ESPI Space Spectrum Policy Report - v5

Space Spectrum Management
Foundations for an informed policy

discussion towards WRC-23 and beyond
ESPI Space Spectrum Policy Report
Report:
Title: “Space Spectrum Management: Foundations for an informed policy discussion towards WRC-23 and beyond”
Published: October 2023
ISSN: 2218-0931 (print) • 2076-6688 (online)
Editor and publisher:

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI)
Schwarzenbergplatz 6 • 1030 Vienna • Austria
Phone: +43 1 718 11 18 -0
E-Mail: office@espi.or.at
Website: www.espi.or.at
Rights reserved - No part of this report may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose without permission
from ESPI. Citations and extracts to be published by other means are subject to mentioning “Space Spectrum Management:
Foundations for an informed policy discussion towards WRC-23 and beyond”, October 2023. All rights reserved” and sample
transmission to ESPI before publishing.
ESPI is not responsible for any losses, injury or damage caused to any person or property (including under contract, by
negligence, product liability or otherwise) whether they may be direct or indirect, special, incidental or consequential,
resulting from the information contained in this publication.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1
2 THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THE SPACE SECTOR ............................................................................... 2
3 THE VALUE OF SPECTRUM AND ITS EXPLOITATION ................................................................................. 5
4 REGULATING SPECTRUM: THE ITU AND NATIONAL SYSTEM ................................................................. 9
5 CHALLENGES TO TACKLE AT THE WRC-23 AND BEYOND .................................................................. 14

5.1 Dealing with overfiling and Bring into Use rules ............................................................................. 17
5.2 Maximising the use of spectrum across applications .................................................................. 20
5.3 Harmonising spectrum management .................................................................................................. 23
5.4 Improving Spectrum monitoring............................................................................................................ 26
5.5 Balancing efficiency with equitable access to spectrum .......................................................... 29
5.6 Driving space sustainability concerns ................................................................................................. 32
6 EUROPEAN REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT FOR SPECTRUM .................................................................35
7 A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE ON SPECTRUM POLICY ............................................................................. 41

7.1 Developing a European approach to spectrum sharing .............................................................. 41
7.2 Synergising knowledge and expertise within Europe ...................................................................41
7.3 Strengthening ties between spectrum and space authorities ................................................. 42
7.4 Harmonising spectrum management systems in Europe .......................................................... 42
AUTHORS............................................................................................................................................................ 44
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................................................45
ANNEX A: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................... 46
ANNEX B: INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT FOR SPECTRUM ............... 48
ANNEX C: STUDY GROUPS AND AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE WRC-23.........................................................54

1 INTRODUCTION
In today’s world, the role played by wireless communication is becoming exceedingly crucial.
Devices of different kinds, which rely on wireless networks to work, are an integral part of our
everyday life: from smartphones to Near Field Communication (NFC) and Radio-Frequency
Identification (RFID), including tools such as remote controllers or wearables.
Radio spectrum availability is the backbone of the digital economy, with the full portfolio of
space applications being no exception. Both the operation of satellites and the provision of
services intrinsically relies on wireless communication. Space operations can only be conducted in
a reliable manner, provided that access to required spectrum bands is granted, and their use is
ensured free of interference. Indeed, Telemetry, Tracking and Command (TT&C) transmissions
require specific (and usually different) frequency bands for both the uplink and the downlink data
transfer. Similarly, radar or Radio Frequency (RF) monitoring systems conducting Space Situational
Awareness (SSA) are underpinned by a licensed use of spectrum. Moreover, frequency bands are
essential for satellite operators to generate value from services such as television broadcasting,
Internet of Things (IoT) connectivity, satellite Positioning, Navigation and Timing (PNT) information,
broadband communication, weather forecasting, and active and passive remote sensing.
Whilst frequency bands are crucial enablers of space activities, spectrum is a valuable, scarce,
and finite resource. Moreover, the use of frequency bands for satellite missions must coexist with
the need for spectrum of other applications and services, a fact that makes spectrum availability
even more limited. In this regard, regulatory decisions are needed to further ensure an effective
and efficient use of frequency bands for all, protecting space data transfer against interference with
other spacecraft, ground stations or terrestrial applications. Thus, the utilisation of most spectrum
bands requires highly competitive and complex allocation, coordination, and planning frameworks.
Mobile Radiolocation Scientific &

Radio
Broadcasting Broadband systems (transport experimental
Fixed Networks navigation
satellite networks safety, anti- satellites, Radio
(telephony, systems
(TV and sound (high-speed collision devices, Astronomy
broadband) air/maritime traffic (space and (EO, metereology,
programme) Internet
control) terrestrial) space reserach)
connectivity)
Figure 1: Radio communications terminals in the Information and Communication Technologies ecosystem
This Report aims to explain the topic and focus on the crucial policy dimension of spectrum
management in outer space, while also investigating how spectrum management systems could
be enhanced to more effectively and efficiently deal with the currently congested space and
spectrum environment and the demand for a more connected world.
Chapter two will provide an overview of the outstanding dynamics within the satellite communications
sector, followed by an assessment of the changing societal and economic value of spectrum, covered
in Chapter three. An overview of the ITU system and of national assignment and licensing procedures
for space systems is presented in Chapter four. An analysis of selected policy and regulatory
challenges and their implications in the lead up to the WRC-23 for space services will be presented
in Chapter five. Chapter six provides an overview of the European regulatory framework, whilst
Chapter seven posits a European policy perspective and proposal for spectrum policy. A description
of the international spectrum management regime and European spectrum regulatory environment
is included in Annex B, and an overview of WRC Study Groups and Agenda Items in Annex C.
The Report benefitted from the review of external experts, and interviews with selected
stakeholders ranging from international organisations to national entities, relevant industrial actors
and academia (See Acknowledgments).
European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 1

2 THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THE SPACE SECTOR

The space sector is experiencing rapid evolution, with the satellite communication application
playing a central role in this development in both Europe and worldwide. Indeed, as space is
increasingly becoming part of the broader digital infrastructure, with satcom services integrated
into terrestrial networks and providing solutions across various industry and market verticals.
Overall, the global satellite communications sector is undergoing significant transformation, as
market and technology forces converge, and newer value propositions and user requirements
emerge. Changes are witnessed on the demand side, stemming from
the digital revolution, with the emergence of new connectivity needs 12.6%
and requirements. For instance, Over-The-Top (OTT) services are 5.4%
offered through the Internet by operators such as Microsoft, Amazon 5.7%
and Netflix, all of which predominantly rely on terrestrial infrastructure
53.7%
for their service provision.1 This context is affecting the satcom market. 9.9%
While direct broadcast services (DBS) and direct-to-home (DTH)

television traditionally represent the largest portion of the 12.7%
downstream segment of the space economy ($89.9 billion as of 2022,

Space Foundation), revenues from these services have witnessed a Video Social
slowdown over the past decade, with falling prices resulting from Web browsing Gaming
Messaging Others
oversupply. This is due to a major shift from DBS and DTH services Figure 2: Global traffic share of
to non-linear television, notably driven by Video on Demand (VoD).2 different services, 2021 (Credit: Axon
based on Sandvine)
This changing market demand pushes satcom operators to respond to the need for wider access
and higher data rates by relying on new solutions, including larger satellites integrating maximum
capacity, such as Very High Throughput Satellites (VHTS), and Ultra High Throughput Satellites
(UHTS) but also more flexible programmable satellites (notably, constellation architectures using
smaller and smaller satellites), and taking advantage of the decrease in costs. This facilitates the
high-volume production required by large constellations to provide customers with the capacity to
adapt to the evolving market demand. The necessity for increased transmission capacity requires
tapping into larger bandwidth and therefore higher frequencies.
In parallel, the above-mentioned trend in the satcom sector is creating a progressive trend of
shifting from pure Geostationary Orbit (GSO) to complementary or alternative Low Earth Orbit
(LEO) connectivity. This is due to the low latency, and consequently better user experience,
required by new online activities such as video conferencing and live-streaming, cloud-based
applications, telemedicine, real-time gaming, transportation management, emergency response,
and High Frequency Trading.3 Indeed, only the shorter distance to LEO with respect to GEO allows
such a reduced latency in data transmission, despite requiring the deployment of large
constellations instead of single satellites for coverage reasons. This implies a change of the usual
architecture of satellite infrastructure, as well as for the satellite manufacturing industry. In the
non-GSO regime, especially LEO, the large constellation sector is developing as a source of
growth and disruption. New space actors with strong financial support are emerging at
unprecedented levels of innovation, as new models of development and a shift of risks and
responsibilities are being experienced. This paradigm shift is also evident in the fact that some GEO
1
ITU defines OTT as “application accessed and delivered over the public Internet that may be a direct technical/functional
substitute for traditional international telecommunication services”. in “Collaborative framework OTTs”. (Link).
2
A. Tyagi & R. Sharma. 2019. “DTH Technology”. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (Link).
3
S. Spolitis et al. 2014. “Latency causes and reduction in optical metro networks”. SPIE Photonics West OPTO (Link). This is
also due to lower-cost and easier access to LEO in comparison to GEO.

satellite operators are moving from traditional GEO networks and services to a diversification
of their infrastructure, increasingly cooperating with or acquiring new LEO and Medium Earth Orbit
(MEO) entrants, as well as teaming up with traditional terrestrial telecom providers. The
hybridisation (or consolidation) of networks allows satcom operators to provide solutions across
various verticals, with the goal of capturing the fast-growing broadband connectivity market and
tackling the expected booming demand for connectivity across a variety of sectors with diverse
latency and transmission capacity (and therefore bandwidth) needs, such as aerial (e.g., in-flight
connectivity), maritime mobility, land transportation in remote areas, fixed data, and government
services. As an example, SES already pursued a multiorbital solution in 2020, after having acquired
O3B and its MEO networks in 2016. Similarly, the combination of Eutelsat and OneWeb, providing
integrated GEO and LEO solutions and services, takes advantage of both the higher capacity
offered by GEO and the lower latency offered by LEO satellites. 4 This emphasises the high
expectations traditional operators place on LEO and MEO connectivity, which is believed to become
the new growth engine for the satcom business not only in Business-to-Consumer (B2C) markets
but also, potentially, in the Business to Business (B2B) and Business to Government (B2G) markets.
In parallel, recent examples of horizontal mergers, such as Viasat’s acquisition of Inmarsat (in this
case happening between two GEO operators) complete the picture suggesting a reconstruction of
the ecosystem with fewer competitors.5
The approach developed by some new entrants, such as SpaceX, goes one step further and aims
to establishes processes where the connectivity solution is part of a vertically integrated market,
offering new combined services, such as autonomous driving. 6 In June 2022, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) granted SpaceX authorisation to use its Starlink system on
vehicles in motion. Further, the direct satellite-to-device (D2D) innovative business model is taking
shape especially for emergency purposes. Indeed, D2D technology allows consumer smartphones
to send messages directly through the satellite platform, thus bridging the gap between satellite
and terrestrial mobile network operators. D2D market is forecasted as a significant opportunity in
satellite communications, with projected revenue of $60 billion and up to 350 million subscribers
by 2030.7 Several IT companies such as Apple and T-Mobile US have entered the satcom sector.
For example, Apple and Globalstar, a U.S company operating a suite of LEO satellites for voice and
data services, agreed on a use of 85% of the satellite network capacity to provide “Emergency SOS
By Satellite”.8
New spectrum-hungry connectivity concepts are also emerging. 9 In particular, a profound

transformation of business activities is the result of the worldwide deployment of 5G in the 2020s.
Indeed, the 5G standard enables the first multi-technology network, making use of a set of
dedicated technologies, leading to an increase in connectivity capabilities and services which
require space solutions to be crucially integrated with terrestrial ones.
Overall, in a setting where traditional global terrestrial telecommunications infrastructure networks
maintain their role in transmitting most data (including land-based delivery systems such as fibre
optic, copper cable antenna sites or towers for terrestrial wireless communications), space and
terrestrial services are not mutually exclusive. For instance, space-based assets are crucial when
land-based systems are down, such as during natural or human-made disasters. But beyond
4
Eutelsat. 2023. “Eutelsat and OneWeb combination heralds new era in space connectivity”. Eutelsat (Link).
5
J. Rainbow. 2023. “Satellite operators Viasat and Inmarsat complete merger deal”. SpaceNews (Link).
6
ITU/UNESCO. 2022. “The State of Broadband”. Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development (Link).
7
I. Suarez & C. Queiroz. 2022. “The Coming Era of Satellite Direct-to-Handset Connectivity”. ViaSatellite (Link).
8
R. Jewett. 2022. “Apple to Debut iPhone With Emergency Messaging Enabled by Globalstar Satellites”. ViaSatellite (Link).
R. Jewett. 2022. “Apple Says SOS Via Satellite is Now Available via Globalstar Satellites”. ViaSatellite (Link).
9
ESPI. 2020. “ESPI brief No.37: Rethinking the assessment of the value of spectrum”. ESPI (Link).

backing terrestrial systems with the space-based infrastructure, the latter could represent a turning
point in providing coverage to less densely populated regions or areas of low terrestrial penetration,
where deploying terrestrial infrastructure is costly and time consuming. 10 Thus, a technology mix is
critical in providing the most affordable solution possible, depending on each case, seen by new
players such as mobile network operators entering the satellite ecosystem.
Bridging the Digital Divide: What is the Role for Space?

Broadband connectivity has become an essential component of everyday life worldwide,
benefitting global trade, health, employment, learning and social cohesion. 11 This trend is
substantiated by the double-digit annual growth of Internet users (11% growth in 2020, with a
peak of 15% in low- and middle-income countries), with an acceleration during the COVID-19
pandemic. 12 Whilst access to broadband has become a relevant factor considered by policy
makers worldwide, as of 2022, only around 66% of the total population were reported to have
access to the Internet, with about 2.7 billion people without the possibility to make full use of
broadband connectivity services, including in Europe. 13 In Europe, the share of households with
Internet access has risen in 2022, but 7% of them still lack broadband connectivity.14
Bridging the digital divide between remote and urban areas is made arduous by high costs of
serving hard-to-reach and low-populated areas, and the consequent low return on investment
(also, considering aspects related to the low Average Revenue Per User - ARPU). This data should
be read in parallel with analysis provided by the World Bank, which identifies a positive impact
of increasing broadband penetration on GDP growth (e.g., 1.38 point of GDP growth for every
10% increase in access to broadband connectivity for low- and middle-income economies –
reduced to 1.21 for high-income economies).15 Satellite-based broadband has the advantage of
being quickly deployable, no matter how remote the area is. 16 Furthermore, satellite
broadband is more cost-effective in areas without terrestrial infrastructure. In Africa, Eutelsat is a
leading operator, connecting over 200,000 users with their Konnect satellites.17.
The European Commission (COM), the European Space Agency (ESA) and national governments
are recognising the potential benefits of space-enabled broadband connectivity to complement
existing terrestrial infrastructure towards higher European competitiveness and societal
progress. 18 Indeed, the use of a range of solutions, embedding the space-based component,
seems consistent with COM’s recent commitment to developing adequate frameworks so that
“all market players benefiting from the digital transformation (…) make a fair and proportionate
contribution to the costs of public goods, services and infrastructures.”19
Within the overall picture, a crucial role will be represented by the recent adoption by the EU
Council of the Regulation for the development of IRIS2, notably representing the EU constellation
giving a response to the security needs that come into play with the spread of broadband
connectivity.20
10
ESOA. 2017. “Satellite & Spectrum: The Right Wavelength”. GSOA (Link).
11
M. Young & A. Thadani. 2022. “Low Orbit, High Stakes”. CSIS Aerospace Security Program (Link).
12
ITU/UNESCO 2022. “The State of Broadband”. Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development (Link).
13
ITU data in: ITU/UNESCO 2022. “The State of Broadband”. Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development: 2 (Link).
14
Eurostat. 2023. “Digital economy and society statistics”. Eurostat (Link).
15
C. Qiang et al. 2009. “Economic Impact of Broadband”. In Information & Communications for Development (Link).
16
ITU/UNESCO 2022. “The State of Broadband”. Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development (Link).
17
M. Holmes. 2023. “Eutelsat hits milestone of connecting 200,000 people in Africa.” Via Satellite (Link).
18
COM. 2020. “Facing the challenges of broadband deployment in rural and remote areas”. COM (Link).
19
COM. 2023. “European Declaration on Digital Rights and Principles for the Digital Decade”. COM (Link).
20
Representation in Cyprus. 2023. “Commission invites the industry to submit proposals to deploy the new EU secure
connectivity satellite constellation, IRIS2”. COM (Link). And COM. 2023. “Reg No 2018/1046”. TED (Link).

3 THE VALUE OF SPECTRUM AND ITS EXPLOITATION

The use of the radio frequencies depends, among other factors, on their intrinsic physical
characteristics, including the propagation properties or wavelength, and the technical
requirements of their use being more suitable for a particular type of communication service.21
When focusing on space telecommunication, there are physical limits to the use of
electromagnetic waves as the atmosphere absorbs certain frequencies, preventing the signals
emitted from Earth to reach satellites and vice versa. Therefore, the only two portions of the
electromagnetic spectrum that are open to space are the visible bands (for which solutions
meeting high technical requirements are still under demonstration and not yet deployed) and the
part of the radio spectrum that goes from approximately 30 MHz to more than 50 GHz. Space
communication uses bands from Very high frequency (VHF) to Ultra high frequency (UHF), as well
as Super high frequency (SHF) band and the lower portion of Extremely high frequency (EHF), also
known as L, S, C, Ku, Ka and Q/V bands.
Electromagnetic spectrum Radio Spectrum Frequency bands used by satellites
bands
Frequency
Submarine comm., ELF Wavelength
pipeline maintenance 1 GHz
300 Hz
1000 km Civilian Mobile-Satellite Services (e.g.,
Military secure ULF
L Iridíum), GPS carriers, Inmarsat services
communications
Radio waves 3 KHz 2 GHz
Atmospheric window in Maritime nav. beacons & VLF 100 km
Satellite television & radio broadcasting,
the higher bands, time signals, military S mobile services including in-flight
Currently used for comm. 30 KHz connectivity, ISS communication
space comm. services. 10 km
LF 4 GHz
Navigation aids, AM
radio broadcasting Fixed-Satellite television & data services
300 KHz C (incl. broadcasting), especially in areas
MF 1 km subject to tropical rainfall
1mm AM radio broadcasting
Infrared (incl. maritime) 8 GHz
Few frequencies pass 3 MHz Military services, (incl. radar applications),
through atmosphere. Shortwave radio, HF 100 m X weather monitoring, air traffic and
GMDSS military and maritime vessel control
380 nm gov. comm. 30 MHz 12 GHz
Visible light & UV
Space comm. under 700 nm Air nav., incl. satellite- VHF 10 m Fixed-Satellite television & data services
demonstration. based, navigation aids, Ku (incl. direct broadcast services in the lower
VHF TV, FM radio, 300 MHz Ku band frequencies)
10 nm 1m 18 GHz
Satellite telecom. UHF UHF
TV, mobile phone, Fixed-Satellite television & data services
voice & data network, 3 GHz Ka* including fixed and mobile two-way
X & Gamma rays 10 cm broadband services
10 pm Satellite telecom., short- SHF
Atmosphere opacity. 40 GHz
range terrestrial data links
30 GHz Q
Fixed and mobile high-speed broadband
1 cm /
Astronomy, radar landing EHF services including in-flight connectivity
Legend V
systems, remote sensing 75 GHz
F: Frequency V: Very 300 GHz
L: Low E: Extremely 1 mm
M: Medium U: Ultra * (according to ITU, for space telecommunications, K
H: High S: Super and Ka band are designated by the single symbol Ka)
Figure 3: Atmospheric Windows and Spectrum bands used for satellite telecommunication (Credit: ITU, GSMA, ESPI)
The last decade has witnessed the advent of satellite constellations, operated or proposed by
both governments and commercial entities. Several space actors have announced their plans to
develop large, multi-satellite infrastructures, especially in LEO for different purposes, thereby
showing an interest in getting access to significant portions of the radio spectrum, particularly at
high frequencies in Ku and Ka or even Q/V bands.22 Some first operational satellites have been
deployed by SpaceX making use of the E band for experimental purposes, which follows the V
21
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. pp. 26-27, See Footnote 14.
22
I. del Portillo et al. 2018. ”Ground segment architectures for LEO constellations with feeder links in EHF-bands” (Link).

band in the 75-80 GHz.23 These constellations are composed by a batch of satellites at, at least, a
magnitude larger than the satellite constellations deployed by Iridium, Globalstar and Orbcomm in
the late 1990s, and occupy orbits between approximately 500 and 1.500 km. 24 SpaceX has
launched over 4,800 operational satellites. OneWeb has launched 618 first-generation satellites
into orbit, thus reaching completion of its constellation. More broadly, more than 1.7 million non-
GSO satellites, planned to be launched by 2030 according to the filings made with the International
Telecommunication Union (ITU). 25 The envisioned systems range from dozens of CubeSats to
thousands of satellites to be manufactured and launched during the 2020s, targeting exclusively
non-GSO. This includes Amazon´s plans to launch over 3,000 satellites as part of its Kuiper
constellation and SpaceX Starlink approved by the FCC for the launch of 7,500 next-gen
spacecrafts for upgrading its constellation.26 In 2021, E-Space made a regulatory filing through the
government of Rwanda for two ITU-filed narrowband networks, called Cinnamon-217 and
Cinnamon-937, comprising some 327,320 satellites in 27 orbital shells broadcasting in both L- and
S-band. More recently, the company filed registration through France’s National Frequencies
Agency (ANFR), for a fully C-band constellation, called Semaphore-C, and consisting of 116,640
satellites in 810 orbital planes.27
However, both orbits and spectrum are limited natural resources. This is mostly due to
physical/engineering limitations of using frequencies, and the hardship of coexistence between
services; this also implies a maximum of constellations that could be deployed because of
spectrum availability. As it will be explained in the following Chapter, ITU has identified radio
frequencies and any associated orbits, including GSO, as a limited natural resource in ITU
Constitution and Convention (CC) Article 44 and the Radio Regulations (RR).
The increasing use of space has led to a higher congestion of Earth orbits and a growing demand
for access to radio frequency spectrum bands for satellite applications. The rising demand for
spectrum by new competitors elevates the risk of spectrum shortage, as well as the urgency of
securing spectrum bands for satellite systems. Overall, the satellite connectivity market is
projected to triple, from $4.3 billion to $16 billion by 2030, and the share taken by non-GSO solutions,
mostly captured by LEO constellations, is expected to grow 2.5 times faster than the total market,
representing almost 50% of it by 2030. In addition, for instance, the satellite IoT market is projected
to reach $8.7 billion by 2032,28 and spectrum management should allow this prospective growth.29
New concepts, technologies and activities are expected to squeeze various novel types of services
(e.g., high altitude platforms, intelligent interlinked transport systems) into existing frameworks. This
is reflected in the ongoing debate between spectrum mangers on how to use this limited resource
rationally, efficiently, and economically. This also leads to candidates competing for the same
spectrum rights and contributes to serious concerns of interference, even among different types of
applications. 30 This demand requires a new allocation of frequency bands, with the setup of
mechanisms to ensure coexistence, 31 or incumbents to optimise and free up spectrum already
allocated (See Thematic Box: C band Relocation in the U.S).
23
NTIA. 2023. “Development of a National Spectrum Strategy”. NTIA (Link).
24
JASON. 2021. “The Impacts of Large Constellations of Satellites”. National Science Foundation (Link).
25
UN. 2023. “Our Common Agenda Policy Brief 7: For All Humanity – The Future of Outer Space Governance”. (Link): 5.
26
C. Henry. 2018. “FCC approves SpaceX, Telesat, LeoSat and Kepler Internet Constellations”. Space (Link).
27
P. De Selding. 2023. “E-Space registers 116,640-satellite C-band network with ITU through France”. Space Intel (Link).
28
Allied MARKER Research, Satellite IoT Market Research, 2032 (Link)
29
J. Fagerberg. 2023. “The Satellite IoT Communications Market”. Berg Insight (Link).
30
31
See for instance in this regard European Radiocommunications Committee. 1999. “ERC Decision (99)06”. CEPT (Link).

In parallel to the increasing demand for spectrum, new (cost-effective) technologies are making
it possible to ensure that available spectrum is used (and shared) efficiently, and to enable the
use of other portions of the spectrum (with larger bandwidth). An example is represented by tools
for dynamic spectrum sharing, enabling more than one user to operate on the same band without
interference through a centralised coordination access based on primary or secondary users. 32
Nevertheless, among other concerns, constraints related to the need to share confidential
information between operators could arise.
In addition, mainly because of increasing congestion in lower frequencies (L, S and C bands), as well
as migration due to 5G or 6G deployments, satellite operators are moving to higher frequencies (Ku,
Ka) for TV and very-small-aperture terminal (VSAT) services, with service beams more focused on
regional or sub-regional areas because of the reduced propagation characteristics. Such an
evolution is reasoned by the fulfilling of a general need for higher data rates in all
radiocommunication services, including Earth Exploration-Satellite Service (EESS) data, or Space
Operation-related data, and the technology maturity for both spacecraft and terrestrial terminals
which makes higher bands cheaper and easier even for less experienced operators as reliable
commercial of the shelf hardware. While Ku band is becoming increasingly congested due to the
deployment of large LEO constellations, Ka band is gaining popularity especially for user and
gateway links, with higher risk of interference between close spacecrafts, also due to the smaller
terminal antenna having wider beamwidths. Q/V band is also becoming of some interest for
satellite operators, due to the higher bandwidth and higher data rate, as well as emerging uses of
the E band, especially for feeder links.33 The greater flexibility, including in terms of utilisation and
transition to other bands, allowed by technological advancements, has drawn attention to the
determination of the value of spectrum as the core parameter driving spectrum management.
Together with the aforementioned physical characteristics of each frequency band, other
parameters such as its scarcity, variable market, economic rent, and strategic and regulatory
aspects contribute to the determination of the value of spectrum and should be continuously
considered to ensure its rational, efficient and economical use as part of the optimal spectrum
management approach. An analysis on the value of spectrum requires consideration (or at least
an estimate) of both economic and social benefits. The former could be quantified through the
sum of the direct effect of the use of a spectrum band, the forward and back linkages on GDP and
employment, or though measuring the consumer and producer surplus. 34 The latter are
represented by the possibility to provide, for instance, education and training through broadcasting,
or the availability of personal devices for home health and security. Attention to social benefits
requires in some cases limitations to the spectrum market in scientific research. In this context,
other socially relevant aspects must be considered, including the value of unlicensed spectrum or
the need for harmonisation of some spectrum bands.
The valuation of spectrum being highly situational, and depending on different intrinsic and extrinsic
factors, is an increasing interest for economic approaches to spectrum management. 35 The first
objective aims to ensure the most efficient and effective use of available spectrum bands, and
maximise the benefits for society generated by the radio spectrum. 36 A second objective is
represented by resource rent capture, where the rent is defined and quantified as the price that a
32
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. pp. 28-30. See Sub-chapter 5.2.
33
C. Henry. 2017. “FCC gets five new applications for non-geostationary satellite constellations”. SpaceNews (Link).
P. De Selding. 2022. “ITU approves 8-month deadline extension for OneWeb”. Space Intel report (Link).
34
ITU. 2014. “Economic aspects of spectrum management”. (Link) at 31.
35
Present and following considerations mainly derived from ITU “Economic aspects of spectrum management”. (Link).
36
ITU. 2014. “Economic aspects of spectrum management”. ITU (Link) at 16.

resource would bring in an open market. Auction mechanisms hold significant potential for an
accurate reflection on the value of spectrum but need to be combined with active competition
policies and limits on the purchasable spectrum. Moreover, needs of non-commercial users such
as radio astronomers must be considered.
To conclude, there is a large relation between spectrum, value, and use. Efficient spectrum use
and economic return seem to be the mainstream parameters to determine the current value of a
spectrum band. Nonetheless, the value of the spectrum used for public services should be
considered, as well as the value of unlicensed spectrum. An assessment on spectrum value is
strictly correlated to additional policy factors, including sovereignty aspects, geopolitical issues,
and its dependency from regional or national industrial policies. Having a clear understanding of
how the value of spectrum is changing is crucial for regulators when relocating spectrum with the
best overall outcomes.
Relocation of the C band in the U.S – A Case Study

A clear sign of how spectrum value is changing due to new demand and use is represented by
the relocation of spectrum bands for the delivery of new services, which are necessary despite
the increasing optimisation of spectrum usage (e.g., frequency band sharing). The drive for high-
speed connectivity, embodied especially in the roll-out of terrestrial 5G networks, has increased
the demand for spectrum rights. This demand has also grown in frequencies long serving the
satellite community, such as the C band in 3.7-4.2 GHz range, leading in 2019 and 2020 to the
most prominent C band clearance from satellite to mobile 5G played out in the U.S. Traditionally,
the C band has been used by Fixed-satellite service (FSS) operators such as Intelsat, SES or
Eutelsat, until ITU allocated this band for 5G mobile services during the WRC-15, with limited
protection for FSS operators. Essentially, the intrinsic physics of the C band make it particularly
suitable for the delivery of 5G due to the balance between coverage and high throughput.
Following the WRC-15 and WRC-19, the need to relocate part of the C band for 5G services has
grown. In 2020, the U.S FCC adopted rules to free 280 MHz (plus 20 MHz guard band) of mid-
band spectrum with the transition of existing services out of the 3.7-4.0 GHz band into the upper
portion of the band (4.0-4.2 GHz) with a 2025 deadline. It also offered the option (with additional
incentives) to accelerate the process in two earlier phases: the lower 120 MHz to be cleared by
2021 and the upper 180 MHz by 2023.37 The FCC auctioned the 280 MHz for 5G in December 2020,
with $78 billion in revenues, a record compared to previous FCC auctions.38 The FCC agreed with
the largest satellite Alliance (i.e., C band Alliance), led by Intelsat, on the full compensation of their
cost of exiting the band, including the construction of new satellites (estimated $3.5-$5.2 billion
for procurement of new satellites, TT&C and gateway consolidation, technology upgrades), and
approved up to $9.7 billion in incentives for the quicker migration.
Intelsat will receive the final payment of about $4.9 billion and SES $3.97 billion in total proceeds,
having managed to meet FCC’s anticipated 2023 deadline; the two companies have already
unlocked more than $2 billion together by meeting the first-phase milestone in 2021, and they
both successfully met the milestone ahead of schedule in August 2023. Eutelsat and Telesat
respectively announced they expect to receive $382 million by the end of 2023 for its C-band
clearing, following $125 million in interim proceeds; and $260 million for the last phase of its C-
band clearing efforts, following an $85 million interim payment.
37
FCC. 2020. “FCC 20-2”. Federal Communications Commission (Link).
38
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars. and K. Hill. 2021. “Auction slows as it surpasses $80 billion”. RCR Wireless (Link).

4 REGULATING SPECTRUM: THE ITU AND NATIONAL SYSTEM

A clear and certain, yet adaptive, regulatory framework is key for the radiofrequency spectrum
to be used in an effective and efficient way, ensuring operations free from harmful interference.
This can be translated onto a highly competitive and complex system addressed through radio
spectrum management. The latter can be defined as:
“the process of regulating the use of radio frequencies to promote efficient use and gain a net
social benefit.”39
Radio spectrum management activities integrate administrative and technical procedures with the
aim to maximise the utilisation of radiofrequency bands, while avoiding harmful interference.
With the same objective, radio frequency management procedures take place both at the
national and international level. At the international level, several national spectrum
administrations and supranational organisations are directly or indirectly involved in spectrum
management, including ITU, International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), and the World
Meteorological Organisation (WMO).
The International Telecommunication Union system
The extensive and complex international regulatory regime for telecommunications has been
established through the ITU, one of the oldest specialised agencies of the UN, devoted to
Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). 40 ITU’s legal framework does not have the
character of a self-contained regime and thus “the rules on distribution of orbital slots and associated
radio frequencies should be interpreted and applied in close connection with the general principles of
space law, which is in turn part of international law at large.”41
ITU works through three main “Sectors”:
Radiocommunication Sector Telecommunication Telecommunication

(ITU-R) Standardisation Sector Development Sector
Coordinating radio frequency (ITU-T) (ITU-D)
spectrum & assigning orbital slots Establishing global standards Bridging the digital divide
Figure 4: Three ITU Sectors
The treaty-based agency manages the finite radio spectrum worldwide through continual
consultation, cooperation, and coordination, and operates through its ITU- Radiocommunication
Sector (ITU-R) and Radiocommunication Bureau (BR).
ITU’s 193 Members States act together as global spectrum coordinators, after consultation of their
national stakeholders (i.e., radio frequency users composed of government organisations, the
communication industry, academia, researchers, and the public). Their rights and obligations are
defined in the ITU CC and complemented by the Radio Regulations (RR). Radio frequencies and
any associated orbits are regulated with the intent to avoid harmful interference under Article 45 of
the ITU Constitution. In addition, Article 44 stated that “in using frequency bands for radio services,
Member States shall bear in mind that radio frequencies and any associated orbits, including the
geostationary-satellite orbit, are limited natural resources and that they must be used rationally,
efficiently and economically, (…) so that countries or groups of countries may have equitable access
to those orbits and frequencies.”
39
C. Doyle, et al. 2007. Essentials of modern spectrum management. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40
A. Froehlich. 2021. Legal Aspects Around Satellite Constellations. Basel: Springer Nature Switzerland.
41
S. Marchisio. 2014. “The ITU Regulatory System: A Self-Contained Regime or a Part of International Law?”. IRIS (Link).

The ITU RR are a binding international treaty modifies and updated at the ITU-R World
Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) every three to four years to consider the technical
developments and relevant changes in spectrum use. It governs the use of radiofrequencies and
specifies the conditions for the international arrangements. It contains allocations, plans, and
procedures (table of frequency allocation to the services, regulatory provisions for spectrum
utilisation). RR are supplemented by Rules of Procedures (RoP), which describes specific
interpretation and application of the articles of the RR. Because of their binding nature for ITU
Members, states must domestically apply their provisions, adopting adequate national laws and
regulations, in addition to special bilateral or multilateral arrangements. Concrete regulatory
arrangements and enforceability remain with states. In particular, the RR not only provides the rules
to be applied to spectrum use, but also establishes rights and obligations resulting from that use.
While the harmonisation of allocation worldwide remains the aim of the ITU, the organisation
manages the radio spectrum by dividing the world into three ITU regions, with each region
having potentially its own set of radio frequency allocations. This means that the radio spectrum,
namely the portion of the electromagnetic spectrum ranging from 9 kHz to 300 GHz, is segmented
into several bands and allocated to over 40 different types of terrestrial or space
telecommunication or radio astronomy services.42
Services Regions (Areas of Countries) Stations (Satellites)
Allocation Allotment Assignment
Figure 5: Frequency Distribution
As of today, the ITU RR have allocated up to the 275 GHz band so far, reserving possibility to
address up to 3,000 GHz. Frequency bands are either exclusively allocated to a single
radiocommunication service, or to more than one through a shared frequency allocation. These
services are defined as primary or secondary, with the latter prevented from causing harmful
interference to the former, or claiming protection from it. The outcomes of the agreed frequency
allocations are included in ITU RR Article 5, which defines the (international) Table of Frequency
Allocations (TFA). The TFA is based on a block allocation method (i.e., a discrete portion of the
spectrum is allocated to the different services), including footnotes providing further specifications
on how the bands are to be assigned or used. 43
The TFA is part of RR and as such is an international treaty to which National Administrations
shall be in conformity with. Countries rely on the TFA and comply with the condition that regulates
the use of frequencies in the allocated bands (e.g., compliance with allotment plan; requirement for
coordination procedure; mandatory notification). While changes made to the TFA during the WRC
are frequently self-executing upon ratification of the WRC Final Acts, countries may deviate from
agreed international allocations with the use of footnotes to the TFA or pursuant to Article 4.4
of the RR (non-conforming use), under the constraining rule that this does not cause harmful
interference to, and not claim protection from harmful interference to services in other countries
and stop operation immediately if a protection of such frequency band is required.44
In line with the national spectrum management policy of the country, policy and technical
considerations for the implementation of WRC decisions are usually taken care though public
42
ITU. 2007. “West African Common Market Project”. ITU (Link).
43
GSMA. 2017. “The spectrum policy dictionary”. GSMA (Link).
44
See non-conforming assignment (No.8.4) in accordance with No. 4.4. J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: The Rise of 5G and
Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p. 64. See also ITU. 2020. “Spectrum Management”. Digital Regulation Platform (Link): 11.

consultation (e.g., the U.S) or rulemaking. Therefore, several national spectrum management
practices are observed, while some basic, common processes are recognised. Furthermore,
countries can nationally add limitations in terms of who can use specific frequencies (e.g., it is the
case of frequencies that are assigned to space services internationally, but that nationally are open
to use for Military/Government operators – but only within the boundaries of space services).
Member States maintain sovereignty over the use of radio frequencies within their territories. In
line with their national spectrum management policies, and in compliance with the (international)
TFA, they establish their national TFA. Upon the request of stations operators, the spectrum
management authority of each country assigns the frequency to a station of the given
radiocommunication service, issuing the related licence and (potentially) determining the related
fees (See Thematic Box: “Frequency Assignment & Licensing”).
For satellite networks, ITU filing system operates out of the Space Planned bands on the principle
of “First Come First Served” (FCFS)/efficient orbit/spectrum use and interference-free operation
satisfying actual requirements, based on the right and obligation of the “coordination before use”
approach for non-planned services, which includes a two or three-step procedures depending on
the type of network published, in the BR’s International Frequency Information Circular - BR IFIC
(Space):
• Advance Publication Information (API) procedure for some non-GSO networks.
• Coordination procedures (CR), with ITU technical and regulatory examinations to identify need
of coordination followed by coordination with relevant administrators for GSO and some non-
GSO networks or adjustment of parameters.45
A Priori Planned band – under the

Non-Planned band – under the First Come First Served (FCFS) principle
equitable principle
With coordination procedures (CR) Without CR
Advanced Publication Information
(API) filing (Section I, Article 9 RR)
Potential consultations in case the BR publishes information on BR
country request modifications Coordination Request filing to the identified
IFIC (Space)
administrations or to the Bureau (Section II, Article 9)
– otherwise API is cancelled
BR publishes information in a Special Section of the

BR IFIC (Space) General coordination with
potentially affected networks
Coordination process Adjustment of
and agreement parameters
Notification of the final frequency assignment parameters to the Bureau
BR publishes information of the notice in the BR IFIC (Space)
Examination by the Bureau, and publication in the BR IFIC (Space) of the favourable or unfavourable finding
Bringing into Use (BiU) a frequency assignment to a space station of a satellite network and submission of due diligence
information
Recording in the Registration in the Mater International Frequency Register
Figure 6: Spectrum Management procedures for planned and non-planned space services
To give (more) priority to the principle of equitable access to orbit/spectrum resources for future
use, a priori planning approach allows Member States to have access to a predetermined share of
the frequency spectrum in part of BSS and FSS from an associated GSO position on their territory
with the overarching goal to optimise the development and equitable sharing of the GEO belt and
address the problems of its limitedness, scarcity and saturation.46
45
Sec. I of No. 9, RR-2020 (vol. I) and Sec. II of No. 9, RR-2020 (vol. I).
46
Appendix 30, 30A, and 30B. See R. Jakhu. 1982. “The Legal Status of the Geostationary Orbit”. Annals of Air and Space
Law 7: 344. F. Lyall. 1994. “The International Telecommunication Union and Development”. Journal of Space Law 22: 24.

Even though not all Plan assignments are currently in operation, they are protected from harmful
interference from other networks based on the Plan characteristics.
BSS Plan – Appendices 30/30A FSS Plan – Appendix 30B
Plans separated by Regions Worldwide plan
Allotment plans (conversion to assignments
Assignment plans
before use)
Shared with other space services in other
No other space service allocated
Regions
List for R1&3 only List for all 3 Regions
Protection based on grid points in service areas
Cluster concept in Region 2 plan
for downlinks
Table 1: BSS and FSS Plan features (Credit: ITU)
Finally, the international recognition of the rights to use the spectrum from an orbit free from
harmful signal interference occurs by recording frequency assignments from orbital location, in the
Master International Frequency Register (Master Register). The time to fulfil ITU procedures is
limited to keep the Master Register close to operational satellites. The time between the API/CR
reception by the BR and the complete Bring into Use (BiU) is a maximum of 7-year, and 8 years in
the Planned bands from the date of receipt of Article 4 (Part A) submissions of Appendices30/30A
of RR or Article 6 (A6A) submissions of Appendix 30B of RR.
Frequency Assignment methods & Licensing
Frequency assignment has the overarching objective to provide applicants with a band that allows
the best performance of the proposed activity, while at the same time ensuring that future
applicants can also be accommodated in a part of the spectrum. The completion of the
assignment process by national authorities most often results in a licence, with rare exceptions.
Indeed, ITU RR No. 18.1 states that “no transmitting station may be established or operated by a private
person or any enterprise without a license issued in an appropriate form [..],” unless operations under
non-interference basis are allowed by the government.
Spectrum Property Right Models Non-Exclusive Model
Spectrum Commons
Administrative Approach Market-Based Approach
Approach
Figure 7: Spectrum Assignments Methods

Focusing on the administrative approach, the licence (also including “permits” and “authorisations”,
considered as licences even if with different legal authority) is the “traditional approach” to manage
the use of the radio spectrum. It implies a regulator choosing the future occupant of a specific band
and determining its assigned frequencies or assigning it on a first come first served basis.47 This aims
to create constraints for each radio station, thus conserving the limited spectrum resource for the
public interest. Licence mechanisms have been defined as resulting in “spectrum property rights”
or “spectrum ownership” models and represents the spectrum management scheme most
frequently used over the past 100 years. 48
It is an approach implying procedures used in the case of mutually exclusive spectrum requests
and can be categorised as non-market-based assignment approaches, namely comparative
processes and lotteries (the administrative approach). 49 In this context, spectrum can also be
awarded through the so-called “beauty contest”, a tendering process involving the
comparison of different potential users based on the identified criteria. An example in the space
47
According to the definition of ITU. 2015. “Handbook on National Spectrum Management”. (Link): 90.
48
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p. 123
49
ITU. 2012. “Exploring the value and economic valuation of spectrum”. Regulatory & Market Environment (Link).

domain is provided by the licensing of MSS spectrum in Europe to two "pan-European” operators
within an EU-harmonised frequency band of 1,980 -2,010 MHz and 2,170 – 2,200 MHz (2 GHz).
Inmarsat and EchoStar were granted licenses until mid-2027 (See Thematic Box in Chapter 6).
Regulators can also make use of a “market-based approach”, mainly relying on auctions. This
approach uses market forces to determine the distribution of spectrum. The entities obtaining the
license can then trade their spectrum rights in a secondary market, with the incentive for owners to
transfer or lease unutilised bands. This solution should favour the efficient utilisation of spectrum
bands. While many regulators have incorporated market forces in the assignment procedures for
terrestrial services (e.g., 5G spectrum auction bids in the United States), this approach has limited
implementation in the satellite radiocommunication services. This is mostly due to the complexity
and cost of space systems (with most satellite MSS/FSS/BSS systems specifically built after
securing spectrum), as well as the need for frequency diversity and because operators should
obtain market access rights in every country they want to operate in.50
An additional type of assignment is represented by the “spectrum commons approach” (or

unlicensed/license-exempt).51 This model allows multiple users of unlicensed spectrum, relying on
the fact that technological evolution would facilitate this approach. Nevertheless, apart from the
example of the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands for Wi-Fi, a control of basic rules to be respected by users
is still needed for the model to spread. These approaches are based on the idea that as
technologies advance, devices can cooperate and coexist, avoiding interference, leading to less
scarcity of spectrum resources (further analysis of such an approach is included in Chapter 5.2).52
The possibility for different services to coexist (especially fixed services, while mobile may require
exclusive use) is also correlated with the level of knowledge and understanding of regulatory and
technical constrains by spectrum regulators.
The administrations differentiate between and the model of “individual usage rights /authorisation”
(either frequency blocks, transmitting stations or coordinated networks will be licenced), or a
“common model” (with general licence for all applications which can cope with the predefined
technical conditions).Today the general practice is still mostly an exclusive or semi-exclusive
access to spectrum for satellite use, allocating the frequencies to the primary service (e.g., 5G
frequencies) and then allowing secondary service operators to apply for licenses on a FCFS basis,
provided they will not interfere. 53 Satellite operators mostly utilise secondary allocations as filler for
their services. In addition, general licenses are commonly provided for the terminal equipment
meeting certain technical requirements.
Finally, countries have financed their spectrum management programs through the allocation of a
portion of the annual budget to spectrum management, based on government priorities.
Nevertheless, as the state is the “owner” of the spectrum, different types of fees can be charged
to occupants; in particular, usage fees (considering economic benefits from spectrum use by
occupants), or administrative fees (to cover the cost of spectrum management activities) are worth
mentioning. Additionally, revenue generated through auctions is another funding approach. While
no country solely relies on auction revenues, as shown by the C band auction held by the FCC in
2020, Australia, Canada and the UK also charge government entities for their spectrum use. 54
50
An analysis of this procedure should be better investigated at the regional level, and it is further assessed in Chapter 6.
51
ITU. 2020. “Spectrum Management”. Digital Regulation Platform (Link): 76-77.
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p. 70.
52
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. pp. 1124, 125. p. 125.
53
For the sake of completeness, before the advent of 5G all licenses were relying on individual usage rights.
54
ITU. 2014. “Economic aspects of spectrum management”. ITU (Link).

