IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v45y2001i4p427-452.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spending Priorities and Democratic Rule in Latin America

Author

Listed:
  • James H. Lebovic

    (Department of Political Science, George Washington University)

Abstract

Has democracy produced a shift in Latin American budget priorities from military to civilian spending? Do discerned shifts from military to civilian spending within democracies represent “hard choices,†that is, are they shifts of the “zero-sum†variety in which resources from one budget are effectively given to another? A budgetary model is developed to explain the change in nonmilitary relative to military spending. Cross-sectional time series data for a large number of Latin American countries in the period from 1974 to 1995 are used to test the model. Results show that level of democracy has a significant positive effect on the size of nonmilitary relative to military budgets, that Latin American democratization is producing significant budgetary changes, and that democratic countries rely on zero-sum trade-offs that defy prediction.

Suggested Citation

  • James H. Lebovic, 2001. "Spending Priorities and Democratic Rule in Latin America," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 45(4), pages 427-452, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:45:y:2001:i:4:p:427-452
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002701045004002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002701045004002
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002701045004002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beck, Nathaniel & Katz, Jonathan N., 1995. "What To Do (and Not to Do) with Time-Series Cross-Section Data," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 634-647, September.
    2. de Boef, Suzanna & Granato, Jim, 1999. "Testing for Cointegrating Relationships with Near-Integrated Data," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 99-117, January.
    3. Kamlet, Mark S. & Mowery, David C. & Su, Tsai-Tsu, 1988. "Upsetting National Priorities: The Reagan Administration's Budgetary Strategy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 82(4), pages 1293-1307, December.
    4. Russett, Bruce, 1982. "Defense Expenditures and National Well-being," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 76(4), pages 767-777, December.
    5. Brzoska, Michael, 1995. "World military expenditures," Handbook of Defense Economics, in: Keith Hartley & Todd Sandler (ed.), Handbook of Defense Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 3, pages 45-67, Elsevier.
    6. Mintz, Alex, 1989. "Guns Versus Butter: A Disaggregated Analysis," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 83(4), pages 1285-1293, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sajjad Faraji Dizaji, 2019. "Trade openness, political institutions, and military spending (evidence from lifting Iran’s sanctions)," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 57(6), pages 2013-2041, December.
    2. Sajjad F. Dizaji & Mohammad Reza Farzanegan & Alireza Naghavi, 2016. "Political institutions and government spending behavior: theory and evidence from Iran," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 23(3), pages 522-549, June.
    3. Sajjad. F. Dizaji & Mohammad Reza Farzanegan, 2018. "Do sanctions reduce the military spending in Iran?," MAGKS Papers on Economics 201831, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    4. Oualid Lajili and Philippe Gilles, 2018. "Financial Liberalization, Political Openness and Growth in Developing Countries: Relationship and Transmission Channels," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 43(1), pages 1-27, March.
    5. Mogues, Tewodaj, 2012. "What determines public expenditure allocations?: A review of theories, and implications for agricultural public investments," IFPRI discussion papers 1216, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. O. Fiona Yap, 2010. "Strategic Government Spending in South Korea and Taiwan: Lessons for Emergent Democracies," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(3), pages 613-634, September.
    7. Rosella Cappella Zielinski & Benjamin O Fordham & Kaija E Schilde, 2017. "What goes up, must come down? The asymmetric effects of economic growth and international threat on military spending," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 54(6), pages 791-805, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric S. Lin & Hamid E. Ali & Yu-Lung Lu, 2015. "Does Military Spending Crowd Out Social Welfare Expenditures? Evidence from a Panel of OECD Countries," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 33-48, February.
    2. Ying Zhang & Xiaoxing Liu & Rui Wang & Ruobing Tang, 2016. "Revisiting the “Guns versus Butter” Argument in China (1950–2014): New Evidence from the Continuous Wavelet Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-13, July.
    3. Michael D. McGinnis, 1991. "Richardson, Rationality, and Restrictive Models of Arms Races," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 35(3), pages 443-473, September.
    4. Justin Conrad & Hong-Cheol Kim & Mark Souva, 2013. "Narrow interests and military resource allocation in autocratic regimes," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 50(6), pages 737-750, November.
    5. Ying Zhang & Xiaoxing Liu & Jiaxin Xu & Rui Wang, 2017. "Does military spending promote social welfare? A comparative analysis of the BRICS and G7 countries," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(6), pages 686-702, November.
    6. Indra de Soysa & Eric Neumayer, 2005. "Disarming Fears of Diversity: Ethnic Heterogeneity and State Militarization, 1988–2002," Public Economics 0503008, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Sep 2005.
    7. HeeMin Kim & Hyeyoung Yoo & Jungho Roh, 2015. "A re-examination of the effects of the economy, government spending, and incumbent ideology on national policy mood," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 329-344, December.
    8. Posma Sariguna Johnson Kennedy, 2022. "Is There Competition in Budget Policy of Education and Defense in Indonesia?," International Journal of Economics and Financial Research, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 8(2), pages 58-62, 06-2022.
    9. Benjamin E. Goldsmith, 2003. "Bearing the Defense Burden, 1886-1989," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 47(5), pages 551-573, October.
    10. Ali, Mumtaz & Prasad, Ramendra & Xiang, Yong & Deo, Ravinesh C., 2020. "Near real-time significant wave height forecasting with hybridized multiple linear regression algorithms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    11. Meghamrita Chakraborty, 2023. "Linking Migration, Diversity and Regional Development in India," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 8(1), pages 55-72, January.
    12. Alexis Habiyaremye, 2008. "Economic Proximity and Technology Flows: South Africa's Influence and the Role of Technological Interaction in Botswana's Diversification Effort," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2008-92, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    13. Müller, Karsten, 2020. "German forecasters' narratives: How informative are German business cycle forecast reports?," Working Papers 23, German Research Foundation's Priority Programme 1859 "Experience and Expectation. Historical Foundations of Economic Behaviour", Humboldt University Berlin.
    14. Paolo Di Caro & Roberta Arbolino & Ugo Marani, 2018. "A note on the effects of human capital policies in Italy during the Great Recession," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(3), pages 1302-1312.
    15. Mattos, Enlinson & Rocha, Fabiana & Toporcov, Patricia, 2013. "Programas de incentivos fiscais são eficazes? Evidência a partir da avaliação do impacto do programa nota fiscal paulista sobre a arrecadação de ICMS," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 67(1), April.
    16. Bruno Amable & Donatella Gatti & Jan Schumacher, 2006. "Welfare-State Retrenchment: The Partisan Effect Revisited," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 22(3), pages 426-444, Autumn.
    17. Andreas Stephan, 1997. "The Impact of Road Infrastructure on Productivity and Growth: Some Preliminary Results for the German Manufacturing Sector," CIG Working Papers FS IV 97-47, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    18. Geddes, R. Richard & Wagner, Benjamin L., 2013. "Why do U.S. states adopt public–private partnership enabling legislation?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 30-41.
    19. Krause, Werner & Giebler, Heiko, 2020. "Shifting Welfare Policy Positions: The Impact of Radical Right Populist Party Success Beyond Migration Politics," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 56(3), pages 331-348.
    20. Doğan Barak & Mustafa Ünlü, 2024. "Economic Policy Uncertainty and Remittance Nexus: Evidence From Top 10 Remittance-receiving Countries," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2024(4), pages 653-675.

    More about this item

    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:sae:jocore:v:45:y:2001:i:4:p:427-452. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.