IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v31y2009i4p342-349.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The politics of airplane production: The emergence of two technological frames in the competition between Boeing and Airbus

Author

Listed:
  • Ibsen, Alexander Z.

Abstract

Economic models of technological innovation, as well as modern sociological approaches to the study of organizations, predict that two-actor markets will eventually evolve into one dominant technological logic. Why is it, then, that the only two global manufacturers of large commercial airplanes have developed diametrically opposed technological philosophies? Based on secondary historical sources, this article employs a theory of two-party democracies from political science and the theory of sociotechnical frames to explain why Boeing pilots are allowed ultimate command of their aircraft whereas Airbus confers this authority to the flight computer.

Suggested Citation

  • Ibsen, Alexander Z., 2009. "The politics of airplane production: The emergence of two technological frames in the competition between Boeing and Airbus," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 342-349.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:31:y:2009:i:4:p:342-349
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2009.10.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X09000827
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2009.10.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Irwin, Douglas A. & Pavcnik, Nina, 2004. "Airbus versus Boeing revisited: international competition in the aircraft market," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 223-245, December.
    2. Giovannetti, Emanuele, 2001. "Perpetual Leapfrogging in Bertrand Duopoly," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 42(3), pages 671-696, August.
    3. Steven R. Beckman, 2003. "Cournot and Bertrand Games," The Journal of Economic Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 27-35, January.
    4. Anthony Downs, 1957. "An Economic Theory of Political Action in a Democracy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(2), pages 135-135.
    5. Tombak, Mihkel M., 2006. "Strategic asymmetry," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 339-350, November.
    6. Carbaugh Robert J & Olienyk John, 2004. "Boeing-Airbus Subsidy Dispute: A Sequel," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 1-11, December.
    7. Garcia Pires, Armando José, 2006. "Losers, Winners and Prisoner's Dilemma in International Subsidy Wars," CEPR Discussion Papers 5979, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Arnold Barnett, 2000. "Free-Flight and en Route Air Safety: A First-Order Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(6), pages 833-845, December.
    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. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    2. Diana Terrazas‐Santamaria, 2021. "Strategic introduction of a new product under uncertainty: A duopoly case," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(4), pages 796-807, June.
    3. Yadong Zhang & Chao Zhang & Shaoping Wang & Rentong Chen & Mileta M. Tomovic, 2022. "Performance Degradation Based on Importance Change and Application in Dissimilar Redundancy Actuation System," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, March.

    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. Christophe Crombez, 2004. "Introduction," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 227-231, July.
    2. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    3. Kaivan Munshi & Mark Rosenzweig, 2008. "The Efficacy of Parochial Politics: Caste, Commitment, and Competence in Indian Local Governments," NBER Working Papers 14335, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Burkhard Schipper & Hee Yeul Woo, 2012. "Political Awareness and Microtargeting of Voters in Electoral Competition," Working Papers 124, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    5. Marco Faravelli & Randall Walsh, 2011. "Smooth Politicians And Paternalistic Voters: A Theory Of Large Elections," Levine's Working Paper Archive 786969000000000250, David K. Levine.
    6. Hank C. Jenkins-Smith & Neil J. Mitchell & Kerry G. Herron, 2004. "Foreign and Domestic Policy Belief Structures in the U.S. and British Publics," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(3), pages 287-309, June.
    7. Agnès Bénassy‐Quéré & Lionel Fontagné & Horst Raff, 2011. "Exchange‐rate Misalignments in Duopoly: The Case of Airbus and Boeing," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 623-641, April.
    8. Eric Kaufmann & Henry Patterson, 2006. "Intra‐Party Support for the Good Friday Agreement in the Ulster Unionist Party," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(3), pages 509-532, October.
    9. Micael Castanheira, 2003. "Why Vote For Losers?," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(5), pages 1207-1238, September.
    10. Peter J. Coughlin, 2015. "Probabilistic voting in models of electoral competition," Chapters, in: Jac C. Heckelman & Nicholas R. Miller (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Voting, chapter 13, pages 218-234, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Mihir Bhattacharya, 2019. "Constitutionally consistent voting rules over single-peaked domains," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 52(2), pages 225-246, February.
    12. Marc Henry & Ismael Mourifié, 2013. "Euclidean Revealed Preferences: Testing The Spatial Voting Model," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 650-666, June.
    13. , & ,, 2006. "Group formation and voter participation," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 1(4), pages 461-487, December.
    14. Dendi Ramdani & Arjen Witteloostuijn, 2012. "The Shareholder–Manager Relationship and Its Impact on the Likelihood of Firm Bribery," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 495-507, July.
    15. Alan E. Wiseman, 2006. "A Theory of Partisan Support and Entry Deterrence in Electoral Competition," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 18(2), pages 123-158, April.
    16. Alessandro Olper & Johan Swinnen, 2013. "Mass Media and Public Policy: Global Evidence from Agricultural Policies," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 27(3), pages 413-436.
    17. Armèn Hakhverdian, 2009. "Capturing Government Policy on the Left–Right Scale: Evidence from the United Kingdom, 1956–2006," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 720-745, December.
    18. Sven Banisch & Eckehard Olbrich, 2021. "An Argument Communication Model of Polarization and Ideological Alignment," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 24(1), pages 1-1.
    19. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    20. Peter Nijkamp & Marc van der Burch & Gabriella Vindigni, 2002. "A Comparative Institutional Evaluation of Public-Private Partnerships in Dutch Urban Land-use and Revitalisation Projects," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 39(10), pages 1865-1880, September.

    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:eee:teinso:v:31:y:2009:i:4:p:342-349. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.