Skip to main content

Policy Entrepreneurship and Agenda Setting: Comparing and Contrasting the Origins of the European Research Programmes for Security and Defense

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Emergence of EU Defense Research Policy

Part of the book series: Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management ((ITKM))

Abstract

This chapter builds on the theoretical and empirical insights of Edler and James (Res Policy 44:1252–1265, 2015) to examine the origins of the European Defence Research Programme (EDRP).

Edler and James (Res Policy 44:1252–1265, 2015) used a process tracing methodology to examine the emergence of the European Security Research Programme (ESRP) as part of the Seventh Framework Programme (FP7). The case study shows that the emergence of the ESRP could only be understood by taking into account the policy entrepreneurship of the European Commission. In particular, the paper identifies the role of individual mid-ranking Commission officials who identified a window of opportunity to put the theme on the agenda and mobilized the political and financial resources of selected Directorate Generals of the European Commission. The policy entrepreneurs orchestrated the framing of this policy through managing ideational discourse and mobilizing existing and novel actor networks. In doing so the Commission gained the credibility to be the venue for science and technology policy in the area of security research. The paper also showed how the policy entrepreneurs used ambiguity in the definition of the meaning, scope and rationale for “security research” as a means of assembling a transnational coalition of interests and masking the initial cognitive and normative differences that existed between the various interest actors. The chapter will use process tracing to examine the origins of the EDRP. Specifically, the chapter will consider whether – following neofunctionalism (Haas EB, The uniting of Europe: political, social and economic forces 1950–57. Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1958; Sandholtz W, Stone Sweet A (eds), European integration and supranational governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998; Stone Sweet A, Sandholtz W, Fligstein N (eds), The institutionalization of Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001) – the EDRP is simply an instance of “spillover” from security research to defense research or whether other factors are at play.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The European Union has funded projects of relevance to defense and security through its Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development. The Commission has been keen to emphasize that there has always been an important “dual use” dimension to the Programme. Indeed, defense contractors such as Thomson CSF (now Thales) and GEC and British Aerospace (now BAE Systems) were closely involved in the foundation of the Framework Programme, not least through the ESPRIT program (see Edler and James 2015).

  2. 2.

    It should be noted that this chapter covers the period to December 2016. In December 2016, the European Council indicated its support for the European Defence Action Plan which included the so-called research window that contained proposals for a European Defence Research Programme (European Council 2016). There was still a considerable way to go until its introduction, and this includes the fundamental question of whether this program would be funded within a future Framework Programme or through another EU instrument.

  3. 3.

    According to Baumgartner and Jones (1991), policy venues are institutional settings in which policies are taken up and binding policy decisions are made. The image of an issue consists of the dominant beliefs and values inherent in a policy, underpinned by rhetoric, symbols and evidence. Images, or issue frames, are more than a labeling of policy, as they convey causality and demarcate the policy issues. They influence interest definitions and political constituencies (Daviter 2007: 655) and shape advocacy coalitions (Sabatier 1998).

  4. 4.

    The Kangaroo Group describes itself as “an association with the goal to enhance European unity around the pursuit of concrete common projects. Its main goals are the full implementation of the internal market, the stability of the euro and a common Security and Defence Policy. It is open to representatives of the European institutions, academia, media and the business community who are interested to foster these goals. The motto of the Kangaroo Group is free movement and security” (source: https://www.kangaroogroup.de Accessed 22 May 2017).

  5. 5.

    The working group was chaired by Michel Barnier, then European Commissioner for Institutional Affairs and Regional Affairs. Barnier was to be an important figure in the emergence of the EDRP.

  6. 6.

    Author interview with a former Commission official, December 2016, and the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016.

  7. 7.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016.

  8. 8.

    Questions of strategic competition in the transatlantic relationship remained close to the surface. In the late 2014, the United States announced its Defence Innovation Initiative as part of its so-called Third Offset Strategy in what was seen by some European policy-makers as another threat to European defense industrial and technological competitiveness. Further, there was growing discussion of the need for European “strategic autonomy” in defense technology versus dependence on other (read US) countries.

  9. 9.

    EU defense research fell by almost 30% between 2006 and 2013 (Mauro and Thoma 2016: 7).

  10. 10.

    Author telephone interview with a member state participant in EDA research meetings, September 2016.

  11. 11.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016.

  12. 12.

    Personal correspondence with a member state participant in EDA research meetings, October 2016.

  13. 13.

    Ibid.

  14. 14.

    Michel Barnier was European Commissioner for Internal Market and Services. In 2001, he chaired the Working Group on European Defence as a member of the Convention on the Future of Europe. In 2015, he was appointed by EU President Jean-Claude Juncker as his special advisor on defense.

  15. 15.

    Personal correspondence with a member state participant in EDA research meetings, October 2016.

