Gelişmekte Olan Ekonomilerde Hiper Globolleşme Döneminde Kamu Harcamaları

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 23, 30 - 42, 30.06.2023

Deniz Songur Jülide Yalçınkaya Koyuncu

https://doi.org/10.55589/bsbd.1301412

Öz

Globalleşme literatüründe etkinlik ve telafi hipotezleri geniş bir şekilde ele alınıp ampirik boyutta irdelenmektedir. Bu çalışmada etkinlik ve telafi hipotezlerinin geçerliliği on iki farklı kamu harcaması için sınamaktadır. Beş farklı globalleşeme indeksi (genel globalleşme, ekonomik globalleşme, politik globalleşme, kültürel globalleşme ve sosyal globalleşme indeksi) için analizler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmanın periyodu olarak globalleşmenin en yoğun olduğu Berlin duvarının çöküşü sonrası dönem (hiper globalleşme dönemi olarak adlandırılan 1989 yılı sonrası dönem) seçilmiş, analizler gelişmekte olan ülkeler örneklemi için dengesiz panel veri seti ve iki yönlü sabit etki modelleri kullanılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ayrıca modellerde tüm değişkenler durağan hallerinde kullanılmıştır. Ele alınan beş farklı globalleşme türü için yapılan analizler sonrasında elde edilen sonuçlara göre yoğun bir şekilde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı pozitif katsayılar elde edilmiş olup, bundan dolayı da ağırlıklı bir biçimde telafi hipotezinin geçerli olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kamu Harcamaları, Hiper Globalleşme, Etkinlik Hipotezi, Telafi Hipotezi, İki Yönlü Sabit Etkiler Modeli

