IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/jecper/v8y1994i4p91-110.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Competition Policy, Rivalries, and Defense Industry Consolidation

Author

Listed:
  • William E. Kovacic
  • Dennis E. Smallwood

Abstract

Declining outlays for new weapons programs have triggered a process of consolidation that promises to shrink the U.S. defense industry drastically. Consolidation in the defense industry raises complex competition policy issues that are not amenable to conventional antitrust merger analysis. This paper presents a framework for identifying important contractor competencies, assessing rivalries in defense industry segments, and evaluating the competitive effects of mergers and other consolidation events. As applied to antitrust oversight and to Department of Defense funding, program, and acquisition strategy decisions, this framework can help preserve supply alternatives for developing state-of-the-art weapons needed to satisfy national security requirements.

Suggested Citation

  • William E. Kovacic & Dennis E. Smallwood, 1994. "Competition Policy, Rivalries, and Defense Industry Consolidation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 91-110, Fall.
  • Handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:8:y:1994:i:4:p:91-110
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/jep.8.4.91
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.8.4.91
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keith J. Crocker & Kenneth J. Reynolds, 1993. "The Efficiency of Incomplete Contracts: An Empirical Analysis of Air Force Engine Procurement," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(1), pages 126-146, Spring.
    2. Kovacic, William E, 1991. "Commitment in Regulation: Defense Contracting and Extensions to Price Caps," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 219-240, September.
    3. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 1990. "Measuring the effectiveness of competition in defense procurement: A survey of the empirical literature," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 9(1), pages 60-79.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew James, 2009. "Reevaluating the role of military research in innovation systems: introduction to the symposium," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(5), pages 449-454, October.
    2. Yugank Goyal, 2019. "How Governments Promote Monopolies: Public Procurement in India," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 78(5), pages 1135-1169, November.
    3. Andreas Blume & Asher Tishler, 2000. "Security Needs and the Performance of the Defense Industry," CIG Working Papers FS IV 00-04, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    4. Wipprich, Mark, 2007. "Preisbindung als Kooperationsinstrument in Wertschöpfungsnetzwerken," Arbeitspapiere 60, University of Münster, Institute for Cooperatives.
    5. David R. King & John D. Driessnack, 2007. "Analysis Of Competition In The Defense Industrial Base: An F‐22 Case Study," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(1), pages 57-66, January.
    6. Richard L. Fullerton & R. Preston McAfee, 1999. "Auctioning Entry into Tournaments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(3), pages 573-605, June.
    7. Saar Golde & Asher Tishler, 2004. "Security Needs, Arms Exports, and the Structure of the Defense Industry," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(5), pages 672-698, October.
    8. Marc Guyot & Radu Vranceanu, 1997. "Quelle réglementation pour le secteur de la Défense : l'expérience américaine," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 12(3), pages 167-193.
    9. Simonyan, Karen, 2014. "What determines takeover premia: An empirical analysis," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 93-125.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. William P. Rogerson, 1994. "Economic Incentives and the Defense Procurement Process," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 65-90, Fall.
    2. Yossef Spiegel, 1996. "The Role of Debt in Procurement Contracts," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 379-407, September.
    3. William P. Rogerson, 1993. "Economic Incentives and the Defense Procurement Process," Discussion Papers 1078, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    4. Renaud Bellais & Martial Foucault & Jean-Michel Oudot, 2014. "Économie de la défense," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01052607, HAL.
    5. Thomas P. Lyon, 2000. "Competition and Technological Complexity in Procurement: An Empirical Study of Dual Sourcing," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 0420, Econometric Society.
    6. Ariño, Africa & Reuer, Jeffrey J., 2004. "Alliance contractual design," IESE Research Papers D/572, IESE Business School.
    7. Roussey, Ludivine & Soubeyran, Raphael, 2018. "Overburdened judges," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-32.
    8. Mayer, Kyle J. & Teece, David J., 2008. "Unpacking strategic alliances: The structure and purpose of alliance versus supplier relationships," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 106-127, April.
    9. Kosnik, Lea & Lange, Ian, 2011. "Contract renegotiation and rent re-distribution: Who gets raked over the coals?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 155-165, September.
    10. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2004. "The Efficiency of Public Sector Outsourcing Contracts: A Literature Review," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n29, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    11. Iossa, Elisabetta & Martimort, David, 2016. "Corruption in PPPs, incentives and contract incompleteness," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 85-100.
    12. Artz, Kendall W. & Brush, Thomas H., 2000. "Asset specificity, uncertainty and relational norms: an examination of coordination costs in collaborative strategic alliances," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 337-362, April.
    13. Ernan Haruvy & Elena Katok & Zhongwen Ma & Suresh Sethi, 2019. "Relationship-specific investment and hold-up problems in supply chains: theory and experiments," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 45-74, April.
    14. Rodrigo Carril & Andres Gonzalez-Lira & Michael S. Walker, 2022. "Competition under Incomplete Contracts and the Design of Procurement Policies," Working Papers 1327, Barcelona School of Economics.
    15. Jose Alcalde & Matthias Dahm, 2016. "Proportional payoffs in legislative bargaining with weighted voting: a characterization," Discussion Papers 2016-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    16. Vettas, Nikolaos & Biglaiser, Gary, 2004. "Dynamic Price Competition with Capacity Constraints and Strategic Buyers," CEPR Discussion Papers 4315, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Wang, Sen & Bogle, Tim & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2012. "Forestry and the New Institutional Economics," Working Papers 130818, University of Victoria, Resource Economics and Policy.
    18. Edward Wheatcroft & Henry P. Wynn & Victoria Volodina & Chris J. Dent & Kristina Lygnerud, 2021. "Model-Based Contract Design for Low Energy Waste Heat Contracts: The Route to Pricing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, June.
    19. Stéphane Saussier, 2000. "Coûts de transaction et choix contractuels : un test économétrique sur une entreprise publique," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 145(4), pages 169-180.
    20. Weisman, Dennis L., 2002. "Is there 'Hope' for price cap regulation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 349-370, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H56 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - National Security and War

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:8:y:1994:i:4:p:91-110. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.