IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/defpea/v17y2006i3p273-286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Defense Innovation, Technology Transfers And Public Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Renaud Bellais
  • Renelle Guichard

Abstract

The role of defense in national innovation systems is highly topical, because of the complexity of defense systems and the desire to get value-for-money from R&D investment, especially through the commercialization of defense-funded technology. In practice, external transfer has proved to be a difficult, labor-intensive process, which requires a strong commitment from both parties. Here, intellectual property rights (IPR) appear as a strong incentive for collaboration. Analyzing the lack of IPR culture in defense industries elucidates the difficulties and failures in spin-off attempts. We finally propose strategies leading to a market for defense-born technology.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:defpea:v:17:y:2006:i:3:p:273-286
    DOI: 10.1080/10242690600645274
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10242690600645274
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10242690600645274?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bronwyn H. HALL, 2004. "University-Industry Research Partnerships in the United States," Economics Working Papers ECO2004/14, European University Institute.
    2. Hobday, Mike, 2000. "The project-based organisation: an ideal form for managing complex products and systems?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 871-893, August.
    3. Graham Spinardi, 2000. "Prospects for the Defence Diversification Agency: Technology transfer and the UK defence research establishments," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 123-135, April.
    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. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
    6. Alfonso Gambardella, 2002. "'Successes' and 'Failures' in the Markets for Technology," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(1), pages 52-62, Spring.
    7. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2004. "Little Patents and Big Secrets: Managing Intellectual Property," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 1-22, Spring.
    8. William M. Dugger, 1996. "The Mechanisms of Governance," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 1212-1216, December.
    9. repec:dau:papers:123456789/1316 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. 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.
    2. Renaud Bellais & Martial Foucault & Jean-Michel Oudot, 2014. "Économie de la défense," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01052607, HAL.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.

    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. Hong, Xianpei & Zhou, Menghuan & Gong, Yeming, 2021. "Dilemma of quality information disclosure in technology licensing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(2), pages 543-557.
    2. Williamson, Oliver, 2009. "The Theory of the Firm as Governance Structure: From Choice to Contract," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 6, pages 111-134, December.
    3. Guillaume Daudin, 2006. "Paying Transaction Costs," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2006-14, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    4. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/942 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Pierre-André Chiappori & Bernard Salanié, 2002. "Testing Contract Theory : A Survey of Some Recent Work," Working Papers 2002-11, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    6. Volker Mahnke, 2001. "The Process of Vertical Dis-Integration: An Evolutionary Perspective on Outsourcing," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 5(3), pages 353-379, September.
    7. Frank A.G. den Butter, 2012. "Managing Transaction Costs in the Era of Globalization," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14748.
    8. Niesten, Eva & Jolink, Albert, 2012. "Incentives, opportunism and behavioral uncertainty in electricity industries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 1031-1039.
    9. Bernard Paulré, 2001. "Enjeux et dilemmes de l'économie cognitive," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00135486, HAL.
    10. Christopher Schlägel & Birgitta Wolff, 2007. "Country-Specific Effects of Reputation and Information: A Comparison of Online Auctions in Germany, the UK, and the US," FEMM Working Papers 07027, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    11. Stoneham, Gary & Chaudhri, Vivek & Ha, Arthur & Strappazzon, Loris, 2003. "Auctions for conservation contracts: an empirical examination of Victoria’s BushTender trial," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(4), pages 1-24.
    12. Jérôme Barthélemy & Dominique Geyer, 2005. "An empirical investigation of IT outsourcing vs. quasi-outsourcing in France and Germany," Post-Print hal-00764228, HAL.
    13. Lichtenthaler, Ulrich & Ernst, Holger, 2007. "Developing reputation to overcome the imperfections in the markets for knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 37-55, February.
    14. Raynaud, Emmanuel & Sauvee, Loïc, 1999. "Common labelling and producer organisations: a transaction cost economics approach," 67th Seminar, October 28-30, 1999, LeMans, France 241743, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2005. "The Governance Of Localized Knowledge: An Information Economics Approach For The Economics Of Knowledge," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200502, University of Turin.
    16. Edward Stringham, 2014. "Extending the Analysis of Spontaneous Market Order to Governance," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 42(2), pages 171-180, June.
    17. Kherallah, Mylene & Kirsten, Johann F, 2002. "The New Institutional Economics: Applications For Agricultural Policy Research In Developing Countries," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 41(2).
    18. repec:zbw:inwedp:702017 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Jongwook Kim & Joseph T. Mahoney, 2002. "Resource-based and property rights perspectives on value creation: the case of oil field unitization," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(4-5), pages 225-245.
    20. Sadowski, Bert M., 2017. "Consumer cooperatives as an alternative form of governance: The case of the broadband industry," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 86-97.
    21. Gagliardi, Francesca, 2008. "Institutions and economic change: A critical survey of the new institutional approaches and empirical evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 416-443, February.
    22. Purkus, Alexandra & Gawel, Erik & Thrän, Daniela, 2012. "Bioenergy governance between market and government failures: A new institutional economics perspective," UFZ Discussion Papers 13/2012, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).

    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:taf:defpea:v:17:y:2006:i:3:p:273-286. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GDPE20 .

    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.