Kaynakça

• Abizadeh, S. (2005). An Analysis of Government Expenditure And Trade Liberalization. Applied Economics, 37, 1881-1884.
• Acemoglu, D., & Yared, P. (2010). Political Limits to Globalization. American Economic Review, 100(2), 83–88.
• Aghion, P., Boustan, L., Hoxby, C. L., & Vandenbussche, J. (2009). The Causal Impact of Education on Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Harvard University.
• Anderson, E., & Obeng, S. (2021). Globalization and Government Spending: Evidence for The ‘Hyper- Globalisation’ of the 1990s and 2000s. The World Economy, 44(5), 1144-1176.
• Blum, J., Dorn, F., & Heuer, A. (2021). Political Institutions and Health Expenditure. International Tax and Public Finance, 28, 323–363.
• Borghi, E. (2009). Trade Openness and Public Expenditure on Labor Market Policies. University of Milan and CESPRI.
• Bretschger, L., & Hettich, F. (2002). Globalization, Capital Mobility and Tax Competition: Theory and Evidence for OECD Countries. European Journal of Political Economy, 18, 695–716.
• Busemeyer, M. (2009). From Myth to Reality: Globalisation and Public Spending in OECD Countries Revisited. European Journal of Political Research, 48(4), 455–482. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2009. 00838.x
• Cameron, D. R. (1978). The Expansion of the Public Economy: A Comparative Analysis. American Political Science Review, 72, 237–269.
• Dreger, C., & Reimers, H. E. (2005). Health Care Expenditures in OECD Countries : A Panel Unit Root and Cointegration Analysis. Germany.
• Dritsakis, N., & Adamopoulos, A. (2004). Financial Development and Economic Growth in Greece: An Empirical Investigation with Granger Causality Analysis. International Economic Journal, 18(4), 547–559. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/1016873042000299981
• Fedeli, S. (2015). The Impact of Gdp on Health Care Expenditure: The Case of Italy (1982- 2009). Social Indicate Research, 122, 347–370.
• Ferris, J. S., Park, S. B., & Winer, S. L. (2008). Studying the Role of Political Competition in the Evolution of Government Size over Long Horizons. Public Choice, 137(1/2), 369–401.
• Garret, G. (1998). Partisan Politics in the Global Economy. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Garrett, G. (2001). Globalization and Government Spending Around The World. Studies in Comparative International Development, 35(4), 3–29.
• Garrett, G., & Mitchell, D. (2001). Globalization, Government Spending and Taxation in the OECD. European Journal of Political Research, 39, 145–177.
• Gygli, S., Florian Haelg, N. P., & Sturm, J. E. (2019). The KOF Globalisation Index – Revisited. Review of International Organizations, 4(3), 543-574, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-019-09344-2.
• Hansson, Å., & Olofsdotter, K. (2008). Integration and the Structure of Public Spending. Comparative Political Stıdies, 1001–1027.
• Islam, M. Q. (2004). The Long Run Relationship Between Openness and Government Size: Evidence from Bounds Test. Applied Economics, 36(9), 995–1000.
• Kaufman, R., & Segura-Ubiergo, A. (2001). Globalization, Domestic Politics, and Social Spending in Latin America: A Time-Series Cross-Section Analysis, 1973-97. World Politics, 53(4), 553–587.
• Kimakova, A. (2009). Government Size and Openness Revisited: The Case of Financial Globalization. KYKLOS, 62(3), 394-406.
• Liberati, P. (2007). Trade Openness, Capital Openness and Government Size. Journal of Public Policy, 27(2), 215–247.
• Lubbers, M. (1996). Globalization: An Exploration, Globalization Studies. Harvard University.
• Mourao, P. R. (2007). Has trade Openness Increased all Portuguese Public Expenditures? Adetailed Time-series Study. Financial Theory & Practice, 31(3), 225–247.
• Olgun, H. (2006). Küreselleşme Kavramı ve İçeriğine Genel Bir Bakış. Sosyoekonomi, 3(3), 141-152.
• Petrou, K. (2014). Government Size and Trade Openness Using Bayesian Model Average. University of Cyprus. http://www.ucy.ac.cy/econ/documents/ seminarpapers/2014/Article_1_Draft_2.pdf adresinden erişildi.
• Pickup, M. (2006). Globalization, Politics and Provincial Government Spending in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue, 39(4), 883–917.
• Ram, R. (2009). Openness, Country Size, and Government Size: Additional Evidence From A Large Cross-Country Pnael. Journal of Public Economics, 93, 213-218.
• Rodrik, D. (1997). Küreselleşme Sınırı Aştı mı? (İ. Akyol ve F. Ünsal, Ed.). İstanbul: Kızılelma Yayıncılık.
• Rodrik, D. (1998). Why Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments? Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 1–47.
• Sagarik, D. (2014). Public Expenditures on Health in ASEAN Member Countries: An Analysis of Trends and Policy Determinants. International Conference on Trends in Economics, Humanities and Management. Pattaya/Thailand.
• Saenz, E., Sabate, M., & Gadea, M.D. (2013). Trade Openness and Public Expenditure. The Spanish Case, 1960-2000. Public Choice, 154, 173-195.
• Samimi, P., & Jenatabadi, H.S. (2014). Globalization and Economic Growth: Emprical Evidence on the Role of Complementarities. Globalization and Economic Growth, 9 (4), 1-7.
• Solmaz, E. (2014). OECD Ülkelerinde Ülke İçi Gelir Eşitsizliklerinin Çok Boyutlu Küreselleşme Endeksleri İle İlişkisi. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Faculty of Economics & Administrative Sciences, 19(3), 91-108.
• Stiglitz, J. E. (2017). The Overselling of Globalization. Business Economics, 52(3), 129-137.
• Swank, D. (2001). Mobile Capital, Democratic Institutions, and the Public Economy in Advanced Industrial Societies. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 3, 133–162.
• Tütüncü, A., & Zengin, H. (2018). Telafi ve Etkinlik Hipotezlerinin MINT Ülkeleri için Geçerliliğinin İncelenmesi. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(1), 81–94.
• Wacziarg, R. (2001). Measuring The Dynamic Gains From Trade. The World Bank Economic Review, 15(3), 393–429.
• Winner, H. (2012). Fiscal Competition and the Composition of Public Expenditure: An Empirical Study. University of Salzburg and Austrian Institute of Economic Research.
• Yun, W. S., & Yusoff, R. (2019). Determinants of Public Education Expenditure. A Review Southeast Asian Journal of Economics, 7(2), 127-142.
• Zortuk, M., & Beşer, B. (2014). Dışa açıklık ve Demokratik Yapının Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü Üzerindeki Etkisi: Rodrik Hipotezine Geçiş Ekonomilerinden Kanıt. Ege Akademik Bakış, 14(3), 345-35.