Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Acta Astronautica
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aa

The common objectives of the European Nordic countries and the role
of space
Christopher Lehnert a,n, Christina Giannopapa b, Ersilia Vaudo b
a
German Aerospace Centre, DLR Space Administration, Königswinterer Str. 522-524, 53227 Bonn, Germany
b
European Space Agency, France

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The European Space Agency (ESA) has twenty two Member States with common goals of engaging in
Received 13 November 2015 European space activities. However, the various Member States have a variety of governance structures,
Received in revised form strategic priorities regarding space and other sectorial areas depending on their cultural and geopolitical
19 July 2016
aspirations. The Nordic countries, namely Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, have similarities
Accepted 8 August 2016
which result often in common geopolitical and cultural aspects. These in turn shape their respective
Available online 17 August 2016
priorities and interests in setting up their policies in a number of sectorial areas like shipping and
Keywords: fisheries, energy, immigration, agriculture, security and defence, infrastructures, climate change and the
Nordics Arctic. Space technology, navigation, earth observation, telecommunication and integrated applications
Strategy
can assist the Nordic countries in developing, implementing and monitoring policies of common interest.
Policy objectives
This paper provides an in-depth overview and a comprehensive assessment of these common interests in
Denmark
Finland policy areas where space can provide support in their realisation. The first part provides a synthesis of
Norway the Nordic countries respective priorities through analysing their government programmes and plans.
Sweden The priorities are classified according to the six areas of sustainability: energy, environment and climate
Interests change, transport, knowledge and innovation, natural resources (fisheries, agriculture, forestry, mining,
Policy analyses etc), and security and external relations. Although the national strategies present different national
Areas of sustainability perspectives, at the same time, there are a number of similarities when it comes to overall policy ob-
Space policy
jectives in a number of areas such as the Arctic and climate change. In other words, even though the
Arctic plays a different role in each country's national context and there are clear differences as regards
geography, access to resources and security policies, the strategies display common general interest in
sustainable development and management of resources, protection of the environment, international
cooperation and regional security. The second part of this paper focuses on the national space strategies
and indicates the main priorities and trends. The priorities vary from one country to the other and can
include science, navigation, earth observation, human space flight, launchers, technology development,
and/or applications. The motivation for investing in space activities also change (e.g. international co-
operation, industrial competitiveness, societal benefits, job creation).
& 2016 IAA. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction of commonalities.1 They share a geographical and geological pro-

Understanding the specificities and similarities of Member
States and their past and current governance, policies and strate-
gies is key for an international organisation such as ESA for pre-
paring the future space policies, strategies and programmes in
order to be able to reflect the needs of the Member States, their
governments and their citizens. The Nordic countries of Europe,
namely Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden, have often been
seen in literature as a group of countries that share a large degree
file. They have common boarders, access to the sea, as well as large
forests, and with the exception of Finland they share a common
linguistic heritage. However, even Finland has Swedish as a second
official language. Researchers have for long looked at these four
countries. Their political and economic system are often identified
as being homogenous. Their system is considered as a “Social-
Democratic” welfare state, where a large public sector and redis-
tribution goes hand in hand with elements of the liberal market
economy. The Esping-Andersen's [1] classification for the

n 1
Corresponding author. Iceland can also be regarded as a member of the Nordic countries, but lacking
E-mail addresses: christopher.lehnert@dlr.de (C. Lehnert), both membership in ESA and the European Union, relevant insititutions for space,
christina.giannopapa@esa.int (C. Giannopapa), ersilia.vaudo@esa.int (E. Vaudo). Iceland has not been included in this research.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2016.08.006
0094-5765/& 2016 IAA. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649 641

