TESTING THE SUSTAINABILITY OF CROATIAN MILITARY FORCES: SYSTEM

DYNAMICS APPROACH
Emil Tustanovski
Faculty of Economics & Business, University of Zagreb
Trg J.F.Kennedyja 6, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
E-mail: emil.tustanovski@gmail.com

Mirjana Peji Bach

Faculty of Economics & Business, University of Zagreb
Trg J.F.Kennedyja 6, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
E-mail: mpejic@efzg.hr

Ilko Vranki
Faculty of Economics & Business, University of Zagreb
Trg J.F.Kennedyja 6, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia
E-mail: ivrankic@efzg.hr
Abstract
The events of 9/11 and the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq brought attention to the
requirements of asymmetric and urban warfare, in addition to highlighting international terrorism as a
growing threat to global security. The rapid technological advancement in the fields of electronics and
communication opened new challenges to defense doctrines by introducing robotics and intelligent
weaponry to the battlefield. Introduction of sterner budgetary constraints brought the costeffectiveness of military programs back in the eye of the public. Due to changes in the geopolitical
environment, as well as the economic challenges set by the global financial crisis, there have been
priority shifts in the national security strategies. In most cases, it meant reductions in manpower and
additional spending, while maintaining or even improving national security through optimization of
the use of available resources. In line with the global trends, Croatian military is also going through
the transformation, but one that is currently being stifled by a long recession and negative
demographic trends. The purpose of this article is to outline the possibilities for the usage of system
dynamics models in testing the sustainability of Croatian military forces according to the size and
composition. The main focus of the article is on the demographic trends and their implications on the
Croatian military forces. After a brief exposition of the research done in this field so far, two models
are developed in the article a demographic model and a recruitment model of military forces. Two
models were carefully tested using validation tests suitable for system dynamics modelling. After the
validation, the models were merged into one integral system dynamics model of Croatian military
forces. Three experiments were conducting based on the different values of fertility, and impact of
demographic trends, which emerge from the different fertility level, was tested. The results of the
simulation based on the use of the demographic data from the Census of 2011, as well as estimates for
the data which was not accessible at the time, suggest that the Croatian military could have trouble
meeting its demands for recruits in the next 20-30 years. Additional implications of the current
demographic trends on the sustainability of the Croatian military forces are discussed in the end. Since
the basic inputs for any organization (civilian and military alike) are labor and capital, the problem is
addressed from two complementary perspectives: a demographic perspective and a financial one.
Keywords:

system dynamics, military forces, demography, fertility

1. INTRODUCTION
During the last thirty years, there were four major events that changed the perception of what
constitutes a modern army. The breakdown of the Soviet Union marked the end of the Cold
War, as well as the change of focus from maintaining a large military force for the purpose of
deterrence to the two-theatre approach to warfare. [23] The events of 9/11 and the subsequent
wars in Afghanistan and Iraq brought attention to the requirements of asymmetric and urban
warfare, in addition to highlighting international terrorism as a growing threat to global
security. The rapid technological advancement in the fields of electronics and communication
opened new possibilities and challenges to defense doctrines by introducing robotics and
intelligent weaponry to the battlefield, while the global economic crisis of 2007. Introduced
sterner budgetary constraints and brought the cost-effectiveness of military programs back in
the eye of the public [24].
To adapt to the needs of modern warfare, some of the worlds military organizations are
undergoing modernization and significant restructuring. Since military organizations are often
large and complex systems, such changes pose a challenge for most countries because of the
significant effect the military has on a social and economic level due to the size of its budget,
workforce and other consequences that stem from these choices. The main thesis of this paper
is that system dynamics can be used as a tool to provide a better overview of these effects and
to determine the viability and long term sustainability of planned organizational transitions.
The purpose of this paper is to determine the possibilities of using system dynamics as a tool
for evaluating the sustainability of a predetermined combination of manpower, equipment,
training and other aspects that constitute a military force.
2. MILITARY APPLICATIONS IN SYSTEM DYNAMICS
The primary application for system dynamics models is to facilitate support for decisionmaking in regards to complex environments. Due to the nature of both the organizational and
logistical aspects of the military, as well as warfare itself, there is a continued interest in the
military application of such models since that support could bring a decisive edge in military
situations.
A major contributor to the field is considered to be R.G. Coyle, who first explored the
potential of system dynamics for providing an overall view of problems and the dynamics of
military operations, by publishing a model of a hypothetical World War III. [4] From then on,
system dynamics was applied to most aspects of defense and military related issues. A
significant amount of research was done in the field of supply management simulations,
whether it was modelling military equipment support [5] weapon maintenance supply systems
[10].
System dynamics was successfully applied in other related areas. In strategic project
management, system dynamics models have demonstrated the ability to improve significantly
the quality and performance of management on complex projects [15]. In combination with
discrete event simulations, system dynamics was successfully utilized in developing
frameworks for modelling combat situations with the use of Lanchester Laws [2]. It was also

used to test whether some of the same factors influence both violent conflicts and sustainable
development [28], as well as in creating a model to evaluate counter-insurgency policies [1].
Manpower planning models were used to see how recruitment and attrition affected the costs
of organizations with different hierarchies [11], and training force sustainment models were
successful in illustrating the possibility of creating a bullwhip effect even in situations related
to human resource management [27].
Although system dynamics research is being done in Croatia for the last couple of decades, a
very small part of it is applied to military issues. Research was done on the demographic
sustainability of the Croatian military, and a system dynamics model was created based on its
previous organizational structure [26], but due to the abandonment of conscription in favor of
creating a smaller, professional military force in 2008., it is no longer applicable to the current
situation.
Therefore, the decision was made to create a new manpower planning model of the Croatian
Armed Forces with the emphasis on the demographic sustainability to determine whether the
new organization has the potential for long-term sustainability and to highlight the issues that
could come up due to the specific circumstances in the country and of the model.
3. UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMICS OF SUSTAINABILITY OF CROATIAN
ARMED FORCES
There are several approaches for determining the sustainability for complex organizations
such as the military. The criteria for differentiation are the definition of sustainability and the
benchmarks used in the research, as well as the factors used to determine whether the
observed organization is sustainable. In this case, we focused our efforts into modelling and
observing whether a change in the dominant demographic trends (i.e. low fertility) will affect
the ability of the Croatian military to fill its ranks appropriately, based on current laws and
procedures that govern the recruitment process. The data on the demographic trends obtained
through experimentation with the model will also be used in the discussion to suggest other
mechanisms in which they can affect the long-term sustainability of the Croatian military
force.
In order to achieve this, two models were created: a demographic model and a recruitment
model. Both models were developed using the step-by-step approach [22], as well as tested
using the dimensional consistency test, the extreme conditions test and the behavior
sensibility test.
The demographic model
The demographic model was designed as a cohort-component model divided into three
branches: the male branch, the female branch and the immigration branch. The female branch
is divided further into six cohorts: 0 to 14 years old, 15 to 17 years old, 18 to 27 years old, 28
to 49 years old, 50 years old to RA (retirement age), and the female RA and older group. The
male branch is divided into six age groups as well: 0 to 17 years old, 18 to 27 years old, 28 to
34 years old, 35 to 44 years old, 45 years old to RA, and the male RA and older group.
The age limitations for the cohorts were chosen to enable the observation of the three
variables derived from different combinations of said cohorts: the number of female citizens
in fertile age, the number of citizens that are (by the criteria of age) eligible to apply for
military service, as well as the size of the workforce. Each cohort has a single inflow (births

