战略与国际研究中心-US-Share-of-the-Communications-Satellite-Market_8页_105kb

U.S. Share of the Communications Satellite Market Summary

Core Content

The document analyzes the impact of the 1998 U.S. legislation, which transferred export-licensing jurisdiction for communications satellites from the Department of Commerce to the Department of State. This change was driven by congressional concerns over technology leaks to China and is seen as a key factor in the decline of the U.S. share in the global commercial communications satellite market.

The study examines both satellite orders and launches, using data from industry reports and trade surveys to assess market share trends. It also considers the broader implications of the legislative change on the satellite industry, including effects on research, subcontractors, and related financial activities.

Main Points

• Legislative Change: In 1998, the U.S. Congress transferred export-licensing authority for communications satellites to the Department of State, citing national security concerns.
• Market Share Decline: There is a documented decline in the U.S. share of the commercial communications satellite market, particularly in the Geostationary Orbit (GEO) segment.
• Data Sources:
  • Satellite Orders: Data from the Satellite Industry Association (SIA) and Futron Corporation show a significant drop in U.S. market share, with the European share increasing.
  • Satellite Launches: Launch data indicates a more conservative decline in U.S. share, but still shows a notable drop, especially in 2000.
  • Revenue Figures: The U.S. share of satellite manufacturing revenue declined by approximately 18% between 1999 and 2000.

Key Findings

• Market Share Trends:
  • 1995–2002: U.S. share dropped from 61% to 0%, while Europe increased from 39% to 20%.
  • GEO Satellites: The U.S. share of GEO satellite orders declined from 68% in 1999 to 43% in 2000, with a further drop to 0% in 2002.
• Captive Orders: Some satellite orders are directed to specific manufacturers, complicating market share analysis.
• LEO Constellations: These are considered less representative of market share due to their captive nature and economic challenges.
• Industry Reactions:
  • U.S. satellite manufacturers reported increased costs, delays, and reduced competitiveness due to the new export controls.
  • European firms like Alcatel and Astrium expanded their production capabilities, indicating a shift in market dynamics.
• Cost and Uncertainty: Export controls introduced financial and operational uncertainties, increasing the cost of U.S. satellites and deterring foreign buyers.
• National Security vs. Industry Health: While the legislation aimed to prevent technology leaks, it may have inadvertently weakened the U.S. satellite industry, which is crucial for national security.

Causality and Contributing Factors

• Export Controls: The 1998 legislation is believed to have contributed to the decline in U.S. market share, particularly through increased costs and delays.
• Exchange Rates: The strong U.S. dollar compared to the weaker Euro made European satellites more affordable.
• New Suppliers: Countries like China and India entered the satellite market, diluting U.S. market share.
• European Industrial Policy: Mergers and collaborations among European firms improved their competitiveness.
• Regulatory Uncertainty: The new export control regime created a negative perception among foreign buyers and investors, affecting demand for U.S. satellites.

Policy Implications

• Export Controls: The U.S. has limited influence over exchange rates and foreign industrial policies, but significant control over export regulations. These controls may have made U.S. satellite companies less competitive.
• National Security Risks: The legislation was based on an overestimation of the "uniqueness" of U.S. satellite technology, potentially leading to more harm than benefit for national security.
• Need for Reassessment: The U.S. must reconsider its export control policies to maintain a competitive and robust satellite industry, especially in the face of global competition and the diminishing effectiveness of technology restrictions.

Conclusion

The 1998 legislative change significantly impacted the U.S. share in the commercial communications satellite market, contributing to a decline that was exacerbated by other factors such as exchange rates and the rise of new competitors. While the legislation aimed to protect national security, it may have weakened the U.S. satellite industry's global position, highlighting the need for a balanced approach to regulation and competition.