Thoughts from the European Space Generation Workshop 2026

A few weeks ago we attended the European Space Generation Workshop at the Royal Institution, organised by the Space Generation Advisory Council and co-sponsored by Mewburn Ellis.

The event brought together students, entrepreneurs, investors, engineers and policymakers from across Europe to discuss the future of the sector. There was plenty of enthusiasm, plenty of ambition, and no shortage of ideas.

On reflection three themes jumped out for me.

1. Europe is looking for scale

One topic that came up repeatedly was Europe and its place on the global stage. Can and should Europe compete with other leading space superpowers? Project BROMO, the proposed combination of major space activities from Airbus, Leonardo and Thales was discussed as one potential step in this direction. Whatever view you take of the project itself, the underlying reason it exists is interesting. Europe increasingly finds itself competing against organisations that benefit from scale, whether enormous multinationals, or state-backed programmes elsewhere. With increasing national and supra-national commitments to space spending, in defence and beyond, the appetite to focus that spend in Europe is strong. Project BROMO may be one way to hold those spending commitments in Europe. Substantial competition concerns are yet to be addressed, but the project itself puts European space ambition high on the agenda.

Large organisations are best placed to deliver major programmes and deploy large amounts of capital. Smaller organisations are often where the most disruptive ideas originate. The challenge for the European ecosystem is ensuring that, in pursuing scale, it doesn't lose the agility and entrepreneurial spirit that have helped drive many of the sector's recent successes, and to maintain a pipeline for turning the small into the big. 

Increased space spending will flow through to Tier 2 and 3 suppliers, too. Can Europe support, grow and, crucially, keep the start ups and SMEs to contribute to the European supply chain?

2. The Valley of Death is still alive and well

Many space companies can demonstrate exciting technology, but that’s never enough. Far fewer can navigate the difficult journey between early technical validation and commercial deployment. Capital requirements are increasing. In space, costly failures can happen despite due diligence. The focus technology of a small company may not be pursued because of failures elsewhere in the complex supply chain and in the processes of getting to space and staying there.

The period often referred to as the "valley of death" remains a major hurdle. Investors are being asked to back technologies that show promise but have not yet been fully proven in operational conditions.

What struck me was the extent to which intellectual property could form part of that discussion. It can demonstrate that a company has developed something different. With accompanying strategy that explains the commercial landscape, it can demonstrate a degree of strategic thinking from the all-important growth company leadership. Most importantly, it can provide an identifiable asset at a stage when revenues, customers and commercial traction may still be limited.

A patent is not evidence that a technology works. Equally, investors are rarely investing solely because a company has patents. However, strong IP can help tell a story of a risk worth taking.

3. Sustainability in space is becoming more nuanced

There was also some fascinating discussion around (ISAM). Tech in in-orbit servicing, assembly and manufacturing (ISAM) tends to focus on what happens in orbit: servicing satellites, manoeuvre, extending mission life, removing debris and manufacturing components in space. Less attention is paid to what happens when missions end.

Questions around controlled re-entry, atmospheric ablation and consequent pollution, space craft recovery and environmental impact are likely to become increasingly important as orbital activity continues to grow. Space “sustainability” is moving beyond orbital congestion, and towards a more holistic view of the entire lifecycle of space assets. It feels like an area where plenty of technical challenges, and opportunities, remain. As space continues to become more commercial, the environmental impact of our space activities warrants careful consideration.

Reasons to be optimistic

The challenges facing the European space sector are real. Funding remains difficult, competition is intense, and geopolitical considerations continue to shape the industry. That said, opportunities are there. Whether the European institutions and investment environment can fully capitalise on them remains to be seen, but at least the opportunities are there. That is grounds for optimism.

At the same time, it is hard not to be encouraged by the quality of people entering the sector and their willingness to tackle difficult problems. Whether the discussion was about industrial consolidation, investment, sustainability or technological development, there was a clear recognition that Europe's future in space will depend on continued innovation in business and in technology, with the accompanying appetite to rise to those challenges.