IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hpe/journl/y2008v187i4p109-139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The determinants of military spending in the academic literature over the last fifty years: A survey of the main contributions and models

Author

Listed:
  • Miguel Angel Alonso Neira

    (Universidad Rey Juan Carlos)

  • Antonio Martínez González

    (Universidad Rey Juan Carlos)

Abstract

Although it is difficult to establish a classification of the models which analyze the determinants of defence expenditure due to their great heterogeneity, the present article takes as a starting point the contributions of Smith (1989) and Dunne and Perlo-Freeman (2003a y 2003b), to offer an alternative taxonomy of the theoretical studies proposed in the academic literature over the last fifty years. In particular, it establishes a division in three blocks: 1) Analysis of the external influences of military spending (models of arms races and economic theory of military alliances), 2) examination of the internal factors that reverberate on the design of the defense budget (Bureaucratic and Organizational Politics Models), and 3) empirical studies of the determinants of defence spending, which examine the effects of a wide combination of economic, political, and geostrategic variables on the military budget.

Suggested Citation

  • Miguel Angel Alonso Neira & Antonio Martínez González, 2008. "The determinants of military spending in the academic literature over the last fifty years: A survey of the main contributions and models," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 187(4), pages 109-139, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:hpe:journl:y:2008:v:187:i:4:p:109-139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ief.es/comun/Descarga.cshtml?ruta=~/docs/destacados/publicaciones/revistas/hpe/187_Art5.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Defence economics; arms races; models of military alliances; organizational politics models; determinants of military spending.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design
    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • H56 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - National Security and War

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hpe:journl:y:2008:v:187:i:4:p:109-139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Miguel Gómez de Antonio (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iefgves.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.