Download Economic Rhythms, Maslow Windows and the

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