or maturation) and three outflows (maturation, emigration and dying) which are determined
mostly by external factors, such as fertility and mortality rates, as well as the estimated rate of
emigration for each cohort. The only exceptions are the Female RA and older and Male
RA and older variables, where the maturation outflow is not necessary.
The use of low-resolution cohort-component analysis and actual population data for Croatia in
the model, as well as the need to preserve the age structure of the population throughout the
duration of the simulation, required some modifications to the otherwise straightforward
maturation or ageing mechanism.
The value of the maturation variable depends on three other variables: the maturation lookup,
the delay, and the specific mortality rate for the cohort. The maturation lookup contains the
numbers of people that already belong to the observed cohort and that will age beyond the
upper limit for the cohort each year until the first generation of the newcomers (people that
advanced in age from the previous cohort) ages enough to pass the upper limit for said cohort.
The delay variable makes certain that the number of people entering the cohort also exits the
cohort after the appropriate length of time. The value of the delay variable is adjusted for the
appropriate specific mortality rate, taking into account the time it took for the generation to
pass through the cohort, as well as emigration, in the maturation equation for the cohort.
Due to legal limitations of applying for citizenship [17] and/or military service [19], its annual
rate, as well as other practical limitations, immigration was represented by a simple
population model. The number of female immigrants, however, does affect the rate of births
in the other branches, and its estimated proportion is included into the number of female
citizens in fertile age variable.
The recruitment model
The models are connected through the Recruitment pool variable, which estimates the
number of people eligible for military service, and considers that male and female members of
the population have equal interest in serving which currently is not empirically correct, but
it can be considered as a best case scenario. Since military service is voluntary in Croatia, the
constant ACCEPTABILITY OF MILITARY SERVICE has been added to account for the
proportion of people from that age group which would consider joining. A portion of the pool
determined by the SHARE READY TO APPLY LOOKUP goes through the application
process and into the Applied stock variable. From there, a number of individuals
determined by the PLANNED TESTING LOOKUP is being sent to testing, while others
are sent to the On hold T stock variable. A fixed percentage of the Applied number is
considered to have given up and is removed from the stock using the gave up 1 outflow.
Candidates that are sent on hold have priority in the next testing cycle, and when there are any
in the On hold T stock variable, they are sent through the later testing outflow to the
Tested stock variable, and as many of them as the PLANNED TESTING LOOKUP
allows. If the PLANNED TESTING LOOKUP allows for more people than are currently
available in the On hold T stock variable, people are sent through the testing outflow
directly to the Tested stock variable.
All candidates that went through the testing procedure are represented in the Tested stock
variable. From there, a number of the candidates smaller or equal to the predetermined limit
that successfully passes the tests are directed into service, while others are put on hold until
the next cycle.

A person going through Voluntary military service or VMT can either give up during training,
graduate or graduate as a military specialist. People that give up exit the system completely;
people that graduate into military specialists have been employed due to certain special skills,
and are sent to their respective posts immediately after successfully completing the VMT,
while others are sent to the Went through VMT stock variable. From that point they can exit
the system through ageing, or by seeking employment in the military.
According to Croatian law [18], a commissioned soldier can sign a contract with the military
three times: the first contract lasts for three years, the second for five years and the third one
for six years. After the signing of the second contract, soldiers with an exemplary record and
an adequate level of education may be considered for advancement into non-commissioned
officers. The same criteria apply for the advancement into the ranks of commissioned officers,
except that the chosen candidates for the position of commissioned officers have to go
through one year of additional training.
There are several reasons to why the values of outflows from the stock variables 3 years, 5
years, 6 years, NCO-s, Commissioned officers, and Military specialists are determined by
values stored in lookups, and not by the feedback loops in the model itself. The first one is
that not enough data about the composition of the Croatian military forces is publicly
available to reliably develop what would in a sense be a military restructuring model. The
second reason is that the decisions on the number of soldiers to be recruited, discharged or
retired can be made by the Croatian Parliament, based on the suggestion from the Croatian
Government as necessary [19], and are as such subject to a number of discrete political,
military and economic circumstances.
The model also calculates several key indicators that do not have an essential role in the
functioning of the model, but that illustrate some side issues that provide valuable context for
the results. The equations for these indicators are given below:
(1) workforce = Total population-Female age 0 to 14-Female age 15 to 17-Female RA and
older-Male age 0 to 17-Male RA and older
(2) share of workforce in total population = workforce/Total population
(3) Total reserves = contractual reserves + mobilizational reserves

SMR OF FEMALE<Time>
TF
AGE 0 TO 14
LOOKUP
female age 0 to
14 dying

female births

Female age
0 to 14

maturation of
female age 14 to 15

emigration f 0
to 14

<TF>

SMR OF FEMALE
AGE 15 TO 17
LOOKUP
<Time>
female age 15 to
17 dying

Female age
15 to 17

maturation of
female age 17 to 18
emigration f
15 to 17

<Time>

SMR OF FEMALE
AGE 18 TO 27
LOOKUP
<Time>
female age 18 to
27 dying
Female age
18 to 27
maturation of
female age 27 to 28
emigration f
18 to 27

<Time>

SMR OF FEMALE
AGE 28 TO 49
LOOKUP
<Time>
female age 28 to
49 dying

SMR OF FEMALE
SMR OF FEMALE RA
AGE 50 TO RA
AND OLDER LOOKUP
<Time>
LOOKUP
<TF>
female age 50 to
RA dying
Female
RA and
older

Female age
28 to 49

Female age
50 to RA
maturation of
maturation to
female age 49 to 50
female RA
emigration f
emigration f
50 to RA
28 to 49
<Time>
<Time>

<Time>

female RA and
older dying
emigration f
RA+
<Time>

delay 17 to 18
delay 14 to 15
PROPORTION OF
FEMALES

MATURATION OF
FEMALE AGE 17 TO 18 delay 27 to 28
LOOKUP

MATURATION OF
FEMALE AGE 14 TO 15
LOOKUP

MATURATION OF
FEMALE AGE 27 TO 28
LOOKUP

<maturation of
female age 14 to 15>
births

<maturation of
female age 17 to 18>

<Female age 15
to 17>
<TF>

delay 49 to 50

Number of female
immigrants

IMMIGRATION
LOOKUP

Women in
fertile age
total
fertility
TOTAL
rate
FERTILITY RATE
<PROPORTION
<Female age 18
<Female age 28
LOOKUP
OF FEMALES>
to 27>
to 49>
MATURATION OF
MATURATION OF
MATURATION OF
MALE AGE 27 TO 28
MALE AGE 34 TO 35
delay 17 to 18 MALE AGE 17 TO 18
LOOKUP
LOOKUP
LOOKUP
male
delay 24 to 35
delay 27 to 28
male

proportion of
males

<Time>

MATURATION OF
FEMALE AGE 49 TO 50
LOOKUP

delay to female MATURATION OF

RA
FEMALE TO RA
LOOKUP

<maturation of
<maturation of
female age 27 to 28>
female age 49 to 50>
GENERAL
MORTALITY RATE<Time>
<Time>
LOOKUP

immigration

Immigrants
immigrants
dying

MATURATION OF
MALE AGE 44 TO 45
LOOKUP

MATURATION TO
MALE RA LOOKUP

delay to male
RA

delay 44 to 45

<Time>
emigration m 0
to 17
male births

Male age
0 to 17 maturation of male
age 17 to 18
male age 0 to 17
dying

emigration m
28 to 34

emigration m
18 to 27
Male age
18 to 27

<Time>

SMR OF MALE AGE

0 TO 17 LOOKUP

maturation of male
age 27 to 28

male age 18 to
27 dying

<Time>

SMR OF MALE AGE

18 TO 27 LOOKUP

male age 28 to
34 dying

emigration m
45 to RA

emigration m
35 to 44

Male age
28 to 34 maturation of male
age 34 to 35

Male age
35 to 44

<Time>

SMR OF MALE AGE

28 TO 34 LOOKUP

maturation of male
age 44 to 45

male age 35 to
44 dying

<Time>

SMR OF MALE AGE

35 TO 44 LOOKUP

Figure 1. The diagram of the demographic model

emigration m
RA+

Male age
45 to RA

Male RA
and older

maturation to
male RA

male age 45 to
RA dying

male RA and
older dying

<Time>

SMR OF MALE AGE

45 TO RA LOOKUP

SMR OF MALE RA
AND OLDER LOOKUP

<ageing co
efficient>
ageing
coefficient
<maturation of male
age 27 to 28>
<Female age 18
to 27>

ageing 1

<planned
testing>
<gave up 2>

<TF> put on
<gave up 1>
hold
later
testing
On hold
T

ageing 3

<planned direction
into service>
ageing 2

<maturation of
female age 17 to 18>

ACCEPTABILITY OF
MILITARY SERVICE

PLANNED
EMPLOYMENT
OF SOLDIERS
LOOKUP

planned
renewal 2
discharge 2

5 years
3 years
6 years
<soldier
second
third
discharge 3
employment
contract
contract <TF>
promotion to
plan>
PLANNED
<Time>
NCO
discharge 1
planned
PROMOTION TO
NCO LOOKUP
renewal 1
planned
promotion to nco

On hold

<TF>

Recruitment
Tested
Applied
pool
testing
direction into
application
service
<TF>
process
gave up 1
gave up 2
<Voluntary
military training>
GAVE UP 1
GAVE UP 2
share ready to
LOOKUP
LOOKUP
apply
planned
<Time>
testing
<Time>
planned direction
SHARE READY TO
PLANNED
into service
APPLY LOOKUP TESTING LOOKUP

first<Time>
contract

Graduation <TF>
<Time>

later
direction
into
service

<maturation of
female age 27 to 28>
put on hold T
<Male age 18
<TF>
to 27>
<maturation of male
age 17 to 18>

