Research Article

Governance Performance of Türkiye: A Comparative Analysis with OECD, EU, and BRICS Countries

Volume: 7 Number: 2 August 30, 2025
TR EN

Governance Performance of Türkiye: A Comparative Analysis with OECD, EU, and BRICS Countries

Abstract

This study evaluates Türkiye’s governance performance using World Bank indicators and compares it with OECD, EU, and BRICS countries. Analyses reveal a decline in Türkiye’s governance metrics in recent years, with performance significantly lagging behind OECD and EU countries but exceeding the average among BRICS countries. In the study, criteria weights were determined and multi-criteria decision-making techniques yielded consistent rankings. Correlation analysis confirmed strong alignment across methodologies. While highlighting methodological limitations of World Bank indicators, the study advocates context-sensitive governance reforms over one-size-fits-all institutional models, emphasizing the need to account for historical and socio-political dynamics. The implications of Türkiye’s potential BRICS membership versus its prolonged EU accession process were critically examined, with findings suggesting that short-term alignment with EU institutional expectations remains pragmatic. However, long-term strategic decisions should holistically evaluate political, economic, and cultural dimensions.

Keywords

References

  1. Acaravcı, A., Artan, S., Erdoğan, S., & Bostan Göktürk, T. (2018). Türkiye’de kurumsal kalite, reel gelir ve doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar ilişkisi [Institutional quality, real income and foreign direct investment relationship in Turkey]. Journal of Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty, 5(2), 132–145. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.409819
  2. Acemoglu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2012). Why nations fail: The origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. Crown Business.
  3. Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2001). The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation. American Economic Review, 91(5), 1369–1401. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.5.1369
  4. Aidt, T. S. (2009). Corruption, institutions, and economic development. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 25(2), 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grp012
  5. Andrews, M. (2008). The good governance agenda: Beyond indicators without theory. Oxford Development Studies, 36(4), 379–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600810802455120
  6. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
  7. Aron, J. (2000). Growth and institutions: A review of the evidence. World Bank Research Observer, 15(1), 99–135. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/15.1.99
  8. Aytekin, A., & Gündoğdu, H. G. (2021). OECD ve AB üyesi ülkelerin sürdürülebilir yönetişim düzeylerine göre SWARA tabanlı TOPSIS-Sort-B ve WASPAS yöntemleriyle incelenmesi [Investigation of OECD and EU member countries By SWARA-based TOPSIS-Sort-B and WASPAS methods according to sustainable governance levels]. Öneri, Journal of Marmara University Institute of Social Sciences, 16(56), 943–971. https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.862996

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Development Economics - Macro , Institutional Economics

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

August 30, 2025

Submission Date

May 19, 2025

Acceptance Date

July 24, 2025

Published in Issue

Year 2025 Volume: 7 Number: 2

APA
Birol, Y. E. (2025). Governance Performance of Türkiye: A Comparative Analysis with OECD, EU, and BRICS Countries. Ekonomi İşletme Ve Maliye Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(2), 183-212. https://doi.org/10.38009/ekimad.1701948