighNorth is a case in point. In a region characterisedby vast distances, poor infrastructure and harshclimate, good alternatives to satellite-based obser-vation are hard to find. Research results from theInternational Polar Year (2007–2008) show thatsatellite data are particularly valuable to researchin the polar regions.

Norway participates in international spaceactivities through ESA, Galileo and Copernicus,and through a number of bilateral agreements.Such cooperation puts Norwegian researchers indirect contact with their international colleaguesand gives them dependable access to data and asay in scheduling future observations. The infor-mation obtained and lessons learned help Norwayexpand its scientific and technological knowledgebase in areas of great strategic importance.

Data that can only be obtained from satellitesplay a major role in the study of processes in, onand around the earth. The oldest field of study isatmospheric dynamics, which is the basis fornumerical weather models. Since the early yearsof the 20th century, when the physicist VilhelmBjerknes did pioneering work in meteorology,Norwegian scientists and organisations have beenleaders in the development of weather models.More recently they have been in the forefront ofclimate modelling. Atmospheric models havebeen expanded to include a wide range of chemi-cal components and reactions, and satellite instru-ments today measure a range of chemical compo-nents in the atmosphere. Observations andresearch conducted at Ny-Ålesund, in Svalbard,are among Norway’s contributions to interna-tional conventions on monitoring global air pollu-tion.

Ocean research is a field where satellite data iscrucially important, due to the vast geographicextent of marine areas and the problems of physi-cal access. Leading Norwegian academic andresearch groups participate in all the major Euro-pean marine research programmes. Newer satel-lites, like ESA’s GOCE research satellite, make itpossible to include coastal areas in ocean model-ling. That’s a development of interest to Norway.Norway is also a leader in sea-ice research and oil-spill detection. The observation of algal blooms tohelp understand how they develop is also of greatimportance, not least for the aquaculture industry.

Research on land areas is multi-faceted, andNorway has made its mark on research into snowand ice and the use of satellite data for forest


research. At the Norwegian Forest and LandscapeInstitute, researchers have used earth observa-tion of agricultural conditions to develop operativemonitoring systems for forests and other outlyingresources. Agriculture itself is largely dependenton observations made during the course of ashort growing season. Because satellites now

under planning will provide expanded observa-tional coverage, researchers envisage potentialnew applications tied to resource mapping, forestdegradation and other changes in vegetation. Along tradition of systematic, field-based samplingin agriculture provides a solid basis on which todevelop earth observation services.

Box 4.8 What can satellites tell us about climate and the environment?

– At sea: Satellite observation is especially use-ful over open water, where geometric reso-lution need not be particularly high. Satellitescan measure sea level, sea ice, objects on thesea surface, wave height, currents, oceantemperature, ocean «colour» (associated withalgal blooms, for example), particle content(suspended matter), distribution of spilledoil, etc. Wind speed and wind direction at sealevel are measured for weather forecastingpurposes.

– Fresh water – rivers, lakes and groundwater:Satellite observation technology is increas-ingly applicable to coastlines, fjords and fres-hwater bodies. The parameters that are mea-surable at sea are also measureable in fresh-water bodies. Limitations apply, however,particularly for small water surfaces.

– Land, land use and biodiversity on land: Satel-lite observation applications ashore are wideranging, from environmental surveillance oflarge areas to the details of properties orinfrastructure. Satellites equipped with opti-cal and infrared sensors can provide impor-tant data on vegetation, including climate-related changes, vegetation cover, land use,forest condition/forest damage/deforestation, pollen, and urban green areas.Radar observation can provide data on lands-lides, glacier movement, snow, ice and floo-ding.

– Air pollution, both local and global: Satelliteobservations are used increasingly in combi-nation with in-situ measurements. Techni-ques to measure concentrations of NO2 , SO2,CO, CH2O and aerosols are well developed.Satellites still lack the accuracy and sensiti-vity of ground instruments, but their broadspatial coverage makes satellites useful.Satellites measure gas and particle concen-trations, making it possible to estimate pol-lution emissions, monitor trends and issue

alerts when appropriate. Detection of volca-nic ash is an important application.

– Climate and greenhouse gas emissions: Not allgases are equally observable from space,because they have different absorption cha-racteristics. Some greenhouse gases areobservable by satellite, however, and produ-cts are available to measure CO2, CH4 andH2O.

– Ozone, UV and solar radiation: Ways to quan-tify stratospheric ozone, ozone-depleting sub-stances and related UV and solar radiationare well established. Satellite data are parti-cularly useful in monitoring the size of theAntarctic ozone hole and studying the deple-tion of ozone in our own areas. Ozone datafrom satellites (TOMS/OMI) are used opera-tionally in Norway to estimate and forecastUV radiation for the general public.

– Polar regions: Satellite observation is unsur-passed as a means to acquire data frequentlyand quickly on what’s happening in the polarregions. In the years ahead, more than 150instruments fitted onto various satellites willbe able to observe Svalbard. Measuring seaice is the most obvious application, since reli-able measurement is practically impossiblewithout satellite data. In addition to iceextent, thickness and volume, observablefeatures include currents (ice transport) andchanges in the sea ice’s role as animal habitatand transport medium. ESA’s CryoSat satel-lite provides sea-level data for the centralArctic Ocean. Looking down on polar landmasses, satellites observe glacier coverageand changes in vegetation. The large flow ofdata will necessitate a substantial effort tocalibrate and validate the various observedparameters, using ground-based measure-ments.

– Cultural heritage: Satellites are used to loca-lise and monitor cultural heritage sites, as asupplement to field work.


Satellites can tell us much about active pro-cesses inside the earth. In 2013, ESA will launchSWARM, a system of three satellites designed toobserve the earth’s electromagnetic fields. It isbelieved that such measurements from space willmake it possible to answer questions about theearth’s crust and interior. Research centres inNorway are strongly attuned to the earth’s crustalmagnetic fields. What they learn helps us tounderstand developments in Nordic geology aswell as to chart natural resources.

In addition to being a major consumer of satel-lite data for research, Norway hosts a range ofactivities associated with the launch of researchrockets from launch pads at Andøya and Svalbard.These rocket missions are a necessary comple-ment to satellite and aircraft observations, and areimportant to understanding phenomena such asthe aurora borealis, space weather and climatechanges. Norway is one of the few places in theworld where rocket-based research can be con-

ducted at Arctic latitudes. International collabora-tion at Norwegian rocket ranges is extensive.

Norwegian research efforts have providedmuch of the basis for space-related businessgrowth in Norway. But business development hasbeen characterised by specialisation in clearlydefined technical niches. A number of industrialplayers do operate within the same value chain,though on different levels. This has made collabo-ration and knowledge sharing possible. Formal-ised collaboration was attempted through theSIREN space cluster, an ARENA project in the2006–2009 period. When the project was evalu-ated, a conclusion was that one and the samevalue chain lacked critical mass, despite the factthat several strong space-sector participants hadbeen involved in SIREN. The space cluster con-tributed nonetheless to the founding of the Centrefor Remote Sensing in Tromsø, in 2008.

In the field of satellite communications, backin the 1970s and 1980s, Oslo and Akershus coun-ties saw the emergence of a network of compa-nies, many of which had common goals in satelliteoperations and the development and manufactureof satellite communications equipment. Many ofNorway’s technology actors are participants inthe Norwegian Centres of Expertise (NCE) pro-gramme, which offers collaboration and fundingin the speciality disciplines the actors represent.Examples include NCE Instrumentation, NCESystems Engineering and NCE Micro- and Nano-technology. In addition, a number of companiesand organisations established the Space & EnergyNetwork in 2009 to promote cooperation betweenthe energy and space sectors. The networkfocuses on open innovation, skills development,technology sharing and high-quality meeting are-nas in which to highlight shared technology chal-lenges like extreme operating conditions, remotecontrol, automation, materials selection, projectmanagement and safety.

Figure 4.7 SWARM

Illustration: ESA/AOES Medialab


5 The European Space Agency

Membership in the European Space Agency(ESA) has been the mainstay of Norwegian spaceactivity since the country became a member in1987. Our participation in the organisation hascontributed greatly to the growth of a competitivespace industry, to the spread of technologicalexpertise in government and business, and to theinternationalisation and strengthening of Norwe-gian research. ESA has put us in a position todevelop autonomous national capabilities even aswe exploit the economies of scale that come withworking in a large organisation. Like most ESAmember states, Norway never would have had thefinancial or human resources on its own todevelop large and advanced satellites, launch vehi-cles or space probes. By pooling their resourcesin ESA, member countries have been able toachieve results that most would have been unableto accomplish otherwise. ESA has not only putEurope on the space-technology map, but hasmade it possible for Norway and other memberstates to develop expertise sufficient to protecttheir interests in strategically important spacetechnology and infrastructure.

ESA is an independent intergovernmentalorganisation with 20 member states, headquar-tered in Paris, with an annual budget of about 4billion euros. The EU and ESA work closelytogether, and their memberships overlap. (AmongESA members, only Norway and Switzerland arenot members of the EU.) ESA’s role has primarilybeen in technology development. While ESA wasresponsible for the bulk of development workunderpinning the Galileo and Copernicus pro-grammes, it’s the EU that sees to their operationalfunding. Under the 1975 ESA convention, ESAactivities are to be restricted to peaceful purposes.

5.1 Context for Norway’s ESA participation

ESA was founded in 1975 through the merger ofthe European Space Research Organisation(ESRO) and the European Launcher Develop-ment Organisation (ELDO), both of which traced

their origins to the early 1960s. While ESRO hadhad considerable success in developing scientificsatellites, ELDO had never achieved its goal ofdeveloping a launcher that would give Europeindependent access to space. The purpose of bothESRO and ELDO, and later of ESA, was to pursueEuropean self-reliance in space technology. Agreat deal of space technology development wasthen taking place in Soviet and US military pro-grammes closed to European countries. The 1975merger was intended to improve the return oninvestment by member countries, in part throughincreased focus on industry and user-group inter-ests. In the 1970s and 1980s, ESA developed thefirst European launchers in the Ariane series aswell as a number of satellites and space probes,some for basic research and others for applieddevelopment projects in communications, earthobservation and other fields.

Norway was never a member of ESRO orELDO, and chose at first to remain outside ESA aswell. Participation was not seen as relevantenough to Norwegian research or industry needs.What little there was of publicly funded spaceactivity in Norway (primarily associated with theNorwegian Defence Research Establishment)was confined to domestic programmes or collabo-ration with US research institutions. Things beganto change, however, in the late 1970s. The causewas complex, but three factors predominated.

First, Norway had developed a substantialcommunity of experts in satellite communica-tions. This expertise had sprung from the needfor communications at sea by the Norwegian mer-chant shipping fleet. But as the 1970s unfolded,some Norwegian actors discovered that theirexpertise was in demand internationally. Norwe-gian participation in international developmentprojects became increasingly important as ameans of sharpening technological prowess andcompetitiveness.

The second factor that drew Norway towardsESA membership was the vast expanse of oceanthat fell under Norwegian stewardship in the1970s. It soon became clear that the proper exer-cise of administrative responsibility and sover-


eignty across such enormous and desolate areaswould necessitate extensive satellite monitoring.ESA participation became a tool for developingthe competence Norway would need to fulfil itsstewardship obligations.

A third factor in the decision to move closer toESA was a desire to strengthen Norway’s indus-trial competitiveness by tying Norwegian compa-nies more firmly to international networks. In the1980s, technological innovation was increasinglyrecognised as a fundamental driver of economicgrowth. ESA participation was seen as a tool fortechnology transfer and a channel to new marketsfor high-tech Norwegian companies.

That was the background for Norway’s agree-ment, in 1981, to become an associate member ofESA for a limited period. Norway became a fullmember on 1 Jan. 1987.

5.2 ESA’s organisation

ESA’s goals and governance structure are set outin the ESA Convention of 1975. The agency’s high-est governing body, the ESA Council, normallymeets four times a year at the delegate level.Council delegates represent each of the memberstates and take positions on topical issues relatedto the management of ESA activities. As an associ-ate member, Canada has the right to express itsviews. By act of the council, the European Com-mission and individual EU member states that arenot ESA members may attend meetings and speakout on issues concerning matters of commoninterest to ESA and the EU.

Every three or four years, the ESA Councilmeets at the ministerial level. Ministerial-levelcouncil meetings are attended by ministers withresponsibility for national space programmes.These council meetings determine long-term pro-gramming activity, membership contributions andoverall strategic guidance. The last ministerial-level council meeting took place on 20–21 Nov.2012, in Italy.

