Abstract
We describe the development of the European aerospace R&D collaboration network from 1987 to 2013 with the help of the publicly available raw data of the European Framework Programmes and the German Förderkatalog. In line with the sectoral innovation system approach, we describe the evolution of the aerospace R&D network on three levels. First, based on their thematic categories, all projects are inspected and the development of technology used over time is described. Second, the composition of the aerospace R&D network concerning organization type, project composition and the special role of SMEs is analyzed. Third, the geographical distribution is shown on the technological side as well as on the actor level. A more complete view of the European funding structure is achieved by replicating the procedure on the European level to the national level, in our case Germany.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
In this article we do not specifically address the demand side, but we use developments in it to explain changes on the supply side and the invention community. As Vincenti (1990, p.11) puts it: “performance, size, and arrangement of an airplane, for example (and hence the knowledge needed to lay it out), are direct consequences of the commercial or military task it is intended to perform”.
- 3.
Subsequent years are analyzed within the main chapters, since our data starts with the year 1987.
- 4.
Precursor works on bionics and other aviation specific researches led to the first flights: cf. Moon (2012).
- 5.
An interesting social network analysis about the entrepreneur years of the aerospace industry is provided by Moon (2012).
- 6.
This especially holds for Europe—except Germany, due to restrictions imposed by the allied forces, Germany was allowed (if at all) to produce systems and components in license. Nevertheless during the 1950s the US aircraft industry started to establish a pyramidal supply chain structure.
- 7.
Not only Airbus as the manufacturer of aircraft, but also the defense and space entities were centralized under the European holding company EADS (a consortium of the national firms Aerospatiale Matra, DASA, CASA) founded in 1998/1999. All remarks assigned to facts before that time, are dedicated to different partners building a consortium since the 1970s.
- 8.
Between 10 and 18 % of revenue is re-invested in R&D.
- 9.
On the European OEM-level this changed in 2013, as the French government and the German Daimler AG withdrew at least in a direct manner from EADS.
- 10.
We did not include FP1, since FP1 has no distinct aerospace category.
- 11.
The EUPRO database is constructed and maintained by the AIT Innovation Systems Department by substantially standardizing raw data on EU FP research collaborations obtained from the CORDIS database (see Roediger-Schluga and Barber 2008).
- 12.
Projects in the FP4 subprogram FP4-BRITE/EURAM 3 originally were all assigned the Aerospace Technology subject index, but these were eliminated in a later revision of CORDIS. We have included these projects for consideration as aerospace projects. No projects in FP1 were assigned the Aerospace Technology subject index; we have excluded FP1 from consideration.
- 13.
- 14.
We identified all aerospace relevant projects with the help of the Leistungsplansystematik (“activity systematics”).
- 15.
We do not make use of the standardized subject indices from CORDIS—they provide a broad categorization of all FP projects, but are not specific enough for categorizing the aerospace projects.
- 16.
The REC efforts might not be purely driven by the environmental conscience of the aerospace industry, but driven more by underlying costs. The reduction of fuel consumption exhausted by the engines is the opposite trend to cover the increased fuel prices and demand driven on the side of the airlines.
- 17.
Little difference can be observed between the knowledge specialization patterns between the European level and the level of countries, especially between the major aerospace countries (most of them parts of EADS). This may be expected, since these countries constitute the majority of the European aerospace industry as the aggregate of their historically independent national industries.
- 18.
Vincenti (1990) takes a look into Rosenberg’s “black box” (Rosenberg 1982) and analyzes numerous kinds of complex knowledge levels that engineers in the aeronautical industry apply and use during the design process. He treats science and technology as separate spheres of knowledge that nevertheless mutually influence each other. Concerning the level of knowledge, Vincenti (1990, p. 226) states that engineers use knowledge primarily to design, produce, and operate artifacts (i.e. they create artifacts), while scientists use knowledge primarily to generate new knowledge (and as Pitt (2001, p. 22) states: scientists aims are to explain artifacts). Emerging feedback processes in science are due to scientists’ engagement in open-ended, cumulative quests to understand observable phenomena. Vincenti (1990, p. 8) suggests that normal design is evolving in an incremental fashion and radical changes can be seen as revolutionary.
- 19.
This exceeds the purpose of this chapter, but might be a fruitful field for further research.
- 20.
