Photo by: Staff Sgt. Dylan Bailey
July 2026
Table of Contents
- Introduction
- The Marketplace
- Drone Capability Streams
- Operational Priority Use Cases
- Implications for Canadian Defence
- About the Author
- Canadian Global Affairs Institute
Introduction
In February 2026, Canada released its new Defence Industrial Strategy (DIS), acknowledging the need for a fundamental transformation of the country's defence ecosystem, including its procurement system and the relationship between the military, industrial capacity, and technological innovation. The new strategy places particular importance on the role of emerging technologies in national defence and the need to build new, secure, domestically controlled supply chains while fostering the development of sovereign intellectual property. The newest generation of military technologies is no longer centred solely on hardware, but increasingly on the software, complex components, data architectures, and manufacturing capacity that enable it. Global conflicts, including the Russia–Ukraine War, have demonstrated how technologies such as drones can evolve rapidly and have highlighted the dangers for countries that do not maintain firm control over their supply chains. Furthermore, rising tensions over trade protectionism have underscored the risks of relying on external sources for critical resources and technologies.
In response to these new challenges, the government has started experimenting with new approaches to military technology acquisition as it implements the DIS. The most recent effort in this regard is the newly announced Defence Drone Initiative (DDI) Marketplace. The Defence Investment Agency, on behalf of the Department of National Defence (DND), has launched the DDI Marketplace as a mechanism to accelerate the development and acquisition of key uncrewed and autonomous capabilities, as well as counter-uncrewed aerial systems (C-UAS) capabilities.
This experimental approach moves away from the procurement of individual systems through lengthy competitions and instead establishes a standing marketplace of pre-qualified Canadian suppliers that can rapidly respond to emerging Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) requirements. Overall, the DDI is intended to bridge the divide between industry and military end users, while enabling flexible adaptation as global strategic circumstances evolve and the emergence of technological engineering breakthroughs.
This article provides an overview of what is currently known about the DDI and concludes with an analysis of how it may shape the future of Canadian defence industrial relations, as well as the integration of autonomous and robotic capabilities into the CAF.
The Marketplace
The centrepiece of this initiative is a Request for Supply Arrangement (RFSA), which establishes a pool of pre-qualified suppliers. This group of firms are admitted to this pool based on a number of predetermined criteria, and the process is administered through CanadaBuys. The RFSA is not a formal procurement contract, and membership in the supplier pool does not guarantee future work. Rather, the system allows pool members to compete rapidly for future requirements as they emerge. The pool is intended to function as a dynamic and continuously evolving list of firms, allowing new companies to join on a rolling basis.
During the first year of the RFSA, new supplier pool qualification rounds will occur every three months and every six months thereafter on an ongoing basis. There is no competition to join the pool, nor is participation assessed through a points-based evaluation system. Instead, applicants are assessed on a pass/fail basis. Individual suppliers may qualify for multiple streams (discussed below) and will have recurring opportunities to join the Marketplace as the military’s technological demands evolve. The overall intent is to establish a continuously refreshed supplier base of cutting-edge innovators rather than a small, protected group of static members.
Essentially, the process unfolds as follows: first, Canadian companies submit their qualifications under the RFSA. Successful applicants are approved through a pass/fail assessment and admitted to the pre-qualified supplier pool within the DDI Marketplace. As operational requirements emerge, the Defence Team issues targeted requests exclusively to qualified suppliers, which then compete for specific projects. Officials have emphasized that companies need only demonstrate that they meet the qualification requirements; they are not required to submit detailed technical proposals for every future capability at this stage. This approach is intended to keep the process streamlined.
Notably, eligibility is currently limited to Canadian entities. While there has been some public confusion regarding what constitutes a “Canadian” company for the purposes of this initiative, it has been confirmed that the government is applying the formal “Buy Canadian” definition, which includes Canadian based subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Furthermore, all applicants to the Marketplace must be registered through CanadaBuys.