5 CHALLENGES TO TACKLE AT THE WRC-23 AND BEYOND

The WRC is a treaty-making conference organised by ITU that brings together Member States every
three to four years and plays a key role in shaping technical and regulatory frameworks for the
provision of radiocommunication services in all countries. Among other tasks, it revises the RRs. It also
adopts technical studies and work plans for a six to ten-year cycle, spectrum allocations, satellite
regulatory procedures, space plans of the radio frequency spectrum, and reviews RoP and appeals
from the Radio Regulations Board (RRB). 55
The WRC Agenda results from the decision made by the previous WRC. Its final version is approved
by Council of the ITU. 56 The preparatory process relies on the work of ITU-R Study Groups (SG)
responsible for assessing the technical, operational, and procedural issues of the WRC Agenda Items. 57
Each SG refers to a general radiocommunications matter and is divided in Working Parties (WP) that
carry out preparatory studies to answer questions assigned to the group, relying on the expertise of
over specialists worldwide.58
ITU-R Study Groups
Study Groups Working Parties
SG1: Spectrum Management WP 1A Spectrum engineering techniques
WP 1B Spectrum management methodologies and economic strategies
SG3: Radiowave: Propagation WP 1C Spectrum monitoring
SG4: Satellite Services (FSS + WP 4A Efficient orbit/spectrum utilisation for the fixed-satellite service (FSS)
BSS, MSS & RDSS) and broadcasting-satellite service (BSS)
WP 4B Systems, air interfaces, performance and availability objectives for the
SG5: Terrestrial Services mobile-satellite service (MSS), including IP-based applications and satellite
(fixed, mobile, news gathering (SNG)
radiodetermination, maritime, WP 4C Efficient orbit/spectrum utilisation for the mobile-satellite service
aeronautical, amateur & (MSS) and the radiodetermination-satellite service (RDSS)
amateur-satellite)
WP 7A Time signals and frequency standard emissions
SG6: Broadcasting Services WP 7B Space radiocommunication applications
WP 7C Remote sensing systems
SG7: Science Services WP 7D Radio astronomy
Figure 8: ITU study groups related to space (Credit: ITU, ESPI)
Preparations for the WRC include continuous work of the ITU-R SG meeting several times per year
and leading to the Conference Preparatory Meetings (CPM), taking place after the WRC and six
months before the next conference, as well as the work of the ITU inter-regional workshops.
Consolidated positions along regional approaches are reached by the regional groups while each
nation comes to its own conclusion regarding different Agenda Items. Six main regional
telecommunication organisations (RTOs) serve as forums for regional discussions and consensus,
including the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT), the
Inter-American Telecommunication Commission (CITEL), and the Regional Commonwealth in the Field
of Communications (RCC).
The WRC’s decision-making process is based on the principle of international consensus.59 Industry
and private sector participate and contribute actively to the Study Groups, to the CPM Report and also
55
The ITU Radiocommunication Bureau acts as the executive arm of the RRB.
56
The Council acts as the Union's governing body in the interval between plenipotentiary conferences.
57
GSMA. 2017. “An Introduction to the WRC”. GSMA (Link).
58
ITU, n.d. “Radiocommunication Study Groups”. ITU (Link).
59
The Resolution ITU-R 1-8 “Working methods for the Radiocommunication Assembly, the Radiocommunication Study
Groups, the Radiocommunication Advisory Group and other groups of the Radiocommunication Sector (1993-1995-1997-
2000-2003-2007-20122015-2019) states: “Consistent with the United Nations practice, consensus is understood to mean
the practice of adopting decisions by general agreement in the absence of any formal objection and without a vote”.
Additional details can be found in ITU. 2022. “The Art of Reaching Consensus”. ITUWTSA-20 (Link).

participate in the WRC either as being part of Member State delegations or as a Sector Member. Sector
Members can take place in the debates (with exception on future Agenda Items) but not in the
decision-making process. Researcher, academia, or civil society participate in and contribute to Study
Groups on emerging issues in the ICT field (serving as Study Group rapporteurs and editors) advice but
cannot submit proposals or participate in negotiations and decisions. Decisions are incorporated into
the RR as an amendment to (added/suppressed/modified) provisions, resolutions, and
recommendations to the Radiocommunication Assembly and ITU-R SGs; they are then reflected
immediately in the Final Acts before being merged in a new version of the RR in the six languages of
UN. The last version of the RR adopted in 2020 reflects the decisions reached by representatives of
the 163 Member States that participated in the Conference, and compiles decisions of previous
conferences and the final acts of the WRC-19.
The WRC-19: Major achievements on spectrum management
In late 2019, the WRC-19 took place in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. Among other matters, the agenda
addressed the rollout of 5G mobile networks and allocated more than 17 GHz of new spectrum for
cellular 5G. 60 Additionally, frequency bands were identified for High-altitude Platform Station
(HAPS), which could become yet another competitor for satellites in some applications. Thanks to
the work achieved by the satcom community, the spectrum allocations did not come at the cost of
a drastic reduction of spectrum rights that are essential for commercial satellite operators.
Space-related decisions included:

• Regulatory arrangements facilitating the conduct of short duration satellite missions;
• Spectrum and definition of deployment milestones for non-GEO satellite constellations;
• Spectrum for Earth Stations in Motion operations (e.g., internet access on-board aircraft);
• Millimetre wave frequencies (51.4-52.4 GHz) for fixed satellite services;
• Changes of the table of frequency allocation;
• Associated task regarding the governance of spectrum resources, including adopting
resolutions and recommendations.61
Although the WRC-19 has attempted to resolve multiple spectrum policy issues from a regulatory
and policy perspective, the deployment of satellite constellations and increased congestion on
the physical and spectrum-related environment is continuing to pose several challenges. This
concerns the overarching international spectrum management system, and national legal regimes.
This year, the RA-23 conference will take place from 13 to 17 of November in the same location, and
immediately preceding, the WR.62 The WRC-23 will be held from 20 November to 15 December 2023,
and will tackle several issues shaping the future of spectrum management for terrestrial, maritime and
space services, dealing with a transition through a “new era of space development that poses a big
challenge for ITU and the international community.”63 The 2nd session of the Conference Preparatory
Meeting (CPM) held from 27 March to 6 April 2023 prepared the consolidated report to support ITU
Member States’ preparation of proposals to the WRC-23.64
60
ITU. 2020. “WRC-19 identifies additional frequency bands for 5G”. ITU (Link).
61
62
ITU. 2022. “ITU-R Study Groups and the Radiocommunication Assembly”. ITU (Link).
63
See ITU WRC-23, (Link). ITUPP. 2022. “Highlights: ITU Plenipotentiary Conference 2022”. ITU (Link).
64
ITU. n.d. “Conference Preparatory Meeting (CPM)”. ITU (Link).

The WRC-23 has 10 Agenda Items (AI), with 19 topics under AI 1, 11 topics under AI 7 and 4 topics under
AI 9.65
WRC-23 AI 1: Consider the requirements of existing and future services in frequency bands under consideration of ITU-
Agenda R studies.
Topics
AI 2: Examine revised ITU-R Recommendations and decide whether to update corresponding references in
Radio Regulations.
AI 3: Consider consequential changes and amendments to the Radio Regulations if necessitated by the
decision of WRC-23.
AI 4: Review Resolutions and Recommendations of previous conferences in accordance with Res. 95
(Rev.WRC-19)
AI 5: Review the report from the Radiocommunication Assembly.
AI 6: Identify items requiring urgent action from the study groups in preparation for the next WRC.
AI 7: Consider a possible response to the Plenipotentiary Conference.
AI 8: Take appropriate action on requests from administrations to delete their country footnotes.
AI 9: Consider and approve the Report of the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau.
AI 10: Recommend the Council items to be included in the agenda for the next WRC.
Figure 9: WRC.23 Agenda Items

Among others, space services-related topics include AI 1 (in particular, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19) and AI 7.
For instance, under AI 1.17 Member States at the WRC-23 will develop the regulatory framework for
satellite-to-satellite links in the Ka band, following the studies conducted pursuant to Resolution 773
(WRC-19). Proposals for AIs concerning similar uses of the C band are under discussion for WRC-27
Agenda.66 AI 7 is aimed at considering possible changes, in response to Resolution 86 (Rev. Marrakesh,
2002) of the Plenipotentiary Conference, on advance publication, coordination, notification and
recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining to satellite networks. This is in accordance
with Resolution 86 (Rev. WRC-07), to facilitate the rational, efficient, and economical use of radio
frequencies and any associated orbits, including the GSO.
The growing need for connectivity of earth stations in motion (ESIM), especially in the aeronautical
and maritime sectors, is at the core of the discussions regarding AI 1.15 and 1.16. Respectively, the use
of a larger band for GSO ESIM connectivity will be discussed, as well as the development of technical,
operational, and regulatory measures for non-GSO ESIM. Moreover, among the proposed AI to the
WRC-27, additional bands for non-GSO ESIM connectivity are also being considered.67
Furthermore, discussion has started on the identification of new frequencies/allocations for Lunar
activities (also considering activities already conducted under NASA´s Lunar Spectrum Framework),
as well as for ISAM spacecrafts operations.
To conclude, the WRC-23 will tackle several critical issues shaping the future of spectrum
management for space services, while an even broader analysis will be required in the identification
of Agenda Items for the WRC-27.68 Those may include, among others, the impact of non-GSO satellite
constellation (over)filings, aspects related to harmonisation and flexibility in spectrum allocations, non-
GSO post-mission disposal and the inclusion of equitability and sustainability concerns in the overall
65
ITU. 2023. “ITU-R Preparatory Studies for WRC-23”. ITU (Link).
66
A. Marklund. 2023. “The Road to Dubai: SES Perspectives on WRC-23”. SES (Link).
67
GSOA. 2023. “GSOA WRC23 Positions”. GSOA (Link).
68
Additional details at GSOA. 2023. “GSOA WRC23 Positions”. GSOA (Link).

framework. While the WRC-23 AIs can be found in Annex C, the sections below aggregate and prioritise
several challenges considered relevant.
Balancing
Maximizing
Dealing with efficiency
the use of Harmonising Improving Driving space
overfiling and with
spectrum spectrum Spectrum sustainability
Bring into equitable
across management Monitoring concerns
Use rules access to
applications
spectrum
Figure 10: Conceptualisation of Space Spectrum Policy Challenges (Credit: ESPI)
5.1 Dealing with overfiling and Bring into Use rules

While allocated spectrum is arguably underutilised, the phenomena of overfiling and the problem
of reserving spectrum capacity without bringing the system into use have been a longstanding
concern for ITU. Despite efforts to control overfiling, administrators still file for satellite systems to
maintain competitiveness, increasing pressure on the entire frequency band allocation system.
Forty years ago, the practice, referred to as “paper satellites”, started with regulatory filings sent to
ITU without the intention of manufacturing and launching satellites by the filing organisation or
state.69 In one of the most referenced cases, 1990 saw the Tongan government file for sixteen GSO
satellites, without an actual plan to launch them but with the intention of leasing them to other
operators. While the episode did not per se violate any RR provision, the actions were perceived as
contradicting the spirit of international law.70
ITU addressed the higher processing time due to overfiling in the 1990s (which had resulted in
processing backlog) without harming the growing industry and the needs of sovereign states.
Resolution 18 (Kyoto, Plenipotentiary Conference 1994) instructed the Director of the BR to review
issues concerning satellite coordination, including concerns related to paper filings. To discourage
the reservation of capacity without actual use, the WRC-1997 considered an approach where each
administration would be required to provide evidence that demonstrated an intent to establish a
satellite system within the regulatory procedures.71
ITU filing system through the RR Overfiling
ITU tools
Increased processing Spectrum
(WRC, PP, Council,
times Warehousing
RR, CS, CV)
Figure 11: ITU overfiling, abuse of the BIU rules, and warehousing cycle (Credit: ITU, ESPI)
The consequences of implementing administrative due diligence procedures were considered in

the WRC-2000. Administrative due diligence (Resolution 49 to the RR, Revision WRC-19) consists
of a regular disclosure of information in the implementation of the respective satellite system within
the regulatory time limits (RR No. 11.44). 72 If the complete due diligence information is not received,
the network is cancelled from the Master Register or Appendices 30/30A/30B Lists or Plan and is
69
A. Allison. 2014. The ITU and Managing Satellite Orbital and Spectrum Resources in the 21st Century. Cham: Springer.
p.26.
70
S. Aoki. 2014. “Efficient and equitable use of orbit by satellite systems”. EIP (Link): 232.
71
ITU. “Financial Diligence”. ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (Link).
72
Under RR No. 11.48 (inc. the identity of the satellite network, spacecraft manufactures, and launch service provider).

no longer considered when applying the coordination and recording procedures for other networks.
On the other hand, BR examines the information for completeness and, if a notification is received
before the date of BiU, the assignment is recorded provisionally in the Master Register and definitely
only once the due diligence is received within the maximum time limit. The approach applies to
satellite networks of FSS, MSS or BSS with frequency assignment that are subject to coordination
procedure73 and to submission for plans. 74 Besides administrative due diligence, the financial due
diligence (discussed at the WRC-1997 as a complementary type of procedure) is aimed at ensuring
users pay for the costs incurred in ITU´s satellite networking filings. The proposal came to an
agreement at Council Decision 428 (1999). ITU Council determined the cost recovery principles
and associated fees for satellite network filings, establishing a schedule of processing charges that
relate to the complexity and size of filing (inc. one free entitlement a year for each member state).
The WRC determines regulation covering satellite network filings, in particular, the penalty in the
event of non-payment of cost recovery fee.75
The current practice for GSO systems for non-Plan, as defined in No. 11.44B of the ITU RR, considers
a frequency assignment to fulfil the BiU rule when a satellite in GSO capable of transmitting or
receiving that frequency assignment has been deployed and maintained at the notified orbital
position for a continuous period of 90 days. 76 However, a practice to overcome the BiU rule
includes moving a satellite to another orbit to avoid missing BiU deadlines, a practice that seems to
be representative of 28% of registrations between 2015 and 2022 for satellites that had been BiU in
other orbital slots.77 For instance in 2012, Iran reportedly renamed operating satellites from another
orbit to prevent the deletion of its Zorer-2 system from the Master Register.78
To deal with this practice, and improve the overall systems for the use of frequency orbit pairs in
GSO, Resolution 40 (Rev. WRC-19) is tracking the satellites’ bringing into use filings to identify the
“hopping” phenomena.79 The administration must specify if the station has been previously used to
address the BiU requirement or resume the use of frequency assignments at a different orbital
location within the 3 years before the submission of the information. If the administration has used
such a station, it must also provide information on the previous orbital location, the associated
satellite network(s), and the date when the station was no longer maintained at the previous location
within the same three-year period. This information must be submitted within 30 days of notification
from the BR. Otherwise, the BR will consider that the frequency assignment was not BiU.80
Furthermore, with the surge of large non-GSO satellite constellations, the dynamics of overfiling
and warehousing changed, posing additional challenges on the filing procedure, and creating a
sense of urgency in enhancing ITU and national frameworks. Indeed, this entailed moving from filing
confirmed BiU when a single satellite was BiU, to a system enabling a single filing for multiple
satellites. It raised concerns about coping with the BiU process – in addition to the long-standing
concerns related to a congestion-prone space environment.
73
Under Nos. 9.7 (GSO-GSO), 9.11 (terrestrial services - 9.12, 9.12A) and 9.13 and Resolution 33 in ITU. 2012. “Article 11:
Notification and recording of frequency assignments”. ITU (Link).
74
In particular, any submission under Article 4 of Appendices 30 and 30A (Volume II) and any submission of information
under Article 6 of Appendix30B (FSS plans), with the exception of submission of new MSs seeking the acquisition of their
respective national allotments for inclusion in the Appendix 30B under Article 4 of Appendices 30 and 30A, Volume II.
75
ITU, “Cost recovery” (Link). See Council Decision 482 and RR No. 9.38.1.
76
J. Wheeler. 2023. “The Space Law Review: ITU and Access to Spectrum”. The Law Reviews (Link).
77
S. Aoki. 2014. “Efficient and equitable use of orbit by satellite systems”. EIP (Link): 230.
P. De Selding. 2023. “28% of GEO satellites launched since 2015 used to register networks at other orbitals slots”. SIR (Link).
78
S. Aoki. 2014. “Efficient and equitable use of orbit by satellite systems”. EIP (Link): 229-246.
79
ITU. 2019. “WRC 2019 Final Acts”. ITU Publications (Link).
80
WRC. 2019. “Resolution 40 (REV.WRC-19)”. ITU (Link).

ITU made some progress in addressing these issues at the WRC-15 and the WRC-19. Firstly, ITU-
R was invited to examine provisions requiring additional milestones for deployment of the complete
constellation beyond standard notification and the BiU procedure at the WRC-15 to prevent the risk
of speculative filings and spectrum warehousing and avoid administrations blocking spectrum for
orbits for others. The ITU-R BR practice on non-GSO satellite systems in the FSS, MSS and BSS were
reflected in the RR No. 11.44C. The WRC-19 (AI 7.A) tackled additional rules to prevent orbit and
spectrum reservation without actual use for non-GSO systems through a milestone-based
approach for frequency assignments. Under RR NO 11.44C, a frequency assignment to satellites in
any non-GSO system has completed the BiU requirement when one satellite with the capability of
transmitting or receiving that frequency assignment is deployed and “maintained on one of the
orbital plane(s) for a continuous period of 90 days, irrespective of the notified number of orbital
planes and satellites per orbital plane in the network”. To address issues posed by large
constellations, in compliance with Resolution 35 (WRC-19), non-GSO systems in specific frequency
bands and services must deploy a certain percentage of their constellation in specific timeframes.
Within two years, they must deploy 10% of their constellations, 50% in five years, and complete the
deployment in seven years.81 This milestone-based approach increasingly ensured that the MIFR
accurately reflects the actual deployment of non-GSO satellite systems and services.82
Figure 12: Milestone based approach (Credit: ESPI; ITU)
The focus of the WRC-23 AI 7, Topic B is addressing consequences of failures and measures of
enforceability for the post-milestone procedure. Key considerations include determining
appropriate actions if a constellation fails to meet the milestones or falls below 95% of its
completion, or if it has completed the milestone process and subsequently experiences a reduction
in the number of satellites deployed. Proposed options could be to extend the allowed data range
to three years, adjust constellation size or frequency assignment based on the actual deployment,
incorporate additional milestones into the BiU procedure, or more generally, address cases on an
ad hoc basis before the RRB. 83 For instance, Telesat’s LightSpeed constellation deployment was
81
WRC. 2019. “Resolution 35 (WRC-19)”. ITU (Link).
82
ITU. 2019. “CMP-19-2 Report to WRC-19”. ITU (Link): AI 7(A)
83
R. Pritchard-Kelly. 2023. “WRC-23 on the Horizon”. Air & Space Law 48: 183

not able to meet regulatory milestones under the spectrum authorisation.84 Resolution 35 (WRC-19,
Resolve 12) allows for several milestones to be ignored under certain conditions, including the
submission of a written report indicating efforts made, and proof of a binding agreement for
manufacturing and launch. More recently, ITU RRB has granted a waiver to Rivada Space Networks
for the 10% milestone for its non-GSO constellation in July 2023.85
To conclude, companies such as SpaceX, OneWeb, E-Space, China SatNet and Amazon aim to
launch constellations of up to hundreds of thousands of satellites. In 2021, the government of
Rwanda made one notable filing with ITU. Their proposal included two constellations comprising a
total of 327.230 satellites. These extreme filings are criticised by some industry representatives and
analysts, that question their economic underpinning, the realistic manufacturing/launching plan
and consider systems already in operation exceed projected demand. 86 Varying opinions on how
to address these difficulties have been voiced, with some calling for a complete overhaul of the
regulatory framework, while others advocating for incremental changes at each coming WRCs.87
Critics also attributed the surge in filings to the absence of penalties for inappropriate or
nonconforming behaviour. However, ITU is not a body for "judgment" where actors should apply
the rules as a result of their agreement with it.
5.2 Maximising the use of spectrum across applications

In recent years, the needs of spectrum users have increased and evolved. In particular, there are
requests for greater spectrum capacity access, as well as a more efficient utilisation of spectrum
resources. Spectrum administrators must accommodate the increasing demand for faster
broadband services, mobile data traffic and wireless access systems (including Wi-Fi networks),
facilitate sharing with incumbent users, and develop new approaches to coordinate sharing among
non-GSO systems. The situation is exacerbated by the appetite of terrestrial mobile phone
operators for more spectrum (especially in C band and Ku/Ka band).
New technologies have been developed to enhance the efficient use of spectrum by current and
future users. These include the use of spot beams for transponders or cognitive technologies.
Technology advancement has also played a significant role in creating solutions to open higher
frequency bands (e.g., millimetre-wave frequency band) to more intensive use.
However, the goal to satisfy greater demand for bandwidth can only be achieved by finding the
right balance between innovative technologies and regulations to better deal with spectrum
efficiency. New technologies and use cases are pressuring regulators to implement innovative
approaches, methods, and solutions to better (and more efficiently) use the radio spectrum
resource and enhance the spectrum management regime. This includes exploring relocation
processes (also through incentives for incumbents) (e.g., U.S C band relocation, See Thematic Box
in Chapter Three) and curtailing incumbent uses; as well as the development of tools and
methodologies for spectrum sharing between technical-compatible services. These aspects are of
particular importance within the context of national assignment processes implemented by
domestic spectrum management, including not only spectrum property right models (exclusive
licensing and potential trades in second markets) but also non-exclusive models such as
84
Megaconstellations. 2023. “Tweet posted Mar 29, 2023”. Twitter (Link).
85
R. Jewett. “ITU Waives Rivada Constellation Deadline”. Via Satellite (Link)
86
J. Foust. 2021. “Satellite operators criticize “extreme” megaconstellation filings”. SpaceNews (Link).
87
A. Allison. 2014. The ITU and Managing Satellite Orbital and Spectrum Resources in the 21st Century. Springer: NY. p. 29.

