The degree of collectiveness aimed for in European defence policy raises issues such as burden sharing and relative performance measurement of the European Armed Forces (EAF). This paper compares EAF performance rates on three dimensions: input, throughput and output. In order to express performance, over the period of 1995-2008, differing measures are formulated for each of these dimensions. It appears that, in ranking the burden-sharing behaviour, it is the selection of a specific measure that defines the position of each European country. The implication of our study is that in meaningfully ranking the performance of EAF in the context of burden sharing, various indicators should be combined.

This paper contributes to the literature concerning burden sharing in specific crisis response operations. We provide a quantitative expression of burden-sharing behaviour of the NATO and Non-NATO allies during the International Security Assistance Forces operations in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2010.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify and test predictors for countries to comply with the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) anti-money laundering and terrorist financing recommendations. Design/methodology/approach The authors conduct a quantitative study to explore which factors predict compliance of countries. They include the compliance scores of 196 countries. Findings The results of a forward stepwise regression analysis show that a country’s wealth, measured as gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, is the most important predictor for compliance. This result supports earlier academic work about predictors for compliance (Simmons, 1998; Giraldo and Trinkunas, 2007; Whitaker, 2010). The other factors identified suffering from terrorist attacks, relative financial market dominance, tourism sector and the degree of democracy do not explain additional variance in compliance. Practical implications This research sheds light on compliance as a concept. For policymakers, accountants, companies and governments, it is important to understand why compliance occurs and why not. Originality/value The empirical results indicate that, in contrast to common belief, countries that suffer more from terrorism are not more compliant. Moreover, the rate of democracy, a relative dominant financial market and a strong tourism sector do not stimulate compliance with anti-terrorist financing standards.

No abstract

Across the world, the perceived common ground regarding global safety and security is changing. Facing divergent threats, in addition to their cooperation on defense states will increasingly need to collaborate on additional dimensions to protect their citizens. Hence, next to the military burden-sharing debate, questions as to whether states are contributing their fair shares in other arenas as well will be subject to debate also. This article analyzes national contributions by 28 NATO states to five dimensions connected to today’s safety and security situation, namely military expenditures, foreign aid, combating terror financing, carbon dioxide reductions, and refugee protection. We find that states vary in their contributions to safety and security, each preferring to fund some dimensions more than others. We suggest that acknowledging and allowing for a certain degree of complementarity among states could help transform the debate on burden-sharing, which is cost-focused, to include benefit-sharing behavior. Thus, it may become possible to value every country’s contributions and, building on national strengths, to further cooperation for safety and security along all necessary dimensions.