The conclusion of the Cold War affords an opportunity to evaluate the consequences of America's defense policy of the last 45 years. Defense spending has a larger effect on the economy than the percent of GNP or number of Pentagon employees. Defense spending preempts scientific and engineering talent from other potentially productive endeavors, drains R&D funding, usurps money from infrastructure investment, and adds to budget deficits which in turn raise interest rates. In sum, defense spending diminishes productivity growth, and therefore slows America's economic standing relative to commercial rivals, such as Germany and Japan, which do not spend equivalent amounts on defense. It is quite probable that the rearrangement of our national priorities in pursuit of increased military strength has undermined the non-military dimensions of our national security in ways that outweigh military gains.
The current paper examines the dynamics of state security behavior and international environmental protection. In particular, the study provides a liberal institutional approach in identifying a “guns and butter” relationship between military spending and state participation with international environmental agreements. This cross-national study employs both bivariate and multivariate regression models to analyze the relationship between military expenditures and state participation with international environmental agreements, particularly examining the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. The empirics of the study suggest that states with higher military expenditures as a percent of GDP are less likely to comply with international environmental agreements. Theoretical and empirical implications are presented in the conclusion section.
This volume deals with the economic effects of immigration on the Danish public sector, in terms of both public income (through taxes) and public expenses (through transfers and the use of services).