IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v116y2017icp151-161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Changing characteristics of warfare and the future of Military R&D

Author

Listed:
  • Burmaoglu, Serhat
  • Sarıtas, Ozcan

Abstract

Wars have been a part of humanity since prehistoric times, and are expected to remain an important component of future human societies. Since the beginning of the history wars have evolved in parallel with the changes in Society, Technology, Economy, Environment, Politics and Values (STEEPV). The changing circumstances unavoidably affect the characteristics of warfare through its motivations, shape and size. Armies have adapted themselves to these changing characteristics of warfare through Revolutions in Military Affairs (RMAs) by introducing new military concepts and technologies. Based on the overview of the evolution of military technologies and concepts as a response to changing conditions, the aim of the present study is to anticipate what and how future technologies and concepts will shape warfare and drive impending RMAs. To answer this question, first the RMA literature is reviewed within a broader historical context to understand the extent to which military concepts and technologies affected the RMAs. Then, a time-based technological trend analysis is conducted through the analysis of military patents to understand the impact of technological developments on military concepts. Following the historical analyses, two scenarios are developed for the future of military R&D based on ‘concept-driven’ and ‘technology-driven’ factors. The article is concluded with a discussion about the implications of future scenarios for military R&D, and likely RMAs through the changes of concepts and technologies, and possible consequences such as transformations in organizational structures of armies, new skill and capacity requirements, military education systems, and decision-making processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Burmaoglu, Serhat & Sarıtas, Ozcan, 2017. "Changing characteristics of warfare and the future of Military R&D," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 151-161.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:116:y:2017:i:c:p:151-161
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.10.062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516305376
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.10.062?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. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Nelson, Andrew J., 2009. "Measuring knowledge spillovers: What patents, licenses and publications reveal about innovation diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 994-1005, July.
    4. Nils Petter Gleditsch & Peter Wallensteen & Mikael Eriksson & Margareta Sollenberg & Hã…Vard Strand, 2002. "Armed Conflict 1946-2001: A New Dataset," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 39(5), pages 615-637, September.
    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. Lee, Jun Gon & Park, Min Jae, 2019. "Rethinking the national defense R&D innovation system for latecomer: Defense R&D governance matrix," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Ozcan Saritas & Derrick Ababio Anim, 2017. "The Last and Next 10 Years of Foresight," HSE Working papers WP BRP 77/STI/2017, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    3. Klusáček, Petr & Martinát, Stanislav & Krejčí, Tomáš & Bartke, Stephan, 2019. "Re-development of a former military training area—The case of Brdy told from a local actors’ perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 147-157.
    4. Meng, Jia-Hui & Wang, Jian, 2023. "The policy trajectory of dual-use technology integration governance in China: A sequential analysis of policy evolution," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(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. Choe, Hochull & Lee, Duk Hee & Seo, Il Won & Kim, Hee Dae, 2013. "Patent citation network analysis for the domain of organic photovoltaic cells: Country, institution, and technology field," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 492-505.
    2. Subtil Lacerda, Juliana & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2020. "Effectiveness of an ‘open innovation’ approach in renewable energy: Empirical evidence from a survey on solar and wind power," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    3. Haschka, Rouven E. & Herwartz, Helmut, 2020. "Innovation efficiency in European high-tech industries: Evidence from a Bayesian stochastic frontier approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    4. Plank, Josef & Doblinger, Claudia, 2018. "The firm-level innovation impact of public R&D funding: Evidence from the German renewable energy sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 430-438.
    5. Sears, Joshua B., 2018. "Post-acquisition integrative versus independent innovation: A story of dueling success factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1688-1699.
    6. Epicoco, Marianna, 2013. "Knowledge patterns and sources of leadership: Mapping the semiconductor miniaturization trajectory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 180-195.
    7. Kang, Byeongwoo, 2015. "The innovation process of Huawei and ZTE: Patent data analysis," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 378-393.
    8. Saritas, Ozcan & Burmaoglu, Serhat, 2016. "Future of sustainable military operations under emerging energy and security considerations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 331-343.
    9. Jan Kinne & Janna Axenbeck, 2020. "Web mining for innovation ecosystem mapping: a framework and a large-scale pilot study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2011-2041, December.
    10. Crown, Daniel & Faggian, Alessandra & Corcoran, Jonathan, 2020. "Foreign-Born graduates and innovation: Evidence from an Australian skilled visa program✰,✰✰,★,★★," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    11. Lederman, Daniel & Saenz, Laura, 2005. "Innovation and development around the world, 1960-2000," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3774, The World Bank.
    12. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    13. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    14. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan, 2013. "Do firms face a trade-off between the quantity and the quality of their inventions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1072-1079.
    15. Mueller, Hannes & Rauh, Christopher, 2018. "Reading Between the Lines: Prediction of Political Violence Using Newspaper Text," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 112(2), pages 358-375, May.
    16. Dreher, Axel & Fuchs, Andreas & Langlotz, Sarah, 2019. "The effects of foreign aid on refugee flows," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 127-147.
    17. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    18. Florent Silve & Alexander Plekhanov, 2018. "Institutions, innovation and growth : Evidence from industry data," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 26(3), pages 335-362, July.
    19. Aiello, Francesco & Albanese, Giuseppe & Piselli, Paolo, 2019. "Good value for public money? The case of R&D policy," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1057-1076.
    20. Maria Cipollina & Giorgia Giovannetti & Filomena Pietrovito & Alberto F. Pozzolo, 2012. "FDI and Growth: What Cross-country Industry Data Say," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1599-1629, November.

    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:tefoso:v:116:y:2017:i:c:p:151-161. 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: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    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.