Expeditionary economics

Part of a series on
Economics
History Outline Index
Branches and classifications Applied Econometrics Heterodox International Micro / Macro Mainstream Mathematical Methodology Political JEL classification codes
Concepts, theory and techniques Economic systems Economic growth Market National accounting Experimental economics Computational economics Game theory Operations research Middle income trap Industrial complex
By application Agricultural Behavioral Business Cultural Democracy Demographic Development Digitization Ecological Education Engineering Environmental Evolutionary Expeditionary Feminist Financial Geographical Happiness Health Historical Humanistic Industrial organization Information Institutional Knowledge Labour Law Managerial Monetary Natural resource Organizational Participation Personnel Planning Policy Public Public choice / Social choice theory Regional Rural Service Socio Sociological Solidarity Statistics Urban Welfare
Notable economists de Mandeville Quesnay Smith Malthus Say Ricardo von Thünen List Bastiat Cournot Mill Gossen Marx Walras Jevons George Menger Marshall Edgeworth Clark Pareto von Böhm-Bawerk von Wieser Veblen Fisher Pigou Heckscher von Mises Schumpeter Keynes Knight Polanyi Frisch Sraffa Myrdal Hayek Kalecki Röpke Kuznets Tinbergen Robinson von Neumann Hicks Lange Leontief Galbraith Koopmans Schumacher Friedman Samuelson Simon Buchanan Arrow Baumol Solow Rothbard Greenspan Sowell Becker Ostrom Sen Lucas Stiglitz Thaler Hoppe Krugman Piketty more
Lists Glossary Economists Publications (journals) Schools
Business portal Money portal
v t e

Expeditionary economics is an emerging field of economic enquiry that focuses on the rebuilding and reconstructing of economies in post-conflict nations and providing support to disaster-struck nations.

The term was first introduced in 2010 in an essay^[1] by Carl Schramm, the former president and CEO of the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.^[2] It focuses on the need for good economic planning on the part of developed nations to help prevent the creation of failed states. It also emphasizes the need for the structuring on new firms to rebuild national economies.^[3]

Since then, the theory has been used by the U.S. Government and the U.S. Army to restructure the economies of countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan and helping Haiti after its severe earthquake. Its aim is to provide economic stabilization and support the counterinsurgency tactics in such nations.^[4]

Expeditionary economics and armies must focus on infusing entrepreneurship and "messy capitalism" which prevails in the U.S.^[5] He describes the strategy adopted by economists to quickly establish a trajectory toward economic growth with the formation of firms that can generate rapid growth in revenue and employment. He also asks the U.S. Army to "treat economic reconstruction as part of any successful three-legged strategy of invasion, stabilization or pacification, and economic reconstruction."

The Pentagon has confirmed that it has applied the theory as a "weapon" to stabilize operations in countries with past conflict such as Iraq and Afghanistan and has planned various measures which will come into effect just as the army leaves the countries. With special reference to Iran and Afghanistan, reports show that significant resources have been dedicated to such efforts over the past decade, with hundreds of billions of dollars spent in the two countries. The theory rests to a huge extent on the dynamism of new firms, which constantly introduce innovations into the economy. The U.S Government's recent engagements have made it appreciate that post-conflict economic reconstruction must become a core competence of the U.S. military. However, their actions do not present any such appreciation.

There has been widespread criticism of the theory, particularly on the point that it should be carried out by the invading army. Many economists questioned the relative chances of its application by other post-conflict and military nations.^{[citation needed]} There have also been questions on whether the U.S. Army should be held liable or whether the objectives should be outsourced to private-sector enterprises or to other departments of the U.S. Government. The U.S. Army Stability Operations field manual (published in 2009)^[6] offers no relevant guidance on what role economic development should play in the United States' post conflict strategy or how to help build dynamic, growth-oriented economies. That being said, NATO's preferred COIN operational approach—Clear, Hold, and Build (CHB)—"encompasses offensive, defensive, stability and enabling activities", which apply the principles of expeditionary economics.^[7]

• Carl Schramm
• Entrepreneurial economics
• Expeditionary energy economics
• Experimental economics
• U.S. Army

• Nanto, Dick K. and National Security: Issues and Implications for U. S. Policy. DAINE Publishing House. Pg 4
• Milonakis, Dimitris; Fine, Ben. From Political Economy to Economics: Method, the social and the historical in the evolution of economic theory. Pg 306

• Website Kauffman Foundation^{[permanent dead link‍]}