archetype Scandinavian “Social Democratic” model includes high several international export control and missile proliferation re-
benefits, universal entitlements, high decommodification, a large gimes such as the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the Missile Technology
public sector and small private sector, as well as low stratification. Control Regime, the Wassenaar Arrangement, or the Hague Code
There are more models that provide evidence for grouping of the of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation. At national level,
Nordic State. A recent study however, “The Nordic Model” com- only Norway (1962) and Sweden (1982) have a public law on
missioned by the Research Institute of the Finnish Economy (ETLA) space. None of the Nordic countries parliaments are full members
[2] supports the findings of Esping-Andersen. It summarizes that of the European Interparliamentary Space Conference (EISC),
there is first, a comprehensive welfare state with an emphasis on which is the European forum for national parliaments to discuss
transfers to households and publicly provided social services fi- space policy and regulation matters.
nanced by taxes, which are high notably for wage income and This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the national
consumption. Second, a lot of public and/or private spending on policy priorities of the Nordic countries based on the official
investment in human capital, including child care, education as strategies, published by the government when coming into power.
well as research and development (R&D). Third, a set of labour Their focus is decomposed according to the six areas of sustain-
market institutions that include strong labour unions and em- ability, a concept used to combine sectorial policies and benefits
ployer associations, significant elements of wage coordination, from space. [6] The national space strategies are analysed to
relatively generous unemployment benefits and a prominent role identify the motivators for engaging in space activities and their
for active labour market policies. focus areas with regard to technology domain. Additionally, their
As an embodiment of these theoretical conceptions, the Nordic priorities on using space as a tool to support the six areas of
Council, since 1971 the cooperation forum between the Prime sustainability is analysed.
Ministers of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden,
presents itself to promote and ensure a common set of values of
social cohesion. [3] As part of this function the Nordic Council also
2. Government and strategies
detects the challenges for the future of the Scandinavian social
democratic model. The challenges are in essence increasing glo-
The governments currently in power in the four Nordic coun-
balisation, and demographic change. [4] The threat from globali-
tries are, with the exception of Finland and Sweden minority
sation comes in form of increasing labour mobility and global tax
coalitions that had not been in power previously. Sweden has the
competition that require to restructure the economy and to invest
only governing coalition dominated by the social democrats, while
in innovation. The ageing population is widening the gap between
Denmark's, Finland's and Norway's are centred around con-
the active and the passive part of the population, which leads to
servative and liberal parties that present the Prime Ministers.
difficulties in maintaining the provision of social service. [5] The
(Table 1).
financial and public debt crisis that Europe prevails to be in, is yet
When a government assumes power, it typically publishes
another threat that also requires the Nordic states to act. Through
government programmes providing the overview of the focus for
analysis of government priorities and understanding the directions
the next years. Those government plans of the Nordic countries
these are moving to, tailor made solutions can be found, where
have been gathered and analysed (Table 2).
space can be used as a tool to provide governments with adequate
The basic document for the Danish government programme is
information in developing, implementing and monitoring, the
the plan “Sammen for Fremtiden” (Together for the future), with
achievement of their specific goals.
the underlining objective to achieve greater cooperation – verti-
Space activities have historically been looked at as a matter of
cally and horizontally. The main topics for the legislative period
sovereignty. However, the Nordic countries could understand early
include increasing public sector consumption, a tougher stance on
enough that space activities are difficult to conduct by one state
immigration and a new job reform. It also includes the pursuit not
alone and have engaged in bilateral and multilateral cooperation.
to increase taxes or tolls during this election tenure, as well as
In space, Denmark and Sweden are the two Nordic countries
continued action against the terror organisation Islamic State.
that have the longest tradition. Both have been involved in Eur-
In Finland, the government's plan “Finland, a land of solutions”
opean and international space activities since the 1960's. They
were both members of ESRO and are founding Member States of mainly aims to deregulate and de-bureaucratise, promote en-
ESA. Sweden was the first country to ratify the ESA Convention on trepreneurship, exports and use of renewable natural resources,
23 October 1975. Denmark ratified the Convention in September reduce poverty, inequality and social exclusion, promote Nordic
1977. cooperation, use the Arctic as well as to create a security archi-
Finland and Norway initiated their space activities later. Nor- tecture for Finland. The underlying premise of the Sipilä govern-
way ratified the ESA Convention in December 1986. and Finland ment is that Finland “must set people's resources free to engage in
started its activities in space with the Association Agreement with creative activity, entrepreneurship and the creation of wellbeing.
ESA on September 1986, which was later extended in May 1991. In Finland must become a society founded on know-how, en-
May 1993, Finland officially lodged an application for accession to trepreneurship, equality and caring.” [9].
the ESA Convention. On January 1995, the Accession Agreement to
the ESA Convention entered into force and Finland became the Table 1
Overview of the Nordic governments.
14th ESA Member state. Today, participation in ESA constitutes the
main form of Finland's space activities. Denmark Finland Norway Sweden
All countries are considered as space faring nations, with the
exception of Finland. Denmark belongs to this group since 1999, Elected 2015 2015 2013 2014
Form of Minority Majority Minority Majority
Norway since 2010 with the launch of its first national satellite,
government Coalition Coalition Coalition Coalition
and Sweden already since 1986. However, Norway has been Type of Conservative Center, Center Right & Social
launching suborbital sounding rockets since 1962. government Liberal Liberal & Liberal democratic &
Denmark, Norway and Sweden, have ratified four and Finland National Conservative Green
three out of the five UN Space Treaties, as well as the ITU Con- Budget for 34.5 M€ 45 M€ 77.8 M€ 127 M€
Space
stitution and Convention. Nevertheless, only Sweden is a member (2014)[7]
of the UNCOPOUS, since 1958. All of them are signatories to
642 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649
Table 2
Overview national government strategies.
Denmark “Together for the future” [8]
Finland “Finland, a land of solutions” [9]
Norway “Political platform” [10]
Sweden “Statement of Policy”[11]
Table 3
Number of policy initiatives per country.
Denmark Finland Norway Sweden
122 190 194 76
The Norwegian government outlines its plans in the “Political
platform” to focus on Norwegian competitiveness to secure jobs,
tax reductions, debureaucratization, education, research and
knowledge transfer, more policing for a safer environment, infra-
structure, businesses, climate and health.
Prime Minister Loefven, representing the Swedish government
in its “Statement of Policy”, aims under the motto “come together
and take joint responsibility” at reforming the welfare sector and
the education system, establish clear public finances, and tackle
climate change.
Based on these strategic documents, the specific government
“policy initiatives” can be categorised and synthesised according to
policy goals. Overall, 582 policy initiative were extracted from the
documents, and then grouped into 95 policy goals. (Tables 3 and
4). Policy initiatives appeared commonly in the following format.
While the policy goal will report that there is a common interest to
support sustainable farming practices, this is translated for the
countries in the following way: Denmark aims to create a frame-
work for better conditions in the agriculture and food industry,
while taking care of the environment; Finland will utilise more
efficiently forest resources data and electronic services; Norway
aims at promoting competence-building measures in agriculture
that include an awareness of the environment; and Sweden will
ensure that lifestock farming must allow animals to exhibit their
natural behaviours, and behavioural disturbances must be pre-
vented. Table 4 provides an overview of the policy goals the Nordic
countries have in the various policy areas as they were found in
the government documents.
3. Nordic priorities according to the six areas of sustainability
In order to better understand and identify the common prio-
rities of the Nordic countries where space can serve as a tool for
policy making, the government policies of the four countries have
been analysed and categorised according to the six areas of sus-
tainability. The six areas of sustainability were developed as a
result of a generic analyses on what space can offer to the global
challenge of sustainability, with “its main idea to maintain the
longevity of the global ecosystem safeguarding humanity's further
development or even survival” [12].
The six areas of sustainability are a useful concept for studying
space policies, as it captures the essential areas, in which space can
contribute: Knowledge & Innovation, Environment, Resources,
Energy, Mobility, as well as Security & International Relations.
3.1. Knowledge
The field of knowledge and innovation in its original context
pertains to “Europe as a knowledge society,” which can only be
“sustained when it rests on a strong fundament provided by basic
sciences” [13]. This includes the dimensions of school education, to
gain knowledge and the ability to find new knowledge, but also
knowledge as continuous quest to understand the world around.
The government strategies of the Nordic, also build on this un-
derstanding, when reflecting on the need for more and better
education services, at all stages in life and for everyone in all
places [14]. With this broad understanding of knowledge, the ca-
tegory knowledge in this report comprises the Nordic sectorial
policies Education, Research and Technology Development, Edu-
cation, Research and Technology Development (Arctic), Enterprise
Total
& Industry, Enterprise & Industry (Arctic), Health and Public Ad-
ministration. The overall Nordic goal is to let the increase of
582 knowledge guide future growth. Table 5 shows the common policy
goals the Nordic countries express in their strategies.
The Nordic countries share a common approach to improve
education at all levels in society through funds, regulation, new
forms of coordination between the public and the private sector, as
well as elements of new public management. In addition, they
embrace and promote knowledge transfers into the health sector,
public administrations and businesses. Secondary level of educa-
tion, vocational training, high levels of tertiary graduation and the
adaption of new technologies to bring education services also to
remote places, are quintessential for all of them. Sweden in par-
ticular plans to make secondary education mandatory. All coun-
tries also put an emphasise on new businesses (entrepreneurs and
start-ups) and want to adapt their regulations accordingly. Fur-
thermore, the use of new technologies to spread knowledge is
univocally raised, and research in new technologies that lead to
innovation is promoted through funding of projects and staffing.
A common vision for the Arctic is expressed regarding the
economic potential of the area, and an increase of research cap-
abilities in the region to better understand its environment, its
resources and its potential for the development of the Nordic
countries.
Overall, the Nordic countries place high value in the area of
knowledge. While science is an important factor, also the funda-
ment in secondary education, vocational training and life-learning
are essential parts of the Nordic adaption to globalisation and
demographic change.
3.2. Environment
The policy area of environment is based on the understanding
that “drastic changes have occurred in the environment in the last
few decades. Humanity has been faced with natural disasters –
which together with global warming – constantly deteriorate the
environment humans have become accustomed to live in. All this
can lead not only to changes in lifestyles around the world but
should also prompt humanity to learn and develop means which
would mitigate and offer possible solutions to the issues at stake”
[15].
The Nordic countries have recognised the threat of climate
change, and with its close proximity to the melting Northern ice
caps, are also heavily affected by the consequences of global
warming. They share the vision to protect the natural environ-
ment, to promote a long term climate change policy that effec-
tively reduces the effects, and to promote international coopera-
tion in this field, bilaterally and multilaterally in international fora
(Table 6). Denmark, Finland and Norway, also connect their am-
bitions in knowledge and in promoting the economy with the
promotion of green technologies in the developing world.
To mitigate the effects of climate change, the countries aim to
incorporate a green understanding into the relations between the
public and the private sector, by updating procurement rules and
by bringing the sectors closer together. The protection of the en-
vironment is supported by regulating sensitive areas and reducing
 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649
Table 4
Overview Policy Goals.
Agriculture Increase domestic food production
Improve efficiencies in the public
management
Simplify the financial and organisational
framework for agriculture business
Support sustainable farming practices
Culture Promoting cultural activity, liberal arts and
democracy
Promote religious education and cultural
identities
Support the cultural autonomy of the sami
people
Education, research and tech- Enlarge and enhance adult education
nology development Enlarge vocational training opporunities
Improve basic education
Improve higher education
Improve research and development
Improve secondary education
Improve the organisational, financial and
governance framework
Promote regional involvement
Energy Commercialise renewable energies
Ensure a long term stable energy framework Regional development
toward self-sufficiency
Ensure the energy transition
Expansion of renewable energy
Restructure the domestic and foreign elec-
tricity grids
Enterprise & industry Improve framework conditions for
industries
Improve governance for competition
Promote and support entrepreneurship
Reform tax system for luxury goods
Support the forest industry
Support the mineral and metal industry
Support the shipping industry
Support to tourism
Support the digital economy
Environment (including cli- Improve the organisational, financial and
mate change) governance framework
Promote long term climate change policy
Protection of natural environment
Reduce co2 emission
Reduce consumption of scarce consumption
Fisheries Improve the regulation on fishing fleets
Update the regulation for fishing, hunting Trade
and tourism
Finance Ensure balanced public finance
Improve fiscal monitoring and management
Tax reform
Foreign policy Cooperation on combating illegal
immigration
Promote an independent Palestinian states Transport
Promote green growth and sustainable
development
Promotion of the country and their nationals
abroad
Promotion of the rule of law and democracy
Strengthen Nordic cooperation
Strengthening relations with Russian
federation
Strengthening the United Nations
Support the evolution of the EU'
agriculture&fisheries
Health
Immigration
Justice
Natural resources
Public administration
Security and defence (includes
also internal security)
Social affairs (equality, em-
ployment, citizens’ rights )
643
Improve access to health care
Governance reform for health provision
Introduction of new technologies and working
methods
Update the framework conditions and improve the
quality of services
Improve border protection
Improve environment for roma
Improve framework conditions for asylum seekers
and immigrants
Improve the naturalisation process
Revise the requirements for citizenship and working
conditions
Prevent sexual offenses
Promotion of sustainable exploitation of natural
resources
Promotion of the exploitation of petroleum
Debureaucratization and adaption of new working
methods
Increase transparency, monitoring, accountability
and access to documents
Increase use of new technologies
Promote the integration of the regions, munici-
palities and local governments
Expand ICT throughout the country
Implementation of new projects and modernisation
of rural and urban areas
Improve and expand housing
Strengthen participation and cooperation in NATO
and bi/multilateral agreements
Consolidate defence spending
Improve disaster management
Improve the organisational and governance
framework
Improve the strength and the organisation of police
forces
Promote EU's security and defence policy
Strengthen the Nordic cooperation in defense and
disaster management
Tackle cyber threats, organised crime, terrorism
Ensure the Nordic Model
Improve working conditions through adaptation of
the financial and organisational framework
Promote a flexible and stronger labour market
Promote the awareness and improve the framework
for human rights and the fight discrimination
Promote the inclusion of the labour market
Provide opportunities for young people
Revise the framework for a sustainable pension
system
Revision of social benefits and security
Promote international free trade
Attract foreign investment
Promote export to emerging economies
Promote trade among the neighbouring and Nordic
countries
Support to industries involved in trade
Improve of public railway transport system*
Improve organisational and financial framework for
infrastructure projects
644 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649

