Türkiye’de Armey Eğrisinin Geçerliliğinin Genişletilmiş ARDL Yöntemi ile İncelenmesi

Öz

Ekonomik büyüme ile kamu kesiminin büyüklüğü arasındaki ilişkiyi gösteren ve ters U şeklinde bilinen eğri literatürde Armey eğrisi olarak bilinmektedir. Armey (1995) hipotezine göre, kamu harcamalarındaki artış belli bir seviyeye kadar ekonomik büyümeyi pozitif yönde etkilerken, belli bir seviyeden sonra ekonomik büyümeyi negatif etkilemektedir. Bu çalışmada kamu harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme arasında ters U şeklinde bir ilişkinin olup olmadığını ortaya koyan Armey eğrisi test edilerek Türkiye için optimum kamu harcama seviyesi belirlenmektedir. Bu amaçla Türkiye’de kamu harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme oranı arasındaki ilişki 1960-2023 dönemi esas alınarak Genişletilmiş ARDL (A-ARDL) yöntemiyle analiz edilmektedir. Analiz bulgularına göre Türkiye için Armey eğrisi geçerlidir. Ayrıca uzun dönemde brüt sermaye oluşumunun, ticari açıklığın ve nüfusun büyümeyi pozitif etkilerken; enflasyon oranının negatif etkilediği bulunmuştur. Türkiye için optimum kamu harcama seviyesi %11.17’dir. Türkiye ekonomisinin 2023 yılı itibariyle kamu harcamalarının optimal seviyenin üzerinde olduğu görülmektedir. Bu sebeple büyümeyi desteklemek isteyen politika yapıcılara kamu harcamalarının verimliliğini dikkate alarak optimal seviyelerde kalması önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Armey Eğrisi
• Ekonomik Büyüme
• Kamu Harcamaları
• Türkiye
• Genişletilmiş ARDL.

Investigating Validation of Armey Curve in Türkiye Using Augmented ARDL Method

Abstract

The inverted U-shaped curve, which shows the relationship between economic growth and the size of the public sector, was introduced to the literature as the Armey curve. According to the Armey (1995) hypothesis, an increase in public expenditures positively affects economic growth up to a certain level, while an increase in public expenditures negatively affects economic growth after a certain level. In this study, the Armey curve, which reveals whether there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between public expenditures and economic growth, is tested to determine the optimum level of public expenditure for Turkey. For this purpose, the relationship between public expenditures and economic growth rate in Turkey is analyzed with the Augmented ARDL (A-ARDL) method using data for the period 1960-2023. According to the findings of the analysis the Armey curve is valid for Türkiye. In the long run, gross capital formation, trade openness and population have a positive effect on growth, while inflation rate has a negative effect. The optimum public expenditure level for Turkey is 11.17%. It is observed that public expenditures of the Turkish economy are above the optimal level as of 2023. For this reason, policymakers who want to support growth are advised to keep public expenditures at optimal levels by considering their efficiency.

Keywords

• Armey Curve
• Economic Growth
• Public Expenditure
• Türkiye
• Augmented ARDL

References

1. Abdillah, K. (2023). Optimum government size and economic growth in Indonesia: ARDL model approach. Ekuilibrium: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Ilmu Ekonomi, 18(1), 37-47.
2. Ahmad, R., & Othman, N. (2014). Optimal size of government and economic growth in Malaysia: Empirical evidence. Prosiding Persidangan Kebangsaan Ekonomi Malaysia, 9, 41-48.
3. Al-Abdulrazag, B. (2021). The optimal government size in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia: an ARDL bounds testing approach to cointegration. Cogent Economics & Finance, 9(1), 2001960. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2021.2001960
4. Ali, M. M., & Khan, T. (2017). Armey curve ana lysis for the panel of selected South Asian economies. Journal of Asian Development Studies, 6(1), 6-11. Altunakar, Ş., & Buyrukoğlu, S. (2020). Türkiye’de abrams ve armey eğrilerinin geçerliliği. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(76), 1862-1878. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.730089
5. Altunc, O. F., & Aydın, C. (2013). The relationship between optimal size of government and economic growth: Empirical evidence from Turkey, Romania and Bulgaria. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 92, 66-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.639
6. Altunç, Ö. F., & Aydın, C. (2012). An empirical analysis on the relationship between public sector size and economic growth in Turkey. Ekonomik Yaklaşım, 23(82), 79-79. https://doi.org/10.5455/ey.20003
7. Armey, R.K. (1995). The freedom revolution: The new republican house majority leader tells why big government failed, why freedom works, and how we will rebuild America. Washington DC: Regnery Pub.
8. Asogwa, F. O., Okwudili, A. S., & Urama, M. S. (2019). Economic growth and public expenditure: country specific test of the armey curve hypothesis in Nigeria and Ghana. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 6(1), 498-506. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.61.5817