  16. 16.

    Author interview with a former Commission official, December 2016.

  17. 17.

    Author interview with a European Commission official in DG GROW, December 2016.

  18. 18.

    The six were France, the UK, Germany, Italy, Sweden and Spain.

  19. 19.

    Author interview with a European Commission official in DG GROW, December 2016.

  20. 20.

    Author telephone interview with a member state participant in EDA research meetings; author interviews with a European Commission official in DG GROW, December 2016 and former official, ASD, May 2017.

  21. 21.

    Author interview with a former Commission official, December 2016.

  22. 22.

    Author interview with a European Commission official in DG GROW, December 2016.

  23. 23.

    Ibid.

  24. 24.

    Personal correspondence with a former official, ASD, May 2017. The official added that “France had been trying for years to convince the EU on the merits of industry-led research”.

  25. 25.

    Author interview with a former official, ASD, May 2017.

  26. 26.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016.

  27. 27.

    Author interview with a former official, ASD, May 2017.

  28. 28.

    Author interview with a senior executive, Airbus, February 2017.

  29. 29.

    Author interview with a former official, ASD, May 2017.

  30. 30.

    Author interview with an EU official close to the Group of Personalities, February 2017.

  31. 31.

    The Pilot Project (PP) is an instrument envisaged under Article 54 of the European Union’s 2014–2020 Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Pilot Projects support new policy initiatives for a maximum of 2 years and with funding limited to around €2 million.

  32. 32.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016.

  33. 33.

    “A new start for Europe: my agenda for jobs, growth, fairness and democratic change”. There was no mention of defense R&D in the speech.

  34. 34.

    Author interview with a former Commission official, December 2016.

  35. 35.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016.

  36. 36.

    Author telephone interview with a member state participant in EDA research meetings, September 2016.

  37. 37.

    Author interview with a former Commission official, December 2016.

  38. 38.

    Since 2008, the EDA has produced a Capability Development Plan (CDP) to address European security and defense challenges that makes recommendations about the capabilities European militaries will need to react to those challenges.

  39. 39.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016; author interview with a European commission official in DG GROW, December 2016.

  40. 40.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016; author interview with a European Commission official in DG GROW, December 2016.

  41. 41.

    Author interview with a former Commission official, December 2016.

  42. 42.

    Author telephone interview with a member state participant in EDA research meetings, September 2016.

  43. 43.

    Author interview with the Defence Counsellor, Permanent Representation of a mid-sized member state, December 2016; author interview with a European Commission official in DG GROW, December 2016.

  44. 44.

    Author interview with a former Commission official, December 2016.

Bibliography

  • Ackrill R, Kay A (2011) Multiple streams in EU policy-makings: the case of the 2005 sugar reform. J Eur Public Policy 18(1):72–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ackrill R, Kay A, Zahariadis N (2013) Ambiguity, multiple streams, and EU policy. J Eur Public Policy 20(6):871–887

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguera M (2002) Officials urge single research fund for EU reaction forces. Defense News, 28 January 2002

    Google Scholar 

  • ASD (2015a) Considerations on the proposed EU preparatory action on CSDP-related research. Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • ASD (2015b) Technology priorities for the EU preparatory action. Aerospace and Defence Industries Association of Europe, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer MW (2006) Comanaging programme implementation: conceptualizing the European Commission’s role in policy execution. J Eur Public Policy 13:717–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer MW (2008) Diffuse anxieties, deprived entrepreneurs: commission reform and middle management. J Eur Public Policy 15:691–707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner FR, Jones BD (1991) Agenda dynamics and policy subsystems. J Polit 53:1044–1074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendor J, Moe TM, Shotts KW (2001) Recycling the garbage can: an assessment of the research program. Am Polit Sci Rev 95(1):169–190

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigo D, Jeandesboz J (2010) The EU and the European security industry: questioning the ‘public private dialogue’. The Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrás S (2009) The politics of the Lisbon strategy: the changing role of the commission. West Eur Polit 32(1):97–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borrás S, Radaelli CM (2011) The politics of governance architectures: creation, change and effects of the EU Lisbon strategy. J Eur Publ Policy (4):463–484

    Google Scholar 

  • Bossong R (2012) The evolution of EU counter terrorism policy: European security policy after 9/11. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Citi M (2014) Revisiting creeping competences in the EU: the case of security R&D policy. J Eur Integr 36:135–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen N (2012) Policy entrepreneurs and the design of public policy: conceptual framework and the case of the National Health Insurance law in Israel. J Soc Res Policy 3:5–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen LR, Noll RG (1991) The technological pork Barrrel. The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (1996) The challenges facing the European defence related industry – a contribution for action at European level. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. COM(96) 10 final

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (1997) Implementing European Union strategy on defence-related industries, COM(1997) 583 final

