Experimentation, legitimacy, and lived experiences in military innovation
The case of the Dutch Land Information Manoeuvre Centre
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 19488316 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Sofie Van Der Maarel (0000-0002-4067-1445, Radboud University Nijmegen, autor de correspondencia), Eric-Hans Kramer (Netherlands Defence Academy), Eric‐hans Kramer (Netherlands Defence Academy), T Molendijk (0000-0003-0325-5087, Radboud University Nijmegen) |
| Año | 2026 |
| Páginas | 1-21 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2026-06-05 |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Critical Military Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 2333-7486 • E-ISSN: 2333-7494 |
| Editorial | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/23337486.2026.2677974 |
| OpenAlex | W7163637661 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Referencias citadas | 38 |
Militaries increasingly experiment with data-driven technologies to enhance readiness and prepare for future warfare. Yet developing these technologies in-house poses significant challenges, particularly given the limited opportunities for real-world experimentation. This paper examines the Land Information Manoeuvre Centre (LIMC), an experimental Dutch army innovation hub active during the COVID-19 pandemic but without a formal legal mandate. The objective is to analyse the motivations and promises that drove this unit, to better understand dilemmas surrounding legitimacy in military experimentation. Through the conceptual lens of experimentation practices (driven by visions and imaginaries of military innovation), legitimacy (as entangled law and ethics), and soldiers’ lived experiences, the study shows that experimentation is not only about testing technical functionalities, but also about shaping social, legal, and ethical frameworks. The analysis reveals that military experimentation can challenge legal and moral boundaries, potentially generating dilemmas and moral disorientation among soldiers. These findings contribute to broader studies of experimenting in security contexts by providing a framework that integrates both legal and ethical dimensions of legitimacy. Moreover, by demonstrating how visions and imaginaries inform experimentation practices and lived experiences, the paper shows how such imaginaries can be strategically mobilized to justify actions as moral obligations, allocate resources, and steer investments. Ultimately, we argue that experimentation reshapes how innovation in warfare is legitimized at political and strategic levels, and how soldiers make sense of and justify their actions
Field (mathematics) · Government (linguistics) · Identity (music) · Information system · Lived experience · Anthropology: Ethics, History, Culture · Military History and Strategy · Military Strategy and Technology
War, Identity and the Liberal State
Ontopower
Qualitative content analysis
Moral injury and moral repair in war veterans
“If You Have a Hammer…”
Prototype warfare’
Innovating Algorithmic Warfare
Learning to feel, learning to fear? Emotions, imaginaries, and limits in the politics of securitization
Experimentation in humanitarian locations
The Security Imaginary
Imaginaries of omniscience
Securing with algorithms
Sociotechnical Imaginaries of EU Defence
Moral Injury and Soldiers in Conflict
Normalising algorithmic warfare through visual practice
Ethics, the military imaginary, and practices of war
Drones, risk, and moral injury
Transformation, insecurity, and uncontrolled automation
Experimental air power
Visualizations of the small military drone
The act of killing
This Is Not What I Signed up for
Remote Split
Disruptive Technologies for Security and Defence
From blitzkrieg to blitzscaling
Military Violence in Its Own Right
Experiencing Deportation as Dirty Work? The Case of Dutch Escort Officers
From Idiophylaxis to Inner Armor
| Altamente citado | No |
|---|