Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study maps policy instruments, influence pathways, and research gaps connecting defense research and development (R&D) policies, innovation capability, and firm performance in emerging markets, addressing scattered evidence linking these policies to firm profitability. A scoping review was conducted using PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Open-access Scopus records were screened using a Population-Concept-Context (PCC) framework; 160 records were identified, and 18 studies were included after title, abstract, and full-text assessment. Key instruments identified include public R&D funding, procurement, civil–military integration, offsets, technology transfer, institutional collaboration, cluster or national champion formation, financing support, and business model innovation. These policies are primarily associated with increased R&D intensity, patents, absorptive capacity, technological readiness, commercialization, sales, exports, and productivity. However, direct accounting evidence based on ROA or NPM remains limited, descriptive, or self-reported. This review uniquely synthesizes fragmented evidence on defense R&D policy effectiveness in emerging economies, identifying critical gaps in objective financial performance measurement. Findings guide policymakers in designing evidence-based defense R&D instruments while highlighting the need for standardized accounting metrics to evaluate firm-level outcomes. This research contributes a comprehensive policy-instrument taxonomy and identifies pathways linking defense R&D to innovation and performance, offering a foundational reference for future empirical studies in emerging market contexts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wahyudi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: