IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcybxx/v3y2018i3p445-466.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative industrial policy and cybersecurity: the US case

Author

Listed:
  • Vinod K. Aggarwal
  • Andrew W. Reddie

Abstract

This paper investigates the relationship between the US government and its domestic cybersecurity sector drawing on the special issue framework. We show how there has been, and argue that we will likely continue to see, substantial public investment in the sector by the US government via industrial policy to address cybersecurity market failures. This analysis is particularly important given that both the market failures associated with the provision of cybersecurity and the government role in addressing this challenge remain under-explored in the existing academic and policy literature. The paper proceeds in three parts. First, it outlines the unique categories of three types of firms – those in the cybersecurity sector, large technology companies and internet-adjacent firms – involved in the under-provision of cybersecurity and examines possible market failures. Second, we inventory existing measures employed by the US government to engage with each type of firm to address real and perceived market failures in these different sectors. Finally, we examine how state-society relations have conditioned US government intervention approaches in this sector and argue that well-established IT firms now have a privileged lobbying role related to state-society relations in the United States.

Suggested Citation

  • Vinod K. Aggarwal & Andrew W. Reddie, 2018. "Comparative industrial policy and cybersecurity: the US case," Journal of Cyber Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 445-466, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcybxx:v:3:y:2018:i:3:p:445-466
    DOI: 10.1080/23738871.2018.1551910
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23738871.2018.1551910
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23738871.2018.1551910?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.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rcybxx:v:3:y:2018:i:3:p:445-466. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/rcyb .

    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.