Secrets to shield or share? new dilemmas for military R&D policy in the digital age

Abstract The US Department of Defense (DOD) normally pursues a closed approach to technological development. It captures results from its own sponsored research and development (R&D), and the results are kept shielded by restrictions on related publications and exports. This R&D strategy is no longer viable. Now most military technology has commercial origins, the US no longer dominates all relevant technological fields, and sophisticated dual-use technology is accessible to adversaries in open global markets. DOD can address this dilemma by drawing on external R&D that tests a technology’s general capabilities against a variety of potential uses and by placing more of its internal emphasis on technology integration. Historically, this approach to military R&D also yields more commercial spin-offs.

[1]  Laura J Gurak,et al.  Persuasion and Privacy in Cyberspace: The Online Protests over Lotus MarketPlace and the Clipper Chip , 1997 .

[2]  Robin Cowan,et al.  Quandaries in the economics of dual technologies and spillovers from military to civilian research and development , 1995 .

[3]  Telecommunications Board.  Funding a Revolution: Government Support for Computing Research , 1999 .

[4]  Michael Borrus,et al.  U.S.-Japanese Competition in the Semiconductor Industry: A Study in International Trade and Technological Development , 1982 .

[5]  Sean S. Costigan,et al.  Arming the future : a defense industry for the 21st century , 1999 .

[6]  M. Borrus.  Competing for Control: America's Stake in Microelectronics , 1988 .

[7]  Jeffrey A. Hart,et al.  Display's the Thing: The Real Stakes in the Conflict Over High Resolution Displays , 1992 .

[8]  S. Hacker,et al.  Military Enterprise and Technological Change: Perspectives on the American Experience , 1986 .

[9]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Is the Internet a US invention?—an economic and technological history of computer networking , 2002 .

[10]  Jordi Molas-Gallart,et al.  Which way to go? Defence technology and the diversity of 'dual-use' technology transfer , 1997 .

[11]  J. Abbate,et al.  Inventing the Internet , 1999 .

[12]  Glenn R. Fong,et al.  and Industrial Policy American and Japanese Experiences in Microelectronics , 1990 .

[13]  Wayne Sandholtz,et al.  The Highest Stakes: The Economic Foundations of the Next Security System , 1992 .

[14]  Steven Levy,et al.  Crypto: How the Code Rebels Beat the Government--Saving Privacy in the Digital Age , 2001 .

[15]  H. Klein.  Technology push-over: defense downturns and civilian technology policy , 2001 .

[16]  Ernest Braun,et al.  The Semiconductor Industry. (Book Reviews: Revolution in Miniature. The History and Impact of Semiconductor Electronics) , 1978 .

[17]  Bruce Schneier,et al.  The Electronic Privacy Papers: Documents on the Battle for Privacy in the Age of Surveillance , 1997 .

[18]  Stuart W. Leslie,et al.  Forces of production : a social history of industrial automation , 1985 .

[19]  Dorothy E. Denning.  The Clipper Encryption System , 1993 .

[20]  Reviewed by Jonathan Levie.  Managing New Industry Creation: Global Knowledge Formation and Entrepreneurship in High Technology , 2003 .

[21]  J. Tilton.  International diffusion of technology : the case of semiconductors , 1971 .

[22]  Anthony DiFilippo.  Military Spending and Industrial Decline: A Study of the American Machine Tool Industry , 1986 .

[23]  Glenn R. Fong.  The potential for industrial policy: Lessons from the very high speed integrated circuit program , 1986 .

[24]  B. R. Scott,et al.  U.S. competitiveness in the world economy , 1985 .

[25]  Jay Stowsky,et al.  From Spin-Off to Spin-On: Redefining the Military's Role in Technology Development , 2005 .

[26]  C. Debresson,et al.  Forces of production : a social history of industrial automation , 1985 .