Air Power Development Strategies for Safeguarding Airspace Sovereignty: A Systematic Review of Patterns and Typologies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52690/jswse.v7i3.1612Keywords:
Air Power Development, Airspace Sovereignty, Defense Strategy, Systematic Literature ReviewAbstract
The strategic imperative of airspace sovereignty necessitates robust air power development, yet existing literature remains fragmented across technological, operational, diplomatic, and institutional silos, hindering a holistic understanding of effective strategic formulation. This study aims to synthesize thematic patterns and develop a comprehensive typology of air power development strategies through a systematic review of contemporary scholarship. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a systematic literature review was conducted on peer-reviewed journal articles indexed in the Scopus database and supplementary sources. After rigorous screening against predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 studies published between 2017 and 2025 were selected for thematic synthesis. The analysis reveals four dominant thematic patterns, capability-driven, technology-centric, diplomacy-oriented, and institutional governance factors, which are consolidated into four strategic typologies: capability-based, technology-focused, diplomacy-oriented, and hybrid strategies. The findings demonstrate a paradigmatic shift from siloed, platform-specific approaches toward integrated, multidimensional frameworks that combine military readiness, technological innovation, institutional strengthening, and international cooperation. Theoretically, this study bridges military innovation theory and the political economy of defense by offering a typological framework that clarifies strategic choices and enables cross-context comparative analysis. Practically, it provides policymakers with an adaptive roadmap for designing resilient air power strategies that balance capability modernization, technological adoption, and cooperative security to address contemporary airspace threats.
References
Borg, S. (2020). Below the Radar. Examining a Small State’s Usage of Tactical Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. Defence Studies, 20(3), 185–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/14702436.2020.1787159
Borges, L. (2023). Leading Sectors and Polarity Change in the Context of US-China Competition: A Process-Based Analysis of the Origins of Polarity Shift. International Politics, 60(6), 1159–1186. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-023-00507-y
Bridgelall, R. (2024). Aircraft Innovation Trends Enabling Advanced Air Mobility. Inventions, 9(4), 84. https://doi.org/10.3390/inventions9040084
Calcara, A., Gilli, A., Gilli, M., Marchetti, R., & Zaccagnini, I. (2022). Why Drones Have Not Revolutionized War: The Enduring Hider-Finder Competition in Air Warfare. International Security, 46(4), 130–171. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00431
Christensen, M., Skærbæk, P., & Tryggestad, K. (2019). Contested Organizational Change and Accounting in Trials of Incompatibility. Management Accounting Research, 45, 100641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2019.03.001
Cohen, A. P., Shaheen, S. A., & Farrar, E. M. (2021). Urban Air Mobility: History, Ecosystem, Market Potential, and Challenges. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 22(9), 6074–6087. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2021.3082767
Droff, J., Guiberteau, J., Laville, C., Malizard, J., & Noël, L. (2024). The Political Economy of Military Aircraft, the Case of Europe. Defence and Peace Economics, 35(4), 464–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2023.2271816
Droff, J., & Malizard, J. (2023). 50 Shades of Procurement: The European Defense Trilemma in Defense Procurement Strategies. The Economics of Peace and Security Journal, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.15355/epsj.18.1.18
Eslami, M., & Borges, L. (2025). Frontiers of the Drone Industry: Major Powers and the Evolution in Air Warfare. In the Drones Race and International Security (pp. 55–76). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-05921-5_4
Grimes, C. (2021). Defense Sector Politics. Studies in Comparative International Development, 56(4), 463–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-021-09344-7
Hildmann, H., & Kovacs, E. (2019). Review: Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) as Mobile Sensing Platforms (MSPs) for Disaster Response, Civil Security and Public Safety. Drones, 3(3), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones3030059
Horowitz, M. C., & Pindyck, S. (2023). What is a Military Innovation and Why It Matters. Journal of Strategic Studies, 46(1), 85–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2022.2038572
Jakob, M., Flachsland, C., Christoph Steckel, J., & Urpelainen, J. (2020). Actors, Objectives, Context: A Framework of the Political Economy of Energy and Climate Policy Applied to India, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, 101775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101775
Jordan, J. (2021). The Future of Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles: An Analysis Using the Three Horizons Framework. Futures, 134, 102848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102848
Küsters, C. (2018). Why is There No Joint European Remotely Piloted Aircraft System Project Under the Common Security and Defence Policy? The RUSI Journal, 163(2), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2018.1475625
Liikola, J., & Blomvall, P. (2026). Beyond Linear Planning: How Artificial Intelligence Multiagent Systems Can Redefine Operational Art and Decision Making in Warfare. Journal of Advanced Military Studies, 16(2), 167–192. https://doi.org/10.21140/mcuj.20251602008
Locatelli, A. (2018). Too Far Ahead? The US Bid for Military Superiority and Its Implications for European Allies. In US Foreign Policy in a Challenging World (pp. 145–163). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54118-1_8
Manurung, Y. S., Maarif, S., Toruan, T. S. L., & Swastanto, Y. (2023). Indonesian National Defense Strategy in the Asean Region of the 21st Century Based on Defense System and Security Population Demography. JMKSP (Jurnal Manajemen, Kepemimpinan, dan Supervisi Pendidikan), 8(2), 746–755. https://doi.org/10.31851/jmksp.v8i2.11687
Marzi, G., Balzano, M., Caputo, A., & Pellegrini, M. M. (2025). Guidelines for Bibliometric‐Systematic Literature Reviews: 10 Steps to Combine Analysis, Synthesis and Theory Development. International Journal of Management Reviews, 27(1), 81–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12381
Pellegrino, F. (2022). Big Data and Satellites: Between Safety of Airspace and Criminal Liability (pp. 43–66). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13952-9_3
Sanusi, O. I., & Adeeko, O. (2025). Endogenous Threats, Dual-Use Innovation, and the Economic Dynamics of Military Spending. Defence and Peace Economics, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2025.2561874
Scott, B. I., & I. Andritsos, K. (2023). A Drone Strategy 2.0 for a Smart and Sustainable Unmanned Aircraft Eco-System in Europe. Air and Space Law, 48(Issue 3), 273–296. https://doi.org/10.54648/AILA2023041
Shklarsky, I., & Shamir, E. (2023). Driving Innovation in Air Power: The Cold War’s Four Generations of Fighter Jets. Defense & Security Analysis, 39(2), 146–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/14751798.2023.2178071
Silfverskiöld, S., Andersson, K., & Lundmark, M. (2021). Does the Method for Military Utility Assessment of Future Technologies Provide Utility? Technology in Society, 67, 101736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101736
Steen, R., & Hansen, T. B. (2025). Collaborative Defense in the Arctic: Strengthening Norway’s Oil Sector Resilience Through Knowledge Sharing and Vigilance Against Drone Threats. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12302
Yelwe, R. M. (2025). Light Combat Aircraft (LCA) Tejas vs. JF-17 Thunder: Evaluating Performance, Capabilities, and Strategic Importance. Comparative Strategy, 44(5), 570–599. https://doi.org/10.1080/01495933.2025.2501644
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yanto S Manurung
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