Table 4 (continued )

Support the evolution of the EU's econom-

ic&trade policy
Support the evolution of the EU's foreign
and security policy
Support the evolution of the EU's immigra-
tion policy

Table 5 Table 7
Policy goals in knowledge & innovation. Policy goals in Resources.

Debureaucratization and adaption of new working All Public Service Increase domestic food production All
methods Reform Support sustainable farming practices All
Improve the organisational, financial and govern- All Simplify the financial and organisational framework Denmark, Finland,
ance framework for agriculture business Norway
Update the regulatory framework for fishing Denmark, Finland,
Enlarge vocational training opportunities All Education
Norway
Improve basic education All Reform
Improve secondary education All Arctic
Improve higher education All Sustainable use of marine resources Denmark, Finland,
Improve Research and Development All Norway
Sustainable use of Arctic resources Norway, Sweden
Improve access to health care All Health
Reform
Introduction of new technologies, working All
methods and improve quality of service
elements of the universal human rights every human being should
Revise governance for health provision All
have adequate access to them” [16]. However, the decreasing land-
Arctic
use for agriculture and depletion of water reservoirs, increase the
Identify and exploit business opportunities in the All
Arctic
need for trade and novel management solutions.
Strengthen Research capabilities in Arctic Region All The Nordic countries are no champions of agriculture (Euro-
stat), and have only limit areas for planting and cultivating of life
forms. Therefore they share the goals to find ways to increase
Table 6 domestic food production, while implementing sustainable farm-
Policy goals in environment.
ing practices, that protect animals and ensure fertile soil. A key
Promote long term climate change policy All component here are programmes for young farmers and in-
Promote the role of international cooperation in All centives for a new farming generation (Table 7).
environment In the arctic region, there is no common approach for the use of
Protection of natural environment All resources. However, Denmark, Finland and Norway do emphasise
Reduce CO2 Emission All
Improve the organisational, financial and govern- Denmark, Norway,
the need for the sustainable use of marine resources.
ance framework Sweden To face the challenges of globalisation and demographic
change, the Nordic countries place a special emphasize on the
Arctic
Monitoring, managing and governance of En- All promotion of agriculture business and new methods.
vironmental issues
Promote international cooperation in the arctic All 3.4. Energy
environment
Creation of Nature conservation areas in the Sweden, Finland,
Arctic Norway
The issue of Energy is to be assessed with the background that
energy needs are one of the crucial topics of the 21st century, with
the need to cope “with the increased energy needs caused by a
their exploitation, in particular forest and marine areas, but also by growing world population and increasing industrialisation” [17].
giving stimuli for people to change their lifestyle to a more en- Energy policy has to follow the “three inherently contracting goals,
vironmental-friendly one. the security of supply, efficiency and cost effectiveness as well as
Although, the Artic is seen as an area for business opportunities environmental compatibility“ [18].
and resources exploitation, the management of environmental The Nordic countries are well aware of the Energy challenges
issues in the region, is underlying the Nordic ambitions. Finland, and are determined to find solutions, by emphasising the use of
Norway and Sweden also aim at establishing conservation areas, renewable energies, finding new sources of energy and ensuring a
Norway and Sweden highlight the importance of sustainable use long term stable energy framework with self-sufficiency as its end
of the resources. All of the countries regard international co- goal (Table 8).
operation as a crucial element to protect the Arctic. Denmark, Finland and Norway, also have plans for the Arctic
The Nordic countries have put environmental issues on the were the goal is to strengthen conventional and new energy in-
agenda and aim at an overhaul of their public and private sectors, to vestments in the Arctic.
better incorporate mitigating solutions. They are also aware of the The Nordic countries are very ambitious and determined in
sensitivity of the Arctic region, and equally give attention to en- solving their need for Energy, with cost efficient and environ-
vironmental factors. Overall, environmental mitigation solutions, are mental friendly solutions.
part of facing the general challenges the Nordic states are facing.
3.5. Mobility
3.3. Resources
The area of mobility is understood in the context that “people
There is an increasing scarcity of resources that the world has are travelling more and more and freight transportation is in-
to face, in the sense that “food and water are considered to be creasing with globalisation. The management of land, air, and sea
 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649
Table 8
Policy goals in Energy.
Ensure energy transition to renewables All
Find new renewable sources Finland, Norway,
Sweden
Ensure a long term stable energy framework toward Norway, Sweden
self-sufficiency
Restructure the domestic and foreign electricity Denmark, Norway
grids
Arctic
Strengthen Conventional and New Energy In- Denmark, Finland,
vestments in the Arctic Norway
Table 9
Policy goals in mobility.
Improve of public railway transport system All
Improve and expand housing Finland, Sweden
Implementation of new projects and modernisation of Norway, Denmark
rural and urban areas
Improve organisational and financial framework for in- Norway and
frastructure projects Sweden
traffic is a crucial issue with critical economic, safety and security
consequences.” [19].
Mobility for the Nordic countries is largely a concern in regard to
public transportation in metropolitan areas as well as railway
transport systems. They share goals to implement new management
systems, but also introduce new technologies, set up new connec-
tions and therefore increase people's mobility to move (Table 9).
Furthermore, Finland, Norway and Sweden also place a high
value of expanding ICT throughout the country. There are no
ambitions vis a vis the Arctic for the Nordic.
Overall, infrastructure projects in the Nordic countries are
mainly based on the improvement of the railway sector. This will
allow people to move in the vast lands of the North, and increase
the economic activities in the countries.
3.6. Security and international relations
In its original understanding of Schrogl/Mathieu/ Lukaszczyk
2009 (251), security refers to the evolution of threats that have led
to the emergence of the new concept ‘sustainable security’, which,
“includes protection, reconstruction, CIMIC (Civil and Military Co-
operation), disarmament and state-building.” Within the realm of
this study, also elements of international relations as part of for-
eign policy and immigration policy are considered, as these have
become elements for system protection.
The Nordic countries share a range of common approaches
under this area, that makes their common DNA visible as they
present themselves to other states on the international level. The
analyses detected that in security and safety matters the countries
show commonalties in immigration policy, that creates better
conditions for asylum seekers and immigrants, the promotion of
the EU's security and defence (CSDP) policy, also in the case of
Norway, as well as the fight against organised crime, terrorism and
cyber threats.2 (Table 10) Norway participates in fora of the EU's
CSDP. In addition, the Nordic countries have their own platform of
cooperation, the Nordic Defence Cooperation (NorDefCO), which
they aim to strengthen further.
From a foreign policy perspective, the Nordic states share the
goals to promote the rule of law and democracy internationally,
2
Denmark had opted out and does not participate in the EU's security and
defence (CSDP) policy. Nevertheless, the government sees the need to do and thus
put a referendum on membership on the Agenda.
645
Table 10
Policy goals in Security & International Relations.
Strengthen participation and cooperation in NATO and bi/multilateral All
agreements
Promote EU's Common Security and Defence Policy All
Promotion of the rule of law and democracy All
Strengthening the United Nations All
Strengthen the Nordic Cooperation All
Tackle cyber threats, organised crime, terrorism All
Improve the strength and the organisation of police forces All
Arctic
Enhance cross border cooperation All
and for this also to empower the United Nations. They also have a
common special interest, in promoting green technologies, espe-
cially in developing countries. With regard to the Arctic, the Nordic
states intend to increase their cooperation.
In the area of security and international relations, their ambi-
tions reflect the domestic goals to invest in green technologies and
new forms of energy to prevent the effects of climate change. They
have in common that they priorities multilateral, regional and
international cooperation in the field of Security.
4. The Nordic space strategies
Space can be used as a tool in assisting decision & policy makers in
developing, implementing and monitoring a number of sectorial po-
licies. The explicit link between space at the service of society is be-
coming more and more apparent of the past years. Motivations behind
space vary among ESA Member states (Fig. 1). [20] The most common
ones identified are boosting industrial competitiveness, engagement
in international cooperation, technology development and transfer, job
creation, as indirect benefit of space,3 European non-dependence, and
societal benefits. The top motivator to invest in space among all ESA
Member States is industrial competitiveness followed closely by the
intention to promote and foster international cooperation. [21] Space
activities are perceived as a means to enhance the space related in-
dustries and/or high tech industries. Closely linked to the objective of
industrial competitiveness is the potential of technology transfer from
space for commercial purposes in terrestrial application. The analysis
also shows that industrial competitiveness is top priority for the
Nordic countries with the exception of Norway that does not explicitly
state it like the other three. International Cooperation is a particular
motivator for Finland and Norway. Explicitly, Finland is the only
country of the Nordics that is motivated by Technological Develop-
ment. Interestingly, none of the Nordic countries mention societal
benefits or job creation, as indirect benefit of space, as driver to invest
in space. Societal benefits as motivator for space motivates less
Members States than any other motivation. [18] This is possibly due to
the fact that Member States are less aware of the benefits of space as a
tool to tackle societal challenges.
Three out of the four Nordic countries, Finland, Norway and
Sweden, have developed an official space strategy. The strategies
are:
 Finland: Finnish Space Strategy 2013–2020 (Ministry of
Economy)
 Norway: Between heaven and Earth: Norwegian space policy
for business and public benefit (Ministry of Trade and Industry)
3
The motivation, Job creation as indirect benefits of space refers to the under-
standing that investments in space can lead to job growth in non space sector. This
is different from the traditional motivation of industrial competiveness as a driver
to invest space, as it looks at job creation in the space sector only.
646 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649

Fig. 1. Motivation for investing in space.

Fig. 2. Technology domains of interest.

 Sweden: Long-term Strategy for Period 2011–2015 (Swedish

Table 11
Overview on responsible Ministries and Implementing Entities in the Nordic States.
National Space Board) Ministry of Education and Research)

Country Ministry Implementing Entity Denmark follows an unofficial plan that was developed by the
Danish Agency for Science and Innovation [22].
Denmark Ministry of Higher Educa- Danish Agency for Science, Technology
The analyses of these documents combined with an ESA stra-
tion and Science and Innovation (DASTI)
Finland Minister of Economic TEKES – The Finnish Funding Agency tegic workshop, shows a common Nordic interest in the traditional
Affairs for Innovation ESA technology domains: Navigation, Satellite Communication,
Norway Minister of Trade, Industry Norwegian Space Center Launchers, Human Space Flight, Science and Exploration, Earth
and Fisheries
Observation and Integrated Applications (Fig. 2) [23]. The Nordic
Sweden Minister of Higher Educa- Swedish National Space Board
tion and Research countries are all interested in all domains with the exception of
Sweden, not explicitly expressing interest in satellite

Table 12
Overview on Nordic Governance. Ministries overseeing the various organisations.

Organisation/Country Denmark Finland Norway Sweden

EUSC/NATO Defence
EUMETSAT Environment Agriculture & Environment Transport & Communication Environment
GMES/COPERNICUS Science & Higher Education Agriculture & Environment – Enterprise &Innovation
GSA/GALILEO Transport Transport & Communication – Enterprise & Innovation
ITU Business & Growth Transport & Communication Transport &Communication Enterprise &Innovation
UN Foreign Affairs
 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649
Table 13
Overview on the Nordic Space Strategies and Programmatic Priorities.
Denmark
Evaluation the Danish Contribution to Space Research (Danish Agency for Science
Technology and Innovation, 2008) and Evaluation of Danish Industrial Activ-
ities in the European Space Agency [24]
 Funding of ESA programmes, to support scientific environments, open compe-
tition, small and medium size companies, continuity in ESA investments
 Small and low-cost scientific satellites
 Earth observation, data and applications, climate monitoring, launcher tech-
nologies, microgravity research, telecommunications, technology development,
meteorological satellites development, and space situational awareness
 Arctic region
Finland
Finnish Space Strategy 2013 2020 [25]
 Tends to cover all public sector activities from satellite and space satellite to
applications
 Raising level of scientific research, increasing competitiveness of the national
space industry (technology development)
 Cooperation between industry and academia
 Space applications for Arctic and Arctic Sea region
 Data services, open geospatial data services, positioning, remote sensing, climate
changing and environmental safety
 Boost the competitiveness of services in positioning, remote sensing and geo-
graphic information
 Niche capability development, support of the national space industry and
technology transfer to non-space sectors
 Development of applications for satellite navigation, Earth Observation (en-
vironmental monitoring, natural resources, energy)
 Increasing capabilities in science and technology, products of space and appli-
cation industry, strengthening the impact on public and private services (socio-
economic benefits)
 Strengthening the scientific research and participation in the European
programmes
 Increasing the societal impact of research and exploiting data collected by space
science
Norway
Between heaven and earth: Norwegian space policy for business and public benefit
[26] (Ministry of Trade and Industry, 2013)
 The main goal is to foster profitable companies, growth and employment, when
meeting important needs of society and user groups, when securing the greater
return on international space collaboration, and supporting high-quality national
administration of national space activity
 Traditional areas are launchers, human spaceflight, space exploration, satellite
navigation, communications, Earth observation sciences, ground infrastructure,
and potential in micro satellite development
 The key focus areas are in national space industry development, Earth ob-
servation, satellite communications and navigation (ground systems)
 In Earth observation, Norway has a special focus on integrated applications in
maritime traffic monitoring, fishery resources, maritime borders security, sea
pollution (oil spills, offshore installations), mapping ice and icebergs
Sweden
Long-term Strategy for Period 2011 2015 ) [27]
 Main goals are to promote the use of space for public applications (for en-
vironment, communications and transport), to increase the competitiveness of
space industry and institutions, and to exploit potentials of the Esrange Space
Center
 Key national programme areas are in magnetospheric and ionospheric research,
astronomical studies, remote sensing, Earth atmosphere and environment ob-
servation, and specialised industrial competence in technology development
 Main strategy focuses are in operation in space, industrial competitiveness, ac-
cess to space, and development of space operations and space research
(knowledge management, innovation and competitiveness), and fostering of
European space cooperation
 Main strategy impact areas are such in transport, communications, environment
and climate
telecommunications, even though it participates in the related ESA
optional programme.
All Nordic countries have strong capabilities in Earth Observa-
tion and all of them participate in ESA's technology domains at
some level. Denmark and Finland, particularly have strong re-
search capacities, while Norway and Sweden have particularly
strong capabilities in telecommunication and launchers That is
interesting as Sweden neither has the explicit motivation in Space
for societal benefits, nor has it expressed as a strategic interest so
647
far.
The governance structure of the Nordic countries regarding
space are varying both for ESA oversight as well as oversight of
and participation in other organisations engaged in space activ-
