BRICS and Astropolitics: Governance Challenges in a Multipolar Space Order

Ugeda, Luiz; Sanches, Karine

doi:10.11606/issn.2179-0892.geousp.2026.237915.en

Abstract:

This study explores the convergence between astropolitics, smart governance, and technological sovereignty within the BRICS framework, analyzing the impacts of these interactions on international relations and urban management. The research examines how BRICS countries integrate advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence and big data, to enhance the interoperability of geoinformation systems and environmental monitoring, offering innovative solutions to emerging challenges in outer space. Through a comparative analysis of the bloc's heterogeneous public policies, the potential of the Glonass and Beidou systems as central axes of spatial articulation within the BRICS is identified. The discussion also addresses how these initiatives influence space security, sustainability, and the formulation of global space governance norms. The conclusion argues that the creation of a smart space governance body by the BRICS could solidify the bloc's position as a strategic actor in global astropolitics, fostering a multilateral and inclusive approach that offers an alternative to the traditional dominance of Western powers.

Keywords:
astropolitics; technological sovereignty; geoinformation; spatial data infrastructure; sustainability; Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Resumo:

Este estudo explora a convergência entre astropolítica, governança inteligente e soberania tecnológica no âmbito do BRICS, analisando os impactos dessas interações nas relações internacionais e na gestão urbana. A pesquisa examina como os países do bloco integram tecnologias avançadas, como inteligência artificial e big data, para ampliar a interoperabilidade de sistemas de geoinformação e de monitoramento ambiental, oferecendo soluções inovadoras para desafios emergentes no espaço exterior. Por meio de uma análise comparativa das políticas públicas heterogêneas do BRICS, identifica-se o potencial dos sistemas Glonass e Beidou como eixos centrais de articulação espacial. A discussão também aborda como essas iniciativas influenciam a segurança espacial, a sustentabilidade e a formulação de normas globais de governança do espaço. Conclui-se que a criação de uma instância de governança espacial inteligente pelo BRICS pode consolidar o bloco como ator estratégico na astropolítica global, promovendo um enquadramento multilateral e inclusivo que oferece alternativa à tradicional hegemonia ocidental.

Palavras-chave:
astropolítica; soberania tecnológica; geoinformação; infraestrutura de dados espaciais; sustentabilidade; Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável (ODS)

Resumen:

Este estudio analiza la convergencia entre astropolítica, gobernanza inteligente y soberanía tecnológica en el marco de los BRICS, examinando los impactos de estas interacciones en las relaciones internacionales y la gestión urbana. La investigación evalúa cómo los países del bloque integran tecnologías avanzadas, como la inteligencia artificial y el big data, para fortalecer la interoperabilidad de los sistemas de geoinformación y de monitoreo ambiental, ofreciendo soluciones innovadoras a los desafíos emergentes en el espacio exterior. A través de un análisis comparativo de las políticas públicas heterogéneas del BRICS, se identifica el potencial de los sistemas Glonass y Beidou como ejes centrales de articulación espacial. La discusión también aborda la influencia de estas iniciativas en la seguridad espacial, la sostenibilidad y la formulación de normas globales de gobernanza espacial. La conclusión sostiene que la creación de un organismo de gobernanza espacial inteligente por parte de los BRICS podría consolidar al bloque como actor estratégico en la astropolítica mundial, promoviendo un enfoque multilateral e inclusivo que ofrezca una alternativa a la hegemonía tradicional de las potencias occidentales.

Palabras clave:
astropolítica; soberanía tecnológica; geoinformación; infraestructura de datos espaciales; sostenibilidad; Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible (ODS)

Introduction

Astropolitics examines power relations and strategies in outer space, focusing on the use of space technologies, resource exploration, and space security (Dolman, 2020). Unlike traditional geopolitics, which centers on terrestrial territories, astropolitics extends this analysis beyond Earth, addressing aspects such as orbital control and the militarization of celestial bodies (Havercroft; Duvall, 2009). Strategic control of space, for instance, through satellite megaconstellations like Starlink, reshapes state sovereignty and international security dynamics (Klinger, 2021).

Smart governance involves the integration of advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI) and big data, in the management of territories and populations. This approach enables data-driven decision-making, optimizing urban resources and enhancing the efficiency of public services (Albino; Berardi; Dangelico, 2015). The intersection of space policies and technological innovations is evident in the development of smart cities. Satellites provide critical data for environmental monitoring, disaster management, and urban planning (Nam & Pardo, 2011). The integration of spatial information with terrestrial systems improves the efficiency of urban services and the resilience of cities, particularly in countries leading the digital transformation, such as China, through initiatives like "Safe Cities" (Hillman; McCalpin, 2022).

Technological sovereignty has become central to international disputes, particularly with the advancement of AI and space technologies. Nations seek to control critical technologies to ensure independence and competitive advantage (Larsen, 2022). The fragmentation of technological ecosystems, as seen in the competition between the U.S. and China, raises concerns about global governance and the need for frameworks that foster international cooperation (Curtis; Klaus, 2024).

Global governance faces challenges in regulating the use of outer space and emerging technologies. The lack of robust legal frameworks for activities such as asteroid mining could lead to conflicts between nations and private companies (Fox, 2019). This study analyzes how BRICS countries are addressing the challenge of converging astropolitics, smart governance, and technological sovereignty, and how this convergence is redefining international relations and urban management. Using a comparative approach to distinct political regimes and an analogy of governance models, the study aims to identify and propose mechanisms for system convergence and governance improvements to tackle emerging challenges and opportunities in the contemporary international landscape.

Space Landscape in Recent Years: The Space Race 2.0

In recent years, the United States has reaffirmed its leadership in the space sector, driven by an increasing synergy between the public and private sectors. NASA, in collaboration with companies such as SpaceX and Blue Origin, has spearheaded pioneering initiatives like the Artemis program, which aims to return humans to the Moon and, eventually, to explore Mars (Johnson, 2012). The development of reusable rockets by SpaceX has revolutionized the launch market, significantly reducing operational costs (Seedhouse, 2013).

In Europe, the European Space Agency (ESA) has been consistently pursuing the strengthening of the continent's technological and strategic autonomy. Projects such as Galileo, a global satellite navigation system, and Copernicus, dedicated to Earth observation, represent significant advancements in environmental sustainability and Europe's competitiveness in the space sector (Harvey, 2003). The modernization of rockets like Ariane 6 and Vega ensures greater autonomy in space access, crucial for Europe’s strategic security and economic competitiveness (Pasco, 2017). These programs consolidate Europe's space infrastructure and enhance its ability to address global challenges such as climate change and disaster management (Krige; Russo, 1994).

Transatlantic cooperation between NASA and ESA has been vital to the success of high-impact scientific missions. The launch of the James Webb Space Telescope in 2021 combines the efforts of both agencies to deepen knowledge about the formation of galaxies, stars, and planets (Logsdon, 2015).

The growing competition in the space sector characterizes what many authors refer to as the "Space Race 2.0" marked by trends such as democratization, commercialization, and militarization of space (Pekkanen, 2019). In the United States, the strengthening of public-private partnerships bolsters the country’s technological and commercial leadership (Bergan, 2022). Meanwhile, Europe seeks to consolidate its position in an increasingly dynamic global environment by adopting strategies that balance technological innovation and rigorous regulation in data collection and management (Cross, 2019).

However, this evolving landscape also presents significant challenges, such as the exponential increase in orbital debris due to the growing number of operational satellites, which threatens the sustainability of future missions (Rajagopalan, 2018).

If: (i) the "Space Race 2.0" combines cooperation and competition among major global actors; (ii) the United States continues to expand its hegemony in the sector; and (iii) Europe aligns innovation with data regulation to remain competitive; how can the space policies of BRICS countries contribute to a balance between scientific progress and environmental responsibility, ensuring benefits that serve humanity as a whole?

Historical Evolution of BRICS Space Programs

The historical evolution of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) space programs is characterized by asymmetry in the pace of development among these nations but unified by their growing prominence in the global landscape of space exploration. From early efforts in satellite and telecommunications technology to more ambitious planetary exploration missions, these countries have invested in expanding their space capabilities for scientific, economic, and strategic purposes (Goswami, 2020). Emerging space technologies, such as remote sensing satellites and launch vehicles, have become the cornerstone of technological advancement and national sovereignty.

The role of BRICS in global space governance has garnered increasing recognition, particularly within the context of the Space Race 2.0 (Novoselova, 2017). These nations have spearheaded efforts to regulate the peaceful use of space, aiming to prevent its militarization and promote international cooperation, aligned with neo-functionalist principles (Sultan; Mahmood, 2022). The expansion of BRICS' space capabilities, exemplified by India’s successful lunar mission in contrast to the challenges faced by Russia (Firsing, 2024), underscores their leadership in shaping global norms for space exploration.

Furthermore, the interplay between competition and collaboration within the aerospace sector reflects the dynamic balance between individual priorities and multilateral cooperation within the bloc (Kahn, 2018). The following sections will explore how these models have evolved and the extent to which they have shaped the collective and individual contributions of BRICS nations to global space initiatives.

