IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v43y2015icp23-32.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Military utility: A proposed concept to support decision-making

Author

Listed:
  • Andersson, Kent
  • Bang, Martin
  • Marcus, Carina
  • Persson, Björn
  • Sturesson, Peter
  • Jensen, Eva
  • Hult, Gunnar

Abstract

A concept called Military Utility is proposed for the study of the use of technology in military operations. The proposed concept includes a three-level structure representing key features and their detailed components. On basic level the Military Utility of a technical system, to a military actor, in a specific context, is a compound measure of the military effectiveness, of the assessed technical system's suitability to the military capability system and of the affordability. The concept is derived through conceptual analysis and is based on related concepts used in social sciences, the military domain and Systems Engineering. It is argued that the concept has qualitative explanatory powers and can support military decision-making regarding technology in forecasts, defense planning, development, utilization and the lessons learned process. The suggested concept is expected to contribute to the development of the science of Military-Technology and to be found useful to actors related to defense.

Suggested Citation

  • Andersson, Kent & Bang, Martin & Marcus, Carina & Persson, Björn & Sturesson, Peter & Jensen, Eva & Hult, Gunnar, 2015. "Military utility: A proposed concept to support decision-making," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 23-32.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:43:y:2015:i:c:p:23-32
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.07.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X15000573
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.07.001?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. Sartori, Giovanni, 1970. "Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(4), pages 1033-1053, 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. Liwång, Hans, 2022. "Defense development: The role of co-creation in filling the gap between policy-makers and technology development," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).

    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. Xinyu Zhang & Yue Liao, 2023. "A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Populism Research (2000–2020)," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    2. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    3. Peters, Ina, 2014. "Too Abstract to Be Feasible? Applying the Grounded Theory Method in Social Movement Research," GIGA Working Papers 247, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    4. Pursey Heugens & J. Oosterhout & Muel Kaptein, 2006. "Foundations and Applications for Contractualist Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 211-228, October.
    5. Xiaohong Yu & Zhaoyang Sun, 2022. "The company they keep: When and why Chinese judges engage in collegiality," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 936-1002, December.
    6. Thomas Denk, 2013. "How to measure polyarchy with Freedom House: a proposal for revision," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 3457-3471, October.
    7. Liesbet Hooghe & Gary Marks, 2015. "Delegation and pooling in international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 305-328, September.
    8. Graeme Auld & Stefan Renckens, 2017. "Rule-Making Feedbacks through Intermediation and Evaluation in Transnational Private Governance," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 670(1), pages 93-111, March.
    9. Mathieu Rousselin, 2012. "The EU as a Multilateral Rule Exporter - The Global Transfer of European Rules via International Organizations," KFG Working Papers p0048, Free University Berlin.
    10. Jessica F Green, 2017. "Policy entrepreneurship in climate governance: Toward a comparative approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(8), pages 1471-1482, December.
    11. Louise Tillin, 2013. "National and Subnational Comparative Politics: Why, What and How," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 1(2), pages 235-240, December.
    12. Kaminski Joseph Jon, 2019. "Rethinking Realism and Constructivism Through the Lenses of Themes and Ontological Primacy," Croatian International Relations Review, Sciendo, vol. 25(85), pages 6-29, November.
    13. Mueller, Klaus, 1997. "East European studies, neo-totalitarianism and social science theory," Discussion Papers, Presidential Department P 97-004, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    14. Gutiérrez Sanín, Francisco, 2009. "The quandaries of coding and ranking: evaluating poor state performance indexes," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28483, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. Riccardo Pelizzo, 2018. "Democracy and Governance," Research Africa Network Working Papers 18/004, Research Africa Network (RAN).
    16. Moshe Maor, 1995. "Intra-Party Determinants of Coalition Bargaining," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 7(1), pages 65-91, January.
    17. Suraj Jacob, 2015. "Towards a Comparative Subnational Perspective on India," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 3(2), pages 229-246, December.
    18. Giovanni Sartori, 1993. "Totalitarianism, Model Mania and Learning from Error," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 5(1), pages 5-22, January.
    19. Daniel Buarque, 2023. "What makes a serious country? The status of Brazil’s seriousness from the perspective of great powers," Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 19(3), pages 359-370, September.
    20. Giovanni Capoccia, 2002. "Anti-System Parties," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 14(1), pages 9-35, January.

    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:43:y:2015:i:c:p:23-32. 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.