Who Owns the Orbit? Space Traffic Management and Law of Shared Responsibility.

By Arya Anushree & Debomita Biswas (LL.M., Symbiosis Law School,Pune)

We’ve mastered space travel, but not space discipline, and that’s becoming a dangerous problem. Every launch, development and innovation with relation to space has been a proud moment for every nation across the world, but what has been kept out of mind and consideration is that space is no longer the empty, silent frontier we once imagined, with satellites, mega constellations, and growing clouds of debris orbiting earth, our skies are becoming dangerously crowded. Every launch adds to congestion, and every collision risk threatens the communication, navigation, and security systems we rely on daily. As the race to space accelerates, the need for clear rules, coordinated monitoring and a global responsible behaviour has never been more urgent. This very problem introduces the most relevant concept of ‘Space traffic management’. 

Commercialisation and Lack of Orbital Space.  

The Earth's orbit has expanded at an unprecedented rate over the past few decades. Thousands of active satellites exist today orbiting Earth, and a growing number of mega-constellations are made up of thousands of small satellites being launched fast. While these mega-constellations provide superior connectivity and global internet access, they also create significant problems with orbital traffic. Usable orbital space is limited, in contrast to the infinite skies we envision. Some areas are far more valuable than others, particularly Low Earth Orbit (LEO). Outer space is undergoing a structural transition from a scientific and defence domain into a hyper-commercial, data-driven infrastructure market.

State debris is an even more dangerous issue that exacerbates this congestion. Now, debris from previous collisions, abandoned rocket stages, defunct satellites, and even tiny bits of paint or metal orbit the Earth at amazing speeds.  The threat is real. Thousands of pieces of debris can be produced by a single collision, and each one has the potential to cause more collisions. Some orbital zones may become unusable for decades as a result of this chain reaction, which is generally called a cascading effect. This expanding cloud of risk is increased by each new launch that disregards long-term sustainability.

Why Orbital Chaos Matters on Earth  

Beyond orbit, the effects of space traffic and debris are felt. Infrastructure based in space is essential to modern societies. Communication networks, banking systems, aviation and maritime navigation, disaster response, and national security can all be negatively impacted by satellite failures. It can thus result in geopolitical instability, safety issues, and actual financial losses are all consequences of orbital chaos. Earthly life and governance are now inextricably linked to space sustainability. 

Outdated Legal Architecture 

Yet, the governance system remains frozen in its Cold War origins. The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, the Liability Convention of 1972, and the Registration Convention of 1976 did not anticipate private launch providers, autonomous manoeuvring software, debris polluting ASAT tests, or billions of dollars in orbital broadband revenue. This very mismatch between a  21st-century commercial ecosystem and the mid-20th-century treaty architecture make Space Traffic Management (STM) the next foundational legal frontier. STM is often described as a technical protocol for avoiding collisions, sharing orbital data, or coordinating satellite identities. This blog argues that the characterisation is conceptually thin. It is not merely a safety instrument, it is a public law of the orbital economy. 

STM beyond technical coordination 

A key, and repeatedly underscored, point taken in STM among global forums, especially UNCOPUOS, the UNCITRAL First Committee and the World Economic Forum, is that STM must be recognised as a core, global governance function for the sustainable use of outer space – rather than a voluntary or purely technical coordination mechanism. These forums consistently emphasise that the explosive growth in the number of satellites, mega-constellations and private actors has outpaced informal and nonbinding practices and guidelines. They argue that effective Space Situational Awareness (SSA) systems must be transparent and interoperable, and that data should be shared on a trust-based basis between states and commercial operators, who must have explicit responsibilities. The forums also endorse a strong normative push towards a preventive, ex ante regulatory approach to collision avoidance, debris mitigation, and end-of-life disposal, rather than relying on post-damage liability regimes. Collectively, this reflects an emerging consensus that  Space Traffic Management (STM) is a foundational component of space security, commercial certainty, and intergenerational sustainability, requiring coordinated legal and policy frameworks at both international and national levels. 

