Skip to main content
main-content

Über dieses Buch

This book explores European security and defense R&D policy, unveiling the strategic, industrial, institutional and ideational sources of the European Commission’s military research initiative. Starting from a well-defined empirical epicentre—the rise of non-civilian R&D priorities in the European Union—this book covers interrelated themes and topics such as approaches to arms production and R&D collaboration relationships between European R&D-related institutions technology and research foundations of European security policy past and present European armament collaborations transatlantic R&D collaboration the militarization of border security.

Divided into 5 sections, the enclosed chapters explore the EU technology and innovation policy in regards to security, industrial competitiveness and military capabilities. The terrorist attacks in the US on September 11, 2001 provided a window of opportunity for the introduction of security as a distinct European R&D priority. In fact, since 2002, the Preparatory Action for Security Research (PASR) has funded 45 million euros to 39 research consortia to conduct security R&D. While the idea of pooling defense research efforts and programmes in Europe is not new, the establishment of institutions like the European Defense Agency (EDA) are a major step into institutionalizing European agencies involvement in supporting defense technology research. It is against this backdrop of policy developments that this book is positioned, in addition to addressing some of the political, economic, industrial and philosophical questions that arise.

Featuring contributions from a variety of academic fields and industries, this book will be of interest to scholars, researchers, students and policy makers in the fields of security policy, international relations, innovation, European studies and military studies.

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Frontmatter

Chapter 1. Introduction

Abstract
The evolution of the European science and technology policy has been a process characterised by an ever-increasing financial commitment at the EU level (e.g. what started with 3.3 billion ECUs in the first Framework Programme (FP1) has reached 82 billion euros in H2020), an enlargement of thematic areas (focal point of FPs moved from energy and IT to more diverse and more ‘horizontal’ themes, including researcher mobility), a growing awareness of its economic implications (knowledge-based economy, technology-intensive economic growth, industrial policy) as well as its linkages to education and innovation policies (higher education area, innovation union). Despite this growing spiral, European science and technology policy was committed to one specific characteristic: its civilian orientation. Non-civilian topics, such as funding for defence research, were explicitly excluded from the scope of FPs for reasons that go back to WWII and the notion that EU is a force of good.
Nikolaos Karampekios, Iraklis Oikonomou, Elias Carayannis

Theoretical Considerations

Frontmatter

Chapter 2. Policy Entrepreneurship and Agenda Setting: Comparing and Contrasting the Origins of the European Research Programmes for Security and Defense

Abstract
This chapter builds on the theoretical and empirical insights of Edler and James (Res Policy 44:1252–1265, 2015) to examine the origins of the European Defence Research Programme (EDRP).
Edler and James (Res Policy 44:1252–1265, 2015) used a process tracing methodology to examine the emergence of the European Security Research Programme (ESRP) as part of the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7). The case study shows that the emergence of the ESRP could only be understood by taking into account the policy entrepreneurship of the European Commission. In particular, the paper identifies the role of individual mid-ranking Commission officials who identified a window of opportunity to put the theme on the agenda and mobilized the political and financial resources of selected Directorate Generals of the European Commission. The policy entrepreneurs orchestrated the framing of this policy through managing ideational discourse and mobilizing existing and novel actor networks. In doing so the Commission gained the credibility to be the venue for science and technology policy in the area of security research. The paper also showed how the policy entrepreneurs used ambiguity in the definition of the meaning, scope and rationale for “security research” as a means of assembling a transnational coalition of interests and masking the initial cognitive and normative differences that existed between the various interest actors. The chapter will use process tracing to examine the origins of the EDRP. Specifically, the chapter will consider whether – following neofunctionalism (Haas EB, The uniting of Europe: political, social and economic forces 1950–57. Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1958; Sandholtz W, Stone Sweet A (eds), European integration and supranational governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998; Stone Sweet A, Sandholtz W, Fligstein N (eds), The institutionalization of Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001) – the EDRP is simply an instance of “spillover” from security research to defense research or whether other factors are at play.
Andrew D. James

Chapter 3. The Horizon 2020 European Defence Research Program and the Economic Consequences of Military R&D

Abstract
After an assessment of the Horizon 2020 European Defence Research Program, this article discusses the basic assumption behind both civilian and military expenditures, namely, that such expenditures foster economic growth and are successful anti-crises policies. First, the historical example of the long period of economic growth following WWII is considered. The conclusion is reached that it was economic growth that made possible such expenditures rather than the other way around. Theoretical arguments and empirical data are submitted to substantiate this claim. The Keynesian multiplier and its alternative, the Marxist multiplier, are examined. Finally, the article considers the advantages and disadvantages of the production and export of arms. The following conclusion is reached: the production of weapons (a) while enriching the producers of weapons contributes to the tendential fall of the average rate of profit in the producing and exporting country, (b) impoverishes the workers of the importing country and (c) responds to the offensive needs of the imperialist countries.
Guglielmo Carchedi

Chapter 4. EU Research and Technology Policy: Balancing Between the National and the EU Dimension

Abstract
Research and technological development (RTD) has been regarded as a “convenient” area of activity for the European Union, given its technical and highly extrovert nature that favors international cooperation. EU’s initiatives and allocation of funds from its budget are an indication that this particular sector has been upgraded within the EU policy agenda. Thus, dynamism in the RTD sector is an issue that has been rather recently linked with European integration, while RTD has been a focal point of EU’s growth strategies, toward 2010, at first, and then toward 2020. The content of community policy has evolved within the framework of its main policy RTD tool, namely, the Framework Programmes (FPs), but at the same time, it remains quite limited to project funding, although research and technology may be considered to be a “more European” public good than it is actually today, according to a normative approach. The existing – restrictive for the EU – allocation of competences between the national and supranational level may be explained by member states’ stance. For the purposes of this chapter, emphasis is laid on national preferences and the conceptual framework of liberal intergovernmentalism. This particular theory is used in an alternative way, for the analysis of the evolution of a sectoral policy rather than for the examination of the European integration process and big, “historical” agreements. In this context, analysis is based on reasons and parameters that prevent EU member states from transferring (more) power to the EU, such as differences between policies, research systems, and preferences of the member states.
Charalampos Chrysomallidis

Defense R&D and Industrial Collaboration

Chapter 5. The Economics of European Defense Industrial Policy

Abstract
The policy comprises a Single Market for defense equipment and a European defense industrial base. A brief history of the policy is presented. The 2016 European Defence Action Plan (EDAP) is designed to address the lack of interoperability, technology gaps and insufficient scale economies. The stylised facts of European defense spending and arms firms are outlined. The economics of arms collaboration is reviewed and assessed. Alternative models of arms collaboration are evaluated. Rising unit costs and Brexit are future challenges for the policy.
Keith Hartley

Chapter 6. The Economic Imperative of Europeanizing Defense Innovation

Abstract
Security of supply and the mastering of defense innovation are the grounds for strategic autonomy that is at the heart of true sovereignty. This is the reason why many European countries have chosen to develop and maintain a domestic defense industrial base. While such policy was relevant for decades, the rising costs of defense capabilities and budgetary constraints should push these countries to gather resources. This is notably the case for defense innovation, which requires a certain level of investment to be effective due to threshold effects. The need to Europeanize defense innovation also results from the reliance of defense industry on non-defense innovations and from the impacts of the fourth industrial revolution on arms manufacturing. In this context, the Europe Defence Fund could provide the right incentives to achieve both transformations through a true Europeanization of defense innovation.
Renaud Bellais

Chapter 7. European Collaboration in the Development of New Weapon Systems

Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is threefold: firstly, to offer a historical profile of Europe’s arms industrial collaborative experience; secondly, to evaluate the process and impact of major European collaborative programs, especially with regard to research and development (R&D); and, thirdly, to explore the contemporary status of collaborative effort in the light of recent EU policy initiatives, including the 2009 European Procurement Directive and the contemporary pressures and challenges that have forged the shape and direction of the EU’s Horizon 2020 Defence Research Programme. In this regard, the Commission’s underlying thematic is to evolve the European defense industrial base into a single common entity. Arms collaboration is viewed as a transformative device in this process, promoting cross-border engagement, enhancing military-related standardization and fostering economies of scale and industrial and technological rationalization. The chapter will analyze progress toward these goals, advancing our understanding of the topic through empirical assessment of the collaborative model’s contribution to the sustainability and enhancement of European defense R&D in a post-BREXIT environment.
Ron Matthews

Chapter 8. European Armament Collaboration: What We Can Learn from History and Concepts

Abstract
Historically, European armament cooperation takes place under very specific conditions: the European defense market is no free and regular market, as states exercise their influence aiming to retain a certain degree of defense industrial autonomy and trying to keep know-how and jobs in their respective national economies. Nor does it function only according to political will, since governments have to accept the various limitations of their national defense industry in capacity, capability and competitiveness. This situation is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Hence, the question is how to balance and moderate these diverging interests to deliver better results than in the past, when collaborative armament projects often suffered from cost overruns and delivery delays. Combining empirical evidence and conceptual approaches, which are able to interweave the logics of both systems, will provide satisfactory explanations for past experiences. Furthermore, it will enable us to develop an understanding of how future collaborations may yield greater chances for success, economically and politically.
Christian Mölling, Torben Schütz

Historical Background and Evolution

Frontmatter

Chapter 9. A Technologically Guided Explanation of the (Delayed) Emergence of EU Military Research: The Curious Antecedent of the European Aeronautics Research Programme

Abstract
The present chapter develops a technologically guided explanation around the (delayed) emergence of an EU military research program. The chapter contends that a changing technological scenario, made more critical by the security and economic consequences deriving from the end of the Cold War, came to play a major role in confirming the strategic and political significance of aeronautical industries at European level. The contribution digs into the origins of the EU involvement in research and development (R&D) affairs in order to document how defense research has only very recently come to be part of the European compound. The chapter offers an attentive reading of some of the most salient aspects characterizing the political economy of aeronautical industries and of their R&D functioning to elaborate on technological drivers and implications of policy entrepreneurial choices undertaken in the aeronautics research domain. It is argued that, in a changed global security scenario, a combined set of technological innovations registered a significant impact on both (civil-military) segments of the industry/markets accompanying a shift in the techno-economic paradigm governing aeronautical production. Technological considerations were wisely placed at the roots of the policy entrepreneurial strategies having accompanied the framing of an aeronautics research theme under the 2nd Commission’s Framework Programme. It is contented that the experience of the EU aeronautics research case proved essential in supporting the affirmation of a new model of governance for aeronautics research in Europe. By inaugurating a new order of economic and political relations, the EU aeronautics research case has been regarded as a milestone political development having marked the positive evolution toward the research themes of security and defense.
Alessandra De Angelis

Chapter 10. The European Arms Industry, the European Commission and the Preparatory Action for Security Research: Business as Usual?

Abstract
The chapter studies the making of the Preparatory Action for Security Research (PASR), which is a key episode in the development of EU security research leading to the inclusion of a security theme in FP 7. Its primary aim is to provide an in-depth description and analysis of the role of the European arms industry in the setting-up of the initiative, highlighting more broadly this actor’s centrality in the translation of security goals into research and technological output. Using PASR as a case study, the chapter highlights the embeddedness of security considerations in technological, industrial, and socio-economic objectives. Moreover, it documents the dense web of interconnections that unfolded among the industry and the European Commission as a major stakeholder in EU security policy establishment and demonstrates the social nature of the development of security research and technology and the definition of European security problems and solutions. Essentially, it introduces the European arms industry as an actor in the governance of European security research and European security per se.
Nikolaos Karampekios, Iraklis Oikonomou

Chapter 11. The Emergence of the European Defence Research Programme

Abstract
This chapter examines the emergence of the European Commission’s defense research initiative. It traces the development of a particular narrative on security, innovation, research and economic growth from Servan-Schreiber’s 1960s fears about the transatlantic security technology gap and argues that this narrative became deeply embedded in successive research programs most notably ESPRIT from the 1980s and the security research agenda that began in the 7th Framework Programme, which in turn have shaped the defense research program. The chapter then looks at the claims made by the proponents of defense research funding finding there are three interlocked claims: a technology gap or strategic autonomy claim, an economic and technological benefits claim and a security imperative argument. The chapter goes on to argue that not all these factors can be satisfied in this defense research program and that difficult trade-offs will need to be made. It concludes by asserting that these decisions have to be made with a realistic assessment of the state of the EDTIB, otherwise, the chapter will argue that this risks creating perverse incentives for member states in defense industrial policy and thus may not aid the development of the CSDP in the way it is intended.
Jocelyn Mawdsley

Actors and Institutions

Frontmatter

Chapter 12. Network Analysis of EU-Funded R&D Collaboration in the European Security Research Programme: Actors and Industries

Abstract
The purpose of this chapter is to examine the EU-funded research collaborative networks formed in the European Security Research Programme (ESRP), a €1.4 billion component of the 7th EU Framework Programme. In particular, the ESRP has the twin objectives of enhancing public safety through the development of security technologies and fostering the growth of a globally competitive European security market. Social network analysis is employed to investigate network structure and dynamics and examine the role of the participating organizations over a 7-year period. Empirical results suggest that this kind of networks is highly connected, structured around a core of key actors which are mainly large-sized firms, prestigious universities and research centers. Networking activity seems to be enhancing specific research collaboration patterns among actors with diverse technological backgrounds, scale and scope. Therefore, an important policy implication is that EU collaborative networks may significantly contribute to the formation of technology fusion, one major source of contemporary innovations in fields such as security and defense.
Evangelos Siokas

Chapter 13. The European Parliament on Space: From Promoting Scientific Research to Supporting the Common Security and Defence Policy

Abstract
The European Parliament has co-legislating authority on the EU’s space policy, and space has an increasingly important security and research dimension. Therefore, it is crucial to know what the EP’s stance is on space. Rather than taking a snapshot, the chapter will look at development of the EP’s positions toward a European space policy. Drawing on EP space resolutions and on personal interviews with MEPs and EP officials, the chapter’s main goals are to show: (1) that the EP is not shy to talk openly about the EU’s space programs being used for security purposes, (2) that the EP started pushing for a European space policy early on (earlier than other EU institutions), and (3) that research has been instrumentalized to build an EU space policy that has a security/military dimension.
Emmanuel Sigalas

Chapter 14. The EDA-European Commission Connection in EU Military R&D: Not Seeing the Forest for the Trees

Abstract
The European Defence Agency (EDA) has been critical for the shaping of EU armaments policy and, consequently, for the agenda of military research and development (R&D) at the Brussels level. As the Commission initiative on defense research falls directly into the remit of the Agency, the literature has noted the existence of rivalry between the two institutions. This conclusion is also compatible with a reading of the two institutions that emphasizes their different institutional form – supranational versus intergovernmental. Utilizing a historical materialist approach, the chapter attempts – against this consensus over inter-institutional rivalry – to highlight the inner unity of purpose that unites dialectically the EDA and the Commission as far as defense research is concerned. It does so by documenting the record of EDA in the realm of R&D and by integrating this record and the Commission initiative into a single conceptual scheme, emphasizing the unifying role of the goal of supporting the competitive position of the European arms industry.
Iraklis Oikonomou

Chapter 15. EU-NATO Cooperation: The Case of Defense R&D

Abstract
The aim of this chapter is to analyze how the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) stimulate defense research and development (R&D) cooperation among their respective members. The chapter also seeks to understand how, if at all, the EU and NATO cooperate with each other as organizations in the domain of defense R&D. Looking at each organization separately and then as interrelated institutions, this chapter aims to offer readers a clearer understanding of how European governments cooperate with one another for pursuing defense R&D.
Daniel Fiott

