The Experts below are selected from a list of 20550 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Gerald Schneider - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
eliciting substance from hot air financial market responses to eu summit decisions on european Defense
International Organization, 2010Co-Authors: Michael M Bechtel, Gerald SchneiderAbstract:The results of deliberations in multilateral fora are often considered as ineffective. Decision making in the European Union (EU) and in particular its key intergovernmental body, the European Council, poses no exception. Especially in the domain of EU foreign and security affairs the unanimity requirement governing this institution allegedly allows nationalist governments to torpedo any attempt to build up a credible European Defense force and a unified foreign policy stance. In this paper, we take issue with the claim that multilateral summits merely result in "hot air" by looking at whether and how decisions made during EU summit meetings affect the European Defense Industry. We argue that investors react positively to a successful strengthening of Europe's military component - a vital part of the intensified cooperation within the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) - since such decisions increase the demand for military products and raise the expected profits in the European Defense Industry. Our findings lend empirical support to the view that financial markets indeed evaluate the substance of European Council meetings and react positively to those summit decisions which consolidated EU military capabilities and the ESDP. Each of these substantial Council decisions increased the value of the European Defense sector by about 4 billion Euros on average. This shows that multilateral decisions can have considerable economic and financial repercussions.
-
eliciting substance from hot air financial market responses to eu summit decisions on european Defense
2009Co-Authors: Michael M Bechtel, Gerald SchneiderAbstract:The results of deliberations in multilateral fora are often considered as ineffective. Decision making in the European Union (EU) and in particular its key intergovernmental body, the European Council, poses no exception. Especially in the domain of EU foreign and security affairs the unanimity requirement governing this institution allegedly allows nationalist governments to torpedo any attempt to build up a credible European Defense force and a unified foreign policy stance. In this paper, we take issue with the claim that multilateral summits merely result in "hot air" by looking at whether and how decisions made during EU summit meetings affect the European Defense Industry. We argue that investors react positively to a successful strengthening of Europe's military component - a vital part of the intensified cooperation within the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) - since such decisions increase the demand for military products and raise the expected profits in the European Defense Industry. Our findings lend empirical support to the view that financial markets indeed evaluate the substance of European Council meetings and only react to those summit decisions which consolidated EU military capabilities and the ESDP. Each of these substantial Council decisions increased the value of the European Defense sector by about 4 billion Euros on average. This shows that multilateral decisions can have considerable economic and financial repercussions.
Michael M Bechtel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
eliciting substance from hot air financial market responses to eu summit decisions on european Defense
International Organization, 2010Co-Authors: Michael M Bechtel, Gerald SchneiderAbstract:The results of deliberations in multilateral fora are often considered as ineffective. Decision making in the European Union (EU) and in particular its key intergovernmental body, the European Council, poses no exception. Especially in the domain of EU foreign and security affairs the unanimity requirement governing this institution allegedly allows nationalist governments to torpedo any attempt to build up a credible European Defense force and a unified foreign policy stance. In this paper, we take issue with the claim that multilateral summits merely result in "hot air" by looking at whether and how decisions made during EU summit meetings affect the European Defense Industry. We argue that investors react positively to a successful strengthening of Europe's military component - a vital part of the intensified cooperation within the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) - since such decisions increase the demand for military products and raise the expected profits in the European Defense Industry. Our findings lend empirical support to the view that financial markets indeed evaluate the substance of European Council meetings and react positively to those summit decisions which consolidated EU military capabilities and the ESDP. Each of these substantial Council decisions increased the value of the European Defense sector by about 4 billion Euros on average. This shows that multilateral decisions can have considerable economic and financial repercussions.
-
eliciting substance from hot air financial market responses to eu summit decisions on european Defense
2009Co-Authors: Michael M Bechtel, Gerald SchneiderAbstract:The results of deliberations in multilateral fora are often considered as ineffective. Decision making in the European Union (EU) and in particular its key intergovernmental body, the European Council, poses no exception. Especially in the domain of EU foreign and security affairs the unanimity requirement governing this institution allegedly allows nationalist governments to torpedo any attempt to build up a credible European Defense force and a unified foreign policy stance. In this paper, we take issue with the claim that multilateral summits merely result in "hot air" by looking at whether and how decisions made during EU summit meetings affect the European Defense Industry. We argue that investors react positively to a successful strengthening of Europe's military component - a vital part of the intensified cooperation within the European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) - since such decisions increase the demand for military products and raise the expected profits in the European Defense Industry. Our findings lend empirical support to the view that financial markets indeed evaluate the substance of European Council meetings and only react to those summit decisions which consolidated EU military capabilities and the ESDP. Each of these substantial Council decisions increased the value of the European Defense sector by about 4 billion Euros on average. This shows that multilateral decisions can have considerable economic and financial repercussions.
Harvey M Sapolsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
restructuring the u s Defense Industry
International Security, 2000Co-Authors: Eugene Gholz, Harvey M SapolskyAbstract:The end of the Cold War produced major changes in the U.S. Defense sector. More than 2 million Defense workers, military personnel, and civil servants have lost their jobs. Thousands of arms have left the Industry. More than one hundred military bases have closed, and the production of weapons is down considerably. As signiacant as these changes are, they do not address the key issues in restructuring the post–Cold War Defense sector. The Reagan-era Defense buildup led contractors to invest in huge production capacity that no longer is needed. This capacity overhang includes too many open factories, each of which produces a “legacy” system that was designed for the Cold War. Many individual Defense plants are also too large to produce efaciently at post–Cold War levels of demand. Until this excess capacity is eliminated, the United States will continue to spend too much on Defense. The politics of jobs and congressional districts that many analysts thought governed the Cold War have triumphed in its aftermath. Today, years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, not one Cold War weapon platform line has closed in the United States. 1 The same factories still produce the same aircraft, ships, and armored vehicles (or their incremental descendants). During the Cold War, the high level of perceived security threat increased U.S. policymakers’ respect for military advice on weapons procurement and research and development (R&D) decisions. The military services’ expert knowledge checked Congress’s pork barrel instincts, and failed or unneeded weapon systems were often canceled. Today, however, contractors and congres
Juhana Riyadi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Simulation Model of Iron Sponge Plant Layout for the Defense Industry Based on Industry 4.0 Model
'STKIP Singkawang', 2020Co-Authors: Aritonang Sovia, Juhana RiyadiAbstract:The Industry 4.0 is a change in the perspective of how to view an Industry based on the resources owned, to operate according to needs. The sponge iron Industry is a raw material Industry to support the steel Industry which is intended as material for shipbuilding and combat vehicles used by the Indonesian National Millitary. It is necessary to plan and design a sponge iron plant with an Industrial 4.0 model. The implementation of the Industry 4.0 model aims to optimize the operational needs of the plant, especially the sponge iron plant, which is relatively rare in Indonesia. The concept of a factory layout (cellular layout, modular layout), the concept of lean manufacturing, as well as the concepts and principles of the smart factory (Cyber-Physical Systems) are concepts that will be applied in the planning and design of the Industrial 4.0 sponge iron plant layout. In order to produce an optimal layout, a simulation model using FlexSim 2018 Software and layout optimization is used the Computerized Relative Allocation of Facilities Technique (CRAFT) algorithm with the help of CRAFT Software Integrated Microsoft Excel 2019
-
ANALYSIS OF THE PROCESS OF IRON SAND PROCESSING INTO SPONGE IRON IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE Defense Industry OF STEEL RAW MATERIALS
'Indonesia Defense University', 2019Co-Authors: Aritonang Sovia, Jupriyanto Jupriyanto, Juhana RiyadiAbstract:The number of iron sand reserves is mostly spread in the coastal waters of Indonesia, from the coast of Sumatra, the southern of Java to Bali, the beaches of Sulawesi, beaches in East Nusa Tenggara (NTT), and the northern coast of Papua. Total reserves for ore are 173,810,612 tons and metal as much as 25,412,652.62 tons. But its utilization was not optimal because PT. Krakatau Steel, and PT. Krakatau Posco has produced steel plates only 24,000 to 36,000 tons per year. While the need for steel plates for the shipping Industry each year requires 900,000 tons per year. With the need for raw material for steel plates in the form of iron sponges with Fe ≥ 60%, PT. Krakatau Steel is still imported from abroad. The proof is PT. Krakatau Steel before and during the year 2000 still imported Iron Ore Pellets from the countries of Sweden, Chille and Brazil for 3,500,000 tons per year. This condition is the cause of the national steel Industry unable to compete with the foreign steel Industry because imported raw materials are subject to import duties. This is an opportunity to build a steel raw material company because all this time the steel raw material Industry in Indonesia has only two companies. This condition encourages the manufacture of iron sponges, with the process of making iron sponges with technology adapted to installed production capacity. This study analysed the manufacture of iron sponges using Cipatujah iron sand, as raw material for the manufacture of iron sponges, with the results obtained in the form of iron sponges with the highest levels of Fe ≥60.44%. This can be used for the purposes of raw materials for steel making PT. Krakatau Steel (PT. KS), because so far PT. KS claims that Fe <60% local sponge iron products. This can encourage the independence of steel raw materials, which impacts on the independence of the defence Industry. But the government must also protect and prioritize steel raw materials for national production for national steel production. With the national government steel Industry, the consortium of vendors supplying raw material (iron sponge) to maintain the quality and supply of continuous sponge iron.Keywords: iron sand, iron pellet, iron spong
Eugene Gholz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
eisenhower versus the spin off story did the rise of the military industrial complex hurt or help america s commercial aircraft Industry
Enterprise and Society, 2011Co-Authors: Eugene GholzAbstract:In his Farewell Address, President Eisenhower warned that the military-industrial complex (MIC) threatened to dominate American research, crowding out commercial innovation. Ironically, a number of analysts point to spin-off benefits of the 1950s' military effort as a crucial source of American high-tech competitiveness, often citing the key example of the relationship between military jet aircraft and the Boeing's 707. But the huge military investment in jet aviation had both benefits and costs for the commercial Industry. This article compares the development of the Boeing 707 and its relationship to military projects like the KC-135 tanker to the contemporary development of commercial jet aircraft by other companies that were also integral parts of the military-industrial complex (MIC), including Douglas Aircraft and its commercial DC-8 and Convair and its commercial 880 and 990. Using evidence from archives, interviews with retired company executives, contemporary trade press, and academic studies, the article concludes that membership in the MIC did not offer firms a leg up in commercial markets. President Eisenhower was generally right about the costs of the military effort, but military spending remained low enough to allow commercial Industry to thrive in parallel to the Defense Industry.
-
identifying disruptive innovation innovation theory and the Defense Industry
Innovations: Technology Governance Globalization, 2009Co-Authors: Peter Dombrowski, Eugene GholzAbstract:This article improves Clayton Christensen's widely cited theory of innovation and applies it to explain recent developments in the U.S. Defense Industry. We clarify Christensen's categorization of innovations, and expand the theory's scope to products with multiple quality attributes and markets that have a 'demand pull' for innovation. We then demonstrate that military leaders have misdiagnosed the current wave of innovation by casually claiming that it is disruptive. These improvements to Christensen's theory could help improve military investment decisions.
-
restructuring the u s Defense Industry
International Security, 2000Co-Authors: Eugene Gholz, Harvey M SapolskyAbstract:The end of the Cold War produced major changes in the U.S. Defense sector. More than 2 million Defense workers, military personnel, and civil servants have lost their jobs. Thousands of arms have left the Industry. More than one hundred military bases have closed, and the production of weapons is down considerably. As signiacant as these changes are, they do not address the key issues in restructuring the post–Cold War Defense sector. The Reagan-era Defense buildup led contractors to invest in huge production capacity that no longer is needed. This capacity overhang includes too many open factories, each of which produces a “legacy” system that was designed for the Cold War. Many individual Defense plants are also too large to produce efaciently at post–Cold War levels of demand. Until this excess capacity is eliminated, the United States will continue to spend too much on Defense. The politics of jobs and congressional districts that many analysts thought governed the Cold War have triumphed in its aftermath. Today, years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, not one Cold War weapon platform line has closed in the United States. 1 The same factories still produce the same aircraft, ships, and armored vehicles (or their incremental descendants). During the Cold War, the high level of perceived security threat increased U.S. policymakers’ respect for military advice on weapons procurement and research and development (R&D) decisions. The military services’ expert knowledge checked Congress’s pork barrel instincts, and failed or unneeded weapon systems were often canceled. Today, however, contractors and congres
