Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Economic Rhythms, Maslow Windows and the New Space Frontier Kruti Dholakia-Lehenbauer (Corresponding Author) Euel Elliott University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, U.S.A. Bruce Cordell 21stCenturyWaves.com, Bonsall, CA, U.S.A. Date: 02/20/2012 Abstract: This paper explores the possible relationship between space exploration and long swings in the economy and socio-technical systems. We posit that the early phases of long upswings are characterized by periods of optimism and the spirit of adventures that provided a motivation for large scale explorations and other great infrastructure projects in the past. These Maslow Windows help us understand prior eras of exploration and cultural dynamism, and offer a hopeful scenario for space exploration in the next two decades. We offer some observations as to what the exploratory thrust might look like, including a return to the lunar surface combined with other activities. Of course, we also point out that the next great wave of space exploration will almost certainly have a much more international flavor than has heretofore been the case. 1 1. Introduction This essay examines the relationship between the exploration of space in the 21st century and the phenomenon of long economic and socio-technological cycles. The basic contention of this study builds upon prior work by Cordell [1, 2] and Lin, Dholakia & Elliott [3]. The latter offers plausible scenarios for future exploration and exploitation of lunar and near-lunar resources. Cordell’s work, in particular, offers a foundation for the current study by providing arguments for future human activities in space based on long economic and socio-technical cycles, and their subsequent impact on human activities. This research also proposes important linkages between space exploration, long cycles and the phenomenon of Maslow windows which are characterized by bursts of interest in exploration and human adventure, combined or integrated with large-scale macro engineering projects (MEPs). Thus, we suggest a linkage, through long cycles of a connection between earlier human exploration and development of MEPs and the near term future of humanity in space, beginning in the 2015-2020 time frame. This essay proceeds by first discussing the role of long economic and socio-technical cycles in the global economy. We then move to a discussion of the specific relationships between economic cycles and exploration, including those activities directed toward the frontier of space. We offer a scenario that suggests the form that activities beginning in the 2015-2020 time period and lasting until about 2030 or so might take. We conclude our study with some observations about the deeper connections that may exist between human psychological needs, economic cycles and the properties of self-organizing systems. 2. Maslow Windows 2 In order to understand the concept of Maslow Windows, let us first start by understanding the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Model. Maslow [4] proposed that human beings are motivated by their needs. In a pyramid-shaped model (See Figure 1), Maslow placed physiological needs such as food, water, oxygen, shelter and others as being the most basic. Once these needs are largely met, human beings try to meet their safety needs which include security of self, employment, resources, and family. These needs are followed by social needs that involve feelings of belongingness. As these needs start being met, human being move to what are called esteem needs of not just being accepted but being valued by others in social groups and society in general. The next and the top stage of the Model is the “self-actualization” needs stage. This level of need involves realizing the maximum self-potential by pursuing moral behaviors, creativity, problem-solving and acceptance of facts among others. Figure 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Model In the social or broader context, Cordell [1] terms the societal affluence that creates a widespread ebullience by briefly elevating society to the highest levels of Maslow’s hierarchy as being the 3 opportunity for a Maslow Window. In conjunction with the long wave theory, the LW/MW model [1, 2] examines how the historical and macroeconomic data explains the trends of human exploration and expansion and sets the stage for future space exploration. Cordell states, with a nod to Stewart [5] and KWaves [6], that long waves in the economy provide a framework in which major exploration, grand infrastructural efforts, and warrior behavior are especially enabled roughly every 56 years. The close association of Great Explorations, MEPs, and major wars with the 56 year energy/economics cycle suggests the following “Maslow Window” model: Rhythmic, twice-per-century major economic booms create widespread affluence. As societal “Maslow pressures” are reduced, many people ascend the Maslow Hierarchy into an affluence-induced ebullient state and momentarily find exploring and building to be almost irresistible. Similarly there are others who do not ascend the Maslow Hierarchy, and sometimes even tragically trigger major wars. This unusual confluence of affluence and ebullience creates what we call a “Maslow Window” - a spectacular decade that rapidly declines just after the energy peak. 3. Prior Research on Economic Long Waves The phenomenon of long economic waves or cycles has been a matter of debate among economists and students of the economy and macroeconomic change for decades. While there have been skeptics, particularly among mainstream economists, the concept has been embraced by many, e.g. [7], particularly among systems theorists [8, 9, 10, 11] and others willing to entertain the possibility of complex interactions between the economy and socio-technical systems [12, 13, 14]. Some of this literature (see, [15, 13]) explores long economic cycles from the standpoint of a nonlinear dynamics and complex systems view of economics and related phenomena. Much of the discussion of long economic cycles has been in the context of Kondratieff (K) wave theory, named for the Russian economist who first described what he believed to be recurring 54-60 year cycles in capitalism manifested by periods of economic expansion and rising prices followed by economic contraction and price deflation [6]. According to this theory, the years roughly encompassing the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the period 1860 or so to about 1873, the early decades of the twentieth century up 4 to about 1920 and the period from the mid-20th century just after the end of World War II to about 1970 comprise Kondratieff upswings, with the decades following the peak of the Kondratieff cycle representing years of increasing economic decline leading to a collapse in prices and finally, severe economic dislocation characterized by rapidly falling profits and rising unemployment. Within the U.S. historical experience, the long agricultural depression of the 1870s to 1890s and the Great Depression of the 1930s are consistent with the K-cycle framework. From the standpoint of Kondratieff analysis, the current period of economic and financial crisis is consistent with a Kondratieff trough, although the precise timing of the trough and the next upswing is a matter of some controversy. Some scholars, notably Berry et al [14] have revised the basic K-wave framework to incorporate two Kuznets growth cycles nested within the large 54-60 year K-cycle. The A cycle is a reflationary cycle of 20-25 years that occurs when the K-wave has bottomed and is beginning on upswing. The B cycle represents a period of deflationary growth following an inflation peak characterized by slow growth, or stagflation. Using the Berry et al [14] formulation, the period 1929-33 represents a primary trough, followed by a period in the mid and late 1930s of a Type B Kuznets growth cycle. This should have set the stage for a move into a long wave trough in the 1940s, but this was masked by the complete mobilization that was necessary in order to fight WW II, and of course, the advent of Keynesian demand management in the macroeconomy. There is a difference of opinion between Berry et al and others in the process interpretation of the Great Depression and the timing of the fourth K-wave deep, although as we note, the practical impact in terms of our broad understanding of a major acceleration of long term growth sometime in the early decades of the 21st century is unaffected, although the Berry model appears most on target (see below). In addition to the Kondratieff formulation of long cycles and the Berry model, we have recently seen reference to so-called “supercycles.” These economic phenomena are characterized by periods of extended growth, which, in the language of analysts at Standard Chartered Bank [16], is driven by “the industrialization and urbanization of emerging markets and global trade,” with the expansion, which 5 began around 2000, likely to last for a generation or more, and, if true, would take us to around 2030. Moreover, while the growth should be global, the primary drivers of global growth will be emerging market economies in China, India, and elsewhere. We suggest here that none of these cyclical theories of growth are inconsistent with the notion of a period of growth and innovation in the early decades of the 21st century, although clearly the differences related to timing create potential problems. Berry’s [14] formulation seems most prescient, since it suggests a long wave trough in economic activity beginning early in the second decade of the 21st century and lasting for about 15 years until a stagflationary crisis develops. All of the various k-wave formulations tend to emphasize that such waves are associated with the creation, maturation, and death of entire socio-technical systems such as the book of the 1840s and 1850s built around the steam engine and Bessemer steel process, or the emergence of electricity and the automobile in the late 1800’s or later the arrival of radio, television, and aircraft. Still, recognizing that k-wave and supercycle approaches to growth are not meant to predict with precision profound shifts in macroeconomic activity, relatively modest variations in timing do not detract from the basic idea of a new era of growth at some point in the early 21st centuryi. 4. Economic Cycles and Their Linkage to Other Phenomena Research suggests the effect of these long wave cycles is associated with far more than strictly economic phenomena. One example is the anxiety long wave of Gaus [17] and another is the generational cycles of Strauss and Howe [18]. One important finding has shown that long economic K-waves are closely correlated with a 56 year energy cycle [5, 19] discovered in 1989. Historical Statistics of the United States [20] documents that total energy consumption in the U.S. (back to 1840) and electrical energy use (after 1900) can be described as a sinusoid with a period of 56 years and amplitude of 15% deviation, and are correlated with period of economic growth. i The Standard Chartered analysis based on the concept of supercycles is, as noted, broadly consistent with the kwave model, although the 2008 crisis, and its sheer depth, represents more than just an exogenous interruption of a cycle that began around 2000. On the other hand, from the standpoint of one of the authors of this paper, financial panics in 1832 and 1893-94 were precursors to the spectacular opening of Maslow Windows. 6 Source: [5] Other students of long wave phenomena point to the confluence of inflationary peaks in the long wave and major wars, referred to by Berry et al [14] (see also [21]) as peak wars that result from clashes over resources resulting from growing economic pressures. Berry et al [14] make a case for an interesting relationship between long wave cycles and politics. Specifically, K-wave upswings following a trough (an “A” cycle) are characterized by progressive politics of the kind seen during the Progressive era and the Kennedy-Johnson years, while stagflationary peaks seen at the end of the initial growth cycle following a long wave trough is associated with conservative political eras. Others [22] make a case that K-cycles are associated with fundamental managerial styles. And, Berry et al[12] posit a confluence between economic cycles and generational attitudes. Building upon the work of Strauss and Howe [18] Berry and Kim [13] suggest that these are broad generational regimes characterized by risk-taking, adventure, and exploration by those coming of age during k-upswings, and an inward turning characterizing eras of decline. 5. The Current Trough and Predicted Upswing The past few years since the Financial Panic of 2008 and the resulting Great Recession have had a massive impact on the U.S. and had substantial effects on many nations, resulting in shocks to financial 7 markets, and a severe, even disastrous influence in some cases on nations’ financial solvency. Regarding the U.S., the events of recent years have seriously undermined U.S. economic fortunes and left the nation’s finances badly damaged as federal budget deficits and a rapidly rising debt burden exist. These deep, structural problems have called into question the U.S. commitment to a range of governmental activities. The current climate of budgetary stringency has cast doubt on private investments in defense, science and technology, and other areas, including space. Just in the last year, the Obama Administration has cancelled plans for the U.S. planned return to the Moon as part of Project Orion, designed to return Americans to the lunar surface by the end of the current decade. Given the above events, how is it possible to discuss major new initiatives in space, or even other more prosaic initiatives having to do with more basic infrastructural needs here on Earth, such as species depletion, commitment to new energy sources and the like? Yet, as we noted earlier, virtually every long wave analysis suggests we will soon (in the next few years) be entering a new era of positive economic prospects, which should last for at least 15-20 years. In this context, it is instructive to consider long-term trends in GDP to forecast the financial resources available to the U.S. near 2025 (an energy cycle peak) when a major super-cycle growth phase is likely to culminate in large-scale activities in space. For example, in the Figure below, the GDP ratios for three energy peak years versus their preceding troughs (peak year minus 28) show that a reasonable GDP ratio for 2010 is approximately three. 8 Because we know the real GDP for 2010, this ratio allows us to project the 2025 real GDP as nearly $30 T (in 2005 USD). Similar reasoning with historically known GDP ratios – involving peak years versus peak years minus 15 years (our current position in the energy cycle), and peak years versus other peak years – provide two other estimates of real GDP in 2025 of about $ 25T (in 2005 USD). Using these real GDP (2025) estimates it is possible to project the economic growth rates required in the next 15 years to achieve them. For example, if we start rapid growth in 2012 (unlikely) we’ll require the 1960s Apollo annual growth rate (5%); but if the boom is delayed until 2013 or 2015 (more likely), we’ll need 1960s level growth rates of 5.2% and 6.3%, respectively. As mentioned previously, essentially all long wave indicators converge on ~ 2015 for the onset of the next major boom. This timeframe is also supported by the durations of major recessions that followed the Panics of 1837 and 1893, and preceded their Maslow Windows: 5 and 4 years respectively. If the Panic of 2008 and our current great recession follow suit, the next major boom could commence by 2015. Further support is provided by Barro [23] whose study of 59 international, non-war depressions since 1870 indicated they average only 4 years in duration. 9 As the Standard Chartered analysis [16] suggests, however, the next wave will not necessarily be driven by the West in general or the United States in particular, although they may participate in the boom. Unlike the earlier booms of the twentieth or nineteenth centuries, the engine of prosperity this time may well be found in the emerging market economies of China, India and other emerging giants such as Brazil and Russia. The emerging market economies have weathered the recent financial and economic crisis in much better shape than the U.S. or western Europe or Japan; their debt problems are nearly nonexistent, their own demographic problems are still decades away and many of these countries such as China and to a great extent, India are producing a workforce of very well trained researchers and engineers and a population that is to a great extent, far more scientifically literate than found in the U.S. and other western countries. Given the soaring ambitions of countries like China and India, the former of which is planning to make a manned lunar landing within the decade, and which is developing some of the best universities in the world, a leading role for Asia is not implausible. Over the next few decades, continued advances in computer hardware and software, biotechnology, increasing deployment of nanotechnological systems, new and innovative alternative energy systems and the like will provide the foundation for what may be a long and sustained period of growth. Already, many countries are beginning to push back the boundaries of space. China, India, and Japan are moving forward with their own human space flight programs, with the goal, at least in the case of China and Japan, of placing their explorers on the Moon by the early to mid-2020s [24]. Other major political actors, including the European Union and the Russian Federation, are also likely to be involved once the pace of exploration begins to accelerate [25]. China, in particular appears extremely well positioned to play a leading, if not dominant role in space during the next economic boom. With growth rates averaging around 10 percent or so per year, China appears slated to become the largest economy by 2016 or so. Even assuming that China’s growth rate cannot be sustained indefinitely at or near double digit levels, even more modest growth rates of 6-8 percent would seem quite plausible, and would allow China to become not only the largest economy by the middle of this decade, but could become the wealthiest nation as measured by per capita GDP by mid- 10 century. Given China’s ambitions both in terms of becoming a true superpower but demonstrating its virtuosity in a vast array of scientific and technological endeavors, China could well be the linchpin of a major multination push into space, although it is important to keep in mind that China has an aging population of its own that will put increased stress on its financial resources in the 2030s and beyond, and of course we simply do not know exactly how the ongoing debt crisis will play out, and its impact on China and other countries. It is difficult to imagine, of course, a renewed space effort without having the U.S. deeply involved. Given the U.S. technological base and wealth of knowledge gleaned from more than 50 years of space exploration, both human and wing automated probes, the U.S. is likely to be a key player in a future, 21st century version of Lewis and Clark’s “Corps of Exploration.” U.S. strength in computers and artificial intelligence, heavy launch vehicles, and other technological infrastructure would likely make U.S. participation a critical component of a future human move into space. Moreover, although the U.S. may for some time find itself burdened by the aftermath of the financial crisis of 2008 and finding itself refusing to avoid massive new public commitments of resources, the private sector may be in a position to play a hugely active role in space. Indeed, some of us (e.g. [3]) have called attention to the possibility, and certainly the hope, that private, commercial ventures in space will become an important feature of 21st century space exploration. Such activities could encompass, at least over the next several decades, the initial efforts at mining of asteroids that constitute Near Earth Objects (NEOs) as well as activities on the lunar surface, including mining of important industrially useful metals , and even extraction of Helium-3 (He3) from the lunar regolith. Should technical problems to be resolved, He3 could be used in the powering of future fusion reactors on Earth. Bursts of exploration and eras in which the culture reinforced adventure, at times on a grand scale, tend to occur during periods of economic growth and when there is a general sense of optimism. Vibrant economies provide the resource foundation for such activities. Let us examine how the next era of exploration might come about? First, let us take as a working assumption that, on the basis of several different but not unrelated frameworks, we are either beginning to enter a new growth cycle, or have 11 been, since about 2000, in a growth cycle, interrupted by the recent financial crisis which had due consequence for the new economy, particularly among the U.S. and other advanced economies. The basis for growth has to be evaluated in the context of where the major international growth and innovation occur. Within the U.S., which has suffered heavily from the financial crisis and resulting recession, where unemployment reached 10.2 percent before finally receding, there are a number of possibilities. Keep in mind that we do not think the U.S. will be the most