Research-Development Expenditures and Economic Growth Relationship: An Applicatıon for Economies Rise Markets

Yıl 2019, , 255 - 263, 20.03.2019

Meltem Kılıç , Ferhat İspiroğlu

https://doi.org/10.18506/anemon.429901

Cited By: 3

Öz

Innovations in science and technology are one of the driving forces of
economic development and growth. Investments in R & D activities are
effective in increasing the level of competition as well as economic growth. It
also draws attention to the impact of R & D on economic growth in internal
growth models. It is important to adopt a continuous understanding of
innovation in achieving sustainable economic growth. The development of
innovative production systems is key to ensuring efficiency, economic growth
and prosperity. In this context, the relationship between R & D and
economic growth in the 15 countries that the IMF described as the rising market
economy of the IMF was tested by using panel data analysis between 1996-2015.
As a result of the analysis, a positive relationship was found between the expenditures
made on R & D and economic growth in 15 emerging market economies, and it
was also learned that there was a mutual bi-directional causality between the
two variables.

Anahtar Kelimeler

R&D, Economic Growth, Panel Data Analysis

Araştırma-Geliştirme Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Yükselen Piyasalar Ekonomileri İçin Bir Uygulama

Öz

Bilim
ve teknolojik alanlarında ortaya çıkan yenilikler ekonomik gelişme ve büyümenin
itici güçlerinden biridir. Ar-Ge faaliyetlerine yapılan yatırımlar ekonomik
büyümenin yanında rekabet düzeyinin de artmasında etkilidir. İçsel büyüme
modellerinde de Ar-Ge’nin ekonomik büyüme üzerinde olan etkisine dikkat
çekilmektedir. Sürdürülebilir bir ekonomik büyümenin gerçekleştirilebilmesinde
sürekli yenilik anlayışının benimsenmesi önemlidir. Yenilikçi üretim
sistemlerinin geliştirilmesi verimlilik, ekonomik büyüme ve refah artışının
sağlanmasında anahtar görevi üstlenmektedir. Bu kapsamda, çalışmada IMF’nin
yükselen piyasa ekonomisi olarak nitelendirdiği 15 ülkede Ar-Ge ve ekonomik
büyüme arasındaki ilişki 1996-2015 yılları arası için panel veri analizi
kullanılarak test edilmiştir. Analiz sonucunda, 15 yükselen piyasa ekonomisinde
Ar-Ge’ye yapılan harcamalarla ekonomik büyüme arasında pozitif yönlü bir ilişki
bulunmuş, ayrıca iki değişken arasında karşılıklı olarak çift yönlü nedensellik
olduğu bilgisine ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ar-Ge, Ekonomik Büyüme, Panel Veri Analizi

Kaynakça

• Aghion, P., & Howitt, P. (1992). A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction, Econometrica, 60(2), 323-351.
• Akıncı, M., & Sevinç, H. (2013). Ar-Ge Harcamaları ile Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki: 1990-2011 Türkiye Örneği, Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(27), 7-17.
• Altın, O., & Kaya, A. A. (2009). Türkiye’de Ar-Ge Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki Nedensellik İlişkinin Analizi, Ege Akademik Bakış, 9(1), 251-259.
• Altıntaş, H., & Mercan, M. (2015). Ar-Ge Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: OECD Ülkeleri Üzerine Yatay Kesit Bağımlılığı Altında Panel Eşbütünleşme Analizi, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 70(2), 345-376.
• Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D Spillovers And The Geography Of İnnovation And Production, American Economic Review, 86, 630-640.
• Baltagi, B. H. (2013). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, Fifth Edition, Wiley.
• Barro, R. J. (1990). Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 103-125.
• Bassanini, A., & Scarpetta, S. (2001). The Dricing Forces of Economic Growth: Panel Data Evidence For The OECD Countries, OECD Economic Studies, No:33.
• Bor, Y. J., Chuang, Y., Lai, W., & Yang, C. (2010). A Dynamic General Equilibrium Model for Public R&D Investment in Taiwan, Economic Modelling, 27(1), 171‐183
• Bozkurt, C. (2015). R&D Expenditures and Economic Growtj Relationship in Turkey, International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5(1), 188-198.
• Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Application to Model Specifications in Ecocometrics, Review of Economic Studies, 47, 239-25.
• Chang, Y. (2004). Bootstrap Unit Root Tests in Panels with Cross-sectional Dependency, Journal of Econometrics, 120, 263-293.
• Coe, D. T., & Helpman, E. (1995). International R&D Spillovers, European Economic Review, 39 (5), 859‐887.
• Dominique, G., & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2001). R&D and Productivity Growth: Panel Data Analysis of 16 OECD Countries, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, 2001/3, OECD Publishing.
• Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, Procedures and Microeconomic Effects of Innovestion, Journal of Economie Literature, 26, 1120-1171.
• Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger Non-Causality in Heterogeneous Panels, Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
• Genç, M. C., & Atasoy, Y. (2010). Ar-Ge Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Panel Veri Analizi, Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 5(2), 27-34.
• Goel, R. K., & James, E. P. & Ram, R. (2008). R&D Expenditures and U.S. Economic Growth: A Disaggregated Approach, Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(2), 237-250.
• Göçer, İ. (2013). Ar-Ge Harcamalarının Yüksek Teknolojili Ürün İhracatı, Dış ticaret Dengesi ve Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerindeki Etkileri, Maliye Dergisi, 165, 165-240.
• Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1991). Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
• Gülmez, A., & Yardımcıoğlu, F. (2012). OECD Ülkelerinde Ar-Ge Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Panel Nedensellik Analizi (1990-2010), Maliye Dergisi, 163, ss:335-353.
• Güloğlu, B., & Tekin, R. B. (2012). A Panel Causality Analysis of Relationship Among Research and Development, Innovation and Economic Growth in high-Income OECD Countries, Eurasian Economic Review, 2(1), 32-27.
• Gümüş, E., & Celikay, F. (2015). R&D Expenditure and Economic Growth: New Empirical Evidence, The Journal of Applied Economic Research, 9(3), 205-217.
• IMF, (2017). International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/02/weodata/index.aspx, (03.03.2018).
• Korkmaz, S. (2010). Türkiye’de Ar-Ge Yatırımları ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin VAR Modeli ile Analizi, Journal of Yaşar Univesity, 20(5), 3320-3330.
• Lichtenberg, F. R. (1992). R&D Investment and International Productivity Differences, NBER Working Paper Series, No:4161, 1-39.
• Lucas, R. E. (1988). On The Mechanics Of Economic Development” Journal of Monetary Economics, North-Holland, 22, 3-42.
• Melemen, M. (2007). Çin: Uluslararası Ticarette Yükselen Pazar Ekonomisi, Türkmen Kitabevi, İstanbul.
• Miller, R. R. (1998). Selling to Newly Emerging Markets, Greenwood Publishing Group.
• Nazlıoğlu, Ş. (2010). Makro İktisat Politikalarının Tarım Sektörü Üzerindeki Etkileri: Gelişmiş ve Gelişmekte Olan Ülkeler İçin bir Karşılaştırma, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Kayseri.
• OECD, (1993). The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities: Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development, https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/9789264063525-en.pdf, (07.03.2018).
• Omoregia, U. (2015). A Developing Country’s Absorprite Capacity: The Ling Between FDI and Economic Growth in Nigeria, Open Access Library Journal, 2, 1-7.
• Osorio, B. B., & Pose, A. R. (2004). From R&D to Innovation and Economic Growth in the EU, Growth and Change, 35(4), 434-455.
• Özcan, B., & Arı, A. (2014). Araştırma-Geliştirme Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Panel Veri Analizi, Maliye Dergisi, 16, 39-55.
• Pesaran, H. M. (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels, University of Cambridge Working Paper, No: 0435.
• Pesaran, H. M., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels, Journal of Econometrics, 142, 50-93.
• Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and Inference in Large Heterogeneous Panels with a Multifactor Error Structure, Econometrica, 74(4), 967-1012.
• Pesaran, H. M. (2007). A Simple Panel UnitRoot Test in the Presence of Cross Section Dependence, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
• Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous Technological Change, Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71-102.
• Romer, P. M. (1986), “Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth”, The Journal of Political Economy, 94 (5), ss. 1002-1037
• Sadraoui, T., Ali, T. B., & Deguachi, B. (2014). Economic Growth and International R&D Cooperation: A Panel Granger Causality Analysis, International Journal of Econometrics and Financial Management, 2(1), 7-21.
• Sağlam, Y., Egeli, H. A., & Egeli, P. (2017). Gelişmiş ve Gelişmekte Olan Ülkelerde Ar&Ge Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki: Panel Veri Analizi”, Sosyoekonomi Dergisi, 25(31), 149-165.
• Samimi, A. J., & Alerasoul, S. M. (2009). R&D and Economic Growth: New Evidence From Some Developing Countries, Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3(4), 3464-3469.
• Serén, F., & Jesus, M. (1999). Aggregate R&D Expenditure and Endogenous Economic Growth, http://pareto.uab.es/wp/1999/43699.pdf, (16.04.2018).
• Trajtenberg, M. (1990). Economic Analysis of Product Innovation, The Case of CT Scanners, Harvard Economic Studies.
• Ülkü, H. (2004). R&D, Innovation and Economic Growth: An Empirical Analysis, IMF Working Paper, http://www.imf.org/~/media/Websites/IMF/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2004/_wp04185.ashx, (15.03.2018).
• Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709-748.
• Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel Cointegration Tests of the Fisher Effect, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23, 193-233.
• Yanyun, Z., & Mingqian, Z. (2004). R& D and Economic Growth: Panel Data Analysis in ASEAN+3 Countries, A Joint Conference of AKES, RCIE, and KDI: Korea and the World Economy, III, July 3-4, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Korea, https://faculty.washington.edu/karyiu/confer/seoul04/papers/zhao.pdf, (15.03.2018).
• Yu-Ming, W., Li, Z., & Jian-Xia, L. (2007). Co-integration and Causality Between R&D Expenditure and Economic Growth in China:1953-2004, International Conference on Public Administration, 76, 869-876