Went
through
VMT

NCO's

NCO retirement
and discharges

planned NCO
RD

sent to CO
training
<TF>

CO
training

Voluntary
military
training

planned
promotion to CO
PLANNED
PROMOTION TO CO
LOOKUP
cadet
graduation

<Time>
PLANNED DIRECTION
INTO SERVICE
LOOKUP

PLANNED NCO
RD LOOKUP

<TF>

graduated into
MS

want to be MS
GAVE UP 3
LOOKUP
gave up 3

planned CO
RD
Commisioned
officers

Military
specialists

CO
retirement
and
discharges

MS
retirement
and
discharges

MS
employment
<Time>

Figure 2. The diagram of the recruitment model

promotion to
CO

PLANNED CO
RD LOOKUP
PLANNED MS
RD LOOKUP

planned MS
RD
PLANNED MS
EMPLOYMENT
LOOKUP

planned MS
employment

4. SIMULATION RESULTS ANALYSIS

4.1. Experiment design
The main focus of this paper is on the demographic trends in Croatia over the next 50 years
and their impact on the Croatian Armed Forces, especially on the influence of the changes in
the total fertility rate, which is widely recognized as a key aspect of the population decline in
Croatia over the last several decades. To that effect, three scenarios were chosen to monitor
the changes in the size and structure of the total population in Croatia during the observed
period: the low-fertility Scenario 1, the medium fertility Scenario 2, and the high fertility
Scenario 3. These scenarios were developed by Gelo, Akrap and ipin [12], and the fertility
values are presented in Table 1.
The starting values for the stock variables representing different age groups of both the male
and female population were sourced from the results of the Census of 2011. [8], and the
mortality rates for these groups were calculated as weighted averages of the mortality rates for
the appropriate ages published in the Statistical Yearbook of 2012. [7]. The maturation rates
found in the lookups of the demographic model compensate for the size of the age groups for
the purpose of maintaining the appropriate age structure by using pre-calculated values for the
maturation rates until enough time passes that the first group of people that entered a certain
age group matures enough to exit that same group.
The starting values for immigration and emigration rates were calculated as averages of the
values published by the Croatian Bureau of Statistics for the 2008. to 2012. period [6], but the
values concerning future immigration are simply estimations designed to negate the effect of
the proposed emigration rates on the total population. This decision was made to simplify the
model because there is no current research available to the authors that would enable the
creation of a more refined migration model.
2010-2014
2015-2019
2020-2024
2025-2029
2030-2034
2035-2039
2040-2044
2045-2049
2050-2054
2055-2059
2060-2064

Scenario 1
1,4
1,35
1,3
1,25
1,2
1,15
1,1
1,1
1,1
1,1
1,1

Scenario 2
1,48
1,42
1,38
1,33
1,3
1,25
1,3
1,35
1,4
1,5
1,55

Scenario 3
1,6
1,65
1,75
1,85
1,95
2,05
2,1
2,1
2,1
2,1
2,1

Table 1. The predicted total fertility rates for the low, medium and high
fertility scenarios for the observed period. [6]

A slight problem with the experiment design arose concerning the availability and existence
of official data and/or research related to the military part of the model, especially for some
lookups and variables. Where it was possible, official records and peer reviewed papers were
used as sources, but some of the values either came from less reliable sources (e.g. newspaper
articles) or are conjecture based on circumstantial information or authors estimates.
The ACCEPTABILITY OF MILITARY SERVICE LOOKUP is treated as an exogenous
constant, estimated at the value of 0.45, meaning that 45% of the population of the
recruitment pool finds the possibility of military service acceptable. The estimation is based
on the research done by Matika and Ogorec [16], which shows that 27.7% of respondents
would like to find employment in the military, and that 61.5% would seek employment in the
military only if they could not find it elsewhere. The share of the second group in the total
population of the recruitment pool is adjusted by the rate of unemployment for that age group
[3].
The SHARE READY TO APPLY LOOKUP is also treated as an exogenous constant,
valued at 0.01. This estimation is based on unconfirmed reports that around 6600 people
applied for voluntary military training in the period between 2008. and 2011., which is around
2200 people per year, or approximately 1% of the recruitment pool [13]. The value of the
PLANNED TESTING LOOKUP is an estimate based on the media reports regarding
waiting periods and the assumed number of applicants [9].
The value of the PLANNED DIRECTION INTO SERVICE LOOKUP is based on the
number of applicants currently being admitted for voluntary military training on a yearly basis
[18]. The value of the GIVE UP lookups is an estimation of the share of people that did not
succeed in reaching the next phase of the recruitment process for any reason, and it is more or
less a free estimate due to the lack of any official data to that regard.
The values for the promotion, graduation, retirement and dismissal lookups were calculated
based on the Plan for Admission into Active Military Service for the year 2014 [25] and the
planned ratio of commissioned officers, NCOs and soldiers in the active service according to
the Strategic Defense Overview [18].
The experiment was designed in order to determine whether the proposed demographic trends
will be able to sustain the needs of the military for manpower under the provided conditions
and to find the variables that have the greatest influence on its outcome.
4.2. Population dynamics simulation results
The results of the population dynamics simulation predict a significant decline in the
population in all three scenarios due to low total fertility rates, as well as the low inflow of
immigrants. However, there is a significant difference in the total population at the end of the
observed period due to the sizeable difference in the total fertility rate between the pessimistic
Scenario 1, and the optimistic Scenario 3.

Total population
6M

persons

5M
12 31 23

4M

1 23 123

12

3
12

3
12

12

12

3
12

3
2

3
1

3M

2
1

2M
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Total population : Scenario 1
Total population : Scenario 2
Total population : Scenario 3

2
3

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

2
3

Figure 3: A graph illustrating the changes in the size of the total population based on the
proposed scenarios over the simulated period.

Because members of the military are predominantly male, the population dynamics of
different male age groups are shown to illustrate several important implications of the results
of the proposed demographic trends. The first important implication is that, although it has an
immediate effect on the size of the total population, any change in the total fertility rate takes
18 years to affect the size of the workforce or the pool for military recruitment, as seen in
graphs XX. The second important implication is that population of the Male age 18 to 27
cohort, which forms the base for military recruitment, experiences a significant reduction in
every one of the proposed scenarios. Although the population stabilizes around 200000
members in Scenario 3, its steady decline in scenarios 1 and 2 lowers the expected population
size to about 100000 a third of the population size at the beginning of the simulation.
Male age 0 to 17

Male age 18 to 27

600,000

400,000

persons

123

23

12

300,000

1 2

12

12

3
12

2
1

12

150,000

300,000

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

200,000

31

231

23

12

31 23
12

3
12

3
1

3
12

3
12

12

100,000

0
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Male age 0 to 17 : Scenario 1
Male age 0 to 17 : Scenario 2
Male age 0 to 17 : Scenario 3

persons

450,000

12

2
1

0
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Male age 18 to 27 : Scenario 1
Male age 18 to 27 : Scenario 2
Male age 18 to 27 : Scenario 3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

Figure 4: Graphical reprezentations of the simulation results for the male population aged 0 to
17 and 18 to 27 throughout the duration of the simulation in all three scenarios.

In the population of males age 28 to 34 and 35 to 44, a steady decline is seen throughout the
entire observed period in every scenario except in scenario 3, in which stabilization is

observed after the first generation of people born in the model enters the respective age
groups. By then, however, the population of said groups has experienced a 33% and a 38%
drop, respectively.
Male age 35 to 44
400,000

300,000

300,000

200,000

1231

231

23

1231 2
31

persons

persons

Male age 28 to 34
400,000

31231

2312

12

100,000

3
12

3
12

1
2

2
3

2
3

1
2

1
2

1
2

12

1
2

12

31

23

12

312

200,000

31

23

12

31 2 3

12

3
12

12

0
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Male age 35 to 44 : Scenario 1
Male age 35 to 44 : Scenario 2
Male age 35 to 44 : Scenario 3

1
2

3
12

100,000

12

1
2

23123

0
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Male age 28 to 34 : Scenario 1
Male age 28 to 34 : Scenario 2
Male age 28 to 34 : Scenario 3

1231

2
3

1
2

2
3

2
3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

Figure 5: Graphical reprezentations of the simulation results for the male population aged 28 to
34 and 35 to 44 throughout the duration of the simulation in all three scenarios.