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2000) Towards a European research area. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. COM(2000)6 final

    Google Scholar 

  • Commission of the European Communities (2007) A strategy for a stronger and more competitive European defence industry, COM(2007) 764 final

    Google Scholar 

  • Cram L (1994) The European Commission as a multiorganization: social policy and IT policy in the EU. J Eur Public Policy 1:195–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Daviter F (2007) Policy framing in the European Union. J Eur Public Policy 14:654–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doig W, Hargrove EC (1987) Leadership and innovation. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • EDA (2006) Solana, Verheugen, enders urge boost to EU spending and collaboration on defence R&T, press release, 9 February 2006

    Google Scholar 

  • EDA (2011) 2010 Defence data. European Defence Agency, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EDA (2016) First EU pilot project in the field of defence research sees grant agreements signed for €1.4 million, press release, 28 October 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Edler J (2000) Institutionalisierung europaischer Politik. Die Genese des Forschungsprogramms BRITE als reflexiver sozialer Proze? Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Edler J (2003) How do economic ideas become relevant in RTD policy making? Lessons from a European case study. In: Biegelbauer P, Borrás S (eds) Innovation policies in Europe and the US: the new agenda. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 253–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Edler J, James AD (2015) Understanding the emergence of new science and technology policies: policy entrepreneurship, agenda setting and the development of the European framework Programme. Res Policy 44:1252–1265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Advisory Group on Aerospace (2002) Strategic aerospace review for the twenty-first century. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2013) Towards a more competitive and efficient defence and security sector, COM(2013) 542 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council (2013) Conclusions of the European Council, 19/20 December 2013

    Google Scholar 

  • European Council (2016) European Council meeting (15 December 2016) Conclusions EUCO 34/16

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2010) Review of security measures in the research framework Programme, directorate general for internal policies. European Parliament, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2014) A new deal for European Defence, COM(2014) 387 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2016) European Defence action plan, COM(2016) 950 final

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2013), The cost of Non-Europe in common security and defence policy, European Parliamentary Research Service

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (2016) Defence: MEPs push for more EU cooperation to better protect Europe. Press release, 23 November 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • European Union (2007) Treaty of Lisbon amending the treaty on European Union and the treaty establishing the European Community, 13 December 2007, 2007/C 306/01

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiott D, Bellais R (2016) A “game changer”? The EU’s preparatory action on defence research. ARES Policy Paper, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Garret G, Weingast B (1993) Ideas, interests, and institutions: constructing the European community’s internal market. In: Goldstein J, Keohane R (eds) Ideas and foreign policy. Beliefs, institutions and political change. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 207–235

    Google Scholar 

  • Haas EB (1958) The uniting of Europe: political, social and economic forces 1950–57. Stanford University Press, Stanford

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale J (2011) EU commissioner Michel Barnier: ‘EU to establish defense policy task force’ working closely with the European defence agency and European External Action Service’. Atlantic Organization for Security, 8 November 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes B (2006) Arming big brother: the EU’s security research Programme. StateWatchTransnational Institute, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • High Level European Advisory Group on Aerospace (2002) Strategic aerospace review for the twenty-first century. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooghe L, Keating M (1994) The politics of European Union regional policy. J Eur Public Policy 1(3):367–393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James AD (2004) European defence research and technology (R&T) cooperation: a work in progress. In: Bialos J, Koehl S (eds) European Defence Research and Development: new visions and prospects for cooperative engagement. Johns Hopkins University, Washington, DC, pp 95–116

    Google Scholar 

  • James AD (2006) The transatlantic defence R&D gap: causes, consequences and controversies. Def Peace Econ 17(3):223–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehin O (2010) European defence economy affected by the Crisis, Europe.Visions 7, IFRI-Bruxelles

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly E (2016) EU to launch €90M military research pilot in 2017. Science Business, 1 December 2016

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly E (2017) Commission confirms the aim of new EU military R&D programme is to develop home-grown weapons. Science Business, 25 January 2017

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohler-Koch B (1996) Die Gestaltungsmacht organisierter Interessen. In: Jachtenfuchs M, Kohler-Koch B (eds) Europaische Integration, Opladen. MZES, Mannheim, pp 193–224

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon JW (1984) Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Little, Brown, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney J, Thelen K (eds) (2010) Explaining institutional change: ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauro M, Thoma K (2016) The future of EU defence research. Directorate-General for External Policies. Policy Department, European Parliament

    Google Scholar 

  • Mawdsley J (2009) The EU and armaments: towards a military industrial complex? In: Paper presented at Congrès AFSP 2009, Grenoble

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazey S, Richardson J (1994) The commission and the lobby. In: Edwards G, Spence D (eds) The European Commission. Longman, London, pp 169–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe S (1995) Technology systems and technology policy in an evolutionary framework. Camb J Econ 19(1):25–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom M (1997) Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation. Am J Polit Sci 41:738–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintrom M, Norman P (2009) Policy entrepreneurship and policy change. Policy Stud J 37:649–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mörth U (2000) Competing frames in the European Commission: the case of the defence industry and equipment issue. J Eur Public Policy 7(2):173–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemann A, Schmitter PC (2009) Neofunctionalism. In: Dietz T, Wiener A (eds) European integration theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Official Journal of the European Union (2009a) Directive 2009/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 6 may 2009 simplifying terms and conditions of transfers of defence-related products within the community, official journal of the European Union, L 146/1, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Official Journal of the European Union (2009b) Directive 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the council of 13 July 2009 on the coordination of procedures for the ward of certain works contracts, supply contracts and service contracts by contracting authorities or entities in the fields of defence and security, and amending directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC, official journal of the European Union, L 216/76, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkmann M (2003) Policy entrepreneurs, multilevel governance and policy networks in the European polity: the case of the EUREGIO. Department of Sociology, Lancaster University. http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/PerkmannPolicyEntrepreneurs.pdf

  • Peters BG (1994) Agenda setting in the European Community. J Eur Public Policy 1:9–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson J (1991) Technology policy in Europe: explaining the framework programme and EUREKA in theory and practice. J Common Mark Stud 29(3):269–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson J (1995) EU research policy: the politics of expertise. In: Rhodes C, Mazey S (eds) The state of the European Union: building a European polity? Lynne Rienner, Boulder, CO, pp 391–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Princen S (2007) Agenda setting in the European Union: a theoretical exploration and agenda for research. J Eur Public Policy 14:21–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Princen S (2010) Venue shifts and policy change in EU fisheries policy. Mar Policy 34:36–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Princen S (2011) Agenda setting strategies in EU policy processes. J Eur Public Policy 18:927–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Princen S, Rhinard M (2006) Crashing and creeping: agenda setting dynamics in the European Union. J Eur Public Policy 13:1119–1132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radaelli CM (1995) The role of knowledge in the policy process. J Eur Public Policy 2:159–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson J (1994) EU water policy: uncertain agendas, shifting networks and complex coalitions. Environ Polit 4(4):140–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson J (1996) European Union. Power and policy-makings. In: Richardson J (ed) Policy making in the EU: interests, ideas and garbage cans of primeval soup. Routledge, London, pp 3–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts NC (1992) Public entrepreneurship and innovation. Rev Policy Res 11:55–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatier PA (1998) The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe. J Eur Public Policy 5:98–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandholtz W, Stone Sweet A (eds) (1998) European integration and supranational governance. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Spence D, Edwards G (2006) The European Commission. John Harper Publishing, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson P (2010) Let’s get physical: the European Commission and cultivated spillover in completing the single market’s transport infrastructure. J Eur Public Policy 17:1039–1057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson PJ (2012) Image and venue as factors mediating latent spillover pressure for agenda setting change. J Eur Public Policy 19:796–816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone Sweet A, Sandholtz W, Fligstein N (eds) (2001) The institutionalization of Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Tigner B (2002) Terrorism concerns prompt talk of EU funding research: idea a radical departure from national control. Defense News, 23 September 2002

    Google Scholar 

  • Trybus M (2006) The new European Defence agency: a contribution to a common European security and defence policy and a challenge to the community acquis? Common mark. Law Rev 43(3):667–703

    Google Scholar 

  • Trybus M (2014) Buying defence and security in Europe: the EU defence and security procurement directive. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • van der Steen M, Groenewegen J (2008) Exploring policy entrepreneurship. Discussion paper series on the coherence between institutions and technologies in infrastructures, WP0801, Delft University

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace H (1983) Negotiation, conflict and compromise: the elusive pursuit of common policy. In: Wallace H, Wallace W, Webb C (eds) Policy making in the European Community, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 43–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace W (1996) Government without statehood: the unstable equilibrium. In: Wallace H, Wallace A (eds) Policy making in the European Union, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 429–460

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt U (2003) Economic policy-makings in evolutionary perspective. J Evol Econ 13:77–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahariadis N (2008) Ambiguity and choice in European public policy. J Eur Public Policy 15(4):514–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Claire Coffey for her excellent assistance with the background research for this chapter and Jakob Edler who co-authored an earlier paper upon which Sect. 2.2 of this chapter draws. All errors and omissions remain my own.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew D. James .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

James, A.D. (2018). Policy Entrepreneurship and Agenda Setting: Comparing and Contrasting the Origins of the European Research Programmes for Security and Defense. In: Karampekios, N., Oikonomou, I., Carayannis, E. (eds) The Emergence of EU Defense Research Policy. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68807-7_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics