The second day of Space Renaissance International’s Fourth World Congress brought together philosophers, policy specialists, lawyers and space advocates to examine the cultural foundations of spaceflight, the governance of future settlements, the proposed 18th Sustainable Development Goal and the prevention of conflict beyond Earth.

1 July 2026 — The Fourth Space Renaissance International World Congress continued on Wednesday with a programme examining the ideas, institutions and international agreements that will shape humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.

Following the opening day’s focus on civilization and quality of life, Day 2 shifted attention towards space philosophy and history, governance of extraterrestrial communities, the Space 18th SDG Coalition, lunar geopolitics and the prevention of weapons in space.

The discussions highlighted a recurring concern: while technological capabilities are developing fast and offer great opportunities to improve humanity’s quality of life, our immature ethical, political and legal frameworks are hindering us from taking profit of this glorious perspective. Participants underlined the importance of philosophical reflection: we cannot become a spacefaring civilization without science and technology, yet without philosophy we cannot conceive humanist requirements for vehicles, habitats, or governance, nor can we shape inclusive institutions and credible safeguards against potential conflict.

Recovering the Philosophical Roots of Spaceflight

The day opened with the session “Space Philosophy & History,” chaired by Dr. Marie-Luise Heuser.

Dr. Heuser explored the wave of public and intellectual enthusiasm for space that developed during the early twentieth century. She traced the cultural roots of space habitation through movements such as Russian Cosmism and Germany’s interwar “space fever,” discussing pioneers who imagined rotating habitats, artificial gravity and permanent human communities beyond Earth.

Her presentation showed that many concepts commonly regarded as products of the modern space age were already being developed by artists, philosophers, scientists and filmmakers during the 1920s.

The history of these ideas also served as a warning. Technological visions created for peaceful exploration can be redirected towards military or authoritarian purposes when their political context changes. Therefore, the presentation connected the history of spaceflight with the responsibility to protect its humanistic foundations.

Dr. Maria Harney examined a more contemporary challenge: the ethical governance of artificial intelligence in space. She argued that technological development often moves faster than the ethical systems intended to guide it, leading to a delay in “moral maturity” that may become particularly dangerous in remote and extreme environments.

AI-supported missions may require systems to make decisions concerning safety, health, privacy and access to resources. Yet human beings cannot be treated merely as components in an automated system. Dr. Harney, therefore, called for clearer principles concerning consent, human oversight, accountability and personal autonomy.

Dr. Julio Rezende presented the concept of “Astrodesertanism”, drawing on analogue activities in Brazil’s semi-arid and remote environments. He described how desert landscapes can function not only as training environments for future missions but also as places for reflecting on isolation, resilience, sustainability and the human relationship when exposed to extreme surroundings.

Amalie Sinclair addressed the identities and responsibilities of modern space philosophy. She argued that philosophy should not remain separate from practical policy but should provide leadership by clarifying the values and assumptions underlying space governance.

The session also included a contribution associated with Natale Viscomi on the spirit as an “invisible body” and its relationship with scientific construction, reason, beauty and cosmic consciousness.

Together, the presentations showed that space philosophy is not simply an abstract discussion. It influences how technologies are designed, how risks are understood, and what forms of society humanity may attempt to build beyond Earth.

Designing Governance while Settlements Are Built

The second session, “Space Policy,” examined the legal, political and socio-technical foundations required for future off-world communities.

Veronica Chiaravalli discussed the need to design inclusive operational and economic protocols for settlements in which humans, robots and intelligent systems work together. She argued that future space communities will require new forms of training, professional expertise and participatory design. Rather than adapting social arrangements after infrastructure has been constructed, future residents and stakeholders should be involved in shaping the systems through which settlements operate.

Emeline Paat-Dahlstrom examined the role of “space enablers” in creating sustainable space ecosystems. Drawing on examples from countries including Luxembourg, the Philippines and New Zealand, she described how cooperation among governments, private companies, universities and communities can create opportunities in regions without long-established space industries.

