Free riding in NATO after the Rise of Russia: cost sharing, free riding and selective incentives in NATO from 2009 to 2019

被引:0
作者
Pedersen R.B. [1 ]
Ohrt A. [1 ]
Svendsen G.T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Aarhus
关键词
Alliances; Defence spending; Free riding; NATO; Public choice;
D O I
10.1057/s42738-023-00109-9
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
After a period of relative overperformance due to the focus on output indicators in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) burden-sharing debate, we ask whether the shift back to input indicators prior to the Ukraine War meant that the smaller NATO allies have returned to their fringe position as NATO underperformers. According to the deterrence model, smaller allies are induced to free ride to a higher degree than mid-sized allies. Utilizing insights from public choice theory, our analysis demonstrates, first, that there is no support to the claim that the size of NATO member state GDP determines the percentage of GDP spent on defence. Second, selective incentives tend to reduce the incentive for small allies to free ride. The relationship between GDP and the percentage of GDP spent on defence capabilities is therefore conditional upon the net gain of the individual member state. Defence capabilities that are characterized as a public good when we control for exposed borders indicate a higher percentage of GDP spent on defence. Our conclusions show that even though small allies continue to free ride, they do so less than expected due to the existence of selective incentives in the period from 2009-2019. © 2023, The Author(s).
引用
收藏
页码:54 / 72
页数:18
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [1] Anthony C., NATO’s “Brain Death” Burdensharing Blunders: Focusing on the Right Investment, Force Strength, and Readiness Needs., (2019)
  • [2] The EU and Its Neighbours: Tackling Security Challenges Together. European External Action Service, (2020)
  • [3] Haesebrouck T., NATO Burden Sharing in Libya: A Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61, 10, pp. 2235-2261, (2017)
  • [4] Haesebrouck T., EU Member State Participation in Military Operations: A Configurational Comparative Analysis, Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 30, 2-3, pp. 137-159, (2017)
  • [5] Hillman A.L., Public Finance and Public Policy: A Political Economy Perspective on the Responsibilities and Limitations of Government, (2019)
  • [6] Jakobsen P.V., The Danish Libya Campaign: Out in Front in Pursuit of Pride, Praise, and Position, Political Rationale and International Consequences of the War in Libya, pp. 192-208, (2016)
  • [7] Jakobsen P.V., Ringsmose J., Burden-Sharing in NATO: The Trump Effect Won’t Last, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, (2017)
  • [8] Jakobsen P.V., Rynning S., Denmark: Happy to Fight, Will Travel, International Affairs, 95, 4, pp. 877-895, (2019)
  • [9] Jakobsen P.V., Ringsmose J., Saxi H.L., Prestige-Seeking Small States: Danish and Norwegian Military Contributions to U.S.-Led Operations, European Journal of International Security, 3, 2, pp. 256-277, (2018)
  • [10] Jorgensen K.E., Kaas J.G., Knudsen T.B., Svendsen G.T., Landorff L., The EEAS Navigating Foreign Policy Paradigms, European Politics and Society. Available at:, (2020)