A feminist Green Foreign Policy approach to space debris: Centering justice and equity beyond Earth’s orbit

Introduction

Space debris has emerged as an urgent global green security challenge that threatens Earth’s environment, critical satellite infrastructure, and humanity’s long-term ability to access space-based services. The problem is clear: thousands of defunct satellites, spent rocket stages, and collision fragments now orbit Earth, creating an increasingly hazardous environment. This technical challenge carries profound implications for global justice, sustainability, and peace, and aligns directly with the core pillars of the Green Foreign & Security Policy (GFSP) narrative as summarized in the Green Foreign Policy Snapshots Preliminary Report.

This article argues that space debris governance must be understood through three foundational elements of the GFSP narrative: Promotion of Peace and Non-Violence (characteristic 6), Climate Policy & Sustainability (characteristic 3), and International Cooperation & Alliances (characteristic 9). It also shows how a comprehensive GFSP approach must integrate Elements of Feminist Foreign Policy (characteristic 4) directly into space diplomacy. This requires centering justice, equity, and sustainability in how we understand and regulate space debris, ensuring that the harms and benefits of space use are distributed fairly, and that all communities, especially those most at risk, have genuine voice in shaping global norms.

Contextualizing space debris within the GFSP narrative

Space debris represents a critical threat to global sustainability and peace. According to the GFP Snapshots Preliminary Report, Climate Policy & Sustainability (characteristic 3) achieves considerable prevalence across green party foreign policy positions globally. This is because environmental challenges transcend borders—what happens in orbit affects everyone on Earth, making space sustainability inherently a collective concern requiring coordinated action rather than competitive advantage.

Nearly 60% of SDG targets rely on space-based data. Satellites enable climate monitoring, disaster response, and development initiatives, particularly for vulnerable communities. Without functioning satellites, cyclone warning systems cannot save lives in Bangladesh, climate data collection becomes impossible in Sub-Saharan Africa, and remote communities cannot access telemedicine. Thus, orbital sustainability is fundamentally a development and climate justice issue.

Yet the orbital ecosystem is degrading rapidly. The European Space Agency tracks approximately 40,000 objects in Earth orbit, though only 11,000 are active satellites. Existing fragments generate additional fragments through collisions faster than they naturally decay. This scenario, defined Kessler Syndrome after the first scientist who described it, is no longer theoretical. It threatens the satellite infrastructure upon which climate adaptation and sustainable development depend.

This crisis directly undermines the GFSP narrative’s emphasis on International Cooperation & Alliances (characteristic 9). While voluntary frameworks exist, like the COPUOS Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines and ISO 24113, compliance remains uneven. The fragmented, voluntary nature of current debris governance reflects a gap that green foreign policy specifically addresses through Elements of Normative Foreign Policy (characteristic 1).

Normative foreign policy works by promoting common rules, international institutions, and legal frameworks as antidotes to strategic competition. Rather than assuming states pursue narrow self-interest, normative approaches anchor behavior in shared norms and accountable institutions. For space debris, this means building enforceable, multilateral legal frameworks based on shared responsibility, transforming space from a competitive domain into a regime of collective stewardship. Unlike realist approaches treating space as a domain where states maximize unilateral advantage, the GFSP narrative treats it as a shared ecosystem requiring collective stewardship, transparency, and binding rules.

Feminist rerspectives on space debris impacts

The gendered dimensions of space debris remain invisible in mainstream space security discourse. This represents a critical gap that Elements of Feminist Foreign Policy (characteristic 4) illuminates. Feminist analysis asks: who bears costs and o collects the benefits? Which populations are protected and which rendered vulnerable?

Women, girls, and marginalized groups, especially in the Global South, rely critically on satellite-enabled services. When satellites fail due to debris impacts, maternal health networks collapse, women lose access to telemedicine for prenatal and emergency care. When disaster systems fail, women in flood-prone regions lose crucial evacuation time. When agricultural satellites cease functioning, smallholder farmers, often women, cannot access climate data to adapt crops. These are concrete threats to fundamental capabilities.

Disruptions widen digital divides and restrict critical information access, compounding systemic inequalities. This connects to Promotion of Human Rights (characteristic 7) and equitable information access. The GFSP narrative identifies human rights as a core characteristic reflecting the conviction that universal rights transcend borders. When space debris limits information access for women and the Global South, it violates fundamental rights in ways traditional frameworks fail to capture.

However today exclusion pervades governance itself. According to Project Ploughshares, “those who face disproportionate harms are rarely in the room.” Participation by women, BIPOC, and Global South representatives in space security diplomacy has been “abysmal.” Current space governance remains “patriarchal, hierarchical, and archaic,” built on Cold War thinking and conducted in technical language excluding non-experts. From a green foreign policy perspective, this democratic deficit is destabilizing as rules ignoring Global South nations’ needs or excluding women’s voices are unlikely to be seen as legitimate or fair, undermining compliance.

The GFSP narrative emphasizes that Feminist Foreign Policy is essential. Feminist analysis reveals how gender shapes access to power and resources within international institutions. In space governance, this means examining why women comprise only a tiny fraction of space engineers and decision-makers, and how “space security” language marginalizes equitable development concerns. Genuine inclusion requires accessible processes with translation services, travel funds, decision-making power, and recognition that those most affected by debris should help shape governance rules.

GFSP narrative informing feminist space governance

Four GFSP characteristics are particularly informing for reshaping space governance:

Promotion of Peace and Non-Violence (Characteristic 6): The GFP Snapshots Preliminary Report identifies this among the most consistently endorsed characteristics globally, rooted in the green movement’s pacifist foundations. In space, this directly challenges militarization. Anti-satellite weapons tests exemplify how geopolitical competition pollutes the orbital environment. One test in 2021 created 3,000+ debris fragments, heightening tensions while generating cascading harms for vulnerable communities dependent on satellite services. From a GFSP narrative perspective grounded in characteristic 6, space weapons like ASAT violate shared responsibility for the commons.

Fair Trade, Development, and Resources (Characteristic 5): The report  identifies this as a core element of the GFSP narrative, reflecting critique of extractive capitalism and colonial exploitation. Characteristic 5 examines how international economic activity’s benefits and burdens are distributed. In space, rapid commercialization (e.g., mega-constellations, space tourism, asteroid mining) benefits wealthy countries and corporations while imposing risks (debris, orbital crowding) on vulnerable populations. Historically, space activity “fuelled tensions while excluding developing countries from access and participation,” creating a “space gap” that compounds inequality. A GFSP narrative approach grounded in characteristic 5 critiques “space colonialism” as reproducing extractive, unequal patterns in a new domain. Practically, this could mean, for example, requiring mega-constellations demonstrate tangible benefits for underserved regions, or tying orbital licenses to public good contributions like emergency broadcasting in least-developed countries.

Prohibition/Restriction of Arms and Arms Trade (Characteristic 8): The GFSP narrative treats arms control as both distinct and an expression of peace principles. From a feminist perspective, any weapons system generating debris is fundamentally unjust as it converts shared infrastructure into militarized competition. Research shows women and girls suffer disproportionately during conflicts triggered by resource scarcity and strategic competition. Preventing space weaponization prevents future conflicts rooted in orbital resource competition. This aligns characteristic 8 with the feminist principle (characteristic 4) that women and marginalized communities bear disproportionate militarization costs.

International Cooperation and Alliances (Characteristic 9): The GFP Snapshots Preliminary Report shows this is nearly universal, reflecting the understanding that transnational challenges require transnational solutions grounded in institutions and law. Addressing space debris requires genuine multilateral collaboration and authentic problem-solving grounded in shared responsibility, not strategic positioning. This means leveraging COPUOS as platforms for building trust and coordinating action. Characteristic 9 emphasizes that transparent, inclusive institutions facilitate cooperation even among competitors by reducing uncertainty and enforcing compliance through collective monitoring. Information-sharing about orbital launches and debris tracking creates conditions for deeper cooperation on debris remediation and sustainable practices.

