Türkiye’de İnşaat Sektörü, İstihdam ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi: GMM Yaklaşımı

Year 2023, , 491 - 503, 30.11.2023

Ayşe Özge Artekin

https://doi.org/10.29249/selcuksbmyd.1382436

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı Türkiye için 2005-2023 yılları arasında çeyreklik veriler temel alınarak inşaat sektörü, istihdam ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi Zivot-Andrews (ZA) birim kök, Phillips-Perron (PP) birim kök, ve GMM testleri uygulanarak ele almaktır. Ayrıca Granger nedensellik testi kullanılarak değişkenler arasındaki ilişkinin gücü ve yönü hesaplanmıştır. Zivot-Andrews (ZA) birim kök ve Phillips-Perron (PP) birim kök testleri sonuçlarına göre I(1) düzeyinde tüm seriler durağan olarak tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, GMM analizi sonuçları, Türkiye için 2005'ten 2023'e kadar istihdamın ekonomik büyümeyi etkilediğini ortaya koymaktadır. Granger nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre ise gecikme uzunluğu 2 iken hem inşaat sektörü ekonomik büyümenin hem de ekonomik büyüme inşaat sektörünün Granger nedenidir. Başka bir ifadeyle değişkenler arası kısa vadeli bir ilişkinin yanı sıra aralarında çift yönlü bir ilişki de vardır. Aynı şekilde istidam ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiye bakıldığında hem kısa vadeli ilişki hem de birbirleri arasında çift yönlü bir ilişki mevcuttur. İnşaat sektörü ile istihdam arasındaki ilişki gözlemlendiğinde ise hem birbirleri arasında kısa vadeli ilişkinin varlığından söz edilebilir hem de aralarında çift yönlü bir ilişki vardır. Sonuç olarak, Türkiye’de iyi planlanmış kamu harcamaları ve kamu inşaat işlerine uygulanan vergilerle ilgili uygulanan akılcı maliye politikaları istihdamı teşvik edecek ve inşaat faaliyetlerini istikrara kavuşturacaktır. Türkiye’de hükümet ve politika yapıcıların uygulayacağı bu adımlar sayesinde daha kalıcı hale getirilen inşaat faaliyetlerinin oluşturacağı istihdam alanları beraberinde istikrarlı bir ekonomik büyümeyi de destekleyecektir.

Keywords

İnşaat Sektörü, İstihdam, Ekonomik Büyüme, Granger Nedensellik Testi, GMM Testi

Examining the Relationship Between the Construction Sector, Employment and Economic Growth in Türkiye: GMM Approach

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the construction sector, employment and economic growth for Türkiye, based on quarterly data between 2005 and 2023, by applying Zivot-Andrews (ZA) unit root, Phillips-Perron (PP) unit root and GMM tests. Additionally, the strength and direction of the relationship between the variables are calculated by employing the Granger causality test. In addition, the strength and direction of the relationship between the variables are calculated by using the Granger causality test. According to the results of both Zivot-Andrews (ZA) unit root and Phillips-Perron (PP) unit root tests, all series are determined as stationary at the I(1) level. Additionally, GMM analysis results reveal that employment affects economic growth for Türkiye from 2005 to 2023. According to the Granger causality test results, when the lag length is 2, both the construction sector is the Granger cause of economic growth and the economic growth is the construction industry's Granger cause. In other words, there is both a short-term relationship between the variables and a two-way relationship between them. Likewise, when looking at the relationship between employment and economic growth, there is both a short-term relationship and a bidirectional relationship between each other. Finally, when the relationship between the construction industry and employment is observed, it can be said that there is a short-term relationship between them and there is a two-way relationship between them. According to these empirical findings, well-planned public expenditures in Türkiye and rational fiscal policies regarding taxes applied to public construction works will promote employment and stabilize construction activities. Thus, the employment areas created by construction activities which have become more permanent through these steps to be implemented by the government and policy makers in Türkiye will also support a stable economic growth.