important driver of growth. Nonetheless, growth rates in the 3-4 percent range are not completely implausible, and such growth would surely have a positive effect on what has been, in the past recession period since summer of 2010, an anemic job market. Of course, a great deal depends upon the ability of the U.S. to regain control of its financial destiny. With a federal debt to GDP ratio is currently approaching 70 percent, and projected to reach almost 90 percent by 2020, it is absolutely imperative that the U.S. take dramatic actions over the next few years to reduce the massive and persistent budget deficits and begin to bring the debt to GDP ratio more in line with the needs of a healthy, growing economy. This is imperative because research by Reinhardt and Rogoff [26] has shown that when nation’s debt to GDP ratio reaches 90 percent or higher, the potential for real growth is substantially reduced. The belief by the U.S. public that the nations finances need fixing is evidenced by the 2010 midterm elections and opinion surveys; what is still uncertain is the extent to which citizens will be willing to accept budget cuts that directly affect them. As an aging U.S. population comes to rely more and more on social security and Medicare, which is where nearly 75 percent of all spending occurs, the need to reduce the growth rate of these programs dramatically increases. The jury is still out on whether the U.S. and its political classes should make the necessary decisions, which will require both substantial budget cuts and likely increases in revenue to be able to reduce the debt version. If the U.S. can get its financial house in order, the U.S. growth and innovation engine can be a major force over the next few decades in providing the foundation of a durable advance by humans into space. 12 There are certainly other factors that may drive U.S. growth and policy. In spite of its problems, the U.S. remains a center of technological innovation. Its major upswings in growth have historically been associated with new economic-technological paradigms. The great upswings of the past were correlated with the technological advances that drove the industrial revolution of the 19 th century, the development of the automobile and radio in the early decades of the twentieth century, and later in the mid-twentieth century the maturation of television, the early computing revolution and the development of the transistor; today, we are in the early stages of a technological revolution as great as the previous economictechnological revolutions. Continuous advances in computers and their linkage to the internet and the creation of social technologies, advances in information technologies including 4G mobile smart phones, telecommuting robotics, biotechnology and genetic engineering and advances in nanotechnological systems as well as advances in new energy systems including hybrid and electric and solar power will, over the years, has the potential to create vast new pools of wealth. An interesting observation worthy of note is the fact that prior economic upswings from a long wave Kondratieff trough have been associated with progressive political eras. The progressive reform era of the early twentieth century was one such era. Berry et al view the 1960s as representing a similar progressive era. And, although there are differences of opinion regarding the Great Depression era of the 1930s, we know that traumatic events like the Depression or other severe financial crisis may bring about demand for new governmental responsibilities. The events of 2008-10 seem to be a case in point. A financial crisis associated with the collapse of a massive housing bubble and exacerbated by the highly leveraged position of many financial institutions holding complex financial instruments based upon securitized and bundled mortgages, resulted in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. Unemployment soared and economic growth trended into negative territory, as GDP declined 6.1% percent in the first quarter of 2009 and, though the situation stabilized, 1% percent in the second quarter. Unemployment reached 10.2 percent at its peak, in November of 2009; and although the recession appears to have ended, at least officially, in the summer of 2009, the overall employment 13 picture has remained very subdued. More to the point, however, in response to the financial crisis, and as a backlash against a Republican administration that had been in office eight years, a liberal Democrat, Barack Obama, was elected President. If history, based on the intertwining of economic and political cycles was any guide, the nation might be able to expect a 15-20 year period of progressive, activist government. Such activism would surely not preclude major government initiatives in the realm of space, possibly focused in the larger term on the need to move as many industrial processes off-earth, and to prepare for the day when resource depletion of key materials would begin to become a reality. Such activities could be combined with an aggressive array of exploratory missions to the Moon and beyond. The early years of the Obama administration certainly suggested that a new, long progressive era was upon us. Massive stimulus spending, reforms of the financial sector that imposed draconian new regulatory framework on banks and hedge funds, a sweeping new health care entitlement that was bitterly opposed by conservatives, an as well as an array of social policy initiatives all pointed to another huge surge of government activism. However, as we are all aware, the backlash against the Obama Administration that culminated in the 2010 midterm election gains by the Republican Party where the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives, plus making gains in the Senate, suggest that the nation might be on a path different from that suggested by past experience. Moreover, the building deficit and debt crisis may place several constraints on the ability of any government to commit public resources to major new initiatives, whether they are on earth and are more social welfare related, or in space. It is certainly possible that another era of government activism full of the possibilities of collective action on various fronts and fueled by a robust economic foundation might still be in our future. However, we think it is at least as likely that the next decade or so will see a new kind of activism that seeks to empower individuals and entrepreneurship. Such a new kind of activism would be different from previous eras of activism that saw a dramatic expansion in the role of the state. Because of massive budgetary pressures, this might not be possible. Government could, however, provide a foundation for private entrepreneurship a public-private partnership, and a willingness by private consortia, or even 14 government entities, to be more willing to cooperate with Chinese, Indian, Japanese, European, and Russian companies and State actors, such as in Cordell [27]. Although our preceding discussion regarding U.S. growth has focused on the U.S., we think, the greatest opportunities for growth will come from the economies of Asia, and particularly China and India and