Page:SATCON2 Executive Summary.pdf/9

 We acknowledge that many constituencies and perspectives were not included through the Community Engagement WG, and that what we share here does not represent all members of any subgroup. We nevertheless note these common themes that recurred and resonated across the five subgroups:
 * The skies and space belong to everyone. Space is a global commons.
 * All people are impacted by changes in the sky. Nearly all consulted for SATCON2 had already noticed a dramatic rise in satellite constellation sightings in the past two years, and were worried. Many communities see the unchecked actions of space actors as colonization expanded to a cosmic scale during a time of global crisis.
 * The sky must be considered part of the environment and the current National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) exemption for the satellite constellation industry must end.
 * Ecosystems depend on the night sky and on each other.

Collectively, the Community Engagement WG offers the observations and recommendations outlined below.

3.3.1. Duty to consult

Satellite operators must first consult all impacted groups, including the sovereign American Indian/Alaska Native nations and global Indigenous communities before launching satellites. Industry must fully consider the concerns of Indigenous nations, including sovereignty, transparency, written agreements, and jurisdiction of treaties in space.

3.3.2. Need for more information and communication

Communities want more information and dialogue. Astronomers and other parties concerned about the impacts of LEO satellite constellations need to engage, listen, share, and act with affected constituencies, government agencies, and cultural, grassroots, and political leaders. Decision-makers and private satellite operators must intentionally invite the voices and groups that have historically been excluded from the power structure and decision-making regarding space activity.

3.3.3. Engage with industry

Astronomers and other interested and affected groups need to continue to engage with the satellite industry to build relationships and find common ground.

3.3.4. Recognize and rebalance power structures

Decision-makers and advocates for regulation of LEO satellites should recognize the economic, legal, and political structures that continually affect technology choices. The regulatory process must take those power structures into account to optimize societal and environmental benefit with equity — power over a global commons comes with responsibilities to the global good.

3.3.5. Learn from the past

History offers valuable lessons on many issues with satellite constellations including environmental concerns, loss of millenia-old practices, and the painful legacies of colonization. The past century in particular offers ample examples of disruptive technologies that have been developed first and regulated only later, with varying degrees of cost, benefit, risk, and impact, e.g., telephones, trains/ planes/cars, fossil fuels, and the Internet itself. Examples of global challenges requiring international collaboration include damage to the ozone layer, for which corrective action has been largely successful, and climate change, for which a global course of corrective action has remained elusive.

3.3.6. “Science vs. Internet” is a false choice

Affordable broadband is crucial to almost all aspects of 21st century work and life, and some communities welcome satellite broadband. However, we must not assume that LEO satellite constellations are the only option; industry and agencies must develop a meaningful assessment of viable alternatives to satellite broadband, including ground-based fiber, from the perspectives of cost, infrastructure and environmental impact. 9