Keywords

Construction Sector, Employment, Economic Growth, Granger Causality Test, GMM Test

References

• Ahmad, M., Zhao, Z. Y., & Li, H. (2019). Revealing stylized empirical interactions among construction sector, urbanization, energy consumption, economic growth and CO2 emissions in China. Science of the Total Environment, 657, 1085-1098.
• Aigheyisi, O. S. & Edore, J. O. (2021). Economic Growth and Employment in Nigerias’s Services Sector. Journal of Economics and Allied Research, 6(1), 90-102.
• Aigheyisi, O. S. (2015). Economic Growth and Unemployment in Nigeria: An Empirical Verification of Okun’s Law. West African Financial and Economic Review, 12(1), 133-152.
• Aydıner-Avşar, N., & Onaran, Ö. (2010). The determinants of employment: A sectoral analysis for Turkey. The Developing Economies, 48(2), 203-231.
• Ayinde, T. O., Adekunle, O. A., & Muritala, A. T. (2018). Economic Growth and Sustainable Employment Generation: Empirical Validation of Okun’s Law in Nigeria. Journal of Management, Economics and Industrial Organization, 2(2), 33-59.
• Anaman, K. A., & Osei‐Amponsah, C. (2007). Analysis of the causality links between the growth of the construction industry and the growth of the macro‐economy in Ghana. Construction Management and Economics, 25(9), 951-961.
• Barbaros, M., Kalaycı, S., & Bakır, D. (2019). Türkiye’de Gıda İhracatı, Gıda Fiyatları ve Enflasyon arasındaki Nedenselliğin Analizi. Avrasya Uluslararası Araştırmalar Dergisi, 7(18), 537-548.
• Barber Jr, H. M., & El-Adaway, I. H. (2015). Economic performance assessment for the construction industry in the southeastern United States. Journal of Management in Engineering, 31(2), 05014014.
• Beşe, E., & Kalaycı, S. (2021). Environmental Kuznets curve (EKC): empirical relationship between economic growth, energy consumption, and CO2 emissions: evidence from 3 developed countries. Panoeconomicus, 68(4), 483-506.
• Bhavsar, V., & Sangapurkar, A. (2018). In what way does the construction sector contribute to economic growth? Empirical evidence from India. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 11(1-2), 141-158.
• Chang, T., & Nieh, C. C. (2004). A note on testing the causal link between construction activity and economic growth in Taiwan. Journal of Asian Economics, 15(3), 591-598.
• Chiang, Y. H., Tao, L., & Wong, F. K. (2015). Causal relationship between construction activities, employment and GDP: The case of Hong Kong. Habitat International, 46, 1-12.
• Dada, E. A. (2018). Jobless growth in Nigeria: determining employment intensive sectors. Journal of African Development, 20(2), 69-78.
• Dünya Bankası (1984). The Construction Industry: Issues and Strategies in Developing Countries, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
• Erol, I. (2019). New geographies of residential capitalism: Financialization of the Turkish housing market since the early 2000s. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 43(4), 724-740.
• Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254-280.
• Giang, D. T., & Pheng, L. S. (2011). Role of construction in economic development: Review of key concepts in the past 40 years. Habitat International, 35(1), 118-125.
• Green, R. K. (1997). Follow the leader: how changes in residential and non‐residential investment predict changes in GDP. Real Estate Economics, 25(2), 253-270.
• Haider, A., Jabeen, S., Rankaduwa, W., & Shaheen, F. (2023). The Nexus between Employment and Economic Growth: A Cross-Country Analysis. Sustainability, 15(15), 11955.
• Hillebrandt, P. M. (2000). Economic Theory and the Construction Industry. Third Edition. London: Macmillan Press LTD.
• Hodge, D. (2009). Growth, employment and unemployment in South Africa. South African Journal of Economics, 77(4), 488-504.
• Huang, L., Krigsvoll, G., Johansen, F., Liu, Y., & Zhang, X. (2018). Carbon emission of global construction sector. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81, 1906-1916.
