18
Examination of witnesses
Rory Daniels, David Browne and Dr Joseph Mhango.
Q165 The Chair: Welcome to the next session of the inquiry into the UK’s engagement with space. In this session, we are going to have a think about how space is utilised and the importance of space in other sectors, if you like, in terms of those who benefit from the fact that we are able to do what we do in space—what you might call the UK’s non-space economy. I am delighted that we have with us three fantastic witnesses. In the course of asking the first question, I shall ask you also to introduce yourselves while you are responding so that we do not waste your time in trying to achieve both of those things.
Shipping and agriculture are two of the areas that we most often hear about in benefiting from satellite technology. It would be great if you could begin by telling us a bit more about the usage of technology in these sectors and how reliant they are on satellite technology. I am happy for whomever wishes to jump in and start off to do so.
Dr Joseph Mhango: I am a senior lecturer in applied data science at Harper Adams University. I have an agricultural background: I have a PhD in remote sensing for precision agriculture. I will be answering the agriculture-related questions.
To your question, satellite technology is becoming pretty much ubiquitous in agriculture. We use it all the time, especially in the three main areas of satellite communication, navigation and earth observation. I can unpack those three areas and how we use it.
In earth observation, it is dominated mainly by farmers’ desire to predict crop growth and yield in advance. That means that a lot of satellite-related work is especially around Sentinel-2—the European Space Agency satellite—imagery. How we use it is that we collect all the multispectral data and, using that, we generate vegetation indices. Those indices tell us how healthy or unhealthy a crop is at a spatial level. Sentinel-2 satellite imagery is at a 10-metre resolution; that is the highest you can get. If you have a hectare, you have about 100 points of data that you can collect, whereas a normal agronomy operation would take maybe one observation in a hectare. It lets us increase the spatial resolution at which we collect this data. Spectrally, through the vegetation indices, we can also assess vegetation health in a way that the human eye would not be able to.
How we use this technology is that we feed it into mechanistic crop growth models. These models have been there for a really long time but they have been using low-resolution, hard-to-measure indices like leaf area index. Satellite technology now allows us to automate that—to predict leaf area index from the vegetation indices then feed them into the crop growth models. That is really powerful because, now, we are able to work not only at a very high spatial scale but at a very high temporal scale because these indices have to be measured over time. That allows us to make the crop growth predictions more accurate for the crop growth models.
In earth observation itself, that is not the only application. There are a lot. There are things like field boundary detection, for example. The very first thing that every farmer practising precision agriculture gets told when they log into a precision agriculture platform is, “Tell us your postcode. We’ll take you to your postcode. Now draw a map of your farm”. The base maps that people use are all satellite imagery. They may use a Google Maps base map or an Esri base map but, more and more, people want these to be automated because they are often months old; they are not very recent. People want to use the Sentinel-2 satellites themselves to predict the field boundary. They can generate a crop mask; that crop mask then becomes their field boundary so that they do not have to draw manually. Earth observation is really ingrained with agriculture in that way, through both crop growth modelling and some automation of perception tasks.
I will move on to satellite communications. I must say, connectivity in rural England is not very good. A recent survey said that, although more than 90% of people have access to 4G services from at least one provider, only about 56% have access from all of the four major ones. Having access is one thing; that access also being good and continuous is another. To say the least, it is not good in rural England. Most people have ended up turning to satellite-based internet connectivity—that is, direct-to-device satellite connectivity.
This is not just for home use. The main driver of this is actually agriculture because a lot of IoT—internet of things—devices are now deployed. People are tracking methane emissions in broiler sheds or tracking soil moisture to inform their irrigation scheduling. People use RTK on their drones when they often do not have an RTK base station; therefore, they want it always to be connected to the NTRIP via wifi. All these connectivity needs are not met because of the rural connectivity problem. There is a lot of usage of satellite internet for that.
The Chair: Thank you so much; that is a fabulous introduction. Let me pause you there because we will come on to some of the detail. Mr Daniels, perhaps you would like to introduce yourself and comment on the question.
Rory Daniels: First, let me say that techUK welcomes the opportunity to provide insights to this committee. If you have not heard of us before, we are the UK’s technology trade association. We have about 1,100 member companies, and we act on their behalf to convene the sector, promote what they do and be the interface between the technology sector and government. I lead techUK’s work on emerging technologies, of which future space tech is part of my remit. I should clarify that, due to the composition of our membership, our work is not heavily skewed towards these two sectors; however, we can speak more broadly on how technologies are being applied in the space sector.
In agriculture, we are seeing satellite technologies facilitating the practice of precision agriculture, helping farmers to optimise yields—as Joseph said—to manage crops more effectively and to promote sustainable agriculture or farming. Multiple companies now offer high-frequency, field-level detail of between half a metre to five metres in resolution, as well as global coverage for monitoring crop health, soil conditions and land use changes. Historical imagery archives enable farmers to analyse trends over time, perhaps in correlation with seasons—temporally, as Joseph said. The use of satellite data will ultimately drive more informed decision-making, resulting in efficiencies for UK-based businesses and more sustainable practices—for example, monitoring key metrics, such as soil health.
In shipping, satellite imagery and data analytics are empowering entities such as the coastguard to collect powerful data on the position of vessels, subsequently enabling the tracking of these vessels, the monitoring of things like marine conservation areas and the detection of illegal activities such as illegal fishing.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Mr Browne, I am sure that you have something to add on all of this.
David Browne: Good afternoon. I am responsible for corporate affairs in the United Kingdom and Ireland for Maersk Logistics and Services, which is part of the AP Moller-Maersk group. I am also a member of the Chamber of Shipping; therefore, although I will speak mostly about Maersk, it will hopefully reflect on other members of the chamber as well. In case you are not familiar with Maersk, we manage and own a fleet of about 700 container ships, so we are very active in this area. We also have tankers and ships of other designs.
I start by saying that satellites are not important to the shipping industry—they are absolutely critical. The way that things are now, we would be severely impaired if we did not have access to them. As we go forward, they are going to become even more critical in the years to come.
A bit like how Dr Joseph looked at the question, I have broken it down into three parts. We see that satellite usage fits into our business in three ways: first, on the ship itself in terms of efficiency, navigation, and safety; secondly, from a crew perspective, in their welfare and communication and how they live their lives; and, thirdly, for our customers’ cargo so that they can see what is happening with their precious cargos when they are on board the ship. Do you want me to go into those three areas now, or would you rather wait?
The Chair: Could you do a little summary of each? I am sure that we will come back to them in detail; this is just so that we do not miss anything.
David Browne: On the ship side, with full 24/7 internet connectivity, we see that essential positioning data is available for navigation, collision avoidance and emergency signalling. In addition to that, with integration with weather data and ship systems, we can see dynamic route optimisation, which in turn leads to fuel efficiency. With the IoT, which we have heard about already, with the ship feeding the IoT and the IoT feeding the ship from multiple sensors on board, we find that the fleet can be optimised and the ship on the voyage can be optimised. The data that we get from that allow us to make more decisions on how we deploy vessels. Through cloud-based systems and remote monitoring, we can make sure that the ships are doing the best they possibly can.
From a crew perspective, as we know, in this modern age, few people are without a mobile device in their hand at any time, enjoying connectivity with friends and family. Certainly, our crew members would not relish being without that for weeks on end as they go about their jobs. We are pleased to see that crew welfare is at the core of what we are doing; this piggybacks on our ability to manage our ships. They can FaceTime to stay connected to their families and even game or things like that, as they see fit.
From the cargo perspective, let us take temperature-controlled cargos as an example. Through reefer monitoring, the customer—using the internet from wherever they are in the world—can check on the temperature of their cargo, the gas mix inside the container and even the humidity. This not only feeds them information for that particular voyage but allows them to build patterns; it influences when they might harvest the crops or even plant the crops. Those are the three main areas.
Q166 Baroness Mobarik: My question is in the same vein, on the relationship of shipping and agriculture sectors to space, but I will modify it slightly. We have heard of the potential benefits but what are the risks of applying space-based technologies to the maritime and agriculture sectors, particularly in terms of sustainability, security and economic resilience?
David Browne: Shipping can certainly be a very dangerous business. Although there are many safety measures built in, there is no doubt that, if there were an over-reliance on pure satellite communications alone, it could get even more dangerous. That is why, no matter what, we will always have those additional safety measures built in. From a risk perspective, an acute risk would be the risk of having the GNSS—the navigation system—denied to the vessel. That could be through jamming or spoofing, where the vessel is led to believe that it is in a place it is not and so is literally dragged into more dangerous waters.
From that perspective, there are two risks. One would be an over-reliance on satellite technology and the crews not being sufficiently ready to take over if the computers failed; that is not the case for many maritime nations, I think, but it is still a risk. Then there is the denial of navigation or other systems. As we go a bit further down the field and we need more and more technology and guaranteed uptime, the fact that we have a limited number of constellations providing very limited bandwidth—as we need the ships to do more and have more access to cloud-based systems—could be a problem for the future and is certainly a gap in the market. Perhaps we will come back to speak about that later in the session.
