Hukukun Üstünlüğü Ve Yasal Kalite İle Yolsuzlukla Mücadele Ve Hesap Verebilirliğin İktisadi Refah Üzerine Etkileri: Oecd Ülkelerine Yönelik Panel Veri Analizi

Year 2024, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 48 - 68

Uğur Salgar

https://doi.org/10.58654/jebi.1418045

Abstract

İktisat politikasının en önemli hedeflerinden biri olan iktisadi büyüme, ülke ekonomilerinin toplam büyüklüğünün analiz edilmesi açısından da anahtar bir gösterge olmasına karşın, ülkeler arasındaki refah farklılıkları hususunda net bir görüş sahibi olunmasına katkı sunamamaktadır. Birçok ekonomist, bu noktada kişi başına düşen GSYİH verisini baz alarak analiz yapmaya çalışmasına rağmen, toplumun genel harcama gücü göz ardı edilmektedir. Bu noktada, çalışmada aynı ürün ve ürün gruplarının tek bir parasal endeks üzerinden hesaplanarak toplumların tüketim gücünü veren satın alma gücü paritesinin kullanılmasının elverişliliği tartışılarak, 36 OECD ülkesinin iktisadi, politik ve sosyal refah göstergelerinin birbirleri ile ilişkisi panel veri regresyonu ile analiz edilmektedir. Analiz sonucunda hukukun üstünlüğü, yasal kalite, yolsuzlukla mücadele ile hesap verebilirlik ve şeffaflığın satın alma gücü üzerinde pozitif etkisinin olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Keywords

iktisadi refah, satınalma gücü, hukukun üstünlüğü, hesap verebilirlik, yolsuzlukla mücadele, yasal kalite

THE EFFECTS OF RULE OF LAW, REGULATORY QUALITY, CONTROL OF CORRUPTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY ON ECONOMIC WELFARE: PANEL DATA ANALYSIS ON OECD COUNTRIES

Abstract

Despite the fact that economic growth, which is one of the most important objectives of economic policy, is a key indicator for analyzing the total size of national economies, it cannot contribute to a clear view of the differences in welfare between countries. Many economists try to analyze this point based on GDP per capita data, but the general spending power of the society is ignored. At this point, this study analyzes the relationship between economic, political and social welfare indicators of 36 OECD countries by using panel data regression by discussing the feasibility of using purchasing power parity, which gives the consumption power of societies by calculating the same products and product groups on a single monetary index. As a result of the analysis, it is found that rule of law, legal quality, anti-corruption, accountability and transparency have a positive effect on purchasing power.

Keywords

economic welfare, purchasing power parity, rule of law, control of corruption, regulatory quality, accountability