ities. Such organisation include the European Organisation for
Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT), the Eur-
opean Union Satellite Center (EUSC), the European Global Navi-
gation Satellite Systems Agency (GSA), the European Defence
Agency (EDA), the International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
and the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer
Space (UNCOPUOS). The Ministries involved vary and may include
the Ministry of Science, Technology, Research and Education,
Economy, Industry, Innovation, Transport, Research and Education,
Economy, Industry, Innovation, Transport, Telecommunications,
Defence, Environment, Energy, Foreign Affairs.
Table 11 shows the responsible Ministries and implementing
entities for ESA. Denmark and Sweden have Ministries with a
scientific focus overseeing matters of space in ESA, which shows
that their approaches to space is through science, technology and
education. A strong focus is given on improving the scientific and
research capabilities of the sector also through more collaboration
with industry, and focus on applicability. Sweden is having a
special focus on magnethospheric and ionospheric research, as-
tronomical studies, remote sensing, Earth atmosphere and en-
vironment observation. Specific priorities in Denmark are in pro-
moting small and low-cost scientific satellites as well as the pro-
motion of Small Medium Size Enterprises (SMEs).
Finland and Norway, on the other hand lead space activities in
ESA through the Ministry of Economy/Trade and Industry pro-
viding more focus on the role of space for industrial competi-
tiveness, job creation, as indirect benefit of space, and its role in
transversal matters. Finland is keen to develop niche capability in
support of the national space industry and technology transfer to
non-space sectors. Norway's main goal is to foster profitable
companies, growth and employment, meeting important needs of
society and user groups, and securing the greater return on in-
ternational space collaboration, as well as supporting high-quality
national administration of national space activity. Norway has also
a particular interest in Earth observation, with special focus on
applications for maritime traffic monitoring, fishery resources,
maritime borders security, sea pollution (oil spills, offshore in-
stallations), mapping ice and icebergs.
Table 13, gives a consolidated overview of the Nordic Space
Strategies and Programmatic Priorities.
Table 12 shows the Ministries responsible for the for the
oversight of other organisation which also play a role in setting up
a space agenda.
Space is a tool that can be used to support many other policy
areas. Due to its transverse nature space can serve as a “multiplier”
to the six areas of sustainability. Member States foresee different
levels of the role space can have as an enabling tool in support of
these areas (Fig. 3). It is not surprising that all Member states are
unanimously accepting the importance of space assets for tele-
communications and transport. This could be attributed to the
widespread use of satellite communications, in particular in the
field of broadcasting and the increased use of navigation to
transport. The role of space for security is becoming of increasing
importance and is the second most popular area of sustainability.
In the case of the Nordics, what received equal attention with
knowledge and education and environment. The role of space for
security is often underlined in countries with long land or sea
boarders as a means to support boarder control. Denmark, Finland
and Norway explicitly mention the role of space for security. When
it comes to considering natural resources (including fisheries,
mining, energy, etc.) priorities tend to coincide with serving na-
tional interests. Norway and Sweden make explicit reference to
648 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649
Fig. 3. Areas of sustainability domains of interest.
natural resources. The role of space for energy is considered the
least important in ESA Member States and this is confirmed also in
the Nordic countries. Regarding knowledge and education, Den-
mark, Finland and Norway explicitly see space as an enabler. Only
Norway explicitly mentions the importance of space for the energy
sector. This could be attributed to the lesser understanding in
other countries of the role of space can play in the energy sector
and the possible synergies it brings. However, this is expected to
change over the years as alternative sources of energy will be in-
creasing, as space can be used as a tool for choosing appropriate
locations for alternative sources of energy and for optimising en-
ergy grids worldwide.
5. Concluding remarks
The national government priorities have been analysed to
provide a comprehensive overview of the common objectives in
sectorial policies and provide an overview of the government's
perspectives regarding space. The common priorities have been
framed according to the six areas of sustainability: energy, en-
vironment, knowledge, mobility, resources, and security.
The Nordic countries have a strong focus on Energy with par-
ticular interest in renewables, environment and climate change
through international cooperation. These countries concentrate
efforts on social cohesion and employment as well as growth
through innovation, thereby confirming theoretical reflections on
the Nordic “social-democratic” model and its future. A particular
focus is given to developing a knowledge based society through
education, research and development in high tech sectors in-
cluding health and security. The Arctic region is of joint common
interest and amongst top priorities for all four countries. Ad-
ditionally, there is the target to improve public transportation,
connectivity, modernisation and efficiency. Also to support sus-
tainable farming and strengthen Nordic cooperation is a common
objective. All Nordic countries give a special attention to security
and are interested to promote EU security and defence, boarder
control and cyber security.
For the space sector in particular, all Nordics with the exception
