Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Evaluation of the Relationship of Current Account Deficit and Financial Development on the Axis of Panel Causality Analysis

Year 2015, , 73 - 85, 04.11.2015
https://doi.org/10.20979/ueyd.182896

Abstract

In the literature, beside the view stating that financial development which gained momentum in recent years has an impact on current deficit, the increase occurring in current deficit provide contribution to the financial development by increasing demand to financial instruments. The main objective of the work in this direction is; the detection of the causality between financial development and the current account deficit and if later on to determine the effects of the causality. Therefore, for 24 OECD country the direction of current deficit and financial development between the years 1995-2012 has been determined with the Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel causality test, short-term coefficients related to the factors on the model formed towards the acquired model have been calculated by Feasible Generalized Least Squares (FGLS) method. As a result of analysis, we did not find impact of the current account deficit on financial development; but negative effect of the financial development to the current account deficit has been found. 

References

  • Andersen, T. M., Jensen, S. E., & Risager, O. (1998). Macroeconomic perspectives on the Danish Economy: problems, policies and prospects. Working Paper No18.
  • Arestis, P., & Demetriades, P. (1997). Financial development and economic growth: assessing the evidence. Economic Journal, 107, 783 – 799.
  • Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Bayraktutan, Y., ve Demirtaş, I. (2011). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerde cari açığın belirleyicileri: Panel veri analizi. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(2), 1-28.
  • De Gregorio, J., & Guidotti, P. E. (1995). Financial development and economic growth. World development, 23(3), 433-448.
  • Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
  • Duman, A., & Lee, K. (2000). Financial system, financial liberalization and crises, a tale of two countries: Turkey and Korea. [Çevrim-içi: www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~leekk/study/kotur.doc], Erişim: 13.02.2015.
  • Ekinci, M. F., Erdem, F. P., ve Kılınç, Z. (2015). Credit growth, current account and financial depth. Applied Economics, 1-13.
  • Epstein, G. A. (Ed.). (2005). Financialization and the world economy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Ersoy, H. (2013, Ekim). Küresel kriz: Dış borçlar ve cari açık perspektifinden Türkiye analizi. Maliye Finans Yazıları, 100, 95-114, [Çevrim-içi: http://www.finanskulup.org.tr/assets/maliyefinans/100/MFY-100-HicabiErsoy_Kuresel_Kriz_Turkiye_Analizi.pdf ], Erişim: 16.02.2015.
  • -
  • Friedman, M. (1937). The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 32, 675-701.
  • Frees, E. W. (1995). Assessing cross-sectional correlation in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 69, 393-414.
  • Hassan, K., & Islam, M. R. (2005). Temporal causality and dynamics of financial development, trade openness and economic growth in vector auto regression for Bangladesh, 1974-2003: Implication for poverty reduction. The Journal of Nepalese Business Studies, 2(1).
  • Khan, M. S., & Semlali, A. S. (2000). Financial development and economic growth: an overview. International Monetary Fund.
  • Krippner, G. (2004). What is financialization?. Mimeo: UCLA.
  • Levine, R. (1997). Financial development and economic growth: views and agenda. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 688 – 726.
  • Nazlıoğlu, Ş. (2010). Makro iktisat politikalarının tarım sektörü üzerindeki etkileri: Gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkeler için bir karşılaştırma. Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kayseri.
  • Patrick, H. T. (1966). Financial development and economic growth in underdeveloped countries. Economic Development Culture Change, 14(2), 174–89.
  • Pesaran, M.H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics No. 0435.
  • Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
  • Roubini, N., & Paul W. (1998). Current account sustainability in transition economies. NBER Working Paper Series. No:6468, 1-58.
  • Shan, J. (2005). Does financial development ‘lead’ economic growth: A vector auto-regression appraisal. Applied Economics, 37(12), 1353-1367.
  • Shan, J. Z., & Morris, A. (2002). Does financial development 'lead' economic growth?. International Review of Applied Economies, 16(2), 153-68.
  • Telatar, E. (2011). Türkiye’de cari açık belirleyicileri ve cari açık-krediler ilişkisi. Bankacılar Dergisi, 78, 22-34.
  • Ünalmış, D. (2002). The causality between financial development and economic growth: the case of Turkey. The Central Bank of the Turkish Republic, Research Department Working Paper, No:3.
  • Uygur, E. (2012). Türkiye'de cari açık tartışması. Turkish Economic Association Discussion Paper, No.25.
  • Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193-233.
  • Yılmaz, Ö., ve Kaya, V. (2006). Finansal kalkınma ve iktisadi büyüme arasındaki nedensellik. İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 21(244), 120-131.

