2022
DOI: 10.1111/rode.12893
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Military spending and sustainable development

Abstract: Using a panel data set of 160 economies from 1950 to 2018, this paper examines the relationship between military expenditures and economic, health‐related, education, environmental, and social indicators of sustainable development. The results generally suggest that the size of the military expenditures is negatively associated with educational attainment, life expectancy, infant and maternal mortality rates, female labor force participation, gender equality, and access to safe drinking water, electricity, bas… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Further, the results reveal that MILEXP exhibits a negative and significant coefficient in the sub-sample of developed countries, which indicates that 1% increase in military expenditure as a share of government’s total expenditure on average decrease the overall SDGs score by 4.8% in these countries. This provides additional evidence to several previous studies showing that higher military spending is likely to hinder sustainable development (Obasi et al , 2018; Elgin et al , 2022; Erdoğan et al , 2022). As Tian et al (2020) argue, allocating a sizeable military budget would limit financial resources needed to achieve SDGs.…”
Section: Empirical Results and Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Further, the results reveal that MILEXP exhibits a negative and significant coefficient in the sub-sample of developed countries, which indicates that 1% increase in military expenditure as a share of government’s total expenditure on average decrease the overall SDGs score by 4.8% in these countries. This provides additional evidence to several previous studies showing that higher military spending is likely to hinder sustainable development (Obasi et al , 2018; Elgin et al , 2022; Erdoğan et al , 2022). As Tian et al (2020) argue, allocating a sizeable military budget would limit financial resources needed to achieve SDGs.…”
Section: Empirical Results and Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…MILEXP is the military expenditure as a share in government's total expenditure. As noted by Elgin et al (2022), it could have negative or positive effects on sustainable development. The FREEDOM measure used here is the most commonly used index of economic freedom compiled by Heritage foundation.…”
Section: Money Launderingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Together with all these appropriate steps, the findings of our study emphasize the necessity of reducing the weight of polluting fossil fuels in energy use in NATO countries with environmental policies such as monitoring energy use in military camps, carbon tax, and renewable energy incentives.Militarization of countries from NATO increases environmental degradation. High MEX are closely related to various environmental and sociocultural problems such as air pollution, access to electricity and drinking water, infant mortality, and low life expectancy(Elgin et al, 2022).NATO has high MEX and military equipment, weapons, and construction increase demand for fossil fuels. Even without war, military transportation activities lead to an expansion of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%