IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v14y2026a11244.html

Mission Green: Defense, Decarbonization, and the Politics of Transformative Mission‐Oriented Innovation Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos Cantafio Apitz

    (Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, Canada)

  • Darius Ornston

    (Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, Canada)

  • Trang Thu Nguyen

    (Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, Canada)

Abstract

The urgency of decarbonization has generated increasing interest in using mission-oriented innovation policies to achieve net-zero emissions. An energy transformation, however, requires managing a much more complex portfolio of supply- and demand-side initiatives than traditional, “linear” missions. “Transformative” innovation policy thus poses a formidable administrative and political challenge, particularly for large, federal, liberal market economies. Leveraging variation in state capacity within the US, we find that the Department of Defense is better positioned to pursue transformative, green innovation policies than the Department of Energy, despite the latter’s central position in national decarbonization efforts. Specifically, the Department of Defense’s scale and scope enable it to coordinate across a wide array of policy instruments, actors, and priorities. Whereas efforts to endow the Department of Energy with similar capacities sparked a backlash, the Department of Defense’s bipartisan mandate to confront geotech challenges and its ability to leverage secrecy have insulated it from political interference. In illustrating how one large, liberal polity has succeeded (and struggled) in pursuing decarbonization, we highlight the distinct administrative and political capabilities which underpin transformative innovation policy, the tension between them, and one strategy to soften this tradeoff.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos Cantafio Apitz & Darius Ornston & Trang Thu Nguyen, 2026. "Mission Green: Defense, Decarbonization, and the Politics of Transformative Mission‐Oriented Innovation Policy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 14.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v14:y:2026:a:11244
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.11244
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/11244
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.11244?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carril, Rodrigo & Duggan, Mark, 2020. "The impact of industry consolidation on government procurement: Evidence from Department of Defense contracting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. Bonvillian, William B. & Weiss, Charles, 2015. "Technological Innovation in Legacy Sectors," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199374519.
    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. Andrea Migone & David Chen & Bryan Evans & Alex Howlett & Michael Howlett, 2025. "“Is Lobbying for Losers?”: Corporate Behavior and Canadian Military Procurement Contracting," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 558-582, April.
    2. Cappelletti, Matilde & Giuffrida, Leonardo M., 2022. "Targeted bidders in government tenders," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-030, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Sofia Patsali, 2021. "University Procurement-led Innovation," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-13, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    4. Boland, Matthew & Godsell, David, 2021. "Bureaucratic discretion and contracting outcomes," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Rodrigo Carril, 2021. "Rules Versus Discretion in Public Procurement," Working Papers 1232, Barcelona School of Economics.
    6. Pearson, R.J. & Costley, A.E. & Phaal, R. & Nuttall, W.J., 2021. "Corrigendum to “Technology Roadmapping for mission-led agile hardware development: a case study of a commercial fusion energy start-up” Technological Forecasting & Social Change 158 (2020) 120064," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. Anastasios Tsakalidis & Mitchell van Balen & Konstantinos Gkoumas & Ferenc Pekar, 2020. "Catalyzing Sustainable Transport Innovation through Policy Support and Monitoring: The Case of TRIMIS and the European Green Deal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    8. Wolff Guntram B. & Steinbach Armin & Zettelmeyer Jeromin, 2025. "The Governance and Funding of European Rearmament," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Paradigm, vol. 60(4), pages 210-214.
    9. Amy Finkelstein & Nathaniel Hendren, 2020. "Welfare Analysis Meets Causal Inference," NBER Working Papers 27640, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Thornton Jeremy & Lecy Jesse, 2019. "Good Enough for Government Work? An Incomplete Contracts Approach to the Use of Nonprofits in U.S. Federal Procurement," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, October.
    11. Kyle R. Myers & Lauren Lanahan & Evan E. Johnson, 2025. "Small Business Innovation Applied to National Needs," NBER Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, volume 5, pages 97-132, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. De Jaegher, Kris & Šoltés, Michal & Titl, Vítězslav, 2025. "Easing renegotiation rules in public procurement: Evidence from a policy reform," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    13. Jonas Minet Kinge & Jostein Grytten, 2021. "The impact of primary care physician density on perinatal health: Evidence from a natural experiment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(12), pages 2974-2994, December.
    14. Carril, Rodrigo, 2026. "Effizienz in der Verteidigungsbeschaffung: Best Practices für Europas Sicherheit," Kiel Reports 6, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    15. Vivek Bhattacharya, 2021. "An Empirical Model of R&D Procurement Contests: An Analysis of the DOD SBIR Program," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(5), pages 2189-2224, September.
    16. Leonardo M. Giuffrida & Gabriele Rovigatti, 2022. "Supplier selection and contract enforcement: Evidence from performance bonding," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 980-1019, November.
    17. Joshua D. Gottlieb & Maria Polyakova & Kevin Rinz & Hugh Shiplett & Victoria Udalova, 2020. "Who Values Human Capitalists' Human Capital? Healthcare Spending and Physician Earnings," Working Papers 20-23, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    18. Francesco Decarolis & Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Leonardo M. Giuffrida & Elisabetta Iossa & Vincenzo Mollisi & Emilio Raiteri & Giancarlo Spagnolo, 2021. "Buyers' role in innovation procurement: Evidence from US military R&D contracts," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 697-720, November.
    19. J. Atsu Amegashie, 2024. "Rules, Discretion, Corruption, and Efficient Sole-Sourcing in Procurement," CESifo Working Paper Series 11489, CESifo.
    20. Howell, Sabrina T. & Rathje, Jason & Van Reenen, John & Wong, Jun, 2021. "Opening up Military Innovation: Causal Effects of 'Bottom-up' Reforms to U.S. Defense Research," IZA Discussion Papers 14297, IZA Network @ LISER.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cog:poango:v14:y:2026:a:11244. 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: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    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.