9. Aydin, C., & Esen, Ö. (2019). Does too much government spending depress the economic development of transition economies? Evidences from dynamic panel threshold analysis. Applied Economics, 51(15), 1666-1678. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2018.1528335
10. Aznan, M. S. B. M., Goh, H. H., Koong, S. S., & Tan, S. H. (2022). Nonlinear threshold approach for asymmetric effects of government size on economic growth in an emerging Asian economy: the Malaysian experience. Heliyon, 8(9). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10524
11. Bayrak, R. (2019). Does the optimal size of defense expenditure exist? An empirical study on Turkey. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, 18(1), 135-160. https://doi.org/10.17134/khosbd.561221
12. Bayrak, R. (2021). How does the development level of countries affect optimal size of government: An empirical study with panel data analysis. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 11(1), 391-405. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.870485
13. Binay, M. (2019). OECD Ülkelerinde sağlık harcamalarının ekonomik büyümeyi maksimize edecek şekilde optimizasyonu. SGD-Sosyal Güvenlik Dergisi, 9(2), 449-476. https://doi.org/10.32331/sgd.658899
14. Bozma, G., Başar, S., & Eren, M. (2019). Investigating validation of Armey curve hypothesis for G7 countries using ARDL model. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 20(1), 49-59.
15. Can, C. K., & Aktaş, E. E. (2022). Quantifying the optimal long-run level of government expenditures in Turkey: 1968-2019. Ekonomski vjesnik: Review of Contemporary Entrepreneurship, Business, and Economic Issues, 35(1), 69-86. https://doi.org/10.51680/ev.35.1.6
16. Cetin, M. (2017). Does government size affect economic growth in developing countries? Evidence from Non-stationary Panel Data. European Journal of Economic Studies, 6(2), 85-95. https://doi.org/10.13187/es.2017.6.85 Coayla, E. (2018). The Armey curve: Size of public spending and economic growth in Peru. Journal of Applied Economic Sciences, 13(59), 1365-1372.
17. Ekinci, A. (2011). What is the optimum size of government: A suggestion. International Journal of Economics and Finance Studies, 3(1), 45-54.
18. Herath, S. (2009). The size of the government and economic growth: An empirical study of Sri Lanka. WU Vienna University of Economics and Business. SRE - Discussion Papers No. 2010/05 https://doi.org/10.57938/099f6565-f804-4b35-87ba-f313775b6788
19. Herath, S. (2012). Size of government and economic growth: A nonlinear analysis. Economic annals, 57(194), 7-30. https://doi.org/10.2298/EKA1294007H
20. İyidoğan, V. P. & Turan, T. (2017). Government size and economic growth in Turkey: A threshold regression analysis. Prague Economic Papers, 26(2), 142-154.
21. Jain, M., Nagpal, A., & Jain, A. (2021). Government size and economic growth: an empirical examination of selected emerging economies. South Asian Journal of Macroeconomics and Public Finance, 10(1), 7-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/2277978720979889
22. Jain, N., & Sinha, N. (2022). Re-visiting the Armey curve hypothesis: an empirical evidence from India. South Asian Journal of Macroeconomics and Public Finance, 11(2), 168-184. https://doi.org/10.1177/22779787211054007
23. Kalabak, A. Y., Karatepe, S., & Avunduk, O. (2021). D evletin ekonomideki boyutu üzerine ampirik bir analiz: 1960-2019 Türkiye örneği. Maliye Dergisi, 181, 72-96. Kasal, S. (2023). Analysing the Armey curve based on the fourier cointegration approach for Turkey. Economic Annals, 68(236), 139-158. https://doi.org/10.2298/EKA2336139K
24. Lupu, D., & Asandului, M. (2019). The nexus between economic growth and public spending in Eastern European countries. Engineering Economics, 28(2019), 155-161. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.ee.28.2.7734
25. Mendonça de, H. F., & Cacicedo, T. (2015). Size of government and economic growth in the largest Latin American country. Applied Economics Letters, 22(11), 904-910. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2014.987909
26. Miller, J. C. (2018). Using the Armey Curve to measure the size of government. Economic Analyst.
27. Mose, N. (2020). An analysis of optimal devolved government size for growth: Armey curve in Kenya. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Africanos, 5(10). https://doi.org/10.22456/2448-3923.98594
28. Murshed, M., Mredula, F., & Tabassum, F. (2018). An empirical assessment of optimal government size and economic growth in light of the Armey Curve: a panel data investigation. World Review of Business Research, 8(1), 161-173.
29. Mutascu, M., & Milos, M. (2009). Optimal size of government spending. The case of European Union member states. Annales Universitatis Apulensis: Series Oeconomica, 11(1), 447.
