Ethics, Scientists, Engineers and the Military - Ethical Engineering for International Development and Environmental Sustainability - page 320

West to Eastern Europe and some of the majority world (developing) countries may
be occurring (Perlo-Freeman 2013a ). In the previous period of high economic
growth, military spending generally increased more slowly than overall spending.
Austerity measures have affected military spending less than other types of
spending. Therefore, the percentage of general domestic product (GDP) devoted to
military spending has generally increased in the current period of reduced growth
(Perlo-Freeman and Solmirano 2012a ).
Overall military spending was an estimated 2.5% of global GDP in 2012, a small
increase from 2.4% in 2001 (Perlo-Freeman and Solmirano 2012a ; Perlo-Freeman
et al. 2013 ). The USA was the largest spender, accounting for 39% of global
military expenditure. While this has reduced from 41% in 2010 and this is the fi rst
time since 1991 that it has dropped below 40%, US military spending in 2012 was
still roughly equivalent to that of the next 11 countries combined (Perlo-Freeman
et al. 2013 ). The USA has maintained expenditure on a number of large-scale
programmes, including the Ground Combat Vehicle, tactical wheeled vehicle, the
C/MV-22 aircraft programmes and the F35 joint strike fi ghter programme (Jackson
2012a ), and its total spending of $685.3 billion in 2012 was 69% higher in real
terms than that in 2001, showing the effects of the 'war on terrorism' (Sköns and
Perlo-Freeman 2012 ). However, the real-term reductions of 1% in 2011 and 5.6% in
2012 indicate the possibility of a new approach by the USA, though this could also
be a short-term response to austerity and the political process of reducing high and
rising government debt (Sköns 2013 ). Russian military expenditure has been
increasing since 1999, and the rate of increase jumped to 16% in real terms in 2012
with proposed nominal increases of over 40% for 2013-2015, giving a real-term
increase of 17% between 2012 and 2015 (Perlo-Freeman 2013b ).
The 15 largest military spenders accounted for 82% of world military spending
in 2012 and the fi ve largest spenders, the USA, China, Russia, UK and Japan for
60% (Perlo-Freeman et al. 2013 ). Saudi Arabia, which increased its military expen-
diture by 90% between 2001 and 2011 devoted 8.7% of GDP to military expendi-
ture, though this also includes expenditure on 'public order' and 'safety'. Other
countries with large percentage increases in their military expenditure between 2002
and 2011 include Afghanistan (36%), India (59%), Vietnam (82% since 2003),
Indonesia (82%) and Mexico (52%). European historical and recent data show a
relationship between occurrences of war and the strength of armed forces and
between the total number of military personnel and the number of casualties
(Brusaco-Mackenzie 2002 ), illustrating the importance of reducing military expen-
diture and the size of armed forces.
The nature of armed confl ict has been changing, with a reduction in confl icts
between states. Confl icts within states (sometimes also involving outside intervention)
now generally account for 70-80% of all confl icts. Changes in the nature of armed
confl ict have led to changes in the Uppsala Confl ict Data Program, which has
recorded data on ongoing violent confl icts since the 1970s. The previous data
collection category of major armed confl ict involving at least 1,000 battle-related
deaths in a calendar year and with at least one of the parties a state government is