Latin American Defense Expenditures, 1938-1965.
ResearchPublished 1968
An analysis of Latin American defense expenditures, 1938-1965. The study is based on data published in the United Nations [Statistical Yearbook]. All data have been reduced to constant 1960 U.S. dollars. Defense spending reached a peak level of $1.4 billion in 1958, declined thereafter to about $1.2 billion, and turned upward in 1964 and 1965 to about $1.4 billion. Contrary to the commonly held view that Latin American defense spending has increased tremendously since the late 1930s, these measurements suggest at most a doubling--significantly less than the increase experienced by other countries. The hypothesis that Latin American defense spending is importantly affected by domestic political instability and fears of border conflicts is examined. Suggestions are made for future research and for improving the data reporting system of the Agency for International Development. 148 pp. Ref.
Topics
Document Details
- Copyright: RAND Corporation
- Availability: Web Only
- Year: 1968
- Pages: 148
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/pubs
- Document Number: RM-5310-PR/ISA
Citation
RAND Style Manual
Chicago Manual of Style
This publication is part of the RAND research memorandum series. The research memorandum series, a product of RAND from 1948 to 1973, included working papers meant to report current results of RAND research to appropriate audiences.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.