South America, particularly Brazil. These nations, and others, possess enormous potential with the rise of huge middle classes over the next few decades. The rise of these middle classes will provide enormous new markets, for indigenous as well as Western firms. The transformation of these societies will also take place concurrent with the continued advance of these nations educationally as more and more citizens take advantage of advanced educational opportunities. If current trends are projected into the future, engineering and science will continue to be major professional attractions for students, which over time will build in dramatic fashion the intellectual capital of these countries, and provide a technical and scientific basis for a variety of advanced and complex projects, including those aimed at human efforts to establish a strong presence in space. Such a scientific and technical foundation can also serve to build these industries. This will plausibly come to maturation in the 21st century, including radical advances in software and computational systems, biotechnology, nanotechnology, robotics, and the like. Other factors could impel a new burst of economic energy. Even moderately improved economic conditions over the next few years could promote more international trade openness that in turn could lead to greater international efficiencies and higher growth. Combined with the likely continued development of financial and demographic markets and banking institutions will provide sweeping new opportunities for emerging market economies, as more sophisticated capital markets will allow for more efficient use of capital. China is already planning for Shanghai to become one of the top financial centers on the globe by 2020, equaling or surpassing Hong Kong. This may be associated with much greater internationalization of the Chinese currency, the Yuan. Allowing convertibility would go a long way toward allowing China to become a true financial superpower, and at some point its currency could become one of the leading reserve currencies along with the Dollar, the Euro and the Japanese Yen. 15 The basic point is that opportunities will exist on a stupendous scale for the creation of great wealth and vast pools of capital, some of which can be directed toward the building of a science and technology infrastructure that will be highly conducive to exploration. This will be facilitated by the rapidly expanding scientific and technological base found in countries like India and China, where advanced training in the hard sciences, mathematics, and engineering are far more appreciated than in the U.S., where all too many young people are primarily concerned with the avoidance of technical subjects. Moreover, as the Standard Chartered analysis [16] suggests, demographics can play an important role in promoting growth in Asia and elsewhere outside the Western advanced economies. A very young population in India and Brazil, and a relatively youthful China (that, nonetheless, will begin to suffer demographic pressures as its one child policy will begin creating pressures on labor supply by 2030 or so) will provide an impetus to growth that will no longer exist in the West. Such demographic trends will reinforce already favorable economic growth potential for these countries. Overall, the prospects for economic growth are bright. Some will see the benefits for greater growth than others, and so international balance of trade and balance of payments flows will need to be watched. Protectionism will need to be avoided. But we think the odds are good that a period of sustained prosperity is ahead of us. Greater growth rates will be achieved by non-Western countries, although the West, including Europe and the one heretofore advanced non-Western nation, Japan, should see some growth. 6. A Renewal of Space Exploration We think, based upon our prior discussion, that the economic resources and wherewithal necessary for a major push into space over the next two decades is highly plausible. Many nations will have the economic capacity and technological-scientific foundation to participate in a renewed space effort. This second wave will be to establish a stronger, more permanent presence in space and its environs and to push beyond our nearest neighbor, the Moon. There are important provisos; all of this will require the absence of a major war, or another economic or financial crisis that drains away the needed resources for such exploration. 16 What would a future wave of exploration look like? Let us first briefly examine organization and resource allocation issues. Unlike the 1950s and 1960s when the U.S. and Soviet Union were the only nations capable of engaging in exploration, today and in the foreseeable future multiple nations who are moving to the forefront economically may be not only willing but eager to be involved. Just as, in the 1950s and 1960s much of the space effort was fueled by national pride, so too can we expect similar sentiments from nations like China, India, Brazil, Japan and others, including already established space powers such as Russia and to a more limited extent, the nations of the European Union (EU). Rising powers such as China, already planning manned lunar missions around 2020 or so, will also be able to make increasingly large financial contributions to a cooperative space effort, in addition to their growing technological process. In short, we expect that there will ultimately emerge a permanent global consortium of countries operating through an international entity. This would be a kind of international space administration built along the lines of NASA or the European Space Agency, or other models (e.g., [27]). While it is almost inconceivable that national space programs will be completely subsumed or merged into an international entity, nonetheless such an international organization is likely critical to future cooperative space efforts. Certainly, there are important synergies that could be achieved by such efforts, provided that duplication of effort is left to a minimum. The continuation of U.S. and Soviet experience in space, the experience with heavy launch vehicles, the U.S. experiences learned in its earlier manned lunar missions and unmanned mission, the U.S. technological advantages in microminiaturization, computers and AI, Soviet skills in long space flight and the like, not to mention the financial resources that can be brought to bear by emergent economies represent a formidable set of advantages. Of course, skilled leadership and organizational skills will be critical for the effort to live up to its potential. Substantively, we expect a renewed space effort would take place on several fronts. First, we do not dismiss the role of automated probes. As technology advances, such probes become increasingly sophisticated and will be able to carry out more and more complex missions. Even now, plans exist for 17 Mars sample return missions, and a robust space effort would certainly support continued robotic exploration of the gas giants, their most scientifically interesting Moons (such as Jupiter’s Europa where there is tantalizing evidence of an ocean miles underneath the icy surface) and