SustainabilityOf.Space：宇宙活動ベンチマークフレームワーク — 指標化手法

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:セクター特化型サステナビリティ指標の設計手法（ライフサイクル区分・属性タグ付け・段階的成熟モデル）の一事例として参照できる。

🏢実務担当者:宇宙関連事業者は、ISSB・ESRSでは手薄な軌道環境・廃棄・寿命延長などの開示論点を整理する際のチェックリストとして活用できる。

🏛政策担当者:新興セクターに対する開示インフラの自主的整備と、公式基準への段階的接続のあり方を検討する参考になる。

This record sets out the indexing methodology behind the Space Activity Benchmark Framework (Draft Version 0.3, 14 November 2026). SustainabilityOf.Space, a trading name of Callala Ltd, uses the framework to assess publicly available disclosures from organisations active in and around the space sector. The assessments inform the Space Index and the Space Leaderboard. The framework assesses the sustainability of space activities, rather than of the organisation as a whole. In its current working form, it follows the physical lifecycle of space systems through seven lifecycle stages, called Partner Categories: design and manufacture testing and pre-launch launch and ascent in-orbit operations space traffic and orbital conduct end-of-life and disposal future circularity and life extension These stages contain a combined 24 benchmark categories. Each benchmark category is tagged with primary and secondary attributes drawn from the S4SR concepts: Safety, Security, Sustainability, and Survivability & Resilience. The attributes act as cross-cutting metadata rather than as the primary hierarchy. This keeps the structure anchored in physical reality and stable as policy terminology evolves. The framework is designed to complement broader reporting regimes such as the ISSB standards and ESRS, not to replace them. It focuses on issues that are specific to space or disproportionately material to space activities. Each benchmark category is assessed through three questioning layers: Awareness, Recognition and Prevention Implementation, Protection and Process Integration, Stewardship, Intentionality and Recovery Binary or nominal disclosure questions support AI-assisted assessment. Each category then receives a five-level benchmark position (Excellent, Good, OK, Weak, Poor), designed to be derived from human assessment of publicly disclosed evidence alone. A taxonomy-first process decides in advance which categories apply to each organisation.  The framework is intended to mature from disclosure (Phase 1), through benchmarking (Phase 2, the current target), to quantified measurement (Phase 3). This is a working draft published to provide a stable, citable reference. It has not been peer-reviewed. When citing specific partner and/or benchmark categories, please use the version-specific DOI and the category code (for example, BC5.2).

• Zenodo https://zenodo.org/records/24221093first seen 2026-11-15 04:14:30