IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Can we declare military Keynesianism dead?

  • Luca Pieroni
  • Giorgio D’Agostino
  • Marco Lorusso

This paper empirically tests the Keynesian hypothesis that government defence spending positively impacts on aggregate output, by using a long run equilibrium model for the US and the UK. Our contribution, with respect to previous works, is twofold. First, our inferences are adjusted for structural breaks exhibited by the data concerning fiscal and monetary variables. Second, we take into account different dynamics between defence spending on aggregate output, showing that the results are sensitive to sub-sample choices. Though the estimated elasticities in both countries show a lack of significance in the more recent years of the sample, defence spending priorities addressed to international security may revitalize pro-cyclical effects in the UK, by an industrial policy of defence shared with the EU members.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Università di Perugia, Dipartimento Economia in its series Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia, Finanza e Statistica with number 44/2008.

in new window

Length: 24 pages
Date of creation: 15 Feb 2008
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pia:wpaper:44/2008
Contact details of provider: Postal: via Pascoli, 20 - 06123 Perugia
Phone: +39 075 5855279
Fax: +39 075 5855299
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Fernandez, Roque B, 1981. "A Methodological Note on the Estimation of Time Series," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(3), pages 471-76, August.
  2. John B. Taylor, 2000. "Teaching Modern Macroeconomics at the Principles Level," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 90-94, May.
  3. Taylor, John B., 1993. "Discretion versus policy rules in practice," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 195-214, December.
  4. J Paul Dunne & Ron Smith & Dirk Willenbockel, 2004. "Models of Military Expenditure and Growth: A Critical Review," Working Papers 0408, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
  5. David Romer, 2000. "Keynesian Macroeconomics without the LM Curve," NBER Working Papers 7461, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Dritsakis, N., 2004. "Defense spending and economic growth: an empirical investigation for Greece and Turkey," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 249-264, February.
  7. Bent Nielsen & Soren Johansen & Rocco Mosconi, 2000. "Cointegration analysis in the presence of structural breaks in the deterministic trend," Economics Series Working Papers 2000-W22, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  8. Keith Hartley, 2003. "The future of European defence policy: An economic perspective," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 107-115.
  9. John Virgo, 2001. "Economic impact of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001," Atlantic Economic Journal, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 29(4), pages 353-357, December.
  10. Michael Gerace, 2002. "US Military Expenditures and Economic Growth: Some Evidence from Spectral Methods," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 1-11.
  11. David Aristei & Luca Pieroni, 2008. "Government Consumption And The Composition Of Private Expenditure: A Conditional Error Correction Model," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 55(2), pages 143-166, 05.
  12. Blomberg, S. Brock & Hess, Gregory D. & Orphanides, Athanasios, 2004. "The macroeconomic consequences of terrorism," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(5), pages 1007-1032, July.
  13. Mohammad Hashem Pesaran & Richard J Smith & Yongcheol Shin, 1999. "Structural analysis of vector error correction models with exogenous I(1) variables," ESE Discussion Papers 38, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
  14. Valerie A. Ramey & Matthew D. Shapiro, 1999. "Costly Capital Reallocation and the Effects of Government Spending," NBER Working Papers 6283, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Craig Burnside & Martin Eichenbaum & Jonas Fisher, 2003. "Fiscal Shocks and Their Consequences," NBER Working Papers 9772, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. Chow, Gregory C & Lin, An-loh, 1971. "Best Linear Unbiased Interpolation, Distribution, and Extrapolation of Time Series by Related Series," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 53(4), pages 372-75, November.
  17. H. Sonmez Atesoglu, 2002. "Defense Spending Promotes Aggregate Output in the United States--Evidence from Cointegration Analysis," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 55-60.
  18. David Gold, 1997. "Evaluating the trade-off between military spending and investment in the United States," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 251-266.
  19. Dakurah, A. Henry & Davies, Stephen P. & Sampath, Rajan K., 2001. "Defense spending and economic growth in developing countries: A causality analysis," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 651-658, August.
  20. Santos Silva, J. M. C. & Cardoso, F. N., 2001. "The Chow-Lin method using dynamic models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 269-280, April.
  21. Kollias, Christos & Manolas, George & Paleologou, Suzanna-Maria, 2004. "Defence expenditure and economic growth in the European Union: A causality analysis," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 553-569, July.
  22. Johansen, S., 1991. "Determination of Cointegration Rank in the Presence of a Linear Trend," Papers 76a, Helsinki - Department of Economics.
  23. Johansen, Soren, 1995. "Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198774501, July.
  24. Saikkonen, Pentti & Lutkepohl, Helmut, 2000. "Testing for the Cointegrating Rank of a VAR Process with Structural Shifts," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 18(4), pages 451-64, October.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pia:wpaper:44/2008. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Davide Castellani)

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.