the outer planets of Uranus, Neptune, and beyond. It may be deemed useful to explore, using deep space probes that are committed to decades long journeys to explore the Kuiper belt of comets and other objects beyond Pluto. The amount of water contained in this material that has existed since the early solar system could prove useful indeed for some future advanced human civilization. Most of the excitement and drama of space is associated with human exploration. What might a future space program, perhaps international in scope, look like? Two of the authors have discussed future cis-lunar exploration. Table one, based on extrapolations of NASA and other timelines, suggests how lunar and cis-lunar exploration might develop. Table 1. Estimated Timeline for Lunar Development 2020 – 2030 2030 – 2050 2050 – 2075 2075 – 2100 2100 – 2150 Human flights to Moon resume. Resumption and Expansion of Scientific Activities Initial Establishment of Permanent Bases and Colonization. First Colonization Activities, with use of lunar resources in construction of colonies Expansion and Deepening of Colonization, Beginning of Asteroid mining, Energy Production and initial tourism Mature commercial effort encompassing more extensive asteroid mining, energy, tourism Use of lunar commercial and non-commercial resources for expansion of commercial sphere to Mars and beyond Sources: [3] Table 1 is a composite derived from various timelines and extrapolations given by NASA [24, 28, 29] and the U.S. Government and offers a potential glimpse at the expected development of commercialization activities. First, a number of activities such as launching lunar orbiting spacecraft, launching landers for surface exploration, and the operation of spacecraft to implement lunar sample return would likely be required before actually building the base. 18 The second stage would consist of constructing the lunar base and base operations, which include logistics and re-supply among other activities. The third stage, around 2050-2075 would consist of base augmentation. In this stage, private entities would be encouraged to expand any existing investments in the base expansion. The provision of privately financed augmentations can increase the base’s capabilities of exploration and research. The fourth stage, estimated to take place in the last quarter of the 21st century around 2075-2100 and continue into the 22nd century, could possibly witness extensive base utilizationii. Once established, it may serve to facilitate important scientific research that is difficult to achieve in Earth orbit such as radio telescope space stations at select Lagrangian points [30]. From a technical standpoint, there is, over the next few decades, the need to develop reliable and relatively inexpensive heavy launch vehicles to support such missions. Like US Ares V would be one potential vehicle, and other nations might develop other possibilities. But heavy launch capability is critical for future human exploration, at least over the next few decades until other innovative ideas (such as the space elevator, discussed later in this paper) that are still on the drawing board have been developed. The European Union’s Ariane heavy launch vehicle and its successors would also be important in the 2020-2030 or so time period. Once a base is fully established and is an ongoing operation, various kinds of commercial activities might be expected to be carried out beyond those related to the development of the base or scientific activities on the surface that have potential commercial applications. As discussed in Lin, Dholakia and Elliott [3], the first type of commercial application would be future lunar facilities that can be used as bases from which to engage in limited asteroid mining [31]. At some point in the twenty first century, commercial activities may well become viable, and human inhabitation of the lunar surface may play a critical role [31, 32]. The Moon, which the great visionary Krafft Ehricke once designated “the ii An important proviso needs to be made about the above-noted timelines. Obviously, much could happen that would significantly alter the admittedly tentative anticipated time frames for advance. A long and debilitating economic crisis could significantly alter the interest of political leaders in what might be viewed as a politically risky space agenda, not to mention the possibility that financial resources may be sufficiently strained as to discourage both state actors and the private sector from making massive, long-term financial commitments. 19 eighth continent” [33] could well play a role as a base, particularly for mining of those Earth-approaching or Earth-crossing (known as Apollo-type) asteroids that are described by astronomers as NEO (or Near Earth Orbit) objects. Literally hundreds of such objects can be found within a space of a few million miles of Earth. The metals and ores contained within many of these objects, particularly nickel and iron, are estimated to be worth trillions of dollars [31]. The second type of commercialization activity is the exploitation of natural resources that are in place on and underneath the lunar surface. The Moon has an abundance of oxygen, silicon, iron, titanium, magnesium, calcium, and aluminum that exist as oxides [3]. Over time, lunar settlers could mine the existing precious minerals and ores on the Moon and establish viable, sustainable colonies that benefit from a variety of commercial economic activities. When we refer to asteroid or lunar mining we wish to emphasize that we are not expecting that we would see the development of massive “space factories” that will extract huge quantities of material for shipment to Earth. The amount of energy necessary for escaping Earth’s gravity well and transferring extremely large payloads into space, then transferring raw materials back to earth, is likely unfeasible in any time span relevant to our discussion. Rather, we expect that mining activities would be used in situ in the construction of equipment and systems for use in the immediate or proximate environment from which they have been extracted. Advances in robotic mining technologies, conceivably down to something near the level of nanotechnology or certainly micro-processing technologies would make this approach potentially viable. The third arena for commercialization lies in the realm of energy. Criswell has suggested building massive solar panels on the lunar surface and beaming that energy back to Earth [34]. While this might be eventually feasible, there are technical issues involving the surge of the transmission antenna and other factors that could make this a cost-prohibitive approach. 