The population of the Male age 45 to RA group is mostly unaffected by the fertility changes,
but a slight increase in the population of the age group is noticeable in scenario 3 by the end
of the observed period. There is, however, a slight increase in the groups population during
the 2031.-2037. period due to the planned increase of the retirement age. This change also
accounts for the simultaneous temporary slump in the population of the Male RA and older
age group, but the same group is not affected by the changes in fertility during the observed
period. It is also important to note that the size of the population of that age increases by
around 35%, from 296208 to 399225, during the same period, which, in terms of its share in
the total population, represents an increase from 6,91% to 9,93% in the best case scenario, and
to 13,17% in the worst case scenario. The relative increase is similar in the female population
of the same age group, around 33% or, in absolute terms, from 462425 people in the
beginning of the simulation to 614489 at the end of the observed period. In terms of its share
in the total population, this represents an increase from a 10,79% share to a 15,28% share in
the best case scenario, and to a 20,27% share in the worst case scenario. In summation, the
results of the simulation suggest that the share of people in the retirement age in the total
population will be in the range between 25,21% and 33,44%, depending on the scenario.

Male RA and older

Male age 45 to RA
123

23

600,000
12

123

persons

500,000

1 23
1

31231

231

31

500,000
23
12

400,000

31

123
12

persons

600,000

400,000
1

1
23

23

12

31

2312

31

231

2312

31 2

12312

3123

12

300,000

300,000

200,000
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)

200,000
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)

Male age 45 to RA : Scenario 1

Male age 45 to RA : Scenario 2
Male age 45 to RA : Scenario 3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

123

Male RA and older : Scenario 1

Male RA and older : Scenario 2
Male RA and older : Scenario 3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

Figure 6: Graphical reprezentations of the simulation results for the male population aged 45 to
RA and RA and older throughout the duration of the simulation in all three scenarios.

4.3. Military dynamics simulation results

As expected, the reduction in the male and female populations between ages 18 and 27 caused
a proportional decline in the recruitment pool in all three scenarios. In 2061., the model
predicts its size to be between 26059 members in Scenario 1 to 108011 in Scenario 3. With
the constant value of the SHARE READY TO APPLY LOOKUP of one percent throughout
the simulation, the model predicts that the number of the active military personnel will begin
declining rapidly in the year 2044. to a level well below the planned 15000 troops (Plan).
Active military personel

Recruitment pool
400,000

20,000

300,000

17,500

200,000

31

23

12

persons

persons

1
12

12

31

2312 3

100,000

12

1
2

3
1 2

1
2

3
12

1
2

3
12

1
2

31

2 312 31 2312 31 231 23123

12312 3

12
1 2

12 12

12,500

3
12

2
3

2
3

1
2

2
3

10,000
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Active military personel : Scenario 1
Active military personel : Scenario 2
Active military personel : Scenario 3

12

0
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Recruitment pool : Scenario 1
Recruitment pool : Scenario 2
Recruitment pool : Scenario 3

15,000

2
3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

2
3

2
3

Figure 7: Graphical reprezentations of the expected changes in the size of the recruitment pool
and active military personel in all three scenarios.

The population drop also has an adverse effect on the total number of reserves which can be
mustered in case of an emergency. Total reserves experience a severe decline, dropping from
790132 in 2011. to 323112 in 2061. in Scenario 1 or to 516420 in 2061. in Scenario 3. The
graph of the first contract variable indicates that, after some volatility due to the planned
restructuring of the age and rank composition of the Croatian military, the decline in the
number of active military personnel is closely correlated to the reduction in the employment
of new soldiers. The values of these important stocks and velocities are shown and compared
in Table 2 below.
Total reserves
123

23

123

12

31

600,000

persons

First contract
3

1,000
23

12

31

23

23

12

750

3
12

3
12

400,000

3
12

3
12

200,000

persons/year

800,000

31
2

1 2312 3

2312 3

31 231

31 2

500

12 3

12
12

250

0
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
Total reserves : Scenario 1
Total reserves : Scenario 2
Total reserves : Scenario 3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

2
1

12

0
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
first contract : Scenario 1
first contract : Scenario 2
first contract : Scenario 3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

Figure 8: Graphical reprezentations of the expected changes in the number of the total
reserves, and the number of people signing the first active military service contract in all three
scenarios.

Variable name
Recruitment pool
Went to VMT
Soldiers
Non-commissioned
officers
Commissioned officers
Active military personnel
Total reserves

Scenario 1
2011.
2061.
239600
26059
15000
707
5998
3215

Scenario 2
2011.
2061.
239600
40868
15000
796
5998
3746

Scenario 3
2011.
2061.
239600
108011
15000
1382
5998
6735

5778

4892

5778

4892

5778

4892

3377
16490
790132

2547
10878
323112

3377
16490
790132

2547
11486
356804

3377
16490
790132

2547
14869
516420

Table 2: The comparison of the starting and final values of relevant variables in all three
scenarios.

5. DISCUSSION
The structure of the model and the results of the simulation highlighted the existence of
several key issues that have a significant effect on the long-term sustainability of the Croatian
Armed Forces, and starting with the demographic trends that are already in effect.
Due to the currently low total fertility rate and the slightly negative migration balance, Croatia
will probably experience some reduction in the population of the working age. The retirement
age reform will mitigate some of the effect for a short while, but the simulation results show
that, by the year 2061., this population will be reduced by 540269 people in the best case
Scenario 3, and by 1033635 in the worst case Scenario 1.
And while the high fertility Scenario 3 would help to stabilize the size of the workforce in the
long run, the first results in that regard would show only after 18 years. By then, the share of
the workforce in the total population would drop due to the increased number of children in
combination with the increase in the retirement age population. The effects of the drop are
faster and more pronounced in Scenario 3, but, by the end of the simulation, the share of
workforce in the total population converges to around 55% in all three scenarios.
According to [21], the increase in the retirement age population will demand a large increase
in public expenditure for pensions and health services. Coupled with the smaller tax base,
there is a significant possibility that some pressure will be exerted to reduce military
spending, or at least not to increase it further. Due to the importance of wages to the appeal of
military career [16], and the probable increase in the job market competition from the private
sector [14], the military could feel a further reduction in size due to either a lack of interest or
through an increased share of trained soldiers leaving the military to join the civilian
workforce.
Some of the predicted negative effects could be mitigated by an increase in the flow of
working-age immigrants into Croatia which would increase the size of the workforce and
reduce the competition the private sector represents to the military in the job market. But
while an increase in the number of immigrants could relieve the pressure exerted on the
military for these reasons, it has no short-term effect on the size of the recruitment pool due to
the citizenship requirements for military employment. On the other hand, emigration has both
an immediate and a long-term effect on the size of the recruitment pool proportional to its

volume, not to its net effect on the migratory balance , and as such represents a significant risk
to the adequacy of military recruitment.
Share of workforce in total population

Workforce
0.8

4M
3.25 M

0.7
1 23 1

2.5 M

231

1 23 12

2 31 2

3 12 3

1 2 3 1 23 1 2 3
3
12

0.6
3

12

12

1.75 M
1M
2011

2021

workforce : Scenario 1
workforce : Scenario 2
workforce : Scenario 3

2031
2041
Time (year)
1

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

3
12

3
1 2

2051

1
2

2061

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

31

3 12

12

2
3

12

12

12
3

12
3

1
3

0.5

0.4
2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 2051 2056 2061
Time (year)
share of workforce in total population : Scenario 1
share of workforce in total population : Scenario 2
share of workforce in total population : Scenario 3

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

1
2

2
3

Figure 9: Graphical reprezentations of the expected changes in the size of the workforce, as well
as the share of workforce in the total population in all three scenarios.

6. CONCLUSION
Following the simulation results that show an almost linear continuation of current trends in
scenarios 1 and 2, it is safe to assume that there is a higher probability that the demographic
future of Croatia will follow along those lines. Although the Recruitment pool will technically
be sufficiently large to accommodate the needs for recruits of the Croatian military, its
success will depend mostly on its ability to remain a competitive employer in spite of the
decreasing labor supply and the mounting budgetary pressures due to pension and public
health expenditure growth.
The results also highlight the necessity of creating long-term plans development plans due to
long-term effects of demographic changes, as well as the significant delay to the effect the
changes in fertility have on the workforce. Introduction of scenario planning would assure the
robustness of these long-term plans, and the use of system dynamics in their development
would enable the planners to optimize the desirable effects by making use of the relevant
feedback loops.
The main problem with the presented model is the relatively large number of lookups due to
the lack of relevant research on which support models could be based to provide better results
and create a more useful model. Considering the potential benefits of such models, the authors
recommend that more research should be conducted in regards to this subject, especially in
the field of external migrations and its causes. The authors also recommend increasing the use
of system dynamics models as a decision support tool for policy making on all of the levels of
government.

APPENDIX A. SUSTAINABILITY MODEL FORMULATION

(001) "3 years"= INTEG (IF THEN ELSE(Time<2015, IF THEN ELSE((first
contract)>PLANNED EMPLOYMENT OF SOLDIERS LOOKUP(Time, PLANNED
EMPLOYMENT OF SOLDIERS LOOKUP(Time)-discharge 1-second contract , first
contract-discharge 1-second contract ), IF THEN ELSE((first contract)>soldier
employment plan, soldier employment plan-discharge 1-second contract ,
first
contract-discharge 1-second contract ) ),2000)
Units: persons
(002) "5 years"= INTEG (second contract-discharge 2-promotion to NCO-third
contract,2000)
Units: persons [0,?]
(003) "6 years"= INTEG (third contract-discharge 3,1998)
Units: persons [0,?]
(004) ACCEPTABILITY OF MILITARY SERVICE= 0.45
Units: fraction
(005) Active military personel="3
years"+"5
years"+"6 years"+Commisioned
officers+Military specialists+NCO's+Voluntary military training
Units: persons
(006) ageing 1=IF THEN ELSE(On hold T>0, (ageing coefficient)*On hold T , 0 )
Units: persons/year
(007) ageing 2=IF THEN ELSE(On hold >0, (ageing coefficient)*On hold
,0)
Units: persons/year
(008) ageing 3=IF THEN ELSE( Time<2015 , 3000 , IF THEN ELSE(Went through VMT
>0, (ageing coefficient)*Went through VMT , 0 ) )
Units: persons/year
(009) ageing coefficient=(maturation of female age 27 to 28+maturation of male age 27 to
28)/(Female age 18 to 27+Male age 18 to 27)
Units: fraction/year
(010) application process=Recruitment pool*share ready to apply/TF
Units: persons/year
(011) Applied= INTEG (application process-gave up 1-put on hold T-testing,1000)
Units: persons
(012) births= Women in fertile age*total fertility rate/35
Units: persons/year
(013) cadet graduation=30
Units: persons/year
(014) classified mobilizational reserves=Went through VMT-contractual reserves
Units: persons
(015) CO retirement and discharges=
planned CO RD
Units: persons/year
(016) CO training= INTEG (sent to CO training-promotion to CO,110)
Units: persons
(017) Commisioned officers= INTEG ( cadet
graduation+promotion
to
CO-CO
retirement and discharges, 3377)
Units: persons [0,?]
(018) contractual reserves=IF THEN ELSE( planned reserves>Went through VMT , Went
through VMT , planned reserves )
Units: persons

(019) delay 14 to 15=

DELAY FIXED(female births, 15 , 2026 )
Units: persons/year
(020) delay 17 to 18=
DELAY FIXED(maturation of female age 14 to 15, 3 , 2014 )
Units: persons/year
(021) delay 17 to 18 male=DELAY FIXED(male births, 17 , 2028 )
Units: persons/year
(022) delay 24 to 35=
DELAY FIXED(maturation of male age 27 to 28, 6 , 2017 )
Units: persons/year
(023) delay 27 to 28=
DELAY FIXED(maturation of female age 17 to 18, 10 , 2011 )
Units: persons/year
(024) delay 27 to 28 male=DELAY FIXED(maturation of male age 17 to 18, 10 , 2021 )
Units: persons/year
(025) delay 44 to 45=
DELAY FIXED(maturation of male age 34 to 35, 10 , 2021 )
Units: persons/year
(026) delay 49 to 50=
DELAY FIXED(maturation of female age 27 to 28, 22 , 2011 )
Units: persons/year
(027) delay to female RA=DELAY FIXED(maturation of female age 49 to 50, 17 , 2011 )
Units: persons/year
(028) delay to male RA=DELAY FIXED(maturation of male age 44 to 45, 21 , 2030 )
Units: persons/year
(029) direction into service=IF THEN ELSE(On hold/TF>0, IF THEN ELSE(On hold/TF
>=planned direction into service, 0 , IF THEN ELSE( (Tested/TF)-gave up
2<=planned direction into service, planned direction into service- later direction into
service , planned direction into service-later direction into service ) ) , IF THEN
ELSE( (Tested/TF)-gave up 2<=planned direction into service , (Tested/TF)-gave up 2
, planned direction into service ))
Units: persons/year [0,?]
(030) discharge 1="3 years"*(1-planned renewal 1)/3
Units: persons/year
(031) discharge 2="5 years"*(1-planned renewal 2)/5
Units: persons/year
(032) discharge 3="6 years"/(6*TF)
Units: persons/year
(033) emigration f 0 to 14= 348
Units: persons/year
(034) emigration f 15 to 17=162
Units: persons/year
(035) emigration f 18 to 27=837
Units: persons/year
(036) emigration f 28 to 49=1895
Units: persons/year
(037) emigration f 50 to RA=1111
Units: persons/year
(038) "emigration f RA+"=779
Units: persons/year
(039) emigration m 0 to 17=560
Units: persons/year
(040) emigration m 18 to 27=928
Units: persons/year
(041) emigration m 28 to 34=719

Units: persons/year
(042) emigration m 35 to 44=933
Units: persons/year
(043) emigration m 45 to RA=1408
Units: persons/year
(044) "emigration m RA+"=779
Units: persons/year
(045) Female age 0 to 14= INTEG (female births-emigration f 0 to 14-female age 0 to 14
dying-maturation of female age 14 to 15,317703)
Units: persons
(046) female age 0 to 14 dying=(Female age 0 to 14*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 0 TO 14
LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(047) Female age 15 to 17= INTEG (maturation of female age 14 to 15-emigration f 15 to
17-female age 15 to 17 dying-maturation of female age 17 to 18, 71278)
Units: persons
(048) female age 15 to 17 dying=(Female age 15 to 17*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 15 TO 17
LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(049) Female age 18 to 27= INTEG (maturation of female age 17 to 18-emigration f 18 to
27-female age 18 to 27 dying-maturation of female age 27 to 28, 260545)
Units: persons
(050) female age 18 to 27 dying=(Female age 18 to 27*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 18 TO 27
LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(051) Female age 28 to 49= INTEG (maturation of female age 27 to 28-emigration f 28 to
49-female age 28 to 49 dying-maturation of female age 49 to 50, 641125)
Units: persons
(052) female age 28 to 49 dying=(Female age 28 to 49*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 28 TO 49
LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(053) Female age 50 to RA= INTEG (maturation of female age 49 to 50-emigration f 50 to
RA-female age 50 to RA dying-maturation to female RA, 465478)
Units: persons
(054) female age 50 to RA dying=(Female age 50 to RA*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 50 TO
RA LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(055) female births=births*PROPORTION OF FEMALES
Units: persons/year
(056) Female RA and older= INTEG (maturation to female RA-"emigration f RA+"-female
RA and older dying, 462425)
Units: persons
(057) female RA and older dying=((Female RA and older*SMR OF FEMALE RA AND
OLDER LOOKUP(Time))/TF)-"emigration f RA+"/35
Units: persons/year
(058) FINAL TIME = 2061
Units: year
(059) first contract =IF THEN ELSE( Went through VMT/TF >0 ,IF THEN ELSE(
Time<2015 , IF THEN ELSE( (Went through VMT*(0.19+0.26)/TF)>=PLANNED

(060)
(061)
(062)
(063)
(064)
(065)
(066)

(067)
(068)
(069)
(070)

(071)
(072)

(073)
(074)

(075)

(076)

(077)