• Kalaycı, S., & Özden, C. (2021). The linkage among sea transport, trade liberalization and industrial development in the context of CO2: An empirical investigation from China. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 9, 633875.
• Kalaycı, S., & Köksal, C. (2015). The Relationship Between China's Airway Freight In Terms Of Carbon-Dioxide Emission And Export Volume. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 60-68.
• Kelleci, S. Ü. ve Fırat, E. (2017). Doğrudan Yabancı Sermaye Yatırımları ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki: Azerbaycan Örneği, Relationship Between Foreign Direct Investments and Economic Growth: The Azerbaijan Sample. International Conference on Eurasion Economics.
• Lean, C. S. (2001). Empirical tests to discern linkages between construction and other economic sectors in Singapore. Construction Management & Economics, 19(4), 355-363.
• Mkhize, N. I. (2019). The sectoral employment intensity of growth in South Africa. Southern African Business Review, 23(1), 1-24.
• Myers, D. (2022). Construction economics: A New Approach. Fifth Edition ed. London and New York: Taylor & Francis.
• Oladinrin, T. O., Ogunsemi, D. R., & Aje, I. O. (2012). Role of construction sector in economic growth: Empirical evidence from Nigeria. FUTY Journal of the Environment, 7(1), 50-60.
• Olamade, O. (2020). Is Economic Growth Working for Jobs? An Investigation of the Employment Generating Capacity of the Nigerian Economy. Journal of Economics and Business, 3(4), 1345-1356.
• Özkan, F., Özkan, O., & Gündüz, M. (2012). Causal relationship between construction investment policy and economic growth in Turkey. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(2), 362-370.
• Öztürk, A., & Kalaycı, S. (2017). Türkiye’de Eğitim, İşsizlik ve Enflasyona Dayalı Gelir Dağılımı Adaletsizliği. Turkish Studies, 12(31), 151-168.
• Park, S. H. (1989). Linkages between industry and services and their implications for urban employment generation in developing countries. Journal of Development Economics, 30(2), 359-379.
• Rameezdeen, R. (2007). Image of the construction industry. CIB Priority Theme-Revaluing Construction: A W, 65, 76-87.
• Ramsaran, R., & Hosein, R. (2006). Growth, employment and the construction industry in Trinidad and Tobago. Construction Management and Economics, 24(5), 465-474.
• Sodipe, O. A., & Ogunrinola, O. I. (2011). Employment and economic growth nexus in Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(11), 232-239.
• Soydal, H. (2006). Türkiye’de Doğrudan Yabancı Sermaye Yatırımlarının Verimlilik Analizi: Otomotiv Sektörü Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (16), 577-604.
• Sutthichaimethee, J., & Kubaha, K. (2018). Forecasting energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in Thailand’s construction sector by enriching the LS-ARIMAXi-ECM model. Sustainability, 10(10), 3593.
• TCMB (2023a). İnşaat sektörü (bin tl) "https://evds2.tcmb.gov.tr/", 19.08.2023 tarihinde TCMB resmi sitesi veri tabanından alınmıştır.
• TCMB (2023b). İstihdam (İnşaat sektörü-Bin kişi) "https://evds2.tcmb.gov.tr/", 21.08.2023 tarihinde TCMB resmi sitesi veri tabanından alınmıştır.
• TCMB (2023c). GSYİH (BİN TL) "https://evds2.tcmb.gov.tr/", 20.08.2023 tarihinde TCMB resmi sitesi veri tabanından alınmıştır.
• Tiwari, A. K. (2011). A causal analysis between construction flows and economic growth: evidence from India. Journal of International Business and Economy, 12(2), 27-42.
• Tse, R. Y., & Ganesan IV, S. (1997). Causal relationship between construction flows and GDP: evidence from Hong Kong. Construction Management & Economics, 15(4), 371-376.
• Wells, J. (1986). The Construction Industry in Developing Countries: Alternate Strategies for Development, Croom Helm Ltd, London.
• You, T., & Zi, H. (2007). The economic crisis and efficiency change: evidence from the Korean construction industry. Applied Economics, 39(14), 1833-1842.
• Zivot, E., & Andrews, D. W. K. (2002). Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 20(1), 25-44.