(unlicensed) “spectrum commons” approaches (multiple users on nonexclusive basis). 88 Other types
of sharing regimes such as the sharing of spectrum between FSS GSO satellite networks or with
hybrid models or networks are also considered.
As a premise, while the possibility for different services to coexist is generally high (even though
subjects to technical features, e.g., with fixed services being more suitable for bands sharing than
mobile ones), the use of sharing practices is also related to the knowledge and understanding of
these practices, as well as their constrains by regulators. Indeed, technical solutions are sometimes
not exploited because of commercial or bureaucratic reasonings.
Focusing on the “spectrum commons approach”, this refers to the establishment of bands for
unlicensed devices, so long these devices respect specific parameters (e.g., low power of
transmission, low duty cycle, etc.). An example of these models is represented by the use of
unlicensed or license-exempt frequency bands, such as the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz bands, for Wi-Fi.
Different views around this approach are shared within ITU, and in regulatory proceedings at both
national and regional level. Major proponents of these models include influential Silicon Valley
companies like Microsoft and Intel. Another example is illustrated by the dynamic spectrum access
(DSA)-enabled devices that allow multiple radio services or spectrum users to operate
simultaneously without causing harmful interference. This approach does not foresee specific
allocations: apparatuses would be functioning having access to a big chunk of spectrum via
Cognitive Radios or Clearinghouses (or both). 89 This enhances communication capacity compared
to static spectrum access practices, increasing spectrum efficiency and utilisation. 90 DSA are
already being implemented by some governments to enhance spectrum utilisation, particularly in
underutilised bands. One example is the U.S FCC Citizen’s Band Radio Service (CBRS) regulatory
regime in the 3.5 GHz band, which employs DSA to facilitate sharing between licensed and
unlicensed mobile devices. Commercial communications, fixed satellites, and U.S military radars
also share parts of the C band in this model. While still at its early stage of exploitation, it could play
a vital role in dealing with the increasing congestion of the space and spectrum environment,
resulting promising for spectrum mangers.
Additional approaches to make more spectrum available in the long run include novel spectrum
auction designs (e.g., incentive-based auctions), licences which include “use it or lose it”
processes, milestones with more stringent build out conditions/requirements, or the reduction of
guard bands in international and domestic allocations (whenever technological advancement
allows for it).91
Regulators enable incumbent users the right to share their spectrum through commercial
agreements, leaving the requirements to coordinate their spectrum per their filing obligations in a
operator-to-operator level. Coordinating spectrum sharing among non-GSO satellite operators
plays a crucial role in ensuring fair spectrum allocation, and enabling the deployment of next-
generation systems. Recently, OneWeb and SpaceX reached an agreement on a spectrum
coordination plan (valid over the U.S territory), possibly driven by the need for launch capacity on
88
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p. 124 Analysis of these approaches
has been included in Chapter 4.
89
A Cognitive Radio is a device capable of knowing its location and of sensing (or knowing via real time databases) who is
using what frequency in its surroundings (thus picking a frequency, channel, power of transmission, modulation and so on)
to avoid interfering/being interfered with, in an automatic, real-time way.
90
91
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p.145. See also Chapter 6.

OneWeb’s side. 92 Their connected Ku bands will provide 2nd-generation networks for their
broadband customers.
In certain cases, regulators have imposed the requirement to share a given amount of spectrum
amongst a certain number of operators to ensure competitive and equitable access to spectrum. 93
In other cases, administrations are also implementing rules requiring demonstration of the ability to
coordinate with incumbent operators prior to emitting licensure, as a pre-emptive measure. In
addition, regulators have also enabled incumbent users to the right to share their spectrum by
awarding usage rights in areas or times when the incumbents are not utilising it. If sharing is not
voluntary, secondary usage rights should be outlined in the incumbent’s primary spectrum license,
allowing them to plan accordingly. Incumbent license holders should also be compensated for
sharing their spectrum, considering the opportunity costs involved. 94
Spectrum efficiency can also be enhanced using hybrid models, because users are notably
interested in the quality of the service, notwithstanding the technology at its basis. Services
intermittently access the same or ideally adjacent frequencies (to save on hardware), and ensure
continuous delivery of RF service to a user, as conditions surrounding that user change and make
it easier for a single radiocommunication service to operate versus the other. An example is that of
D2D, which is usually combined with other communication technologies to deliver a fully-fledged
solution. This includes the combination of MSS with terrestrial or complementary ground
components, especially in the S bands 1980-2025 MHz and 2170-2200 MHz. Alternatively, network
and end user services (and equipment) that combine multiple GSO satellite networks, or terrestrial
and wireless with non-GSO satellite network, have been explored. Enhanced spectrum sharing and
maximising existing bands for efficient 6G networks will be even more relevant. Unlike 5G, which
already encompasses all fixed and mobile terrestrial and satellite technologies, 6G will require even
greater capacity and higher speed to serve advanced applications which will connect humans to a
variety of objects. 95 New techniques, such as Artificial Intelligence algorithms, can improve
spectrum sharing, but it requires planning for THz frequency bands to enhance spectrum utilisation
efficiency.96
Hybrid technologies, including networks and end users’ services as well as network of network
systems, represent a clear example of areas where the role of spectrum harmonisation is crucial,
especially in enabling the seamless interoperability of these systems. Radio-based
communication technologies and networks rely on spectrum harmonisation, either at regional or
international level. This ensures a level of synergies and overall efficiency in its allocation and
utilisation, while also guaranteeing regulatory certainty. Harmonisation is particularly critical in the
satellite industry, where "they could benefit from the ability to use the same equipment with the same
frequency bands across the globe." 97 This harmonisation is crucial for fixed, mobile, satellite, and
broadcasting industries as it enables economies of scale, connectivity, and interoperability.
Harmonisation efforts are pursued within ITU, with the WRC-23 increasing its efforts to achieve and
encourage global regional harmonisation, especially beyond the WRC.
92
M. Khan. 2023. “Dish Network, Environmental Group Sue to Stop SpaceX's Second-Gen 13 Starlink”. PC (Link).
93
FCC. 1994. “Amendment of the Commission's Rules to Establish Rules and Policies Pertaining to a Mobile Satellite
Service in the 1610-1626.5/2483.5-2500 MHz Frequency Bands. 9 FCC Red 5936”. FCC (Link)
94
A. Pourmoghadas et al. 2016. “On the Spectral Coexistence of GSO and non-GSO FSS Systems: Power Control
Mechanisms and a Methodology for Inter-site Distance Determination”. Int. J. Satell. Commun (Link): 4-5.
95
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. pp. 22, 169,170.
96
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. pp. 179-180.
97
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p. 73

Concerns around non-GSO orbital tolerance
Orbital tolerance concerns the acceptable (and therefore allowed) deviation of operational orbits
of satellites from the altitude listed in their ITU filings. This discussion, which relates to the physical
question on how close operationalised LEO orbits may be to each other, is becoming of higher
importance as satellite constellations require multiple fleets of satellites to be flown at slightly
different orbits to minimise collision risks. Therefore, many operators launch different batches of
satellites slightly above or below the altitude “notified” to ITU, thus making coordination more
complex.98
In this context, it should be considered that non-GSO satellites equipped with automatic collision
avoidance systems might systematically violate potential tolerance areas; and they might create a
de-facto no-access/uncoordinated orbital shell if the collision avoidance capability is factored in
the tolerance area. Also, smallsats are often built and filed for not really knowing which launch
vehicle will deliver them to orbit – as the filing often precedes launch booking –, increasing the risk
for inaccuracy in the (ITU) filings for what concerns orbital parameters. They are barely equipped
with propulsion and often rely entirely on their launcher to establish their final orbit.99
As no rules on orbital tolerance are currently in place, ITU study groups are discussing methods
with which to outline acceptable deviation (“tolerance”), as well as whether deviation should be
measured by an absolute number or a percentage of the baseline altitude. The WRC-23 Agenda
Item 7 topic A will compel Member States to conclude and clarify how decisions on orbital tolerance
play into regional efforts in Space Traffic Management. Ultimately, these decisions will strengthen
the commercial vitality of the built-out milestones.
5.3 Harmonising spectrum management

Spectrum harmonisation and spectrum sharing play a crucial role in ensuring the efficient use of
spectrum at the international, as well as at the regional level, while also facilitating sustained
growth, innovative service and fostering economies of scale. 100 Spectrum harmonisation in the
satellite industry is enhanced through the increased use of standards. Standardisation and
regulatory harmonisation are necessary to facilitate the rapid implementation of evolving radio
technologies such as Wi-Fi, the 4G and 5G ecosystems, and beyond. The satellite industry has
worked with several standardisation bodies on improving the performance of both GSO and non-
GSO networks.
The critical role played by the satellite industry in the telecommunication sector, and the rising need
to better integrate space and terrestrial networks effectively, are demonstrated by the recent
inclusion of non-terrestrial networks in standardisation documents for standards bodies such
as the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) and ITU. 101 The 3GPP is a project established in
1998 by multiple telecommunications standard development organisations to provide a complete
system description for mobile telecommunications through officially published releases. Initially
focused on 3G, the partnership’s scope has expanded to include technical standards for 4G and 5G.
98
R. Pritchard-Kelly. 2023. “WRC-23 on the Horizon”. Air & Space Law 48, Special Issue.
99
Parallel studies on the GEO orbit show the significant discrepancy of most satellites from their prescribed orbital
longitude as seen in Roberts & Linares. 2022. “A Survey of ITU Space Station Applications in the GEO”. AMOS (Link).
100
Policy Tracker. 2023. “How does EU spectrum policy work?” Policy Tracker (Link). See also J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum
Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p. 159.
101
ITU. 2015. “Handbook on National Spectrum Management”. ITU (Link).

Actors and stakeholders involved in the cooperation include telecommunications standard

development organisations, ITU, and other relevant industry entities.
Within this framework, the approval of normative activities on non-terrestrial networks in 3GPP
Release 17 has generated significant interest. Release 17 enables NR-based satellite access for
global service continuity. The standard aims to define "5G for space: the NR NTN standard" and is
further supplemented by the ITU WP4B's efforts to develop standards for the satellite component of
International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT) beyond 2022. It supports satellite access for IoT
use cases, including satellites in 3GPP specifications, and it will drive global access to 5G and
stimulate satellite industry growth.102
Focusing on IMT, through international deliberations involving government and industry

radiocommunication experts, ITU has established global technology standards for the last three
generations of mobile broadband: IMT-2000 (3G), IMT-Advanced (4G), and IMT-2020 (5G). These
standards enable harmonisation, implementation, and best practices for IMT requirements and its
radio interface through regulations, global standards, and core network standards.103 In addition, ITU-
R Recommendations have been developed to provide detailed technical specifications for the
terrestrial and satellite radio interfaces of IMT, thus enabling ubiquitous coverage for IMT.104
IMT-Family and Naming Conventions As of 24. Feb. 2022
International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT)
Name IMT-2000 IMT-Advanced IMT-2020

[Systems beyond
Rec. ITU-R M.1457-15 ITU-R M.2012-5 ITU-R M.2150
IMT-2020]
Radio • IMT-2000 CDMA DS • LTE-Advanced • 3GPP 5G-SRIT

• IMT-2000 CDMA MC • WirelessMAN- • 3GPP 5G-RIT
Interface
• IMT-2000 CDMA TDD Advanced • 5Gi
Techn.
• IMT-2000 TDMA SC • DECT 5G-SRIT
• IMT-2000
• FDMA/TDMA
• IMT 2000 OFDMA
TDD WirelessMAN
Year
1st/latest
05/2000 – 10/2020 02/2014 – 02/2022 02/2021 – 02/2022 2030?
publicatio
n as of 24.
Feb. 2022
Market 3G 4G 5G 6G
name
Figure 13: IMT Naming Conventions (Credit: ITU; ESPI)
Several satellite operators have urged countries to make better use of the already identified IMT
and to prioritise spectrum optimisation or spectrum refarming over the identification of new
spectrum.105 This is particularly relevant in the context of Agenda Items 1.2, 1.3, 10, as well as in the
identification of AI for WR-27 (See Thematic Box:“WRC-23 Agenda Items related to IMT 17 GHz”).
In line with the intertwined nature of standards and spectrum allocation process, standard-setting
and spectrum management processes are strengthening their relations, with governments
increasingly considering standard bodies and involving themselves in the establishment of
standards alongside private actors. On their end, standard bodies are getting closer to space (e.g.,
ISO getting the qualification of COPUOS Observer) or witnessing the participation of space entities
in their framework (e.g., 3GPP). In a few circumstances, these bodies also liaise with ITU-R Study
groups to obtain and provide relevant information, so as to better inform their internal work. The
ITU-R Study Groups and ITU-T Study Groups conduct extensive studies and discussions involving
102
M. Jaffar & N. Chuberre. 2022. “NTN & Satellite in Rel-17 & 18”. 3GPP (Link).
103
ITU. n.d. “ITU–R SECTOR ITU-R FAQ on IMT”. ITU (Link).
104
ITU. 2022. “Handbook on International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT)”. ITU Publications (Link).
105

stakeholders from governments, regulators, industry, and academia to drive these developments. On
another side, the limited number of existing ground segment service providers (e.g., KSAT, Viasat, SSC,
Leaf Space, ATLAS, Contec, AWS GS) compared to the plethora of operators, is de facto informing the
market around the same standardised frequencies, procedural practices, hardware and protocols
suggested by the firsts. Finally, the availability but also reduced cost of the equipment is significantly
favoured by the presence of standards. Overall, the role of this dialogue is an imperative for the
success of spectrum’s standard and management organisations.
In parallel to this standardisation process, a twofold trend is witnessed. Companies such as SpaceX
are verticalising their solutions, building their user terminals themselves, while others partner to
provide Direct-to-Handset or Direct-to-Device solutions (Apple & Globalstar, Huawei & Beidou,
Iridium & Qualcomm), thus developing parallel solutions with different industrial standards.
WRC-23 Agenda Items related to IMT 17 GHz
7-24 GHz is a congested band range, being allocated to 16 radio services. It is heavily populated
by satellite, with satellite operator struggles to accommodate the growing services demand in core
FSS & MSS & BSS bands operating in these ranges. A large portion of spectrum has been identified
for IMT in previous WRCs. For instance, WRC-19 identified a total of 17.25 GHz bandwidth for IMT
above 24 GHz with only a limited number of countries having used it for 5G as of today. However, in
addition to spectrum identified for IMT at WRC-19, the IMT industry is pushing to obtain access to
additional global harmonised mid-band spectrum in the band between 7 and 24 GHz that could be
potentially identified for IMT as part of AI 10 at the WRC-23.106
Further harmonisation of spectrum for 5G as a result of the WRC-23 (and towards WRC-27) would
contribute to the expansion of wireless mobile communications, supporting the request of the 5G
mobile industry. Reasoning for supplementary IMT spectrum for dense urban applications should
be clarified, especially with 6G mobile
systems being still in an early stage in
its research.
The future development of IMT for

2030 and beyond is under study by the
ITU-R regional organisations. 107 In this
context, studies have been already
initiated in the U.S for future auctioning
of the X band, currently in use by
remote sensing industries. 108 In any
case, while the WRC identifies specific Figure 14: Amount of spectrum available for IMT (Credit: Sameer
frequency bands for IMT deployment Sharma, GSOA)
through the RR, this identification does not limit the use of those bands for other allocated
applications, nor does it prioritise 5G or other mobile telecom services over other uses . 109 Each ITU
Member state determines which bands will be made available for IMT in its country based on
national or regional requirements.110
106
GSOA, “WRC-23 Agenda Item 10: Studies on IMT identification in 7-24 GHz for 6G” (Link).
107
ITU News. 2022. “WRS-22: Mobile broadband trends from 3G to 6G”. ITU (Link).
108
AIA, CSSMA, CSF, SIA. 2023. “Joint Association X Band Letter”. AIA Aerosapce (Link).
109
P. Ryan. 2005. “The Future of the ITU and its Standard-setting Functions in Spectrum Management”. p. 349 In: The
Standards Edge: Future Generation. Arkansas: Bolin Communications.
110
ITU News. 2022. “An inside look at mobile broadband standards development”. ITU (Link).

To conclude, enhancing the utilisation of spectrum resources encompasses a broad range of tools,
models, and technologies. Such a goal will require innovative approach as well as identification of
methods to assess spectrum availability and the potential of harmful interference. Notwithstanding
those efforts, some users have argued for spectrum to be set-aside for several applications,
including railroads and IoT, both at the domestic and international level. For instance, the WRC-23
Agenda Item 1.18 aims to allocate spectrum for commercial IoT purposes. Such an approach raises
concerns that it limits the use of a radio allocation to a particular application, impeding its use to a
variety of users even though they meet the technical parameter indicated in the RR.111 Vice versa,
this approach could also foster the growth of new uses of spectrum in bands where spectrum may
currently be underutilised, thereby addressing the overall desire to efficiently use spectrum. The
discussion for AI 1.18 has evolved and is being continued under AI 2.13 for WRC27.112
5.4 Improving Spectrum monitoring

Spectrum monitoring, prediction of interference risks, and planning solutions for potential
interference scenarios are a crucial component of an effective spectrum management system,
as it ensures that the use of authorised spectrum aligns with its intended usage. 113 It helps to identify
and address equipment complexity, interactions, malfunctions, or misuse. Accurate, continuous and
real-time monitoring of spectrum usage globally supports interference resolution functions,
including those caused by unauthorised or non-compliant transmitters with exceeding out-of-band
or spurious emissions.114 This ensures quality reception of broadcasts, provides data for spectrum
management processes, guides frequency selection, and prepares for Radiocommunication
Conferences by providing spectrum occupancy reports and aiding in the BR programme
organisation.115
During the Plenipotentiary Conference 2022, Resolution 186 was revised to:
“Strengthen ITU’s role in transparency and confidence-building measures in outer space

activities by instructing the ITU BR Director to make satellite monitoring facility information
available to governments.”116
The document encourages Member States and space stakeholders to promote information sharing,
capacity building, and best practices to bridge the digital divide and enhance the reliability of
radiocommunication satellite networks/systems. 117
Continuous monitoring and international coordination are vital to mitigate the increased risk of
interference in satellite connectivity due to its rapid growth and expansion. Spectrum monitoring
serves as a valuable source of information and verification in the spectrum management process. 118
It reinforces the role of cooperation agreements between ITU and national administrations in
solving incidents.119
111
112
ITU, “ITU-R Preliminary Studies for WRC-27” (Link)
113
ITU News. 2022. “Space monitoring at the core of ITU Radiocommunication activities”. ITU (Link).
114
Limitations include some services such as GNSS, or passive and radio astronomy services that operate at power levels
that can only be monitored with a very dense network of interference detection sensors. With very narrow beams at higher
frequencies this could also be a challenge.
115
The BR organises monitoring programs globally, regionally, or limited to specific areas or administrations.
116
ITU, 2022. “Highlights: ITU Plenipotentiary Conference 2022”. ITU (Link).
117
ITU. 2022. “Resolution 186 (Rev. Bucharest, 2022)”. ITU Publications (Link).
118
ITU. 2011. “Handbook Spectrum Monitoring”. ITU (Link): 4-5.
119
ITU News. 2022. “Space monitoring at the core of ITU Radiocommunication activities”. ITU (Link).

Maps of licensed stations Licensing and

Licensed/unlicensed frequency
frequencies assignment
Spectrum
Spectrum management
Management
information
Database Map of licensed
Synchronisation with
stations
remote regional
databases
Predicted Data
Spectrum Reference Database
Management Policy & Interference Complaints
Common Display Records,
Spectrum
Reports, Statistical Data &
Management
Spectrum Analysis Broadcasting Coverage
Monitoring & Quality Interference
Enforcement & Clearance
Measurements
Spectrum Characteristics
Comparison to License Database
Monitoring
results &
missions
Figure 15: Spectrum monitoring ecosystem (Credit: ITU, ESPI)
Recommendation 36 (WRC-97) urged ITU-R to study and recommend the necessary tools to
achieve global monitoring coverage for efficient resource utilisation. Administrations were
encouraged to provide monitoring facilities pursuant to Article 16 RR (such as establishing central
offices and/or HF monitoring stations), cooperate in requested monitoring programs, and address
the monitoring of emissions from space stations. 120 Specifically, administrations with space
monitoring facilities were encouraged to participate in the international monitoring system and
notify the Bureau “of their monitoring stations for inclusion in List VIII (Section III)”.
Regulatory provisions, including those outlined in RR No. 16, govern “the establishment and
operation of the international monitoring system.” 121 The latter is comprised of designated
monitoring stations operated by administrations, public or private agencies, joint monitoring
services, or international organisations. The system coordinates monitoring activities to meet
international requirements for collecting, exchanging, and publishing information. Administering
authorities determine if the technical standards followed by these stations align with ITU-R
Recommendations and communicate this information to ITU.122 ITU publishes data on these stations
and the centralising office’s name in the List of International Monitoring Stations (List VIII). 123 As a
matter of fact, both Recommendation 36 (WRC-97) and RR No. 16, did not find broad application for
space-based telecommunications.
The Bureau plays a vital role by organising regular and special monitoring programs, analysing
the results, and facilitating their communication with administrations. For instance, RR No. 15
allows administrations to seek the Bureau’s assistance in resolving harmful interference cases.
However, for space services the BR exercises control mainly on the information provided by
governments when issuing licenses to a mobile station or mobile earth station in compliance with
RR No. 18.6, as well as in the framework of the administrative due diligence of Resolution 49
(Rev.WRC-07) and the BiU conditions of Resolution 40 (Rev.WRC-19). The BR relies on information
(e.g., identifying sources, determining jurisdictions, and measuring field strength when needed) that
can be obtained through international monitoring, which may involve organising special
120
See RR No. 16 and RR No. 21 and 22.
121
ITU. 2011. “Handbook Spectrum Monitoring”. ITU (Link): 15.
122
Stations with lower technical standards may be authorized to meet specific monitoring data needs.
123
As mandated by RR No. 20 (§8). WP1C, Annex 1 to 1C/95-E - draft revision of Report ITU-R SM.[SMALL-SAT], 2020.

programmes with limited monitoring stations. Cases of harmful interference are reported in the
Satellite Interference Reporting and Resolution System (SIRRS), from which the BR may require two
types of information: first, the identification and location of potential sources of interference; second,
the BR assesses the interfering station’s field strength measurement.
Announced and operating large satellite constellations introduce additional complexities.

Traditional fixed measurement sites are no longer sufficient to thoroughly test and verify satellites
transmission and location on non-GSO. Some significant concerns arise from the increasing
congestion of the non-GSO and its associated frequency spectrum, including the rise in the
likelihood of signal harmful interference, the reliability (inc. legal certainty, transparency and
interoperability) in licensing, and the potential lack of efficient use of spectrum and related orbit
positions. An example of these new complexity factors can be found in the technical issue related
to the limits on the power that large constellations can emit when communicating with ground
terminals (Equivalent Power Flux-Density, EPFD), so as to protect GEO fixed-satellite and GSO
broadcasting-satellite services from interference. In particular, this matter will be addressed under
AI 7, topic J, with the aim of establishing a procedure for collaboration among administrations in
ensuring the aggregated EPFD limits are not exceeded. This is in parallel to the discussion on a
proposed AI for the WRC-27 for the modification of Article 22 RR regarding the review of EPFD limits,
with concerns raised by GSO operators in this regard.124
National administrations must address these concerns by implementing radio monitoring

capabilities that are able to provide a deep understanding of radio spectrum usage patterns over
time. Innovative approaches are necessary to mitigate potential issues, such as collecting and
correlating data beyond radio frequency elements, utilising scalable and transportable sensors that
can be dynamically reconfigured, and leveraging on-board signal processing capabilities. 125 New
solutions and measurement techniques are needed in vast or inaccessible territories. In this context,
ground-based systems have shown some limitations, in particularly due to the limited monitoring
range, the insufficient number of monitoring sites, the difficulties posed by complex ground
morphologies and the labour-intense procedures in adverse weather conditions.
To this extent deploying radio-monitoring LEO spacecraft could represent an effective solution.
Collecting comprehensive radio frequency data enables a mapping of the radio spectrum usage
and an analysis of trends. Furthermore, the system can identify unused or congested spectrum,
aiding spectrum allocation, frequency coordination, and future planning. 126
Enhancement of the spectrum monitoring tools require the centralisation of the collected data,
particularly for non-GSO constellations that only partially cover populated areas. Establishing a new
level of cooperation between administrations is necessary to consolidate data collection and
analysis. This collaboration will facilitate the correlation of similar events across the globe and
enable the prediction of future occurrences. Nevertheless, collecting and analysing data may
become overwhelming for administrations, potentially resulting in longer licensing processes or
even deregulation in some cases. In this sense, developing tailored Artificial Intelligence capabilities
could become essential to managing this challenge. 127
Detecting and identifying unauthorised transmitters is functional to solving interference concerns.

However, distinguishing between legal and unauthorised signals can be challenging, particularly in
124
125
G. Baraglia. 2020. “Emerging challenges for satellite spectrum monitoring”. ITU News (Link).
126
WP 1C, Annex 1 to Document 1C/95-E - draft revision of Report ITU-R SM.[SMALL-SAT], 2020.
127
G. Baraglia. 2020. “Emerging challenges for satellite spectrum monitoring”. ITU News (Link).

crowded frequency bands where authorised and unauthorised transmitters have similar
modulation characteristics. Conversely, the absence of a signal does not always mean an unused
frequency or no assignment; the assigned transmitter might not have been active during the
monitoring period.128 Therefore, monitoring information and spectrum management records do
not always have a straightforward relation. Channel occupancy data only indicate frequency
usage, not giving information on the specific signal transmitter. Similarly, the presence of an
assignment at a specific frequency does not guarantee that the measured signal comes from
the assigned transmitter. Additional methods like aural monitoring or direction finders may aid in
identifying and locating illegal transmitters once their operation has been detected.
The challenges of spectrum monitoring for space non-GSO is not at the WRC-23 agenda nor
addresses by the CPMs report. A detailed analysis of the allocated preparatory work for each ITU-
R study group shows that WP 1C, which studies spectrum monitoring techniques, is not listed as a
responsible nor a contribution group to any AI. On the other hand, Resolution 22-5 from ITU-R
determines that SG1 should address the specific needs of spectrum management organisations in
developing countries and focus on improving spectrum management practices. The considerations
outline the relevance of spectrum monitoring to discussions about the use of computer-aided
systems and participation from spectrum management personnel worldwide, including the ITU BR.
It encourages administrations from developing countries to “strengthen their national radio-
frequency management organisation.”129
Ultimately, a robust spectrum management system depends on an effective spectrum

monitoring, as well as the reliance on inspection capabilities. When interference complaints arise,
monitoring helps identify the interfering signal’s location, transmission type, and technical
parameters for further investigation. The spectrum management database aids in determining if the
source of interference is an authorised transmitter operating beyond its parameters, or an illegal
operator. However, while rules and procedures should be oriented towards effective enforcement,
aspects related to mandate, power, and resources for the establishment of such a mechanism
should be further considered. Implementing an effective monitoring system is a massive endeavour,
and while it represents an ideal ultima goal, due to regulators’ limited resources, regulators continue
to rely on operators to identify and notify them of instances of interference.
5.5 Balancing efficiency with equitable access to spectrum

ITU´s space-related regulations have traditionally been based on the First Come, First Served (FCFS)
(and coordination before use) procedure with rights and obligation, in line with the principle of
efficient, rational, and cost-effective (economical) spectrum/orbit management and utilisation
for equitable access. Following the recognition of GSO and, later, other earth orbits as a limited
natural resources in Article 33(2) of the 1973 ITU Convention, concerns of several developing
countries for the progressive exploitation and congestion of GSO frequencies/orbital slots led
Member States to implement a parallel equitable access procedure with frequency/orbital position
plans for each country.130
In 1985 and 1988, the World Administrative Radio Conference (WARC) on the use of GSO and the
planning of the space services utilising it convened in Geneva with the task “to reconcile the principle
128
ITU. 2011. “Handbook Spectrum Monitoring”. ITU (Link): 11-12.
129
ITU. 2019. “Resolution ITU-R 22-5. Improvement of national radio spectrum management practices & techniques”. (Link).
130
ESPI. 2022. “Report 82 - Space Environment Capacity”. ESPI (Link).

of guaranteed and equitable access with that of the efficient and economic use of two limited natural
resources: GSO and the radio frequency spectrum.”131
1959 1961 1963 1973
UN General Assembly Recommendation

Plenipotentiary
Resolution 1721 (XXI) 10A: all members of
The practice of First Conference, Article
satellite the ITU have the right
Come, First Served 33(2): equitable
communications to equitable use of
(FCFS) is continued access to frequency
available to all nations frequency bands for
for space services. bands for space radio
on a global and non- space
services.
discriminatory basis. communication.
1999 1988 1985 1979
Article 44 ITU WARC-79 improved

The second session of The first session of the
Constitution: efficient spectrum sharing and
the WARC-ORB WARC-ORB focus on
use and equitable frequency allocations
translates the reconciling equitable
access to spectrum for space services
principle of access to access with efficient
and orbit resources & between developed
the GSO for all use of limited
due diligence and developing
countries for FSS. resources.
procedures. countries.
Figure 16: ITU space-related regulation (Credit: ITU, ESPI)
To guarantee equitable access, Article 44 of the ITU CC, “Use of the radio frequency spectrum
and of the geostationary satellite and other satellite orbits”, paragraph 2 states that:
“in using frequency bands for radio services, Member States shall bear in mind that radio
frequencies and any associated orbits, including the GSO, are limited natural resources
and that they must be used rationally, efficiently and economically, in conformity with the
provisions of the RR, so that countries or groups of countries may have equitable access to
those orbits and frequencies, taking into account the special needs of the developing countries
and the geographical situation of particular countries.”132
As a constant evolution of the Space Plans to remain efficient to provide equivalent access to GSO,
at the WRC-19 the Resolution 170 was adopted, “which provides the procedure to ensure equitable
access to frequency bands under Appendix 30B (with the FSS Plan revised at WRC-07) by developing
countries.” Additionally, Recommendation 16 (Rev. WRC-19) to the ITU-R continue to recognised the
relevance and importance of equitable spectrum access: the WRC-23 will continue to address
challenges related to equitable access in GSO in its AI 7 Topics D, E, F, H and I, titled “Space Plans
for equitable access to GSO in the fixed or broadcasting satellite services” and AI 7 Topic K, titled
“review of the special procedure in the Resolution 553 for enhancement of equitable access to
broadcasting-satellite networks in the frequency band 21.14–22 GHz in ITU Regions 1 and 3 (Rev.
WRC-15).”
While the notion of equitable access is in priority (with secondary priority the efficient use of
those planned bands) attached to the planning process of GSO systems, in part of BSS and FSS
bands, it has also been regarded as a widely accepted guiding principle for the regulation of space
activity. As a common and finite resource, spectrum should indeed serve all applications, both
space-based/terrestrial and fixed /mobile, radio astronomy and others. Regulations should ensure
accessibility for stakeholders from all Member States and companies. In this context, additional
challenges and discussions arose from the introduction of large non-GSO satellite systems for
commercial communications.
131
ITU. n.d. “1st session, Geneva, 1985". History Portal of the ITU (Link).
132
ESPI. 2019. Studies in Space Policy: Legal Aspects around Satellite Constellations v.19. Cham: Springer Nature. pp. 84-85.

Indeed, as LEO large constellations became more appealing, developing countries and commercial
operators seek to guarantee frequency assignments availability. Criticisms of the FCFS model in
international forums question the long-term and sustainable access to orbital space environment
and spectrum, and the need to implement requirements around the principles of equity. The RR
includes provisions mitigating the FCFS to create rights and obligation to coordinate with
newcomers and justify technically reasons when compatibility is not possible. The coordination
process on technical data is creating room (at least in theory, for more responsible actors) for
accommodating coordination between stakeholders – first or later comer. While non-GSO offer a
larger volume of available slots at multiple altitudes (called orbital shells by the Astro dynamic),
certain orbits are more favourable than others for cost-effectiveness and longevity of the
system, also influencing the viability and utility of satellite constellations.
Consequently, late comers may face less favourable conditions, such as the need to operate in
harsher orbits, including those overlapping with the Van Allen belts or where the orbital debris
density reaches its maxima.133 However the difficulty of deployment of large constellation project
within regulatory time limits is also an opportunity to reopen spectrum/orbit resources.
Achieving a balance between an efficient and equitable sharing of spectrum and orbits in a
changing space environment is challenging, often resulting in some telecommunication systems
lacking sufficient spectrum access. In contrast, enforcing equitable access in non-GSO through the
implementation of additional measures, while aimed at also increasing efficiency, could have
unintended consequences, further complicating regulatory compliance, especially for those
operators and administrations lacking expertise.134
The matter has been raised at the 2022 ITU Plenipotentiary Meeting (PP-22) and is expected to be
discussed at the WRC-23. Resolution 218 on the “ITU's role in the implementation of the
"Space2030" Agenda: space as a driver of sustainable development, and its follow-up and review
process” recognises the significance of Article of the 44, ITU Constitution. It highlights that:
“developing countries, least developed countries, small island developing states and
landlocked developing countries face a lack of resources and expertise to address the
complexities of the coordination processes.” The document argues that ITU should “support
the implementation of the Space2030 Agenda, especially the parts related to space services of
overarching objective 3 of UNGA Resolution 76/3: improve access to space for all and ensure
that all countries can benefit socio-economically from space science and technology
applications and space-based data, information and products, thereby supporting the
achievement of the SDGs.” 135
It instructs the Secretary-General and the Directors of the BR:
“To engage in the dialogue with relevant UN entities and promote BR's activities related to
space,” as well as “to strengthen global partnerships and cooperation among Member States,
UN entities, international and regional intergovernmental and non-governmental
organisations, industry and private-sector entities in order to ensure that, through joint efforts
and by taking advantage of the practical experiences and contributions of different
stakeholders, the benefits of space will be brought to everyone, everywhere.”
The Resolution concludes with a need to:
133
G. Long. 2020. “The Impact of Large Constellations of Satellites”. JASON (Link): 22-23.
134
P. Zhao. 2019. “The Benefits of Technology Neutral Spectrum Licenses”. GMSA (Link): 8.
135
The Space 2030 Agenda was adopted by the UN GA in 2021, on space as a driver of sustainable development.

“Give high priority to the matter of equitable access to satellite orbits, taking into account the
special needs of developing countries and the geographical situation of particular countries.”
The dynamic stemming from the FCFS approach toward more equitable planning would require
a balance between “efficient and economic” use with its “equitable” access, and consequently need
to be embedded in new ways of addressing and managing the Earth orbital environment at large,
beyond just spectrum allocation.
5.6 Driving space sustainability concerns

The growing use of Earth’s orbits by states, international satellite organisations, and private entities
can only increase space congestion, and, consequently, the proliferation of space debris. The surge
in satellite constellations enhances the risk of collisions and interference between satellite systems,
contributing to concerns regarding the long-term sustainability of space activities. Large non-GSO
constellations are posing unique challenges for national regulatory processes, and for the
international outer space regime at large, increasingly leading to the potential overuse of LEO,
both from a physical and radio frequency perspective. While national regulatory regimes have been
historically associated with oversight purposes, they are also increasingly designed to ensure the
sustainability of the space environment. This is relevant when considering that both spectrum and
orbits are considered limited natural resources, as affirmed by policy and regulatory documents,
including article 44 of the ITU CC.
In 2022, the ITU Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-22) released the Resolution 219 on the
“sustainability of the radio-frequency spectrum and associated satellite orbit resources used
by space services.”136 The resolution underscored the urgent need to review technologies used in
satellite networks in GSO, as well as the increased numbers of satellites within non-GSO systems,
with a view to addressing them, if necessary, in the RR and in the processing of frequency
assignments by the BR. The document noted that such a challenge related to the deployment of
non-GSO satellite systems should be addressed before those systems are launched.
The Resolution emphasises the significance of a sustainable approach to radio spectrum utilisation
in space. 137 It is the result of deliberations on the challenges posed by interference and other
adverse consequences that arise from the increased use of shared spectrum and orbital resources
in non-GSO systems.
As a result of the Resolution, Member States have been invited to “instruct the Radiocommunication
Assembly (RA) to urgently perform the necessary studies through ITU-R study groups to address the
increasing use of radio-frequency spectrum and associated orbit resources in non-GSO orbits and
the long-term sustainability of these resources, as well as on equitable access to, and rational and
compatible use of, the GSO and non-GSO orbit and spectrum resources, consistent with the
objectives of Article 44 of the Constitution.”
This Resolution represents the first step in tackling harmful signal interference and other harms
associated with the increased use of shared spectrum and orbital resources. However, some
Member States are unable to settle on what is meant by “harms” and “issues”. More neutral language
was proposed to ensure the long-term sustainability of the Earth orbit environment and equitable
access to the non-GSO orbit. In addition, some Member States raised concerns on the fact that
136
ITU. 2022. “Highlights: ITU Plenipotentiary Conference 2022”. eTrade for all (Link). See also ITU. 2022. “Final Acts of the
Plenipotentiary Conference Bucharest, 2022”. ITU Publications (Link).
137
Access partnership. 2023. “Driving Space Sustainability”. Access Partnership (Link).

such a matter would not fall within the scope of the ITU’s mandate, especially when related to
sustainability aspects such as space traffic coordinator, and debris mitigation and remediation.
The result of the study on implementation of the Resolution will then be submitted by the Director
of BR to the WRC-23 and, likely the next WRC in 2027, for its consideration, implementation, and
discussion around matters which remain unresolved.
The commitment of ITU on space sustainability is strengthen by Resolution 218 on the “ITU's role
in the implementation of the "Space2030" Agenda.” Previously, ITU has provided guidance about
disposal orbits (“graveyards”) for satellites through the Recommendation on the Environmental
protection of the GSO. 138 While deorbiting capabilities will remain the preferable option, a similar
guidance for non-GSO should be considered.139
Scientific services are also facing more challenges from the increased activity in non-GSO orbits.
Radio Astronomy stations are normally sited in very remote areas of the planet to minimise the
human-made radio activity, some even protected by national legislation as Radio Quiet Zones, are
seeing a rapid increase in satellite density in the skies. 140 Large constellations of non-GSO satellites
are visible from any point on Earth bringing new challenges for the very sensitive radio receivers in
radio telescopes. 141 However, satellite operators have been working closely with the astronomy
community to address these issues. For instance, SpaceX has been commended by the Radio
Astronomy stations on their engagement in seeking solutions together.142
Another effect of the increased use of space is the reflection of sunlight from objects in LEO,
gradually changing our view of the night sky and affecting optical telescopes, especially those
designed to detect asteroids with a possible collision course with Earth. While this effect is not
regulated under ITU, it is an integral part of the topic of space sustainability.
Concerns regarding orbital space and spectrum congestion are expected to escalate as the number
of satellites and space objects launched rises exponentially at an unprecedent rate, thus requiring
an urgent need to strengthen and increase an internationally coordinated action and decision.
Recognising the evolving nature of space technologies and the associated concerns regarding
space sustainability, ITU should remain committed to supporting endeavours towards a more
sustainable space environment.
To support actions of governments in addressing these concerns, key international meetings (like
the WRC-23) gathering actors from the private sector and administrations in a decision process by
consensus are essential to accelerate a globally coordinated solution.143 Collaboration such as the
recently announced ESA-ITU cooperative effort for the characterisation and geolocation of satellite
interference, would also be crucial.144
138
ITU. 2010. “Recommendation ITU-R S.1003.2 (12/2010)”. ITU (Link). It is not legally binding.
139
Graveyard orbits could be considered for NGSO satellites operating above LEO.
See G. Di Mauro et al. 2021. “ITT 7210 – End-of-Life Disposal Concepts for Lagrange-Points and HEO Missions”. ESA (Link).
140
ITU. 2021. “Report ITU-R RA.2259-1”. ITU (Link).
141
C. Walker (ed.). 2022. “Dark and Quiet Skies II for Science and Society”. UNOOSA/Noirlab (Link).
142
J. Foust. 2023. ‘NSF and SpaceX reach agreement to reduce Starlink effects on astronomy’. SpaceNews (Link).
143
J. Manner. 2023. “The Regulatory Roadmap for 2023”. Via Satellite (Link).
144
J. Foust. 2023. “ITU emphasises importance of space sustainability”. SpaceNews (Link).

A new approach to Outer Space Governance

The sustainability challenge that the space environment is currently addressing has called for new
approaches, philosophies, and concepts that could effectively mitigate and remediate the risks
related to increasing physical and spectrum congestion. The challenge faced can only be
addressed through strong international cooperation and a transformation of present and future
outer space governance frameworks, maximising the opportunities of outer space and minimising
the short and long-term risks.
While maintaining the centrality of Member States and their leadership on intergovernmental
processes, an agile, as well as broad and multi-stakeholder outer space governance response
should be pursued. This framework should build on the work that has historically been done on
space sustainability by different administrations and supranational bodies, including UN COPUOS,
multilateral bodies of the GA, ITU, and other entities such as the IADC, whilst also acknowledging
a degree of overlap between their work.
This narrative is confirmed by the UN Secretary General Policy Brief NO7 commenting on the
overlap between intergovernmental entities’ missions relating to space security, safety, and
sustainability.145 A new governance framework for various areas of space sustainability should be
explored in a cooperative format between bodies of the UN system, considering the UN space
treaties and any other means of international cooperation, whilst also including a platform to
broaden operational stakeholder inclusion.
In particular, the latter should serve to increase contribution more effectively from external
experts, to keep pace with technological advancements and the definition of operational
requirements. When focusing on synergies between UNCOPUOS and ITU, the intertwined
dynamics between effective spectrum management and the physical capacity of the space
environment, as well as the level of exchange between space and spectrum entities, should be
explored. For instance, ITU´s database has vast amounts of data on satellite networks filings (e.g.,
orbital parameters) that could be a useful complementary element when discussing Space
Situational Awareness, Space Traffic Management or collision avoidance, especially if synergised
with additional data sources - as previous attempts has already demonstrated.
Achieving a sustainable space environment necessitates worldwide collaboration and resource-

sharing at the intergovernmental level under the auspices of the UN. UN COPUOS, the ITU-R,
WRC, as well as bodies outside the UN-system that delas with space sustainability, should
continue to operate under different mandates and in different institutional setups. However, an
effective space sustainability international coordination scheme and collaboration between
different regulators will ensure some best practices be taken forward to enhance and reinforce
the effectiveness of the respective regimes, and, more generally, the broader outer space
governance. This is especially needed when dealing with the above-described related challenges
and to ensure the continued viability and sustainability of space activities.146
A clear opportunity to enhance outer space governance is provided by the UN Summit of the
Future in 2024. 147
145
UN. 2023. “Our Common Agenda Policy Brief 7: For All Humanity – The Future of Outer Space Governance”. (Link): 10.
146
COPUOS. 2023. “A/AC.105/2023/CRP.23”. UNCOPUOS (Link).
147
UN. n.d. “UN Summit of the Future in 2024”. UN (Link).

6 EUROPEAN REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT FOR SPECTRUM

States play a key role in the multi-level (encompassing international, regional, and national)
spectrum management system. When drawing attention to the international level, with its
associated challenges, towards national systems, the sovereignty that states maintain over the
use of spectrum in their territories should be highlighted. Indeed, the allocation and assignment
of frequencies various uses and user occurs at the state level, which retain flexibility and autonomy
in managing the spectrum bands within their territory, with the same applicable for space services.
National spectrum management approaches
National spectrum management can be defined as the system consisting of “structures,

procedures, and regulations whereby an administration controls the use of the radio spectrum within
its geographical boundaries.” 148 These activities have the overarching objectives of ensuring the
availability of spectrum for both public and private entities that contribute to the social and
economic objectives (e.g., reduction of the digital divide), while at the same time making the most
efficient use possible of the limited resource. These high-level objectives are translated into
activities conducted as part of the national spectrum management system, including spectrum
planning, frequency assignment and licensing, liaison and consultation with national
organisations, spectrum management financing, spectrum monitoring. The international TFA
(ITU RR No 5) and the national TFA represent the foundation of such a system.
Spectrum management
Support functions Database records System outputs
functions
Planning & regulations

Financing Regulation
Allocation & allotment Allocation Allocations
Frequency assignment & Assignments Licences
licensing Licenses Equipment standards
National liaison & Equipment standards Invoices
Administrative
consultation Addresses and Spectrum use based on
Legal
International & regional directions monitoring
Spectrum engineering
cooperation Accounting Notification
Automation
Standards, Inspection Resolutions and
Training
specifications & Measurements recommendations
equipment authorisation Interference resolution Spectrum plans
Monitoring Complains and inquiries International
Spectrum enforcement Interference agreements
(inspections & Measurements
investigations
Figure 17: National Spectrum Management Systems (NSMS) (Credit: ESPI, ITU)
Different approaches to spectrum management can be pursued domestically.
Firstly, when focusing on the relation between the spectrum and space regulators, several
approaches can be highlighted. Indeed, every European country has a different spectrum
authorisation process (and different specific requirements that need to be met for the ITU filing
procedures), a different satellite authorisation process (or sometimes lacking it entirely), and a
different registration process to the UN Register of Objects Launched into Outer Space (usually
dealt with by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs). For instance, in the French system the National
Frequency Agency (ANFR) manages satellite filings and fulfils all ITU procedures, while the Ministry
in charge of space, notably the Ministry of Economy, provides launch authorisations. In the UK, the
Office of Communications (Ofcom) is responsible for spectrum management and filings to the ITU,
148
ITU. 2020. “Spectrum Management”. Digital Regulation Platform (Link): 4.

while the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) grants launch authorisations to satellite operators. The
diversification in approaches results in a barrier for smaller operators, struggling to interface with
the relevant point of contact for the different procedures. Germany is one of the few cases with a
centralised approach where the Federal Network Agency for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications,
Post and Railways (BNetzA), which is responsible for the assignment and transfer of frequency (and
orbit) usage rights from the German government to the operators, consequently being the single
interface for satellite operators. Recognising the value of a centralised mechanism, the practice of
operators is sometimes oriented towards simply circumventing their national regulators and ending
up filing with BNetzA.
Moreover, while some countries have a single regulator for private and public spectrum, other
countries split such a responsibility between two or more agencies. In the U.S case, spectrum is
allocated either by the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) for
federal use, or by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for commercial and non-federal
use. In France, ANFR manages satellite filings and fulfils all the ITU procedures. Similarly, in the
United Kingdom, Ofcom is the unitary regulator responsible for government and private spectrum.
When more than one national body is entrusted with spectrum management tasks, a coordination
between all the entities involved is deemed necessary and the decision process (contemplating the
participation of private organisations) is defined.
The regulatory framework is usually based on a radiocommunication law complemented by

several regulations and procedures adopted by national spectrum authorities with the aim to
regulate the licensing process, define the necessary technical and operational standards, design
the equipment authorisation procedures, and channel plans. 149 For instance, in France, spectrum is
subject to the French Post and Electronic Communications Code. In 2021, Ordinance No. 2021-650
transposed Directive (EU) 2018/1972, altering the French regime. In the United Kingdom, Section 22
of the Communications Act 2003 is complemented with the Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006). In
Germany, procedures are established under the 2021 Telecommunications Modernisation Act.
A reform of the licencing procedure at the national level (including reducing regulatory burdens
and fees) has been initiated in different countries. 150 This is being seen in the currently attempted
reform of the licensing procedures adopted by the FCC. Indeed, in March 2023 the Committee on
Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives, which is also entrusted with
telecommunications matters, approved a number of space-related bills. 151 This includes the
Satellite and Telecommunications Streamlining Act and the Secure Space Act, whose drafts had
already been released in February with the aim to accelerate and increase the security aspects of
FCC’s licensing procedures, while also introducing safety and sustainability requirements. This
especially is a direct consequence of the rising number of non-GSO applications. 152 Nevertheless,
in July the bill was rejected by the House of Representatives because of concerns regarding the
authority that it would have given to the FCC to regulate space safety and space traffic
management. 153 Similarly, in early-2022 the FCC and NTIA launched a Spectrum Coordination
Initiative to improve coordination within the U.S government on spectrum management and related
policy issues. 154 This was then followed by an update to the Memorandum of Understanding
149
ITU. 2020. “Spectrum Management”. Digital Regulation Platform (Link): 6.
150
M. Young & A. Thadani. 2022. “Low Orbit, High Stakes”. CSIS Aerospace Security Program (Link).
151
Energy & Commerce Committee. n.d. “Subcommittees”. Energy & Commerce Chair Rodgers (Link).
152
J. Rainbow. 2022. “Bipartisan legislation seeks to reform FCC satellite licensing rules”. SpaceNews (Link).
J. Rainbow. 2023. “House subcommittee advances five satellite-related bill”. SpaceNews (Link).
153
J. Foust. 2023. “House rejects satellite spectrum licensing bill because of space safety provisions”. SpaceNews (Link)
154
FCC. 2022. “FCC, NTIA Establish Spectrum Coordination Initiative”. Federal Communications Commission (Link).

between the parties. 155 In addition, in September 2023, FCC adopted new rules to expedite and
facilitate its processing of space and earth station applications.156
European Regulatory Framework for Spectrum Management
When focusing on the European framework for spectrum management, several entities contribute
to shaping policy and regulatory means on top of the national prerogatives. The common European
policy position to ITU is formulated by a cooperative body, called the European Conference of
Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT).
CEPT Member States
Albania ESA Member States

Andorra EU Member States
Azerbaijan
Norway Austria Ireland ESA Cooperating States
Bosnia and
Switzerland Belgium Italy
Herzegovina Bulgaria
The United Czech Luxembourg
Georgia Cyprus
Kingdom Republic The Netherlands
Iceland Croatia
Denmark Poland
Lichtenstein Malta
Estonia Portugal
Moldova
Finland Romania
Monaco ESA Associate Members
France Spain
Montenegro
Germany Sweden
Republic of North Latvia
Greece
Macedonia Lithuania
Hungary
San Marino Slovenia
Serbia Slovak
Türkiye Republic
Ukraine
Vatican
Figure 18: Country membership in relevant European frameworks (Credit: ESPI)

Its Electronic Communications Committee (ECC) produces non-binding Decisions,
Recommendations and Reports through a consensus decision-making process among its 46
members. The work of the ECC is supported by the Conference Preparatory Group (CPG), in charge of
preparing the European Common Proposals for the WRC, as well as conducting studies on relevant
matters. 157 The CEPT also supported the creation of the European Telecommunications Standards
Institute (ETSI) and maintains strong links through a Memorandum of Understanding to produce
harmonised standards. More specifically, ETSI reports on the technical, legal, and economic aspects of
standardisation for new radio systems and ICTs. Finally, the European Commission (COM) plays an
overarching role in the regulatory environment. By designing and managing the framework of regulation
for aspects of spectrum management, COM is supported by several bodies providing advice, notably the
Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG). Overall interaction is maintained through CEPT reports released
under the mandate of COM, whilst ETSI is recognised by COM as the European Standards Organisation
(See Annex B). Generally, COM works with Member States to develop EU-wide spectrum policies,
harmonise usage, and enhance the availability of spectrum information.
The fundamental 2002 Radio Spectrum Decision refers to the provision of satellite-based
communication services with intrinsic geographical coverage beyond the borders of a single
Member State as one of the key reasons for requiring a coordination of radio spectrum use at the
European level, in addition to an adequate representation of the EU at ITU and its WRC. 158
155
FCC. 2022. “MOU Between the FCC and NTIA on Spectrum Coordination”. FCC (Link).
156
FCC. 2023. “Report & Order & Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 23-73).” FCC (Link).
157
ECC. 2023. “Status of CEPT Preparation for WRC-23/RA-23”. ECC CEPT (Link).
158
EP and Council. 2022. “Decision No 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council”. (Link).

uropean Conference of
lectronic
ostal and Conference
Communications
Telecommunications Preparatory Group
Committee CC
dministrations C T
uropean Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG)

uropean
Telecommunications
Commission tandards Institute T I
Body of European Regulators for Electronic
Communications (BEREC)
upporting bodies Radio Spectrum Committee
Memorandum of Telecommunications Conformity Assessment

Understanding and Market (TCAM)
Administrative Cooperation Group (ADCO RED)
Figure 19: European Ecosystem for Spectrum Management

Harmonisation is achieved with a threefold system:
● The RED Directive establishes a regulatory framework for placing radio equipment on the
market, with particular attention to the efficient use of the radio spectrum. Building on this, the
Commission, supported by the Telecommunication Conformity Assessment and Market (TCAM),
formulated an Implementing Decision (M/536) for the request to ETSI and CENELEC (another
standardisation body recognised by the EU) to develop harmonised standards. The
harmonisation mechanism is based on the fact that compliance with these standards creates a
presumption of conformity with the requirements set by the RED Directive.
● The EECC has among its objectives the “development of common rules and predictable regulations for
the effective, efficient and coordinated use of radio spectrum”, thus entrusting member states with the
responsibility to cooperate in the strategic planning and coordination of radio spectrum through the
RSPG. Moreover, member states are requested to provide predictable regulation for radio spectrum
licensing for at least 20 years to foster investments, particularly in the 5G connectivity. 159
● The 2002 Radio Spectrum Decision (676/2002/EC), with its Article 4(3), is used as the legal
basis for the adoption of several implementation decision for the harmonisation of specific
bands.160 The technical reports released by the CEPT in response to the mandates issued by
COM contribute to the preparation of such Implementing Decisions. 161
While the positions for WRC on European level are taken by CEPT in the so-called CPG under the
CEPT/ECC with the aim is to have an ECPs (European common proposals) on all the AI of the WRC-23;
the role played by COM through its harmonisation activity also has an impact on the preparation of the
ITU WRC. Indeed, despite the fact that the EU lacks voting rights in ITU, thus relying on its Member
States to achieve its policy objectives, the EU participates the Conference as a sector member, without
voting rights but with the possibility to participate in the study period.162 To this extent, the EU position is
established by a Decision of the Council following the COM Proposal, on a subset of the WRC AI. In
particular, EU-positions are only taken on AI in cases where EU treaty aspects are affected, such as
Single Market issues, ECS bands (Mobile bands and RLAN), and cases of coordination which fall under
the EECC (Art. 4 and 28). All EU positions are said to be consistent with the ECP developed within CEPT.163
159
COM. 2018. “European Electronic Communications Code”. EUR-Lex (Link).
160
In February 2022, COM adopted two implementing decisions for the use of radio spectrum by short-range devices
within 874-876 and 915-921 MHz frequency bands, and on the harmonisation of the 900 MHz and 1800 MHz frequency
bands, for their use for 5G applications (Implementing Decisions (EU) 2022/172 and 173 respectively). EU. 2022.
“Commission implementing decision (EU) 2022/173”. Official Journal of the European Union (Link).
161
COM. “Harmonising spectrum for enhanced connectivity”. COM (Link).
162
ITU. n.d. “Sector Members”. ITU (Link).
163
COM. 2019. “EU at the WRC-19”. European Parliament (Link).

In preparation for the WRC-23, COM submitted a proposal to the Council in May 2023, which was
formally adopted in September 2023 as the EU joint-position to the WRC. 164 Whilst COM has
declined to comment on the details ahead of the WRC, the position will be largely focused on global
frequency allocation from 2030 onwards. There is speculation that the UHF band, which is currently
allocated to broadcast use, will see mobile services added on a secondary level. This has resulted
in strong interest from mobile network operators on their ability to acquire usage rights, especially
as these 470-694 MHz frequencies will allow for widespread coverage.165The discussion is ongoing,
with high probability that the outcome will be in line with the RSPG opinion from December 2022.166
As aforementioned, Members States in Europe have different policy and regulatory frameworks.
This fragmentation is particularly problematic when compared to non-European policy approaches,
like FCC. The latter could be regarded as indeed more “agile” and “flexible” while the first could be
considered “rigid” and “conservative” under different perspectives. Despite drawing from the COM
TFA, EU countries’ TAFs and regulations have differences that impair operating across EU countries
for what concerns Space (and in particular SOS, EESS, SRS services). S-band and X-band, the
backbone of EESS satellites, are wholly available in some countries, available only for
Military/Governmental operators in others, and available only for certain segments in others. These
divergences must be addressed if spectrum sharing is the goal.
Moreover, the need for innovative approaches and increasing spectrum sharing is currently
driven by the advent of 5G and the consequent demand for spectrum.167 In this context, while the
U.S (for instance with the CBRS) and some parts of Asia have made progress, Europe faces
challenges in addressing access to spectrum due to structural issues involving a lack of
enforcement powers compared to other institutions abroad, multiple countries with a plethora of
local interests, and the presence of different regulatory regimes. 168 With this premise, RSPG
published a Report on Spectrum Sharing in February 2021, followed by a subsequent Opinion
published in June, with the aim of facilitating consensus on a European framework for sharing
spectrum bands.169 However, the RSPG Report lacked any "space" related practical sharing pilots.
In 2023 a similar direction was identified at the national level, with the UK government releasing its
policy paper on spectrum.170 This made explicit reference to engaging with Ofcom UK (the national
body responsible for spectrum management) on spectrum sharing arrangements, as well as linking
spectrum’s key role to the nation’s space sector ambitions.
In addition to the incentive-based spectrum management applied in the case of the relocation of the C
band in the U.S (See Thematic Box in Chapter 3), two mechanisms are worth mentioning. First, the (not so
successful) creation of spectrum secondary markets since the 2000s, with the FCC introducing a system
of spectrum rights transactions without requiring an assignment of the license to the new user.171 Second,
use it or lose it conditions for 5G licenses, following a principle already implemented in Europe for mobile
spectrum auctions and by ITU for non-GSO FSS satellite networks.172 Similar approaches are in place in
European countries, such as Austria.173
164
European Parliament. 2023. “Reply to Parliamentary Question E-001811/2023(ASW)”. European Parliament (Link).
165
J. Krieger. 2023. “EU opts to keep UHF band for broadcast at WRC-23, but adds mobile”. Broadband TV News (Link).
166
COM, RSPG. 2022. “Opinion on the ITU-R World Radiocommunication Conference 2023”. RSPG (Link).
167
168
J. Walko. 2021. “Europe Struggling to Share Spectrum”. EE Times (Link).
169
COM. n.d. “Promoting the shared use of Europe’s radio spectrum”. COM (Link).
170
Dept. For Science, Innovation & Technology. 2023. “Spectrum statement”. UK GOV (Link).
171
J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. pp. 146-149.
172
K. Bode. “Do we need use it or lose it spectrum rules?”. DSL Reports (Link). See also J. Manner. 2022. Spectrum Wars: the
Rise of 5G and Beyond. Boston: Artech House. p. 148.
173
Further details on the case study of Austria can be found in RIS. 2021. “TKG 2021 Federal Act”. GV.AT (Link).

Finally, a crucial economic driver for efficient spectrum regulation is fostering emerging technologies and
services which spur competition and innovation in the satellite industry. In some cases, spectrum
regulatory frameworks are not revisited with sufficient regularity, potentially creating an environment that
encourages legacy operators to maintain effective monopolies over certain bands.
European Harmonisation of 2 GHz frequency for MSS

In February 2007, COM adopted Decision No 2007/98/EC1, which aimed to promote European
harmonisation of the use of 2 GHz (1980-2025 MHz, 2170-2200 MHz), frequency bands by systems
providing Mobile-Satellite Services (MSS). This was to prevent a fragmented internal market, avoid
harmful interference situations, and utilise MSS spectrum efficiently. What followed was the legal
framework established by Decision No 626/2008/EC in June 2008. This outlined the allocation
procedure at the EU level for MSS operators. 174 It also defined common obligations of the selected
operators to which the rights of use were subject, namely:
• Selected operators shall use the assigned MSS spectrum.
• Six to nine milestones (set out in the Decision) are met within 24 months of selection.
• Operators shall honour any commitments given in their application.
• Annual reports will be provided by the operators to the competent authorities of all MS.
• Any necessary rights of use and authorisations shall be granted for a duration of 18 years.
Following the beauty contest procedure, MSS spectrum was allocated to two “ an-European” operators
to achieve an EU-harmonised frequency band of 2 GHz. Inmarsat (acquired by Viasat in May 2023) and
Solaris (now EchoStar) were granted licences until mid-2027, after being assessed on both their technical
and commercial abilities, as well as the technical and commercial quality of the MSS offered. 175 The
operators also had to obtain authorisation at the national level for the use of complementary ground
components. The purpose of authorisation Decision No 2009/449/EC was to create an internal market
open to competition, whilst reducing digital inequalities through improved coverage in less-developed
areas of the EU.176 While the “pan- uropean” approach arguably prevented other MSS operators from
entering the market for 15+ years, concerns have emerged that the allocated MSS spectrum remained
underutilised until recently and could have been used more efficiently.177
In November 2022, the RSPG, under the direction of COM, initiated its review and reconsideration of
the EU regulatory framework on MSS. This was in part due to the upcoming expiry of licenses in
2027, but also due to the necessity to maximise the efficient use MSS spectrum. 178 Recent
technological and market developments require a renewed assessment of the licensing allocation.
Actors has been invited to assess different possible scenarios for the use of the 2 GHz MSS
frequency band beyond 2027 and to provide recommendations as to the most appropriate way
forward taking into consideration the efficient and effective use of the 2 GHz MSS frequency band
for the period after 2027.
In line with upcoming EU digital and green policies (e.g., the Digital Decade Policy Programme 2030
and European Digital Single Market strategy), COM will produce a draft opinion for public
consultation in October 2023, with a final opinion to be published in February 2024.
174
ANACOM. 2016. “Issue of right of use of frequencies to Echostar”. ANACOM (Link).
175
Inmarsat. 2023. “Viasat completes acquisition of Inmardat.” Inmarsat (Link).
176
COM. 2020. “Selection and authorisation of mobile satellite services (MSS)”. EUR-Lex (Link).
177
Friedner et al. 2017. “Study on Spectrum Assignment in the European Union”. COM (Link). p. 58.
178
RSPG. 2022. “Request for an Opinion on the Future of the EU-level regulator framework”. COM.(Link).

7 A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE ON SPECTRUM POLICY

There is a significant history of cooperation between European regulators regarding spectrum. This
should be further leveraged and evolved to attain an even better level of harmonisation in the future,
and a more efficient use of spectrum bands to ensure European competitiveness. In this context,
four policy perspectives have been considered for the medium to long-term evolution of the
European spectrum framework in the space domain:
Harmonising
Synergising Strengthening ties
Developing a spectrum
knowledge and between spectrum
European approach management
expertise within and space
to spectrum sharing systems at the
Europe authorities
European Level
Figure 20: ESPI Perspectives on European Spectrum Policy
As a result of the four policy dimensions outlined above, this study proposes four recommendations
for further consideration in the development of space spectrum policy by European policymakers.
7.1 Developing a European approach to spectrum sharing

A reflection on how stakeholders can work together to develop a European approach to spectrum
sharing for space radiocommunication services should be strengthen. This includes exploring how
emerging technologies can be leveraged to maximise the efficiency of key spectrum bands and
respond to the needs of European stakeholders. Questions to be addressed include how to balance
spectrum sharing with exclusive licences and how to solve the potential conflict between spectrum
sharing approaches and auctions of spectrum bands.179 . A solution to balancing exclusive licensing
with auctioning, is that of the private management rights regime. This allows for a re-selling of
spectrum in underutilised areas and permits spectrum re-use, although actions should be
considered to monitor its utilisation to prevent spectrum hoarding and monopolistic tendencies.
Notwithstanding the benefit to encourage spectrum sharing practices through regulatory framing,
regulators considering employing such rules should also consider the operational implementation
of spectrum sharing, and ensure the availability and feasibility of technical and resourcing
capabilities to enforce these sharing rules. This would potentially serve to alleviate burdens on the
licensees as a whole. Ultimately, the development of an adaptive spectrum sharing roadmap
could be considered.
Recommendation One: To develop a spectrum sharing roadmap for Europe
7.2 Synergising knowledge and expertise within Europe

An environment that facilitates effective knowledge-transfer and foster expertise is vital. The
creation of a centralised information point (or “one-stop shop”) to help navigate access to spectrum,
mission authorisation, space object registration, and earth stations licensing across EU member
states could pave the way for further coordination.
179
T. Ramachandran. 2022. “No auctioning satellite spectrum”. Financial Express (Link).