20 The Moon may also eventually prove to be an invaluable source of material for nuclear fusion reactors. An advanced fusion technology civilization may find extensive use of the lunar surface given the abundance of Helium-3 (He3). He3 appears to exist in abundance on the Moon, and could be used in Deuterium-He3 (D-He3) reactors [35]. He3, a non-radioactive light isotope, has accumulated in the lunar soil due to solar winds over billions of years. According to H. Schmitt and others, its efficiency and absence of radioactive waste production make it an important candidate for consideration [36, 37]. Deuterium-He3 reactors would have a clear advantage over other possible systems. One of the advantages of such reactors will be related to the generation of relatively small number of neutrons and hence, costs are much reduced [38, 39]. Other possible uses of He3 may be found in advanced propulsion systems. Researchers have for decades considered the possibility of nuclear-based propulsion systems and made proposals as documented in Martin and Bond [40, 41].iii As with other mining activities, we expect that, for the most part, exploitation of energy resources would likely be utilized in space itself although these could be application of He3 on Earth. The possibility of production of solar energy from off-Earth activities has been a subject of discussion for several years. Gerard O’Neill’s proposals for a space-based system of solar panel arrays that would beam energy back to Earth has been perhaps one of the most prominent proposals [42]. More recently, Japan has put forward a proposal to have a solar power generator that could produce up to one gigawatt of energy in geostationary orbit by 2030 [43]. Any activities in Cis-lunar space as described above would surely require substantial near-Earth support in the form of permanent, space habitats. Presumably, the International Space Station would, over the coming decades, be superseded by newer, safer and more technologically advanced systems, not to iii There has been disagreement about the possible use of D-He3 fuel in space propulsion systems. Some researchers such as Orth [38] called into question the use of systems such fuel, while others such as Shmatov [45] make a case for D-He3 based propulsion systems for advanced interplanetary craft. The application of He 3 type systems to spacecraft propulsion is still being debated, but if feasible it would justify profit-centered commercial mining operations of He3 and could be a useful component of a viable commercial strategy. There is also the possibility of competition between mining the lunar He3 and the possible production of He 3 by the Inertial Fusion Energy (IFE) plants [46]. 21 mention systems that provide substantially improved comfort. Such stations could provide important research support including optical and radio astronomy, including more extensive monitoring of NEOs. Should activities in space really begin to expand, decisionmakers may want to consider constructing a space elevator. The concept of the space elevator has been around for more than a century, being first proposed by the Russian scientist Tsiokovsky. His idea was to build an Eiffel Tower to space. Though obviously impractical, the fundamental idea is not implausible. A cable or some other construction, if sufficiently long, could rely upon centrifugal force to not fall. The problem is being able to use material strong enough to withstand the forces generated by laws of motion, which could cause the cable to snap. At some point in the twenty-first century nanotechnology such as carbon nanotubes may allow such a structure to be built. While creation of such a structure would stretch 22,236 miles, as explained by Kaku [44 pp. 277-281] into space and require massive resources and the overcoming of numerous technological obstacles, not to mention geopolitical agreement on just where such a system would be located, such a grand undertaking could at least be put in the initial research and development stage. A space elevator or even an effort to fully develop near Earth human outposts in near Earth orbit as well as to exploit possibilities for development of stations at Lagrangian points would be of tremendous value to the future of space exploration. The point here is that regardless of whether humans will finally decide to venture out toward the planets, a very robust, permanent scientific and commercial presence around Earth, as well as the Moon and the near-Earth environs will be essential. Ultimately, of course, the great vision of a return to space will not be satisfied with a program of unmanned robot probes or human efforts in near-Earth and cislunar space. Interplanetary exploration is likely the real destiny for humans. Even though human interplanetary flight is still likely decades away even under the most optimistic of circumstances, research efforts in the near and medium run will lay the foundations for eventual human travel to the planets, almost certainly beginning with Mars, and later, by the latter decades of the 21st century, pushing outward beyond the asteroid belt to the gas giants of Jupiter and Saturn, and possibly beyond. During the Maslow Window of 2015-2030 or so, substantial planning for such missions can begin, and at least in the case of a 22 Mars mission development of the necessary hardware to be used could be developed, with a view toward an actual mission in the early to mid-2030s, with possibly 2030 or so being the most optimistic timeline. It seems likely to use that only a human mission to Mars will be able to definitively answer the great continuing question of whether there is in fact any form of life on the Red Planet even if in microbial form, and the equally interesting question of whether there was life, perhaps complex in nature, on Mars hundreds of millions of years ago when it appears there was water on a surface that was far different from what now exists. Hopefully, we would be able to avoid the same mistakes with Mars that were made with the lunar missions. In the case of the Moon, they were carried out, then in a case of almost incomprehensible negligence, abandoned. There was no follow-up in terms of establishment of bases or even creation of a semi-permanent presence. It is to be hoped that the first Mars mission will not be the last. Before the next Maslow window closes, firm institutional foundations need to be laid for follow-up missions that will, at a minimum, lay the groundwork for a much larger permanent presence on Mars when the subsequent Window opens sometime in the 2070s or 2080s. Along with Mars, we do not want to forget exploration beyond Mars to the gas giants. There are extremely important scientific reasons to explore the region around Jupiter and Saturn, not the least of which is the very real possibility that Jupiter’s Moon Europa may well possess an ocean of water under its surface, and where there is water, there is at least the possibility of life. While human visits to the hostile environment of the gas giants or their Moons is likely several decades away, the planning and initial development of planning can take place during the vibrant years of the next Maslow Window. 7. Conclusion Maslow Windows appear to open during exceptional, sustained periods of economic growth and optimism. As we have seen, these periods of growth tend to follow somewhat regular cycles. We appear to be on the verge of, or have just entered, a new cycle characterized by sustained economic growth and prosperity on a global scale that will last for the next two decades or so. This era of growth will take place within a framework of increased globalization and the appearance in the world scene of new international 23 players in renewed efforts to return to space, and most important, to stay there. These actors will include not just national players such as China, India and the established powers such as the U.S. and Russia, and the EU, but, we suspect an increased presence by private corporations, private-public consortia and other organizational forms. It is our expectation that, barring unforeseen circumstances, a robust renewal of a global space effort will see human activity in Earth orbit, cis-lunar space and the lunar surface and eventually toward the close of the next window, human missions to Mars, supplemented with an extensive and sophisticated array of automated probes that can lay the foundation for the next human push into the outer reaches of the solar system and beyond over the next 100-200 years. 24 Bibliography [1] Cordell, B. "Forecasting the Next Major Thrust into Space." Space Policy 12, no. 1 (1996): 45-57 [2] Cordell, B. "21st Century Waves: Forecasting Technology Booms and Human Expansion into the Cosmos." Futures Research Quarterly 22, no. 3 (2006): 21-42 [3] Lin, W., K. Dholakia, and E. Elliott. "The Next Frontier: Commercialization of the Lunar Space and Cislunar Space in the 21st Century." JBIS 63 (2010): 53-60 [4] Maslow, A.H. "A Theory of Human Motivation." Psychological Review 50, no. 4 (1943): 370-96 [5] Stewart, H.B. Recollecting the Future: A View of Business, Technology, and Innovation in the Next 30 Years. Irwin Professional Pub, 1989 [6] Kondratieff, N.D. "The Long Wave in Economic Life." The Review of Economic Statistics 17 (1935): 105-115 [7] Devezas, T.C., ed. Kondratieff Waves, Warfare and World Security. Vol. 5. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2006 [8] Sterman, J.D. "The Economic Long Wave: Theory and Evidence." System Dynamics Review 2, no. 2 (1986): 87-125 [9] Sterman, J.D. "Long Wave Decline and the Politics of Depression." Bank Credit Analyst 44 (1992): 2642 [10] Forrester, J.W. "Innovation and Economic Change." Futures 13 (1981): 323-331 [11] de Greene, K.B. "The Kondratiev Phenomenon: A Systems Perspective." Systems Research 5, no. 4 (1988): 281-298 [12] Berry, B.J.L. "Migration Reversals in Perspective: The Long-Wave Evidence." International Regional Science Review 11, no. 3 (December 1988): 245-251 [13] Berry, B.J.L., and H. Kim. "Are long waves driven by techno-economic transformations?: Evidence for the U.S. and the U.K." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 44, no. 2 (September 1993): 111135 [14] Berry, B.J.L., E. Elliott, E. J. Harpham, and H. Kim. The Rhythms of American Politics. Lanham: University Press of America, 1998 [15] Paich, M., and J. D. Sterman. "Boom, Bust, and Failures to Learn in Experimental Markets." Management Science 39, no. 12 (December 1993): 1439-1458 [16] Standard Chartered Bank. The Super-Cycle Report. Global Research, England: Standard Chartered Bank, 2010 25 [17] Gaus, H. Why Yesterday Tells of Tomorrow: How the Long Waves of the Economy Help Us Determine Tomorrow's Trends. Philadelphia, PA: Garant Publishers, 2003 [18] Strauss, W., and N. Howe. Generations. The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069. New York, NY: William Morrow & Co., Inc., 1991 [19] Modis, T. Predictions: Society's Telltale Signature Reveals the Past and Forecasts the Future. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster, 1992 [20] Cambridge University Press. Historical Statistics of the United States. 2011. http://www.cambridge.org/us/americanhistory/hsus/ (accessed July 14, 2011) [21] Goldstein, J.S. The Predictive Power of Long Wave Theory, 1989-2004. Vol. 5, in Kondratieff waves, warfare and world security, edited by T.C. Devezas. Fairfax, VA: IOS Press, 2006 [22] Kiel, L. D., and E. Elliott. "Long-Wave Economic Cycles, Techno-Economic Paradigms, and the Pattern of Reform in American Public Administration." Administration & Society 30, no. 6 (January 1999): 616-639 [23] Barro, R.J. "What Are the Odds of A Depression?" Wall Street Journal, March 4, 2009 [24] SubCommittee on Space and Aeronautics. "NASA’s Exploration Initiative: Status and Issues." Hearing Charter, Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C., 2008 [25] NASA. The Global Exploration Strategy Framework. National Aeronautical Space Agency (NASA), 2007 [26] Reinhart, C. M., and K. S. Rogoff. "Growth in a Time of Debt." American Economic Review 100, no. 2 (May 2010): 573-78 [27] Interspace-design For An International Space Agency 4Space Policy [28] NASA. Vision for Space Exploration. NASA document outlining President George W. Bush's plan, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2004 [29] NASA. NASA's Exploration Systems Architectural Study. Projections for ESAS and NASA in the 21st Century, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2005 [30] Pluchino, S., N. Antonietti, and C. Maccone. "Protecting the Moon Farside Radio-Telescopes from RFI Produced at the Future Lagrangian Points Space Stations." Journal of British Interplanetary Society (JBIS) 60 (2007): 60 [31] Lewis, J. S. Mining the Sky: Untold Riches from the Asteroid, Comets, and Planets. Addison-Wesley, 1996 26 [32] Williams, M. "Mining the Moon." Technology Review. Website. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), August 23, 2007 [33] Zubrin, R. Entering Space: Creating a Spacefaring Civilization. New York, NY: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam, 1999 [34] Criswell, D. R. "Lunar Exploration." Testimony of Dr. David R. Criswell at Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space Hearings. 2003 [35] Winterberg, F. "Rocket Propulsion by Thermonuclear Microbombs Ignited with Intense Relativistic Electron Beams." Raumfahrtforschung 15 (1971): 208-217 [36] Schmitt, H. "Lunar Industrialization: How to Begin?" Journal of British Interplanetary Society (JBIS) 47 (1994): 527-530 [37] Sved, J., G. C. Kulcinski, and G. H. Miley. "A Commercial Lunar Helium-3 Fusion Power Infrastructure." Journal of British Interplanetary Society (JBIS) 48 (1995): 55-61 [38] Orth, C. D. VISTA -- A Vehicle for Interplanetary Space Transport Application Powered by Inertial Confinement Fusion. Technical Report, US Department of Energy, Livermore, CA (US): Lawrence Livermore National Lab., 2003 [39] Tabak, M. "What is the role of tritium-poor fuels in ICF?" Nuclear Fusion 36, no. 2 (1996): 147 [40] Everett, C. J., and S. M. Ulam. On a Method of Propulsion of Projectiles by Means of External Nuclear Explosions. LAMS, 1955 [41] Martin, A. R., and A. Bond. "Nuclear Pulse Propulsion: A Historical Review of an Advanced Propulsion Concept." Journal of British Interplanetary Studies 32 (1979): 283-310 [42] O'Neill, G. K. "Space Colonies and Energy Supply to the Earth." Science 190 (1975): 943-947 [43] Hornyak, T. "Farming Solar Energy in Space." Scientific American, July 2008: 9-10 [44] Kaku, M. Physics of the Future: How Science Will Shape Human Destiny and Our Daily Lives by the Year 2100. Random House Digital, Inc., 2011 [45] Shmatov, M. L. "The Expected Efficiency of Burning of the D-He3 Fuel in Space Propulsion Systems." Journal of British Interplanetary Studies 89 (2006): 35-38 [46] Some Thermonuclear Power Plants as the Possible Sources of He3 for Space Propulsion Systems JBIS180