IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/epc/journl/v12y2017i1p38-45.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The European defense market: Disruptive innovation and market destabilization

Author

Listed:
  • Renaud Bellais

    (Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Techniques Avancées Bretagne (ENSTA Bretagne), Brest, France)

  • Daniel Fiott

    (Institute for European Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium)

Abstract

The global defense industry is shifting toward a new paradigm in which an emphasis on technology-driven capability development is being undermined by disruptive innovations emanating from the commercial sector. This evolution is likely to result in important effects on the defense market, lessening barriers to entry and turning upside down the approach to innovation. For the defense sector this entails that shifts in the organizational behavior of firms and military establishments are required if the full benefits of innovation are to be captured and integrated into defense capability development processes. This article analyses this shifting paradigm with the European defense market as a departure point. Briefly exploring the shifts in defense industrial processes since the 20th century, this article outlines the benefits of integrating the defense and civilian technological and industrial bases.

Suggested Citation

  • Renaud Bellais & Daniel Fiott, 2017. "The European defense market: Disruptive innovation and market destabilization," Economics of Peace and Security Journal, EPS Publishing, vol. 12(1), pages 38-45, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:epc:journl:v:12:y:2017:i:1:p:38-45
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.epsjournal.org.uk/index.php/EPSJ/article/view/287
    Download Restriction: Open access 24 months after original publication.
    ---><---

    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. Rogerson, William P, 1990. "Quality vs. Quantity in Military Procurement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 83-92, March.
    2. Oren Setter & Asher Tishler, 2006. "A Brave Leap Or A Gradual Climb? The Dynamics Of Investment In R&D Of Integrative Technologies," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 201-222.
    3. Kulve, Haico te & Smit, Wim A., 2003. "Civilian-military co-operation strategies in developing new technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 955-970, June.
    4. repec:dau:papers:123456789/1397 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. David Kirkpatrick, 2004. "Trends in the costs of weapon systems and the consequences," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 259-273.
    6. Renaud Bellais & Renelle Guichard, 2006. "Defense Innovation, Technology Transfers And Public Policy," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 273-286.
    7. Kathleen A. Walsh, 2007. "China R&D: A High-Tech Field of Dreams1," Asia Pacific Business Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 321-335, July.
    8. Sofia Börjesson; & Maria Elmquist, 2012. "Aiming at innovation: a case study of innovation capabilities in the Swedish defence industry," International Journal of Business Innovation and Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(2), pages 188-201.
    9. Andrew Middleton & Steven Bowns & Keith Hartley & James Reid, 2006. "The Effect Of Defence R&D On Military Equipment Quality," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 117-139.
    10. Renaud Bellais & Renelle Guichard, 2006. "Defense, Innovation, Technology Transfers and Public Policy in France," Post-Print hal-01160780, HAL.
    11. Stowsky, Jay, 2004. "Secrets to shield or share? new dilemmas for military R&D policy in the digital age," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 257-269, March.
    12. Kurth, James R, 1972. "The Political Economy of Weapons Procurement: The Follow-On Imperative," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(2), pages 304-311, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Roland Zullo & Yijun Liu, 2017. "Contending With Defense Industry Reallocations: A Literature Review of Relevant Factors," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 31(4), pages 360-372, November.
    2. Renaud Bellais, 2013. "Technology and the defense industry: real threats, bad habits, or new (market) opportunities?," Post-Print hal-00947395, HAL.
    3. Renaud Bellais & Martial Foucault & Jean-Michel Oudot, 2014. "Économie de la défense," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01052607, HAL.
    4. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Rosario Marin, 2011. "Potential Dual-Use Of Military Technology: Does Citing Patents Shed Light On This Process?," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 335-349.
    5. Gholz, Eugene & James, Andrew D. & Speller, Thomas H., 2018. "The second face of systems integration: An empirical analysis of supply chains to complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1478-1494.
    6. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Rosario Marín & Pedro Prats, 2013. "Factors affecting the diffusion of patented military technology in the field of weapons and ammunition," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(1), pages 1-22, January.
    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. Bo Kyeong Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1203-1227, September.
    9. Jean Belin & Marianne Guille & Nathalie Lazaric & Valérie Mérindol, 2019. "Defense Firms Adapting to Major Changes in the French R&D Funding System," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 142-158, February.
    10. Patrick S. Roberts & Jon Schmid, 2022. "Government‐led innovation acceleration: Case studies of US federal government innovation and technology acceleration organizations," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(3), pages 353-378, May.
    11. Ozgur T rpan, 2019. "Analyzing the Enablers for Turkish Defence Industry Supply Chains: An Interpretive Structural Modelling Approach," International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, Econjournals, vol. 9(3), pages 205-212.
    12. Federico Caviggioli & Antonio De Marco & Giuseppe Scellato, 2020. "Investigating the capabilities and the competitiveness of the EU vis-à-vis its main competitors in developing civilian technologies with critical spillovers into the defence," JRC Research Reports JRC120293, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Malik, Tariq H., 2018. "Defence investment and the transformation national science and technology: A perspective on the exploitation of high technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 199-208.
    14. Federico Caviggioli & Antonio De Marco & Giuseppe Scellato, 2018. "Assessing the innovation capability of EU companies in developing dual use technologies," JRC Research Reports JRC113915, Joint Research Centre.
    15. Jeffrey Ding & Allan Dafoe, 2021. "Engines of Power: Electricity, AI, and General-Purpose Military Transformations," Papers 2106.04338, arXiv.org.
    16. Michael P. Leidy & Robert W. Staiger, 1985. "Economic Issues and Methodology in Arms Race Analysis," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 503-530, September.
    17. Christine Duke & Cameron McKean, 2008. "Alternative methodologies for projecting defence spending," Economic Roundup, The Treasury, Australian Government, issue 2, pages 1-11, July.
    18. Yongmin Chen & Ron Smith, 2001. "Equilibrium Cost Overruns," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 2(2), pages 401-414, November.
    19. Renaud Bellais & Fanny Coulomb, 2013. "Le Complexe militaro-industriel, cinquante ans après Eisenhower," Post-Print hal-03299767, HAL.
    20. S Y Sohn & Y Kim & B T Kim, 2009. "Cost of ownership model for spare engines purchase for the Korean navy acquisition program," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(12), pages 1674-1682, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Defence; innovation; Europe; technology; disruption;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O52 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economywide Country Studies - - - Europe

    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:epc:journl:v:12:y:2017:i:1:p:38-45. 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 Brown, Managing Editor, EPSJ (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecaarea.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.