Cari Açık Ve Finansal Gelişmişlik İlişkisinin Panel Nedensellik Analizi Ekseninde Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2015, , 73 - 85, 04.11.2015
https://doi.org/10.20979/ueyd.182896

Abstract

Literatürde son yıllarda hız kazanan finansal gelişmenin, cari açık üzerinde etkisi olduğu görüşünün yanı sıra, cari açıkta meydana gelen artışın finansal araçlara talebi arttırarak finansal gelişmeye katkı sağladığı görüşü de mevcuttur. Bu doğrultuda çalışmanın temel amacı; cari açık ile finansal gelişme arasındaki nedenselliğin varlığının tespiti ve daha sonrasında, varsa bu nedenselliğin etkisinin belirlenmesidir. Bu nedenle 24 OECD ülkesi için 1995-2012 yılları arasında cari açık ve finansal gelişmişlik arasındaki ilişkinin yönü Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel nedensellik testi ile belirlenmiş, elde edilen sonuç doğrultusunda oluşturulan modelde değişkenlere ilişkin kısa dönem katsayılar FGLS yöntemi ile hesaplanmıştır. Yapılan analiz sonucunda, cari açığın finansal gelişme üzerinde etkisine rastlanmamış, ancak finansal gelişmenin cari açık üzerinde negatif etkisi olduğu tespit edilmiştir. 

References

  • Andersen, T. M., Jensen, S. E., & Risager, O. (1998). Macroeconomic perspectives on the Danish Economy: problems, policies and prospects. Working Paper No18.
  • Arestis, P., & Demetriades, P. (1997). Financial development and economic growth: assessing the evidence. Economic Journal, 107, 783 – 799.
  • Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Bayraktutan, Y., ve Demirtaş, I. (2011). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerde cari açığın belirleyicileri: Panel veri analizi. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(2), 1-28.
  • De Gregorio, J., & Guidotti, P. E. (1995). Financial development and economic growth. World development, 23(3), 433-448.
  • Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
  • Duman, A., & Lee, K. (2000). Financial system, financial liberalization and crises, a tale of two countries: Turkey and Korea. [Çevrim-içi: www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~leekk/study/kotur.doc], Erişim: 13.02.2015.
  • Ekinci, M. F., Erdem, F. P., ve Kılınç, Z. (2015). Credit growth, current account and financial depth. Applied Economics, 1-13.
  • Epstein, G. A. (Ed.). (2005). Financialization and the world economy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Ersoy, H. (2013, Ekim). Küresel kriz: Dış borçlar ve cari açık perspektifinden Türkiye analizi. Maliye Finans Yazıları, 100, 95-114, [Çevrim-içi: http://www.finanskulup.org.tr/assets/maliyefinans/100/MFY-100-HicabiErsoy_Kuresel_Kriz_Turkiye_Analizi.pdf ], Erişim: 16.02.2015.
  • -
  • Friedman, M. (1937). The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 32, 675-701.
  • Frees, E. W. (1995). Assessing cross-sectional correlation in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 69, 393-414.
  • Hassan, K., & Islam, M. R. (2005). Temporal causality and dynamics of financial development, trade openness and economic growth in vector auto regression for Bangladesh, 1974-2003: Implication for poverty reduction. The Journal of Nepalese Business Studies, 2(1).
  • Khan, M. S., & Semlali, A. S. (2000). Financial development and economic growth: an overview. International Monetary Fund.
  • Krippner, G. (2004). What is financialization?. Mimeo: UCLA.
  • Levine, R. (1997). Financial development and economic growth: views and agenda. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 688 – 726.
  • Nazlıoğlu, Ş. (2010). Makro iktisat politikalarının tarım sektörü üzerindeki etkileri: Gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkeler için bir karşılaştırma. Basılmamış Doktora Tezi, Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kayseri.
  • Patrick, H. T. (1966). Financial development and economic growth in underdeveloped countries. Economic Development Culture Change, 14(2), 174–89.
  • Pesaran, M.H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Economics No. 0435.
  • Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
  • Roubini, N., & Paul W. (1998). Current account sustainability in transition economies. NBER Working Paper Series. No:6468, 1-58.
  • Shan, J. (2005). Does financial development ‘lead’ economic growth: A vector auto-regression appraisal. Applied Economics, 37(12), 1353-1367.
  • Shan, J. Z., & Morris, A. (2002). Does financial development 'lead' economic growth?. International Review of Applied Economies, 16(2), 153-68.
  • Telatar, E. (2011). Türkiye’de cari açık belirleyicileri ve cari açık-krediler ilişkisi. Bankacılar Dergisi, 78, 22-34.
  • Ünalmış, D. (2002). The causality between financial development and economic growth: the case of Turkey. The Central Bank of the Turkish Republic, Research Department Working Paper, No:3.
  • Uygur, E. (2012). Türkiye'de cari açık tartışması. Turkish Economic Association Discussion Paper, No.25.
  • Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193-233.
  • Yılmaz, Ö., ve Kaya, V. (2006). Finansal kalkınma ve iktisadi büyüme arasındaki nedensellik. İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 21(244), 120-131.
There are 29 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Behaviour-Personality Assessment in Psychology
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Ali Alper

Gürçem Oransay

Publication Date November 4, 2015
Submission Date November 4, 2015
Published in Issue Year 2015

Cite

APA Alper, A., & Oransay, G. (2015). Cari Açık Ve Finansal Gelişmişlik İlişkisinin Panel Nedensellik Analizi Ekseninde Değerlendirilmesi. Uluslararası Ekonomi Ve Yenilik Dergisi, 1(2), 73-85. https://doi.org/10.20979/ueyd.182896

Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Yenilik Dergisi

Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, İİBF, İktisat Bölümü, 61080, Trabzon/Türkiye

https://dergipark.org.tr/ueyd

28816

 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.