Quantitative and qualitative research use different research methods to collect and analyze data, and they allow you to answer different kinds of research questions. When collecting and analyzing data, quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings. Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses. Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experience in more detail. Common quantitative methods include experiments, observations recorded as numbers, and surveys with closed-ended questions. Common qualitative methods include interviews with open-ended questions, observations described in words, and literature reviews that explore concepts and theories.
problem where the socially desirable outcome occurs where marginal cost is equal to marginal benefit. The neoclassical approach sees the government as a rational actor which weighs up the opportunity cost and security benefits of milex. However, both approaches have experienced criticisms. The neoclassical approach is criticised for concentrating on the supply side so ignoring the internal role of the military whilst Keynesian is criticised for failing to consider supply side issues.
Furthermore, the UK should increase milex due to the positives effect on the microeconomy. Modernisation theory would argue increasing milex has many benefits on the quality of factors of production and firm characteristics. For example, the military sector offers training and education for labour as well as investment in capital. However, for the UK – a economically developed country – these benefits would be limited. As the UK’s factors of production are already developed the additional effects of increasing milex in terms of the modernisation theory for the UK would be minimal.
Marxism would additionally argue the UK should increase military expenditure in order to sustain effective demand and maximise the economic surplus. It can be argued higher levels of milex will lead to low levels of unemployment and high levels of capacity use. This is significant to the UK in order to maintain the current high employment figures which during 2017 reached 74.8%. Therefore, increasing military expenditure will lead to improving the UK state of security.
Nevertheless, numerous individuals would debate milex has negative effects on the economy therefore to improve security policy the UK should decrease military expenditure. According to the military industrial complex milex has negative effects on the economy due to information problems which leads to resources being skewed away from the civilian sector to the inefficient military provision. Arguably for the UK this asymmetric information leads to exaggerated risks and inflated military spending as can be seen by the increase in 2016. Despite some benefits many would debate the military sector is more corrupt and inefficient than the civilian sector as well as wasteful. As a result, some economists like Oden argue military spending represents an economic burden.
It could be argued that increased military spending has the inverse effect of decreasing economic growth therefore is negative for UK’s security policy. Galvin’s report argues increased military spending would result in reduced growth rate for the UK. This is because the UK has developed infrastructure and communication therefore there is little gain. Furthermore, further studies would support this idea like Rothschild. His report suggests high milex impedes growth due to impact on export levels. High milex reduces export availabilities in the machinery and transport equipment needed for export expansion therefore dampens export led growth. In fact, for the UK increased spending leads to a greater opportunity cost for the government. Arguably, increased milex diverts funds away from health and education causing alternative threats to security policy. Moreover, the UK is constrained by the ever-growing budget deficit. Increased milex would result in worsening the budget deficit therefore having negative effects for the UK economy for example increasing national debt which is unsustainable.
An alternative method to fund increased milex could be to increase and fund through taxes. However, this would have knock on negative effects on the UK’s growth rate. Increasing taxes on individuals would lead to decreased consumption as a result of net wage falling therefore reducing aggregate demand and growth. Similarly, taxes on companies would lead to less profit and innovation affecting the quality of products so reducing growth as demand is reduced. These effects would lead to greater issues for the UK therefore the UK will improve security by reducing milex.
On the one hand evidence of increasing milex could be as a result of the UK terrorist threat increasing to severe. The debate of whether to increase or decrease UK’s milex is continually questioned and research would suggest a common view is that defence spending is economically ambivalent. On the basis of research reports, the data would suggest the UK should increase milex in order to enhance security policy and improve its current security state.
Conclusion
Overall, to conclude the UK currently faces security issues from increased crime and terrorist threats as well as the debate over whether to increase milex or decrease it. Arguably, each of these threats can intertwine with one another challenging the UK policymakers. Increased
