After more than ten years of war, there have been no studies that assess the relative capabilities of Regular Army and reserve component units of the same type. The authors assess the importance of component status relative to a number of potential determinants of operational effectiveness, including but not limited to unit type, training level, experience in country, and associated costs and risk using stated preference choice experiments.
Arroyo Center Publications
Search RAND Arroyo Center Publications
To perform keyword searches across Arroyo Center publications, enter one or more keywords and press "search". Keywords may be complete words or abbreviations (eg, "logistics" or "logist"). When more than one keyword is entered, the search logic is "keyword1 AND keyword2". You may also specify "keyword1 OR keyword2". To search for authors, enter only the author's last name.
Read Recent Arroyo Center Publications
This brief summarizes a report that comprehensively examines non-violent, cost-imposing options that could be pursued to overextend and unbalance the Russian regime.
As the U.S. National Defense Strategy recognizes, the United States is currently locked in a great-power competition with Russia. This report seeks to define areas where the United States can compete to its own advantage. It examines Russian vulnerabilities and anxieties; analyzes potential policy options to exploit them; and assesses the associated benefits, costs, and risks, as well as the likelihood of successful implementation.
This analysis of the new Blended Retirement System (BRS) finds that it can sustain U.S. Army Reserve participation relative to the legacy system if continuation pay (CP) is set at optimized levels. The analysis also predicts CP cost and the percentage of reservists opting in to the BRS. CP levels affect the likelihood that currently serving members elect the BRS, thereby affecting the time pattern of cost to the Army.
Using an original data set of 145 ground, air, and naval interventions from 1898 through 2016, this report identifies those factors that have made U.S. military interventions more or less successful at achieving their political objectives. The factors that influence success vary depending on the type of objective being pursued, highlighting the need for careful analysis and resourcing decisions before policymakers initiate military interventions.