How the economic justification for national Submarine development emerges : The Four-Pillar Model

Sammanfattning

This thesis examines how the economic rationale for developing and sustaining national submarine capability can be interpreted within the contemporary defence‑industrial landscape. Submarine systems represent one of the most complex and sensitive categories of defence production and require long‑term competence, institutional continuity and sustained public investment. Sweden’s A26 programme provides the empirical foundation for analysing how economic justification is constructed in a small‑state context characterised by rising geopolitical tension, long capability cycles and renewed attention to security of supply. Traditional cost‑benefit tools tend to privilege visible, short‑term financial costs and therefore underestimate long‑term and systemic effects such as competence formation, spillovers, industrial continuity and strategic autonomy. To address this limitation, the study develops a Four‑Pillar analytical framework comprising spillover effects, spinoff effects, export logic and innovation‑system dynamics. The research employs an abductive, qualitative design that combines semi‑structured interviews with senior experts, documentary analysis and a comparative reference to the Gripen programme. The findings indicate that several mechanisms associated with submarine development may contribute to broader economic and industrial outcomes, although the strength of these mechanisms varies and is often based on respondent perceptions rather than measurable indicators. Interviewees describe a wide technology base surrounding the A26 programme, cross‑platform learning, and the importance of coordinated interaction between FMV, Saab Naval, FOI and the Navy. At the same time, the analysis identifies constraints, including limited export opportunities, challenges in measuring spillovers and the risk that expected effects may not fully materialise. The thesis argues that the economic rationale for national submarine development is best understood as emerging from the interaction of multiple mechanisms within a coordinated defence‑innovation system. This interpretation is consistent with the empirical material but remains subject to uncertainty due to the qualitative nature of the evidence. Submarine programmes should therefore be evaluated as long‑term strategic investments in national competence and technological resilience rather than as isolated procurement costs. The Four‑Pillar model offers a structured basis for examining these dynamics and for informing future policy and analytical work.