Novel Themes of an Emerging Agenda

Frontmatter

Chapter 16. Toward an Authentic European Defence Research Strategy: Legal Aspects

Abstract
In order to achieve the Union’s intervention in defense research, important limitations had to be lifted. The most important of these was compliance with the European treaties. Indeed, for a long time, many jurists felt that such an action was not respectful of the treaties. It was therefore necessary to demonstrate that such an action was indeed respectful of the European legal order. It was then necessary to demonstrate that the intervention of the Union would bring ‘added value’ to that of the member states, which was far from self-evident in a field where many defense industries are very jealous of their prerogatives and even hostile to intervention by the Union. Finally, the question of the amount of the budget had to be settled. Other questions still remain open, and one would think that they will be answered during the preparatory action. In particular, this concerns the governance of the EDRP. This article provides an overview of all these issues.
Fréderic Mauro

Chapter 17. The Evolving Role of the EU in Space-Related Security and Defence Research

Abstract
This chapter is dedicated to the evolving role of European research in the field of space and in particular the potential impact of the future European Defense Fund covering both research and capabilities development at European level. While the EU already demonstrated its capacity to financing dual-use space programs, this Fund could open the way to more military-oriented research. Still, many questions remain open, such as how much of this fund will be dedicated to space, to finance what exactly, which impact will the Brexit have on research funds, and, above all, to what extent national ministries of defense will accept European deeper involvement in this sensitive kind of affairs.
Lucia Marta

Chapter 18. Militarization of European Border Security

Abstract
The recent EU policy of boosting and militarizing border security, which builds upon prolonged lobbying by the European military and security industry, is reflected in EU funding for border security research and development (R&D) projects. Border security and border control are focal points in the EU’s main research programs, notably the 6th and 7th Framework Programmes and Horizon 2020. Large military and security companies, as well as research agencies, are the main profiteers of the millions the EU spends on this research. Apart from these direct profits for the industry, border security R&D research helps drive an agenda that continually seeks to expand border security, as part of the drive of the military-industrial complex to enlarge its scope and penetrate into security markets. This includes the use of an increasingly militarized security angle as a stepping stone to the financing of full-blown military research.
Mark Akkerman

Chapter 19. The Security Dimension in the Non-security FP7 Cooperation Thematic Areas

Abstract
Although security was nominated as a distinct research and development (R&D) theme (European Security Research Programme, ESRP) in the Seventh European Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7), security and security-related research themes can be identified in numerous calls issued by other R&D priorities in the Cooperation program. For example, in energy, transport, health, etc., in addition to themes found in most of the other major FP7 Programmes (ideas, etc.), given the explicitly civilian character of European research, the introduction of ESRP stood as an “anomaly”. Yet, it appears that security considerations influenced other research priorities, thus apportioning a significant part of the civilian-aimed funds. Overall, this can be seen as an interim point where non-civilian R&D priorities initiated a process leading to the militarization of EU research. To show the above, we put forward a quantitative methodology making use of database analyses.
Nikolaos Karampekios

Chapter 20. Conclusion

Abstract
This volume is set to explore the phenomenon of EU military research, from a variety of theoretical perspectives and by analysing a variety of actors and processes. The European Commission’s involvement in non-civilian R&D is a development with profound consequences not only for the European security or technology but for the European integration as a whole. All analyses in this volume point to something deeper than merely yet another funding programme; what is at stake here is the very nature and orientation of the European project. It is not by coincidence that the terms ‘innovation’ and ‘militarization’ have been included in the book’s title; they depict the profundity of a phenomenon that has been discursively articulated as a tool for the promotion of technological innovation and capability development but actually takes the form of something much bigger, an all-encompassing trend of militarization that touches upon the economic, political, strategic, institutional and, indeed, ideological foundations of European integration.
Nikolaos Karampekios, Iraklis Oikonomou, Elias Carayannis
Weitere Informationen

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise