This document discusses priorities for UK space exports and trade negotiations following Brexit. It notes that the UK space industry generates over £5 billion in exports annually, with top markets in Europe, North America, Asia Pacific, and the Middle East. Key barriers include restricted government procurement, commercial restrictions, weak IP enforcement, and regulatory barriers. The document identifies priority countries for new trade agreements, including the US, India, China, Japan, and countries in the Gulf. It outlines opportunities and barriers in these markets, and provides examples of provisions in existing EU trade deals to boost space sector access. Officials seek industry feedback on identified priorities and barriers.
This policy brief highlights the uncertainties facing the UK in the field of intellectual property protection upon leaving the EU, with consideration of ways of mitigating that uncertainty.
Why does the UK impose export controls?
What is controlled (and what is not)?
How does the licensing process work?
What are the different types of licence?
How are the controls enforced, what are the penalties?
How to avoid delays and risks in export licensing?
How BIS and Green Light Exports can provide help.
A presentation to a conference on European Dual Use Export Controls in Amsterdam, 25-26 September 2014. It offers practical tips on how to avoid delays and denials of export licence applications in the EU.
Presentation to the C5 Export Controls Forum, 20-21 May 2014 Brussels. Explores 5 main areas for reform of EU export controls, taking into account the recent European Commission Communication on reforming Dual Use controls
Comparing EAC, SADC and ECOWAS EPAs: What can ESA EPA draw from them?
Isabelle Ramdoo
ECDPM Deputy Programme Manager
24-25 November 2014
Harare, Zimbabwe
This presentation by Fabienne ILZKOVITZ & Adriaan DIERX from the DG Competition at the European Commission, was made during the Workshop on market studies selection and prioritisation of sectors and industries held on 9 March 2017 at the OECD Headquarters. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/market-studies-workshop-on-selection-prioritisation-of-sectors-industries.htm
Non agriculture market_access_issues_and_concerns_for_indiaYogesh Bandhu
A key element of the Doha Round of trade negotiations is the liberalisation of trade in industrial products, commonly known as non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Negotiations under NAMA focus on market access for all products that are not covered under the negotiations on agriculture or services and aim to reduce, if not possible to completely eliminate, tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that restrict trade in these products. The framework adopted for modalities for negotiations under NAMA, known as the ‘July Package’, envisages reduction of industrial tariffs in both developed and developing countries, according to a formula that is yet to be agreed. These negotiations are important for developing countries, as these will determine the market access opportunities available to developing countries through which they can improve their growth prospects.
As per the WTO text on NAMA of December 6, 2008, the developing countries have been asked to undertake tariff reductions of 60 - 70 per cent while the developed countries are offering a reduction of only 20 - 30 per cent based on Swiss formula for tariff reduction which gives a coefficient of 8 for developed countries and 22 on an average for developing countries. The insistence on developing countries to cut their bound tariffs in NAMA or agriculture until they go below the applied levels along with the continuation of US practice of having a bound level that is twice its actual spending on agricultural domestic subsidies has been objected by India and China.
India desires that the modalities for tariff cuts should reflect the mandate of less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments and comparability in ambition between NAMA and Agriculture.
So far as the tariff reduction is concerned, it may be mentioned that the Swiss formula should not be used for making commitments on tariff reduction as it involves the use of an arbitrary coefficient, a, which can be manipulated by member countries. Even, the simple average formula has its own limitations. For instance, it overlooks the values that are either very high or very low and thus cannot solve the problem of tariff peaks.
The simplest way is to reduce the bound levels of developed countries to 5 or 10 per cent for all tariff lines as their industries have already developed. Otherwise, the developed countries can be asked to bring their bound tariff rates to 5 to 8 per cent for those tariff lines that cover at least 98 per cent of the potential exports, and not the actual exports as that may be lower because of existing high import tariff or domestic support in importing country, of developing countries to developed countries. This potential of exports for developing countries can be calculated through revealed comparative advantage or by matching the developing countries exports and developed countries imports at different commodity classification levels.
Abhaya Sumanasena - Real Wireless - Spectrum Options techUK
Presentations from the SPF Cluster 2 & 3: Release Mechanisms & Flexible Spectrum Access workshop on 21 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Presentations from the SPF Spectrum Resilience workshop on 03 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
This policy brief highlights the uncertainties facing the UK in the field of intellectual property protection upon leaving the EU, with consideration of ways of mitigating that uncertainty.
Why does the UK impose export controls?
What is controlled (and what is not)?
How does the licensing process work?
What are the different types of licence?
How are the controls enforced, what are the penalties?
How to avoid delays and risks in export licensing?
How BIS and Green Light Exports can provide help.
A presentation to a conference on European Dual Use Export Controls in Amsterdam, 25-26 September 2014. It offers practical tips on how to avoid delays and denials of export licence applications in the EU.
Presentation to the C5 Export Controls Forum, 20-21 May 2014 Brussels. Explores 5 main areas for reform of EU export controls, taking into account the recent European Commission Communication on reforming Dual Use controls
Comparing EAC, SADC and ECOWAS EPAs: What can ESA EPA draw from them?
Isabelle Ramdoo
ECDPM Deputy Programme Manager
24-25 November 2014
Harare, Zimbabwe
This presentation by Fabienne ILZKOVITZ & Adriaan DIERX from the DG Competition at the European Commission, was made during the Workshop on market studies selection and prioritisation of sectors and industries held on 9 March 2017 at the OECD Headquarters. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/market-studies-workshop-on-selection-prioritisation-of-sectors-industries.htm
Non agriculture market_access_issues_and_concerns_for_indiaYogesh Bandhu
A key element of the Doha Round of trade negotiations is the liberalisation of trade in industrial products, commonly known as non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Negotiations under NAMA focus on market access for all products that are not covered under the negotiations on agriculture or services and aim to reduce, if not possible to completely eliminate, tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that restrict trade in these products. The framework adopted for modalities for negotiations under NAMA, known as the ‘July Package’, envisages reduction of industrial tariffs in both developed and developing countries, according to a formula that is yet to be agreed. These negotiations are important for developing countries, as these will determine the market access opportunities available to developing countries through which they can improve their growth prospects.
As per the WTO text on NAMA of December 6, 2008, the developing countries have been asked to undertake tariff reductions of 60 - 70 per cent while the developed countries are offering a reduction of only 20 - 30 per cent based on Swiss formula for tariff reduction which gives a coefficient of 8 for developed countries and 22 on an average for developing countries. The insistence on developing countries to cut their bound tariffs in NAMA or agriculture until they go below the applied levels along with the continuation of US practice of having a bound level that is twice its actual spending on agricultural domestic subsidies has been objected by India and China.
India desires that the modalities for tariff cuts should reflect the mandate of less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments and comparability in ambition between NAMA and Agriculture.
So far as the tariff reduction is concerned, it may be mentioned that the Swiss formula should not be used for making commitments on tariff reduction as it involves the use of an arbitrary coefficient, a, which can be manipulated by member countries. Even, the simple average formula has its own limitations. For instance, it overlooks the values that are either very high or very low and thus cannot solve the problem of tariff peaks.
The simplest way is to reduce the bound levels of developed countries to 5 or 10 per cent for all tariff lines as their industries have already developed. Otherwise, the developed countries can be asked to bring their bound tariff rates to 5 to 8 per cent for those tariff lines that cover at least 98 per cent of the potential exports, and not the actual exports as that may be lower because of existing high import tariff or domestic support in importing country, of developing countries to developed countries. This potential of exports for developing countries can be calculated through revealed comparative advantage or by matching the developing countries exports and developed countries imports at different commodity classification levels.
Abhaya Sumanasena - Real Wireless - Spectrum Options techUK
Presentations from the SPF Cluster 2 & 3: Release Mechanisms & Flexible Spectrum Access workshop on 21 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Presentations from the SPF Spectrum Resilience workshop on 03 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Paul Howland - DSTL - SPF EM risk framework presentation v2techUK
Presentations from the SPF Spectrum Resilience workshop on 03 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Peter Curnow-Ford - SPF Cluster 2 - Spectrum Access EvolutiontechUK
Presentations from the SPF Cluster 2 & 3: Release Mechanisms & Flexible Spectrum Access workshop on 21 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Stephen Temple - 5GIC - Dynamic Spectrum Expansion for 21 May SPFtechUK
Presentations from the SPF Cluster 2 & 3: Release Mechanisms & Flexible Spectrum Access workshop on 21 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Nigel King - UK WISPA - Flexible Spectrum AccesstechUK
Presentations from the SPF Cluster 2 & 3: Release Mechanisms & Flexible Spectrum Access workshop on 21 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Tony lavender - Plum Consulting - Flexible Spectrum Access MethodstechUK
Presentations from the SPF Cluster 2 & 3: Release Mechanisms & Flexible Spectrum Access workshop on 21 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Cliff Mason - Ofcom - Spectrum Awards, Access and SharingtechUK
Presentations from the SPF Cluster 2 & 3: Release Mechanisms & Flexible Spectrum Access workshop on 21 May 2018
More information about the UK Spectrum Policy Forum is available here.
http://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Tony lavender - Plum Consulting - incorporating social value into spectrum al...techUK
Incorporating Social Value into Spectrum Allocation Decisions
Presentation to UK Spectrum Policy Forum - Cluster 3: Economic and Social Value of Spectrum
29 March 2018
Tony Lavender
More information on the UK Spectrum Policy Forum can be found here: https://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
Philip bates - Analysys Mason - spectrum policy forum 29 march 2018techUK
Overview of Analysys Mason 2012 study on the value of spectrum to the UK economy
Presentation to UK Spectrum Policy Forum - Cluster 3: Economic and Social Value of Spectrum
29 March 2018
Philip Bates
More information on the UK Spectrum Policy Forum can be found here: https://www.techuk.org/about/uk-spectrum-policy-forum
LF Energy Webinar: Electrical Grid Modelling and Simulation Through PowSyBl -...DanBrown980551
Do you want to learn how to model and simulate an electrical network from scratch in under an hour?
Then welcome to this PowSyBl workshop, hosted by Rte, the French Transmission System Operator (TSO)!
During the webinar, you will discover the PowSyBl ecosystem as well as handle and study an electrical network through an interactive Python notebook.
PowSyBl is an open source project hosted by LF Energy, which offers a comprehensive set of features for electrical grid modelling and simulation. Among other advanced features, PowSyBl provides:
- A fully editable and extendable library for grid component modelling;
- Visualization tools to display your network;
- Grid simulation tools, such as power flows, security analyses (with or without remedial actions) and sensitivity analyses;
The framework is mostly written in Java, with a Python binding so that Python developers can access PowSyBl functionalities as well.
What you will learn during the webinar:
- For beginners: discover PowSyBl's functionalities through a quick general presentation and the notebook, without needing any expert coding skills;
- For advanced developers: master the skills to efficiently apply PowSyBl functionalities to your real-world scenarios.
Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey 2024 by 91mobiles.pdf91mobiles
91mobiles recently conducted a Smart TV Buyer Insights Survey in which we asked over 3,000 respondents about the TV they own, aspects they look at on a new TV, and their TV buying preferences.
Generating a custom Ruby SDK for your web service or Rails API using Smithyg2nightmarescribd
Have you ever wanted a Ruby client API to communicate with your web service? Smithy is a protocol-agnostic language for defining services and SDKs. Smithy Ruby is an implementation of Smithy that generates a Ruby SDK using a Smithy model. In this talk, we will explore Smithy and Smithy Ruby to learn how to generate custom feature-rich SDKs that can communicate with any web service, such as a Rails JSON API.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 4DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 4. In this session, we will cover Test Manager overview along with SAP heatmap.
The UiPath Test Manager overview with SAP heatmap webinar offers a concise yet comprehensive exploration of the role of a Test Manager within SAP environments, coupled with the utilization of heatmaps for effective testing strategies.
Participants will gain insights into the responsibilities, challenges, and best practices associated with test management in SAP projects. Additionally, the webinar delves into the significance of heatmaps as a visual aid for identifying testing priorities, areas of risk, and resource allocation within SAP landscapes. Through this session, attendees can expect to enhance their understanding of test management principles while learning practical approaches to optimize testing processes in SAP environments using heatmap visualization techniques
What will you get from this session?
1. Insights into SAP testing best practices
2. Heatmap utilization for testing
3. Optimization of testing processes
4. Demo
Topics covered:
Execution from the test manager
Orchestrator execution result
Defect reporting
SAP heatmap example with demo
Speaker:
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
Key Trends Shaping the Future of Infrastructure.pdfCheryl Hung
Keynote at DIGIT West Expo, Glasgow on 29 May 2024.
Cheryl Hung, ochery.com
Sr Director, Infrastructure Ecosystem, Arm.
The key trends across hardware, cloud and open-source; exploring how these areas are likely to mature and develop over the short and long-term, and then considering how organisations can position themselves to adapt and thrive.
Software Delivery At the Speed of AI: Inflectra Invests In AI-Powered QualityInflectra
In this insightful webinar, Inflectra explores how artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming software development and testing. Discover how AI-powered tools are revolutionizing every stage of the software development lifecycle (SDLC), from design and prototyping to testing, deployment, and monitoring.
