Global defence expenditure reached $2.7 trillion in 2024, marking a 9.4% annual increase—the steepest since the Cold War (SIPRI, 2025). As military budgets expand amidst rising geopolitical tensions, corruption risk in the defence sector represents a critical governance challenge with direct security consequences. Research demonstrates that corrupt defence institutions undermine state legitimacy, divert resources from capability development, and create grievances that violent non-state actors exploit. Yet, while extensive literature examines the empirical effects of corruption, no systematic analysis exists of how states discursively construct corruption as a security threat within national defence policy.
This research provides the first computational analysis of corruption framings across 119 countries’ national security and defence documents (1987–2024), examining how policy discourse shapes institutional responses to defence sector governance failures. Using natural language processing, network analysis, and machine learning on the Edinburgh National Security and Defence Documents Dataset (607 documents, 19 million words), the project investigates three questions: How do corruption-security framings evolve temporally? What factors explain cross-national variation in framing approaches? How do specific framings correlate with measurable policy outcomes?
The study employs sequential mixed-methods: large-scale computational text analysis identifies framing patterns, followed by structured focused comparison of 12 countries and process tracing of 3–4 intensive cases linking discourse to institutional reform. Collaboration with Transparency International Defence & Security provides access to expert insight and Government Defence Integrity Index data covering 86 countries, enabling validation of relationships between framing strategies and corruption control effectiveness. This partnership will ensure findings directly inform evidence-based anti-corruption advocacy whilst generating unprecedented analytical depth through methodological triangulation between discourse analysis and governance assessment.
Collaborative Partner: Transparency International: Defence and Security
- First Supervisor: Professor Andrew Neal, andrew.neal@ed.ac.uk
- Second Supervisor: Dr Gerhard Anders, Gerhard.Anders@ed.ac.uk
- Third Supervisor: Dr Roy Gardner, roybowesgardner@gmail.com