Wartime Ukraine Defence Innovation Ecosystem Formation through Drone Technologies

Abstract

In recent discussions, the Russian–Ukrainian war has increasingly been described as a technological war. With a severe shortage of conventional weaponry, Ukraine was forced to seek asymmetric responses to counter an adversary superior in numbers and firepower. One of the most effective asymmetric solutions emerged in the form of drones. The widespread adoption of drones accelerated during periods when arms deliveries from international partners were delayed. Their relative affordability, the feasibility of civilian procurement, and the ease with which they could be modified into weaponised platforms, even directly at the frontline, contributed significantly to their rapid dissemination (Combating Terrorism Center [CTC], 2024). Additionally, the proliferation of volunteer initiatives and the high concentration of skilled engineers and IT specialists within the Ukrainian Armed Forces enabled large-scale drone supplies even before formal state involvement. According to the IT Research Ukraine 2024: Resilience as the New Reality report, 67.6% of IT companies have mobilised employees for defence-related activities (IT Research Ukraine, 2024). This grassroots mobilisation also facilitated the military’s rapid adaptation to new drone technologies, setting the stage for the broader emergence of Ukraine’s defence innovation ecosystem. The mass adoption of drones catalysed the emergence of a new generation of domestic manufacturers. These companies increasingly localised and adapted production to achieve two strategic goals: reducing costs and expanding the operational applicability of drones explicitly tailored to the needs of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (CTC, 2024). In 2023, the Ukrainian government took a more active role in supporting this grassroots-driven innovation by launching the Brave1 initiative, a defence technology cluster to accelerate the development of military-focused start-ups and dual-use technologies. Within its first year, Brave1 facilitated the rapid prototyping and scaling of numerous innovations, ranging from FPV drones to advanced situational awareness systems. As a result, by October 2024, President Zelensky announced that Ukraine could produce up to four million drones annually, far exceeding the initial target of one million drones for 2024. In fact, overall domestic weapons production tripled in 2023. It doubled again in the first eight months of 2024, reflecting a deliberate shift toward technological self-reliance (Saballa, 2024). In parallel, civil society initiatives such as Tech Forces of Ukraine, Come Back Alive Charity Organisation and individual leaders like Serhii Sternenko played critical roles by mobilising

funding, technical expertise, and volunteer networks to expand the scale and effectiveness of drone deployment. These collaborations between public and private actors helped create an increasingly robust innovation ecosystem, ensuring technological solutions could be developed and fielded with unprecedented speed and adaptability. However, the distinct features of the ecosystem also stem from historical factors predating the full-scale invasion. These include the existence of a highly developed IT sector, historically weak state regulation, a strong and vibrant civil society, low university involvement in applied technological innovation, and geographic and political proximity to the European innovation and security environment (European Council on Foreign Relations [ECFR], 2023). Together, these factors have formed a unique innovation ecosystem characterised by an unusually high degree of horizontal coordination, openness, and low levels of internal competition. Open-source development practices have become a hallmark of the sector. Civil society has played a particularly influential role through advocacy, organisation, and direct financial support for innovation efforts (ECFR, 2023). Moreover, the military itself has emerged as a key actor, not merely as an end-user, but as an active participant in innovation processes, offering feedback, identifying operational gaps, and, in some cases, co-developing solutions. Studies that explore the development of defence innovation ecosystems, particularly those catalysed by war, remain rare and under-theorised. Specifically, there is a significant research gap concerning how innovation ecosystems emerge and evolve under wartime pressures and how these ecosystems differ structurally and functionally from traditional, peacetime innovation defence systems. Existing models of innovation ecosystems generally assume relatively stable, institutionally regulated environments. However, Ukraine's experience during the full-scale Russian invasion challenges these assumptions, offering a unique opportunity to observe how innovation ecosystems can rapidly form, adapt, and scale in response to existential threats (Combating Terrorism Center [CTC], 2024). The existential pressure to stay ahead of a stronger, better-resourced enemy is not merely accelerating innovation processes in Ukraine—it is reshaping the structural logic, actor relationships, and coordination patterns within the emerging defence innovation ecosystem. This study addresses this research gap by investigating the emergence and development of Ukraine’s defence innovation ecosystem during wartime. It will focus particularly on the role of the drone sector, the dynamics of ecosystem coordination, and the influence of crisis conditions and societal mobilisation. To guide this investigation, the following research questions are formulated:

Research question 1: What role did the drone technologies play in the emergence and evolution of Ukraine`s defence innovation ecosystem? Research question 2: What are the main characteristics and structural challenges of Ukraine’s defence innovation ecosystem formed during wartime? This study does not aim to reduce Ukraine’s defence innovation ecosystem to a single model but to map and interpret the multiplicity of actor roles, technological functions, and coordination logics that have emerged under the pressure of war. The thesis highlights the unique pathways and structural dynamics that differentiate crisis-driven innovation from more stable, peacetime settings by connecting empirical findings to broader innovation ecosystem theory.