Policy and advocacy pathways toward feminist green space governance

The GFSP narrative translates into concrete policy mechanisms:

1. Inclusive multilateral dialogue (characteristics 4, 5, 7): The framework emphasizes that participatory decision-making requires actively including typically excluded voices. This means expanding COPUOS to welcome NGOs, Indigenous representatives, women’s groups, and affected communities through new mechanisms. Parliamentary networks, proven effective in climate policy, could be adapted for space governance. Genuine accessibility requires translation services, travel funds, capacity-building, and decision-making power. This means establishing working groups explicitly centering feminist analysis (characteristic 4), environmental justice perspectives, and Global South expertise (characteristic 5).
2. Gender-responsive norms and accountability (characteristics 1, 4): The GFSP narrative places normative foreign policy at the centre, with feminist foreign policy specifying that norms must be gender-responsive. This means integrating feminist principles into space legislation and debris mitigation guidelines as foundational, not add-ons. Space agencies should conduct gender impact assessments before major initiatives and track participation rates in decision-making. The GFSP narrative suggests this improves policy outcomes by incorporating knowledge traditional technical approaches miss.
3. Capacity-building for vulnerable communities (characteristics 3,5,7): The GFSP narrative treats development and sustainability as inseparable from human rights and fair resource distribution. Supporting STEM education among girls and women, and providing training for satellite-dependent communities, reflects this integrated approach. Just as climate science emphasizes Indigenous knowledge alongside Western science, space programs should integrate local insights. From a green foreign policy perspective, democratizing technology means ensuring those suffering first-order climate impacts benefit from space technology and help shape its future. This includes supporting Global South universities to develop their own satellite capacities and debris-monitoring capabilities, shifting from dependence to autonomy.
4. Shifting from technological positivity to justice-oriented governance (characteristic 1): The GFP Snapshots Preliminary Report also identifies normative foreign policy as requiring new narratives and value frameworks. Currently, space governance is dominated by technocratic language and realist assumptions. A GFSP normative approach fundamentally reframes these narratives. Instead of celebrating satellite constellations, we ask whether they serve universal broadband or corporate profit (characteristic 5). Rather than treating space militarization as inevitable, we promote de-escalation norms rooted in non-violence (characteristic 6). We shift from technocratic solutions toward justice-oriented governance centering those most harmed (characteristic 4).

The GFPS framework requires reconceptualizing how space institutions describe missions and priorities, moving from “efficiency” and “strategic advantage” to “equity,” “sustainability,” and “collective wellbeing.” This helps us understand which problems are urgent, whose concerns are heard, which solutions are legitimate. A justice-oriented framework redefines space debris not as a technical problem to manage, but as symptomatic of governance prioritizing commercial and military advantage over sustainability and equity.

Conclusion

Space debris represents a pressing global security challenge intersecting climate resilience, development, and peace, all core GFSP narrative concerns. Addressing it through a feminist green foreign policy lens highlights dimensions neglected by traditional governance: marginalized communities’ rights, obligations to future generations, and a cooperative, caring approach to our shared orbital commons.

By centering equity with sustainability, space policy reflects green foreign policy’s core commitment to justice and solidarity. The GFSP narrative provides a concrete toolkit: normative foreign policy (characteristic 1) grounding enforceable institutions; feminist foreign policy (characteristic 4) centering the most affected; fair development (characteristic 5) ensuring equitable space benefits; peace and non-violence (characteristic 6) de-escalating militarized competition; human rights (characteristic 7) guaranteeing information access; and international cooperation (characteristic 9) enabling collective orbital stewardship.

In practice, this requires strengthening international law and institutions with enforceable debris rules while democratizing processes so women, Global South voices, and vulnerable communities are genuinely at the table. It means treating orbital space as a common ecosystem requiring ethics of care grounded in shared responsibility rather than unilateral advantage. It means recognizing space governance as fundamentally a justice question: which communities benefit, which bear costs, and who decides?

The longer systemic reforms are delayed, the closer we move toward cascading orbital catastrophe disproportionately harming those least responsible. This feminist-green vision challenges us to urgent action, ensuring space remains a domain of cooperation and justice, not conflict and inequality. By embracing GFSP narrative with feminist perspectives at the core we ensure the orbital environment serves humanity’s most vulnerable.