Advertisement

Analyzing the Economic Impacts of a Military Mobilization

  • Robert E. Chapman
  • Carl M. Harris
  • Saul I. Gass
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems book series (LNE, volume 332)

Abstract

A military mobilization is a complex series of events, which if modeled adequately, can specify how a national economy makes the transition from a peace-time to a war-time footing. Problems in modeling such situations have highlighted the importance of evaluating large-scale, policy-oriented models prior to their use by decision makers. The current study outlines a generic procedure for conducting such an evaluation. Specifically, macro- economic modeling and a structured sensitivity analysis can be combined to measure and evaluate the economic impacts of a military mobilization.

Keywords

Capital Stock Final Demand Federal Emergency Management Agency Mobilization Scenario Real Investment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Chapman, R. E., Gass, S. I., Filliben, J. J., and Harris, C. M., Guidelines for Evaluating Emergency Management Models and Databases: A Suggested Approach, Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology, NISTIR 88–3826, 1989.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Gass, S. I., “Decision-Aiding Models, Validation, Assessment, and Related Issues for Policy Analysis,” Operations Research, Vol. 31, 1983, pp. 603–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Hudson, E. A., and Jorgenson, D. W., The Long Term Interindustry Transactions Model: A Simulation Model for Energy and Economic Analysis, Washington, DC: Federal Preparedness Agency, 1979.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Hudson, E. A., and Jorgenson, D. W., “U. S. Energy Policy and Economic Growth, 1975–2000,” The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Vol. 5, Autumn 1974, pp. 461–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Simulations of the 36 DGEM Over the Historical Period,Lexington, MA: Data Resources, Inc., 1980.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Test and Sensitivity Simulations of the 36 Sector Dynamic General Equilibrium Model,Lexington, MA: Data Resources, Inc., 1980.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Goettle, R. J., and Hudson, E. A., User’s Guide to the 36 DGEM Simulation Model, Cambridge, MA: Dale Jorgenson and Associates, 1984.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Goettle, R. J., and Hudson, E. A., Final Report on the Dynamic General Equilibrium Model, Cambridge, MA: Dale Jorgenson and Associates, 1984.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Goettle, R. J., and Hudson, E. A., 36 DGEM: The Dynamic General Equilibrium Simulation Model, Cambridge, MA: Dale Jorgenson and Associates, 1984.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Harris, C. M., Issues in Sensitivity and Statistical Analysis of Large-Scale, Computer-Based Models, Gaithersburg, MD: National Bureau of Standards, NBS GCR 84–466, 1984.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Harris, C. M., Computer Generation of Latin Hypercube Sampling Plans, Gaithersburg, MD: National Bureau of Standards, NBS GCR 84–476, 1984.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    McKay, M. D., Conover, W. J., and Beckman, R. J., “A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output from a Computer Code,” Technometrics, Vol. 21, 1979, pp. 239–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Filliben, J. J., DA TA PLOT - Introduction and Overview, Gaithersburg, MD: National Bureau of Standards, Special Publication 667, 1984.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York, Inc. 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert E. Chapman
    • 1
  • Carl M. Harris
    • 2
  • Saul I. Gass
    • 3
  1. 1.National Institute of Standards and TechnologyGaithersburgUSA
  2. 2.George Mason UniversityFairfaxUSA
  3. 3.University of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations