Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T23:04:08.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reforming Defense Procurement: Lessons from France

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Ethan B. Kapstein  and
Jean-Michel Oudot
Ethan B. Kapstein
Affiliation:
INSEAD
Jean-Michel Oudot
Affiliation:
French Department of Defense
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Is it possible to generate more efficient outcomes with respect to public procurement in general and defense acquisition in particular? Or are cost overruns inevitable when it comes to major engineering projects, like the development of modern weaponry? In this article, we draw on a unique data set of nearly 50 French armaments contracts in order to examine how one government has reformed its defense acquisition process over the past twenty years. Beginning in the early 1990s, France embarked on a series of policy reforms that enabled the state to contain skyrocketing weapons costs. We emphasize three, inter-related aspects of the defense acquisition environment in France that favored cost containment: first, hard budget constraints; second, the great technical capacity that the French government brought to bear on the weapons acquisition process, coupled with its iterative relationship with a small number of suppliers; and third, the use of contracting techniques that empowered project managers.

Keywords

defensereformhard budget constraintcontractinginstitutions
Type
Article
Information
Business and Politics , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , August 2009 , pp. 1 - 25
Copyright
Copyright © V.K. Aggarwal 2009 and published under exclusive license to Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bajari, Patrick and Tadelis, Steven 2001. “Incentives versus Transaction Costs: A Theory of Procurement Contracts.” Rand Journal of Economics 32 (3): 387–407 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bajari, Patrick, McMillan, Robert and Tadelis, Steven 2009. “Auctions Versus Negotiations in Procurement: An Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baron, David and Besanko, David 1988. “Monitoring of Performance in Organizational Contracting: The Case of Defense Procurement.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 90 (3): 329–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besfamille, Martin and Lockwood, Ben 2004. Are Hard Budget Constraints for Sub-National Governments Always Efficient? Warwick Economic Research Papers n° 717.Google Scholar
Bolton, Patrick and Dewatripont, Mathias 2005. Contract Theory. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT press, 2005)Google Scholar
Dupre, J. Stefan and Gustafson, W. Eric 1962. “Contracting for Defense: Private Firms and the Public Interest.” Political Science Quarterly 77 (2): 161–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easterly, William 2001. The Elusive Quest for Growth. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Eremenko, Paul A. 2007. A Conceptual Framework for Choice of Form of Acquisition Contracts. SSRN working paper series, McLean, Va.: Booz-Allen-Hamilton, 30 April.Google Scholar
Gansler, Jacques 1989. Affording Defense. Cambridge, Ma.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ganuza, Juan-Jose 2003. Competition and Cost Overruns in Procurement. UPF Economics and Business Working Paper n°772, October.Google Scholar
Gholz, Eugene and Sapolsky, Harvey M. 1999/2000, “Restructuring the U.S. Defense Industry.” International Security 24 (3): 5–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gil, Ricard and Oudot, Jean-Michel 2008. Award Mechanism, Renegotiation and Relational Contracting: Evidence from French defense procurement and Spanish movie exhibition. Working paper.Google Scholar
Government Accountability Office 2006. Defense Acquisitions: DoD Wastes Billions of Dollars Through Poorly Structured Incentives. 5 April, 06-409T.Google Scholar
Government Accountability Office 2008. Defense Acquisition: Better Weapon Program Outcomes Require Discipline, Accountability, and Fundamental Changes in the Acquisition Environment. 3 June, 08-782T.Google Scholar
Houttemane, Jean-Paul 2008. “Les Evolutions de la Politique d'Acquisition du Ministère de la Défense.” Defense Nationale et Securite Collective, October 2008, hors serie sur les marchés publics de défense : 21–31.Google Scholar
Kapstein, Ethan B. 2004. “Capturing Fortress Europe: International Collaboration and the Joint Strike Fighter,” Survival 46 (3), Autumn.Google Scholar
Kirat, Thierry, Bayon, Denis and Blanc, Helene 2003. Maîtriser les Coûts des Programmes D'Armement. Paris: La documentation française.Google Scholar
Kolodziej, Edward 1988. Making and Marketing Arms: The French Experience and its Implications for the International System. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, Jonah 1999. “Vice into Virtue? Progressive Politics and Welfare Reform in Continental Europe.” Politics and Society 27 (2): 239–273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayer, Kenneth 1991. The Political Economy of Defense Contracting. New Haven, Ct.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McNaugher, Thomas 1989. New Weapons, Old Politics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
National Audit Office 2005. Driving the Successful Delivery of Major Defence Projects: effective Project Control is a Key Factor in Successful Projects. 20 May.Google Scholar
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) 1990. Financial and Economic Data Relating to NATO Defense. Brussels, NATO, Document M-DPC-2(90)70, 6 December.Google Scholar
Jean-Michel, Oudot (2008a), “Risks and Performance of Defence Procurement Contracts”, Défense Nationale et Sécurité Collective, février, n°2008-2, 91–98.Google Scholar
Jean-Michel, Oudot (2008b), «Choix du type de contrat et performance : le cas des marchés publics de défense», Economie Publique, 21 (2), 157–182.Google Scholar
Rand Corporation, 2007. Is Weapon System Cost Growth Increasing? Santa Monica, Ca., Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
Rand Corporation, 2008. Historical Cost Growth of Completed Weapons Systems. Santa Monica, Ca.: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
Rodden, Jonathan, Eskeland, Gunnar and Litvack, Jennie 2003. Fiscal Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, Guofu 1996. “Optimal Procurement Mechanisms for an Informed Buyer.” Canadian Journal of Economics 29 (3): 699–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tirole, Jean 1999. “Incomplete Contracts: Where Do We Stand?” Econometrica 67 (4): 741–781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. 1967. “The Economics of Defense Contracting: Incentives and Performance”, In McKean, (Ed.), Issues in Defense Economics, Columbia University Press, New-York: 217–256.Google Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting. New-York: The Free Press.Google Scholar