Limitations of Existing Treaties

The way we govern space is predominantly based on several key international treaties that were revolutionary for their time, but are now being tested against challenges associated with modernity. With regard to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, it has played an unappreciated role in every launch of a rocket and every exploration of another planet since its enactment. It was also the first agreement to convey that space belongs to all of us, thereby permitting governmental exploration without ownership. It also made clear that if a private company builds the satellite, the country that licensed it still bears responsibility for whatever that satellite does. That single document has kept the cosmic commons surprisingly civil, yet it was never designed to manage rush-hour traffic or the daily jostling of mega constellations. 

When accidents began to look inevitable, the Liability Convention stepped in (1972) and said, in effect: “If your hardware hurts someone back on Earth, you pay no excuses. If the damage happens in orbit, we’ll sort out who is at fault after the fact.” Helpful, yes, but it is like calling a tow truck after the crash instead of installing traffic lights. A few years later, the Registration Convention (1976) added a scrap of transparency by asking states to list the objects they launch.  Still, it never demanded that these nations share up-to-the-minute orbital coordinates, so the catalogue keeps falling out of sync with reality. The International Telecommunication Union regulates frequency allocation and orbital placement of satellites at 36,000 km above the Earth’s surface. However, they do not possess the authority to regulate the increase in the volume of spacecraft travelling through Low Earth Orbit and are limited to providing best practice guidance via the United Nations Long-term Sustainability. Therefore, although the classic international treaties provided the foundational framework for space activities, they did not anticipate the implementation of congestion management techniques, as evidenced by the lack of laws regulating such activities. Countries globally have adapted their national laws to facilitate commercial development in space, and as a result, those laws have changed the nature of global governance over Space Activities. By way of example, the United States passed the Commercial Space Launch Act, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) licensing policies for satellites, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory framework for commercial space flights. Thus, while enabling private enterprises such as SpaceX to innovate and change the way people communicate globally, they have simultaneously increased congestion in low Earth orbit. Space Policy 2023 and the Space Activities Bill all provide opportunities for the private industry to participate in space while still maintaining safety authorisation and national accountability. However, a single country cannot regulate a shared orbital area. Current and effective STM will require mandatory international collaboration to include live data exchange, the development of a common collision avoidance procedure, the establishment of debris mitigation measures, and liability reform to account for the effects of private and Artificial Intelligence-operated spacecraft. If we do not create this type of collaboration, we risk the orbit being held hostage and collapsing in on itself. If we establish this type of collaboration, we develop STM as a means to keep space a viable global common, fostering economic development, protecting digital human rights, and enabling future generations to access space. 

Shared Responsibility of shared Orbit 

From a legal policy perspective, STM must now be reimagined as a hybrid governance framework that integrates international law, national regulation and cooperative technical standards. While challenges in the international space realm are primarily related to the lack of legally binding agreements or treaties, there is also a lack of implementation mechanisms to enforce these agreements. An example of one type of implementation mechanism that should be developed is through establishing degrees of obligations for soft law measures (i.e., UN COPUOS Guidelines) that create binding baseline obligations, but with flexibilities as to how those obligations are met. While developing mechanisms for regulating STM (Space Traffic Management) obligations, states should also create a domestic framework for providing licenses for domestic entities, collecting STM-related data (i.e., STM data needs to be shared), and creating a framework for allocating liability for STM activities. By creating these domestic licensing regimes, issuing licenses for operating in STM, and requiring that all STM data (including obligations) be disseminated, states will encourage commercial entities to assist them in protecting the long-term sustainability of the orbital environment. New entrants (i.e., India, others) are at a point where they can choose how to deal with STM obligations and the associated commercial entity relationships. By creating their own domestic STM traffic rules and supporting multilateral and equitable STM standards development, they will be able to leave behind the limitations of being an STM player who simply reacts and will be in a position to create new trends. The importance of this issue transcends simply preventing satellites from colliding with each other, but also be sustainable.

To get there, we have to start treating low-Earth orbit like a shared backyard rather than a free-for-all parking lot. Freedoms such as launching whenever and wherever have to be matched with concrete responsibilities: keep an eye on what you put up, share data about where it goes, and help clean up what you break. A strong, legally grounded traffic system built on cooperation and open books is no longer a nice idea; it's the minimum required to keep space open for business, science, and wonder.