A central characteristic of the DDI Marketplace is its modularity. It is designed to allow the CAF to rapidly acquire capabilities in response to immediate needs. As a result, officials have noted that maintaining excessively large stockpiles of related technologies is unlikely to be desirable, as they may quickly become obsolete in rapidly evolving fields such as drones. Instead, they argue that Canada requires an industrial base capable of adapting quickly as requirements change in response to the needs of end users. In essence, this initiative represents Canada’s effort to establish a peacetime version of Ukraine’s Brave1 platform. Brave1 is Ukraine’s government-backed defence innovation platform that providing grants, testing, organizational support, and a dedicated online marketplace to accelerate the development and deployment of technologies in support of the country's war effort.
To provide greater focus, the DDI is currently structured around different capability streams as well as specific priority use cases. While the various streams and broader technological categories, such as drones and C-UAS, are unlikely to change significantly, the specific applications of these technologies may evolve over time.
Drone Capability Streams
The Marketplace is organized around five principal supplier streams.
1. Uncrewed and Counter-Uncrewed Systems
- complete systems
- components
- supporting services
2. Digital Enablers
- communications
- computing
- cyber capabilities
- command and control
- data systems supporting autonomous platforms
3. Systems Integration
- engineering
- software integration
- interoperability
- platform integration
4. Testing, Evaluation and Training
- operational testing
- evaluation
- training services
- drone and counter-drone testing
5. Innovation and Experimentation
- lower Technology Readiness Level (TRL) technologies
- early-stage innovators
- experimentation projects
- prototype development
This stream is intended to encourage participation by emerging companies that may not yet possess mature commercial products.
Operational Priority Use Cases
Government officials identified six operational capability priorities that will drive future procurements.
1. Low-Cost Tactical Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) Drones
The objective is to procure large numbers of affordable ISR drones capable of supporting land, maritime and air operations. Officials emphasized affordability and scalability, arguing that military forces require systems that can be deployed in significant numbers rather than expensive, exquisite platforms.
2. Complex Terrain Uncrewed Ground Vehicles (UGVs)
Priority areas include:
- logistics
- equipment transport
- operating in GPS-denied environments
- Arctic applications
- reducing the physical burden on personnel
Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technologies may play an important role in this capability area.
3. Modular Explosive Payload Families
Canada intends to develop standardized, modular payload architectures for uncrewed systems.
Officials contrasted this approach with the ad hoc adaptations seen in Ukraine, emphasizing the need for standardized Canadian solutions.
4. Low-Cost Counter-Drone Interceptors
A major emphasis is on affordable interceptor systems designed to minimize collateral damage.
Government officials referenced lessons from Ukraine and suggested a desired interceptor price point of approximately $5000, significantly below many existing systems. These systems are viewed as particularly valuable for domestic and urban environments where collateral damage must be minimized.
5. Maritime Autonomous Systems
Priority capabilities include:
- autonomous surface vessels
- autonomous underwater systems
- route surveying
- mine detection
- protection of Canadian ports
- surveillance of strategic waterways and maritime choke points
6. Canadian Sovereign Deep Precision Strike
The final priority area focuses on developing sovereign Canadian capabilities for:
- long-range precision strike
- deep reconnaissance
- long-range autonomous systems
Officials have emphasized the importance of ensuring these capabilities are developed and sustained domestically.
Implications for Canadian Defence
The Defence Industrial Strategy stated many of the right things; however, as commentators have noted, implementation will matter most. In order to acquire military equipment and technology more quickly and effectively, Canada will need to take risks and test new solutions. The establishment of the DDI represents a potentially significant departure from traditional procurement pathways in Canada. A persistent challenge in Ottawa has been a culture of risk aversion within the federal bureaucracy that constrains timely decision-making. This cannot continue, as the pace of technological innovation has demonstrated that excessive caution and delays can create serious strategic vulnerabilities.
Depending on how things unfold, the DDI may not be fully successful, but the government should be commended for its willingness to take a risk. For genuine innovation to occur within the Canadian defence ecosystem, risk-taking is necessary, even though it can sometimes lead to failure. The DDI will likely encounter challenges as it is operationalized, but what will matter most is whether the DIA and the Defence Team can learn from those challenges, adapt their approach, and improve the process accordingly.
Further, a number of broader themes emerge from the stated capability streams and operational priorities. First, drones are not a stand-alone capability; rather, they are more accurately conceptualized as part of an integrated ecosystem involving hardware, software, digital infrastructure, and, most importantly, the personnel who drive their development and employment. Technology is often analyzed in isolation, but end users, the individuals who will physically employ these systems in combat and other operational settings will play a considerable role in shaping their evolution.