Russian Pioneering in the Space Race and Current Status

The Soviet Union was a pioneer in the space race, inaugurating the era of space exploration with the launch of Sputnik 1 on October 4, 1957, the first artificial satellite of Earth. This event not only marked the beginning of a technological competition between superpowers but also spurred the development of space policies and programs on a global scale (Siddiqi, 2000; 2018). The flight of Yuri Gagarin into space in 1961 aboard the Vostok 1 solidified Soviet leadership during this historic period, showcasing the country’s ability to achieve scientific advancements with global impact (Harford, 1999).

Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the Soviet Union expanded its efforts through programs such as Luna, which conducted the first lunar impact missions and automated sampling of lunar soil (Harvey, 2007). The development of space stations, including Salyut and later Mir, set new standards for prolonged life in space and orbital research, reinforcing Soviet space exploration capabilities despite economic constraints and internal tensions (Zak, 2014).

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia inherited much of the Soviet space infrastructure. The establishment of the Roscosmos agency in 1992 was a significant milestone, though the 1990s were marked by budget cuts and reduced investments. Despite these challenges, Russia maintained a significant space presence, particularly through the Soyuz program, which provided critical transportation of astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) (Hendrickx; Vis, 2007). International collaboration became essential during this period, especially with NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA).

In the past two decades, Russia has sought to revitalize its space program in response to new global challenges. In August 2023, Roscosmos launched the Luna-25 mission, aimed at exploring the Moon’s south pole and searching for evidence of water ice. This marked Russia’s first lunar mission since 1976, signaling an attempt to regain relevance in lunar exploration (Zak, 2014). However, technical and economic challenges continue to hinder the progress of many planned projects (McCauley, 2014).

One of Russia’s primary current objectives is the construction of the Russian Orbital Service Station (ROSS), intended to replace the International Space Station (ISS), with operations expected to begin in the next decade. This project aims to reaffirm Russian sovereignty in space and ensure autonomy amidst geopolitical tensions with the West. Nonetheless, experts emphasize that the success of these projects depends on Russia’s internal financial and political stability, as well as strategic partnerships (Harvey, 2007).

Currently, the Russian space program faces increasing competition from new global actors, such as China and private companies in the United States. The need for innovation and modernization is evident, but the Soviet legacy remains a strategic resource for scientific and technological advancements. Russia’s pioneering role continues to serve as a historical benchmark in the space race, as the country seeks to adapt to 21st-century demands and maintain its global relevance (Harford, 1999).

The Rapid Growth of China in the Space Sector

In recent decades, China has emerged as one of the leading powers in the space sector, demonstrating rapid growth in technological capacity and strategic ambition. The origins of China's space program trace back to the 1950s, with the pioneering work of Qian Xuesen, an engineer of great significance in the development of the country’s first rockets and satellites (Chandrashekar, 2022). Since then, the Chinese government has consistently invested in research, development, and space infrastructure to achieve technological independence and global competitiveness (Harvey, 2019).

The Shenzhou 5 mission, which sent Yang Liwei into Earth's orbit, showcased China's mastery of complex space technologies (Johnson-Freese, 1998). A significant milestone was achieved in 2003 when China became the third country to independently send humans into space. Since then, China has expanded its manned missions, including the construction of the Tiangong space station, which became operational in 2021 and marks a crucial step toward autonomy in space activities (Harvey, 2019).

Lunar exploration has become a strategic priority for China's space program. The country has successfully conducted missions under the Chang'e program, most notably the Chang'e 4 mission, which achieved the first landing on the far side of the Moon in 2019 (Aliberti, 2015). This mission not only highlighted China’s technical capabilities but also provided valuable scientific data about the Moon’s composition, enhancing human knowledge of Earth's natural satellite. Beyond lunar achievements, China has also made strides in Mars exploration. In 2021, the Tianwen-1 mission placed an orbiter around Mars and landed the Zhurong rover on its surface, making China the second country, after the United States, to operate a rover on Mars (Kulacki; Lewis, 2009). This accomplishment underscores the increasing sophistication of China’s space program, which aims to establish its role as a leader in interplanetary exploration (Harvey, 2019).

In addition to exploration missions, China has heavily invested in communication, navigation, and Earth observation satellites, solidifying its status as a global actor in the space arena. The BeiDou navigation system, completed in 2020, stands out as an alternative to the American GPS, reflecting China’s pursuit of technological sovereignty and its growing geopolitical influence. This development not only reinforces China’s autonomy in global positioning services but also strengthens its strategic role in the international space services market (Stovpets; Svyrydenko, 2020; Moltz, 2012).

China’s advancements, exemplified by manned missions and interplanetary exploration, integrate scientific innovation with space diplomacy, signaling its intent to lead a new era of technological competition and strategic cooperation in global space exploration (Al-Rodhan, 2018; Drozhashchikh, 2019).

The Significance of India in Low-Cost Space Missions

While the United States, China, and Russia remain at the forefront of space exploration, India has emerged as a strategic player by adopting an innovative model centered on low-cost space missions. This bold approach not only challenges established conventions but also redefines the foundations of competitiveness in the global space sector. The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) has played a pivotal role in this transformation, leading space missions with budgets significantly lower than those of other international agencies.

A landmark example is the Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM), also known as Mangalyaan, launched in 2013. MOM placed India among the exclusive group of nations capable of orbiting Mars, with an estimated cost of only $74 million, a fraction of the billions spent on similar missions by other countries (Suzuki, 2019; Avachat, 2023). This achievement was widely celebrated for its technical efficiency and budget management, establishing ISRO as a global reference for low-cost missions (Lele, 2013a).

India’s success in the "Space Race 2.0" stems from a combination of factors. ISRO prioritizes the development of indigenous technologies, cost-effective manufacturing processes, and a highly skilled yet relatively low-cost workforce (Hussain; Shahzad, 2023). Guided by the philosophy of "doing more with less," the organization reuses existing technologies and adopts innovative solutions to optimize available resources (Kapoor; Bhattacharya, 2024).

Beyond technological implications, India’s low-cost missions generate significant geopolitical and economic impacts. These initiatives enhance the country’s prestige in international forums, expand its capacity to attract commercial and scientific partnerships, and solidify India’s position as a key satellite launch provider for nations without independent access to space (Firsing, 2024). Furthermore, Indian space programs have direct applications in environmental monitoring, disaster management, and satellite communications, delivering tangible social benefits to the most vulnerable populations (Parvaiz, 2023).

India’s achievements inspire a new generation of space actors to challenge established norms, reaffirming the strategic and transformative potential of space exploration (Mwiya; Kalunga, 2024).

Brazil’s Role: Aerospace Industry and Space Bases

Brazil has been striving to consolidate its position in the aerospace sector, particularly in space bases, leveraging its strategic geographical location and public policies geared toward technological innovation. Its proximity to the Equator provides significant advantages for orbital launches, reducing fuel consumption and enabling heavier payloads (Mitchell, 2008; 2017). This feature positions the Alcântara Launch Center (CLA), located in Maranhão state, as a cornerstone for the development of Brazil’s space industry and its integration into the international market (Harding, 2015).

The CLA has garnered growing global attention, particularly after the signing of the 2019 Technology Safeguards Agreement (TSA) with the United States. This agreement aims to protect sensitive technologies during the commercial use of the base, facilitating operations by international companies (Nakahodo, 2021). Studies highlight the base’s potential to enhance Brazil’s position in the global market while addressing regional inequalities (Durão, 2004). Additionally, Embraer, one of the world’s largest regional aircraft manufacturers, strengthens Brazil’s reputation as a competitor in the global aerospace technology market, creating opportunities for more advanced space projects (Alarcón; Loureiro, 2013).

However, the Brazilian Space Program (PEB) faces significant challenges (Ugeda, 2017). Budgetary limitations, bureaucratic hurdles, and a lack of skilled labor have hindered the sector’s growth. Greater international integration and the enhancement of national infrastructure are essential to overcome these barriers (Nakahodo; Fonseca; Pereira, 2024). The effort to establish a competitive technological base is closely tied to Brazil’s aspirations for a larger role in the global market (Matos, 2017).

International cooperation has been a central strategy. In addition to the TSA with the United States, Brazil maintains partnerships with agencies such as the ESA (European Space Agency), Roscosmos (Russian space agency), and China through the CBERS Program (China-Brazil Earth Resources Satellite). These collaborations provide access to advanced technologies and support Brazil’s entry into global markets for launches and space services (Mitchell, 2008; Sarli et al., 2015).

In January 2025, Brazil established the state-owned company Alada under Law No. 15,083/2025. Alada is tasked with economically exploiting aerospace infrastructure, developing technologies, managing satellite networks, and supporting airspace control. The company will also operate at the Alcântara Space Center with access to resources from the Aeronautical Fund, although details regarding its total budget have not yet been disclosed.

