Competing Explanations of U.S. Defense Industry Consolidation in the 1990s and Their Policy Implications

By Brady, Ryan R.; Greenfield, Victoria A. | Contemporary Economic Policy, April 2010 | Go to article overview

Competing Explanations of U.S. Defense Industry Consolidation in the 1990s and Their Policy Implications


Brady, Ryan R., Greenfield, Victoria A., Contemporary Economic Policy


I. INTRODUCTION

In this article, we test for structural breaks in U.S. defense industry and spending data over the last five decades. The defense industry data, which include various measures of market concentration, capture trends in consolidation; the spending data, defined broadly to include measures of contract awards, budget authority, and expenditures and investment, capture trends in market size. We identify structural breaks in those data and compare them to structural breaks found in data relating to the rest of the economy to address a lingering debate among defense analysts, policy practitioners, and executives as to the forces behind the consolidation of the defense industry in the 1990s. Was the consolidation the result of an explicit directive of the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) or was it driven by the same forces that led to consolidation in many sectors of the U.S. economy in the 1990s? In an era in which concerns about the future of the defense industry are again prominent, the answer bears directly on whether and how the DOD might choose to engage as a policymaking and procuring agency. If broader economic forces drive industry behavior, the DOD may face limitations in promoting competition, spurring innovation, or otherwise shaping the defense industry. We interpret structural breaks in the data as indicative of changes in defense spending, the defense industry at large, and the broader economy, which, in the context of two stylized narratives, provides a statistical approach to explaining defense-industry consolidation.

The first stylized narrative, representing what we refer to as the "DOD-policy-centric" view, describes the DOD as the primary engineer of defense industry consolidation in the 1990s. The defense budget had been declining steadily since the mid-1980s and the DOD was seeking to reduce excess capacity and check rising costs. In response, at a 1993 dinner now referred to as the "Last Supper," the DOD asserted its support for industry-wide consolidation [see Augustine (1997, 2006) for an eyewitness account]. The DOD backed its assertion by agreeing to reimburse firms for some merger-related costs and, later, through antitrust oversight [for discussions see Gholz and Sapolsky (1999-2000), Markusen and Costigan (1999), and Markusen (1997)]. Without explicitly denying the relevance of economy-wide factors, this narrative claims DOD policy as the dominant factor in the consolidation process. For example, the former chairman of the Lockheed Martin Corporation, Norman R. Augustine, characterizes the Last Supper as perhaps "the most critical moment in the defense industry's consolidation" (Augustine, 1997). His comments suggest that the defense industry was hesitant to consolidate, even when faced with a declining budget, without encouragement from its largest purchaser, the DOD. (1)

In contrast, a stylized "economy-centric" view places economy-wide phenomenon at the center of a story in which the same forces that drove the large number of mergers in the rest of U.S. economy also drove the consolidation of the defense industry in the 1990s. Such forces included developments in capital markets, innovation in technology, and deregulation [see Holmstrom and Kaplan (2001) and Andrade, Mitchell, and Stafford (2001) for details on merger activity in the U.S. economy]. Although the economy-centric view does not dismiss the impact of the decline in the defense budget, or the response of the DOD to that decline, it suggests that other forces provide a more telling explanation of defense-industry consolidation. Hensel (2007), for example, offers evidence that defense industry mergers in the 1990s are more correlated with economy-wide mergers than with DOD spending [see also Flamm (1998) and Oden (1998) for relevant discussions of evidence that is supportive of an economy-wide perspective].

We use the methods of Bai and Perron (1998, 2003) to estimate structural breaks in data that measure defense industry consolidation, defense spending, and economy-wide trends. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Competing Explanations of U.S. Defense Industry Consolidation in the 1990s and Their Policy Implications
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.