2024/07/15 by Tor Bukkvoll · 1 voice
Economics, Econometrics and Finance · Social Sciences · #Ammunition #Argument (complex analysis) #Business #Computer science #Defense, Military, and Policy Studies #Economics #Finance #Geography #International Relations and Foreign Policy #Marketing #Microeconomics #Order (exchange) #Outcome (game theory) #Political Conflict and Governance #Political science #Process (computing) #Procurement #Production (economics) #Ukrainian
paper · doi:10.1525/cpcs.2024.2279103
openalex publication_date 2024/07/15 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/23
This article discusses critical failures in Ukrainian defense production and procurement in the period 2014 to 2023. The main puzzle is why Ukraine did so little to satisfy the needs of the country’s armed forces in essential segments of military capabilities when there seems to have been no disagreement on their necessity. Furthermore, both technological and financial resources appear to have been present. The main argument is that Ukraine’s status as a limited access order (LAO) is an important part of the explanation. The empirical evidence in support of this conclusion comes from process-tracing production and procurement in the three areas of ammunition, unmanned aerial vehicles, and armored vehicles. The initial condition of an LAO is linked to the outcome of production and procurement failure through a detailed investigation of the actors and processes that took place within each of the mentioned segments. It is primarily a theory-guided single-outcome study, but the findings may serve as inspiration for more generic studies of the effects of LAOs on national security.