South Africa as a Representative of the African Continent

South Africa has established itself as one of the leading representatives of the African continent in politics, economics, and science, achieving significant advancements in the aerospace and technology sectors. In the space domain, South Africa’s involvement in the Square Kilometre Array (SKA), one of the world’s largest radio telescope projects (Dewdney et al., 2009), stands out. A significant portion of the SKA infrastructure is being installed in the Northern Cape, a location that, as noted by Latimer (2013), not only reflects the country’s vastness and unique geographical features but also reinforces its position as a globally significant scientific hub.

In the aerospace and defense sectors, South Africa is home to companies like Denel Dynamics, which are engaged in advanced technological projects with both regional and international impact. According to Vidmar and Vermeylen (2022), the participation of African countries, such as South Africa and Nigeria, in space programs signals a new chapter in the space race, where emerging nations strive to strengthen their technological capacities. This context underscores South Africa’s ability to drive scientific and technological innovation on a continental scale.

Politically, South Africa plays a prominent leadership role as a mediator within the African Union and in multilateral forums, such as the United Nations and BRICS. As Varada (2022) highlights, the country’s engagement in these spaces not only advances the continent’s interests but also contributes to consolidating a narrative of greater African unity. This leadership is particularly evident in global discussions on climate change, economic governance, and international security, where South Africa seeks to articulate African demands within broader global contexts.

Other BRICS Countries

With the expansion of BRICS to include new members such as Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, Iran, and, most recently, Indonesia in January 2025, the bloc now comprises ten full members. These countries bring diverse perspectives and varying stages of space development, contributing to the bloc’s diversification and strengthening its initiatives. Each nation presents unique capabilities and challenges within the space context.

Egypt has emerged as a pioneer in the African space sector with the establishment of the Egyptian Space Agency (EgSA) in 2019. The country prioritizes the use of satellites for environmental monitoring, agriculture, and water resource management, which are critical for sustainable development (Rubin, 2024). Egypt maintains significant collaborations with space powers such as China and Russia and seeks to expand its participation in multilateral satellite projects within the BRICS framework.

The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has become a prominent actor in the space sector, with ambitious initiatives such as the Mars Hope mission launched in 2020, positioning the country among leaders in interplanetary exploration (Firsing, 2024). The UAE is home to the Mohammed bin Rashid Space Centre, which leads satellite development projects and fosters international collaborations. Its advanced infrastructure and substantial investments in space technologies make the UAE a strategic partner in BRICS, contributing expertise and financial resources (Rubin, 2025).

Ethiopia has made significant strides in the space sector with the launch of its first satellite, ETRSS-1, in 2019, supported by Chinese technical assistance (Gadisa, 2023). Ethiopia focuses on leveraging space technologies to address food insecurity and monitor climate change. Membership in BRICS provides Ethiopia with opportunities for enhanced technological cooperation and financial support to strengthen its emerging space capabilities.

Iran, on the other hand, has a relatively advanced space program (Tarikhi, 2009), with experience in satellite launches and rocket technology development (Ruehl, 2022). Despite facing international sanctions that constrain global cooperation, Iran leverages its BRICS membership as a platform to expand partnerships and engage in space projects that bolster its geopolitical presence.

Indonesia, which became a full member of BRICS in January 2025, has a rapidly expanding space program (Lele, 2013b) led by the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN). The country focuses on developing satellites for telecommunications and environmental monitoring, particularly given its vulnerability to natural disasters. Indonesia’s entry into the bloc strengthens BRICS’ regional influence in Asia and broadens its geostrategic reach.

In addition to full members, partner countries such as Belarus, Bolivia, Kazakhstan, Cuba, Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, Uzbekistan, and Nigeria participate in BRICS discussions without voting rights. Many of these nations have emerging space initiatives and view BRICS as an opportunity to advance their national programs. For instance, Kazakhstan, with its renowned Baikonur Cosmodrome (Matos et al., 2024), holds international significance as a base for global space launches, while Nigeria focuses on using satellites for socioeconomic development.

Recommendations for Space Cooperation among BRICS

Space cooperation among BRICS countries presents significant potential for integrating space technologies with urban management, particularly in the context of smart cities. Satellites enable real-time data collection and infrastructure planning. Through joint initiatives, BRICS members can develop and share space technologies that facilitate the management of transportation systems, water resources, and urban energy efficiency (Moltz, 2011). This synergy can contribute to sustainable development and enhance the resilience of urban areas, especially in countries facing major urbanization challenges, such as India, Brazil, and South Africa.

Satellites also play a crucial role in smart city infrastructure planning by enabling the analysis of geospatial data to identify patterns and trends. In China, for example, the use of satellite data has supported the development of advanced public transportation systems and environmental monitoring initiatives (Johnson-Freese, 2007). India has employed satellite data to support its Smart Cities Mission, which aims to transform 100 Indian cities into technological and sustainable urban hubs (Anand et al., 2018). South Africa, in turn, has implemented satellite-based solutions to monitor water distribution in both urban and rural areas, contributing to the mitigation of water scarcity crises (Clercq et al., 2018).

Space cooperation among BRICS members also carries important implications for security and technological sovereignty. The development of autonomous space technologies reduces dependence on foreign systems and strengthens national resilience. Russia and China, as leaders in this field, can share expertise with other members, contributing to local capacity building and promoting the interoperability of space systems (Dolman, 2020). Such technological independence is also essential to ensure that member states can protect their critical infrastructures against cyber threats and external interference.

Furthermore, space cooperation within BRICS should be accompanied by continuous efforts to integrate space technologies into public policies and national development strategies. The establishment of legal frameworks that encourage public-private partnerships and ensure the ethical and sustainable use of spatial data is essential to the success of these initiatives. By combining resources and expertise, BRICS countries have the potential to transform space cooperation into a strategic instrument for addressing twenty-first-century urban challenges while strengthening their global influence.

The following sections present some concrete opportunities for deeper cooperation within the bloc.

Shared Use of Satellites for Communication and Earth Observation

The shared use of satellites has become a viable and strategic solution to meet the growing demands for communication and Earth observation. This cooperative model allows different countries and organizations to jointly utilize space resources, reducing costs, promoting data exchange, and optimizing the use of existing infrastructure. This approach is particularly relevant for developing countries that face financial or technological limitations in implementing independent space programs (Moltz, 2012). Collaboration also facilitates the inclusion of smaller actors on the global stage, expanding access to space technologies.

Shared communication satellites have played a fundamental role in global connectivity, especially in remote and hard-to-reach regions. For instance, initiatives like the African satellite RASCOM-QAF1 demonstrate how regional partnerships can improve digital connectivity in underdeveloped areas (Ngcofe; Gottschalk, 2013). By reducing dependence on international private operators, participating countries strengthen their technological sovereignty and expand access to services such as internet, telephony, and data transmission for their populations.

In Earth observation, shared satellites have significantly contributed to environmental, agricultural, and natural disaster monitoring. Programs like the European Union’s Sentinel initiative illustrate how sharing space data can benefit multiple countries simultaneously, providing real-time information to address crises such as floods and droughts (Johnson-Freese, 2007). In the context of BRICS countries and other developing nations, such data is essential for implementing more effective public policies and adapting their economies to climate change.

The cooperation in satellite use also generates economic benefits, as it allows the sharing of development, launch, and operational costs. Long-standing partnerships such as the Brazil-China collaboration in the CBERS Program (China-Brazil Earth Resources Satellite) illustrate the positive impact of these initiatives, providing accessible satellite imagery for agricultural monitoring and environmental preservation in both countries (Lino; Lima; Hubscher, 2000). This cooperation model also inspires new initiatives in regions like Africa and Asia, where countries aim to integrate resources to maximize the benefits of space technology.

Despite its advantages, shared satellite use faces challenges related to governance and data protection. As Klinger (2020) highlights, the establishment of clear norms for sharing sensitive information, as well as resolving disputes over the priority use of satellites, are central issues for the success of such initiatives. The lack of technical and legal infrastructure in some countries may limit the full utilization of these technologies, requiring joint efforts to strengthen local capacities and promote inclusive space governance.

The shared use of satellites represents a unique opportunity to advance the universalization of access to space observation and promote sustainable development. Through global and regional partnerships, it is possible to expand access to space technologies and maximize their positive impact in areas such as connectivity, environmental monitoring, and disaster resilience. Promoting international cooperation initiatives in the space sector should be a priority for governments and global organizations, ensuring that the benefits of space technologies are accessible to all.

Environmental Monitoring and Cybersecurity

Environmental monitoring has emerged as a strategic component in the preservation of natural resources and the mitigation of climate disasters. The increasing adoption of technologies such as remote sensors, satellites, and the Internet of Things (IoT) introduces significant challenges related to cybersecurity (Raghuvanshi et al., 2025). Protecting critical infrastructures and environmental data is essential to ensuring the secure and efficient functionality of these systems, especially in the context of a highly interconnected global environment (Wei; Yue; Khan, 2024).

Environmental monitoring systems rely on vast volumes of geospatial and climatic data, which are often targets of cyberattacks. For instance, data generated by satellites, used to predict extreme weather events such as hurricanes and floods, can be manipulated, leading to inadequate or delayed responses to environmental emergencies. In this context, cybersecurity goes beyond data protection; it also encompasses the integrity and availability of communication networks that support these systems. Studies show that digital governance and legal interoperability are critical to strengthening cybersecurity in BRICS countries, highlighting the need for coordinated policies and shared resources (Evgenii; Cocou, 2020; Yarygina; Krylova, 2023).

Critical infrastructures, such as satellite networks and ground sensors, are particularly vulnerable to attacks. These actions can compromise essential operations, including water quality monitoring, natural disaster prediction, and forest management. Protecting these systems requires the development of advanced security protocols, including the application of technologies such as artificial intelligence and blockchain. Blockchain’s decentralization, for instance, ensures greater transparency and reliability in protecting environmental data and monitoring carbon emissions, which are prone to manipulation and fraud (Rai; Rawat, 2022).

International cooperation is indispensable for standardizing cybersecurity protocols and promoting the exchange of information among nations. Initiatives such as the European Union's Copernicus Program serve as a reference for integrating environmental data and digital security. In BRICS countries, this collaboration is even more relevant, considering that many face significant technical and financial challenges in implementing advanced solutions (Sampene et al., 2021; Khan et al., 2023).

The integration of cybersecurity and environmental monitoring presents challenges but also strategic opportunities, as the digitization of processes and the adoption of advanced technological solutions not only enhance the resilience of monitoring systems but also increase their effectiveness in global governance contexts. Coordinated investments in cybersecurity, emerging technologies, and international cooperation are indispensable for protecting natural resources and ensuring a sustainable future (Azam, 2019; Ojekemi et al., 2022).

Interoperability among BRICS Geoinformation Systems

Firmly rooted in concepts such as digital sovereignty, interoperability among the geoinformation systems of BRICS countries is a cornerstone for integrating geospatial data and addressing the growing demand for collaborative solutions in urban planning, environmental monitoring, and sustainable development. The creation of a unified spatial data infrastructure among members could optimize information exchange and bolster integrated public policies, while also advancing scientific progress in the use of geoinformation, as highlighted by Belli and Jiang (2024). This strategic cooperation enables the bloc to tackle global challenges related to sustainability and climate resilience in a coordinated manner (Gavrilenko; Shenshin, 2024).

China and India stand out within BRICS for their technological leadership in remote sensing and Earth observation satellite systems, with initiatives such as India’s Cartosat satellites, widely used in urban planning and disaster response (Belli; Zingales, 2023). This interoperability offers detailed and comprehensive data critical to addressing complex issues such as deforestation, climate change, and food security. Systems like China’s BeiDou and Russia’s GLONASS provide a foundation for consolidating technical integration and developing interoperable digital services (Luterová, 2016).

The sharing of geoinformation within BRICS also holds great potential for strengthening digital infrastructure and smart city initiatives. High-resolution satellites can be used in water resource management, public transportation systems, and natural disaster mitigation, aligning with the group’s strategic priorities (Gromova; Ferreira, 2024). South Africa, for instance, has employed geospatial data for urban mapping and development, while Russia advances the use of its GLONASS system in large-scale applications (Carugati, 2022). An integrated digital hub among member countries would facilitate access to strategic information for governments and scientific institutions, fostering significant innovations in the use of geoinformation.

However, technical, political, and institutional challenges hinder the advancement of interoperability. Barriers such as the standardization of data formats, security protocols, and information governance are evident, as discussed by Belli, Gaspar and Jaswant (2024). Addressing these challenges requires the development of multilateral agreements that establish clear rules for accessing and using geospatial data, ensuring national sovereignty protection while fostering international cooperation. The application of ISO standards and the strengthening of interoperable legal frameworks are identified as promising paths to overcome these obstacles (Belli, 2021).

Interoperability among BRICS systems could also generate economic benefits, such as optimizing infrastructure projects and increasing efficiency in agricultural and industrial supply chains. The creation of new digital markets based on geospatial data could drive economic growth, particularly in less developed regions of member countries (Banga; Singh, 2019). To realize this potential, investments in technical capacity building, research, and innovation are necessary. The establishment of geospatial data centers of excellence in BRICS countries would be a strategic measure to promote knowledge exchange, as proposed by Gromova and Ferreira (2024) .

Creation of a Smart Space Governance Instance

The creation of a smart space governance instance has become an urgent necessity in today’s context, marked by the rapid expansion of space exploration and utilization. The growing number of satellites in orbit, the deployment of commercial megaconstellations, and competition among nations and private companies demand global mechanisms to regulate the sustainable use of outer space. In this scenario, governance integrating emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain could monitor, manage, and regulate these activities transparently and effectively (Banga; Singh, 2019).

One of the critical challenges this instance must address concerns the management of space debris, which poses a significant threat to orbital operations. Predictive AI-based solutions can be implemented to track debris and mitigate collision risks. Smart governance could encourage practices aligned with the circular economy, such as the reuse of satellites and spacecraft, while establishing global standards for space waste management. These efforts align with spatial data infrastructure (SDI) initiatives, which are essential for integrating information and facilitating decision-making in complex scenarios (Hashmi; Ahmad; Nawaz, 2021; Bondarenko, 2013).

Policies ensuring equitable distribution of the benefits derived from space must also be promoted. Emerging countries face significant challenges in accessing space technologies, exacerbating technological disparities. A smart space governance instance could develop capacity-building programs and foster international partnerships to include these nations. Thus, space would be managed as a global resource, aligned with the principles of collaborative governance (Georgiadou; Bernard; Sahay, 2006; Papaskiri et al., 2019), with a central role for governance established within the BRICS framework.

Issues related to the security and sovereignty of space data also demand attention. The advancement of remote sensing technologies and high-resolution satellites heightens concerns about privacy and the ethical use of space data. Establishing clear norms for the collection, storage, and sharing of these data can prevent abuses and strengthen mutual trust among the various actors involved, ensuring protection against cyber threats through robust digital infrastructure (Kalil, 2015; Câmara et al., 2006).

To ensure effective governance, a multilateral approach is required, bringing together governments, international organizations, private companies, and academia. The model of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) provides a starting point, but it is imperative to integrate innovative technologies and practices to meet contemporary demands. Digital tools and collaborative platforms can facilitate real-time decision-making, promoting transparency and alignment among global actors (Bondarenko, 2013; Georgiadou; Bernard; Sahay, 2006).

Finally, the creation of a smart space governance instance must prioritize long-term sustainability, in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Outer space is increasingly strategic for climate monitoring, precision agriculture, and global connectivity. Effective governance must ensure that space operations contribute to collective well-being, creating intangible public goods within the BRICS framework, while avoiding adverse impacts such as the militarization of space or excessive exploitation of extraterrestrial resources (Dzulhisham, 2024; Papaskiri et al., 2019).

Conclusions

From an astropolitical perspective, BRICS finds a strategic opportunity by implementing measures such as geoinformation system interoperability, environmental monitoring, and smart space governance. These actions have the potential to consolidate the bloc as a key player in global space governance, offering alternatives to the traditional dominance of Western powers and promoting a multilateral and inclusive approach to the use of outer space. At a time when space exploration is expanding exponentially, with megaconstellations of satellites and new commercial initiatives, the development of a smart governance framework becomes vital for the efficiency, security, and sustainability of space operations.

The integration of geoinformation systems among BRICS countries enables the creation of a robust and interconnected network of geospatial data, benefiting areas such as agriculture, urban planning, and climate monitoring. This collaboration reduces reliance on systems from developed countries, strengthens BRICS’ technological sovereignty, and generates innovative solutions that can be marketed globally, enhancing the group’s economic and technological influence on the international stage.

Shared satellite use and environmental monitoring also exemplify how BRICS can align sustainability with technological innovation. By leveraging data from integrated satellite systems, the bloc can mitigate environmental crises, monitor deforestation, predict natural disasters, and manage water resources. Simultaneously, the application of advanced cybersecurity protocols safeguards space systems against external attacks, ensuring the integrity and reliability of information. This allows BRICS to advance global objectives, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), while positioning itself as a leader in the ethical and responsible use of space technologies.

The establishment of a smart space governance framework by BRICS also enhances its geopolitical influence. By promoting the inclusion of emerging countries and partners in space utilization, the bloc not only strengthens its position in international forums but also shapes global norms for space exploration around systems like Glonass and BeiDou. This multilateral approach grants BRICS greater legitimacy and bargaining power, enabling active participation in setting rules for space debris management, sustainable extraterrestrial resource use, and spatial data governance.

The proposed measures provide BRICS with a platform to solidify its position in global astropolitics. The combination of advanced technologies, international collaboration, and a commitment to responsible governance creates a model for space use that balances innovation, sovereignty, and sustainability. By leading this agenda, BRICS demonstrates that space can be managed as a global common good, benefiting not only the most powerful nations but also promoting collective well-being and the advancement of humanity.

REFERENCES

AL-RODHAN, N. The New Space Race. The National Interest, n. 156, p. 67-74, 2018.
ALARCÓN, J. E. G.; LOUREIRO, G. The Leader Company’s Innovation Strategy and its Role Within the Aerospace Industry in Sao Jose Dos Campos: Brazil. In: ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering, 19, 2012, Trier. Anais [...] Londres: Springer, 2013. p. 95-106.
ALBINO, V.; BERARDI, U.; DANGELICO, R. M. Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, v. 22, n. 1, p. 3-21, 2015.
ALIBERTI, M. When China Goes to the Moon Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. v. 11.
ANAND, A.; SREEVATSAN, A.; TARAPOREVALA, P. An overview of the smart cities mission in India. Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, p. 1-17, 2018.
AVACHAT, Vaibhavi. Rocket Science for The Space Race. SSRN, International Conference on Communication and Information Processing, dez. 24 de 2023. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4674802 Accessed on: 30 mar. 2026
» https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4674802
AZAM, M. Relationship between energy, investment, human capital, environment, and economic growth in four BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v. 26, n. 33, p. 34388-34400, 2019.
BANGA, R.; SINGH, P. J. BRICS digital cooperation for industrialization. Centre for Competition Regulation and Economic Development, Working Paper, n. 4, 2019.
BELLI, L. CyberBRICS: A multidimensional approach to cybersecurity for the BRICS. In: BELLI, L. (org.). CyberBRICS: Cybersecurity Regulations in the BRICS Countries. Cham: Springer, 2021. p. 1-33.
BELLI, L.; GASPAR, W. B.; JASWANT, S. S. Data sovereignty and data transfers as fundamental elements of digital transformation: Lessons from the BRICS countries. Computer Law & Security Review, v. 54, 2024.
BELLI, L.; JIANG, M. Digital Sovereignty in the BRICS: Structuring Self-determination, Cybersecurity, and Control. Cybersecurity, and Control SSRN, 4 nov. 2024.
BELLI, L.; ZINGALES, N. Interoperability to foster open digital ecosystems in the BRICS countries. Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies; Xinhua Institute; China Institute of International Studies, 2023.
BERGAN, B. Space Race 2.0: SpaceX, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, NASA, and the Privatization of the Final Frontier. Minneapolis: Motorbooks International, 2022.
BONDARENKO, Е. Spatial Data Infrastructure Solutions to Contemporary Problems of the Region. Human Geography Journal, v. 15, n. 2, p. 29-33, 2013.
CÂMARA, G. et al Networks of innovation and the establishment of a spatial data infrastructure in Brazil. Information Technology for Development, v. 12, n. 4, p. 255-272, 2006.
CARUGATI, R. The Sino-Russian Partnership and the Bipolarization of the World. Network for Strategic Analysis, 12 maio de 2022. Available in: https://ras-nsa.ca/the-sino-russian-partnership-and-the-bipolarization-of-the-world/ Accessed on: 6 jun. 2025.
» https://ras-nsa.ca/the-sino-russian-partnership-and-the-bipolarization-of-the-world/
CHANDRASHEKAR, S. China's Space Programme: From the Era of Mao Zedong to Xi Jinping. Cham: Springer , 2022.
CLERCQ, W. D. et al Water research in southern Africa: data collection and innovative approaches towards climate change adaption in the water sector. Biodiversity & Ecology, v. 6, p. 54-65, 2018.
CROSS, M. A. K. D. The social construction of the space race: then and now. International Affairs, v. 95, n. 6, p. 1403-1421, 2019.
CURTIS, S.; KLAUS, I. The Belt and Road City: Geopolitics, Urbanization, and China's Search for a New International Order. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2024.
DEWDNEY, P. E. et al The square kilometre array. Proceedings of the IEEE, v. 97, n. 8, p. 1482-1496, 2009.
DOLMAN, E. Astropolitik: Classical Geopolitics in the Space Age. London: Routledge, 2020.
DROZHASHCHIKH, E. Space Race 2.0: shifting to Asia. Religiski-filozofiski raksti, v. 26, n. 2, p. 258-281, 2019.
DURÃO, O. S. C. Applications, results, perspectives and consequences of a 25 years old space program in a developing country. In: International Astronautical Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, the International Academy of Astronautics, and the International Institutional of Space Law, 55, Vancouver, 2004. Anais [...]. Vancouver: International Astronautical Federation, 2004.
DZULHISHAM, H. E. Iran's geopolitical gamble in turning to BRICS. RSIS Commentaries, Singapore, n. 186, 2024.
EVGENII, N.; COCOU, M. M. Unified digital law enforcement environment - necessity and prospects for creation in the BRICS countries. BRICS Law Journal, v. 7, n. 2, p. 66-93, 2020.
FIRSING, S. BRICS is winning the new space race. International Policy Digest, 19 abr. 2024.
FOX, S. J. Policing mining: in outer-space greed and domination vs. peace and equity-A governance for humanity! Resources Policy, v. 64, dez. 2019.
GADISA, D. Odyssey of Ethiopia's space program: revealing the past and changing the future. Journal of Space Safety Engineering, v. 10, n. 2, p. 245-255, 2023.
GAVRILENKO, V.; SHENSHIN, V. BRICS expansion: a geopolitical triumph of partner countries. BRICS Law Journal, v. 11, n. 3, p. 9-53, 2024.
GEORGIADOU, Y.; BERNARD, L.; SAHAY, S. Implementation of spatial data infrastructures in transitional economies: editorial introduction to part one of the special issue. Information Technology for Development, v. 12, n. 4, p. 247-253, 2006.
GOSWAMI, N. India’s space program, ambitions, and activities. Asia Policy, v. 15, n. 2, p. 43-49, 2020.
GROMOVA, E.; FERREIRA, D. B. On the way to BRICS+ digital sovereignty: opportunities and challenges of a new era. BRICS Law Journal, v. 11, n. 3, p. 54-69, 2024.
HARDING, R. C. Emerging space powers of Latin America: Argentina and Brazil. In: AL-EKABI, C. et al (ed.). Yearbook on Space Policy 2012/2013: Space in a Changing World. Cham: Springer , 2015. p. 221-231.
HARFORD, J. Korolev: How One Man Masterminded the Soviet Drive to Beat America to the Moon. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1999.
HARVEY, B. Europe's Space Programme: To Ariane and Beyond. London: Springer-Praxis, 2003.
HARVEY, B. The Rebirth of the Russian Space Program: 50 Years After Sputnik, New Frontiers. London: Springer-Praxis , 2007.
HARVEY, B. China in Space: The Great Leap Forward. Cham: Springer Nature, 2019.
HASHMI, A.; AHMAD, M. A.; NAWAZ, M. A. The role of coordination, decision making and spatial data infrastructure on the disaster management in Pakistan: moderating role of information system. Review of Applied Management and Social Sciences, v. 4, n. 1, p. 79-91, 2021.
HAVERCROFT, J.; DUVALL, R. Critical astropolitics: the geopolitics of space control and the transformation of state sovereignty. In: BORMANN, N.; SHEEHAN, M. Securing Outer Space Abingdon: Routledge, 2009. p. 42-48
HENDRICKX, B.; VIS, E. Energiya-Buran: The Soviet Space Shuttle. London: Springer-Praxis , 2007.
HILLMAN, J. E.; McCALPI, M. Watching Huawei’s “Safe Cities”. Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, 4 nov. 2019. Available in:Available in:https://www.csis.org/analysis/watching-huaweis-safe-cities#h2-the-issue? Accessed on: 6 jun. 2025.
» https://www.csis.org/analysis/watching-huaweis-safe-cities#h2-the-issue?
HUSSAIN, S.; SHAHZAD, K. India's quest for ‘global space and influence’ through the ‘outer space’ domain. Journal of Space Safety Engineering, v. 10, n. 3, p. 351-365, 2023.
JOHNSON, S. B. The Secret of Apollo: Systems Management in American and European Space Programs. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012.
JOHNSON-FREESE, J. The Chinese Space Program: A Mystery Within a Maze. Malabar: Krieger Publishing Company, 1998.
JOHNSON-FREESE, J. Space as a Strategic Asset New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.
KAHN, M. Prospects for cooperation in science, technology and innovation among BRICS members. In: LARIONOVA, M.; KIRTON, J. J. (ed.). BRICS and Global Governance London: Routledge , 2018. p. 168-186.
KALIL, A. M. Spatial Metrics and Urban Planning 2015. Dissertação (Mestrado em Política Ambiental Global) - Faculdade da Escola de Serviço Internacional, American University, Washington, 2016.
KAPOOR, L.; BHATTACHARYA, S. How India Achieves Space Mission Success on a Shoestring Budget: A Lesson in Economic Efficiency. International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and Technology, v. 8, n. 9, p. 85-96, 2024.
KHAN, Y. et al Analyzing the impact of natural resources and rule of law on sustainable environment: a proposed policy framework for BRICS economies. Resources Policy, v. 86, 2023.
KLINGER, J. China, Africa, and the Rest: Recent Trends in Space Science, Technology, and Satellite Development. China Africa Research Initiative (CARI), Washington, Working Paper, n. 2020/38, 2020. Available in: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/248166 Accessed on: 30 mar. 2026
» https://hdl.handle.net/10419/248166
KLINGER, J. M. Environmental geopolitics and outer space. Geopolitics, v. 26, n. 3, p. 747-767, 2021.
KRIGE, J.; RUSSO, A. Europe in Space: 1960-1973. Noordwijk: ESA Publications Division, 1994.
KULACKI, G.; LEWIS, J. A place for one’s mat: China’s space program, 1956-2003. Cambridge: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2009.
LARSEN, B. The geopolitics of AI and the rise of digital sovereignty. Brookings Institution, Washington, 8 dez. 2022. Available in: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-geopolitics-of-ai-and-the-rise-of-digital-sovereignty/ Accessed on: 26 jan. 2025.
» https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-geopolitics-of-ai-and-the-rise-of-digital-sovereignty/
LATIMER, A. The Space Race Cape Town: Penguin Random House South Africa, 2013.
LELE, A. Asian Space Race: Rhetoric or Reality? Cham: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013a.
LELE, A. Space investments: Southeast Asia. In: LELE, A. Asian Space Race: Rhetoric or Reality? Cham: Springer , 2013b. p. 109-121.
LINO, C. D. O.; LIMA, M. G. R.; HUBSCHER, G. L. CBERS - An international space cooperation program. Acta Astronautica, v. 47, n. 29, p. 559-564, 2000.
LOGSDON, J. M. After Apollo? Richard Nixon and the American Space Program. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
LUTEROVÁ, T. Země BRICS - nový faktor ekonomického vývoje ve světové ekonomice na počátku 21. století - základní přehled 2016. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (Bacharelado), Universidade da Boêmia do Sul, České Budějovice, 2016.
MATOS, P. de O. et al Geohistorical changes and space exploration: a study of the Baikonur Cosmodrome. Revista InterAção, v. 15, n. 1, 2024.
MATOS, P de O. Industrial base defence: an analysis of the space systems industry in Brazil. In: RICCO, M. F. F. (org.). Culture and Defence in Brazil: an inside look at Brazil’s aerospace strategies. London: Routledge , 2017. p. 39-49.
McCAULEY, M.; McCAULEY, M. The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Union London: Routledge , 2014.
MITCHELL, S. T. Constellations of Inequality: Space, Race, and Utopia in Brazil. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017.
MOLTZ, J. C. The Politics of Space Security: Strategic Restraint and the Pursuit of National Interests. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2011.
MOLTZ, J. C. Asia’s Space Race: National Motivations, Regional Rivalries, and International Risks. New York: Columbia University Press , 2012.
MWIYA, F.; KALUNGA, W. S. A shining example of low-cost space exploration: the success of India’s space program. Acceleron Aerospace Journal, v. 3, n. 3, p. 505-507, 2024.
NAKAHODO, S. N. Should space be part of a development strategy? Reflections based upon the Brazilian experience. New Space, v. 9, n. 1, p. 19-26, 2021.
NAKAHODO, S. N.; FONSECA, L.; PEREIRA, A. L. Developing a sustainable financial framework for emerging spacefaring nations: the case of Brazil. New Space, v. 12, n. 2, p. 88-100, 2024.
NAM, T.; PARDO, T. A. Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In: International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging Times, 12, 2011, Washington. Anais [...] New York: ACM, 2011. p. 282-291.
NGCOFE, L.; GOTTSCHALK, K. The growth of space science in African countries for Earth observation in the 21st century. South African Journal of Science, v. 109, n. 1, p. 1-5, 2013.
NOVOSELOVA, M. BRICS: dialectics of unity and diversity as a key to successful global cooperation. BRICS Law Journal, v. 4, n. 4, p. 145-151, 2017.
OJEKEMI, O. S. et al Toward a sustainable environment and economic growth in BRICS economies: do innovation and globalization matter? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v. 29, n. 38, p. 57740-57757, 2022.
PAPASKIRI, T. V. et al Digital land management. In: International Symposium on Earth Sciences: History, Contemporary Issues and Prospects, Moscow, 2019. Anais [...] Bristol: IOP Publishing, 2019. v. 350, n. 1. p. 012065.
PARVAIZ, A. India’s space missions spark science funding debate. SciDev.net-Enterprise, 5 set. 2023.
PASCO, X. Le Nouvel Âge Spatial: De la Guerre Froide au New Space. Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2017.
PEKKANEN, S. M. Governing the new space race. AJIL Unbound, v. 113, p. 92-97, 2019.
RAGHUVANSHI, R. et al Artificial Intelligence for Smart City Development in BRICS Economies: opportunities and challenges. In: MAKER, S. et al (ed.). Handbook of Artificial Intelligence for Smart City Development: Management Systems and Technology Challenges. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2025. p. 173-208.
RAI, S. K.; RAWAT, A. Exploring the nexus between environment quality, economic development and industrialization in BRICS nations: the role of technological innovation and income inequality. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v. 29, n. 25, p. 37842-37853, 2022.
RAJAGOPALAN, R. The global space race, 2.0. Observer Research Foundation, 14 fev. 2018.
RUBIN, L. A Middle East space race? Motivations, trajectories, and regional politics. Space Policy, v. 69, 2024.
RUBIN, L. Racing to the heavens? Comparing Middle East space programs. In: MARSHALL, T.; MOWTHORPE, M.; SOUSA, A.F. (ed.). Routledge handbook of space policy London: Routledge , 2025. p. 528-542.
RUEHL, J. P. The Ukraine war is accelerating the new space race. CounterPunch, 13 maio de 2022.
SAMPENE, A. et al Analysis of the BRICS countries’ pathways towards a low-carbon environment. BRICS Journal of Economics, v. 2, n. 4, p. 77-102, 2021.
SARLI, B. et al South American space era. In: International Astronautical Congress, 66, 2015, Jerusalém. Anais [...] Paris: IAF, 2015. p. 11174-11189.
SEEDHOUSE, E. SpaceX: Making Commercial Spaceflight a Reality. Cham: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.
SIDDIQI, A. A. Challenge to Apollo: The Soviet Union and the Space Race, 1945-1974. Washington: NASA History Division, 2000.
SIDDIQI, A. A. Beyond Earth: A Chronicle of Deep Space Exploration. Washington: NASA History Division , 2018.
STOVPETS, O.; SVYRYDENKO, D. Chinese perspectives in the “space race” through the prism of global scientific and technological leadership. Philosophy and Cosmology, v. 25, p. 57-68, 2020.
SULTAN, B.; MAHMOOD, A. BRICS space diplomacy and response of non-Western countries: the inscription of neo-functionalism. Journal of Humanities, Social and Management Sciences (JHSMS), v. 3, n. 1, p. 351-365, 2022.
SUZUKI, K. Space policies of Japan, China and India: comparative policy logic analysis. Ritsumeikan Kokusai Kenkyu (立命館国際研究), v. 31, n. 5, 2019.
TARIKHI, P. Iran’s space programme: riding high for peace and pride. Space Policy, v. 25, n. 3, p. 160-173, 2009.
UGEDA, Luiz. Direito administrativo geográfico: fundamentos na geografia e na cartografia oficial do Brasil. Brasília: Geodireito, 2017.
VARADA, P. The space race expands: why africans nations are looking beyond earth. Harvard International Review, v. 43, n. 2, p. 40-43, 2022.
VIDMAR, Matjaz; VERMEYLEN, Saskia. Utopia(s), outer space law and ecology. ESST Review, v. 41, n. 1, p. 28-72, 2022. Available in: https://www.easst.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/review_2022_04.pdf#page=28 Accessed on: 26 jan. 2025.
» https://www.easst.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/review_2022_04.pdf#page=28
WEI, H.; YUE, G.; KHAN, N. U. Uncovering the impact of fintech, natural resources, green finance and green growth on environment sustainability in BRICS: an MMQR analysis. Resources Policy, v. 89, 2024.
YARYGINA, I.; KRYLOVA, L. BRICS investment policy in contemporary environment. BRICS Journal of Economics, v. 4, n. 2, p. 193-208, 2023.
ZAK, A. Russia in Space: The Past Explained, The Future Explored. Ontario: Apogee Books, 2014.

Declaration of availability of research data:
All the data supporting the results of this study were published in the article itself.
Generative AI disclosure:
In the absence of specific legislation, the research used artificial intelligence tools based on prompts from the authors, observing applicable international references, especially ISO/IEC 23894:2023 (AI risk management), as well as complementary standards relating to information security (ISO/IEC 27001:2022), data quality (ISO/IEC 25012:2008), impartiality (ISO/IEC TR 24027:2021) and governance (ISO/IEC 38507:2023). The tools were used to support the organization of technical topics and the systematization of data, without decisional autonomy or authorship. All content was entirely conceived, validated and reviewed by the authors, who assume full responsibility for the results presented.

Edited by

Article editor:
Edilson Alves Pereira Júnior

Data availability

All the data supporting the results of this study were published in the article itself.

Publication Dates

Publication in this collection
14 Aug 2026
Date of issue
2026

History

Received
12 Sept 2025
Accepted
08 Feb 2026

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License

[1] AL-RODHAN, N. The New Space Race. The National Interest, n. 156, p. 67-74, 2018.

[2] ALARCÓN, J. E. G.; LOUREIRO, G. The Leader Company’s Innovation Strategy and its Role Within the Aerospace Industry in Sao Jose Dos Campos: Brazil. In: ISPE International Conference on Concurrent Engineering, 19, 2012, Trier. Anais [...] Londres: Springer, 2013. p. 95-106.

[3] ALBINO, V.; BERARDI, U.; DANGELICO, R. M. Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, v. 22, n. 1, p. 3-21, 2015.

[4] ALIBERTI, M. When China Goes to the Moon Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. v. 11.

[5] ANAND, A.; SREEVATSAN, A.; TARAPOREVALA, P. An overview of the smart cities mission in India. Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi, p. 1-17, 2018.

[6] AVACHAT, Vaibhavi. Rocket Science for The Space Race. SSRN, International Conference on Communication and Information Processing, dez. 24 de 2023. Disponível em: Disponível em: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4674802 Accessed on: 30 mar. 2026
» https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4674802

[7] AZAM, M. Relationship between energy, investment, human capital, environment, and economic growth in four BRICS countries. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v. 26, n. 33, p. 34388-34400, 2019.

[8] BANGA, R.; SINGH, P. J. BRICS digital cooperation for industrialization. Centre for Competition Regulation and Economic Development, Working Paper, n. 4, 2019.

[9] BELLI, L. CyberBRICS: A multidimensional approach to cybersecurity for the BRICS. In: BELLI, L. (org.). CyberBRICS: Cybersecurity Regulations in the BRICS Countries. Cham: Springer, 2021. p. 1-33.

[10] BELLI, L.; GASPAR, W. B.; JASWANT, S. S. Data sovereignty and data transfers as fundamental elements of digital transformation: Lessons from the BRICS countries. Computer Law & Security Review, v. 54, 2024.

[11] BELLI, L.; JIANG, M. Digital Sovereignty in the BRICS: Structuring Self-determination, Cybersecurity, and Control. Cybersecurity, and Control SSRN, 4 nov. 2024.

[12] BELLI, L.; ZINGALES, N. Interoperability to foster open digital ecosystems in the BRICS countries. Chinese Academy of Cyberspace Studies; Xinhua Institute; China Institute of International Studies, 2023.

[13] BERGAN, B. Space Race 2.0: SpaceX, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, NASA, and the Privatization of the Final Frontier. Minneapolis: Motorbooks International, 2022.

[14] BONDARENKO, Е. Spatial Data Infrastructure Solutions to Contemporary Problems of the Region. Human Geography Journal, v. 15, n. 2, p. 29-33, 2013.

[15] CÂMARA, G. et al Networks of innovation and the establishment of a spatial data infrastructure in Brazil. Information Technology for Development, v. 12, n. 4, p. 255-272, 2006.

[16] CARUGATI, R. The Sino-Russian Partnership and the Bipolarization of the World. Network for Strategic Analysis, 12 maio de 2022. Available in: https://ras-nsa.ca/the-sino-russian-partnership-and-the-bipolarization-of-the-world/ Accessed on: 6 jun. 2025.
» https://ras-nsa.ca/the-sino-russian-partnership-and-the-bipolarization-of-the-world/

[17] CHANDRASHEKAR, S. China's Space Programme: From the Era of Mao Zedong to Xi Jinping. Cham: Springer , 2022.

[18] CLERCQ, W. D. et al Water research in southern Africa: data collection and innovative approaches towards climate change adaption in the water sector. Biodiversity & Ecology, v. 6, p. 54-65, 2018.

[19] CROSS, M. A. K. D. The social construction of the space race: then and now. International Affairs, v. 95, n. 6, p. 1403-1421, 2019.

[20] CURTIS, S.; KLAUS, I. The Belt and Road City: Geopolitics, Urbanization, and China's Search for a New International Order. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2024.

[21] DEWDNEY, P. E. et al The square kilometre array. Proceedings of the IEEE, v. 97, n. 8, p. 1482-1496, 2009.

[22] DOLMAN, E. Astropolitik: Classical Geopolitics in the Space Age. London: Routledge, 2020.

[23] DROZHASHCHIKH, E. Space Race 2.0: shifting to Asia. Religiski-filozofiski raksti, v. 26, n. 2, p. 258-281, 2019.

[24] DURÃO, O. S. C. Applications, results, perspectives and consequences of a 25 years old space program in a developing country. In: International Astronautical Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, the International Academy of Astronautics, and the International Institutional of Space Law, 55, Vancouver, 2004. Anais [...]. Vancouver: International Astronautical Federation, 2004.

[25] DZULHISHAM, H. E. Iran's geopolitical gamble in turning to BRICS. RSIS Commentaries, Singapore, n. 186, 2024.

[26] EVGENII, N.; COCOU, M. M. Unified digital law enforcement environment - necessity and prospects for creation in the BRICS countries. BRICS Law Journal, v. 7, n. 2, p. 66-93, 2020.

[27] FIRSING, S. BRICS is winning the new space race. International Policy Digest, 19 abr. 2024.

[28] FOX, S. J. Policing mining: in outer-space greed and domination vs. peace and equity-A governance for humanity! Resources Policy, v. 64, dez. 2019.

[29] GADISA, D. Odyssey of Ethiopia's space program: revealing the past and changing the future. Journal of Space Safety Engineering, v. 10, n. 2, p. 245-255, 2023.

[30] GAVRILENKO, V.; SHENSHIN, V. BRICS expansion: a geopolitical triumph of partner countries. BRICS Law Journal, v. 11, n. 3, p. 9-53, 2024.

[31] GEORGIADOU, Y.; BERNARD, L.; SAHAY, S. Implementation of spatial data infrastructures in transitional economies: editorial introduction to part one of the special issue. Information Technology for Development, v. 12, n. 4, p. 247-253, 2006.

[32] GOSWAMI, N. India’s space program, ambitions, and activities. Asia Policy, v. 15, n. 2, p. 43-49, 2020.

[33] GROMOVA, E.; FERREIRA, D. B. On the way to BRICS+ digital sovereignty: opportunities and challenges of a new era. BRICS Law Journal, v. 11, n. 3, p. 54-69, 2024.

[34] HARDING, R. C. Emerging space powers of Latin America: Argentina and Brazil. In: AL-EKABI, C. et al (ed.). Yearbook on Space Policy 2012/2013: Space in a Changing World. Cham: Springer , 2015. p. 221-231.

[35] HARFORD, J. Korolev: How One Man Masterminded the Soviet Drive to Beat America to the Moon. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1999.

[36] HARVEY, B. Europe's Space Programme: To Ariane and Beyond. London: Springer-Praxis, 2003.

[37] HARVEY, B. The Rebirth of the Russian Space Program: 50 Years After Sputnik, New Frontiers. London: Springer-Praxis , 2007.

[38] HARVEY, B. China in Space: The Great Leap Forward. Cham: Springer Nature, 2019.

[39] HASHMI, A.; AHMAD, M. A.; NAWAZ, M. A. The role of coordination, decision making and spatial data infrastructure on the disaster management in Pakistan: moderating role of information system. Review of Applied Management and Social Sciences, v. 4, n. 1, p. 79-91, 2021.

[40] HAVERCROFT, J.; DUVALL, R. Critical astropolitics: the geopolitics of space control and the transformation of state sovereignty. In: BORMANN, N.; SHEEHAN, M. Securing Outer Space Abingdon: Routledge, 2009. p. 42-48

[41] HENDRICKX, B.; VIS, E. Energiya-Buran: The Soviet Space Shuttle. London: Springer-Praxis , 2007.

[42] HILLMAN, J. E.; McCALPI, M. Watching Huawei’s “Safe Cities”. Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, 4 nov. 2019. Available in:Available in:https://www.csis.org/analysis/watching-huaweis-safe-cities#h2-the-issue? Accessed on: 6 jun. 2025.
» https://www.csis.org/analysis/watching-huaweis-safe-cities#h2-the-issue?

[43] HUSSAIN, S.; SHAHZAD, K. India's quest for ‘global space and influence’ through the ‘outer space’ domain. Journal of Space Safety Engineering, v. 10, n. 3, p. 351-365, 2023.

[44] JOHNSON, S. B. The Secret of Apollo: Systems Management in American and European Space Programs. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2012.

[45] JOHNSON-FREESE, J. The Chinese Space Program: A Mystery Within a Maze. Malabar: Krieger Publishing Company, 1998.

[46] JOHNSON-FREESE, J. Space as a Strategic Asset New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.

[47] KAHN, M. Prospects for cooperation in science, technology and innovation among BRICS members. In: LARIONOVA, M.; KIRTON, J. J. (ed.). BRICS and Global Governance London: Routledge , 2018. p. 168-186.

[48] KALIL, A. M. Spatial Metrics and Urban Planning 2015. Dissertação (Mestrado em Política Ambiental Global) - Faculdade da Escola de Serviço Internacional, American University, Washington, 2016.

[49] KAPOOR, L.; BHATTACHARYA, S. How India Achieves Space Mission Success on a Shoestring Budget: A Lesson in Economic Efficiency. International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and Technology, v. 8, n. 9, p. 85-96, 2024.

