Taking production relations seriously: the role of defence firms in armaments cooperation

Kurç, Çağlar; Oktay, Sibel

doi:10.1080/09662839.2018.1520699

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Isu seputar ADIC ini pada dasarnya sangat menarik untuk dikaji dari beberapa sisi. Pertama, Kerjasama industri pertahanan ASEAN ini sejalan dengan tren pada pasar senjata dunia yang semakin banyak melakukan kolaborasi internasional (Calcara, 2020;Kinne, 2016;Kurc & Oktay, 2018). Kedua, sebagaimana disebutkan sebelumnya visi besar ADIC sangat baik dan berpotensi membawa keuntungan strategis bagi negara-negara anggota.…”

Section: Pendahuluanunclassified

Analisis Penyebab Stagnansi ASEAN Defense Industrial Collaboration (ADIC)

Rayasti,

Anandi

2024

j. gov. soc. politicol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An independent defense capability is an aspiration and a crucial need for nations. Achieving this will ensure the state’s independence from the possible influence of weapon-producing states. To attain this goal, countries worldwide, including those in the ASEAN region, have endeavored to advance their weapon technologies through national defense industries. The ASEAN Defense Industrial Collaboration (ADIC), established in 2011, was conceived to emulate the success of European consortiums in producing diverse weapon technologies. Regrettably, after 11 years, ADIC has not produced or initiated the development of any weapon technology. The analysis in this article is conducted by synthesizing the perspectives of four key prerequisites for the success of defense industry cooperation: constructivist, institutionalist, liberal, and realist. The research method employed in this article is Causal Process Tracing (CPT), specifically aimed at identifying the prerequisites that lead to specific events. This article concludes that the failure of ADIC is attributed to five factors. Firstly, diverse economic systems among ADIC members create challenges. Secondly, equivalent defense industry capacities lead to competition and hinder collaboration. Thirdly, low spill-over effects from successful cooperation in other sectors impede progress. Fourthly, persistent distrust among ADIC member countries poses a barrier. Lastly, the absence of a defense alliance results in a strong consideration of relative gains. In essence, these factors underscore the complexity and challenges in achieving effective international defense collaboration.

show abstract

Section: Pendahuluanunclassified

Analisis Penyebab Stagnansi ASEAN Defense Industrial Collaboration (ADIC)

Rayasti,

Anandi

2024

j. gov. soc. politicol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More precisely, assigning values to each indicator will be done using an expert evaluation based on data and results obtained from methods used for data acquisition. The methodology was elaborated on the basis of large literature research (Brickson 2007;Buganova et al 2014;Eames and Moffett 1999;Fraser and Henry 2007;Hesarzadeh and Bazrafshan 2018;Holla et al 2010;Karjalainen et al 2020;Kubas et al 2017;Kurc and Oktay 2018;Lewis et al 2015;Lovecek and Ristvej 2010;Lovecek et al 2017;Ristvej et al 2013;Rehak et al 2018;Siser et al 2017;Siponen et al 2014;Vance et al 2012;Wirtz et al 2016). Besides that, methodology contains a precise definition of questions set up by the interviews and the questionnaire survey, which should be focused on when assigning values to individual indicators.…”

Section: Evaluating the Security And Safety Culture Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research of security and safety culture within an organization. The case study within the Slovak Republic

Boroš

Halaj

Hofreiter

et al. 2021

Secur J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Security and safety culture is an increasingly important term in assessing the security and safety of organizations. It is an internal security and safety factor of an organization that can directly influence its overall security and safety. In many cases, however, organizations do not know, nor do they have a way of assessing the level of their security and safety culture. It is therefore necessary to know the content, elements, and sectors in which it can be identified in order to gain a deeper knowledge of security and safety culture in more detail and be able to examine it. Firstly, we focused on creating a model for evaluating the safety and safety culture and its application in selected organizations. Secondly, we devoted to the description and design of an organization’s security and safety culture assessment model. The proposed model is based on the identification of subsectors and indicators of security and safety culture that will gain their value by using information obtained from combining the four proposed methods. Accordingly, six security and safety culture sectors were defined for the purposes of security and safety culture assessment in selected organizations. These were compared to each other to determine their mutual weight. Finally, using these research methods, security and safety culture indicators were also identified and included in the defined security and safety culture sectors. The research needed to design a security and safety culture assessment model was realized in six selected organizations, which wanted to participate in the research. These were divided according to the size of the organization into two small, two medium, and two large organizations. Crucial element in our research was data collection conducted by means of controlled interviews and questionnaire surveys in these organizations. Based on this survey, indicators of security and safety culture could be identified. As a result of this, security and safety culture values are determined for all analyzed organizations. The conclusions will point up the possible way of evaluating security and safety culture in organizations and it also contains a specific example of their usage in the practice. Thus, by using the resulting values, it is possible to decide the further direction for the organizations, focusing on the sectors of the security and safety culture, which yielded unsatisfactory results.

show abstract

“…We further argue that agents will be increasingly empowered over time. The more protracted a delegation relationship, the more informational advantages accrue to agents and the more alternative options they can draw on (Pollack, 1997: 108;De Vore, 2011; see also, Kurc and Oktay, 2018). Agents gain better knowledge of different courses of action, which allows them to create outside options and thus to transform their vulnerabilities into mere sensitivities (Keohane and Nye, 2011).…”

Section: Theorizing the Institutional Resilience Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disarmed principals: institutional resilience and the non-enforcement of delegation

Weiss

Heinkelmann-Wild

2020

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Governments across the world increasingly rely on non-state agents for managing even the most sensitive tasks that range from running critical infrastructures to protecting citizens. While private agents frequently underperform, governments as principals tend nonetheless not to enforce delegation contracts. Why? We suggest the mechanism of institutional resilience. A preexisting set of rules shapes non-enforcement through the combination of (i) its structural misfit with the delegation contract and (ii) asymmetric interdependence that favors the agent over time. To demonstrate the plausibility of our argument, we trace the political process behind Europe’s largest military transport aircraft, the A400M. Governments delegated the development and production of this complex program to a private firm, Airbus. They layered a ‘commercial approach’ onto traditionally state-run defense industries. Yet, resilience caused these new formal rules to fail and eventually disarmed principals. Our mechanism constitutes an innovative approach by theorizing an alternative path toward dynamic continuity.

show abstract

Taking production relations seriously: the role of defence firms in armaments cooperation

Cited by 6 publications

References 50 publications

Analisis Penyebab Stagnansi ASEAN Defense Industrial Collaboration (ADIC)

Analisis Penyebab Stagnansi ASEAN Defense Industrial Collaboration (ADIC)

Research of security and safety culture within an organization. The case study within the Slovak Republic

Disarmed principals: institutional resilience and the non-enforcement of delegation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About