EMPLOYMENT OF SOLDIERS LOOKUP(Time) , PLANNED EMPLOYMENT OF

SOLDIERS LOOKUP(Time) , (Went through VMT*(0.19+0.26))/TF ) ,
IF THEN ELSE( (Went through VMT*(0.19+0.26)/TF)>=soldier employment plan ,
soldier employment plan , (Went through VMT*(0.19+0.26))/TF ) ) , 0 )
Units: persons/year
gave up 1=Applied*GAVE UP 1 LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
GAVE UP 1 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,1)],(2011,0.2),(2061,0.2))
Units: fraction/year
gave up 2=Tested*GAVE UP 2 LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
GAVE UP 2 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,1)],(2011,0.2),(2061,0.2))
Units: fraction/year
gave up 3=Voluntary military training*GAVE UP 3 LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
GAVE UP 3 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,1)],(2011,0.05),(2061,0.05))
Units: fraction/year
GENERAL MORTALITY RATE LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,20)], (2011,6.69),
(2061,6.69))
Units: fraction/year
graduated into MS=want to be MS
Units: persons/year
Graduation=(Voluntary military training/TF)
Units: persons/year
Immigrants= INTEG (immigration-immigrants dying, 0)
Units: persons
immigrants dying=IF THEN ELSE(Immigrants>=0, (Immigrants*GENERAL
MORTALITY RATE LOOKUP(Time))/1000 , 0 )
Units: persons/year
immigration=IMMIGRATION LOOKUP(Time)*1000
Units: persons/year
IMMIGRATION LOOKUP([(2011,0)-2061,15)], (2011,9.097), (2016,9.097),
(2016,9.097), (2021,9.097), (2021,9.097), (2026,9.5) ,(2026,10.5), (2031,10.5),
(2031,10.5), (2036,10.5), (2036,10.5), (2041,10.5), (2041,10.5), (2046,10.5),
(2046,10.5), (2051,10.5), (2051,10.5 ),(2056,10.5),(2056,10.5),(2061,10.5))
Units: persons/year
INITIAL TIME = 2011
Units: year
later direction into service=IF THEN ELSE( On hold/TF >=planned direction into
service , planned direction into service , IF THEN ELSE( On hold/TF >0 , On hold/TF
,0))
Units: persons/year
later testing=IF THEN ELSE( On hold T/TF>=planned testing , planned testing ,
IF THEN ELSE( On hold T/TF>0 , On hold T/TF , 0 ) )
Units: persons/year [0,?]
Male age 0 to 17= INTEG (male births-emigration m 0 to 17-male age 0 to 17 dyingmaturation of male age 17 to 18,408874)
Units: persons
male age 0 to 17 dying=
(Male age 0 to 17*SMR OF MALE AGE 0 TO 17
LOOKUP(Time))/TF

Units: persons/year
(078) Male age 18 to 27= INTEG (maturation of male age 17 to 18-emigration m 18 to 27male age 18 to 27 dying-maturation of male age 27 to 28, 271899)
Units: persons
(079) male age 18 to 27 dying=(Male age 18 to 27*SMR OF MALE AGE 18 TO 27
LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(080) Male age 28 to 34= INTEG (maturation of male age 27 to 28-emigration m 28 to 34male age 28 to 34 dying-maturation of male age 34 to 35, 209739)
Units: persons
(081) male age 28 to 34 dying=(Male age 28 to 34*SMR OF MALE AGE 28 TO 34
LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(082) Male age 35 to 44= INTEG (maturation of male age 34 to 35-emigration m 35 to 44male age 35 to 44 dying-maturation of male age 44 to 45, 287587)
Units: persons
(083) male age 35 to 44 dying=(Male age 35 to 44*SMR OF MALE AGE 35 TO 44
LOOKUP(Time))/TF
Units: persons/year
(084) Male age 45 to RA= INTEG (maturation of male age 44 to 45-emigration m 45 to RAmale age 45 to RA dying-maturation to male RA, 592028)
Units: persons
(085) male age 45 to RA dying=(SMR OF MALE AGE 45 TO RA LOOKUP(Time)*Male
age 45 to RA)/TF
Units: persons/year
(086) male births=births*proportion of males
Units: persons/year
(087) Male RA and older= INTEG (maturation to male RA-"emigration m RA+"-male RA
and older dying, 296208)
Units: persons
(088) male RA and older dying=(Male RA and older*SMR OF MALE RA AND OLDER
LOOKUP(Time))/TF-("emigration m RA+")/35
Units: persons/year
(089) maturation of female age 14 to 15=IF THEN ELSE(Time>=2026, delay 14 to 15(delay 14 to 15*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 0 TO 14 LOOKUP(Time))*14-(emigration
f 0 to 14)/15, MATURATION OF FEMALE AGE 14 TO 15 LOOKUP(Time)*1000(emigration f 0 to 14)/15 )
Units: persons/year
(090) MATURATION OF FEMALE AGE 14 TO 15 LOOKUP( [(2011,0) - (2026,40)],
(2011,24.686), (2012,24.246), (2013,22.892), (2014,21.948), (2015,20.876),
(2016,20.022), (2017,19.487), (2018,19.245), (2019,20.087), (2020,20.35),
(2021,19.59), (2022,20.505), (2023,20.926) ,(2024,21.543), (2025,20.409), (2026,20))
Units: persons/year
(091) maturation of female age 17 to 18=IF THEN ELSE(Time<2014, MATURATION OF
FEMALE AGE 17 TO 18 LOOKUP(Time)*1000-(emigration f 15 to 17)/3 , delay 17
to 18-(delay 17 to 18*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 15 TO 17 LOOKUP(Time))*3(emigration f 15 to 17)/3)
Units: persons/year
(092) MATURATION OF FEMALE AGE 17 TO 18 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2014,40)],
(2011,23.254), (2012,24.077), (2013,23.921), (2014,23.7))

Units: persons/year
(093) maturation of female age 27 to 28=IF THEN ELSE(Time<2022, MATURATION OF
FEMALE AGE 27 TO 28 LOOKUP(Time)*1000-(emigration f 18 to 27)/11 , delay
27 to 28
-(delay 27 to 28*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 18 TO 27
LOOKUP(Time))*11-(emigration f 18 to 27)/11)
Units: persons/year
(094) MATURATION OF FEMALE AGE 27 TO 28 LOOKUP( [(2011,0)-(2021,40)],
(2011,28.579), (2012,28.539), (2013,27.204), (2014,26.409), (2015,26.463),
(2016,25.615), (2017,24.768), (2018,24.773), (2019,24.584), (2020,23.292),
(2021,23))
Units: persons/year
(095) maturation of female age 49 to 50=
IF THEN ELSE(Time<2033, MATURATION OF FEMALE AGE 49 TO 50
LOOKUP(Time)*1000-(emigration f 28 to 49)/22 , delay 49 to 50-(delay 49 to
50*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 28 TO 49 LOOKUP(Time))*22-(emigration f 28 to
49)/22)
Units: persons/year
(096) MATURATION OF FEMALE AGE 49 TO 50 LOOKUP([(2011,20)-(2033,40)],
(2011,32.063), (2012,31.179), (2013,30.176), (2014,29.923), (2015,31.327),
(2016,30.7),
(2017,29.375),
(2018,28.346),
(2019,27.274),
(2020,26.537),
(2021,28.017), (2022,27.651), (2023,27.872), (2024,27.761), (2025,27.699),
(2026,27.94), (2027,28.325), (2028,28.409), (2029,28.827), (2030,28.593),
(2031,28.275), (2032,27.823),(2033,27.5))
Units: persons/year
(097) MATURATION OF FEMALE TO RA LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2038,40)],
(2011,26.857),
(2012,28.382),
(2013,29.981),
(2014,29.5),
(2015,27.725),
(2016,31.326), (2017,31.85), (2018,31.616), (2019,31.533), (2020,30.383),
(2021,30.627), (2022,30.455), (2023,29.906), (2024,29.715), (2025,28.894),
(2026,27.962), (2027,27.726), (2028,29.024), (2029,27.667), (2030,27.845),
(2031,19.692), (2032,19.188), (2033,18.761), (2034,18.413), (2035,19.438),
(2036,19.262), (2037,19.22), (2038,19.256))
Units: persons/year
(098) maturation of male age 17 to 18=IF THEN ELSE(Time>=2028, delay 17 to 18 male(delay 17 to 18 male*SMR OF MALE AGE 0 TO 17 LOOKUP(Time))*17(emigration m 0 to 17)/17 , MATURATION OF MALE AGE 17 TO 18
LOOKUP(Time)*1000-(emigration m 0 to 17)/17 )
Units: persons/year
(099) MATURATION OF MALE AGE 17 TO 18 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2028,40)],
(2011,24.215), (2012,24.622), (2013,25.264), (2014,26.034), (2015,25.199),
(2016,24.002),
(2017,22.985),
(2018,22.131),
(2019,21.098),
(2020,20.3),
(2021,20.259), (2022,21.346), (2023,21.34), (2024,20.952), (2025,21.456),
(2026,21.86), (2027,22.523), (2028,22))
Units: persons/year
(100) maturation of male age 27 to 28=IF THEN ELSE(Time>=2021, delay 27 to 28 male (delay 27 to 28 male*SMR OF MALE AGE 18 TO 27 LOOKUP(Time))*10(emigration m 18 to 27)/10 , MATURATION OF MALE AGE 27 TO 28
LOOKUP(Time)*1000-(emigration m 18 to 27)/10)
Units: persons/year
(101) MATURATION OF MALE AGE 27 TO 28 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2020,40)],
(2011,29.841), (2012,29.546), (2013,28.149), (2014,27.132), (2015,27.319),

(102)

(103)

(104)

(105)

(106)

(107)

(108)

(109)

(110)

(111)
(112)

