Industry structure and innovation in the U.K. defense sector


  • Peter Hall
  • Andrew James



Defense, industry, industrial structure, innovation


The defense industry in the United Kingdom has experienced significant structural change since the end of the cold war. Consolidation has occurred and overseas suppliers have entered while some domestic prime contractors have exited. The implications of consolidation for innovation have been studied in the U.S. environment but much less so in the case of Britain. In this article we report briefly on the changes to structure and review the theory and empirical evidence that suggests how such change might be related to innovation. Firms' own-financed R&D in the British defense industry is proposed as a useful indicator of innovation activity and is observed to have fallen sharply. Possible explanations are sought in the recently-revived inverted-U hypothesis linking competition to innovation, and in government demand fluctuations and British defense procurement reforms. The authors caution against government taking policy action to influence industry structure until more and better data are available to analyze the potential consequences. Investigating in-contract incentives to encourage industry innovation are recommended as a possible alternative.


Aghion, P., N. Bloom, R. Blundell, R. Griffith, and P. Howitt. 2005. “Competition and Innovation: An Inverted-U Relationship.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 701-728.

Birkler, J., A. Bower, J. Drezner, G. Lee, M. Lorell, G. Smith, F. Timson, W. Trimble, and O. Younossi. 2003. Competition and Innovation in the U.S. Fixed-Wing Military Aircraft Industry. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Dasgupta, P. and J.E. Stiglitz. 1980. “Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity.” The Economic Journal, Vol. 90, No. 358, pp. 266-293.

Geroski, P.A. 1990. “Innovation, Technological Opportunity and Market Structure.” Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 42, pp. 586-602.

Harris, M., P. Nightingale, and V. Acha. 2006. The Innovation Gap: Why Policy Needs to Reflect the Reality of Innovation in the UK. London, NESTA (National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts).

Hart, O. 1983. “The Market Mechanism as an Incentive Scheme.” Bell Journal of Economics, Vol. 14. No. 2, pp. 366-382.

Kovacic, W.E. and D.E. Smallwood. 1994. “Competition Policy, Rivalries, and Defense Industry.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 91-110.

Langley, Chris. 2008. “Universities, the military, and the means of destruction in the United Kingdom.” Economics of Peace and Security Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 49-55.

Lorell, M. 2003. The U.S. Combat Aircraft Industry, 1909-2000. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

[MoD] Ministry of Defence. 1991. UK Defence Statistics 1991. London: Ministry of Defence.

[MoD] Ministry of Defence. 2005. Defence Industrial Strategy. London: Ministry of Defence.

[MoD] Ministry of Defence. 2006. Defence Technology Strategy. London: Ministry of Defence.

[MoD] Ministry of Defence. 2006. UK Defence Statistics 2006. London: Ministry of Defence.

Nickell, S. 1996. “Competition and Corporate Performance.” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 104, No. 4, pp. 724-746.

Rogerson, W.P. 1995. “Incentive Models of the Defense Procurement Process.” Chapter 12 in K. Hartley and T. Sandler, eds. Handbook of Defense Economics, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Scherer, F.M. 1967. “Market Structure and the Employment of Scientists and Engineers.” American Economic Review, Vol. 57, pp. 524-531.

Tingvall, P.G. and A. Poldahl. 2006. “Is There Really an Inverted U-shape Relation Between Competition and Innovation?” Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 101-118.




How to Cite

Hall, P., & James, A. (2009). Industry structure and innovation in the U.K. defense sector. The Economics of Peace and Security Journal, 4(1).




Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)