For Canada and the Defence Team to build an overwhelming operational advantage for the CAF, success will depend not only on the cost effective acquisition of commercial off-the-shelf technologies, but also on their ability to develop the broader software and data architecture that enables these platforms. If successful, the DDI could become the foundation of a new defence innovation ecosystem that the Defence Team can continuously refine and adapt as technologies evolve and new operational challenges emerge.
From a Canadian sovereignty perspective, the significance of this marketplace extends beyond the domestic production of hardware platforms. Equally important is the ability to retain sovereign control over the software, data, and intellectual property that underpin these capabilities, ensuring that Canada can sustain, modify, and further develop them without undue reliance on external actors.
The priorities of the Marketplace emphasize the importance of speed over procurement perfection. Much of the emphasis is placed on experimentation and prototype development, reflecting an acknowledgement that continuous refinement will be necessary to adapt capabilities to emerging challenges. In some respects, this may represent a significant cultural shift in Canadian defence procurement decision-making, which has historically prioritized lengthy definition processes.
Historically, the CAF, and particularly the Royal Canadian Air Force, has prioritized exquisite systems over mass when making technology procurement decisions. However, the requirements outlined in the DDI Marketplace suggest that a readjustment in preferences may be underway, given the emphasis on lower-cost tactical drones and more affordable counter-drone interceptors. This likely reflects lessons learned from Ukraine and other contemporary conflicts, where the widespread use of equipment has highlighted the need for scalable and affordable platforms, as well as cost-effective air defence solutions.
Finally, the selected operational use cases reveal a degree of uniquely Canadian prioritization rather than a replication of allied approaches. For example, the emphasis on complex-terrain UGVs likely reflects Canada’s unique Arctic operating environment, as well as its challenging weather and geographic conditions.
About the Author
Dr. Alexander Salt has a PhD from the University of Calgary’s Centre for Military, Security and Strategic Studies and an MA in Political Studies from the University of Manitoba. His research explores military innovation, emerging technologies, and defence industrial relations. He has published research relating to international security and defence policy with Strategic Studies Quarterly, Journal of Military and Strategic Studies, Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, and The Canadian Network for Research on Terrorism, Security, and Society. Previously, he was a Visiting Political Science Instructor with Macalester College and has also held positions with the Centre for Defence and Security Studies, as well as the Consulate General of Canada in Dallas, Texas, and the Consulate General of Canada in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Canadian Global Affairs Institute
The Canadian Global Affairs Institute focuses on the entire range of Canada’s international relations in all its forms including trade investment and international capacity building. Successor to the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute (CDFAI, which was established in 2001), the Institute works to inform Canadians about the importance of having a respected and influential voice in those parts of the globe where Canada has significant interests due to trade and investment, origins of Canada’s population, geographic security (and especially security of North America in conjunction with the United States), social development, or the peace and freedom of allied nations. The Institute aims to demonstrate to Canadians the importance of comprehensive foreign, defence and trade policies which both express our values and represent our interests.
The Institute was created to bridge the gap between what Canadians need to know about Canadian international activities and what they do know. Historically Canadians have tended to look abroad out of a search for markets because Canada depends heavily on foreign trade. In the modern post-Cold War world, however, global security and stability have become the bedrocks of global commerce and the free movement of people, goods and ideas across international boundaries. Canada has striven to open the world since the 1930s and was a driving factor behind the adoption of the main structures which underpin globalization such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization and emerging free trade networks connecting dozens of international economies. The Canadian Global Affairs Institute recognizes Canada’s contribution to a globalized world and aims to inform Canadians about Canada’s role in that process and the connection between globalization and security.
In all its activities the Institute is a charitable, non-partisan, non-advocacy organization that provides a platform for a variety of viewpoints. It is supported financially by the contributions of individuals, foundations, and corporations. Conclusions or opinions expressed in Institute publications and programs are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Institute staff, fellows, directors, advisors or any individuals or organizations that provide financial support to, or collaborate with, the Institute.
Showing 1 reaction