EU states could pool resources to support ITU filings for other Member States that themselves
lack adequate funds or expertise to do so. Additionally, expertise to support ITU filings could be
synergised under an existing body in the European regulatory landscape, such as the ECC or CEPT.
Moreover, EU DG DEFIS, EU DG CONNECT, as well as ESA could play a role, providing advisory
and legal services to guide (small) operators and help them navigate their national frameworks.
Furthermore, workshops for national regulators, space agencies, and industry could provide an
opportunity to share best practices and bring them closer to the needs of the operators and user
segments.
This would address the challenge for European regulators who are often not aware of the space
sector. Arguably, they are neither familiar with ITU software and processes, nor with the UN Register
of Space Objects and responsibilities coming from International Space Law. Thus, an environment
to expand and facilitate expertise would be beneficial at both the regional and international level.
Recommendation Two: To create a European one-stop information point for spectrum & space
7.3 Strengthening ties between spectrum and space authorities

When focusing on the use of spectrum for satellite networks, space stakeholders would benefit
from a closer exchange and coordination between national spectrum managers and authority
dealing with space operations (e.g., for granting the launch operator licence or registering the
space objects). Indeed, this institutional set up is tackled at the national level with several different
models, from cooperative schemes of both spectrum and space organisations in the licensing
procedures, to diversified cooperation mechanisms significantly influenced by the single
administration’s structure.180
One proposed solution could go beyond the coordination of space agencies and space regulators
with their national telecommunications regulators, reaching a whole-of-government approach – a
single coordinated interface at the national level- to licensing procedures and increasing their
role in the meetings of ITU. A source of inspiration could be the Space Frequency Coordination
Group (SFCG), a voluntary informal technical group of frequency managers gathering
representatives from major space agencies and providing a forum for multilateral discussions on
spectrum matters of mutual interest. 181 However, commercial users that wish to utilise these
frequencies may still question the transparency of this process, which highlights the complexity of
ensuring cohesion between private and public interests.
Recommendation Three: To establish a single national coordinated interface to licensing
7.4 Harmonising spectrum management systems in Europe

Consensus-building remains at the forefront of the European approach to spectrum management
and standardisation. However, the multitude of actors within the regulatory landscape, with multiple
bodies providing for different spectrum authorisation process and different specific requirements
180
ESPI. 2023. “Summary Report: Regulator to Regulator Dialogue”. ESPI (Link).
181
SFCG. n.d. “Space Frequency Coordination Group (SFCG)”. SFCG (Link).

that need to be met for ITU filing procedures is the result of a fragmented ecosystem, and represent
a challenge for the space industry.
A change of spectrum regulation is deemed necessary, notably towards regional harmonisation

of a fragmented landscape at a national level. This will be of high economic value as operators
avoid the burden of multiple requirements procedures in all Member States and it avoids
interference along country boundaries. A step towards such a pan-European system is represented
by a light harmonisation of licensing procedures (e.g., common format for applications or the
harmonisation of the requirements for a filing). Such an evolution would not be in contrast with
member states retaining sovereignty and economic benefit from spectrum licensed on their
territory. In addition, the proposal for a coordinated pan-European licensing process could
improve fragmentation, providing a more harmonised system, reducing access barriers to space
and spectrum for new entrants to the market, and enhancing competitiveness.182
Recommendation Four: To harmonise licensing procedures at the European Level
ESPI´s Role and actions in Space Spectrum Policy
With this Report, ESPI aims to initiate a process to:
• provide an overview of the spectrum management regime, including the policy, regulatory
and commercial implications for space, and
• foster an active forum for the analysis and discussion on spectrum management policy,
facilitating the dialogue between the spectrum and space community.
In line with the ESPI Vision 2040,183 ESPI’s research agenda includes under the umbrella of “space
as an asset”, a transversal research theme addressing infrastructure and capabilities required for
access to space, launchers, spaceports, and ground infrastructure. It includes the orbits and
spectrum required by space missions as a pre-requisite to fulfil their purpose.
Short term implementation items to the Report include the organization of an Online Launch
Event to further discuss the outcome of WRC-23 and beyond, as well as additional open and close-
door events.
In addition, leveraging this Report as a foundation for further research activities, ESPI will continue
to support stakeholders with strategic analysis linked with a variety of key topics related to spectrum
policy, including consideration for the enhancement of the space & spectrum governance, cislunar
spectrum management framework, regional harmonisation licensing procedures, and market
access & competitiveness policy assessments. A vision for a Space Law/Space mission
authorisation mechanism and an analysis regarding the EU´s mandate for such a development
should be further considered.
ESPI welcomes proposals and contributions from policymakers and industrial stakeholders, as
well as the broader space and spectrum community. External stakeholders are kindly invited to
contact the Lead author of this Report.
182
European Parliament. 2007. “Study on A Common European Spectrum Policy”. EU (Link): 24. See also COM. 2016. “Study
on Spectrum Assignment in the European Union”. COM (Link): 61, 62. Coordinated license exemptions for certain classes of
VSATs have been present in Finland, Sweden, and Denmark since 2001, showing unified regulatory standards
implemented through national spectrum management: CEPT. 2001. “License Fees in the CEPT”. CEPT (Link).
183
ESPI, “ESPI2040: Space for Prosperity, Peace and Future Generations” (Link)

AUTHORS
Sara Dalledonne is a Research Fellow with Lead on Regulatory Affairs at the European Space
Policy Institute (ESPI). She is the Space Law expert reference at the University of Bologna in Italy,
and a Member of the Support Committee for the Aviation & Space Journal (ASJ). Prior to joining
ESPI, she worked as Research Assistant at the Institute of Air and Space Law at McGill University.
She holds an L.L.M. in Air and Space Law from the McGill University, an L.L.M. in International
Trade Law from ITCILO (University of Turin) and a 5-year Law degree from University of Bologna.
She also successfully completed an ITU Training Course in Satellite Coordination Procedures and
Filings.
Gabriele Redigonda is a Research Fellow at the European Space Policy Institute (ESPI). He has
first joined ESPI as Research Fellow seconded by the Italian Space Agency (ASI) and more
recently as full time ESPI Research Fellow. In parallel, he holds the position of PhD Candidate in
International and European Union Law at the University of Florence. He has an Integrated
Master´s degree in Law and a Bachelor´s degree in Physics and Astrophysics from the University
of Florence, Italy, and has attended a Postgraduate Master Course in Space Institutions and
Policy from SIOI, Rome.
Tales Gaspar has been a Global Fellow at ESPI since May 2023. He is Programme Manager UK
SPF and Satellite at techUK. He is qualified lawyer in Brazil, with experience in law and economics
consultancy in Brazil and the UK. Prior to joining ESPI, he worked at the Economic Regulation
Laboratory (UERJ Reg.) as a Research Assistant. He holds an L.L.M. in Business and Law from
Fundação Getúlio Vargas (FGV Direito-Rio), an MSc in Regulation from the London School of
Economics and Political Science (LSE) and a 5-year Law degree from Rio de Janeiro State
University. He also successfully completed an ITU Training Course in Spectrum Management.
Sophia Djounov joined ESPI as a Research Intern in June 2023. Prior to ESPI, she worked as an
Impact Evaluation trainee within the Impact and Intelligence team at the Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris. She holds an MSc in Policy Analysis
and Politics from Bocconi University in Milan, and a BA in History and International Relations from
the University of Exeter in the UK.
The authors furthermore are grateful to the ESPI Researchers, for the constructive and fruitful
exchanges. In particular, we would like to thank Matija Renčelj (Research Manager); Marco Aliberti
(Associate Manager and Lead on International Engagement); and Mathieu Bataille (Research Fellow
and Lead on Security and Defence).
Finally, the authors would also like to thank ESPI Director, H. Ludwig Moeller, for his guidance and
continuous support to this research.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the experts who agreed to be interviewed for
this report under Chatham House Rules and provided their highly appreciated opinions and
perspectives.
erspectives presented in this report are I’s viewpoints and not necessarily reflect the
opinions of the individuals who served as reviewers or were interviewed as part of this research.
List of Interviewers & Reviewers
Jennifer A. Manner Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, EchoStar
Matteo Cappella Regulatory Affairs Specialist, Leaf Space
Frederico Di Vruno Spectrum Manager, SKAO
Andrew Falle Junior Fellow, Outer Space Institute
Véronique Glaude Senior Radiocommunication Engineer, ITU
Director of Regulatory Affairs and Spectrum

Alexandre Guerin
Management, Eutelsat
Spectrum Management & International Relations, DG

Dominic Hayes
Defence Industry & Space, COM
Simon Molgat Laurin Spacecraft Systems Engineer, Rocket Lab
Ewan Wright Junior Fellow, Outer Space Institute
Director technical, Telecommunications and Postal

Franz Ziegelwanger
Services Department, Ministry of Finance, Austria
The list of Interviewers & Reviewers reflects the diversity of actors involved in spectrum
management. Additional informal interviews were conducted with representatives of the European
Space Agency (ESA), national space agencies and spectrum authorities, as well as additional
representatives of the private sector, NGO, and academia.
The author would also like to thank the Commercial SmallSat Spectrum Management Association
(CSSMA) for the possibility to present the preliminary outcomes of the Report during the 2023
International Meeting, allowing for additional input and feedback from the audience.

ANNEX A: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviations
3GPP 3rd Generation Partnership Project
AI Agenda Item
ANFR French National Frequencies Agency
API Advance Publication Information
APT Asia-Pacific Telecommunity
AR Administrative Regulations
Arcep Electronic Communications, Postal and Print Media Distribution Regulatory Authority
ATU African Telecommunications Union
BEREC Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications
BiU Bring into Use
BNetzA Federal Network Agency for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications, Post and Railways
BR Radiocommunication Bureau
BR IFIC Radiocommunication Bureau’s International Frequency Information Circular
BSS Broadcasting Satellite Service
CBRS Citizen’s Band Radio Service
CEPT European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations
COM European Commission
CPM Conference Preparatory Meeting
CR Coordination procedures
CS Constitution of the International Telecommunication Union,
CV Convention of the International Telecommunication Union,
DBS Direct Broadcast Services
DTH Direct-to-home
EARC Extraordinary Administrative Radio Conference
ECC Electronic Communications Committee
EECC European Electronic Communications Code
EESS Earth Exploration-Satellite Service
EHF Extremely high frequency
ESA European Space Agency
ETSI European Telecommunications Standards Institute
FCC U.S Federal Communications Commission
FCFS First Come, First Served
FSS Fixed-satellite service
GEO Geostationary Equatorial Orbit
GSO Geostationary Orbit
IADC Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee
IALA International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation

ICTs Information and Communication Technologies

IMT International Mobile Telecommunications
IRR International Radio Regulations
ITU International Telecommunication Union
ITU-D ITU Telecommunication Development Sector
ITU-R ITU Radiocommunication sector
ITU-T ITU Telecommunication Standardisation Sector
LEO Low Earth Orbit
MEO Medium Earth Orbit
MSS Mobile Satellite Services
NFC Near Field Communication
non-GSO non-Geostationary
NSMS National Spectrum Management Systems
OTT Over-The-Top
PNT Positioning, Navigation and Timing
PP Plenipotentiary Conference
RA Radiocommunication Assembly
RED Radio Equipment Directive
RFID Radio-Frequency Identification
RoP Rules of Procedure
RR Radio Regulations
RRB Radio Regulations Board
RRC Radio Regulations Committee
RSPG Radio Spectrum Policy Group
RTOs Regional Telecommunication Organisations
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SG ITU-R Study Groups
SHF Super high frequency band
SIRRS Satellite Interference Reporting and Resolution System
TCAM Telecommunications Conformity Assessment and Market Surveillance
TFA Table of Frequency Allocations
TR International Telecommunication Regulations
TT&C Telemetry, Tracking and Command
UAS Universal access and service definition
UHF Ultra-high frequency
UHTS Ultra-High Throughput Satellites
VoD Video on Demand
VHF Very high frequency
VHTS Very High Throughput Satellite
WMO World Meteorological Organisation
WP Working Parties

ANNEX B: INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN REGULATORY

ENVIRONMENT FOR SPECTRUM
The ITU Framework
ITU originally regulated the telegraph before the terrestrial radio services. The Agency first
addressed the question of satellite communications in 1963 in conjunction with the launch into orbit
of the first GSO satellite with commercial use through the Extraordinary Administrative Radio
Conference (EARC-63, also called the Space Conference) to develop the basic administrative and
technical regulations for the operation of space systems and allocate frequency bands for space
radiocommunication purposes.184
This is reflected in the consensus reached in Article 33(2) of the ITU Convention of 1973.
“In using frequency bands for the space radio services Members shall bear in mind that radio
frequencies and the geostationary orbit are limited natural resources, that they must be
used efficiently and economically so that countries or group of countries may have equitable
access to both in conformity with the provisions of the Radio Regulations according to their
needs and the technical facilities at their disposal.”
Moreover, in 1985 and 1988, the World Administrative Radio Conference (WARC) on the use of GSO
and the planning of the space services utilising it convened in Geneva had the task “to reconcile the
principle of guaranteed and equitable access with that of the efficient and economic use of two limited
natural resources: GSO and the radio frequency spectrum.”185
Thus, radio frequencies and any associated orbits, including the GSO orbital positions, are valuable
assets and indispensable resources for satellite communications. As they are limited natural
resources, they must be used equitably, rationally, efficiently, and economically, in conformity
with provisions of the Radio Regulations (RR).
Several ITU Conferences and other relevant international events have led to the current ITU Legal
Framework. The Plenipotentiary Conference (PP) is the supreme body of ITU and generally
convenes every four years to determine the general policies of ITU and adopt the Financial Plan
(Article 8 CS). In the interval between PPs, the Council meets annually to act as the governing body
of ITU, on behalf of the PP. In particular, the Council adopts the agendas for administrative radio
conferences (WRC and RRC).
ITU Plenipotentiary Conference
ITUPP
Supreme organ of the ITU
(CS, Art 7)
Elects the management team of Amends the Constitution and

Determines the general policies Conventions
the ITU, the Council Member
for fulfilling the purposes of the
States and Radio Regulations Adopts the Financial Plan and
ITU
Board (RRB) Members Strategic Plan
Figure 21: ITUPP Competencies (Source: ESPI, ITU)
184
ITU. n.d. ‘Radio Conference’. ITU (Link).
185
ITU. 1985. 'World Administrative Radio Conference on the use of the geostationary-satellite orbit and the planning of the
space services utilizing it (1st session) (Geneva, 1985)'. History Portal of the ITU (Link).

Conferences have led to the adoption of several international treaties, which represent the key legal
framework on which coordination mechanisms are based. They include:
● Constitution of the International Telecommunication Union, (CS)

● Convention of the International Telecommunication Union, (CV)
● Administrative Regulations (AR): International Telecommunication Regulations (TR) and
International Radio Regulations (RR)
Plenipotentiary Conference (PP)
ITU Council
World Conferences on International Telecommunications
ITU-R ITU-T ITU-D

• World Radiocommunication World Telecommunication • World Telecommunication
Conference (WRC) Standardisation Assembly (WTSA) Development Conference
• Regional Radiocommunication (WDTC)
Conference (RRC) • Regional Telecommunication
Development Conference
Radiocommunication Assembly (RA)
Radio Regulations Board (RRB)
Study Groups Study Groups Study Groups

Advisory Groups Advisory Groups Advisory Groups
Director Director
Director
Telecommunication Standardisation Telecommunication Development
Radiocommunication Bureau
Bureau Bureau
General Secretariat (headed by Secretary General)
Figure 22: ITU Organigramme (Article 7 CS) (Source: ITU, ESPI)

ITU has three main areas of activity organised in three Sectors, with each of the three having its own
unique characteristics and activities:
• ITU Radiocommunication sector (ITU-R) oversees the global radio-frequencies spectrum and
satellite orbit management and coordination and develops and updates international
regulations in the use of orbit/spectrum at the WRC and RRC.
• ITU Telecommunication Standardisation Sector (ITU-T) studies technical, operating, and tariff
matters and adopts global standards for international telecommunications (recommendations).
• ITU Telecommunication Development Sector (ITU-D) facilitates and enhances
telecommunications development by offering, organising, and coordinating technical
cooperation and assistance activities in developing countries.
Each of the sector receive the support of two types of memberships: Member States and Sector
Members, in addition to the participation of Associates, and Academia (Article 2 ITU CS).
ITU-R develops adopts the Radio Regulations (RR): they are updated every four years by the ITU
WRCs. RR are a binding international treaty providing a framework for the use of radio-frequency
spectrum and satellite orbit resources through a system of international coordination. Because of
their binding nature, states must domestically apply their provisions, adopting adequate national
legislation, in addition to special bilateral or multilateral arrangements.
Services Regions (Areas of Countries) Stations (Satellites)
Allocation Allotment Assignment
Figure 23: Frequency Distribution

The need for frequency allocation, allotment and assignments activities are pursued at the ITU
World Radiocommunication Conference (WRC) and Regional Radiocommunication Conference
(RRC) level. The WRC may be associated the Radiocommunication Assembly (RA), which shall also
normally be convened every three to four years.
The RA provide the necessary technical bases and respond to all requests for the work of the WRCs.
It deals with and issue, as appropriate, recommendations on questions adopted pursuant to its own
procedures or referred to it by the PP Conference, any other conference, the Council or the Radio
Regulations Board.
Radiocommunication Conference (WRC and RRC)
Radiocommunication Radio Regulation Board

Assembly (RRB)
Conference
Radiocommunication
Study Group (SG) and Preparatory
Advisory Group
Special Commette Meeting (CPM)
Director General
Radiocommunication Bureau (RB)
Informatics,
Space Services Terrestrial Services Study Groups Administration and
Department (SSD) Department (TSD) Department (SGD) Publications
Department (IAP)
Figure 24: ITU-R organigramme (Source: ITU, ESP)
The WRC cycle can be represented as follow:
Figure 25: WRC Cycle (Source: ESPI, ITU)

The WRC (known until 1992 as World Administrative Radio Conferences - WARC) is a treaty-making
conference, which convenes every 3 to 4 years, based on the Agenda recommended by the
previous WRC and approved by Council.
It plays a key role in shaping the technical and regulatory framework for the provision of
radiocommunication services in all countries. Among other tasks, it revises the Radio Regulations
(including Appendices), adopts technical studies and work plans for a 6–10-year cycle, adopts
spectrum allocations, adopts satellite regulatory procedures, adopts allotment Plans of the radio
frequency spectrum, and reviews Rules of Procedures (RoP) and appeals from the Radio
Regulations Board (RRB).186
The preparations for the conference include discussions at the level of ITU-R Study groups, the
Conference Preparatory Meeting, as well as ITU inter-regional workshops, and within regional
groups. Industry contributes to the Conference Preparatory Meeting (CPM) Report and participates
in the WRC either as being part of Member State formal delegations or as an observer, whereby in
the latter role industry may only submit information documents and provide advice but cannot
submit proposals or participate in debates.
Proposals to WRCs are usually co-ordinated by countries through the relevant ITU-R Regional
Groups:
Global • CPM sessions and inter-regional workshops
• Regional/multi-country groups consolidate proposals

• Asia-Pacific Telecommunity (APT)
• Arab Spectrum Management Group (ASMPG)
Regional • African Telecommunications Union (ATU)
• European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT)
• Inter-American Telecommunication Commission (CITEL)
• Regional Commonwealth in the Field of Communications (RCC)
National • Preparations within each ITU Member State Administration
Figure 26: Preparation process for the WRC at the regional level (Source: ESPI, ITU)
The European Regulatory Environment for Spectrum

When focusing on the European level, several entities contribute to shaping policy and regulatory
means on top of the national prerogatives. Firstly, the European Conference of Postal and
Telecommunications Administrations (CEPT), the European regional body recognised by ITU, is
similar to other organisations such as the Asia-Pacific Telecommunity (APT) or the African
Telecommunications Union (ATU) for their respective regions. 187 The CEPT is a cooperative body
that plays a crucial role in contributing to the harmonisation of spectrum use in Europe, especially
by formulating common positions to ITU. Its Electronic Communications Committee (ECC) produces
non-binding Decisions, Recommendations and Reports through a consensus decision-making
process among its 46 members.
186
The ITU Radiocommunication Bureau acts as the executive arm of the RRB.
187
ETSI. 2016. ‘The European regulatory environment for radio equipment and spectrum’. ETSI (Link).

The work of the ECC is supported by the Conference Preparatory Group, in charge of preparing the
European Common Proposals for the WRC, as well as conducting studies on relevant matters. 188
In addition, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) was created in 1988
under the auspices of CEPT to take responsibility for standardisation activities. Today, the Institute
counts more than 750 members and is responsible for the release of globally applicable standards
for ICTs, in parallel to technical reports on the technical, legal and economic aspects of new radio
systems under standardisation. To maintain their strong links and ensure the consistency of ECC
decisions with ETSI harmonised standards, the parties have signed a Memorandum of
Understanding.189
Finally, the European Commission has positioned itself in the overall picture by developing a
specific spectrum management policy and designing a framework for the regulation of some
aspects of spectrum management. In particular, the Radio Spectrum Policy Programme Decision
No. 243/2012/EU, which outlines the policy objectives of the EU on the matter: favouring innovation
and investments trough flexible and efficient spectrum use, avoiding harmful interference,
increasing the use of wireless data, promoting the secondary market (transfer and leasing) of
spectrum rights, and contributing to the digital agenda for Europe. Regarding the regulatory aspects,
a first complete set of Directives to regulate the telecom sector was adopted in 2002 (Telecom
Package and Radio Spectrum Decision No. 676/2002/EC). The framework has undergone several
reforms. The current framework builds on the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC),
established in 2018 (Directive (EU) 2018/ 1972, repealing the previous 2002 Directives), and the
Radio Equipment Directive (2014/53/EU - RED, repealing the previous R&TTE Directive No.
1999/5/EC). In particular, the EECC under Article 12 ensures the freedom to provide electronic
communications networks and services based on a “general authorisation” regime, restating the
freedom to provide services guaranteed by Article 56 of the TFEU. 190 Moreover, the EECC provides
conditions that can be attached to authorisations, such as fees, interoperability, and accessibility in
addition to allowing for the traceability and assignability of spectrum licenses, with member states
facilitating transfers and leases of individual rights of use. 191 Satellite networks are explicitly included
by the EECC as part of the electronic communications networks, in parallel to fixed and mobile
networks, electricity cable systems, networks used for radio and television broadcasting and cable
television networks.192 Moreover, when describing the procedure for limiting the number of rights
of use to be granted for radio spectrum (Art. 53), the EECC specifies that these limits “shall be
without prejudice to any applicable international agreements relating to the use of radio spectrum
(notably the ITU RR) and satellite coordination.”
The policy and regulatory activity of the Commission is then supported by several bodies:
● The Radio Spectrum Policy Group (RSPG), under DG CNECT, is an advisory body to the
Commission and other EU institutions in parallel also promoting effective and efficient
management of electronic communications networks and services, including non-EU countries'
participation (Decision No. 2002/622/EC). 193 The RSPG’s remit has been significantly expanded
by the EECC Directive in 2018 and was finally confirmed in 2019 (Decision No. 219/4147,
repealing the 2002 Decision).194
188
ECC. 2023. ‘Status of CEPT Preparation for WRC-23 / RA-23’. ECC CEPT (Link).
189
ETSI. 2016. ‘The European regulatory environment for radio equipment and spectrum’. ETSI (Link).
190
See Art. 2 (22) EECC for the definition of general authorisation in Directive (EU) 2018/1972. EUR-Lex (Link).
191
A. Baudequin, et al. 2022. ‘In brief: telecoms regulation in European Union’. Lexology (Link).
192
See Article 2 (1), Definitions in ‘Directive (EU) 2018/1972 of 11 December 2018’. EUR-Lex (Link).
193
COM. 2023. ‘Radio Spectrum Policy Group. RSPG23-016 FINAL’, COM (Link).
194
COM. 2023. ‘Radio Spectrum Policy Group (E01384)’. COM (Link).

● The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) is an expert body
to promote an effective telecom internal market and ensures the implementation of the EU
regulatory framework for telecommunications, assisting and advising both EU institutions and
national regulatory authorities (EC 1211/2009 as part of the Telecom Reform Package). It is
complemented by the BEREC Office, an EU agency established by the EECC in 2018.195
● The Radio Spectrum Committee is a group of experts from EU member states, chaired by the
Commission, predominantly conducting comitology activities (Directive No. 676/2002/EC). 196
● The Telecommunications Conformity Assessment and Market Surveillance (TCAM), under
DG GROW, assists the Commission in the preparation of the standardisation requests for the
development of harmonised standards.
● The Administrative Cooperation Group (ADCO RED) gathers the Member States’ surveillance
authorities in charge of ensuring that the equipment placed on the market is compliant with the
technical conditions for spectrum use set by the RED Directive.
COM interacts significantly with both the CEPT ECC and ETSI. ETSI is recognised by the
Commission as the European Standards Organisation (Regulation No. 1025/2012).197 Also, while EU
Decisions prevail on the ECC Decision, especially for the non-binding nature of these last ones,
CEPT releases its Reports upon mandate issued by the Commission (Directive the 676/2002, Art.
4(2)).198
195
BEREC. n.d. ‘Mission’. BEREC (Link).
196
COM. n.d. ‘The Radio Spectrum Committee’. COM (Link). See also COM. n.d. ‘Comitology’. COM (Link).
197
ETSI. 2016. ‘European regulatory environment for radio equipment & spectrum. An introduction. Version 2. 1(Link).
198
COM. n.d. ‘Radio Spectrum CEPT Mandates’. COM (Link).