of Sweden express interest in all technology areas. Sweden, even
though it does not explicitly express interest in telecommunica-
tions in its strategy, invests in ESA programmes and engages in a
considerable amount of projects in this field.
Industrial competitiveness is among top motivators for all the
states and international cooperation is a motivator for space en-
gagement for Denmark and Sweden. The Nordic countries do not
perceive societal benefits and job creation, as indirect benefit of
space, as top essential elements for engaging in space activities. In
the field of Earth observation the Nordic have similar participation
in ESA programmes and return of contracts, with Finland being the
frontrunner.
In the fields of energy, knowledge, environment and security are
priority areas of the governments and have potential to be explored
by the space sectors, as current space strategies do not explicitly
focus on these areas and do not fully capture the potential. Overall,
the potential of space applications to support the government prio-
rities and needs is not fully exploited. More efforts are needed to
promote the use of space to support policy makers in developing,
implementing, monitoring sectorial policies to achieve overall policy
objectives. A further research could be conducted focusing on ana-
lysing the link between overall policy priorities and current & future
space policy priorities of these countries, including interviews with
key decision-makers, to better understand the fabric of space policy
making in the Nordic States.
References
[1] G. Esping-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Princeton Uni-
versity Press, Princeton, 1990.
[2] T.M. Andersen, B. Holmström, S. Honkapohja, S. Korkman, H.T. Söderström,
J. Vartiainen, The Nordic Model: Embracing Globalization and Sharing Risks,
14, Taloustieto Oy. Pg,, Helsinki, 2007.
[3] Norden (2015). The Nordic Welfare Model. Retrieved August 2, 2015, (from
Norden): 〈https://www.norden.org/en/nordic-council-of-ministers/ministers-
for-co-operation-mr-sam/sustainable-development/indicators-for-sustain
able-development-1/the-nordic-welfare-model/〉.
[4] T.M., Andersen, B., Holmström, S., Honkapohja, S., Korkman, H.T., Söderström, & J.,
Vartiainen, 2007, The Nordic Model. Embracing globalization and sharing risks.
Helsinki: Taloustieto Oy.; Norden. (2015). The Nordic Welfare Model. Retrieved
August 2, 2015, (from Norden): 〈https://www.norden.org/en/nordic-council-of-
ministers/ministers-for-co-operation-mr-sam/sustainable-development/indicators-
for-sustainable-development-1/the-nordic-welfare-model/〉; The Economist. (2013,
February 2). The Nordic countries. The Next Supermodel. Retrieved August 3, 2015,
from The Economist 〈http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571136-politi
cians-both-right-and-left-could-learn-nordic-countries-next-supermodel〉.
[5] T.M. Andersen, B. Holmström, S. Honkapohja, S. Korkman, H.T. Söderström,
J. Vartiainen, The Nordic Model: Embracing Globalization and Sharing Risks,
12, Taloustieto Oy. Pg,, Helsinki, 2007.
[6] K.-U. Schrogl, C. Mathieu, A. Lukaszczyk, Threats, Risks and Sustainability –
Answers by Space, Springer, Vienna, 2009.
 C. Lehnert et al. / Acta Astronautica 128 (2016) 640–649
[7] Euroconsult, Profiles of Government Space Programs, Euroconsult, Paris, 2015.
[8] The Danish Government, Together for the Future, Government Platform, Co-
penhagen, 2015.
[9] Finnish Government, Finland, a Land of Solutions, Strategic Programme of the
Finnish Government, 2015.
[10] Norwegian Government, Political platform, Sundvolden (2013).
[11] Government Offices of Sweden, Statement of Government Policy, Stockholm,
2014.
[12] K.-U. Schrogl, C. Mathieu, A. Lukaszczyk, Threats, Risks and Sustainability –
Answers by Space, Springer, Vienna, 2009.
[13] K.-U. Schrogl, C. Mathieu, A. Lukaszczyk, Threats, Risks and Sustainability –
Answers by Space, Springer, Vienna 2009, p. 23.
[14] The Danish Government, 2015. Together for the Future. Copenhagen: Gov-
ernment Platform.; Finnish Government. (2015). Finland, a land of solutions.
Strategic Programme of the Finnish Government.; Norwegian Government.
(2013). Political platform. Sundvolden.; Government Offices of Sweden. (2014).
Statement of Government Policy. Stockholm.
[15] K.-U. Schrogl, C. Mathieu, A. Lukaszczyk, Threats, Risks and Sustainability –
Answers by Space, Springer,, Vienna 2009, p. 63.
[16] Ibid. 105.
[17] Ibid. 155.
[18] Ibid. 155.
[19] Ibid. 205.
[20] D. Sagath, M., Adriaensen, C., Giannopapa, A. Papastefanou, 2014. An assess-
ment of Space Governance Structures and Space strategies in mEMBER STATES
649
OF THE European Space Agency (esa). IAC-14, E3,1.1  23510. in: Proceedings
of the 65th International Astronautical Congress, Toronto, Canada.
[21] Ibid.
[22] Ramboll Management, 2008. Evaluation of Danish Industrial Activities in the
European Space Agency. Assessment of the Economic Impacts of the Danish
ESA-Membership. 〈http://ufm.dk/en/publications/2008/files-2008/evaluation-
of-the-danish-contributions-to-space-research-1.pdf〉.
[23] D. Sagath, M., Adriaensen, C., Giannopapa, A. Papastefanou, A. 2014. An as-
sessment of space governance structures and space strategies in member
states of the European Space Agency (ESA). IAC-14, E3,1.1  23510. Toronto:
International Astronautical Federation; A. Maarten, G. Christina, D., Sagath, A.
Papastefanou, A. (2015). Priorities in national space strategies and governance.
Acta Astronautica.
[24] Ramboll Management, 2008. Evaluation of Danish Industrial Activities in the
European Space Agency. Assessment of the Economic Impacts of the Danish
ESA-Membership. 〈http://ufm.dk/en/publications/2008/files-2008/evaluation-
of-the-danish-contributions-to-space-research-1.pdf〉.
[25] Finnish Space Committee, The national strategy for Finland's space activities
in 2013–2020 – to space through Europe, global benefits and prosperity to
finland from space activities, Finnish Space Committee, 2012.
[26] Ministry of Trade and Industry, Heaven Earth: Nor. Space Policy Bus. Public
Benefit (2013).
[27] Swedish National Space Board, The Swedish National Space Board's Long-Term
Strategy Focused On, Swedish National Space Board, Solna 2012, pp.
2011–2015.