In addition to the ESA Council, ESA has fourstanding committees at the technical level, all ofthem with an advisory function. These are: theIndustrial Policy Committee (IPC), which isresponsible for ESA activities related to industrialdevelopment; the Administrative and FinanceCommittee (AFC), which follows through on ESAbudgets; the International Relations Committee(IRC), which sees to relations with third countriesand international organisations; and the ScienceProgramme Committee (SPC), which has responsi-bility for ESA’s scientific activities. In addition,programme boards have been established in eacharea of ESA activity, such as earth observation,navigation, communications and technologicaldevelopment.

Daily operations of ESA are supervised by anadministration headed by a director general. Thedirector general is appointed by the ESA Councilfor a term of four years, and can sit for more thanone period. Frenchman Jean-Jacques Dordain hasbeen the director general of ESA since 2003.Under the director general are about 2,000employees divided between the agency headquar-ters in Paris and various technical centres in Ger-many, the Netherlands, Italy and Spain. Of all the

Figure 5.1 Ministerial-level ESA Council meeting in Naples, 20 Nov. 2012

Photo: ESA/S. Corvaja, 2012


European organisations active in space, ESA hasthe broadest base of technical expertise.

ESA is funded primarily through member-state contributions, of which there are two kinds.Contributions to mandatory activities go towardsthe funding of ESA administration, basic technol-ogy development and the science programme. Inaddition, countries can make financial commit-ments enabling them to participate in a variety ofoptional programmes. Those commitments aremade at the time of ministerial-level council meet-ings. In addition to member-state contributions,ESA gets significant financial support from the EUand EUMETSAT.

5.3 ESA programmes and industrial policy

ESA’s research-and-development activities areorganised into programmes. These can begrouped into two categories: the mandatory pro-gramme and the optional programmes. The man-datory part is divided into the general budget pro-gramme (accounting for about a third of thebudget) and the science programme. The scienceprogramme is focused on scientific research, suchas exploration of distant planets, solar researchand the search for dark matter. General budgetprogramme activities are geared towards basictechnology development.

The optional programmes are funded throughfinancial commitments made voluntarily by mem-ber states on a programme-by-programme basis.Such commitments come in addition to the states’mandatory contributions. The motivation is usu-ally to ensure participation in a certain pro-gramme by one’s own national industries andresearch bodies. Optional programmes are mainlyfocused on the development of technology andapplied services for communications, navigationand earth observation. It is the optional pro-grammes that are of particular interest to Norway,as they cover technology areas where we havemajor industrial interests (like satellite communi-cations and launch technology) or end-user inter-ests (like earth observation).

ESA contributions are tied to the membercountries’ net national income (NNI). Mandatorysubscriptions in particular are based directly onNNI share, with each country’s percentage shareof mandatory programme costs equalling itsshare of the combined NNI of ESA memberstates. For optional ESA programmes, contribu-tions are essentially voluntary. Contributions rep-

resenting less than a quarter of a country’s NNIshare level, however, give the country no votingrights in the programme in question.

ESA programmes are tightly linked to ESAindustrial policy, which includes a principle ofguaranteed industrial return. In principle, eachmember state’s share of industrial contracts in aprogramme shall equal the percentage of pro-gramme costs that the country pays for, with adeduction for administrative costs. In practice, acountry’s return rate depends partly on its abilityto deliver competitive products. For most membercountries, the principle has worked well. Theindustrial policy ensures that member-state indus-tries come into contact with ESA technology pro-grammes while bolstering support within themember states for continued ESA participation.

Through ESA’s industrial return policy, mostmember countries have found it possible to builda competitive space technology industry. Theresult is true competition between companies onprice and quality. ESA policy is to actively promoteindustrial development in countries that struggleto achieve full return on their contributions.

5.4 Norwegian ESA participation over time

Norway’s annual ESA participation, as measuredin unadjusted kroner, has gone from just underNOK 100 million in 1987 to nearly NOK 500 mil-lion today. Figure 5.2 shows the change over timein mandatory contributions and annual paymentsto optional programmes.

The long-term increase in Norwegian contri-butions is attributable to two factors. The ESAbudget increased by 5 per cent annually until1994, and Norway’s NNI share has almost dou-bled from 1987 to the present. Fluctuations fromyear to year are due to exchange-rate variations.The purchasing power of the mandatory contribu-tions has been fairly stable over the past decade.

Norway’s involvement in optional pro-grammes was relatively stable from 1993 to 2005.At the ministerial-level meeting in 2005, greatemphasis was placed on the importance of spaceinvestments to support the Government ‘s HighNorth policy and Norwegian technology develop-ment. Norway contributed funds about equal toour NNI share of all the new optional pro-grammes. The effect of this increase and aninvestment in new programmes at the ministerial-level council meeting in 2008 account for thesharp rise in contributions from 2006 onward that


can be seen in Figure 5.2. At the ministerial meet-ing in 2012, Norway declared the equivalent of alittle below its NNI share in new optional ESA pro-grammes (see Prop. 74 S (2012–2013)). The moti-vation for Norway’s increased commitment is theopportunity it represents to develop technologiesand markets, particularly those related to nationalutilisation of satellite data. In the case of earthobservation, Norway pays about 2 per cent of theEuropean total, and uses 15 to 20 per cent of theinformation, with a focus on information relevantto our expansive northern areas.

Until 2000, the level of industrial return to Nor-way was good for all ESA programmes. Sincethen, the return level for optional programmeshas remained good, but it has been hard toachieve a satisfactory return level in the manda-tory programme. The main reason for this is thatNorwegian companies capable of contributing tosatellite construction are relatively niche-oriented.In addition, wage growth in Norway has made it

increasingly difficult to compete on price. ESAand Norway together have examined how thesestructural problems can be rectified. ESA hasused internal funds, and Norway has used thetechnology programmes to strengthen the com-petitiveness of Norwegian actors. Norway’sreturn has improved since 2010, and stands in2012 at 95 per cent of the nominal value. In thestraightforwardly technological programmes,Norway’s nominal return is in line with what theprogrammes call for.

The utility of Norway’s ESA membership wasevaluated by PwC in 2012. The evaluation empha-sises that revenues in the Norwegian space econ-omy are unusually large for a small country,accounting for close to 2 per cent of the globalspace economy. The main conclusion was thatNorwegian industry and end-users alike have ben-efitted greatly from the country’s ESA participa-tion, and that the industrial projects return clearsocio-economic value.

Figure 5.2 Norwegian participation in ESA programmes



6 The European Union

In a few short years the EU has become one of themost important European actors in space. Whenthe Treaty of Lisbon entered into force in 2009, itgave the EU a space mandate for the first time.With the development of the Galileo satellite navi-gation programme and the Copernicus earthobservation programme, the EU is about tobecome one of the world’s major satellite infra-structure operators. The EU’s growing involve-ment in space has captured the attention of Euro-pean leaders. Once regarded as a relativelyperipheral endeavour, done for its own sake, spaceactivity has gained status over time as a means toachieve objectives in other policy fields – in par-ticular, to promote growth and innovation. Spacenow has a place at the heart of European politics.

As the EU has gained influence in Europeanspace activities, ESA’s role in some areas haschanged. ESA’s strength is that of a research anddevelopment organisation. The EU for its part hasthe political, financial and administrative musclerequired to build and operate major infrastructuresystems and hitch them to European policy objec-tives like economic growth, security, the environ-ment and climate. In recent years we have seen agrowing tendency towards a division of labourbetween the two organisations, with ESA develop-ing basic infrastructure technology that the EUlater funds and constructs for deployment. Thiswas this model by which Galileo and Copernicusarose with considerable success. The future rela-tionship between the two organisations has notbeen clarified. Some countries want to integrateESA into the EU, as a EU agency, while othersprefer to maintain the status quo. Regardless ofthe organisational structure that emerges, it isclear that many of the most important strategicdecisions on European space activity in the futurewill take place in the EU by virtue of its size, itsbreadth of interest and its legitimacy in the eyes ofmember countries.

For Norway, the changing landscape affordsboth opportunities and challenges. On the onehand, the EU’s enhanced role has given Europethe ability to execute large and complex infra-structure programmes, such as Galileo and

Copernicus. Norway will benefit greatly fromthese systems. On the other hand, Norway’s abil-ity to promote its own interests may be chal-lenged. The key decisions on European spaceactivity are moving from ESA, where Norway is afull member, to the EU, where we are outsiders.This poses new challenges to Norwegian policy.Our space policy is becoming more like our otherEuropean policies, and we must find ways to makeour voice heard on issues where EU space policyaffects Norwegian interests.

6.1 The EU’s role in European space activity – background and trends

The EU’s role in European space programmesbegan to develop in the late 1980s, with the Euro-pean Commission’s initiative to open up the Euro-pean satellite communications market. At thetime, this market was hampered by a complexregulatory regime in which rules varied fromcountry to country. The complexity stifled compe-tition and was seen as an obstacle to the effectiveuse of satellite communications technology inEurope. It is worth noting that this issue wentright to the core of the internal market, namelythe potential for cross-border business activityand effective competition. Right from the start,then, the EU’s involvement in space touched onpolicy fields at the core of the EU project.

During the 1990s and 2000s, EU space activi-ties became gradually stronger, primarily throughclose cooperation with ESA and through the EU’sframework programmes for research and develop-ment. The EU’s efforts were mainly aimed atdeveloping space infrastructure and satellite-based services that would be helpful in achievingpolitical goals in fields such as the environment,climate, transport and security. Since the late1990s, the major pan-European infrastructure pro-grammes Galileo and Copernicus have been thefocal points of EU space activity and of EU-ESAcooperation.

As collaboration between the EU and ESAbecame more extensive, several initiatives were


undertaken to formalise relations between thetwo organisations. The joint ESA-EU space strat-egy declaration of 2000 was intended tostrengthen European space activity by establish-ing collaborative projects between ESA and theEU. In 2004, the two organisations signed a frame-work agreement. An important consequence ofthis agreement was that high-level EU officialsbegan discussing space issues more frequently,including at regular ministerial-level meetings of ajoint body known as the Space Council.

In the main, the early decades of the EU’s par-ticipation in space was characterised by ad hoc ini-tiatives and cooperation with ESA to solve con-crete problems. The EU had no formal mandate toimplement its own space policies. This situationchanged significantly when the Treaty of Lisbonentered into force in December 2009. The treatygives the EU an explicit mandate to formulate aEuropean space policy to support scientific andtechnical development, competitive strength andEU activities in other policy fields. To implementthe policy, the EU is to establish appropriate rela-tions with ESA and if necessary to take othermeasures, like creating a European space pro-gramme. But the Treaty of Lisbon provides nolegal basis for trying to harmonise member states’policies in the area; on the contrary, the textexpressly exclude such initiatives.

As a step in carrying out the Treaty of Lisbonmandate, the EU issued a communication in 2011titled «Towards a Space Strategy for the EuropeanUnion that Benefits its Citizens». It contains threeaims: public benefit, economic growth and astronger EU role on the world stage. The aims ofbenefitting society and strengthening the Euro-pean economy are familiar from previous EU initi-atives in the area. Of more recent date is theexplicit emphasis on the EU’s global status. Thismust be seen in the context of the EU’s height-ened attention to security and foreign affairs(exemplified by the appointment of an independ-ent high representative for security and foreignpolicy) and to the increasing emphasis on spaceinfrastructure in these policy areas. Infrastructurein space is becoming a prerequisite for security onthe ground. As a consequence, European capabil-ity has emerged as an important priority in it isown right, along with dialogue with major spaceactors like the United States, Russia and China.

The foremost characteristic of EU space strat-egy is its very strong orientation towards practicalutility, with space activity defined as a means toachieve objectives in other policy areas. For manyEuropean countries, this implies a new way of

looking at space. Traditionally, space activitieshave been regarded largely as basic research,albeit with significant side effects in the form oftechnological and industrial development. Thebasic premise of EU space strategy is that thespace sector is to supply infrastructure, productsand services critical to economic competitiveness,welfare and security in a modern industrial soci-ety. The clearest manifestations of such thinkingare the space programmes Galileo and Coperni-cus.

6.2 EU space programmes – common infrastructure, common goals

Most of the EU’s space-related activity takes placein the context of programmes whose aim is todevelop and operate pan-European space-basedinfrastructure. By far the largest and most signifi-cant programmes to date are Galileo, the satellitenavigation programme, and Copernicus, the earthobservation programme. Through Galileo andCopernicus, Europe has in many ways steppedinto a new era. In a few years, the EU will be man-aging space-based systems of a magnitude andcomplexity achievable by no one else but majorpowers like the United States, Russia and China.