Poojan Chanjara presented a governance framework focused on civilizational continuity and political autonomy in future settlements. He raised questions about the concentration of authority, the relationship between terrestrial governments and off-world populations, and the need for adaptive institutions capable of evolving as settlements mature.

The session also considered symbolic questions of international cooperation, including the idea of placing a United Nations flag on the Moon. The proposal prompted reflection on how common human interests might be represented beyond Earth.

Dennis O’Brien addressed the legal status of settlements and extraterrestrial resources. The discussion distinguished between the prohibition of national appropriation under the Outer Space Treaty and the legal treatment of resources after they have been extracted.

Participants acknowledged that substantial disagreement remains regarding the application of the non-appropriation principle to private actors and permanent settlements.

Adriano Autino emphasized SRI’s opposition to colonial models of space-resource use, arguing that space resources belong to space settlers and should be used to build space infrastructures and sustain their communities.

Lars R. “Jones“ Vadjina examined algorithmic sovereignty, warning that artificial intelligence may become critical infrastructure for navigation, communications, logistics and decision-making. He argued that such systems will require transparency, auditability, resilience, human oversight and international cooperation.

The session underlined that governance should not be postponed until permanent settlements already exist. The rules governing human–robot relations, political authority, resource access and digital infrastructure must begin to be developed in parallel with the technology.

Reconsidering Sustainable Development Through Space

The third session focused on the “Space 18th SDG Coalition,” an initiative proposing that responsible space development be recognized as a new Sustainable Development Goal.

Dr. Gülin Dede introduced the session, while Adriano Autino reviewed the coalition’s history and rationale. He argued that the existing 2030 Agenda does not adequately address the potential contribution of space development to energy, resources, environmental protection and long-term human resilience.

Dr. Gülin Dede chaired the Space 18th SDG Coalition session.

The proposal does not treat space as separate from sustainability on Earth. Instead, it suggests that responsible expansion beyond Earth could strengthen the existing Sustainable Development Goals through environmental monitoring, communications, disaster response, new resources and future space-based infrastructure.

Veronica Chiaravalli proposed an agile and human-centred formulation capable of adapting to rapid technological and societal change. She argued that a new goal should address challenges such as decentralized decision-making, cognitive safety, secure digital environments and access to emerging technologies.

Amalie Sinclair advocated a design-oriented and non-regulatory approach to international cooperation. She proposed an expert working group that would bring together contributors from different countries and political traditions while maintaining independence and broad international participation.

The session invited researchers, organizations and policymakers to contribute perspectives to the continuing development of the initiative.

Navigating Competition in Cislunar Space

The panel on Lunar Astropolitics examined the changing strategic environment between Earth and the Moon.

Participants considered the growing activities of the United States, China, Russia and other spacefaring actors, as well as the implications of expanding scientific, commercial and security interests in cislunar space.

Leonard David questioned whether existing treaties and institutions possess sufficient enforcement mechanisms to prevent geopolitical rivalry from extending to the Moon.

Alberto Cavallo compared contrasting national approaches to lunar activity, including cooperative language in Chinese policy and the United States’ emphasis on strategic leadership and the Artemis Accords. The discussion considered whether national ambitions could coexist with inclusive international governance.

Speakers also addressed lunar resource extraction, safety and rescue obligations, transparency, space traffic management and confidence-building measures.

Participants stressed that more scientific knowledge is needed before assumptions about the abundance and commercial value of lunar resources become the basis of policy. They also noted that competition does not inevitably lead to conflict if clear rules, communication channels, and shared safety practices are established early.

The panel concluded that no single safeguard will be sufficient. Peaceful cislunar development will require a combination of legal agreements, political dialogue, technical coordination, scientific transparency and ethical responsibility.

Preventing Space from Becoming a Battlefield

Dr. Gülin Dede organized and chaired the final panel, ‘A Ban on Space Weapons’ guiding the discussion across sustainability, governance, peace, dual-use ambiguity, and the prevention of conflict in outer space.

