| The U.S. commercial launch industry began in earnest in 1986, after the U.S. Government changed its launch policy in response to the Challenger accident. This policy change sought to encourage, facilitate, and coordinate the development of commercial expendable launch vehicle operations by U.S. firms and took NASA's Space Shuttle out of the competition for commercial and foreign spacecraft payloads.;The policy change set in motion numerous agency actions aimed at implementing these objectives. Yet, despite subsequent policy statements and implementing actions aimed at improving their ability to compete, U.S. launch firms have failed to secure a leadership position in the commercial market. This dissertation explores the reasons that U.S. commercial launch firms were not more successful between 1986 and 1992. It addresses the question of how implementation of the U.S. Government's commercial space launch policy has affected the U.S. industry's abilities to compete.;Expert interviews, previously unexplored transcripts of meetings of the Secretary of Transportation's Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Council and other sources were used to summarize and describe the historical background of the industry; executive and legislative policy directives, guidelines, and implementing actions; the roles, stakes, resources, and actions of policy decision making and implementing agencies; and the U.S. launch firms, international competitors, and communications satellite firms that were their customers. A framework developed by Mazmanian and Sabatier and other perspectives were used to assess implementation effectiveness and to provide additional understanding of the impact of policy implementation and other factors on the abilities of U.S. firms to compete.;It was found that policy implementing actions both helped and hindered the U.S. industry's abilities to compete. However, the overall competitiveness of U.S. commercial launch firms may not have improved even if policy had been implemented more effectively. The policy design was flawed from the start; it implied that the U.S. Government could influence behaviors of actors and outcomes of events that were beyond its control. The ability of firms to compete ultimately depends on decisions made by the firm, its customers, and its competitors, as well as on the policy implementation actions of the Government. |