Rory Daniels: For me, the one critical risk that I would identify above any other is cyber resilience. Shipping and agriculture both fall within transport and food—two of the UK’s 14 critical national infrastructure sectors—which are vital for national security. As such, the prospect of interference or compromise in these systems, regarding technological services that could be prone to malignant actors, is of significant concern.
The UK must therefore invest in secure and resilient connectivity underpinned by technological solutions, many of which have not yet been invented and some of which will need to be adopted now by these sectors. The UK must also ensure that positioning, navigation and timing technologies are kept consistently up to date to ensure both that they are as resilient as possible and that the data that is collected then transmitted before being analysed can be trusted.
The shift towards what we would call modern software-defined satellites, which can be continually updated while in orbit, and the use of cloud-based systems, combined with the emergence of new technologies or existing technologies applied in new ways—such as blockchain or, as we have heard previously, the internet of things; by this, I mean connected devices—has created the potential for industry to face some long-standing security issues in these sectors. It is not just a risk; it is also an opportunity.
Dr Joseph Mhango: Most of the risks that I would have said have been covered already but I will mention one more; it is very ingrained in our industry. Agriculture is pretty low-risk in terms of data breaches and people targeting agricultural data—it is not that common—but satellite technology and the technologies that we have built around it have been largely focused on giving a sense of autonomy, with things such as autosteered tractors and autonomous flight for drones. Those things come with risks.
One risk I could bring up is a potential for biodiversity outcomes that are negative due to the detachment of the human from the land. For example, say you have a plough moving through a field autonomously because it has been empowered by navigation technology. A human would stop if they saw a ground-nesting bird but the autonomous unit will not stop. Those sorts of considerations need to be made, but I am sure that those risks are cross-cutting with other sectors of technology rather than just space.
Q167 Lord Clement-Jones: My question is initially directed towards Rory, but we will spread it around after he has had a chance to answer it. In written evidence to us, techUK described the new shifts in space economy as “comparable to the advent of the internet”. In this vein, what can we expect to see in terms of the downstream adoption of space data and services? Which sectors are likely to be impacted most by these changes? We will exclude agriculture and shipping from that for the moment.
Rory Daniels: I will begin by giving a bit of context as to why we made that quite provocative statement, then I will give three short examples. We made that comparison between the global space economy and the advent of the internet in our report on emerging space technologies last March. We have recognised, and our members have very much informed us, that, for many businesses, the growing commercialisation of space represents more than just the emergence of a new market; rather, it constitutes the creation of an entirely new network of infrastructure, within which an ecosystem of capabilities will emerge and upon which a plethora of products and services will be built.
Crucially, the opportunity to build, own and control much of this infrastructure—this ecosystem of capabilities and this portfolio of products and services—will lead to not only significant wealth creation but wider economic productivity and societal benefits. That is why we made that comparison. In this vein, we can expect to see downstream actors in the UK increasingly adopting space data and services.
The sectors in which we think that will likely take place will often be, first, sectors in which there is existing space-related expertise, such as defence in terms of its long-standing dependence on space for communications; and, secondly, sectors in which there is a reliance on particularly accurate or timely data. For example, autonomous or driverless vehicles need to understand where they are on the road in real time, regardless of whether they are going through a tunnel or are in the middle of the countryside. The third area includes sectors in which the potential for significant cost reductions or service improvements is present; the insurance industry, in terms of a move from more reactive to more proactive or predictive models of insurance is one example of where space data could potentially be transformative if it were adopted by UK firms early and properly.
Lord Clement-Jones: Joseph, do you agree with that?
Dr Joseph Mhango: Yes. It is quite a provocative statement, but there is some accuracy to it in agriculture. What we expect in the sector is that, over time, the costs of space tech will come down and, with that, many use cases will be enabled. For example, costs for RTK corrections will come down, so there will be more sales of autosteering equipment or machinery. There will be more usage of drone technology for temporal mapping enabled by space navigation. For earth observation, we expect more spectral resolution over time and better satellites covering more space on the electromagnetic spectrum; that will unlock better and better uses of this data for crop modelling. We are looking forward to that.
There is also the ecosystem around it: how we access, for example, space data and earth observation data; the data transfer needs; and the latency. What it takes for you to ingest this data in your day-to-day systems is going to get better and better. I can imagine that, 10 years from now, I will be able to appraise my land before I use it for potatoes by crunching through the previous 10 years of satellite data, finding wherever there was a potato growing in that field and running a crop model to see how potatoes perform in that field. All of these are in the dream stage right now. When we look forward, that is where we would like space technology to go. There is lots of potential and we are just at the beginning, in our opinion.