For the general limitation of patent data usage and patents as strategic element see Granstrand (2010). Further Hollanders et al. (2008, p. 22ff.) discuss the role of patents in the aerospace industry, whereby the main argument states that patent are of minor importance since in the aerospace industry secrecy is the main method to protect knowledge. Nevertheless we suppose that this only (if at all) is correct for the two OEMs in the past. As now weights are changing and new competitors have emerged, patent usage and relevance will increase in the future. Begemann (2008) discusses the role of patents in the aerospace industry in a historical view, beginning with the Wright brothers and continuing to the current situation between Boeing and Airbus.
- 21.
Additionally the fact that satellite and space topics can be seldom commercialized contributes to the fall in the industry share.
- 22.
An interesting article focusing on the anchor tenant concept was written by Niosi and Zhegu (2010). They argue that an anchor is able to spin off new firms and attracts other firms. That favors our findings in the aerospace centers as there is a high agglomeration of participating firms where at least one big player is located.
- 23.
We used a threshold of 500 employees, since compared to international standards and as compared to other companies within the aerospace industry, they can be labeled as SME. The one-time participants are about 70 % of all participants; we analyze them in detail at the end of this section. The category N/A summarizes all participants out of the IND category where no information according to their sizes could be gained, plus all other categories.
- 24.
E.g. the Austrian FACC, a specialist for composite airframes, taken over by Chinese Xi’an Aircraft Corporation.
- 25.
To gain an even more substantial picture, the regional funded projects by local governments could also be considered, as it might be the main source of the internal R&D operations and non-funded projects with partners.
- 26.
This argument is not derogated by the minor aeronautic projects, since the argument that SMEs (which are mostly responsible for the technological development in the space industry) participate more often in nationally funded projects, due to easier access to the national projects and a lower capacity to participate on the national and the European level.
- 27.
References
AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD) (2005) Facts & figures. Brussels
AeroSpace and Defence Industries Association of Europe (ASD) (2007) ASD focus. Brussels
Alfonso-Gil J (ed) (2007) European aeronautics: the Southwestern axis. Springer, Berlin
Asheim BT, Isaksen A (2002) Regional innovation systems: the integration of local ‘sticky’ and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge. J Technol Tran 27:77–86
Barber MJ, Krueger A, Krueger T, Roediger-Schluga T (2006) Network of European Union-funded collaborative research and development projects. Phys Rev E 73(3):036132
Bathelt H, Malmberg A, Maskell P (2002) Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progr Hum Geogr 28(1):31–56
Begemann A (2008) Die Rolle von Patenten in der zivilen Luftfahrtindustrie aus historischer und rechtsvergleichender Sicht. Herbert Utz, Munchen
Bonaccorsi A, Giuri P (2000) When shakeout doesn’t occur: the evolution of the turboprop engine industry. Res Pol 29:847–870
Bonaccorsi A, Giuri P (2001) The long-term evolution of vertically-related industries. Int J Ind Organ 19:1053–1083
Breschi S, Cusmano L (2004) Unveiling the texture of a European Research Area: emergence of oligarchic networks under EU Framework Programmes. Int J Technol Manag 27:747–772
Breschi S, Malerba F (1997) Sectoral systems of innovation: technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics and spatial boundaries. In: Edquist C (ed) Systems of innovation. Frances Pinter, London
Broekel T, Graf H (2012) Public research intensity and the structure of German R&D networks: a comparison of 10 technologies. Econ Innov New Technol 21(4):345–372
Bugos G (2010) History of the aerospace industry. EH.net Encyclopedia, edited by Robert Whaples
Chesbrough H (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston
Cook C (2006) The aerospace industry: its history and how it affects the U.S. economy. Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, New Haven
CORDIS (1998) Fifth framework programme (1998-2002). Available from http://cordis.europa.eu/fp5/about.htm
Dosi G (1982) Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: a suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Res Pol 11:147–162
Dosi G (1997) Opportunities, incentives and the collective patterns of technological change. Econ J 107:1530–1547
ECORYS Research and Consulting (2009) Competitiveness of the European aerospace industry. European Commission, Directorate-General Enterprise & Industry, Brussels
Esposito E, Raffa L (2006) Evolution of the supply chain in the aircraft industry. In: IPSERA conference, San Diego
European Council (1998) Council decision of 22 December 1998 concerning the rules for the participation of undertakings, research centres and universities and for the dissemination of research results for the implementation of the fifth framework programme of the European Community (1998-2002)