References

• Aidt, T., Dutta, J., Sena, V. (2008). Governance Regimes, Corruption and Growth: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Comparative Economics, 36, 195-220. DOI: 10.1016/j.jce.2007.11.004
• Artan, S. ve Hayaloğlu, P. (2014). Kurumsal Yapı ve İktisadi Büyüme İlişkisi: Türkiye Örneği. Sosyoekonomi, 2014-2, Temmuz-Aralık, 347-366. DOI: 10.17233/se.65623
• Baltagi, B.H. (2005). Analysis of Panel Data. Third Edition, John Wiley & Sons.
• Bulkiewicz, J.L. ve Yanıkkaya, H. (2006). Institutional Quality and Economic Growth: Maintenance of the Rule of Law or Democratic Institutions, or Both?. Economic Modelling, 23, 648-661. DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2006.03.004
• Cieslik, A. ve Goczek, L. (2018). Control of Corruption, International Investment, and Economic Growth: Evidence from Panel Data. World Development, 103, 323-335. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.10.028
• Çağlayan, E. ve Şak, N. (2009). OECD Ülkelerinde Satınalma Gücü Paritesi: Panel Veri Analizi. Marmara Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 26(1), 483-500.
• D’Agostino, G., Dunne, J. P., Pieroni, L. (2016). Government Spending, Corruption and Economic Growth. World Development, 84, 190-205. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.03.011
• Drury, A.C., Krieckhaus, J., Lusztig, M. (2006). Corruption, Democracy, and Economic Growth. International Political Science Review, 27(2), 121-136.
• Gökalp, F. ve Baldemir, E. (2006). Kurumsal Yapı ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(1), 212-226.
• Haggard, S. ve Tiede, L. (2011). The Rule of Law and Economic Growth: Where Are We?. World Development, May, 39(5), 673-685. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.10.007
• Hicks J.R. (1975). The Scope and Status of Welfare Economics. Oxford Economic Papers, 27(3), 307-326.
• Hodge, A., Shankar, S., Rao, D.S.P., Duhs, A. (2011). Exploring the Links Between Corruption and Growth. Review of Development Economics, 15(3), 474-490. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9361.2011.00621.x
• Jajilian, H., Kirkpatrick, C., Parker, D. (2006). Creating the Conditions for International Business Expansion: The Impact of Regulation on Economic Growth in Developing Countries: A Cross Country Analysis. In: Regulating Development, Edmund Amann (Ed.), Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Karagöz, K. ve Karagöz, M. (2010). Yolsuzluk, Ekonomik Büyüme ve Kamu Harcamaları: Türkiye İçin Ampirik Bir Analiz. Sayıştay Dergisi, 76, 5-22.
• Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., Mastruzzi, M. (2011). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and Analytical Issues. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 3(2), 220-246. DOI: 10.17/S1876404511200046
• Lange, O. (1945). The Foundations of Welfare Economics. Econometrica, 10(3-4), 215-228.
• Law, S.H., Lim, T.C., Ismail, N.W. (2013). Institutions and Economic Development: A Granger Casuality Analysis of Panel Data Evidence. Economic Systems, 37(4), 610-614. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecosys.2013.05.005
• Lewis-Beck, Michael S. Ve Skalaban, A. (1990). The R-squared: Some straight talks. Political Analysis, 2, 153-171.
• Li, H., Xu, L.C., Zou, H. (2000). Corruption, Income Distribution, and Growth. Economics and Politics, 12(2), 155-181. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0343.00073
• Mauro, P. (1995). Corruption and Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 681-712. DOI: 10.2307/2946696
• Mendez, F. ve Sepulveda, F. (2006). Corruption, Growth and Political Regimes: Cross Country Evidence. European Journal of Political Economy, 22, 82-98. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2005.04.005
• Meon, P.G. ve Sekkat, K. (2005). Does Corruption Grease or Sand the Wheels of Growth?. Public Choice, 122, 69-97.
• Mo, P.H. (2000). Corruption and Economic Growth. Journal of Comparative Economics, 29, 66-79. DOI: 10.1006/jcec.2000.1703
• Nawaz, S., Iqbal, N., Khan, M.A. (2014). The Impact of Institutional Quality on Economic Growth: Panel Evidence. The Pakistan Development Review, 53(1), 15-31.
• OECD. (2008). Measuring Regulatory Quality. Policy Brief, April.
• Ozili, Peterson K. (2023). The acceptable R-square in empirical modelling for social science research. In: Social research methodology and publishing results: A guide to non-native English speakers. IGI Global, 134-143.
• Özalp, L.F.A. (2016). İktisatta Refah ve Refah Devletinin İktisadi Analizi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü İktisat Anabilim Dalı, Doktora Tezi.
• Özpolat, A., Günbala Güven, G., Nakipoğlu Özsoy, F., Bahar, A. (2016). Does Rule of Law Affect Economic Growth Positively. Research in World Economy, 7(1), 107-117. DOI: 10.5430/rwe.v7n1p107
• Pigou, A.C. (1951). Some Aspects of Welfare Economics. The American Economic Review, 41(3), 287-303.
• Swaheleen, M. (2011). Economic Growth with Endogenous Corruption: An Empirical Study. Public Choice, 146, 23-41. DOI: 10.1007/s11127-009-9581-1
• Vishwanath, T. ve Kaufmann, D. (2001). Toward Transparency: New Approaches and Their Application to Financial Markets. The World Bank Research Observer, 16(1), 41-57. DOI: 10.1093/wbro/16.1.41