Lord Clement-Jones: A lot of questions arise from that on access, value, price—all those kinds of thing. David, do you have a similar perspective?
David Browne: I do not have the same long-term strategic view that techUK can give; I am a bit more transactional in my view of how things are in the short term. One thing I can add from figures I received from the UK Chamber of Shipping is that, in 2024, the value of the maritime satellite communication market was somewhere between £4.4 billion and £5.9 billion; it is anticipated to grow to £12.1 billion by 2030. Just with that leap in the more simple things—not going as far as Rory suggested in technological advancements—we see that there is certainly a great opportunity there for growth into these areas.
Q168 Lord Tarassenko: I want to stay on the forward look for the next 10 years. We have had quite a few witnesses so far. Most of them say that space will take advantage of pretty well all the new technologies of the 21st century. We have heard about how space will utilise AI, quantum, nanotechnology, engineering, biology, et cetera. I would like you to look forward; take not all four but one or two. Can you tell us where, in the next 10 years, you see one of these new technologies having the biggest impact on the space economy? Is the UK well placed to take advantage of that?
Rory Daniels: I want to take one quick step back and set out some of the main technologies that we can expect to see in space and for space over the next 10 or so years. Again, I refer to our report on emerging space technologies.
We surveyed our members. They came back with seven technologies: artificial intelligence; quantum, in both communication and compute; sensing and data; robotics; semiconductors; 3D and 4D printing; and what we call space systems, which are, in essence, rovers, rockets, satellites and vehicles. The common thread that underpinned all these technologies was that they promised to enhance the autonomy, intelligence, perception, safety and resilience of everything that is for or in space. I will not pick out one specific technology—that would be unfair because they all converge; particularly with the application of AI to all technologies, it takes five, six or however many emerging technologies to create a solution that will work for a particular use case—but they share some commonalities. I would highlight two.
The first is enhanced connectivity. At techUK, we do a lot of work in our satellite telecoms programme around broadband connectivity across the UK, particularly for rural or isolated communities. These technologies are allowing more widespread, cost-effective and reliable broadband services with a high degree of service performance. Joseph mentioned device-to-device communications. They are a key component of this connected ecosystem, with internet of things technologies, such as the smart fridge or the smart whatever, talking to each other and sharing data both intelligently and in a way that is easy for an individual to access and manipulate. Many of these connected technologies will be dependent on the space domain—increasingly so as we have whole constellations of low-earth orbit satellites providing essential services for citizens.
Secondly, the other commonality between a lot of these emerging technologies is enhanced data processing, analysis and transmission. We are increasingly seeing quantum technologies being actively considered and, in some limited senses, deployed by companies to be, in essence, integrated in the UK’s digital infrastructure, thus transforming how we transmit and secure our data. The UK’s national quantum strategy missions, for example, aim to pioneer the future of the quantum internet by deploying the world’s most advanced quantum network at scale by 2035.
When we talk about satellite communications, these are often quantum-enabled or, at the very least, quantum-encrypted so that they are as secure as possible from nefarious actors. They also have advanced sensing technologies enabled by, again, quantum and other things. These are the two common threads that I see running through, be it robotics, AI or what have you: connectivity and data sitting at the heart of these technologies.
David Browne: I can give some specific, tangible examples from a ship at sea. We have for some years trialled 3D printing on board, and we have delivered parts to vessels at sea by drone, but, ultimately, you often need the physical presence of a skilled technician to fix the parts in order to keep the ship sailing. One of the ways we see quantum and AI being used in future is having a virtual attendance of a service engineer guiding the staff already on board on how to maintain and complete these complex operations, rather than having to have the person there themselves.
The follow-on from that would be to see, perhaps when a ship was coming into port, that the pilot might not physically need to clamber aboard the ship and be there on the bridge guiding her in but could do it from a remote working station, as we see drones operating today. In fact, that pilot could be in control of several ships at one time, creating greater efficiency.
If we were to have those sorts of things in future, we would absolutely need—again, as Rory was saying—that additional bandwidth and broadband that are compatible through many constellations, which we do not have at the moment. Some concerns around what we need to achieve for the future are really thrashing through compatibility and connectivity. There is also a concern that there is not a great deal coming out of Europe, including the UK, in that area.
Dr Joseph Mhango: Agriculture, space technology and AI are already quite integrated. As I mentioned, one of the main uses for earth observation data is feeding into mechanistic crop growth models that have been there for a long time. These crop models will have been handcrafted by crop modellers such as me but, these days, in essence, we do not do that anymore; we develop knowledge-guided neural networks that are preconditioned on reflectance data, say, from the Sentinel-2 satellite.
These days, the mechanistic crop growth models are still the most popular, but the cutting edge of this world is designing and implementing knowledge-guided neural networks that ingest reflectance data from satellites and turn those into physiological parameters, such as leaf area index, how fast a crop is growing or how much nitrogen a leaf is likely to have. All of that is being done using AI.
The integration of earth observation and AI into agriculture is pretty much natural—perhaps not so much in things like robotics, because the level at which robotics become useful in agriculture is at the level of fruit picking; at that point, yes, you can guide the robot to the right tree with RTK correction, but the fine hand movements that you need to pick fruit using a robotic arm will be solved using other sectors, such as computer vision and mechatronics—so I would say that AI and earth observation are more or less deeply ingrained.
Q169 Viscount Stansgate: I beg your pardon—I am sorry to interrupt the committee but I have just received a photograph of my first granddaughter, who was born today; that is why I thought I might not be able to be here in person. I am delighted. I think about the life she is going to have: it will absolutely be dominated by space.
Lord Shamash: That is lovely news.
Viscount Stansgate: Well, it is a complete coincidence. I would prefer to look at the picture rather than ask my question, I am afraid, but I will ask my question then look at the picture.
We have received evidence from the Satellite Applications Catapult telling us that, when it comes to space data and services, “demand is lacking” and “many public and private organisations still view space as complex, risky or simply irrelevant”. Do you recognise this characterisation? From the perspective of non-space-based industries, do you think that more needs to be done to increase the adoption of space technology?
Dr Joseph Mhango: I half agree with the statement that demand is lacking. As far as agriculture is concerned, that is not entirely accurate; there is a lot of demand. Perhaps there is not a lot of demand for the services that are on offer on the market right now. There is a boom of start-ups offering satellite data but the majority of them will take satellite imagery and calculate a vegetation index—do an arithmetic operation, in essence—then dump that map on the farmer to use. Most farmers will look at it and say, “Pretty picture”, but will never actually use it for anything.
Right now, the industry has demand for actionable intelligence but there is a trough of disillusionment due to the dump of data on people without attaching a decision support system to the end of it. The demand for decision support systems that are underpinned by space technology, like earth observation, is huge because people want autonomy. They want the ability to monitor their crop health temporally and predict when to harvest-that demand is insatiable—but what is not there right now is support for the industry to produce the decision support systems that are needed on top of the satellite data to make this actionable intelligence. That is how I would answer that question.
David Browne: Perhaps I might interrupt before Rory goes because he is going to have a far more detailed answer, having 1,100 members—many of whom are SMEs—and I have a very short one. In the shipping industry, I do not recognise that statement because, right down to fishing vessels and all the way up to very large tankers, we are heavily involved in satellite already. It does not specifically represent our industry. If anything, the needs of the shipping industry perhaps need to be heard better by the people in the satellite industry. I will now hand over to my expert colleague.
Rory Daniels: It is no surprise that techUK would recognise that characterisation. The nature of this challenge is twofold: it is partly about awareness and partly about perceptions. On awareness, we are aware that many non-space businesses, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, are unaware of the key capabilities enabled and to be enabled by space—just as many individuals are unaware of the fact that they use space technologies every day and probably could not name what they are.
As for efforts or suggestions to improve awareness, one that comes to mind—it is quite an obvious one—is running advertising or publicity campaigns. That is what we did at techUK in late 2023: promoting the new space economy and the opportunities for non-space companies to start scoping now, because it is coming. I am aware that Ukspace—the space trade association—ran a #ThanksSpace social media campaign that was similar in its aim.
I point to the Space Skills Roadmap 2030, which is published by the Space Skills Alliance. It proposes tackling the space skills gap through a national marketing campaign such as the nuclear sector’s “Destination Nuclear” campaign, which, from what I read, was a massive success. It was supported by 26 organisations and resulted in more than 5,000 people starting applications for roles featuring critical skills gaps within the first six weeks. It is a tried-and-tested method.
As for perceptions, I will give three quick ones. First, on businesses, one anecdote that remains with me, following the running of the techUK campaign I mentioned, is that somebody said that, in French newspapers, news about space typically appears in the business section, but, in British newspapers, it appears under science and technology. Until the UK treats space less as a novelty and more as infrastructure or capability, culture will continue to hold us back; the levels of investment, publicity and political leadership will probably follow.
Secondly, on employees, I go back to the Space Skills Alliance and its recommendations about tackling the space skills gap. One is to stop emphasising astronauts and launch, as this tends to mislead people regarding what working in the space sector is like. There could be a tendency in the UK to keep talking about what we are very good at, particularly from a research perspective, but to forget the bigger picture and how that is perceived.
Thirdly, on investors, I have spoken to a lot of venture capitalists, both in and not in the space sector. They say that space activity is generally perceived as high-risk, very technical and capital-intensive; that is even more so for investors with little or no experience in the sector.
Baroness Stowell of Beeston: Is what you have just said about investors unique to the UK?
Rory Daniels: Those perceptions? No. It is particularly acute in the UK but Europe as a whole struggles with that sort of investment in space companies, as compared to the US.
Q170 Lord St John of Bletso: We know that, last year, the UK Space Agency allocated funds to 10 pilot projects using satellite data in transport, logistics and public services. I know of a UK SME that is using its satellite to identify wildfires across the United Kingdom. We are aware of the EO Data Hub and the Satellite Applications Catapult. What suggestions do you have to stimulate more demand for space data and services? How successful have the Government been in connecting customers to suppliers?
David Browne: Our experience at Maersk, in being a global business, is that, in fact, a lot of the things we have been up to have been self-initiated. I am not in a position to comment on how successful specific government initiatives have been in the areas you mention. What I see more is that, in wider government, it has been an appealing place for us as a tech business to be, to the extent that our global tech headquarters are based here in Maidenhead; for that matter, should the committee ever get a day out and wish to visit, we would be more than happy to host you at our place in Maidenhead, where we employ 1,000 people in programming and cybersecurity. It is a bit removed from this specific question, I am afraid.
Rory Daniels: We would say that government-backed initiatives, such as the ones you mentioned, play a crucial role in accelerating private sector investment and participation in the space sector. As we see it, the challenge is to scale this impact across both non-space sectors and parts of government that are not aware of the potential benefits of connecting customers to suppliers in the context of space. I have three quick suggestions to put to you today.
The first is to move away from the tendency to view space within particular sectors or industries in that context. Often, what we are talking about here are cross-cutting capabilities and multiple intersecting technologies. We are talking about a systemic opportunity. Therefore, a more systemic view of the impact of satellite applications—one that goes beyond particular sectors or industries; it could well be government-led—would help the sector and would convene interest in this topic.
Secondly, I would point to the Procurement Act 2023 and its efforts to facilitate a more diverse and competitive procurement landscape, with simplified processes for suppliers of all sizes—SMEs in particular. With that now in force, these sorts of principles would highly benefit the space sector as well, particularly as we want to grow the SME footprint.
Thirdly, there is something on space clusters, which we know, from work we have done with various clusters, are a much-valued asset in the UK. Certainly not every country has them to call on, but the reach, networks and convening power that these clusters have could be better deployed to stimulate demand for satellite-based data and services systematically—particularly across non-space sectors and from a regional perspective, where there will be other expertise and stakeholders, such as a local university or business that is not yet engaged with space but has a convener ready to step in and bring them round the table.
Dr Joseph Mhango: In agriculture, space technology is mainly back-end infrastructure. The product is not space technology; the space technology is just the infrastructure that we use. It is difficult to bring it to the forefront at the expense of the product but, where a very good product has been produced, it pretty much does not need the Government to sell it. The private sector does a very good job. For example, autosteer machinery is now ubiquitous; a lot of farmers use autosteer to ensure that their agricultural operations are efficient.
If you get my point, this is because the product that has been built on top of RTK correction is at the cutting edge. The space technology behind the RTK and all that is just the infrastructure that enables this. Even so, there are government initiatives that have made a difference—for example, things like the agritech centres, such as Agrimetrics, which is the first stop for almost anybody willing to look at space-related data. That is the first place they go to, and it is partially funded by government.
To Rory’s point, we are of the opinion that space technology should be integrated into the fabric of public policy for things like environmental monitoring schemes, climate action or farm support schemes, such as the SFI—the sustainable farming incentive—or the Rural Payments Agency. If they are at the forefront, they will create awareness that space technology is routinely being used for monitoring, reporting, verification purposes around regenerative agriculture and sustainable farming—things like that. The more awareness we raise through these initiatives, the more these farmers will be willing to use this technology when it is offered to them in other circles or through private sector-led initiatives and products. The Government’s lead, especially around remote sensing—using robot sensing in the SFI—really will get the wheels turning and spur more adoption.
Lord St John of Bletso: What I am getting at is this: Rory mentioned earlier on that the UK sees space as a novelty. A lot more can be done to promote through marketing campaigns. Some who have SMEs in this business are saying, “Rather than giving grants, why don’t the Government give more contracts to those who have this vital data, first, to help the sector and, secondly, to drive demand for the data?”
Dr Joseph Mhango: In agriculture, I would partially support that from this standpoint. We raised the demand question here; there are circles where we think demand is lacking. In my response—if you heard it—I said that demand is there, just not for the level of maturity of the products that are mostly on the market, especially in the SME sector. A lot of translational research and development needs to be done, and a lot of the research that ends up in academic papers is never translated on to the market for use.
That needs to be funded. This is somewhere where the Government can come in to enable the development towards maturity of the decision support systems that take advantage of satellite data, because those are the products that farmers are looking for. They are in the middle between the farmer and the space technology that is infrastructure, which is far removed from the farmer. This translational research bit—the geospatial data science bit that needs to happen—is underfunded. If I were to say what Government should fund more, it would be this translational bit through Innovate UK, BBSRC, EPSRC and all the other councils.
The Chair: We have two more questions. I thank you for your time; I know that we are keeping you.
Q171 Lord Shamash: We have heard evidence—we have already touched on some of this question—that the core problem the space sector faces in the UK is that the Government and the sector do not communicate enough. There is also this whole idea of making sure that the industrial world is aware of the value of space. What do you see as the problem here? How can we cure it, in a sense, so that it is taken forward and the Government and the space sector work much more collaboratively than they are doing?
Dr Joseph Mhango: As Rory mentioned, communication could be better here. We sell technology a lot more than we do the solutions that the technology brings to the market—there definitely could be improvements there; we could use more user-friendly language—but that is more of an issue for marketing departments; I am not sure that it is really something we in this room can do much about. Communication needs to improve.
In other sectors, such as agriculture, we need to improve the usefulness and practicality of the products at the end of the innovation cycle. There are already a lot of tech-focused initiatives, such as rural roadshows and farmer engagement events. Farmers usually go there; these are well-patronised events that farmers go to in order to learn about the newest technology that will bring more autonomy to their field operations, because they are time-poor.
The more useful the technology that we develop, the better it will sell, but, in terms of branding, less technical language needs to be used. Who should solve that? I am not entirely sure, but that is my opinion.
Rory Daniels: To build on that, I would say—as I have said previously—that the space sector in the UK definitely struggles with branding despite many world-leading capabilities, companies and expertise. It can be seen as a niche sector, as I said—rather than fundamental capabilities or infrastructure—and one that can, at times, be more concerned with discovery or science than economics and business. This is something we feel a little uncomfortable about in the UK but both are equally important, for different reasons.
The key thing I would say is that this is despite the fact that there is often a fundamentally strong business case for participating in the space economy—or leveraging technologies that are dependent on or operate in space—in the form of reduced costs, improved decision-making under uncertainty, et cetera. The challenge is that there is not widespread awareness of these tangible benefits for businesses.
Based on feedback that we have received from members, the UK Space Agency is making positive steps in this area. For example, we have been told that it is speaking at a lot more agricultural and financial services-related events—events in sectors or industries beyond those that we typically associate with the space sector—deliberately to broaden their audience. The Government and the sector should do much more of this and, crucially, do it more systematically; in particular, they should target organisations or sectors where we know perceptions are challenging and it is a challenge to overcome them.
At the minimum, that will require some sort of cultural change, such as dedicated funding or some vocal advocates in parts of government. More than that, it will need to operate at the scale required; the scale of the solution must match the scale of the opportunity. We have spoken about just how immense those are. A more systematic approach to cultural transformation, to funding—over multiple years and in multiple parts of government—and to engagement with a broad range of sectors and industries are probably what is needed to turn the dial and realise the opportunity now, before it is too late.
David Browne: It is a very interesting question. It is not a question of branding, as such; it is not a question for the people in the marketing departments. It is about people not having a good understanding of what space means. That might lean towards vocabulary—the very words that we use when we discuss this with people—or it could be about education. When I told some of my colleagues at the tail end of last week that Maersk had been asked to give evidence to the space committee, even within our business, I was looked at in wonder. The suggestion was that, perhaps beyond me being a space cadet, what could I talk about?
So we do see this; to an extent, we even see it among parliamentarians. Do they really all understand what we are talking about? If I take it back more to my natural habitat, in logistics and transport, we have exactly the same problem. When people say logistics, they think of a fork-lift truck driver, whereas I often use the phrase, “Logistics is also putting satellites in space”. People do not see that as logistics. One of the things that we do is host visits of parliamentarians to our sites, where we explain to them exactly what it is. Logistics UK, as a trade body, has a page on its website where MPs can click on their constituency and see how many people are employed in logistics there. All of that work is about—I hate “education” but I cannot think of a better word at the moment—helping people understand what we are talking about.
We have also seen the Department for Transport get involved in that through a campaign called Generation Logistics; it partly funded it and industry partly funded it. It aimed to get understanding specifically into school leavers and young people, initially, in terms of what logistics could offer as a career. Maybe that is the sort of tack we need to adopt with space, where we have a public-private partnership to change that vocabulary or create a greater understanding of what we are talking about.
The Chair: We have certainly learned a lot on this journey.
Q172 Baroness Stowell of Beeston: We have obviously covered a lot of ground in this session. This is really an opportunity for you to propose anything that you have not had the chance to raise and which would be relevant to the Government in trying to expand the domestic market for space-based data or services. Are there any other government-led things that you think should be happening and which we have not covered already?
David Browne: I am going to be slightly cheeky and not bring up something new but reiterate something that I have already said: opportunities for standardisation. Intercompatibility of constellations is really important but, as I mentioned earlier, there are not enough of those constellations; there certainly are not enough of them based outside North America, specifically in Europe.
There is a great opportunity for the UK to move into that position. Can one state or one company do it on its own? Probably not. It is about diplomacy with other Governments and seeing how we can encourage more constellations to deliver the bandwidth and broadband that we spoke about earlier on.
Dr Joseph Mhango: I have already mentioned that there needs to be an integration of space technology into most of the policies around environmental monitoring and farm support schemes; that will really drive adoption more. I have also talked about translational R&D, which needs to be funded to build decision systems on top of earth observation data. This is very important because it is an answer to the demand question, in essence; that should be focused on.
Finally, we need more awareness efforts in terms of all the data sources we have, which the different centres in the UK have set up, for space data. Also, where the opportunity arises, we need to expand these so that space data is more available to people, along with the translational R&D that comes on top of it.
We recently learned a big lesson on this one in academia. We have lost some of the more medium-term and long-term data sources that we had where the provider has changed direction. Now, we no longer have those data sources—the data sources that underpin climate science research, for example, or early warning systems for famine in the global South. These datasets are no longer available because Governments change policies, for example. There is a ring that needs to be built to protect us in the UK, in order to ensure that the things people develop from space data are always available.
The Chair: Mr Daniels, the final word goes to you. Do you have anything that you want to add?
Rory Daniels: I want to pick up on the procurement point we mentioned earlier, because it is an important one that I would like to flesh out a little more. Let me preface this by saying that, although there is certainly more that the Government can and should do to expand the domestic market for satellite data and services, this should not negate the importance of industry being laser-like when it comes to meeting real customer needs through real, tangible use cases. It is not an either/or; after all, it is this competitiveness that is driving a lot of the innovation in the space sector.
There are two things that the Government could do around procurement. First, quite simply, they could lead by example. Government adoption of these technologies and services is still low, as we have heard. For instance, some consultancies in our membership are looking to ensure that their go-to-market offer incorporates satellite-based data insights but they keep hitting the wall of government maturity, which is just too low to allow them to progress.
The Government should consider what else they can do through procurement to demonstrate impact and leverage the power of government contracts, which, let us be honest, are often a lot more attractive to firms than grants. Many of our members would say that procurement is the single most effective lever to stimulate in-country demand, to de-risk investment and to enable the UK to scale innovation across satellite-enabled applications.
Other than leading by example, providing certainty is the other big benefit here. The Government could act as a long-term anchor customer for satellite data and services. By committing to long-term predictable procurement for both civil and defence needs, they could provide the commercial certainty that companies need to invest and scale. This could come through a dedicated downstream procurement strategy aligned with national priorities such as defence capability, resilience and environmental goals. It would also demonstrate downstream capabilities for wider adoption.
In short, many in our membership would argue that, if the UK wants to increase the use of downstream applications, it should lead the way as a customer.
The Chair: Thank you very much indeed. That was a great session. I am extremely grateful to Dr Mhango, Mr Daniels and Mr Browne for joining us today—as well as greeting a new baby.
Lord Shamash: It will be in Hansard, will it not? It will be the first baby in Hansard.
The Chair: It will be everywhere. We will claim her as ours.
Viscount Stansgate: Thank you for being so understanding. I must say, this has been a very exciting session.
The Chair: Thank you so much; that was wonderful. I will now suspend this session.