European Commission (2002) STAR 21: Strategic aerospace review for the 21st century, Brussels
Franz P (2008) Wie reagieren Hochschulen auf neue Technologien? Das Beispiel der Photovoltaik. Wirtschaft im Wandel 12:460–467
Frenken K, Leydesdorff L (2000) Scaling trajectories in civil aircraft (1913-1970). Res Pol 29(3):331–348
Granstrand O (2010) Industrial innovation economics and intellectual property, 5th edn. Svenska Kulturkompaniet, Gothenburg
Gunasekara C (2006) Reframing the role of universities in the development of regional innovation systems. J Technol Tran 31(1):101–113
Hagedoorn J, Wang N (2012) Is there complementarity or substitutability between internal and external R&D strategies? Res Pol 41:1072–1083
Hakansson H (1989) Corporate technological behaviour: cooperation and networks. Routledge, London
Hollanders H, Cruysen AV, Vertesy D (2008) Sectoral innovation systems in Europe: the case of the aerospace sector. Final report, Europe INNOVA
König F (2006) The German National Aeronautics Research Programme. Unpublished speech
Lundvall B-Å (ed) (1992) National systems of innovation. Pinter, London
Malerba F (1999) Sectoral systems of innovation and production. In: DRUID conference on national innovation systems, industrial dynamics and innovation policy
Malerba F (2002) Sectoral systems of innovation and production. Res Pol 31:247–264
Mathy F-J (2011) The aeronautic research programme of the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi). Unpublished speech, Aerodays Madrid
Metcalfe S (1998) Evolutionary economics and creative destruction. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London
Miotti L, Sachwald F (2003) Co-operative R&D: why and with whom?: an integrated framework of analysis. Res Pol 32:1481–1499
Moon F (2012) A social network model for Innovation in early aviation industry. In: Koetsier T, Ceccarelli M (eds) Explorations in the history of machines and mechanisms, vol 15. Springer, Dordrecht
Nelson R (1995) Recent evolutionary theorizing about economic change. J Econ Lit 33:48–90
Nelson R, Winter S (1977) In search of a useful theory of innovation. Res Pol 6(1):36–76
Niosi J, Zhegu M (2010) Anchor tenants and regional innovation systems: the aircraft industry. Int J Technol Manag 50(263):284
Nolan P, Zhang J (2003) Globalization challenge for large firms from developing countries: China’s oil and aerospace industries. Eur Manag J 21(3):285–299
Nooteboom B (1994) Innovation and diffusion in small firms: theory and evidence. Small Bus Econ 6:327–347
Pitt JC (2001) What engineers know. Techné 5:17–30
Ponds R, van Oort F, Frenken K (2010) Innovation, spillovers and university–industry collaboration: an extended knowledge production function approach. J Econ Geogr 10:231–255
Pyka A (2002) Innovation networks in economics: from the incentive-based to the knowledge based approaches. Eur J Innovat Manag 5:152–163
Roediger-Schluga T, Barber MJ (2006) The structure of R&D collaboration networks in the European Framework Programmes. UNU-MERIT working paper series, 2006-36
Roediger-Schluga T, Barber MJ (2008) R&D collaboration networks in the European Framework Programmes: data processing, network construction and selected results. Int J Foresight Innovat Pol 4:321–347
Rosenberg N (1982) Inside the black box: technology and economics. Cambridge University Press, New York
Scherngell T, Barber MJ (2009) Spatial interaction modeling of cross-region R&D collaborations: empirical evidence from the 5th EU framework programme. Pap Reg Sci 88:531–546
Tiwari M (2005) An exploration of supply chain management practices in the aerospace industry and in Rolls-Royce. Master thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Vertesy D, Szirmai A (2010) Interrupted innovation: innovation system dynamics in latecomer aerospace industries. UNU-MERIT Working Paper 2010-059
Vincenti W (1990) What engineers know and how they know it? Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore
Wirtschaftsförderung Region Stuttgart GmbH (WRS) (2011) Kompetenzatlas Luft- und Raumfahrt. Stuttgart
Wixted B (2009) Innovation system frontiers: cluster networks and global value. Springer, Berlin
Wolfe DA (2005) The role of universities in regional development and cluster formation. In: Jones G, McCarney P, Skolnick M (eds) Creating knowledge, strengthening nations. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp 167–194
Zimmermann V, Andres M (2001) Das Innovationsverhalten von kleinen und mittleren Unternehmen. Wirtschaftsdienst 81(9):532–540, ISSN:0043-6275
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Guffarth, D., Barber, M.J. (2017). The Evolution of Aerospace R&D Collaboration Networks on the European, National and Regional Levels. In: Vermeulen, B., Paier, M. (eds) Innovation Networks for Regional Development. Economic Complexity and Evolution. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43940-2_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43940-2_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43939-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43940-2
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)