Box 6.1 Industrial policy in the EU

From an industrial policy perspective, thereare fundamental differences between ESA andthe EU. ESA is a research and developmentorganisation. The ESA convention calls formember countries to receive a timely share ofprojects and contracts in a proportion roughlyequal to the payments they make to ESA – apolicy of guaranteed industrial return.

The EU in principle has an industrial policybased on open competition among companiesin the countries that participate in a given pro-gramme. This means countries have no«right» to get back contracts in proportion tothe project costs they fund. EU industrial pol-icy assumes that a country’s industry must becompetitive. For small businesses, it is impor-tant to be active in the sub-supplier networksof prime contractors.

Since price is an important factor in win-ning contracts, countries with high costs facemajor challenges in securing contracts in openEU competition.


Galileo’s development is among the largestcollaborative industrial projects ever mounted inEurope. The system ensures institutional demandfor Europe’s satellite navigation industry as wellas European control and capacity in a service cate-gory of increasing strategic importance.

Copernicus will be an important tool for scien-tific research, public security and environmentaland climate monitoring in Europe and around theworld. Data obtained from the system’s satelliteswill be an important component of public servicesand a commodity for businesses that process sat-ellite data. In addition to Galileo and Copernicus,the EU has engaged in space-related activitiesthrough framework programmes for research andinnovation. Some EU officials have an ambition toestablish programmes on such topics as spaceresearch and space weather.

6.3 EU satellite navigation programmes: Galileo and EGNOS

The EU channels its satellite navigation invest-ments into the EGNOS and Galileo programmes,whose missions are to develop, operate andexpand systems of the same names. EGNOS(European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Ser-vice) has been in operation since 2009. It verifiesand corrects GPS signals (and eventually will doso for Galileo signals) so the signals are more reli-able and precise. Galileo is to be an independentglobal satellite navigation system comparable tothe American GPS, Russian GLONASS and futureChinese Beidou systems. Unlike the others, Gali-leo will be a purely civilian system. EGNOS andGalileo are being built and operated as separatesystems, but are funded from the same EU budgetline. Each must be viewed in relation to the other.

In the mid-1990s, the EU and ESA began col-laborating on satellite navigation, initially bydeveloping EGNOS. At the same time, prepara-tions began for a future independent satellite navi-gation system. Development of Galileo got underway in 2001. For the rest of the decade, attemptswere made to fund the construction and operationof Galileo as a public-private partnership betweenthe EU, ESA and private investors. It provedimpossible, however, to get private investors toassume financial responsibility, mainly because ofthe modest direct revenue potential and the highpolitical, technological and financial risks. In 2007,therefore, the EU decided to fully fund the sys-tem’s development. The EU became the owner ofthe system with responsibility as well for its opera-

tion, maintenance and continued development.Construction was to be completed in 2013, but theproject’s complexity and the late introduction ofadditional safety requirements have delayed theprogramme and raised costs. Galileo is nowscheduled to enter early operational status in2015. By 2020 the system is to be complete, with30 satellites in orbit and fully operational services.The development of next-generation Galileo satel-lites is already underway.

The EU regards Galileo and EGNOS as toolsto help develop Europe’s high-tech industrialcapabilities and attain European self-reliance in atechnology that is seen increasingly as a strategicpriority. EGNOS consists physically of equipmentinstalled on two satellites in equatorial orbit aswell as a network of ground reference stations andfour control centres. The signals from EGNOScan be received by most any GPS device, and areused to correct inaccuracies in the signals fromthese systems’ satellites. EGNOS provides threeservices: an open service that provides more pre-cise measurement data than GPS alone, a serviceoriented to the aviation market for use during air-port approaches, and a data service that suppliesraw data and corrections through the Internet.

When fully developed, Galileo will be a fullyoperational, global satellite navigation system con-sisting of 30 satellites and 20 or so ground sta-tions. It will provide the following services:– Galileo OS (Open Service), an open public ser-

vice similar to today’s GPS as experienced byits civilian users.

– Galileo PRS (Public Regulated Service), whichwill provide encrypted signals on dedicated fre-quencies. This makes the signal more resistantto disturbances and false signals, and makes itpossible to regulate access. PRS will be offeredto accredited users in the public sector.

– Galileo SAR (Search and Rescue), which willdetect signals and positioning data from emer-gency beacons and relay them to the interna-tional search-and-rescue system COSPAS-SAR-SAT. In contrast to existing services, GalileoSAR will include a return channel, by which theparty in distress will receive confirmation thatits emergency signal has been received.

– Galileo CS (Commercial Service), which is stillin the planning stages and is expected to pro-vide high-precision services to professionalusers and signal-authentication for use in appli-cations such as road pricing.

The construction and future development of Gali-leo and EGNOS provide assurance that Europe’s


space industry will enjoy institutional demand forthe satellite navigation technology. Such demandis a precondition for the very existence of theindustry, given that foreign suppliers are barredfrom serving the (military) US, Russian and Chi-nese systems. In addition to the opportunity ofsupplying technology to satellites and groundinfrastructure, Galileo and EGNOS give Europeancompanies and user groups early insight into, andinfluence over, programme specifications andtechnical systems. That insight is crucial for suc-cess in the growing market for products and ser-vices that exploit satellite navigation data, includ-ing intelligent traffic systems in the road sector,location-based smartphone applications and high-precision services for the maritime sector, the off-shore oil and gas industry and agriculture.

By establishing Galileo and EGNOS, the EUachieves independent capability in a strategicallyimportant navigation technology. Europeandemand for satellite navigation services so far haslargely been satisfied by the US GPS system.While that system has met most European userneeds, it is a military system outside European

control. The Americans make no service guaran-tees and reserve the right to block signals if itwould serve US needs. This has made it problem-atic to rely on GPS alone for critical servicesdemanding high reliability, as in aviation. Moreo-ver, dependency on another country’s militarysystem has been deemed undesirable with regardto European foreign and security policy autonomy.

Galileo will be compatible with GPS in such away that satellite navigation device users will beable to receive signals from both systems. Userswill in fact perceive the two systems as seamlesslyintegrated. With Galileo and GPS workingtogether, the number of satellites available tousers at any given time will be about twice whatwould have been the case if there were only onesystem. That means improved access to satellitenavigation services in polar regions, in deep val-leys and in the midst of buildings in urban areas.The existence of two independent but compatiblesystems also means greater robustness and relia-bility for the services provided. One side effect ofthe EU’s investment in satellite navigation hasbeen that it motivated the United States to

Figure 6.1 Galileo satellites

Illustration: OHB System AG


improve its GPS system to meet the prospect ofcompetition from Galileo. This was part of the rea-son US officials in 2002 chose to cease their inten-tional degradation of the civilian GPS service. Theprecision of the civilian GPS service improvedovernight from 100 metres to 10 metres, a majorbenefit to users worldwide.

6.4 The EU earth observation programme: Copernicus

The EU invests in earth observation through theCopernicus programme, formerly known asGlobal Monitoring for Environment and Security(GMES). The primary purpose of this programmeis to acquire information relevant to environmen-tal and climate policy, ocean monitoring, researchand security. Copernicus will collect data fromearth observation satellites, airborne sensors andground-based monitoring stations. It will alsooperate systems to process the data for differentusers. Copernicus represents a new phase in envi-ronmental monitoring by satellite. Until now, wehave had to rely on individual research satelliteswith a limited service life. Copernicus by contrastwill be an operative system providing continuouscoverage, with replacement satellites going up asold ones are phased out. Such continuity is par-ticularly important for the study of environmentaland climate changes, work that requires repetitiveobservation over a long period of time. Thanks toCopernicus, Europe in 2015 will be operating theworld’s most advanced fleet of environmental sat-ellites. Europe already has a well-developed sys-tem of weather satellites. In the long run the pro-gramme is meant to be Europe’s contribution tothe Global Earth Observation System of Systems(GEOSS). GEOSS will integrate data from differ-ent regional earth observation services to create acommon platform, and will organise the informa-tion for different users. The goal is to develop ashared global infrastructure from which to obtaincontinuously updated information relevant to envi-ronmental management and disaster response.

Copernicus has its roots in international envi-ronmental and emissions agreements concludedin the 1980s and 1990s. With many countries com-mitting themselves to emissions reductions andother environmental measures, there arose aneed to document environmental conditions andmonitor the extent to which countries lived up totheir commitments. It soon became clear that theonly effective way to do this would be to employearth observation satellites. Against this back-

ground, the European Commission launched theidea of a pan-European initiative on earth obser-vation in 1998, through a declaration called theBaveno Manifesto. A partnership was set upamong the European Commission, ESA and themember states of the EU and ESA. In 2000, thepartners began development work aimed at estab-lishing an operational earth observation systemfor Europe. By 2010 they had progressed farenough to begin initial operations. The EU thenadopted Copernicus as an EU programme, on parwith Galileo and EGNOS. The initial operationsphase, from 2011 to 2013, features the establish-ment of services based on data from existingnational, commercial or ESA-owned satellites. Thebreadth of available data will be expanded consid-erably from 2013 onward, as the programme’sown satellites begin to orbit. As planned, Coperni-cus is to achieve fully operational status in 2014.

Fully developed, Copernicus will consist of alarge number of earth observation satellites inaddition to land-based, ocean-based and airbornesensors. Some of the most advanced earth obser-vation satellites, the Sentinels, are under construc-tion and scheduled for launch in 2013. The pro-gramme will also use data from several existingsatellites owned by ESA, the European weathersatellite organisation EUMETSAT and the mem-ber states. Ground stations will also have to be setup to control Copernicus’ own satellites andreceive data. The data provided by all this infra-structure will permit the gradual development of awide range of services for European and interna-tional users. Copernicus programme services willbe categorised as follows:– Marine environments: Monitoring in connec-

tion with maritime safety and transport, oilspills, water quality, polar environment, sea ice,oceanography and marine weather forecasting.

– Land environments: Monitoring in connectionwith freshwater access, flood risk, agricultureand food security, land use, changes in vegeta-tion, forest conditions, soil quality, urban plan-ning and conservation.

– Atmospheric services: Monitoring of air quality,long-range transboundary pollution, ozone,ultraviolet radiation and greenhouse gases.

– Crisis situations: Services to aid response tonatural and man-made disasters such as floods,forest fires, earthquakes and refugee flows.

– Security: Support for border control, maritimesurveillance and protections against terrorismand international crime.It is the EU’s stated goal that Sentinel satellite

data and the core services, which are to be freely


and openly available, will give rise to significantcommercial activity and innovation in downstreamservice markets. In other words Copernicus,while directly addressing significant challenges

related to public administration, the environment,climate and security, is also supposed to stimulatecommercial growth and innovation.

Figure 6.2 The Sentinel satellites will be part of Copernicus

Illustration: ESA/P. Carril

Box 6.2 The Sentinel satellites

At the core of Copernicus are the Sentinel envi-ronmental satellites, which will move in lowearth orbit over the poles. Their continuity, pre-dictability and sensory capabilities should sat-isfy important environmental monitoring needs,especially when it comes to data of global andinternational significance. The satellites are tobe launched between 2013 and 2019. Six differ-ent categories of satellite are planned:– Sentinel 1: Radar-imaging satellites capable

of observing land and sea areas regardless oflight conditions. These satellites will be par-ticularly useful for ocean monitoring andlandslide hazard detection.

– Sentinel 2: Satellites designed to provideimages over land and coastal areas. Theseimages will have particular value in the mon-itoring of forests, soil and freshwater bodies,and in support of emergency services.

– Sentinel 3: Satellites combining radar withoptical sensors to be used for ocean monitor-ing and environmental monitoring over land.

– Sentinel 4 and 5: Satellites able to discern thechemical composition of the atmosphere.

– Sentinel 6: Satellites designed to take preciseelevation measurements, to be used in deter-mining changes in sea level.


6.5 Norwegian participation in Galileo, EGNOS and Copernicus

Norway’s participation in Galileo, EGNOS andCopernicus has evolved gradually over the pasttwo decades. In all three programmes, Norwaywas an early participant in developing technologyand instruments, first through ESA and laterthrough a cooperative arrangement with the EUunder the European Economic Area agreement.Our participation has given us the opportunity toinfluence the programmes, so that they serveNorwegian interests to the degree possible. Nor-wegian companies and public authorities havegained early insight into the programmes,strengthening Norwegian players in the marketfor services and products that rely on satellite nav-igation and earth observation. Early insight hasalso made it possible for Norwegian public offi-cials to identify ways the programmes could helpimprove public services. To date, Norwegianspace-related industrial concerns have won con-tracts in the programmes totalling about 130 mil-lion euros.

Galileo and EGNOS

Norway has been involved in constructing theGalileo and EGNOS satellite navigation systemssince work on the programmes began in the1990s, first through ESA and later in cooperationwith the EU. Norway has contributed 13 millioneuros to the programmes through ESA and 72million euros through the EU. Through its partici-pation, Norway is helping to construct pan-Euro-pean infrastructure that will be of great benefit toNorway. Active Norwegian participation in thesatellite navigation programmes makes it easierfor Norwegian authorities, industries and enter-prises to influence matters affecting coveragearea, access and use of services. Norway’s partici-pation also helps the country’s industries, compa-nies and organisations gain access to the technol-ogy and expertise they need to exploit the oppor-tunities that Galileo provides. This is fertileground for developing competitive services andtechnologies with commercial promise that can beof particular support to users in Norwegian indus-try and public administration. An importantaspect of participation in the Galileo and EGNOSprogrammes is the opportunity it represents tomake sure those systems perform capably in Nor-wegian areas, particularly in the far north. Nor-way has worked actively – and successfully – in

the Galileo and EGNOS governing bodies toimprove system performance in the High North.

The Norwegian Storting approved Norway’sparticipation in Galileo and EGNOS in 2009. Thetwo European legislative acts that regulate the sat-ellite navigation programmes were incorporatedinto the EEA agreement by decision of the EEAJoint Committee on 8 July 2009. The acts incorpo-rated were:– Regulation (EC) No. 683/2008 of the Parlia-

ment and the Council of 9 July 2008 on the furt-her implementation of the European satellitenavigation programmes (EGNOS and Galileo)

– Council Regulation (EC) No. 1321/2004 of 12July 2004 on the establishment of structures forthe management of the European satellite radio-navigation programmes

Respectively, the acts deal with the constructionof Galileo and the programme’s funding through2013 (No. 683/2008) and with the establishmentof the GNSS Supervisory Authority, or GSA (No.1321/2004). The act concerning the GSA was laterreplaced by a new one, which was itself incorpo-rated into the EEA agreement by decision of theEEA Joint Committee on 15 June 2012:– Regulation (EC) No. 912/2010 of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 22 September2010 setting up the European GNSS Agency,repealing Council regulation (EC) No. 1321/2004 and amending Regulation (EC) No. 683/2008

Apart from the acts incorporated into the EEAagreement, a bilateral agreement has been signedwith regard to aspects of Galileo and EGNOS thatdo not naturally belong in the EEA agreement,including security, ground facilities, protection offrequencies and export control. Exchange of clas-sified information related to the programmestakes place in the context of Norway’s securityagreement with the EU. Norway has committeditself financially to participate in Galileo andEGNOS until the end of 2013. Further Norwegianparticipation in the programmes, beyond 2013,would require a decision by the Storting.

Norway’s participation in Galileo and EGNOSpermits the country to sit in the programmes’ gov-erning bodies. As with other EU programmes,Norway lacks voting power, but our right to speakout and participate in other ways gives us consid-erable influence in the specialised bodies that gov-ern Galileo and EGNOS.

Taking part in Galileo and EGNOS hasresulted in contracts for Norwegian industry and


the creation of satellite navigation infrastructureon Norwegian territory. Since 2003, Norwegiancompanies have won Galileo- and EGNOS-relatedcontracts valued at some 79 million euros. ThreeGalileo sensor stations have been established onNorwegian territory – at Svalbard, Jan MayenIsland and the Troll research station in Antarctica.There is also an uplink station on Svalbard for nav-igational data, and a receiving station is beingplanned for the search-and-rescue service thatunderpins COSPAS-SARSAT. Additionally,EGNOS reference stations have been establishedat Svalbard, Jan Mayen Island, Kirkenes, Tromsøand Trondheim to ensure good coverage acrossNorwegian areas. The stations are run by Kongs-berg Satellite Services and the Norwegian Map-ping Authority. Galileo ground stations andEGNOS reference stations are part of the groundsegment that monitors overall system perfor-mance and generates navigational data. The per-formance of EGNOS is steadily improving innorthern latitudes. It is hoped that EGNOS willbecome a useful tool for pilots approaching air-ports in all of mainland Norway.

Copernicus

Norway helped develop the technology thatunderpinned the establishment of Copernicus,first through ESA and the EU’s Seventh Frame-work Programme for Research (FP7), and since2012 through the EEA agreement. The total Nor-wegian financial contribution to Copernicusthrough 2013 amounts to approximately NOK 227million. In part because of Norway’s early involve-ment in Copernicus, Norwegian authorities,industries and businesses today are able to influ-ence the programme. It is important for Norwayto ensure that Copernicus performs well overareas of Norwegian interest. Good performance,from Norway’s perspective, refers to good geo-graphic coverage of areas administered by Nor-way as well as the fine-tuning of satellites to gener-ate the earth-observation data that is most rele-vant to this country. Norway is one of the nationsassumed to benefit most from the data and ser-vices Copernicus will offer. Not only do satellitesin polar orbit provide coverage that’s twice asgood in our areas than further south, but we havevast expanses of sea and land to cover. The pro-gramme is expected to be an important data

Figure 6.3 EGNOS will contribute to safer airport flight approaches

Photo: Markus Mainka/123RF


source for many Norwegian users, includingnational initiatives such as BarentsWatch. Partici-pation will also result in a level playing field forNorwegian companies competing to supply theprogramme. Norwegian players are expected tobe able to provide things like ground station ser-vices and the development of services using earthobservation data. Norwegian participation is alsoconsidered a contribution, in solidarity with othernations, to the development of global earth obser-vation capacity.

Norway formally became a participant inGMES (as it was then called) in 2012. The EU’sregulation of GMES was incorporated into theEEA agreement by decision of the EEA JointCommittee on 13 July 2012, and was approved bythe Norwegian Government in the Council ofState on 12 October 2012. The regulation incorpo-rated was:– Regulation (EC) No. 911/2010 of the European

Parliament and of the Council of 22 September2010 on the European Earth monitoring pro-gramme (GMES) and its initial operations(2011 to 2013)

This regulation is to pave the way for a full-scaleoperational programme starting in 2014. Nor-way’s approval of the regulation gives us the right,but not the obligation, to participate in Copernicusafter 2014. Norwegian participation in Copernicusbeyond 2013 would require action by the Storting.

Participation in Copernicus has resulted incontracts to Norwegian industry and opportuni-ties to influence the services to be provided. Sofar, participation in the programme has returnedcontracts worth 51.5 million euros. In the initialphase of operations, Kongsberg Satellite Serviceshas been awarded a framework contract valued atNOK 200 million to provide ground station ser-vices in Svalbard for five years. Kongsberg Space-tec, based in Tromsø, has supplied advanced sig-nal processing equipment to ground stations serv-ing the Sentinel satellites. Other Norwegian com-panies, too, have contributed to several of the sat-ellites. Within the EU’s FP7 programme,meanwhile, a number of Norwegian researchinstitutions have had a hand in specifying servicesrelated to marine environments and atmosphericservices. The Norwegian Meteorological Institutehas been a central Norwegian participant on theservice side with regard to both sea and atmos-phere, ensuring that important public administra-tion interests are safeguarded.

6.6 What does the EU’s expanded role mean for Norway?

The EU’s activity in space has major conse-quences for ESA and for the countries of Europe.In the course of a few years, ESA has gone frombeing the undisputed forum for pan-Europeanspace activity to being challenged by an EU withrising ambitions. The EU has made i t possible toexecute large infrastructure programmes thatESA would never have been able to manage alone;yet the EU also represents a challenge to ESA’srole as an independent organisation. In countrieswith membership in both the EU and ESA, gov-ernmental focus on space has broadened as space-related issues rise to higher levels of political dis-cussion in a greater number of policy areas. Thisgives space activities greater political weight, butit complicates national and European decision-making processes. Norway, one of only two ESAmembers not in the EU (Switzerland is the other),is in a unique position. On the one hand, the EU’sstrengthened role has led to the development ofinfrastructure from which Norway will benefitgreatly. Galileo and Copernicus will help to solvemajor Norwegian challenges, many of themrelated to the High North and to Norwegian cli-mate and environmental policy. On the otherhand, influence is shifting from an organisation inwhich Norway is a full member to an organisationthat obliges us to try to be heard while standingoutside. As the EU expands its role, Norway’sspace policy naturally takes on aspects of thecountry’s overall European policy.

The relationship between the EU and ESA todate has been characterised by a divvying oftasks, with ESA conducting research and develop-ment and the EU funding and carrying out theconstruction and operation of satellite-based sys-tems. This arrangement has benefitted both par-ties and expanded Europe’s capacity to developspace infrastructure serving public interestsacross national boundaries. It is unclear how therelationship between the two organisations willdevelop in the years to come. The European Com-mission has expressed increasing resistance tothe idea of ESA issuing guidelines that may havebearing on the EU’s own political priorities. Onseveral occasions, leading EU countries havecalled for stronger integration between the twoorganisations – for example, by incorporating ESAinto the EU as an agency comparable to the Euro-pean Defence Agency. Other important EU mem-bers have aligned against such a proposal. Which-ever structure emerges, many of the most impor-


tant strategic decisions about European spaceactivity in the years ahead will be taken in the EU,by virtue of the organisation’s size, its breadth ofinterests and its legitimacy in the eyes of membercountries.

In the years ahead, Norway’s effect on thedeveloping relationship between the EU and ESAwill be limited. However, there is much we can doto safeguard Norwegian interests, regardless ofhow European space activities are organised.First, we can contribute constructively to ESA’sfurther development, so the agency can continue,to the extent possible, to be a strong and inde-pendent a partner for the EU. If despite that effortESA seems likely to face assimilation into the EUsystem, it can be surmised that Norway wouldseek to negotiate an agreement on participation. Astrong Norwegian role in ESA in the meantimewill strengthen our ability to negotiate an advanta-geous agreement. Second, it will be important toposition Norway in near relation to EU space pro-grammes and to take a proactive approach todevelopments in EU space policy. In our dealingswith Galileo and Copernicus, we have seen that

active participation in EU space programmesaffords plenty of scope to advance Norwegianinterests. Norway has earned a reputation as acompetent and constructive partner, and theEuropean Commission has repeatedly empha-sised that the EU desires Norwegian participationin such programmes. Even without voting rights,our participation in the governing bodies andworking groups of Galileo and Copernicus hasproved to be a powerful means of addressing spe-cial Norwegian interests, and of obtaining earlyinsight into programme capabilities and specifica-tions. We have also seen that we can be excluded,without much ado, from important decision-mak-ing processes when we are not sufficiently com-mitted to active participation. In 2011, whenCopernicus became an EU programme after hav-ing been under ESA control, Norway lost theright, previously granted through ESA member-ship, to take part in meetings of the programme’sgoverning bodies. Only in 2012, when Norwaysigned a special agreement with the EU to partici-pate in Copernicus, did we regain our right to jointhe meetings.


7 Norway’s space-related ground infrastructure

Many earth observation satellites move inpolar orbit, circling the earth 14 times per day.Our northern location allows us to receive thedata from most of these satellites. Norway’s posi-tion – along with our tradition of successfullybuilding and operating infrastructure in the Arcticand Antarctic – has given rise to a cluster of com-petitive companies offering ground-based ser-

vices to research institutes and satellite operators.Space-oriented infrastructure has been estab-lished in Svalbard, on Jan Mayen Island, in main-land Norway and in Queen Maud Land in Antarc-tica. Some of the infrastructure is uplink anddownlink equipment that represents a market initself. Other infrastructure is part of the valuechain in Norwegian services. Space-related infra-

Box 7.1 SvalSat

SvalSat is the largest ground station on earth forcontrol of polar-orbiting satellites and datareception from them. Many of the satellites pro-vide meteorological data essential to accurateweather forecasting. The European weather sat-

ellite organisation EUMETSAT and the USNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-tion (NOAA) are heavy users of SvalSat’s down-link services.

Figure 7.1 SvalSat

Photo: KSAT


structure attracts other activities and enterprisesto the polar regions while simultaneously contrib-uting importantly to Norwegian interests in theseareas. The placement of this ground infrastruc-ture also represents a significant component ofNorway’s international space collaboration.

Svalbard

Svalbard is the only easily accessible place in theworld for communicating with polar-orbiting satel-lites on every one of their daily orbits. The hub ofspace activities in Svalbard is the Svalbard Satel-lite Station (SvalSat), owned and operated byKSAT. SvalSat is the world’s largest ground sta-tion for communication with satellites in polarorbit. Japanese research and earth observationsatellites are among those whose data are down-linked here. Of the many antennas at SvalSat,some are owned by KSAT and others by majorcustomers such as NASA, the European Union(Galileo and EGNOS) and EUMETSAT. SvalSat isthe main ground station for the US weather satel-

lite Suomi NPP, which was launched in theautumn of 2011. SvalSat will also be crucial to theLandsat 8 environmental monitoring satellite andthe IRIS solar research satellite, both owned bythe United States and launched in 2013.

National and international organisations aliketake part in space-related research in Svalbard.Notable Norwegian infrastructure includes theNorwegian Mapping Authority’s geodetic obser-vatory at Ny-Ålesund, the Kjell Henriksen Obser-vatory outside Longyearbyen (for observation ofthe aurora borealis and space weather phenom-ena) and the Norwegian portion of the interna-tional EISCAT Svalbard Radar. The German andFrench space agencies, DLR and CNES, havepositioned some infrastructure in Svalbard forimproved tracking of their satellites’ orbits.

Collaboration with the US organisations NASAand NOAA prompted the installation of fibre-opticcable to Svalbard in 2004. The subsea fibre-opticconnection between Svalbard and mainland Nor-way is owned by Norwegian Space Centre Proper-ties. The cable must be regarded as a critical part

Box 7.2 Jan Mayen Island

Stations on Norwegian territory, including theEGNOS monitoring station on Jan Mayen

Island, are required for high-quality system per-formance across Norway’s expansive areas.

Figure 7.2 EGNOS-stasjonen på Jan Mayen

Photo: Kjell Arne Aarmo


of Norway’s space infrastructure; it also providesimportant services to the population of Svalbard.In 2010, the Government commissioned Uninettto install a fibre-optic cable between Ny-Ålesundand Longyearbyen. This cable is scheduled to beready in 2013–2014. The increase in space-basedactivity in Svalbard is drawing increased attentionfrom scientific communities elsewhere in Norwayand around the world. That affects other activitiesin Svalbard, including businesses in other sectors.As stated in Report No. 22 (2008–2009) to theStorting: Svalbard, the Government aims to investin space activities as part of Svalbard’s future live-lihood.

The Svalbard Treaty of 9 February 1920 estab-lishes certain regulations in Svalbard that mayhave implications for space-related infrastructure.

Pursuant to Norway’s Telecommunications Actand § 3 and § 4 of its Svalbard Act, the Norwegianregulation on establishing, operating and usingsatellite earth stations contains special provisionsfor Svalbard. To ensure that earth-station opera-tions are consistent with the Svalbard Treaty’sprohibition against using the archipelago for «war-like purposes», Article 3 of the regulation estab-lishes rules for the authorisation and use of earthstations in Svalbard.

In addition, a separate permit application mustbe made to the Norwegian Post and Telecommu-nications Authority for each satellite that is tomake use of ground station services in Svalbard.The Governor of Svalbard is responsible for theoversight of ground station activities, and con-ducts regular inspections.

Box 7.3 Troll

The Norwegian Galileo sensor stations at Troll,Jan Mayen Island and Svalbard are importantelements of the ground segment that calculates

precise orbits for Galileo satellites and synchro-nises their clocks.

Figure 7.3 Troll, in Queen Maud Land

Photo: Kjell Arne Aarmo


Jan Mayen Island

Jan Mayen Island is the site of an EGNOS refer-ence station. Recently, a Galileo sensor stationwas established there as well. This equipment isowned by the EU and is essential to the naviga-tional performance of the two systems. The maintechnical purpose of the Galileo sensor station isto help make corrections to the orbits or timing ofindividual Galileo satellites, while the EGNOS sta-tion helps expand the EGNOS coverage areabeyond mainland Norway.

There are also some Norwegian space-weather instruments on Jan Mayen Island, andthe use of the island for this purpose is likely toincrease. Jan Mayen Island has no fibre-opticcable connection, so communication to and fromthe island is entirely satellite-dependent.

Antarctica

The Troll research station in Queen Maud Land isoperated by the Norwegian Polar Institute, and isstaffed the year around. Troll is also the site of asatellite station – TrollSat – that is part of the

global network of ground stations operated byKSAT. TrollSat has a variety of customers, and isespecially important for establishing quick con-tact with new satellites in the critical phase afterlaunch. Because of TrollSat’s large bandwidthneeds, its communications infrastructure is suffi-cient to serve the other activities at the researchstation. The launch of Telenor’s Thor 7 satellite in2014 will significantly improve communicationsoptions to and from TrollSat. This will permitgrowth in the number of missions and thusstrengthen TrollSat’s long-term role.

The Antarctic Treaty of 1 December 1959establishes certain activity restrictions on the con-tinent that may have implications for space activi-ties. The treaty mentions specifically that Antarc-tica is to be used only for peaceful purposes, and isto be a demilitarized area. As a consequence ofthe treaty’s environmental protocol, which cameinto force in 1998, Norway is under strict obliga-tion to take measures to protect the environmentin the course of its activities in the Antarctic. Allstates operating in Antarctica are subject to theright of other states to inspect their installationsand bases.

Figure 7.4 Nittedal Teleport earth station

Photo: Telenor Satellite Broadcasting (TSBc)


Mainland Norway

On the mainland there are a number of differenttypes of ground infrastructure related to con-trolling and receiving signals from satellites, sen-sors and smaller stations as well as basic researchinfrastructure related to space.

The Tromsø Satellite Station is owned andoperated by KSAT. Its antenna array serves satel-lite owners from many countries and organisa-tions on a commercial basis. (KSAT is discussedmore fully in Chapter 8.) Nittedal Teleport is Tel-enor’s main control station for communication sat-ellites in the Thor family and for communicationchannels that Telenor controls on other satellites.The Eik earth station in Rogaland is operated byAstrium Services, of France, and relays broad-band traffic to and from maritime parties. TheNorwegian Meteorological Institute in Oslo hassome antennas of its own for direct access to datafrom European and US weather satellites.

The Andøya Rocket Range (ARR) is a centrefor the launch of research rockets and the release

of scientific balloons. The rocket range is situatedby the ocean, and rockets can be made to splashdown in remote, unoccupied waters. In the moun-tains above the rocket range is ALOMAR, whichconducts research on atmospheric conditions andassists with the launch of sounding rockets. (ARRis more fully discussed in Chapter 8.) Notableinfrastructure elsewhere on the Norwegian main-land includes reference stations in Kirkenes,Tromsø and Trondheim to serve the EU’sEGNOS system. The Norwegian Coastal Adminis-tration has 12 stations along the Norwegian coastfor differential GPS enhancement.

The Tromsø Geophysical Observatory (TGO)operates a magnetometer network consisting of14 instruments positioned around Norway, includ-ing Svalbard. Magnetometers monitor geomagne-tism by measuring the strength and direction ofthe earth’s magnetic field around the instruments.The measurement data have many different appli-cations, from earthquake research to aurora fore-casting and navigation for subsea oil drilling.


8 Space activity in Norwegian public administration

In Norway as in the rest of the world, public-sec-tor needs and public-sector undertakings havedominated space activity, and continue to do so.Many space-technology advances have been trig-gered by the service requirements of publicauthorities. In Norway, public-sector demand hascentred on the need for effective services for theoil and gas industry, the shipping industry and thepopulation of Svalbard. As space-based serviceshave developed, government agencies have beenable to employ them to address immediate needs,or to modernise their methods and services.

Public authorities play a key role in facilitatingthe development of national infrastructure. Thespace sector is no exception. Getting satellite sys-tems to address Norwegian areas of interest hasbecome as important to government as to indus-try. And space activities require large invest-ments. Public authorities therefore play a pivotalrole in bringing forth the robust space-based infra-structure that key industries require. Governmentcan help facilitate the development of systemswhose performance and coverage propertiesmeet public and private user needs.

In 1987, Norway felt motivated to join ESA inorder to fulfil the country’s goal of strengtheningits technology, industrial capability and user ser-vices. Norwegian officials understood, however,that the benefits of membership could only be har-vested if strategic actions were taken at thenational level. That is why the Government of thattime established the Norwegian Space Centre.

Over the past 25 years, Norwegian space activ-ities have come far. Along the way, changes havebeen made to keep in step with national and inter-national developments. At times, rapid processeshave had to be initiated to seize opportunities asthey arose.

The Norwegian state currently has administra-tive responsibility or ownership stakes in a num-ber of space organisations and enterprises. Theforemost of these are the Norwegian Space Cen-tre, an agency, and the following companies: theAndøya Rocket Range AS, Norwegian Space Cen-tre Properties AS and Kongsberg Satellite Ser-vices. The state also has ownership interests in

companies whose space activities account for aminor part of their total business. That is the casewith Kongsberg Gruppen, Telenor and Nammo.The Ministry of Trade and Industry has overallresponsibility for Norwegian space policy, but theimplications of space infrastructure are so broadas to involve other ministries and subordinateagencies as well. The Government thereforeestablished an interdepartmental coordinatingcommittee in connection with Norway’s agree-ment to join the Galileo programme.

8.1 Norwegian Space Centre

The Norwegian Space Centre (NSC) was set up asa public foundation in 1987. At first the founda-tion’s main duties lay in administering Norway’sESA membership and operating the AndøyaRocket Range, but gradually its responsibilitieswere expanded. In 1995, Norwegian Space CentreProperties was spun off from the foundation as acompany wholly owned by the space centre. Nor-wegian Space Centre Properties was created toown and operate infrastructure in Tromsø andeventually in Svalbard. The company operatedground stations in Tromsø and Svalbard until2001, when Kongsberg Satellite Services (KSAT)took them over. Ownership in KSAT was dividedbetween Norwegian Space Centre Properties (50per cent) and Kongsberg Defence & AerospaceAS (50 per cent). In 2005, when the NorwegianSpace Centre was converted from a foundationinto a government agency, the foundation’s own-ership stakes in the Andøya Rocket Range (ARR)and Norwegian Space Centre Properties weretransferred to the state.

Today the Norwegian Space Centre (NSC) isan agency with a certain degree of autonomywithin the Ministry of Trade and Industry. Underthe current arrangement, the Storting each yearauthorises the NSC to manage the state’s owner-ship interests on behalf of the Ministry of Tradeand Industry. That includes the authority to buyor sell shares in the companies, and to allocate


dividends or sales income to space-related pur-poses.

The Norwegian Space Centre is designed tobe the state’s agency for strategy, coordinationand implementation, making efficient use of spacefor the benefit of Norwegian society. The NSCpromotes and pursues Norwegian interests inESA, in the EU satellite navigation programmes

EGNOS and Galileo, in the initial operationsphase of the EU earth observation programmeCopernicus, and in several bilateral agreements.In addition, the NSC administers Norwegiannational development support funding, assistsNorwegian industrial actors and prepares anational long-term plan for space activity.

The Norwegian Space Centre has 30 perma-nent employees and eight temporary ones, and itadministers the state’s ownership of the AndøyaRocket Range and Norwegian Space Centre Prop-erties. The Ministry of Trade and Industryappoints the agency’s board of five members andtwo alternates. Board representatives areappointed on the basis of their qualifications, andhave traditionally come from government agen-cies, industry, institutes and R & D organisations.NSC budgets are separate line items in thenational budget. The budgeting system permitsthe agency to receive other income than what isprovided through the national budget.

8.2 State companies active in space

The Andøya Rocket Range, Norwegian SpaceCentre Properties and KSAT are the space-ori-ented Norwegian companies in which the statehas both ownership and administrative responsi-

Box 8.1 National development support funding

Norway’s national development support fund-ing programme (Nasjonale følgemidler) isdesigned in part to strengthen Norwegianactors so they will be better positioned to pro-vide products and services to national andinternational space programmes; the pro-gramme is also intended to address specificnational needs that international forums mayfail to prioritise when the interests of otherparticipants diverge from ours. The EEA hasapproved a set of rules to manage the alloca-tion of such development support funds. Inrecent years, some 30 actors benefitted fromthe funding programme. In 2013, the fundsamounted NOK 35.4 million.

Figure 8.1 Andøya

Photo: ESA/J. Makinen


bility. Public involvement and investment havehelped turn the companies into substantial space-sector players. The space-related infrastructurethey control makes Norway an attractive partnerfor international collaboration.

8.2.1 Andøya Rocket Range AS (ARR)

The ARR is a centre that provides research sup-port to scientists studying atmospheric phenom-ena, primarily through the launch of rockets andresearch balloons. The centre is organised as alimited company owned by the Ministry of Tradeand Industry (90 per cent) and KongsbergDefence & Aerospace (10 per cent).

As a coastal island far from major settlements,Andøya’s location is a competitive advantageexploited not only for research rocket launching,but increasingly for other activities that requirelots of space, such as the testing of missiles andunmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

With 65 employees, the ARR is one of the lead-ing high-technology centres in northern Norway.It started in 1962 as an operational arm of the Nor-wegian Defence Research Establishment, andbecame a limited company in 1997. In addition tothe launch facility at Andøya, ARR’s assets includethe Svalbard Rocket Range (SvalRak) at Ny-

Ålesund and two wholly owned subsidiaries: theAndøya Test Centre (ATC) and the NorwegianCentre for Space-Related Education (NAROM).The ARR also runs the Arctic Lidar Observatoryfor Middle Atmospheric Research (ALOMAR).

The ATC offers testing of rocket technologyfor the defence industry and civilian space activi-ties, and it buys most of its services from the ARR.The Norwegian Armed Forces use the ATC totest anti-ship missiles and has made investmentsto optimise conditions there. NAROM (see Box8.2) educates teachers, university-level studentsand school pupils. Half of its budget is funded by aMinistry of Education and Research grant. TheAndøya-based ALOMAR examines our atmos-phere using a laser technology called lidar («lightradar») and a variety of other measuring instru-ments. The ability to combine measurementstaken at ALOMAR with those obtained by sound-ing rockets is a competitive advantage for ARR.The SvalRak rocket range in Ny-Ålesund is usedto launch sounding rockets. SvalRak is not perma-nently staffed, but is staffed by ARR personnel asneeded.

ARR operations are supported in part by amultinational agreement, the Esrange AndøyaSpecial Project (EASP), with participation by Swe-den, Norway, Germany, France and Switzerland.

Box 8.2 NAROM and «Spaceship Aurora»

NAROM (the National Centre for Space-RelatedEducation) is a national centre and teaching lab-oratory for all educational levels, established in2000. NAROM is uniquely situated – in co-loca-tion with the Andøya Rocket Range – and makesactive use of Norwegian Space Centreresources. Operations are funded through basicannual appropriations from the Ministry of Edu-cation and Research, as well as through the saleof services to educational institutions and oth-ers. The national objective for space-related edu-cation is to develop instructional programmes,courses and other training activities on selectedtopics. Service offerings range from elementarylevel to university level, and include onlinelearning resources, educational activities, semi-nars and conferences on space technology,space physics, the atmosphere and the environ-ment. These are developed and carried out inclose cooperation with other educational institu-tions; NAROM does not award degrees.NAROM contributes to space-industry recruit-

ment efforts, and seeks to encourage childrenand young people to pursue their interest in sci-ence and technology.

The Andøya Rocket Range is also in the pro-cess of establishing an activity centre calledSpaceship Aurora (Romskipet Aurora in Norwe-gian). This centre will be tied to ongoing spaceactivities, and will provide an exciting science-based experience to visitors from Norway andabroad. The centre will consist of buildings total-ling some 1,000 m², including a visitor centre,café, exhibition space, auditoriums and offices.Interactive activities will be offered. Targetgroups include tourists and other visitors as wellas schools and other educational institutions.For several years, one of the ARR’s missions hasbeen to boost public interest in science, technol-ogy and space exploration, and each year it hasassembled pupils, students and teachers fromaround the world for exciting activities atAndøya. Spaceship Aurora will be a valuableaddition.


In 2012, revenues from this agreement accountedfor approximately 45 per cent of sales. The sharecoming from international government sourceshas declined steadily the past 10 years.

The EASP agreement is a cooperative arrange-ment for use of the rocket ranges at Kiruna, Swe-den, and Andøya. Norway joined the pact in itscurrent form in 1990, but had been active since1973 through an association accord with Sweden.The current agreement is automatically extendedfor five years at a time if none of the parties wishto change it. The present agreement covers theperiod from 2011 to 2015. It ensures the continu-ance of basic infrastructure and permits access tothe facilities by user countries at somewhatreduced rates.

Germany is the country that makes the mostuse of the ARR through the EASP agreement. Alarge multi-year German-Norwegian rocket cam-paign called ECOMA, designed to measure mete-oric dust in the atmosphere, was recently com-pleted. Specific German research plans suggest acontinued use of sounding rockets at Andøya.Other countries, too, have ties to the ARR. TheUnited States has been and remains Norway’smost important partner in space. This collabora-tion is based on a 2006 bilateral agreement thatbegan as an agreement on shared activity involv-ing sounding rockets at Andøya. A number ofcountries, including some that are not EASP par-ticipants, maintain scientific equipment at or nearthe ARR.

In 2012, Norway’s funding contribution to theARR under the EASP agreement came to about2.3 million euros, while the combined contributionof the other countries was about 1.3 million euros.In addition come direct mission revenues fromusers of the rocket range (universities andresearch institutes). Rocket missions are sporadicby nature, with their duration depending on boththe atmospheric conditions and the technical chal-lenges that arise. The EASP agreement gives theARR a smoother revenue stream and a longerplanning horizon than dependence on missionrevenues alone would have provided.

Other sources of operational support includecustomer payments and subsidies from thenational budget for education activities. The ARRhas received a total of NOK 17.6 million in fundingfrom the Ministry of Trade and Industry toupgrade its infrastructure. This support is pro-vided by way of earmarked funds from the minis-try within the national development support pro-gramme administered by the Norwegian SpaceCentre.

More than 70 people work at Andenes (themain settlement on the island of Andøya) for theARR, ATC and NAROM. The focus on high tech-nology and international relations makes this anattractive, income-generating element of theregional economy, drawing a great many visitingscientists, teachers and students.

8.2.2 Norwegian Space Centre Properties AS

The purpose of Norwegian Space Centre Proper-ties is to help develop space-related infrastructure.Its activities are viewed in the context of the Nor-wegian Space Centre (NSC) itself. The state, rep-resented by the Ministry of Trade and Industry,owns 100 per cent of the share capital of Norwe-gian Space Centre Properties. The NSC, a govern-ment agency, administers the state’s ownershipinterests, as approved in the Government resolu-tion of 12 December 2003. On behalf of the state,the NSC appoints the board members of Norwe-gian Space Centre Properties. The companyreceives no state subsidies.

Norwegian Space Centre Properties’ focus oninfrastructure development has been important tothe High North. The company owns 50 per cent ofKSAT, which operates satellite stations in Sval-

Figure 8.2 Thor 7

Illustration: Telenor Satellite Broadcasting (TSBc)


bard, Tromsø and Antarctica. The company alsoowns the fibre-optic cable linking Harstad on theNorwegian mainland to Longyearbyen, Svalbard.The fibre-optic cable was laid to serve the Sval-bard Satellite Station and permit its further devel-opment.

The installation of a fibre-optic connectionbetween Svalbard and the mainland in 2002 illus-trated how ownership in Norwegian Space CentreProperties could be used strategically to achievegreater benefits than would otherwise be possi-ble. The most significant part of the funding forthe cable was obtained with help from loans origi-nating in a long-term contract between the NSCon the one hand and NASA and NOAA of theUnited States on the other. Through agreementswith Telenor and Uninett, Norwegian Space Cen-tre Properties has ensured that the fibre-opticcable capacity also benefits other parts of the Sval-bard community. The cable connection was estab-lished to serve KSAT’s satellite station, but it hasalso contributed to a major improvement in com-munications options for Longyearbyen.

Norwegian Space Centre Properties has alsoleased capacity from Telenor for broadband com-munications to Antarctica via the Thor 7 satellite.

The capacity is subleased to KSAT, the main user,but the entire Troll research station will enjoy thebenefits when the connection is opened 2014.

8.2.3 Kongsberg Satellite Services (KSAT)

Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace owns theremaining 50 per cent in KSAT, which wasfounded in 2001. Prior to that, several foreigncompanies were involved in operating the satellitestations in Tromsø and Svalbard. The results werepoor in several ways, and financial performance attimes was highly negative. Through acquisitionsand mergers, the Norwegian Space Centre helpedsort out the ownership situation, concluding withthe current two-way shared ownership of theground station operations.

Norwegian Space Centre Properties’ owner-ship stake in KSAT helps secure state control ofstrategic infrastructure. Much of the company’sbusiness is tied to the infrastructure in Svalbardand Antarctica. Even so, KSAT is a commercialcompany that has developed very positively, with2012 sales in excess of NOK 400 million. KSATtoday runs the largest ground stations in theworld for satellites in polar orbit, and posts solid

Figure 8.3 KSAT receives satellite data in Tromsø

Photo: KSAT


earnings from the services it provides to publicand private international clients.

KSAT currently has ground stations in Sval-bard (SvalSat), Tromsø and Grimstad and at Nor-way’s Troll base (TrollSat) in Antarctica, but alsoin Dubai, South Africa, Singapore and Mauritius.In addition, KSAT has signed agreements withsuppliers for access to data from stations in SouthAmerica, North America and Australia. The com-pany is in a phase of significant expansion.

In recent years KSAT has also turned deci-sively towards the provision of satellite-basedearth observation services. KSAT is a globalleader in oil-spill monitoring. The company alsoprovides services related to ship tracking, ice andsnow mapping and navigation in icy waters. In2009, 22 per cent of revenues stemmed from earthobservation services.

8.2.4 Opportunities and challenges in state administration and ownership

By helping facilitate the construction of nationalspace infrastructure, or by supporting the emer-gence of new technologies and services that meetboth public and private user needs, the state canplay a key role in developing Norway’s space sec-tor. The challenges – and opportunities – consistin organising the state’s administrative and owner-ship roles so as to help achieve the objectives ofNorwegian space policy in the best possible man-ner, in accordance with applicable laws and regu-lations.

The Andøya Rocket Range, Norwegian SpaceCentre Properties and KSAT are companies inwhich the Norwegian state has administrative andownership roles. Their operations have grown asa consequence of substantial public investmentand effort over several decades, reflecting Nor-way’s top priorities in space. The companies wereestablished as important sectoral policy tools, andhave contributed to Norway’s position as anattractive partner for national and internationalspace-related organisations.

The establishment of the ARR and NorwegianSpace Centre Properties as corporations hashelped clarify management and responsibilityissues, and paved the way for efficient operationsand service sales in the marketplace. KSAT hasbuilt a solid commercial foundation for its activi-ties while operating strategically important infra-structure in Svalbard and Queen Maud Land inAntarctica. The combination of public ownership,strategic interests and commercial considerations

makes it necessary to clarify the state’s differentroles.

Today, the ARR, Norwegian Space CentreProperties and KSAT all manage valuable assets –and they do so commercially. Nonetheless thereare differences in the operations, objectives andgrowth potential of the three companies:– The ARR’s main activities are tied to the infra-

structure used in space-related research andeducation. Although operating results havebeen satisfactory in recent years, subsidiesfrom the national budget have been necessaryto fund substantial investments and modernisa-tion.

– Norwegian Space Centre Properties is a signif-icant owner and developer of strategic Norwe-gian space infrastructure, and stands out moreclearly as a sectoral policy instrument. Its 2010agreement with Telenor to lease Thor 7 satel-lite capacity for broadband communicationwith the Troll station in Antarctica cameroughly to NOK 100 million. When, in addition,one considers the company’s ownership stakein KSAT, its fibre-optic cable to Svalbard and itsother High North infrastructure, NorwegianSpace Centre Properties gives the impressionof a robust, dynamic company. The companyreceives no state subsidies.

– KSAT has undergone strong commercialdevelopment since its inception. The companyhas solid earnings from the sale of services,and 30 per cent of profits are paid as dividendsto the two owners, Norwegian Space CentreProperties and Kongsberg Gruppen. Themajority of KSAT activities are nonethelessrelated to the operation of the vital infrastruc-ture in Svalbard and Antarctica.