(2016,26.758), (2017,25.863), (2018,25.746), (2019,25.967), (2020,24.417),

(2021,24))
Units: persons/year
maturation of male age 34 to 35=IF THEN ELSE(Time>=2017, delay 24 to 35-(delay
24 to 35*SMR OF MALE AGE 28 TO 34 LOOKUP(Time))*6-(emigration m 28 to
34)/6, MATURATION OF MALE AGE 34 TO 35 LOOKUP
(Time)*1000(emigration m 28 to 34)/6 )
Units: persons/year
MATURATION OF MALE AGE 34 TO 35 LOOKUP( [(2011,0)-(2016,40)],
(2011,28.869), (2012,29.795), (2013,30.018), (2014,30.455), (2015,30.419),
(2016,29.632), (2017,29.731))
Units: persons/year
maturation of male age 44 to 45=IF THEN ELSE(Time>=2021, delay 44 to 45-(delay
44 to 45*SMR OF MALE AGE 35 TO 44 LOOKUP(Time))*10-(emigration m 35 to
44)/10 , MATURATION OF MALE AGE 44 TO 45 LOOKUP(Time)*1000(emigration m 35 to 44)/10 )
Units: persons/year
MATURATION OF MALE AGE 44 TO 45 LOOKUP( [(2011,0)-(2021,40)],
(2011,30.449), (2012,29.519), (2013,28.258), (2014,27.552), (2015,27.048),
(2016,28.386), (2017,28.393), (2018,28.087), (2019,28.475), (2020,28.524),
(2021,28))
Units: persons/year
maturation to female RA=IF THEN ELSE(Time<2039, MATURATION OF
FEMALE TO RA LOOKUP(Time)*1000-(emigration f 50 to RA)/10 , delay to
female RA-( delay to female RA*SMR OF FEMALE AGE 50 TO RA
LOOKUP(Time))*10-(emigration f 50 to RA)/10)
Units: persons/year
maturation to male RA=IF THEN ELSE(Time>=2039, delay to male RA-(delay to
male RA*SMR OF MALE AGE 45 TO RA LOOKUP(Time))*20-(emigration m 45
to RA)/20 , MATURATION TO MALE RA LOOKUP(Time)*1000-(emigration m 45
to RA)/20)
Units: persons/year
MATURATION TO MALE RA LOOKUP([(2011,10)-(2038,40)], (2011,23.381),
(2012,23.027), (2013,24.039), (2014,26.554), (2015,26.763), (2016,25.836),
(2017,28.639), (2018,27.716), (2019,29.879), (2020,28.893), (2021,28.369),
(2022,27.302), (2023,27.433), (2024,27.306), (2025,26.425), (2026,26.002),
(2027,25.139), (2028,24.501), (2029,23.799), (2030,24.75), (2031,16.662),
(2032,16.366), (2033,16.111), (2034,15.895), (2035,16.673), (2036,16.657),
(2037,16.579), (2038,16.699))
Units: persons/year
Military specialists= INTEG (MS employment+graduated into MS-MS retirement and
discharges,537)
Units: persons [0,?]
mobilizational reserves=unclassified mobilizational reserves+classified mobilizational
reserves
Units: persons
MS employment=planned MS employment-graduated into MS
Units: persons/year
MS retirement and discharges= planned MS RD
Units: persons/year

(113) NCO retirement and discharges=planned NCO RD

Units: persons/year
(114) NCO's= INTEG (
promotion to NCO-NCO retirement and discharges-sent to CO
training, 5778)
Units: persons [0,?]
(115) Number of female immigrants= Immigrants*PROPORTION OF FEMALES
Units: persons
(116) On hold= INTEG (IF THEN ELSE( On hold>0 , put on hold-later direction into
service-ageing 2, put on hold-ageing 2 ), 1500)
Units: persons [0,?]
(117) On hold T= INTEG (IF THEN ELSE( On hold T>0 , put on hold T-ageing 1-later
testing , put on hold T-ageing 1 ),1500)
Units: persons [0,?]
(118) planned CO RD=PLANNED CO RD LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
(119) PLANNED
CO
RD
LOOKUP([(2011,0)(2061,200)],(2011,50),(2014,235),(2015,200),(2016,200),(2017,200),(2018,200),(201
9,200),(2020,75),(2061,75))
Units: persons/year
(120) planned direction into service=PLANNED DIRECTION INTO SERVICE
LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
(121) PLANNED DIRECTION INTO SERVICE LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,1000)],
(2011,800), (2061,800))
Units: persons/year
(122) PLANNED EMPLOYMENT OF SOLDIERS LOOKUP( [(0,0)-2000,1000)],
(2011,400),(2012,77), (2013,77), (2014,975))
Units: persons/year
(123) planned MS employment=PLANNED MS EMPLOYMENT LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
(124) PLANNED MS EMPLOYMENT LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,40)], (2011,40),
(2061,40))
Units: persons/year
(125) planned MS RD=PLANNED MS RD LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
(126) PLANNED MS RD LOOKUP([(0,0)-(4000,60)], (2011,50), (2061,50))
Units: persons/year
(127) planned NCO RD=PLANNED NCO RD LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
(128) PLANNED NCO RD LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,200)], (2011,50), (2014,167),
(2020,167), (2021,55), (2061,55))
Units: persons/year
(129) planned promotion to CO=PLANNED PROMOTION TO CO LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
(130) PLANNED PROMOTION TO CO LOOKUP(
[(2011,40)- (2061,60)],
(2011,45), (2061,45))
Units: persons/year
(131) planned promotion to nco=PLANNED PROMOTION TO NCO LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year

(132) PLANNED PROMOTION TO NCO LOOKUP([(2011,0)- (2061,60)],

(2011,100),
(2061,100))
Units: persons/year
(133) planned renewal 1=0.95
Units: fraction/year
(134) planned renewal 2=0.95
Units: fraction/year
(135) planned reserves=1000
Units: persons
(136) planned testing=PLANNED TESTING LOOKUP(Time)
Units: persons/year
(137) PLANNED TESTING LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,1200)], (2011,1200), (2061,1200))
Units: persons/year
(138) promotion to CO=CO training/TF
Units: persons/year
(139) promotion to NCO=planned promotion to nco
Units: persons/year
(140) PROPORTION OF FEMALES=0.485
Units: fraction
(141) proportion of males=1-PROPORTION OF FEMALES
Units: fraction
(142) put on hold=Tested/TF-direction into service-gave up 2
Units: persons/year
(143) put on hold T=Applied/TF-testing-gave up 1
Units: persons/year
(144) Recruitment pool= INTEG ((maturation of female age 17 to 18-maturation of female
age 27 to 28+maturation of male age 17 to 18-maturation of male age 27 to
28)*ACCEPTABILITY OF MILITARY SERVICE-application process-Voluntary
military training
/TF,(Female
age
18
to
27+Male
age
18
to
27)*ACCEPTABILITY OF MILITARY SERVICE)
Units: persons
(145) SAVEPER = TIME STEP
Units: year [0,?]
(146) second contract="3 years"*planned renewal 1/3
Units: persons/year
(147) sent to CO training=planned promotion to CO
Units: persons/year
(148) share of workforce in total population=
workforce/Total population
Units: fraction
(149) share ready to apply=SHARE READY TO APPLY LOOKUP(Time)
Units: fraction
(150) SHARE READY TO APPLY LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,10)], (2011,0.01),
(2061,0.01))
Units: Dmnl
(151) SMR OF FEMALE AGE 0 TO 14 LOOKUP(
[(2011,0)-(2061,0.001)],
(2011,0.000359), (2061,0.000359))
Units: fraction
(152) SMR OF FEMALE AGE 15 TO 17 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.001)],
(2011,0.000185), (2061,0.000185))
Units: fraction

(153) SMR OF FEMALE AGE 18 TO 27 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.001)],

(2011,0.00023), (2061,0.00023))
Units: fraction
(154) SMR OF FEMALE AGE 28 TO 49 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.001)],
(2011,0.000967), (2061,0.000967))
Units: fraction
(155) SMR OF FEMALE AGE 50 TO RA LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.01)],
(2011,0.004941), (2061,0.004941))
Units: fraction
(156) SMR OF FEMALE RA AND OLDER LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.1)],
(2011,0.049143), (2061,0.032))
Units: fraction
(157) SMR OF MALE AGE 0 TO 17 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.005)], (2011,0.000475),
(2061,0.000475))
Units: fraction
(158) SMR OF MALE AGE 18 TO 27 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.005)], (2011,0.000799),
(2061,0.000799))
Units: fraction
(159) SMR OF MALE AGE 28 TO 34 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.005)], (2011,0.000975),
(2061,0.000975))
Units: fraction
(160) SMR OF MALE AGE 35 TO 44 LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.005)], (2011,0.001839),
(2061,0.001839))
Units: fraction
(161) SMR OF MALE AGE 45 TO RA LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.05)], (2011,0.0103),
(2061,0.0103))
Units: fraction
(162) SMR OF MALE RA AND OLDER LOOKUP([(2011,0)-(2061,0.1)], (2011,0.06055),
(2061,0.045))
Units: fraction
(163) soldier employment plan=15000-(Active military personel/TF) +CO retirement and
discharges +discharge 1+discharge 2+discharge 3+MS retirement and
discharges+NCO retirement and discharges
Units: persons/year
(164) Tested= INTEG (testing+later testing-put on hold-direction into service-gave up 2,
500)
Units: persons [0,?]
(165) testing=IF THEN ELSE(On hold T/TF>0, IF THEN ELSE(On hold T/TF>=planned
testing, 0 , IF THEN ELSE( Applied/TF-gave up 1<=planned testing , planned testing
-later testing , planned testing-later testing ) ) , IF THEN ELSE( Applied/TF-gave up
1<=planned testing , Applied/TF-gave up 1 , planned testing ))
Units: persons/year [0,?]
(166) TF=1
Units: year
(167) third contract="5 years"*planned renewal 2/5
Units: persons/year
(168) TIME STEP = 1
Units: year [0,?]
The time step for the simulation.
(169) total fertility rate=FERTILITY RATE LOOKUP(Time/TF)

Units: fraction/year
(170) TOTAL FERTILITY RATE LOOKUP(
[(2011,0)-(2061,3)],
(2011,1.6),
(2016,1.65), (2021,1.75), (2026,1.85), (2031,1.95), (2041,2.1), (2046,2.1), (2051,2.1),
(2056,2.1), (2061,2.1))
Units: fraction/year
(171) Total population=Male age 0 to 17+Male age 18 to 27+Male age 28 to 34+Male age
35 to 44+Male age 45 to RA+Male RA and older+Female age 0 to 14+Female age 15
to 17+Female age 18 to 27+Female age 28 to 49+Female age 50 to RA+Female RA
and older+Immigrants
Units: persons
(172) Total reserves=contractual reserves+mobilizational reserves
Units: persons
(173) unclassified mobilizational reserves=(Female age 18 to 27+Female age 28 to 49+Male
age 18 to 27+Male age 28 to 34+Male age 35 to 44+0.51*Male age 45 to RA)*0.4classified mobilizational reserves
Units: persons
(174) Voluntary military training= INTEG (direction into service+later direction into
service-gave up 3-graduated into MS-Graduation, 800)
Units: persons [0,800]
(175) want to be MS= 20
Units: persons/year
(176) Went through VMT= INTEG (Graduation-ageing 3-first contract, 15000)
Units: persons
(177) Women in fertile age=Female age 15 to 17+Female age 18 to 27+Female age 28 to
49+Number of female immigrants
Units: persons
(178) workforce=Total population-Female age 0 to 14-Female age 15 to 17-Female RA and
older-Male age 0 to 17-Male RA and older
Units: persons
LITERATURE
[1] Anderson Jr., E. G. (2011). A dynamic model of counterinsurgency policy including
the effects of intelligence, public security, popular support, and insurgent experience.
System Dynamics Review, 27, 111-141.
[2] Artelli, M. J. and Deckro, R. F. (2008). Modelling the Lanchester Laws with System
Dynamics. The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications,
Methodology, Technology, 5, 1, 1-20.
[3] Banka
(2011).Hrvatska
druga
po
nezaposlenosti
mladih
u
Europi.
http://www.banka.hr/hrvatska/hrvatska-druga-po-nezaposlenosti-mladih-u-europi
[Accessed 04/09/14]
[4] Coyle, J. M., Exelby and D., Holt, J. (1999). System dynamics in defence analysis:
some case studies. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50, 372-382.
[5] Coyle, R. G. and Gardiner, P. A. (1991). A Systems Dynamics Model of Submarine
Operations and Maintenance Schedules. Journal of the Operational Research Society,
vol. 42, no. 1, 453-462.
[6] Croatian Bureau of Statistics. (2009-2013).Migration of Population of Republic of
Croatia. http://www.dzs.hr/default_e.htm [Accessed 30/06/14]
[7] Croatian Bureau of Statistics. (2012a). 2012 Statistical Yearbook of the Republic of
Croatia. http:// http://www.dzs.hr/default_e.htm [Accessed 01/09/14]

[8] Croatian Bureau of Statistics. (2012b). Population by Ethnicity, Age and Sex, 2011
Census. http:// http://www.dzs.hr/default_e.htm [Accessed 13/07/13]
[9] Defender.hr (2012).Dragovoljni ronici samo na lijeniki pregled ekaju do dvije
godine.
http://www.defender.hr/republika-hrvatska/obrambena-politika/dragovoljnirocnici-samo-na-lijecnicki-pregled-cekaju-do-dvije-godine.php [Accessed 01/09/14]
[10] Fan, C.-Y., Fan, P.-S. and Chang, P.-C. (2010). A system dynamics modeling
approach for a military weapon maintenance supply system. International Journal of
Production economics, 128, 457-469.
[11] Garza, A., Martin, J. D., Finke, D. A. and Kumara, S. (2014). System Dynamics Based
Manpower Modeling. In Guan, Y. and Liao, H. (Eds.).Proceeding of the 2014
Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference (pp. 3683 3692). Norcross,
GA: Institute of Industrial Engineers
[12] Gelo, J., Akrap, A. and ipin, I. (2005.), Temeljne znaajke demografskog razvoja
Hrvatske: bilanca 20. stoljea, Zagreb: Ministarstvo obitelji, branitelja i
meugeneracijske solidarnosti
[13] Glas Slavonije (2013).Dragovoljno sluenje vojnog roka ne znai i dobivanje posla u
GV-u. http://www.glas-slavonije.hr/207461/1/Dragovoljno-sluzenje-vojnog-roka-neznaci-i-dobivanje-posla-u-HV-u [Accessed 01/09/14]
[14] Karnju, I. (2008). Financiranje obrane. Zagreb: Golden marketing Tehnika knjiga,
Institut za razvoj i istraivanje obrambenih sustava.
[15] Lyneis, J. M., Cooper, K. G. and Els, S. A. (2001), Strategic management of complex
projects: a case study using system dynamics. System Dynamics Review, 17, 237260.
[16] Matika, D. and Ogorec, M. (2010). Gospodarska kriza i poeljnost odabira vojnog
poziva. Drutvena istraivanja, 21, 1, 121136.
[17] Narodne
Novine.
(2013a).
Strateki
pregled
obrane.
http://narodnenovine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2013_08_101_2285.html [Accessed 01/09/14]
[18] Narodne
Novine.
(2013b).
Zakon
o
obrani.
http://narodnenovine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2013_06_73_1452.html [Accessed 01/09/14]
[19] Narodne Novine. (2013c). Zakon o slubi u Oruanim snagama Republike Hrvatske.
http://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/2013_06_73_1453.html
[Accessed
01/09/14]
[20] Nejami, I. (2014). Kamo ide Hrvatska? Budue demografske promjene i neke
njihove posljedice. In Akrap, A., ipin, I. and Strmota, M. (Eds.).Demografija u
Hrvatskoj (pp. 111 122). Zagreb: Ekonomski fakultet Zagreb.
[21] Peji-Bach, M. and eri, V. (2007). Developing system dynamics models with stepby-step approach. Journal of information and organizational sciences, 31, 1, 171
185.
[22] Stiglitz, J. E. (2000). Economics of the Public Sector. Third Edition. New York City:
W. W. Norton & Company.
[23] Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. (2013).SIPRI Fact Sheet - Trends in
World Military Expenditure, 2012. http://books.sipri.org/files/FS/SIPRIFS1304.pdf
[Accessed 01/09/14]
[24] Vlada Republike Hrvatske. (2014). Plan prijma osoblja u djelatnu vojnu slubu za
2014.
godinu.
https://vlada.gov.hr/UserDocsImages//Sjednice/Arhiva//138.%20%2025.pdf [Accessed 01/09/14]
[25] Vranki, I. (2001.) Modeliranje i simulacija upravljanja sustavom ope vojne obveze
metodom sistemske dinamike. Magistarski rad. Zagreb: Ekonomski fakultet
[26] Wang, J. (2007). A System Dynamics Simulation Model for a Four-rank Military
Workforce. DSTO Defence Science and Technoglogy Organization, Edinburgh,
Australia.

[27] Wils, A., Kamiya, M. and Choncri N, (1998). Threats to sustainability: simulating
conflict within and between nations. System Dynamics Review, 14, 129-162.