30. Narayan, P. K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: evidence from cointegration tests. Applied economics, 37(17), 1979-1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840500278103
31. Narayan, P. K., & Smyth, R. (2006). What determines migration flows from low‐income to high‐income countries? An empirical investigation of Fiji–Us migration 1972–2001. Contemporary economic policy, 24(2), 332-342. https://doi.org/10.1093/cep/byj019
32. Nikolova, V., & Angelov, A. (2022). The Armey curve: an empirical analysis of selected Balkan countries and Russia for the period 2006-2019. Finance: Theory and Pract, 26(1), 55-65. https://doi.org/10.26794/2587-5671
33. Nouira, R., & Kouni, M. (2021). Optimal government size and economic growth in developing and MENA countries: A dynamic panel threshold analysis. Middle East Development Journal, 13(1), 59-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/17938120.2021.1898231
34. Nuta, A. C., Nuta, F. M., Chirila, V., Roman, A., & Pusca, A. C. (2015). Testing the relationship between public expenditure and economic growth in Romania. Acta Universitatis Danubius. Œconomica, 11(4).
35. Olaleye, S. O., Edun, F., Bello, H. T., & Taiwo, S. B. (2014). Government expenditure and economic growth: An empirical analysis of the Armey Curve in Nigeria. Romanian Economic Journal, 17(51), 47-66.
36. Pamuk, Y., & Dündar, U. (2016). Kamu harcamalarının optimal boyutu: Türkiye örneği. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(3), 23-50. https://doi.org/10.17065/huniibf.259128
37. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of applied econometrics, 16(3), 289-326. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.616
38. Rajput, S., & Tariq, A. (2019). Government size and economic growth: a panel data study comparing OECD and non-OECD countries. Applied Economics Journal, 26(2), 22-37. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.338424
39. Sam, C. Y., McNown, R., & Goh, S. K. (2019). An augmented autoregressive distributed lag bounds test for cointegration. Economic Modelling, 80, 130-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2018.11.001
40. Şanlı, D. (2022). Testing the armey curve hypothesis in Turkey: evidence from the provincial data. Bulletin of Economic Theory and Analysis, 7(2), 425-443. https://doi.org/10.25229/beta.1206552
41. Şen, H., & Kaya, A. (2019). Alternatif göstergeler bazında Türkiye’de optimal kamu kesimi büyüklüğünün tahmini. Bankacılar Dergisi, 109, 49-81.
42. Şen, H., Kaya, A., & Durucan, A. (2023). New insights into the growth-maximizing size of government: evidence and implications for Turkey. Economic Change and Restructuring, 56(4), 2243-2296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10644-023-09510-y
43. Tabassum, A. (2015). Size of government and economic growth: a non linear analysis. International Journal of Technology and Research, 3(4), 75-78.
44. Toptaş, S. (2024). Optimal Kamu Harcaması Oranı: Türkiye İçin Bir Uygulama. International Journal of Public Finance, 9(1), 175-194. https://doi.org/10.30927/ijpf.1329893
45. Trofimov, I. D. (2020). Health care spending and economic growth: armey-rahn curve in a panel of European economies. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02532-5
46. Tuğcu, C. T., & Gülşen, M. A. (2017). Kamu harcamaları-ekonomik büyüme ilişkisinin asimetrik ARDL yöntemiyle analizi: 1980-2014 Türkiye örneği. Uluslararası Maliye Sempozyumu/Türkiye, 211-228.
47. Turan, T. (2014). Optimal size of government in Turkey. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 4(2), 286-294.
48. Vasilev, A. (2020). The armey curve in Bulgaria (2000-18)–theoretical considerations and empirical results. Theoretical and Practical Research in Economic Fields, 11(21), 21-26.
49. Vedder, R. K., & Gallaway, L. E. (1998). Government size and economic growth. The Committee.
50. Waibena, T. È. D., & Yovo, K. (2023). Optimal size of public expenditure and agricultural growth in Togo: evidence from armey curve. International Journal of Life Science and Agriculture Research, 2(9), 335-340.
51. World Bank (2024), World development indicators, https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
52. Yamak, R., & Erdem, H. F. (2018). Türkiye ekonomisinde armey eğrisi geçerli midir?. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, Prof. Dr. Harun TERZİ Özel Sayısı, 335-346. https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.442807
53. Yıldız, F., & Demirkılıç, Y. (2022). Türkiye’de “Armey Eğrisi” (1970-2020): Teorik Yaklaşımlar ve Ampirik Sonuçlar. Bir Hipotez Bir Test (Maliye ve İktisat Özelinde) içinde. Ekin Yayınları.
54. Yüksel, C. (2019). The size of the public sector and the Armey curve: The case of Turkey. Critical debates in public finance. Berlin: Peter Lang GmbH.