The current structures through which the stateexercises administrative responsibility and owner-ship at the Andøya Rocket Range, NorwegianSpace Centre Properties and KSAT have led toconcerns over the state’s different roles as ownerand grant administrator in the space field. Suchconcerns become more urgent as the companies’market strength increases. The scope and organi-sation of state ownership must accommodate bothindustrial growth on a commercial basis and thecontinued pursuit of policy goals.

The Government will therefore undertake adetailed assessment of the state’s interests in theownership of ARR, Norwegian Space Centre Prop-erties and KSAT, and of the significance thesecompanies have today as sectoral policy tools. Atthe same time, it is important to recognise that


these companies manage valuable assets. KSAT isdistinguished by its strong commercial base,which may have significance for company’s own-ership structure. The Government will alsoexplore the degree to which state ownershipaffects the ability of the companies to fulfil theirinternational partnership roles, and it will exam-ine what correlations exist between the compa-nies’ business activities and the contractual obliga-tions of Norwegian authorities and the NorwegianSpace Centre.

Consideration will also be given to the bestway of organising state ownership in the compa-nies to ensure proper corporate governance withregard to objectivity and the problematic issue ofpublic subsidies, and to ensure that the compa-nies effectively fulfil their sectoral policy roles.That would also be in line with recommendationsmade in the PwC report. The Office of the AuditorGeneral of Norway has raised questions about theadministration of the Andøya Rocket Range andNorwegian Space Centre Properties by the Minis-try of Trade and Industry and the NorwegianSpace Centre, most recently in Document 1(2012–2013). As a specially empowered agencywithin the Ministry of Trade and Industry, theNSC is to be the state’s organ for the strategy,coordination and practise of space activity. Undercurrent arrangements, the NSC is authorisedeach year by the Storting to manage the state’sownership interests. This authorisation includes,as previously mentioned, the power to buy or sellshares in the companies and to expend dividendor sales income for space-related purposes. TheMinistry of Trade and Industry and the NSCmaintain close dialogue on management issues,and managers of the NSC also hold positions inthe Andøya Rocket Range, Norwegian Space Cen-tre Properties and their subsidiaries. Theseorganisational relationships will be subject torenewed evaluation.

8.3 Ministries and agencies

Space activities affect many ministries and agen-cies, each of which is responsible for user per-spectives in a particular sector or operationalsphere. Many Norwegian agencies and centres ofexpertise cooperate with the NSC on developmentprojects to identify potential benefits from space-based services, including the particular ways thatsuch services might help each agency or centre toperform its duties more efficiently.

The Ministry of Trade and Industry is Norway’snational space ministry. It participates in ESA’sministerial-level council and in the ESA/EU SpaceCouncil. The NSC coordinates national space pro-grammes on behalf of the ministry. Appropria-tions to ESA and the NSC come entirely from thebudget of the Ministry of Trade and Industry,which is also responsible for the lion’s share ofpublic funding for space infrastructure. The minis-try is also in charge of Norway’s participation inthe Galileo and Copernicus programmes, with theNSC serving as secretariat.

Since Norway became a member of ESA in1987, the Ministry of Trade and Industry has beenthe Norwegian state’s main agent in space activi-ties, both nationally and internationally. From thestart, its tasks focused largely on developingindustrial capability and skills. Eventually, asactual services came into being, greater focus wasgiven to developing solutions for public-sectoruse. As new applications are demonstrated, it hasbeen left to the individual ministries and agenciesto determine whether and how to leverage theapplications to improve their own operations.

The Ministry of Education and Research con-tributes to space research through the ResearchCouncil of Norway. When Norway joined ESA in1987, the Research Council’s predecessor wasassigned the responsibility of funding basicresearch that ESA made p ossible, includinginstrument building and participation by Norwe-gian research groups.

The Research Council also coordinates Nor-wegian participation in EISCAT and the NordicOptical Telescope. The Ministry of Education andResearch pays Norway’s dues in EUMETSAT,where the Meteorological Institute representsNorway with support from the Norwegian SpaceCentre. The ministry demonstrates its commit-ment to space-related learning through its super-vision of universities, colleges and research insti-tutions. The ministry funds aspects of the Norwe-gian Centre for Space-Related Education(NAROM). Basic funding for universities and col-leges comprises its most significant contributionto space-related research and teaching.

The Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs isresponsible for the coordination of civilian radionavigation policy, a field that includes satellite-based navigation. The Norwegian Coastal Admin-istration monitors ship traffic and oil spills by sat-ellite. It is the main user of the Norwegian satellitethat monitors ship traffic at sea. It is also responsi-ble for the BarentsWatch project. The Directorateof Fisheries and the Institute of Marine Research


use satellite-derived information for research,monitoring, resource management and planning.

The Ministry of Defence contributes to spaceresearch and earth observation through the Nor-wegian Defence Research Establishment (Norwe-gian acronym: FFI). The Norwegian ArmedForces, including the Coast Guard, use informa-tion gathered from earth observation, communi-cations and navigation satellites. Their satellitedata requirements are expected to become soextensive in the years ahead that they plan toacquire their own satellite capacity. The Norwe-gian National Security Authority contributes tosecurity programmes associated with the Galileoproject and illuminates the importance of spaceinfrastructure as an aspect of our nation’s publicsecurity. Through the Globus 2 radar at Vardø, theArmed Forces help in the monitoring of spacedebris. The Ministry of Defence administers anagreement with the United States on access to theGPS system’s military element.

The Ministry of Justice and Public Security hasboth direct and indirect use for satellite servicesbecause of its responsibility for civil protectionand crisis management. Norway’s rescue coordi-nation centres use space services in connectionwith rescue operations, and the ministry partici-pates in the international COSPAS-SARSATsearch-and-rescue collaboration. During rescueactions in Svalbard, the authorities increasinglyemploy all three forms of satellite assistance: com-munications, navigation and earth observation.Satellite-based infrastructure is also used by theNorwegian Directorate for Civil Protection andthe Norwegian National Security Authority. Thepolice are a pertinent consumer of new space ser-vices like Galileo’s Public Regulated Service.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Food is respon-sible for agricultural businesses, which use satel-lite-based navigation and positioning services fora variety of purposes. In the forestry industry, sat-ellite-based positioning services are usedthroughout the value chain. Livestock and rein-deer, meanwhile, can graze more safely in unculti-vated areas if fitted with radio beacons traceableby navigation satellite. Such monitoring has posi-tive animal-welfare consequences by permitting

closer supervision and more efficient round-ups atseason’s end. Positioning services are also usedwhen carrying out agricultural mapping and mon-itoring programmes. Agriculture-related earthobservation research has led to operative map-ping systems for forests and other wildernessresources.

The Ministry of the Environment representsNorway in some of the governing bodies of theEU’s Copernicus earth observation programme.The Norwegian Environment Agency, the Direc-torate for Cultural Heritage, the Norwegian PolarInstitute and the Norwegian Mapping Authorityall use satellite-based earth observation and/ornavigation services. Through the independentNorwegian Institute for Air Research, greenhousegases in the atmosphere are quantified. Environ-mental officials use space-derived information intheir reporting to international environmentalmonitoring programmes. The ministry supportsthe use of satellite data for monitoring tropical for-ests.

The Ministry of Transport and Communicati-ons is responsible for traffic flow and safety issuesthroughout the transport sector. The sector’s useof satellite-based navigation services is growing.Major public users are Avinor, the Civil AviationAuthority, the Directorate of Public Roads and theNorwegian National Rail Administration. Throughthe Post and Telecommunications Authority, theministry is responsible for radio frequency man-agement, including the frequencies used by satel-lites, and for issuing permits to build and operateearth stations. The Governor of Svalbard enforcesthe specific provisions of Article 3 in Norway’searth station regulation.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs contribute toresearch activity through project funding to theResearch Council of Norway. It is the ministry’sresponsibility to make sure that Norway’s obliga-tions under international law are addressed asspace activities are pursued. The Ministry of For-eign Affairs is party to a number of internationalinitiatives involving space; these focus on topicssuch as crisis preparedness, maritime search-and-rescue and forest protection.


Table 8.1 Ministries and agencies, and the satellite services they use

Ministry Agency Relevant services, areas of responsibility

Ministry of Trade and Industry

Norwegian Space Centre ESA, EU space projects, earth observation, satellite communica-tions, satellite navigations, indus-try

Geological Survey of Norway Mapping, landslide monitoring

Innovation Norway/Industrial Development Corp. of Norway (SIVA)

Technology transfer, general busi-ness support and regional devel-opment

Norwegian Maritime Authority Sea safety – navigation. communi-cations, monitoring

Norwegian Metrology Service Calibration, precise time measure-ment

Ministry of Finance Norwegian Customs and Excise Transactions, monitoring, road pricing

Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs

Directorate of Fisheries/Institute of Marine Research

Ocean research, monitoring, resource mapping

Norwegian Coastal Administration

Navigation, safety, oil-spill moni-toring, DGPS

Ministry of Government Administration, Reform and Church Affairs

Agency for Public Management and eGovernment

Digital services

Ministry of Defence Norwegian Coast Guard Fisheries supervision, environ-mental protection, search-and-res-cue and customs control

Norwegian Defence Logistics Organisation

Procurement, operations

Norwegian Defence Research Establishment

Technology, methodology devel-opment

National Security Authority Preventive security, preparedness

Norwegian Armed Forces Military operations

Ministry of Health and Care Services

Norwegian Directorate of Health

Welfare services technology

Ministry of Justice and Public Security

Police Communications, navigation

Governor of Svalbard Supervision of Svalbard earth sta-tions

Joint Rescue Coordination Centres

Search-and-rescue, COSPAS-SAR-SAT

Norwegian Directorate for Civil Protection

Public security, emergency pre-paredness, hazardous materials

Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development

Counties and municipalities Land-use planning, emergency preparedness


8.4 Inter-ministerial coordinating committee for space activities

Norway’s inter-ministerial coordinating commit-tee for Galileo (Norwegian acronym: IKU) wascreated to coordinate matters relating to Nor-way’s Galileo participation. The committee’s statu-

tory authority resides in Proposition No. 54 to theStorting (2008–2009).

But as the number of other Norwegian spaceissues proliferated – including matters related tothe AIS satellites, the Andøya Rocket Range, Bar-entsWatch, Copernicus, Radarsat, research pro-jects and the EU’s space strategy – it was felt that

Ministry of Education and Research

Research Council of Norway Space-related research

Universities and colleges Space-related research, instruc-tion

National Centre for Space-Related Education (NAROM)

Education, training

Norwegian Meteorological Institute

Weather forecasting, EUMET-SAT contact

Ministry of Agriculture and Food

Norwegian Forest and Landscape Institute

Monitoring, mapping, tracking, resource mapping

Ministry of the Environment Norwegian Mapping Authority Mapping, Norway Digital, geod-esy, SATREF

Norwegian Environment Agency

Climate, environment, pollution, resource management

Norwegian Polar Institute Environmental research, monitor-ing, climate, mapping

Directorate for Cultural Heritage

Monitoring of historical sites

Ministry of Petroleum and Energy

Norwegian Petroleum Directorate

Monitoring, resource mapping

Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate

Hydrology, floods and landslides, mapping services, electric power supply

Ministry of Transport and Communications

National Rail Administration Infrastructure construction and operation, maintenance, traffic control

Accident Investigation Board Norway

Transport accidents

Civil Aviation Authority Air safety

Norwegian Public Roads Administration

Traffic safety, navigation, infra-structure

Norwegian Post and Telecommunications Authority

Frequency management

Avinor Aircraft safety, airport operations, SCAT-1

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Foreign service missions, NORAD

Crisis management, communica-tions, earth observation, naviga-tion, tropical forestry project

Table 8.1 Ministries and agencies, and the satellite services they use

Ministry Agency Relevant services, areas of responsibility


the committee should handle them as well. Allthese issues have interested parties in severalministries. Coordination among ministries helpsmaximise the benefit from the Norwegian state’sinvestments in space.

In 2011, therefore, the committee became theinter-ministerial coordinating committee for spaceactivities (in Norwegian: Det interdepartementalekoordineringsutvalget for romvirksomhet). Thecommittee’s job is to coordinate the handling ofspace-related issues by relevant ministries and tobe an arena for information exchange. The com-

mittee meets two to three times per year, adjust-ing the tempo as required by events. It is headedby the Ministry of Trade and Industry, with theNorwegian Space Centre acting as secretariat.Other participants are the Ministry of ForeignAffairs, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry ofthe Environment, the Ministry of Fisheries andCoastal Affairs, the Ministry of Justice and PublicSecurity, the Ministry of Education and Research,the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, the Minis-try of Petroleum and Energy and the NationalSecurity Authority.


9 The Government’s commitment to space

The Government is committed to space activity,and will work to ensure that it continues to serve asa tool for Norwegian interests. Four strategic goalshave been set: profitable companies, growth andemployment; meeting important needs of societyand user groups; greater return on internationalspace collaboration; and high-quality nationaladministration of Norwegian space activity.

To accomplish the four goals, the Governmenthas prepared a number of priorities. What followsare the top priorities associated with each goal.

9.1 Profitable companies, growth and employment

The Government’s industrial policy is intended tohelp create an environment in which companiessucceed and have the ability to grow. The authori-ties seek to provide the most stable and predicta-ble framework conditions possible; it is the com-panies themselves that must seize opportunities.The Norwegian space sector is no exception tothis general perspective.

Box 9.1 Measures

The Government will:

– Work to ensure that public investment inspace activity strengthens value creation andbusiness development

– Work to enhance market access, technologi-cal development and system insight as meansto stimulate Norwegian business growth anddevelopment

– Help ensure that Norway benefits as much aspossible from its European space collabora-tion

– Foster conditions under which Norwegianindustrial participation in ESA programmescontributes to greater strength in other tech-nology areas

– Work to ensure that Norwegian industrytakes advantage of the opportunities inherentin ESA’s principle of guaranteed industrialreturn, and that Norwegian industry is suffi-ciently competitive to obtain contracts in EUspace programmes

– Help to ensure that Norwegian downstreamcompanies gain more benefit from participa-tion in ESA programmes

– Help to ensure that downstream companiesenhance their competitive strength andexport potential

– Help to ensure that space-related invest-ments addressing national needs also help to

trigger value creation in Norwegian industry,provided the approach is consistent withchoosing the most cost-effective solutions

– Use policy and funding instruments strategi-cally to promote service development andcommercial success in business segmentswith significant growth potential and compar-ative advantages

– Help to ensure that Norwegian businessesand other users of earth observation datahave the access to data they need, by:– helping to develop a commercialisation

strategy for satellite data– considering Norwegian participation in

international satellite collaboration tosecure access to useful data

– studying the need for coordinatednational procurement of satellite data

– assessing the costs and benefits of anopen data policy for raw data owned bythe state

– Help to ensure that relevant industrial actorsare informed about opportunities in the Nor-wegian space sector

– Consider, in kind with other industries, thepotential for an Arena project in space-relatedresearch and business development, and indue course a Norwegian Centres of Exper-tise programme.


Through the basic mechanisms of technologydevelopment, market access and system insight,Norwegian investments in space activities havehelped to promote domestic economic growth anddevelopment. International collaboration in con-cert with complementary national framework con-ditions has enabled those three mechanisms toboost profitability, growth and employment inNorwegian companies.

The Government therefore intends to carryout the following measures (see Box 9.1).

9.2 Meeting important needs of society and user groups

These days, space-based applications reach intomany areas of everyday Norwegian life. Spaceoperations have become essential to operating oursociety safety and efficiently and to pursuing keypolicy objectives in the High North and in climateand environmental policy.

Increasingly, space-based infrastructure hasstrategic value by virtue of its importance to theexercise of governmental authority and the provi-sion of critical services. Protecting Norway’sinterests requires a certain degree of national con-trol and independent capability, even when ser-vices can be purchased commercially. Norway hasspecial needs in the High North, and there is noguarantee that actors outside of Norway will have

the ability or interest to develop systems that suc-cessfully address them. Having influence over thedevelopment of essential infrastructure will be ofsignificance to public security and crisis manage-ment. Norway’s public officials and research andtechnology communities must therefore possessenough insight and competence to identify prom-ising solutions, to be competent parties in pro-curement transactions and international collabora-tion, and to develop and implement national solu-tions where appropriate.


9.3 Greater return on international space collaboration

International collaboration has always been – andalways will be – the backbone of Norwegian spaceefforts. ESA membership has served Norway wellin several ways. It has helped the country todevelop a competitive space industry, to accumu-late expertise within the Norwegian state andbusiness community, and to internationalise andstrengthen Norwegian research programmes.

In the future, we must also be good at promot-ing our interests in forums other than ESA.Increasingly, important issues are settled at theEU. As a result, Norwegian space policy has takenon aspects of the country’s European policy. Nor-

Box 9.2 Measures


– Work to ensure that space activities are ableto help meet important social and user needsin a cost-effective manner

– Actively employ supplementary national pro-grammes to address Norwegian user needs

– Help to provide an operating framework inwhich Norwegian technology companies andother centres of expertise can develop andimplement space-based systems that meetNorwegian user needs

– Work to ensure that Norwegian spaceresearch and expertise maintain a high inter-national level

– Help to ensure that Norwegian space activi-ties get the most out of the expertise availablein Norwegian research and educational insti-tutions

– Extend the space research programme at theResearch Council of Norway

– Work to achieve good, robust satellite naviga-tion coverage in the High North and the Arc-tic

– Review how best to address Norwegianrequirements for satellite communications inthe High North

– Work to exploit the potential of satelliteobservation to contribute to climate and envi-ronmental policies

– Continue efforts to deal with vulnerabilitiesassociated with the use of satellite systems

– Actively participate in efforts to establishinternational guidelines for the reduction ofspace debris

– Work to make satellite-based services availa-ble as a key element of transport policy.


wegian interests increasingly have to be promotedfrom the outside, in forums where we are not amember, or where our right to participate is lim-ited. Galileo and Copernicus will help resolve very

important challenges faced by Norway. An activeNorwegian approach to EU policy-making inspace is therefore essential for a variety of rea-sons, including: to secure influence over infra-structure important to Norway; to safeguard theinterests of Norwegian industry, researchers anduser groups; and to position Norway for a futurein which the EU increasingly sets the politicalagenda for European space activity.


9.4 High-quality national administration of space activity

In order for space activity to best serve Norwegianinterests, expertise is required both within theNorwegian state and in Norwegian technology cir-cles and user groups. Norwegian authorities mustbe able to identify needs, assess system proposalsand ensure effective implementation regardless ofwhether the services or infrastructure in questionare to be developed nationally, developed in collab-oration with other nations or purchased from com-mercial providers. To ensure that good solutionsare developed and implemented in a sound man-ner, and to safeguard Norwegian interests in inter-national collaborations, we must draw together thepublic-sector expertise available in administration,technology and international relations.

Box 9.3 Measures


– Continue Norwegian ESA participation as akey tool for promoting Norwegian spaceinterests. In 2012, a commitment of 144.4million euros has been declared towardsNorway’s continued participation inoptional ESA programmes

– Work to secure Norwegian interests in EUspace programmes

– Work to ensure that Copernicus and Gali-leo perform capably in Norwegian areas ofinterest

– Ensure that Norwegian authorities havesufficient ability to pursue Norwegianinterests in international space forums

– Use bilateral agreements where appropri-ate to safeguard and pursue Norwegianinterests

– Continue Norway’s commitment to inter-national collaboration in space-relatedresearch

Box 9.4 Measures


– Strengthen collaboration and coordinationbetween relevant ministries

– Use the Norwegian Space Centre as thestate’s organ for strategy, coordination andpractise to ensure that space is exploited effi-ciently for the benefit of Norwegian society

– Strengthen the Norwegian Space Centre’scapacity for analysis and consultation

– Facilitate the use of space-related groundinfrastructure on the Norwegian mainland asappropriate

– Continue to exploit Svalbard’s geographicaladvantages with regard to space activity inaccordance with existing laws and regula-tions

– Facilitate the further utilisation of Jan MayenIsland for space-related activity

– Facilitate continued Norwegian space activ-ity in Antarctica in accordance with the Ant-arctic Treaty

– Ensure effective organisation of space activi-ties in the Norwegian public sector, withmeasures that include:– undertaking a detailed assessment of the

state’s interests in the ownership of ARR,Norwegian Space Centre Properties andKSAT, and of the significance those com-panies have as sectoral policy instru-ments

– working to achieve as much transparencyas possible regarding subsidy pro-grammes and awards in the Norwegianspace sector

– assessing how governance dialogue withthe Norwegian Space Centre can beimproved


Since the 1960s, the geographical advantagesof Norwegian-hosted ground infrastructure havebeen exploited to develop space activities nowregarded as world class in certain sector niches.Among these are the balloon releases and sound-ing-rocket launches at Andøya and the downlinkservices for polar-orbit satellites at Svalbard, JanMayen Island and Antarctica. As the futureunfolds, Norway’s geographical location willremain an advantage for space-related groundinfrastructure.

The state currently has administrative andownership responsibility for several actors in the

Norwegian space sector. The Andøya RocketRange AS, Norwegian Space Centre PropertiesAS and Kongsberg Satellite Services AS havebeen valuable tools in developing key aspects ofNorway’s space effort. This effort has resulted ina foundation for commercial growth in the compa-nies, which increasingly derive their revenuesfrom the international market. Due to the combi-nation of public ownership, strategic interests andcommercial factors, a clarification of the state’sdifferent roles is called for.



10 Financial and administrative implications

With this white paper, the Government seeks toanchor within the Storting the Government’sbroad policy outlines for Norwegian space pro-grammes. Its content is based on approved budg-ets and plans, and entails no additional financialcommitment. For administrative purposes, noticeis given that the Government will seek to deter-mine, by evaluation, the most appropriate organi-sational structure for public-sector space pro-grammes, and will take the necessary steps torealise that structure.

Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry

r e c o m m e n d s :

That the recommendation from the Ministryof Trade and Industry dated 26 April 2013 regard-ing «Between heaven and earth: Norwegian spaceactivities for business and public benefit», be sub-mitted to the Storting.


Appendix 1

Abbreviations

AFC ESA Administrative and Finance CommitteeAIS Automatic Identification SystemALOMAR Arctic Lidar Observatory for Middle Atmospheric ResearchARR Andøya Rocket RangeATC Andøya Test Center ASCERN European Organisation for Nuclear ResearchCopernicus EU earth observation programme, previously (until 2012) called GMESCOSPAS-SARSAT International search-and-rescue satellite systemEASP Esrange Andøya Special ProjectEDA European Defence AgencyEGNOS European Geostationary Navigation Overlay ServiceEISCAT European Incoherent Scatter Scientific AssociationELDO European Launcher Development OrganisationENVISAT Environmental satelliteESA European Space AgencyESRO European Space Research Organisation (forerunner of ESA)EUMETSAT European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological SatellitesFFI (Forsvarets Forskningsinstitutt)

Norwegian Defence Research Establishment

GEO Group on Earth ObservationsGEO FCT Group on Earth Observations Forest Carbon TrackingGEOSS Global Earth Observation System of SystemsGFOI Global Forest InitiativeGLONASS Global Navigation Satellite SystemGMES Global Monitoring for Environment and SecurityGNSS Global Navigation Satellite SystemGOCE Gravity Field and Steady-State Ocean Circulation ExplorerGPS Global Positioning SystemGSA European GNSS AgencyGSTP ESA General Support and Technical ProgrammeIMO International Maritime OrganisationINMARSAT International Maritime Satellite OrganisationINTELSAT International Telecommunications Satellite OrganisationIPC ESA Industrial Policy CommitteeIPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeIRC ESA International Relations CommitteeISS International Space StationITAR International Traffic in Arms RegulationsITS Intelligent transport systems and servicesITU International Telecommunication Union


KSAT Kongsberg Satellite ServicesNAROM (Nasjonalt senter for romrelatert undervisning)

Norwegian Centre for Space-Related Education

NASA National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNNI Net national incomeNOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNSC Norwegian Space CentreNSCP Norwegian Space Centre PropertiesPRS Public Regulated Service, GalileoPwC PricewaterhouseCoopersR & D Research and developmentSAR Search and rescueSCAT-1 Special Category 1SPC ESA Science Programme CommitteeSvalSat Svalbard Satellite StationTRANSIT US satellite navigation system in 1960sTSS Tromsø Satellite StationUNCOPUOS United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer SpaceUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganisationUNITAR United Nations Institute for Training and ResearchUNOSAT UNITAR’s Operational Satellite Applications Programme

Published by:Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry

Internet address: www.government.no

Cover photo: Norsk Romsenter/FFI/Seatex Printed by: 07 Aurskog AS 12/2013



MILJØMERKET

241 Trykksak 379

Documents

Between heaven and earth: Norwegian space policy for ... · issues affecting the High North, climate policy, the environment, security-related matters, trans-port and research. Chapters