IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/9725.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Defense R&D Policy in the Anti-terrorist Era

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel Trajtenberg

Abstract

This paper seeks to analyze the nature of the terrorist threat following 9/11, and to explore the implications for defense R&D policy. First it reviews the defining trends of defense R&D since the cold war, and brings in pertinent empirical evidence: The US accumulated during the 1990s a defense R&D stock 10 times larger than any other country, and almost 30 times larger than Russia. Big weapon systems, key during the cold war but of dubious significance since then still figure prominently, commanding 30% of current defense R&D spending, vis a vis just about 13% for intelligence and antiterrorism. The second part of the paper examines the nature of the terrorist threat, focusing on the role of uncertainty, the lack of deterrence, and the extent to which security against terrorism is (still) a public good. I develop for that purpose a simple model of terrorism, cast in a nested discrete choice framework. Two strategies are considered: fighting terrorism at its source, and protecting individual targets, which entails a negative externality. Contrary to the traditional case of national defense, security against terrorism becomes a mixed private/public good. A key result of the model is that the government should spend enough on fighting terrorism at its source, so as to nullify the incentives of private targets to invest in their own security. Intelligence emerges as the key aspect of the war against terrorism and, accordingly, R&D aimed at providing advanced technological means for intelligence is viewed as the cornerstone of defense R&D. This entails developing computerized sensory interfaces, and increasing the ability to analyze vast amounts of data. Both have direct civilian applications, and therefore the required R&D is mostly dual use'. Indeed, there is already a private market for these systems, with a large number of players. R&D programs designed to preserve this diversity and to encourage further competition may prove beneficial both for the required R&D, and for the economy at large.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel Trajtenberg, 2003. "Defense R&D Policy in the Anti-terrorist Era," NBER Working Papers 9725, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:9725
    Note: PR PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w9725.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cowan, Robin & Foray, Dominique, 1995. "Quandaries in the economics of dual technologies and spillovers from military to civilian research and development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 851-868, November.
    2. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Ian Ayres & Steven D. Levitt, 1998. "Measuring Positive Externalities from Unobservable Victim Precaution: An Empirical Analysis of Lojack," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(1), pages 43-77.
    4. Lichtenberg, Frank R., 1995. "Economics of defense R&D," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 15, pages 431-457, Elsevier.
    5. Enders, Walter & Sandler, Todd, 1995. "Terrorism: Theory and applications," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 213-249, Elsevier.
    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. Eckstein, Zvi & Tsiddon, Daniel, 2004. "Macroeconomic consequences of terror: theory and the case of Israel," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 971-1002, July.
    2. Eldor, Rafi & Melnick, Rafi, 2004. "Financial markets and terrorism," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 367-386, June.
    3. Chad R. Wilkerson & Megan D. Williams, 2008. "How is the rise in national defense spending affecting the Tenth District economy?," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 93(Q II), pages 49-79.
    4. Howard Kunreuther & Erwann Michel-Kerjan & Beverly Porter, 2003. "Assessing, Managing, and Financing Extreme Events: Dealing with Terrorism," NBER Working Papers 10179, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Manuel Trajtenberg, 2004. "Crafting Defense R&D Policy in the Anti-Terrorist Era," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 1-34, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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. Manuel Trajtenberg, 2006. "Defense R&D In The Anti-Terrorist Era," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 177-199.
    2. Angus C. Chu & Ching-Chong Lai, 2012. "On the Growth and Welfare Effects of Defense R&D," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 14(3), pages 473-492, June.
    3. Falck, Oliver & Wiederhold, Simon, 2013. "Nachfrageorientierte Innovationspolitik," Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem 12-2013, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin.
    4. Renaud Bellais, 1999. "Defense R&D and information technology in a long-term perspective la rd militaire et les technologies de l'information en longue période," Working Papers 28, Laboratoire de Recherche sur l'Industrie et l'Innovation. ULCO / Research Unit on Industry and Innovation.
    5. Manuel Trajtenberg, 2004. "Crafting Defense R&D Policy in the Anti-Terrorist Era," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 1-34, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Mowery, David C., 2010. "Military R&D and Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1219-1256, Elsevier.
    7. Gianluca Pallante & Emanuele Russo & Andrea Roventini, 2020. "Does mission-oriented funding stimulate private R&D? Evidence from military R&D for US states," LEM Papers Series 2020/32, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    8. Deleidi, Matteo & Mazzucato, Mariana, 2021. "Directed innovation policies and the supermultiplier: An empirical assessment of mission-oriented policies in the US economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    9. Matteo Deleidi & Mariana Mazzucato, 2019. "Mission-Oriented Innovation Policies: A Theoretical And Empirical Assessment For The Us Economy," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0248, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    10. Sakakibara, Mariko, 1997. "Evaluating government-sponsored R&D consortia in Japan: who benefits and how?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4-5), pages 447-473, December.
    11. Ufuk Akcigit & Murat Celik & Daron Acemoglu, 2014. "Young, Restless and Creative: Openness to Disruption and Creative Innovations," 2014 Meeting Papers 377, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    12. Panayotis Dessyllas & Alan Hughes, 2005. "R&D and Patenting Activity and the Propensity to Acquire in High Technology Industries," Industrial Organization 0507008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Luis Aguiar & Jörg Claussen & Christian Peukert, 2018. "Catch Me If You Can: Effectiveness and Consequences of Online Copyright Enforcement," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 656-678, September.
    14. Dirk Czarnitzki & Hanna Hottenrott & Susanne Thorwarth, 2011. "Industrial research versus development investment: the implications of financial constraints," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 527-544.
    15. Asmund Rygh & Gabriel R. G. Benito, 2018. "Capital Structure of Foreign Direct Investments: A Transaction Cost Analysis," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 389-411, June.
    16. Elie Sadigh, 1996. "Endogenous growth and neoclassical school [Croissance endogène et école néoclassique]," Working Papers hal-01526907, HAL.
    17. Tom Kirchmaier & Stephen Machin & Matteo Sandi & Robert Witt, 2020. "Prices, Policing and Policy: The Dynamics of Crime Booms and Busts," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1040-1077.
    18. Oliver Falck & Anita Fichtl & Tobias Lohse & Friederike Welter & Heike Belitz & Cedric von der Hellen & Carsten Dreher & Carsten Schwäbe & Dietmar Harhoff & Monika Schnitzer & Uschi Backes-Gellner & C, 2019. "Steuerliche Forschungsförderung: Wichtiger Impuls für FuE-Aktivitäten oder zu wenig zielgerichtet?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 72(09), pages 03-25, May.
    19. Jarle Moen, 2005. "Is Mobility of Technical Personnel a Source of R&D Spillovers?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 81-114, January.
    20. Tom Broekel & Matthias Brachert & Matthias Duschl & Thomas Brenner, 2015. "Joint R and D subsidies, related variety, and regional innovation," Working Papers on Innovation and Space 2015-01, Philipps University Marburg, Department of Geography.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods
    • H56 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - National Security and War

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:9725. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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: (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.