Institutional Quality and Economic Growth: Panel Causality Analysis

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 1, 89 - 100, 01.06.2014

Cengiz Aytun Cemil Serhat Akın

Öz

The aim of this study is to analyze the relation between the institutional quality and economic growth via panel data analysis. The data from 83 countries was analyzed for four income groups by covering the years as 2000-2010. Apart from the previous studies, this application takes into consideration income groups of countries. According to the results, a causality relation for the low income group doesn't exist. On the other hand, one way causality relation exists from institutional quality towards economic growth in middle income groups, and bidirectional causality exists for high income group. In this respect, these results show that institutional quality policies which sustain economic growth could be effective apart from low level income groups.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Institutional Quality, Economic Growth, Panel Causality Analysis

Kurumsal Kalite ve Ekonomik Büyüme: Panel Nedensellik Analizi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı kurumsal kalite ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkinin panel veri analizi ile araştırılmasıdır. 83 ülkeye ait veriler, dört gelir grubu için 2000-2010 yıllarını kapsayacak şekilde analiz edilmiştir. Önceki çalışmalardan farklı olarak uygulama, ülkelerin gelir gruplarını göz önünde bulundurmaktadır. Sonuçlara göre alt gelir gurubunda nedensellik ilişkisi bulunmamaktadır. Orta gelir gruplarında kurumsal kaliteden ekonomik büyümeye doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi bulunurken, yüksek gelir grubunda nedensellik her iki yönde bulunmaktadır. Bu açıdan bulgular ekonomik büyümeyi sağlayacak kurumsal kalite politikalarının düşük gelir grubu haricinde etkili olacağına işaret etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kurumsal Kalite, Ekonomik Büyüme, Panel Nedensellik Analizi

Kaynakça

• Arellano, M., & S, Bond. 1991. Some tests of speciŞcation for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies 58: 277–297.
• Ayal, E.B. & Karras, G. 1998. Components of Economic Freedom and Growth: An Empirical Study, The Journal of Developing Areas, 32 (3): 327-338.
• Baltagi, B. H. 2005. Econometric Analysis of Panel Data (3rd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
• Barro, R.J. 1991. Economic growth in a cross section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106: 407–443.
• Barro, R.J. 1994. Democracy and growth. NBER Working Paper No. 4909, NBER.
• Blundell, R.,&Bond, S. 1998. Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115–143.
• Burkhart, R. E., & Lewis-Beck, M. S. 1994. Comparative Democracy: The Economic Development Thesis. American Political Science Review, 88 (4): 903–10.
• Carlsson, F.& S. Lundström, 2002. Economic Freedom and Growth: Decomposing the Effects, Public Choice, 112 : 335-344.
• Chong, A., & Calderón, C. 2000. Causality and Feedback between Institutional Measures and Economic Growth. Economics and Politics, 12 (1): 69–81.
• Claque, C., Keefer, O., Knack, S. & Olsen, M. 1996. Property and Contract Rights in Autocracies and Democracies. Journal of Economic Growth 1(2):243-276.
• Dawson, J. W. 2003. Causality in the Freedom-Growth Relationship, European Journal of Political Economy 19(3): 479-495.
• Eggertsson, T. 1990. Economic Behavior and Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Farr, W. K., Lord, R.A. & Wolfenbarger, J.L. 1998, Economic Freedom, Political Freedom, and Economic Well-Being: A Causality Analysis. The Cato Journal, 18(2): 247-62.
• Granger, C. W. J. 1969. Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-spectral Methods. Econometrica, 37(3), 424–438.
• Gwartney, J., Lawson, R., & Hall, J., 2012. Economic Freedom Dataset, published in Economic Freedom of the World: 2012 Annual Report. Fraser Institude. [Data file], Retrieved from http://www.freetheworld.com/2012/EFWdataset2012.xls (Erişim Tarihi, 03 Şubat 2013).
• Helliwell, J. F. 1994. Empirical Linkages between Democracy and Economic Growth. British Journal of Political Science, 24 (2): 225–48.
• Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. 2003. Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53–74.
• Islam, S., 1996, Economic Freedom, Per Capita Income and Economic Growth, Applied Economic Letters, 3: 595-597.
• Jha, R., 2005, Macroeconomics for Developing Countries, Routhledge, New York, USA.
• Knack, S., & Keefer, P., 1995. Institutions And Economic Performance: Cross Country Tests Using Alternative Institutional Measures, Economics and Politics, 7(3), 207-228.
• Knack, S. & P. Keefer 1997. Why don’t poor countries catch up? A cross-national test of institutional explanation’, Economic Inquiry, 35, (4): 590-602.
• Kneller, R., Bleaney, M. & Gemmell, N., 1999. Fiscal Policy and Growth: Evidence from OECD Countries, Journal of Public Economics, 74:171-190.
• Lam, P.L., & Shiu, A. 2010. Economic growth, telecommunications development and productivity growth of the telecommunications sector: Evidence around the world. Telecommunications Policy, 34(4), 185–199.
• Lipset, S. M. 1959. Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 53: 69–105.
• Martin, S. X., 1997. I Just Ran Two Million Regressions, American Economic Review, 87(2), s. 178–183.
• Mauro, P. 1995. Corruption and Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 681– 712.
• North, D. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Nelson, M. A. & Singh, R.D., 1998. Democracy, Economic Freedom, Fiscal Policy, and Growth in LDCs: A Fresh Look, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 46 (4): 677–696.
• Rosenberg, N., & Birdzell, L. E. 1986. How the West grew rich: The economic transformation of the industrial world. New York: Basic Books.
• Scully G.W. & Slottje, D.J. 1991. Ranking economic liberty across countries. Public Choice 69: 121–152.
• Shiu, A., & Lam, P. (2008). Causal Relationship between Telecommunications and Economic Growth in China and its Regions. Regional Studies, 42(5), 705–718.
• Shinjo, K., & Zhang, X. 2004. ICT capital investment and productivity growth: Granger causality in Japanese and the USA industries. Presented at the 15th European Regional International Telecommunications Society Conference.
• Sturm, J. E. & De Haan, J., 2001. How robust is the relationship between economic freedom and economic growth really? Applied Economics 33, 839–8844.
• Taylor, L., 2004. Reconstructing Macroeconomics: Structuralist Proposals and Critiques of the Mainstream, Harward University Press. 100