Forecasting the Defense Budget and Assessing Its Impact on Economic Growth: An Empirical Study for Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research examines the impact of critical macroeconomic variables, particularly GDP, inflation rate, and labor force participation rate, on Bangladesh’s defense budget using annual data from 1990 to 2022. The main goal is to predict future defense budgets by analyzing key economic variables that influence budget decisions. This will help understand how economic conditions shape defense budget priorities and allocations. For this research, the Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) model is used, which is characterized by a lag structure of ARDL (4,4,4,4), to study how these economic factors and the defense budget are connected in both long-term and short-term dynamics. The analysis shows a positive correlation between the defense budget and both rates of inflation and GDP growth. However, the participation rate of the labor force is negatively related to the defense budget, and short-term exposure indicates that this participation rate affects the national defense budget more immediately. The ARDL model Bounds Test approach for cointegration shows an F statistic of 12.28744, which exceeds the critical value at the 1%, 5%, and 10% significance levels, strongly suggesting a long-term correlation between the defense budget and economic factors. Furthermore, the Error Correction Model (ECM) shows that the defense budget gradually returns to a long-term equilibrium by correcting roughly 51.95% of any disequilibrium during each period. These results highlight how crucial it is for the defense budget planners in Bangladesh to take economic factors into account to ensure that the defense budget is aligned with the nation’s broader objectives for stability and economic growth.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".