THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)

Cenap Sancar; Canan Sancar

doi:10.18092/ulikidince.287053

TR EN

THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Avrupa Birliği’nin 13 Ülkesi ve Türkiye açısından kentleşme ve ekonomik büyüme arasında bir ilişki olup olmadığını, ilişki var ise bu ilişkinin yönünü belirlemektir. Çalışmada, kişi başına GSYH bağımlı değişken, kentleşmeyi temsilen kentsel nüfus yoğunluğu, sanayi, hizmetler sektörü istihdam oranları ve ayrıca modele dahil edilen tarım sektörü istihdam oranı ve genel istihdam oranı bağımsız değişken olarak ele alınmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında oluşturulan modelin değişkenlerine ait 1990-2014 yıllık serileri panel eşbütünleşme yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Panel nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre, hizmetler sektörü istihdam oranı ve sanayi sektörü istihdam oranı ve tarım sektörü istihdam oranı ile kişi başına GSYH arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi vardır. Bununla birlikte kişi başına GSYH’den kentsel nüfus yoğunluğu ve genel istihdam oranına doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi vardır. Ayrıca, DOLS ve FMOLS sonuçlarına göre kentsel nüfus yoğunluğu ve hizmet sektörü istihdam oranındaki artışlar kişi başına GSYH’yi pozitif yönde etkilemektedir. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulgular kentleşme ve ekonomik büyümenin 13 AB ülkesi ve Türkiye’de birbirlerini besleyen süreçler olduğunu göstermektedir.

Keywords

Kentleşme,Ekonomik Büyüme,AB Ülkeleri,Türkiye,Panel Eşbütünleşme

THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a relationship between urbanisation and economic growth in terms of 13 European Union Member countries and of Turkey as well as to determine the direction of this relationship, if it exists. In the study, GDP per capita was used as a dependant variable where population density and employment rates of industry and services sectors, which represent the urbanisation, as well as the employment rate of agriculture sector and general employment rate, which were included in our model, were used as independent variables. The annual series of the variables of the model that was created within the scope of the study for the period between 1990-2014 were analysed by panel co-integration method. According to panel causality test, there is a bilateral causality relationship between GDP and employment rates of services, industry, and agriculture sectors. Additionally, there was a unilateral causality relationship from GDP towards urban population density and towards general employment rate. Also, according to the DOLS and FMOLS results, the increases in urban population density and in the employment rate of services sector have a positive effect on GDP per capita. Findings from the study show that urbanisation and economic growth are mutually dependent processes in 13 EU member countries and in Turkey.

Keywords

Urbanisation,Economic Growth,EU Countries,Turkey,Panel Cointegration

References

Akbas, Y. E., Senturk, M., ve Sancar, C. (2013). Testing for Causality between the Foreign Direct Investment Current Account Deficit, GDP and Total Credit: Evidence from G7. Panoeconomıcus, 6, 791-812. Doi: 10.2298/PAN1306791A
Antrop, M. (2004). Landscape change and the urbanization process in Europe. Landscape and Urban Planning, 67, 9-26. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00026-4
Bala, A. P. (2009). Urban Concentration and Economic Growth:checking for specific regional effects. CORE Discussion Paper, 38, 1-43. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w7503
Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Barro, R. J., ve Sala-i-Martin, X. (2004). Economic Growth. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Berke, B., Özcan, B.,ve Dizdarlar, H. I. ( 2014). Döviz Piyasasının Etkinliği: Türkiye için Bir Analiz. Akademik Bakış, 14(4), 621-636. Retrieved from
Bertinelli, L., ve Black, D. (2004). Urbanization and growth. Journal of Urban Economics, 56(1), 80-96. Retrieved from
Castells, D., ve Royuela, V. (2013). Urban concentration, infrastructures and economic growth. The University of East Anglia , 2-22. Retrieved from
Chen, M., Zhang, H., Liu, W., ve Zhang, W. (2014). The Global Pattern of Urbanization and Economic Growth: Evidence from the Last Three Decades. PLoS ONE 9(8): e103799. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103799.
Cheng, C. (2012). A study of dynamic econometric relationship between urbanization and service industries growth in China. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 6(1), 8-15.