Learn about:
• The Future of Testing: How AI is shifting testing towards verification, analysis, and higher-level skills, while reducing repetitive tasks.
• Test Automation: How AI-powered test case generation, optimization, and self-healing tests are making testing more efficient and effective.
• Visual Testing: Explore the emerging capabilities of AI in visual testing and how it's set to revolutionize UI verification.
• Inflectra's AI Solutions: See demonstrations of Inflectra's cutting-edge AI tools like the ChatGPT plugin and Azure Open AI platform, designed to streamline your testing process.
Whether you're a developer, tester, or QA professional, this webinar will give you valuable insights into how AI is shaping the future of software delivery.
UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series, part 3DianaGray10
Welcome to UiPath Test Automation using UiPath Test Suite series part 3. In this session, we will cover desktop automation along with UI automation.
Topics covered:
UI automation Introduction,
UI automation Sample
Desktop automation flow
Pradeep Chinnala, Senior Consultant Automation Developer @WonderBotz and UiPath MVP
Deepak Rai, Automation Practice Lead, Boundaryless Group and UiPath MVP
The Art of the Pitch: WordPress Relationships and SalesLaura Byrne
Clients don’t know what they don’t know. What web solutions are right for them? How does WordPress come into the picture? How do you make sure you understand scope and timeline? What do you do if sometime changes?
All these questions and more will be explored as we talk about matching clients’ needs with what your agency offers without pulling teeth or pulling your hair out. Practical tips, and strategies for successful relationship building that leads to closing the deal.
Slack (or Teams) Automation for Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Soluti...Jeffrey Haguewood
Sidekick Solutions uses Bonterra Impact Management (fka Social Solutions Apricot) and automation solutions to integrate data for business workflows.
We believe integration and automation are essential to user experience and the promise of efficient work through technology. Automation is the critical ingredient to realizing that full vision. We develop integration products and services for Bonterra Case Management software to support the deployment of automations for a variety of use cases.
This video focuses on the notifications, alerts, and approval requests using Slack for Bonterra Impact Management. The solutions covered in this webinar can also be deployed for Microsoft Teams.
Interested in deploying notification automations for Bonterra Impact Management? Contact us at sales@sidekicksolutionsllc.com to discuss next steps.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
2. What will we cover?
1. UK Space Exports – value and region
2. Key features of FTAs
3. Trade policy priorities
4. Priority non-EU markets and barriers
5. Example provisions in current FTAs
6. Questions
3. 1. UK Space Exports: value and region
£5bn revenue through exports in 2014/15
UKSA/DIT export survey top markets
Location Income (£m) Percentage of income (%)
Rest of Europe 2,452 49
North America 957 19
Asia Pacific 793 16
Africa and Middle East 398 8
South America 369 8
Undefined 34 0
TOTAL 5,008
Top 10 Non-EU Export Markets Top 10 Import Markets
1. USA 6. India 1. USA 6. South Korea
2. Japan = 7. GCC 2. Russia N/A
3. China = 7. South Africa 3. Israel N/A
= 4. South Korea = 7. Israel 4. Japan N/A
= 4. Russia 10. Brazil 5. China N/A
4. 2. Key features of FTAs
FTAs are bilateral or regional trade agreements
covering ‘substantially all trade’
In theory, pretty much every aspect of trade is on the
table, including: tariffs, services (including
establishment), procurement, product standards, IP,
regulatory barriers.
In reality, certain areas, including defence
procurement aren’t.
Typically take years to negotiate.
But, FTA negotiations create wider dynamics on
economic cooperation. Also UK will seek to pursue
commercial interests in advance of finalising FTAs.
5. 3. Trade Policy Priorities
For manufacturers, the key barriers are:
Restricted government procurement (effectively closed to foreign firms in most major space
nations)
Commercial presence restrictions – e.g. equity ownership
Weak intellectual property enforcement
UK export controls
For operators, the key barriers are:
Regulatory/security requirements - countries often require operators to build gateway
infrastructure to land signals which is costly, restricting or preventing market access
Licensing and testing requirements on satellite equipment
Spectrum allocation
Restrictions on selling direct to customer, requirement to use national incumbants
Local establishment restrictions
For applications, the key barriers are:
Commercial presence restrictions
Restrictions on services, including cross-border trade in services including digital/data
Regulatory barriers affecting DTH, including domestic firms buying from foreign operators
6. What does the export survey tell us?
Market Access Barrier % Respondents
UK export controls 55.56%
Preference to domestic suppliers 50.00%
Regulatory barriers 41.67%
Restricted government procurement 41.67%
Requirement to use national incumbents as intermediaries 36.11%
Customs procedures 33.33%
Security concerns 33.33%
Weak intellectual property protection 30.56%
Licensing requirements 19.44%
High tariffs 16.67%
Export survey supports this assessment and has informed it. All but UK export
controls can be tackled through trade negotiations.
7. 4. Priority non-EU markets and barriers
Focused on markets without EU FTAs already in place…
Tier 1 countries (large developed space nations)
USA
India
China
Tier 2 countries (mixture developed and developing space
nations)
Japan
GCC
Brazil
Indonesia
Others (developing space nations and LICs)
8. FTA Priorities: USA
Opportunity
The US is the largest producer and consumer of space-based products and services.
US government procurement (through DoD and NASA) accounts for around 13% of
global space revenue. US commercial space sector of similar size.
The North American market (USA & Canada combined) accounts for 19% of total UK
export revenues (c. £1bn p/a).
Barriers
No tariffs. Open commercial market, but extremely competitive
Highly restrictive procurement – ‘Buy American’ – but reasons for optimism: Buy
American waivers, special status as part of US National Technology and Industrial
Base (implications?)
Procurement is key:
Achieving access for UK companies through an FTA is likely to require concerted
bilateral diplomacy as part of trade and defence cooperation, along with R&D
collaborations. Time for a campaign?
Defensive interests:
US highly competitive and subsidised by huge institutional procurement, effective
cross-subsidisation. Any further UK opening must be contingent on the US opening
its procurement to UK suppliers.
We need Technology Safeguard Agreement (TSA) for launch programmes –
opportunities/risks?
9. FTA Priorities: India
Opportunity
6th largest space market (institutional). Largely self-sufficient, but does buy technologies
and tier 1 and 2 products. Nascent commercial sector and significant potential for
downstream applications – e.g. climate, agriculture, education, health.
No accurate export data, but identified as priority country by industry through the Space
Growth Partnership (SGP) and 6th largest export market in space survey.
Barriers
10% tariffs.
Restricted procurement– role of Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) and its
commercial arm Antrix.
Very high regulatory barriers affecting operators – ISRO again … incl. preference Indian
satellites, need to provide capacity through ISRO (middle-man), licenses (media), import
licenses for handsets, gateway infrastructure, in-flight connectivity
But some positive signs, recently permitted 100% FDI in space sector, ISRO committed to
increase commercial procurement, ‘downstream’ opportunities
10. FTA Priorities: China
Opportunity
China is the 3rd largest market (institutional). Increasingly sophisticated and self-sufficient,
but keen to buy technology. Dominated by government.
No accurate import/export data. From export survey, 3rd most important non-EU export
market and 5th most important source of imports.
Barriers
Tariffs low (0% parts, 2-2.5% satellites). Weak IP protection and technology transfer
requirements.
Export controls are the major barrier for manufacturers
Restrictive FDI rules: foreign equity restrictions, for telecoms need JV with State owned
enterprise and high capital requirement (c.US150m)
Restrictive type approval of terminals.
Regulatory restrictions on operators – e.g. lease through ‘qualified domestic entity’, but
some pragmatism.
11. Other markets
Japan: 4th largest institutional market. Export survey:
2nd non-EU export market. Regulatory barriers and
preference for domestic suppliers. Value of UK-Japan
Satellite Procurement Agreement (like US one).
GCC: 5% tariff on parts. Export controls. Security
requirements.
Brazil: opaque and burdensome regulations. Satcom
operators face triple-tax (to domestic customer, to 2nd
domestic customer, to consumer)
Indonesia: opaque and unclear regulations. Security
requirements (for govt. censorship) favours domestic
suppliers. Possible equity restrictions …
12. 5. Example provisions in current FTAs
Specific space-sector provisions in EU FTAs include:
EU-South Korea FTA allows EU satellite
broadcasters to operate directly cross-border into
South Korea, thus avoiding the obligation to liaise
with a Korean operator.
EU-Canada CETA proffers access to procurement
by the Canadian Space Agency, covering goods
and services limited to those related to satellite
communications, earth observation and global
navigation satellite systems.
13. 6. Questions…
Have we identified the right countries – e.g.
focusing on new FTA countries, not lower tier
markets etc?
Have we identified the right barriers, what’s
missing, what relative importance?
What is the best way of engaging space industry
on specific barriers as negotiations progress?
Contact:
philip.brown@ukspaceagency.bis.gsi.gov.uk