[50] KHAN, Y. et al Analyzing the impact of natural resources and rule of law on sustainable environment: a proposed policy framework for BRICS economies. Resources Policy, v. 86, 2023.

[51] KLINGER, J. China, Africa, and the Rest: Recent Trends in Space Science, Technology, and Satellite Development. China Africa Research Initiative (CARI), Washington, Working Paper, n. 2020/38, 2020. Available in: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/248166 Accessed on: 30 mar. 2026
» https://hdl.handle.net/10419/248166

[52] KLINGER, J. M. Environmental geopolitics and outer space. Geopolitics, v. 26, n. 3, p. 747-767, 2021.

[53] KRIGE, J.; RUSSO, A. Europe in Space: 1960-1973. Noordwijk: ESA Publications Division, 1994.

[54] KULACKI, G.; LEWIS, J. A place for one’s mat: China’s space program, 1956-2003. Cambridge: American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2009.

[55] LARSEN, B. The geopolitics of AI and the rise of digital sovereignty. Brookings Institution, Washington, 8 dez. 2022. Available in: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-geopolitics-of-ai-and-the-rise-of-digital-sovereignty/ Accessed on: 26 jan. 2025.
» https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-geopolitics-of-ai-and-the-rise-of-digital-sovereignty/

[56] LATIMER, A. The Space Race Cape Town: Penguin Random House South Africa, 2013.

[57] LELE, A. Asian Space Race: Rhetoric or Reality? Cham: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013a.

[58] LELE, A. Space investments: Southeast Asia. In: LELE, A. Asian Space Race: Rhetoric or Reality? Cham: Springer , 2013b. p. 109-121.

[59] LINO, C. D. O.; LIMA, M. G. R.; HUBSCHER, G. L. CBERS - An international space cooperation program. Acta Astronautica, v. 47, n. 29, p. 559-564, 2000.

[60] LOGSDON, J. M. After Apollo? Richard Nixon and the American Space Program. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.

[61] LUTEROVÁ, T. Země BRICS - nový faktor ekonomického vývoje ve světové ekonomice na počátku 21. století - základní přehled 2016. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso (Bacharelado), Universidade da Boêmia do Sul, České Budějovice, 2016.

[62] MATOS, P. de O. et al Geohistorical changes and space exploration: a study of the Baikonur Cosmodrome. Revista InterAção, v. 15, n. 1, 2024.

[63] MATOS, P de O. Industrial base defence: an analysis of the space systems industry in Brazil. In: RICCO, M. F. F. (org.). Culture and Defence in Brazil: an inside look at Brazil’s aerospace strategies. London: Routledge , 2017. p. 39-49.

[64] McCAULEY, M.; McCAULEY, M. The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Union London: Routledge , 2014.

[65] MITCHELL, S. T. Constellations of Inequality: Space, Race, and Utopia in Brazil. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2017.

[66] MOLTZ, J. C. The Politics of Space Security: Strategic Restraint and the Pursuit of National Interests. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2011.

[67] MOLTZ, J. C. Asia’s Space Race: National Motivations, Regional Rivalries, and International Risks. New York: Columbia University Press , 2012.

[68] MWIYA, F.; KALUNGA, W. S. A shining example of low-cost space exploration: the success of India’s space program. Acceleron Aerospace Journal, v. 3, n. 3, p. 505-507, 2024.

[69] NAKAHODO, S. N. Should space be part of a development strategy? Reflections based upon the Brazilian experience. New Space, v. 9, n. 1, p. 19-26, 2021.

[70] NAKAHODO, S. N.; FONSECA, L.; PEREIRA, A. L. Developing a sustainable financial framework for emerging spacefaring nations: the case of Brazil. New Space, v. 12, n. 2, p. 88-100, 2024.

[71] NAM, T.; PARDO, T. A. Conceptualizing smart city with dimensions of technology, people, and institutions. In: International Digital Government Research Conference: Digital Government Innovation in Challenging Times, 12, 2011, Washington. Anais [...] New York: ACM, 2011. p. 282-291.

[72] NGCOFE, L.; GOTTSCHALK, K. The growth of space science in African countries for Earth observation in the 21st century. South African Journal of Science, v. 109, n. 1, p. 1-5, 2013.

[73] NOVOSELOVA, M. BRICS: dialectics of unity and diversity as a key to successful global cooperation. BRICS Law Journal, v. 4, n. 4, p. 145-151, 2017.

[74] OJEKEMI, O. S. et al Toward a sustainable environment and economic growth in BRICS economies: do innovation and globalization matter? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v. 29, n. 38, p. 57740-57757, 2022.

[75] PAPASKIRI, T. V. et al Digital land management. In: International Symposium on Earth Sciences: History, Contemporary Issues and Prospects, Moscow, 2019. Anais [...] Bristol: IOP Publishing, 2019. v. 350, n. 1. p. 012065.

[76] PARVAIZ, A. India’s space missions spark science funding debate. SciDev.net-Enterprise, 5 set. 2023.

[77] PASCO, X. Le Nouvel Âge Spatial: De la Guerre Froide au New Space. Paris: CNRS Éditions, 2017.

[78] PEKKANEN, S. M. Governing the new space race. AJIL Unbound, v. 113, p. 92-97, 2019.

[79] RAGHUVANSHI, R. et al Artificial Intelligence for Smart City Development in BRICS Economies: opportunities and challenges. In: MAKER, S. et al (ed.). Handbook of Artificial Intelligence for Smart City Development: Management Systems and Technology Challenges. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2025. p. 173-208.

[80] RAI, S. K.; RAWAT, A. Exploring the nexus between environment quality, economic development and industrialization in BRICS nations: the role of technological innovation and income inequality. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, v. 29, n. 25, p. 37842-37853, 2022.

[81] RAJAGOPALAN, R. The global space race, 2.0. Observer Research Foundation, 14 fev. 2018.

[82] RUBIN, L. A Middle East space race? Motivations, trajectories, and regional politics. Space Policy, v. 69, 2024.

[83] RUBIN, L. Racing to the heavens? Comparing Middle East space programs. In: MARSHALL, T.; MOWTHORPE, M.; SOUSA, A.F. (ed.). Routledge handbook of space policy London: Routledge , 2025. p. 528-542.

[84] RUEHL, J. P. The Ukraine war is accelerating the new space race. CounterPunch, 13 maio de 2022.

[85] SAMPENE, A. et al Analysis of the BRICS countries’ pathways towards a low-carbon environment. BRICS Journal of Economics, v. 2, n. 4, p. 77-102, 2021.

[86] SARLI, B. et al South American space era. In: International Astronautical Congress, 66, 2015, Jerusalém. Anais [...] Paris: IAF, 2015. p. 11174-11189.

[87] SEEDHOUSE, E. SpaceX: Making Commercial Spaceflight a Reality. Cham: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.

[88] SIDDIQI, A. A. Challenge to Apollo: The Soviet Union and the Space Race, 1945-1974. Washington: NASA History Division, 2000.

[89] SIDDIQI, A. A. Beyond Earth: A Chronicle of Deep Space Exploration. Washington: NASA History Division , 2018.

[90] STOVPETS, O.; SVYRYDENKO, D. Chinese perspectives in the “space race” through the prism of global scientific and technological leadership. Philosophy and Cosmology, v. 25, p. 57-68, 2020.

[91] SULTAN, B.; MAHMOOD, A. BRICS space diplomacy and response of non-Western countries: the inscription of neo-functionalism. Journal of Humanities, Social and Management Sciences (JHSMS), v. 3, n. 1, p. 351-365, 2022.

[92] SUZUKI, K. Space policies of Japan, China and India: comparative policy logic analysis. Ritsumeikan Kokusai Kenkyu (立命館国際研究), v. 31, n. 5, 2019.

[93] TARIKHI, P. Iran’s space programme: riding high for peace and pride. Space Policy, v. 25, n. 3, p. 160-173, 2009.

[94] UGEDA, Luiz. Direito administrativo geográfico: fundamentos na geografia e na cartografia oficial do Brasil. Brasília: Geodireito, 2017.

[95] VARADA, P. The space race expands: why africans nations are looking beyond earth. Harvard International Review, v. 43, n. 2, p. 40-43, 2022.

[96] VIDMAR, Matjaz; VERMEYLEN, Saskia. Utopia(s), outer space law and ecology. ESST Review, v. 41, n. 1, p. 28-72, 2022. Available in: https://www.easst.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/review_2022_04.pdf#page=28 Accessed on: 26 jan. 2025.
» https://www.easst.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/review_2022_04.pdf#page=28

[97] WEI, H.; YUE, G.; KHAN, N. U. Uncovering the impact of fintech, natural resources, green finance and green growth on environment sustainability in BRICS: an MMQR analysis. Resources Policy, v. 89, 2024.

[98] YARYGINA, I.; KRYLOVA, L. BRICS investment policy in contemporary environment. BRICS Journal of Economics, v. 4, n. 2, p. 193-208, 2023.

[99] ZAK, A. Russia in Space: The Past Explained, The Future Explored. Ontario: Apogee Books, 2014.