Cohen, B. (2006). Urbanization in developing countries: Current trends,future projections, and key challenges for sustainability. Technology in Society(28), 63-80. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2005.10.005
Chen, M., Zhang, H., Liu, W., ve Zhang, W. (2014). The Global Pattern of Urbanization and Economic Growth: Evidence from the Last Three Decades. PLoS ONE 9(8): e103799. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103799.
Cheng, C. (2012). A study of dynamic econometric relationship between urbanization and service industries growth in China. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 6(1), 8-15.
Farahmand, S., Sameti, M., ve Sasan, S. S. (2010). Does the development level influence the relationship between economic growth and urban concentration?(Evidences from Mediterranean Countries and EU). Journal of Social and Economic Development, 12(2), 101-114. Retrieved from http://gdri.dreem.free.fr/wp-content/b1-2sameti-urbanconcentration.pdf
Gardner, B. L. (2005). Causes of rural economic development. Agricultural Economics, 32(1), 21-41. Doi: 10.1111/j.0169-5150.2004.00012.x
Grozdev, D. (2011). The Changing Dynamics of Urbanization in Developing Countries. Economic Research Center, 1-4. Retrieved from
Harris, N. (1988). Economic development and urbanisation. Habitat International, 12(3), 5-15. doi:10.1016/0197-3975(88)90057-4
Henderson, J. V. (1988). ‘‘Urban Development: Theory, Fact, and Illusion’’. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Henderson, V. (2002). Urbanization in Developing Countries. The World Bank Research Observer, 17(1), 89-112. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3986401
Henderson, V. (2003). The urbanization process and economic growth: The so-what question. Journal of Economic Growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 47-71. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40215937
Hoang, N. T., ve Mcnown, R. F. (2006). Panel Data Unit Roots Tests Using Various Estimation Methods. Department of Economics - University of Colorado at Boulder, 1-28. Retrieved from
Hope, K. R. (1986). Urbanization and economic development in the third world: An overview. Cities, 3(1), 41-57. doi:10.1016/0264-2751(86)90005-3
Hossain, M. S. (2011). Panel estimation for CO2 emissions, energy consumption, economic growth, trade openness and urbanization of newly industrialized countries. 39(11), 6991–6999. Retrieved from
Huang, M., Hu, S., ve Su, X. (2013). Exploring the Relation between the Urbanization and Urban Employment in China Based on Panel Data and Time Series. 2013 Ninth International Conference on Natural Computation (ICNC) 1814-1819. Doi: 10.1109/ICNC.2013.6818278
Hurlin, C., ve Dumitrescu, E. (2012). Testing for Granger Non-causality in Heterogeneous Panels. Economic Modelling,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
Levin, A., Lin, C.-F., & Chu, C.-S. J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data:asymptotic and "nite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics , 108, 1-24. Retrieved from
Lewis, B. D. (2014). Urbanization and Economic Growth in Indonesia:Good News, Bad News and (Possible) Local Government Mitigation. Regional Studies, 48(1), 192-2007. Retrieved from
Liddle, B.,ve Messinis, G. (2014). Which comes firstUrbanization or economic growth? Evidence from heterogeneous panel causality tests. Accepted , 1-13. Retrieved from
Lo, D. Y. (2010). Urbanization and Economic Growth:Testing for Causality. Department of Real Estate and Construction The University of Hong Kong, 1-25. Retrieved from http://www.prres.net/papers/Lo_Urbanization_Economic_Growth_Testing_Causality.pdf
Mills, E. S., ve Becker, C. M. (1986). Studies in Indian Urban Development. Oxford: Oxford Üniversity Press.
Mills, E. S., ve Nijkamp, P. (1987). Advances in Urban Economics. Oxford: North-Holland.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Cenap Sancar
KARADENIZ TEKNIK UNIV
Türkiye

Canan Sancar
GÜMÜŞHANE ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Türkiye

Publication Date

July 1, 2017

Submission Date

January 23, 2017

Acceptance Date

-

Published in Issue

Year 2017 Number: 19

DOI

https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.287053

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA65EW75TP

APA

Sancar, C., & Sancar, C. (2017). THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY). Uluslararası İktisadi Ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 19, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.287053

AMA

1.Sancar C, Sancar C. THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY). IJEAS. 2017;(19):1-24. doi:10.18092/ulikidince.287053

Chicago

Sancar, Cenap, and Canan Sancar. 2017. “THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)”. Uluslararası İktisadi Ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, nos. 19: 1-24. https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.287053.

EndNote

Sancar C, Sancar C (July 1, 2017) THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY). Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi 19 1–24.

IEEE

[1]C. Sancar and C. Sancar, “THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)”, IJEAS, no. 19, pp. 1–24, July 2017, doi: 10.18092/ulikidince.287053.

ISNAD

Sancar, Cenap - Sancar, Canan. “THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)”. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi. 19 (July 1, 2017): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.287053.

JAMA

1.Sancar C, Sancar C. THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY). IJEAS. 2017;:1–24.

MLA

Sancar, Cenap, and Canan Sancar. “THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)”. Uluslararası İktisadi Ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, no. 19, July 2017, pp. 1-24, doi:10.18092/ulikidince.287053.

Vancouver

1.Cenap Sancar, Canan Sancar. THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY). IJEAS. 2017 Jul. 1;(19):1-24. doi:10.18092/ulikidince.287053