Organizing international armaments cooperation: institutional design and path dependencies in Europe

DeVore, Marc R.

doi:10.1080/09662839.2012.667806

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the most promising attempts to advance the defence industry cooperation in the 1950s was the process of the NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR). ‘In theory, this process would enable NATO’s members to achieve both the economic advantages of large production runs and the military benefits of equipment standardization’ (DeVore, 2012). The NBMR process, indeed, resulted in some high-profile co-production programmes, such as the light ground-attack aircraft FIAT G-91 and anti-submarine aircraft Breguet Atlantic.…”

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Soon after NATO had established the Conference of National Armaments Directors (CNAD) in 1966 as the main platform for cooperation of arms development, production and procurement, the European members formed, within the CNAD’s framework, the Eurogroup to foster exclusively European collaboration. Although the Eurogroup meetings led to the emergence of some high-profile projects, such as the co-development of the Tornado and the European co-production of the F-16, it ‘achieved far less than anticipated’ (DeVore, 2012; cf. The Eurogroup, 1972).…”

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…France, together with Belgium and the Netherlands, jointly developed the Tripartite minesweeper. On the contrary, France would leave the Eurofighter project only a year after its inception (DeVore, 2012; Martin, 2004).…”

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Simultaneously, four largest producers (the United Kingdom, France, Italy and Germany) established the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation (OCCAR) as an agency for management of collaborative weapons projects. OCCAR’s framework facilitated armaments cooperation by replacing the principle of ‘fair return’ in individual projects – one of the major causes of inefficiencies in collaborative projects – with ‘global balance’ of work-share allocation (DeVore, 2012).…”

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Defence cooperation and change: How defence industry integration fostered development of the European security community

Ditrych¹,

Kučera²

2022

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article situates recent initiatives to deepen security and defence cooperation in the European Union in the historical perspective. It proposes a model of constitutive relationship between the process of change in a security community and the formation of a transnational defence industry community of practice which yields positive feedback (‘productive returns’) to the security community as a broader assemblage within which it was constituted. This model is applied to the paradigmatic case of European security community that formed after the World War II (WWII). The analysis shows that the key driver for defence integration traced by means of social network analysis (SNA) in this case was economic rather than political, and for an extended period of time it developed without formal institutions. The productive return of the ‘defence industry machine’ as a distinct community of practice that was constituted through the integration process consisted in the sense of deeper belonging and a shared sense of working well together in a traditionally highly nationalised defence milieu.

show abstract

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Case In Point: European Defence Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Defence cooperation and change: How defence industry integration fostered development of the European security community

Ditrych¹,

Kučera²

2022

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This result contributes to the study of political change in defence policies in Europe (Hoeffler, 2013; Irondelle, 2011; Joana & Mérand, 2014). In doing so, it challenges the argument of path dependence (Pierson, 2000), which insists on the inertia of armament policies in Europe (DeVore, 2012; Genieys & Michel, 2004:87). In the case of the Rafale Marine, France's decision not to retain the F‐18 goes against historical neo‐institutionalist forecasts, in so far as the fighter jet used by French naval officers since the 1960s is the American Crusader, and not a French aircraft.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Defeating the Austerians of the warfare state: French arms policy through the lens of the Programmatic Action Framework

Faure

2020

European Policy Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contributes to the development of the Programmatic Action Framework (PAF) based on the case study of the procurement of the French Rafale fighter jet rather than the American F‐18 by the French government in the 1980s. This decision making dilemma is explained by revealing the competition between two “programmatic cliques.” The “sovereignist” programmatic clique that defends the French option embodies the Custodians of the nation state. The “liberal” programmatic clique that supports the American alternative represents the Austerians of the nation state. The defeat of the Austerians of the French nation warfare state is explained by the ties weakness available to the liberal programmatic clique at the political level of decision making. To this end, 89 semi‐structured interviews were conducted with the political‐military and industrial arms actors.

show abstract

Numbers in global security governance

Baele

Balzacq

Bourbeau

2017

Eur j.of int. secur.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of numbers has been remarkably effective at pressing global claims. While research has documented the historical processes through which numbers gained such prominence, and has examined the political and ethical consequences of this omnipresence, very little is known regarding the specific ways in which numbers create the outcomes that sustain governance. This article proposes to close that gap. Building on the literature that acknowledges that numbers not only describe things but also have profound impacts on things themselves, this article offers an integrated account of the working dynamics of numbers in the governance of security. To do so, the article identifies three distinct but connected vectors of power through which numbers shape security governance: persuasion, (de)politicisation, and standardisation. These insights are exemplified through the prism of different empirical examples, the variety of which aims to display the advantages of the approach we propose.

show abstract

Organizing international armaments cooperation: institutional design and path dependencies in Europe

Cited by 9 publications

References 32 publications

Defence cooperation and change: How defence industry integration fostered development of the European security community

Defence cooperation and change: How defence industry integration fostered development of the European security community

Defeating the Austerians of the warfare state: French arms policy through the lens of the Programmatic Action Framework

Numbers in global security governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About