One aspect of designing future space missions is to determine whether Space Assembly and Servicing (SAS) is useful and, if so, what combination of robots and astronauts provides the most effective means of accomplishing it. Certain aspects of these choices, such as the societal value of developing the means for humans to live in space, do not lend themselves to quantification. However, other SAS costs and benefits can be quantified in a manner that can help select the most cost-effective SAS approach. Any space facility, whether it is assembled and serviced or not, entails an eventual replacement cost due to wear and obsolescence. Servicing can reduce this cost by limiting replacement to only failed or obsolete components. However, servicing systems, such as space robots, have their own logistics cost, and astronauts can have even greater logistics requirements. On the other hand, humans can be more capable than robots at performing dexterous and unstructured tasks, which can reduce logistics costs by allowing a reduction in mass of replacement components. Overall, the cost-effectiveness of astronaut SAS depends on its efficiency; and, if astronauts have to be wholly justified by their servicing usefulness, then the serviced space facility has to be large enough to fully occupy them.