Starting the panel with a keynote speech from a distinguished astronautical voice, but as a true pioneer, Dorin Prunariu, the first and only Romanian Cosmonaut, a veteran of the Soyuz 40 mission, former Chair of UNCOPUOS, and the godfather of ATLAC (the Action Team on Lunar Activities Consultation at COPUOS). Dorin Prunariu discussed why outer space should be protected as a human environment and a domain of peaceful cooperation. The space infrastructure is enabling the many aspects of human life and capabilities on Earth, and the dangers to our orbit due to weaponization may not be easily reversible. If the law for the ban on space weapons is not comprehensive and enforced, it may lead to misuse in the future. The future settlements must not begin with such an environment but through peaceful uses and international cooperation.

Adriano Autino argued that outer space should be protected as a domain for humanity’s long-term civilian future rather than treated as a new strategic high ground. He warned that the deployment of weapons in orbit could threaten space infrastructure, increase debris and undermine the cooperation required for settlement and development.

Dr. Eligar Sadeh distinguished between the militarization and weaponization of space. Military organizations have relied on satellites for communications, navigation and observation for decades, but the deployment or use of offensive weapons represents a further and more dangerous development.

Dennis O’Brien reviewed existing international legal frameworks and the gaps that remain. While the Outer Space Treaty prohibits certain weapons of mass destruction in orbit, it does not establish a comprehensive prohibition of conventional or dual-use systems.

The panel discussed the United Nations process on the Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space and considered whether SRI should seek a more active role in related international discussions.

Joseph N. Pelton broadened the security discussion to include asteroids, comets and orbital debris. He argued that genuine planetary defense should prioritize shared threats to humanity and proposed greater attention to active debris removal and international liability arrangements.

Alberto Cavallo called for a general prohibition of space weapons and warned that existing civilian and military systems could be transformed into instruments of conflict.

Participants also explored the possibility of converting military technologies and industrial capacities towards peaceful space applications. Converting the military industry to civilian space might be the subject of a great campaign to boost both peace on Earth and civilian space development.

Public education, outreach to political leaders, and wider awareness of the Overview Effect were identified as possible elements of a broader cultural strategy for peace.

Institutions Must Keep Pace with Technology

Day 2 demonstrated that the future of space will be determined not only by what humanity is capable of building but also by the principles and institutions it chooses to establish.

The historical presentations showed that visions of space settlement have always carried philosophical and political assumptions. The policy discussions demonstrated that these assumptions will affect the rights of settlers, the distribution of resources, the role of artificial intelligence, and the relationship between Earth and future off-world communities.

The Space 18th SDG session connected these questions to sustainability, while the final panels confronted the geopolitical risks surrounding the Moon and Earth’s orbit.

Across the programme, speakers called for governance to develop before conflict, inequality or concentrated technological power becomes embedded in future space systems.

The challenge emerging from Day 2 was therefore clear: humanity must develop its ethical, legal and diplomatic capacities at the same speed as its technological ones.

SRI does not advocate a two-step strategy in which humanity must first become socially mature before expanding into space. On the contrary, we maintain that expanding into space can itself become one of the drivers of humanity’s maturation. In this sense, Gaia may be understood as a metaphor for Earth giving birth to a wider spacefaring civilization. If that birth takes place amid conflict, exclusion, or unsustainable development, it will be painful and dangerous; if it is pursued peacefully, inclusively, and sustainably, it can become a hopeful civilizational transition. As humanists, we regard this as a primary responsibility.

See the recorded videos of SRIC4:

• Day 2: https://www.youtube.com/live/Z0eZOV_MC9c
• Day 1: https://www.youtube.com/live/7r80QYrcHwQ

Follow the Congress the next days!

Here are the links to the YouTube livestream for each day: https://spacerenaissance.space/event/the-sri-4th-world-congress-30-june-4-july-2026/

ATTENTION PLEASE!!! All the new SRI Members registered during the Congress will get a special edition membership card! Join SRI now!

https://spacerenaissance.space/membership/international-membership-registration/