ANNEX C: STUDY GROUPS AND AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE WRC-23

ITU-R Study Groups
The ITU-R Study Groups develop the technical bases for decisions taken at the WRCs and develop global standards (Recommendations), Reports and
Handbooks on radiocommunication matters. An overview of the ITU Study Group is presented below. 199
Spectrum management principles and techniques, general principles of sharing, spectrum monitoring, long-term strategies for
SG1 - Spectrum management spectrum utilisation, economic approaches to national spectrum management, automated techniques and assistance to
developing countries in cooperation with the Telecommunication Development Sector.
WP 1A - Spectrum engineering Spectrum engineering techniques, including unwanted emissions, frequency tolerance, technical aspects of sharing, spectrum
techniques engineering, computer programs, technical definitions, Earth-station coordination areas and technical spectrum efficiency.
Spectrum management fundamentals, including economic strategies, spectrum management methodology, national spectrum
WP 1B - Spectrum management
management organisation, national and international regulatory framework, alternative approaches, flexible allocations and long-
methodologies and economic strategies
term strategies for planning.
Spectrum monitoring, including the development of techniques for observing the use of the spectrum, measurements
WP 1C - Spectrum monitoring
techniques, inspection of radio stations, identification of emissions and location of interference sources.
Propagation of radio waves in ionised and non-ionised media and the characteristics of radio noise, for the purpose of improving
SG3 - Radiowave propagation
radiocommunication systems.
Provides information and develops models describing the fundamental principles and mechanisms of radiowave propagation in
non-ionised media. Such material is used as the basis of propagation prediction methods developed by the other Working Parties.
WP 3J - Propagation fundamentals
Recognising the natural variability of the propagation medium, WP 3J prepares texts describing the statistical laws relevant to
propagation behaviour and the means of expressing the temporal and spatial variability of propagation data
199
ITU. n.d. ‘Radiocommunication Study Groups’. ITU (Link).

Responsible for developing prediction methods for terrestrial point-to-area propagation paths. In the main, these are associated
WP 3K - Point-to-area propagation with terrestrial broadcasting and mobile services, short-range indoor and outdoor communication systems (e.g., radio local area
networks, RLAN), and with point-to-multipoint wireless access systems.
Studies all aspects of radiowave propagation in and through the ionosphere. Recommendations are maintained describing, in
WP 3L - Ionospheric propagation and mathematical terms, a reference model of ionospheric characteristics and maximum usable frequencies associated with the
radio noise various ionospheric layers. Short-term and long-term ionospheric forecasting, with guidance on the use of ionospheric indices, is
addressed.
Addresses radiowave propagation over point-to-point terrestrial paths and Earth-space paths, both for wanted and unwanted
signals. For terrestrial paths, prediction methods are developed for both line-of-sight and over-the-horizon links, taking into
WP 3M - Point-to-point and Earth-space
account the possible mechanisms that can give rise to fading and distortion of the wanted signal. The resulting predictions,
propagation
generally expressed in terms of a statistical distribution of propagation loss or outage, provide vital information for terrestrial link
planning in the fixed service (FS).
Systems and networks for the fixed-satellite service, mobile-satellite service, broadcasting-satellite service and
SG4 - Satellite services
radiodetermination-satellite service.
WP 4A - Efficient orbit/spectrum Orbit/spectrum efficiency, interference and coordination and related aspects for FSS and BSS. Its work has significant relevance
utilisation for the FSS and BSS to the preparatory work for World Radiocommunication Conferences
WP 4B - Systems, air interfaces,

Carries out studies on performance, availability, air interfaces and earth-station equipment of satellite systems in the FSS, BSS and
performance and availability objectives
MSS. This group has paid particular attention to the studies of Internet Protocol (IP)-related system aspects and performance and
for FSS, BSS and MSS, including IP-
has developed new and revised Recommendations and Reports on IP over satellite to meet the growing need for satellite links to
based applications and satellite news
carry IP traffic. This group has close cooperation with the ITU Telecommunication Standardisation Sector.
gathering (SNG)
Studies conducted within Working Party 4C are aiming at a more efficient use of the orbit/spectrum resources by MSS and RDSS
WP 4C – Efficient orbit/spectrum
systems. This includes analysing various interference situations between such systems but also with systems operating in other
utilisation for the mobile-satellite service
radiocommunication services, developing coordination methodologies, describing the potential use of MSS and RDSS systems for
(MSS) and the radiodetermination-
specific purposes like emergency situations, maritime or aeronautical telecommunications, time distribution, etc.
satellite service (RDSS)*
SG5 - Terrestrial services Systems and networks for fixed, mobile, radiodetermination, amateur and amateur-satellite services.
WP 5A - Land mobile service excluding

Responsible for studies related to the land mobile service, excluding IMT and including wireless access in the fixed service, and is
IMT; amateur and amateur-satellite
also responsible for studies related to the amateur and amateur-satellite services.
service

WP 5B - Maritime mobile service

Responsible for studies related to the maritime mobile service, including the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System
including the Global Maritime Distress
(GMDSS), the aeronautical mobile service and the radiodetermination service, including both radiolocation and radionavigation
and Safety System (GMDSS); the
services. It studies communication systems for the maritime mobile and aeronautical mobile services and radar and radiolocation
aeronautical mobile service and the
systems for the radiodetermination service.
radiodetermination service
Responsible for studies related to fixed wireless systems and HF systems in the fixed and land mobile services. It studies
WP 5C - Fixed wireless systems; HF
performance and availability objectives, interference criteria, RF channel/block arrangements, system characteristics and sharing
systems in the fixed and land mobile
feasibility. (Note that for fixed wireless access (FWA) systems, work related to public access systems for potentially large
services
deployment coverage is carried out in WP 5A.)
Responsible for the overall radio system aspects of the terrestrial component of International Mobile Telecommunications (IMT)
WP 5D - IMT Systems
systems, comprising the current IMT-2000, IMT-Advanced and IMT-2020 as well as IMT for 2030 and beyond.
Radiocommunication broadcasting, including vision, sound, multimedia and data services principally intended for delivery to the
SG6 - Broadcasting service
general public.
WP 6A WP 6B WP 6C Current work items
Systems for space operation, space research, Earth exploration and meteorology, including the related use of links in the inter-
satellite service. Systems for remote sensing, including passive and active sensing systems, operating on both ground-based and
SG7 - Science services
space-based platforms. Radio astronomy and radar astronomy. Dissemination, reception and coordination of standard-frequency
and time-signal services, including the application of satellite techniques, on a worldwide basis.
Covers standard frequency and time signal services, both terrestrial and satellite. Its scope includes the dissemination, reception
WP 7A - Time signals and frequency
and exchange of standard frequency and time signals and coordination of these services, including the application of satellite
standard emissions
techniques on a worldwide basis.
Responsible for the transmission and reception of telecommand, tracking and telemetry data for space operation, space research,
WP 7B - Space radiocommunication
Earth exploration-satellite, and meteorological satellite services. It studies communication systems for use with manned and
applications
unmanned spacecraft, communication links between planetary bodies and the use of data relay satellites.
Covers remote sensing applications in the Earth exploration-satellite service (EESS), both active and passive, systems of MetAids
WP 7C - Remote sensing systems
service, as well as space research sensors, including planetary sensors.
Covers the radio astronomy service. Its scope includes radio astronomy and radar astronomy sensors, both Earth-based and
WP 7D - Radio astronomy
space-based, including space very long baseline interferometry (VLBI)

The ITU WRC-23 Agenda Items
The WRC-23 has 10 Agenda Items, with 19 topics under Agenda item 1, 9 topics under Agenda Items 7 and 3 topics under Agenda Items 9. The WRC-23
agenda is contained in Resolution 811 (WRC-19).200 A comprehensive list is provided below.201
Responsible
WRC-23 Chapters of
Working
Agenda Title WRC Resolution the draft
Party & Study
Item CPM Report
Group
On the basis of proposals from administrations, taking account of the results of the WRC-19 and the Report of the
WP 5B (1)
1 CPM, and with due regard to the requirements of existing and future services in the frequency bands under Res.223 (Rev.WRC-19) Chapter 1
WP 5D (1)
consideration, to consider and take appropriate action in respect of the following items:
to consider, based on the results of the ITU R studies, possible measures to address, in the frequency band 4 800-4
990 MHz, protection of stations of the aeronautical and maritime mobile services located in international airspace
1.1 Res.245 (WRC-19) WP 5D Chapter 1
and waters from other stations located within national territories, and to review the pfd criteria in No. 5.441B in
accordance with Resolution 223);
to consider identification of the frequency bands 3 300-3 400 MHz, 3 600-3 800 MHz, 6 425-7 025 MHz, 7 025-7 125
1.2 MHz and 10.0-10.5 GHz for IMT, including possible additional allocations to the mobile service on a primary basis, in Res.246 (WRC-19) WP 5A Chapter 1
accordance with Resolution 245 (WRC-19);
to consider primary allocation of the band 3 600-3 800 MHz to mobile service within Region 1 and take appropriate
1.3 Res.247 (WRC-19) WP 5D Chapter 1
regulatory actions, in accordance with Resolution 246 (WRC-19);
to consider, in accordance with Resolution 247 (WRC-19), the use of high-altitude platform stations as IMT base
1.4 stations (HIBS) in the mobile service in certain frequency bands below 2.7 GHz already identified for IMT, on a global Res.235 (WRC-15) TG 6/1 (2) Chapter 1
or regional level;
to review the spectrum use and spectrum needs of existing services in the frequency band 470-960 MHz in Region
1.5 1 and consider possible regulatory actions in the frequency band 470-694 MHz in Region 1 on the basis of the review Res.772 (WRC-19) WP 5B (3) Chapter 1
in accordance with Resolution 235 (WRC-15);
to consider, in accordance with Resolution 772 (WRC-19), regulatory provisions to facilitate radiocommunications for
1.6 Res.428 (WRC-19) WP 5B (3) Chapter 2
sub-orbital vehicles;
to consider a new aeronautical mobile-satellite (R) service (AMS(R)S) allocation in accordance with Resolution 428
(WRC-19) for both the Earth-to-space and space-to-Earth directions of aeronautical VHF communications in all or Res.171 (WRC-19) -
1.7 WP 5B (3) Chapter 2
part of the frequency band 117.975-137 MHz, while preventing any undue constraints on existing VHF systems Res.155 (Rev.WRC-19)
operating in the AM(R)S, the ARNS, and in adjacent frequency bands;
to consider, on the basis of ITU R studies in accordance with Resolution 171 (WRC-19), appropriate regulatory actions,
with a view to reviewing and, if necessary, revising Resolution 155 (Rev.WRC-19) and No. 5.484B to accommodate
1.8 Res.429 (WRC-19) WP 5B Chapter 2
the use of fixed-satellite service (FSS) networks by control and non-payload communications of unmanned aircraft
systems;
to review Appendix 27 of the Radio Regulations and consider appropriate regulatory actions and updates based on
ITU R studies, in order to accommodate digital technologies for commercial aviation safety-of-life applications in
200
ITU. 2019. ‘Resolution 811’. ITU (Link).
201
ITU. n.d. ‘WRC-23 Agenda Items’. ITU (Link).

existing HF bands allocated to the aeronautical mobile (route) service and ensure coexistence of current HF systems
alongside modernised HF systems, in accordance with Resolution 429 (WRC-19);
to conduct studies on spectrum needs, coexistence with radiocommunication services and regulatory measures for
1.10 possible new allocations for the aeronautical mobile service for the use of non-safety aeronautical mobile Res.361 (Rev.WRC-19) WP 5B (4) Chapter 2
applications, in accordance with Resolution 430 (WRC-19);
to consider possible regulatory actions to support the modernisation of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety Res.656 (Rev.WRC-
1.11 WP 7C Chapter 2
System and the implementation of e navigation, in accordance with Resolution 361 (Rev.WRC-19); 19)
to conduct, and complete in time for the WRC-23, studies for a possible new secondary allocation to the Earth
exploration-satellite (active) service for spaceborne radar sounders within the range of frequencies around 45 MHz,
taking into account the protection of incumbent services, including in adjacent bands, in accordance with
Resolution 656 (Rev.WRC-19);
to consider a possible upgrade of the allocation of the frequency band 14.8-15.35 GHz to the space research service,
1.13 Res.662 (WRC-19) WP 7C Chapter 3
in accordance with Resolution 661 (WRC-19);
to review and consider possible adjustments of the existing or possible new primary frequency allocations to EESS
1.14 (passive) in the frequency range 231.5-252 GHz, to ensure alignment with more up-to-date remote-sensing Res.172 (WRC-19) WP 4A Chapter 3
observation requirements, in accordance with Resolution 662 (WRC-19);
to harmonise the use of the frequency band 12.75-13.25 GHz (Earth-to-space) by earth stations on aircraft and vessels
1.15 communicating with geostationary space stations in the fixed-satellite service globally, in accordance with Res.173 (WRC-19) WP 4A Chapter 4
Resolution 172 (WRC-19);
to study and develop technical, operational and regulatory measures, as appropriate, to facilitate the use of the
frequency bands 17.7-18.6 GHz and 18.8-19.3 GHz and 19.7-20.2 GHz (space-to-Earth) and 27.5-29.1 GHz and 29.5-30
1.16 Res.773 (WRC-19) WP 4A Chapter 4
GHz (Earth-to-space) by non-GSO FSS earth stations in motion, while ensuring due protection of existing services in
those frequency bands, in accordance with Resolution 173 (WRC-19);
to determine and carry out, on the basis of the ITU R studies in accordance with Resolution 773 (WRC-19), the
1.17 appropriate regulatory actions for the provision of inter-satellite links in specific frequency bands, or portions thereof, Res.248 (WRC-19) WP 4C Chapter 4
by adding an inter-satellite service allocation where appropriate;
to consider studies relating to spectrum needs and potential new allocations to the mobile-satellite service for future
1.18 Res.174 (WRC-19) WP 4A Chapter 4
development of narrowband mobile-satellite systems, in accordance with Resolution 248 (WRC-19);
to consider a new primary allocation to the fixed-satellite service in the space-to-Earth direction in the frequency
1.19 band 17.3-17.7 GHz in Region 2, while protecting existing primary services in the band, in accordance with Res.27 (Rev.WRC-19) CPM23-2 Chapter 4
Resolution 174 (WRC-19);
to examine the revised ITU R Recommendations incorporated by reference in the Radio Regulations communicated
by the Radiocommunication Assembly, in accordance with further resolves of Resolution 27 (Rev.WRC-19), and to
2 - - Chapter 5
decide whether or not to update the corresponding references in the Radio Regulations, in accordance with the
principles contained in resolves of that Resolution;
to consider such consequential changes and amendments to the Radio Regulations as may be necessitated by the
3 Res.95 (Rev.WRC-19) CPM23-2 -
decisions of the conference;
in accordance with Resolution 95 (Rev.WRC-19), to review the Resolutions and Recommendations of previous
4 - - Chapter 5
conferences with a view to their possible revision, replacement or abrogation;
to review, and take appropriate action on, the Report from the Radiocommunication Assembly submitted in
5 - - -
accordance with Nos. 135 and 136 of the Convention;
to identify those items requiring urgent action by the radiocommunication study groups in preparation for the next
6 Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A -
world radiocommunication conference;
to consider possible changes, in response to Resolution 86 (Rev. Marrakesh, 2002) of the Plenipotentiary Conference,
7 Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
on advance publication, coordination, notification and recording procedures for frequency assignments pertaining

to satellite networks, in accordance with Resolution 86 (Rev.WRC-07), in order to facilitate the rational, efficient and
economical use of radio frequencies and any associated orbits, including the geostationary-satellite orbit;
A Tolerances for certain orbital characteristics of non-GSO space stations in the FSS, BSS or MSS Res. 86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
B Non-GSO bringing into use post-milestone procedure Res. 86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
Protection of geostationary satellite networks in the mobile-satellite service operating in the 7/8 GHz and 20/30
C GHz bands from emissions of non-geostationary satellite systems operating in the same frequency bands and Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
identical directions
D Issues for which consensus was achieved in ITU-R (See below) Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
D1 Modifications to Appendix 1 to Annex 4 of RR Appendix 30B Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
D2 New RR Appendix 4 parameters for Recommendation ITU-R S.1503 updates Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
D3 BR reminders for BIU and BBIU Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
E RR Appendix 30B improved procedures for new Member States Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
F Excluding uplink service area in RR Appendix 30A for Regions 1 and 3 and RR Appendix 30B Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
G Revisions to Resolution 770 (WRC-19) to allow its implementation Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
H Enhanced protection of RR Appendices 30/30A in Regions 1 and 3 and RR Appendix 30B Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
I Special agreements under RR Appendix 30B Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
J Modifications to Resolution 76 (Rev.WRC-15) Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
Modification to Resolution 553 (Rev.WRC-15) to remove certain restrictions that prevent administrations from taking
K Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A Chapter 4
effective advantage of the Resolution
to consider and take appropriate action on requests from administrations to delete their country footnotes or to have
8 Res.86 (Rev.WRC-07) WP 4A -
their country name deleted from footnotes, if no longer required, taking into account Resolution 26 (Rev.WRC-19);
to consider and approve the Report of the Director of the Radiocommunication Bureau, in accordance with Article 7
9 Res.26 (Rev.WRC-19) - -
of the Convention;
9.1 on the activities of the Radiocommunication Sector since the WRC-19: - - -
In accordance with Resolution 657 (Rev.WRC-19), review the results of studies relating to the technical and
operational characteristics, spectrum requirements and appropriate radio service designations for space weather Res.657 (Rev.WRC-
a) WP 7C Chapter 5
sensors with a view to describing appropriate recognition and protection in the Radio Regulations without placing 19)
additional constraints on incumbent services;
Review of the amateur service and the amateur-satellite service allocations in the frequency band 1 240 1 300 MHz
b) to determine if additional measures are required to ensure protection of the radionavigation-satellite (space-to- Res.774 (WRC-19) WP 5A (5) Chapter 5
Earth) service operating in the same band in accordance with Resolution 774 (WRC-19);
Study the use of International Mobile Telecommunication systems for fixed wireless broadband in the frequency WP 5A (6)
c) Res.175 (WRC-19) Chapter 5
bands allocated to the fixed services on primary basis, in accordance with Resolution 175 (WRC-19); WP 5C (6)
d) Protection of EESS (passive) in the frequency band 36-37 GHz from non-GSO FSS space stations; Doc. 573 (WRC-19) WP 7C Chapter 5
on any difficulties or inconsistencies encountered in the application of the Radio Regulations; and (This agenda sub-
item is strictly limited to the Report of the Director on any difficulties or inconsistencies encountered in the on any
difficulties or inconsistencies encountered in the application of the Radio Regulations; and (This agenda sub-item is
9.2 - - -
strictly limited to the Report of the Director on any difficulties or inconsistencies encountered in the application of
the Radio Regulations and the comments from administrations. Administrations are invited to inform the Director of
the Radiocommunication Bureau of any difficulties or inconsistencies encountered in the Radio Regulations.)
9.3 on action in response to Resolution 80 (Rev.WRC-07); Res.80 (Rev.WRC-07 - -
Res.804 (Rev.WRC- See studies
to recommend to the Council items for inclusion in the agenda for the next WRC, and items for the preliminary
10 19) - Res. 812 (WRC- on the WRC- -
agenda of future conferences, in accordance with Article 7 of the Convention and Resolution 804 (Rev.WRC-19);
19) 27 pr

oﬃce@espi.or.at
www.espi.or.at

ESPI Space Spectrum Policy Report - v5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ESPI Space Spectrum Policy Report - v5

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ESPI Space Spectrum Policy Report - v5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Space Spectrum Management

Foundations for an informed policy

Editor and publisher:

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI)

2 THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THE SPACE SECTOR ............................................................................... 2

3 THE VALUE OF SPECTRUM AND ITS EXPLOITATION ................................................................................. 5

4 REGULATING SPECTRUM: THE ITU AND NATIONAL SYSTEM ................................................................. 9

5 CHALLENGES TO TACKLE AT THE WRC-23 AND BEYOND .................................................................. 14

5.2 Maximising the use of spectrum across applications .................................................................. 20

5.3 Harmonising spectrum management .................................................................................................. 23

5.4 Improving Spectrum monitoring............................................................................................................ 26

5.5 Balancing efficiency with equitable access to spectrum .......................................................... 29

5.6 Driving space sustainability concerns ................................................................................................. 32

6 EUROPEAN REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT FOR SPECTRUM .................................................................35

7 A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE ON SPECTRUM POLICY ............................................................................. 41

7.2 Synergising knowledge and expertise within Europe ...................................................................41

7.3 Strengthening ties between spectrum and space authorities ................................................. 42

7.4 Harmonising spectrum management systems in Europe .......................................................... 42

ANNEX A: LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................... 46

ANNEX B: INTERNATIONAL AND EUROPEAN REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT FOR SPECTRUM ............... 48

ANNEX C: STUDY GROUPS AND AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE WRC-23.........................................................54

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI)

Mobile Radiolocation Scientific &

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 1

2 THE LONG-TERM VIABILITY OF THE SPACE SECTOR

While direct broadcast services (DBS) and direct-to-home (DTH)

downstream segment of the space economy ($89.9 billion as of 2022,

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 2

New spectrum-hungry connectivity concepts are also emerging. 9 In particular, a profound

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 3

Bridging the Digital Divide: What is the Role for Space?

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 4

3 THE VALUE OF SPECTRUM AND ITS EXPLOITATION

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 5

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 6

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 7

Relocation of the C band in the U.S – A Case Study

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 8

4 REGULATING SPECTRUM: THE ITU AND NATIONAL SYSTEM

The International Telecommunication Union system

Radiocommunication Sector Telecommunication Telecommunication

Figure 4: Three ITU Sectors

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 9

Services Regions (Areas of Countries) Stations (Satellites)

Allocation Allotment Assignment

Figure 5: Frequency Distribution

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 10

A Priori Planned band – under the

BR publishes information in a Special Section of the

Notification of the final frequency assignment parameters to the Bureau

BR publishes information of the notice in the BR IFIC (Space)

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 11

Frequency Assignment methods & Licensing

Spectrum Property Right Models Non-Exclusive Model

Figure 7: Spectrum Assignments Methods

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 12

An additional type of assignment is represented by the “spectrum commons approach” (or

European Space Policy Institute (ESPI) 13