|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
189401
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Augustine weapons systems are proposed as a new class of investment good. They have distinctive economic characteristics (technology intensive, high and rising unit costs, and declining volumes) leading to extensive changes in armed forces’ arsenals including the progressive replacement of military bulk with ever-smaller volumes of increasingly complex, capable, but also expensive weapons systems. While much has been written about their costs, there remain gaps in our understanding of their investment rationale and the modus operandi of their procurement. We distinguish between incremental and transformative Augustine weapons systems and discuss their investment rationale. We show that further understanding of Augustine weapons systems is obtained by using Lancaster’s model of product characteristics and the real investment options framework. Some civilian parallels are also discussed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
100954
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
What is the case for defence and is it a worthwhile investment? This question is addressed for two contrasting nations, namely, the UK and New Zealand. Economists have a set of standard analytical tools for addressing the question but they are difficult to operationalise. This paper provides policy-relevant answers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
083243
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2008.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Traditionally, the EU has protected its national defence industries (through Article 296). There are now policy initiatives to create a European defence equipment market (EDEM) and a European defence technology and industrial base (EDTIB). This article assesses these policy initiatives. It considers the EU as an inefficient defence market and also considers the opportunities for creating an efficient defence industrial policy. Collaboration has been a distinctive feature of European defence industrial policy and a case study of the Typhoon is presented and assessed. Finally, criteria for assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the EDTIB are presented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
134024
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Collaborative defence projects have been a distinctive feature of European defence industrial policy. This article focuses on whether the number of partner nations in international collaborative defence and aerospace programmes is a source of inefficiency. It appears that there is not a simple linear relationship. Two nation collaborations can be efficient, but conventional wisdom assumes that inefficiencies emerge with more than two partner nations. Inevitably, data problems made what appears to be a simple hypothesis difficult to test. The major result is that there is no evidence that efficiency as measured by development times is adversely affected by the number of partner nations. A limited sample regression and a comparison of Airbus vs. Boeing shows a similar conclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
113328
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
BAE Systems is the UK's largest defence and security firm and one of the world's major arms companies. It has changed from a state-owned aerospace firm to a privatised specialist defence company involved in a range of air, land, sea and cyber systems with a major presence in the US defence market. This article describes and assesses the history of the company, its organization, conduct and performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 6 |
ID:
190438
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Much of the literature on military aircraft unit costs is based on US data. This article adds to our knowledge by using an original data set for UK military aircraft costs, profits and prices. A distinction is made between unit costs within a generation of aircraft and between generations. Four research questions are addressed. First, is the UK aircraft industry a decreasing cost industry; second, are new entrants higher cost suppliers; third, what is the evidence on profitability in war and peace and between new entrants and original developers; fourth, what is the UK evidence on Augustine-type cost escalation and on the efficiency of aircraft procurement in war and peace? The UK aircraft industry was found to be a decreasing cost industry reflecting both scale and learning economies. Typically, new entrants were higher cost suppliers and profit rates were higher in peace-time. There was substantial Augustine cost escalation for UK combat aircraft and doubts are raised about the efficiency of military aircraft procurement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 7 |
ID:
095039
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The UK defence economy has some distinctive features. Its Armed Forces have a worldwide capability reflected in modern air, land and sea forces with an expeditionary role. Its world role is further reflected in a nuclear capability and a high technology defence industrial base, substantial defence R&D with the UK as a major arms exporter. This survey focuses on the period 1970 to 2008. It explains the military-industrial complex and estimates a demand for military expenditure function. There follows an analysis of procurement and defence industrial policy. Future policy issues are outlined, namely, the costs of the UK's world role and its relations with European defence policy. It is concluded that the UK faces some difficult defence choices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
ID:
072705
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2006.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Much of the alliance literature has focused on the collective defence benefits and burden-sharing. This article considers the potential for developing a defence industrial policy in a military alliance. Previous proposals from the literature are reviewed, especially proposals for economic specialization based on comparative advantage applied to both armed forces and defence industries in a military alliance. European Union (EU) defence policy is outlined, including its armaments agencies (OCCAR and the European Defence Agency), and inefficiencies in EU defence markets are identified. Economic theory offers some policy guidelines for an efficient defence industrial policy in a military alliance, including gains from trade and competition, from learning and scale economies, and from reducing the duplication of costly R&D. These economic principles are applied to the EU and are also applicable to NATO. Evidence of efficiency gains from trade and from economies of scale and learning is reviewed and applied to various scenarios for the creation of a Single European Market for defence equipment. The scenarios include a liberalized competitive market, a centralized EU procurement agency and a 'twin-track' model. Estimates are presented of the cost savings from these scenarios. However, proposals for an efficient defence industrial policy will be opposed by the potential losers who will prefer alternative industrial policies involving international collaboration and offsets. Among these alternatives, collaboration is assessed as a distinctive European policy. The inefficiencies of collaboration are reviewed, including its impact on development and production costs and on delays in delivery. Consideration is given to the research issues to be addressed by an economic evaluation of European collaborative projects. The article concludes by stressing the inefficiencies of current procurement policies in the EU and NATO and the potential cost savings from the adoption of a more efficient defence industrial policy within an alliance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
ID:
144151
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Defence inflation is a recurring factor in determining defence spending. It is widely reported in official government publications and in the trade press, but remains relatively neglected by defence and peace economists. There is a need for more in-depth economic analysis and critical evaluation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
ID:
069856
|
|
|
| 11 |
ID:
002812
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
New York, United Nations, 1993.
|
| Description |
xi, 91p.; ill
|
| Series |
UNIDIR; no.94
|
| Standard Number |
9290450754
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:3/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 034317 | 327.174/HAR 034317 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 034639 | 327.174/HAR 034639 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 034825 | 327.174/HAR 034825 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
ID:
006111
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1995.
|
| Description |
xiii, 381p.
|
| Series |
Cambridge surveys of economic literature
|
| Standard Number |
0521442044
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 037618 | 355.6220973/SAN 037618 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
ID:
046775
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Cheltenham, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2001.
|
| Description |
v.l(xxxvi, 522p.);v 2 (429p.) v.3(xi,622p.)
|
| Series |
International library of critical writings in economics
|
| Standard Number |
185278945X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:3/I:0,R:3,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 045506 | 355.622/HAR 045506 | Main | On Shelf | Reference books | |
| 045507 | 355.622/HAR 045507 | Main | On Shelf | Reference books | |
| 045508 | 355.622/HAR 045508 | Main | On Shelf | Reference books | |
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
ID:
005698
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Brassey's, 1991.
|
| Description |
x, 190p.
|
| Standard Number |
0080336256
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:2/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 033222 | 355.622/HAR 033222 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
| 037440 | 355.622/HAR 037440 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
ID:
107742
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Routledge, 2011.
|
| Description |
xviii, 296p.
|
| Standard Number |
9780415271325. hbk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 056245 | 355.622/HAR 056245 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
ID:
058927
|
|
|
| 17 |
ID:
100627
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Despite the cuts demanded by the Strategic Defence and Security Review, Britain will maintain its global role in defence, albeit at a lower level. But cost and budget pressures have exposed serious economic inefficiencies in commissioning and acquisition practices. Ultimately, the review has protected service budgets, rather than conducted a wholesale reappraisal of defence ways and means.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
ID:
072172
|
|
|
| 19 |
ID:
078366
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Amesterdam, Elsevier, 2007.
|
| Description |
v2(xx, 608-1258p)
|
| Series |
Handbooks in economics, no. 12
|
| Standard Number |
9780444519108
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 052480 | 338.47355/SAN 052480 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
ID:
048690
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
Amesterdam, Elsevier, 1995.
|
| Description |
xix, 606p
|
| Series |
Handbooks in economics, no. 12
|
| Standard Number |
0444818871
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 039114 | 338.47355/HAR 039114 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|