IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sru/ssewps/52.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Political and Economic Context of European defence R&D

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Along with all other defence-related issues, defence research is a controversial area for EU action. Until recently, defence issues have not figured prominently among EU policy discussions and defence research has played little, if any, role in European technology policy. Although the Framework Programme is funding research projects that could have potential military applications in addition to their explicit civilian goals, there is no strategy on how to address such "dual-use" research activities. Yet, this paper argues that the interaction between technologies developed for civilian and for military use has led to a situation in which it is increasingly difficult to refer to distinct military and civilian technology bases. From the point of view of policy formulation a strict separation between defence and civilian technologies is increasingly appearing as anachronistic. The extent to which "dual-use" research will be explicitly considered in the development of the 6th Framework Programme will again emerge as a matter of debate. The paper presents and discusses different avenues through which dual-use and defence-related research could be given formal consideration in the development and implementation of the 6th Framework Programme.

Suggested Citation

  • Jordi Molas-Gallart, 2000. "The Political and Economic Context of European defence R&D," SPRU Working Paper Series 52, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:52
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sussex.ac.uk/Units/spru/publications/imprint/sewps/sewp52/sewp52.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Molas-Gallart, Jordi, 1997. "Which way to go? Defence technology and the diversity of 'dual-use' technology transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 367-385, October.
    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. McLeish, Caitriona & Nightingale, Paul, 2007. "Biosecurity, bioterrorism and the governance of science: The increasing convergence of science and security policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1635-1654, December.

    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. James A. Cunningham & Paul O’Reilly, 2018. "Macro, meso and micro perspectives of technology transfer," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 545-557, June.
    2. Gholz, Eugene & James, Andrew D. & Speller, Thomas H., 2018. "The second face of systems integration: An empirical analysis of supply chains to complex product systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1478-1494.
    3. Kulve, Haico te & Smit, Wim A., 2003. "Civilian-military co-operation strategies in developing new technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 955-970, June.
    4. Andrew James, 2006. "The Transatlantic Defence R&D Gap: Causes, Consequences And Controversies," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 223-238.
    5. 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.
    6. Kartuzov Iegor, 2020. "Evaluation of dual use materials science technologies issue in Ukraine – «trick or treat»," Technology audit and production reserves, Socionet;Technology audit and production reserves, vol. 5(4(55)), pages 48-52.
    7. Jianzhong Xu & Song Zhang, 2020. "An Evaluation Study of the Capabilities of Civilian Manufacturing Enterprises Entering the Military Products Market under the Background of China’s Civil–Military Integration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-23, March.
    8. Tor Bukkvoll & Tomas Malmlöf & Konstantin Makienko, 2017. "The defence industry as a locomotive for technological renewal in Russia: are the conditions in place?," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 232-249, April.
    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. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Daniel Stenholm & Daniel Corin Stig & Lars Ivansen & Dag Bergsjö, 2019. "A framework of practices supporting the reuse of technological knowledge," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 128-145, June.
    13. Stowsky, Jay, 2004. "Secrets to shield or share? new dilemmas for military R&D policy in the digital age," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 257-269, March.
    14. Bo Kyeong Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "Exploring the effect of dual use on the value of military technology patents based on the renewal decision," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1203-1227, September.
    15. Manuel Trajtenberg, 2006. "Defense R&D In The Anti-Terrorist Era," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 177-199.
    16. 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.
    17. Kuan, Jennifer & West, Joel, 2023. "Interfaces, modularity and ecosystem emergence: How DARPA modularized the semiconductor ecosystem," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EU research policy; defence; dual-use research;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:sru:ssewps:52. 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: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spessuk.html .

    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.