Legal Gaps in the Definition of Space Debris

INTRODUCTION. The article is devoted to the problem of defining the concept of "space debris" from the point of view of two concepts: the concept of safety and the concept of property. The aim of the article is to substantiate the importance of developing a unified definition of space debris and to formulate proposals for eliminating legal gaps in the definition of space debris. The research is based on publications by Russian and foreign specialists in space law, the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space Guidelines on Space Debris Mitigation, space debris reduction standards, Russian and US legislation regulating space activities, and draft regulations aimed at ensuring the safety of space activities and space debris reduction. The following methods were employed in the preparation of the article: the comparative analysis method, the analogy method, the logical method, the description method, the generalisation method, and the comparative legal method.

RESULTS. The research conducted has enabled the identification of discrepancies in the definition of the concept of 'space debris' from the perspectives of security and property; it is posited that the absence of a consolidated understanding of space debris in the near future may result in deleterious consequences. It is concluded that the precise definition of the concept of space debris is not critical for ensuring the safety of space activities; however, the concept of property requires clarification of space debris criteria in order to realise the possibility of cleaning the near-Earth space and the surface of celestial bodies from anthropogenic pollution. It is proposed that the definition of space debris be formulated within the context of the property concept.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The analysis demonstrates the relevance of the chosen topic, and the discussion of the problems is carried out in the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, on other international and national platforms. Despite the efforts of the scientific community, a consensus remains elusive regarding a universally accepted definition of 'space debris'. National jurisdictions make attempts to formulate their own definition of ‘space debris’ in order to allow their residents to carry out new types of space activities, occupying the relevant sectors of the space economy. The paper distinguishes approaches to defining the concept of 'space debris' through the prism of security and property concepts, and formulates proposals for formalizing the concept of 'space debris' from the perspective of the property concept.

1. Adushkin V.V., Aksenov O.Y., Veniaminov S.S., Kozlov S.I. Ob ocenke opasnosti melkogo kosmicheskogo musora dlya kosmicheskoj deyatel`nosti i e`kologii Zemli [The estimate of the small space debris danger for space activities and near-earth ecology]. – Vozdushno-kosmicheskaya sfera [Aerospace Sphere Journal]. 2019. № 3 (100). Р. 72-81. (In Russ.)

2. Alessi E.M., Rossi A., Valsecchi G.B. Environmental effect of space debris repositioning. – Advances in Space Research. 2017. Vol. 60. Issue 1. P. 28-37.

3. Holikov I.V., Granina E.D. Otvetstvennost' v mezhdunarodnom kosmicheskom prave [Liability in international space law]. – Pravo v Vooruzhennyh Silah. Voenno-pravovoe obozrenie. [Law In The Armed Forces. Military-Legal Review]. 2023. № 6. Р. 102-107. (In Russ.)

4. Makarov Yu.N. Monitoring texnogennogo zasoreniya kosmicheskogo prostranstva. Problemy` i resheniya [Space debris monitoring. Problems and solutions]. – Nanoindustriya [Nanoindustry]. 2019. T. 12. № 1. Р. 6-14. (In Russ.)

5. McKnight D., Witner R. [et al.]. Identifying the 50 statistically-most-concerning derelict objects in LEO. – Acta Astronautica. 2021. Vol. 181. P. 282-291.

6. Napper I.E., Thompson R.Ch., Bentley J. [et al.]. A sustainable development goal for space: Applying lessons from marine debris to manage space debris. – One Earth. 2025. Vol. 8. Issue 2. P. 1-15.

7. Newman Ch., Dinsley R., Ralston W. Introducing the law games: Predicting legal liability and fault in satellite operations. – Advances in Space Research. 2021. Vol. 67. Issue 11. P. 3785-3792.

8. Olejnikov I.I. [i dr.]. Monitoring texnogennogo zasoreniya okolozemnogo kosmicheskogo prostranstva i preduprezhdeniya ob opasny`x situaciyax, sozdavaemy`x kosmicheskim musorom [Monitoring of anthropogenic debris in near-Earth space and warnings of hazardous situations created by space debris]. Moscow: CzNIImash. 2015. 244 р. (In Russ.)

9. Oreshenkov A.M. Teoreticheskie osnovy` mezhdunarodno-pravovogo aspekta udaleniya «kosmicheskogo musora» [Theoretical Basis of International Legal Aspect of “Space Debris” Removal]. – Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava [Moscow Journal of International Law]. 2024. № 2. P. 46-64. (In Russ.)

10. Popova O.A. Mezhdunarodno-pravovoe regulirovanie ispol'zovaniya kosmicheskogo prostranstva v mirnyh celyah: osnovnye koncepcii. [International legal regulation of the use of outer space for peaceful purposes: basic concepts]. – Aktual'nye problemy rossijskogo prava [Actual Problems of Russian Law]. 2020. № 7 (116). P. 129- 144. (In Russ.)

11. Popova R., Schaus V. The Legal Framework for Space Debris Remediation as a Tool for Sustainability in Outer Space. – Issledovanija kosmosa [Space research]. 2018. № 2. С. 175-224.

12. Shinkaretskaya G.G. Udalenie kosmicheskogo musora – nastoyatel'naya mezhdunarodno-pravovaya problema [Space debris removal is an urgent international legal problem]. – Pravovaya politika i pravovaya zhizn' [Legal Policy And Legal Life]. 2024. № 3. P. 114-122. (In Russ.)

13. Shtodina I.Yu. Est' li budushchee u Dogovora o principah deyatel'nosti gosudarstv po issledovaniyu i ispol'zovaniyu kosmicheskogo prostranstva, vklyuchaya Lunu i drugie nebesnye tela? [Does The Treaty On Principles Governing The Activities Of States In The Exploration And Use Of Outer Space, Including The Moon And Other Celestial Bodies, Have A Future?]. – Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitel'nogo pravovedeniya [Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law]. 2023. № 6. P. 96-102. (In Russ.)

14. Su J., Zhu L. The Environmental Dimension of Space Arms Control. – Proceedings of the International Institute of Space Law. 2011. P. 50-51.

15. Tronchetti F., Liu H. Australia’s signing of the Artemis Accords: a positive development or a controversial choice? – Australian Journal of International Affairs. 2021. Vol. 75 (3). P. 243-251.

16. Udartsev S.F. Formirovanie kosmicheskih gosudarstv i ih kosmicheskih vojsk [Formation of space states and their space forces]. – Pravo i gosudarstvo [Law and State]. 2022. № 3 (96). Р. 6-32. (In Russ.)

17. Viggiano D.N. One Man's Space Junk is Another Man's Archaeological Treasure: The Potential for Conflict and Compromise in the Emerging Fields of Environmental and Historic Preservation Law in Outer Space. – International Institute of Space Law. 2011. P. 202-222.

18. Yakusheva R.R., Agapova M.R. Problemy mezhdunarodno-pravovogo regulirovaniya kosmicheskoj deyatel'nosti v usloviyah ee kommercializacii [Commercialization of space activities: international-law aspects]. – Vestnik yuridicheskogo fakul'teta Yuzhnogo federal'nogo universiteta [Bulletin of the Law Faculty of the Southern Federal University]. 2022. № 4. P. 97-106. (In Russ.)