Borç Diplomasisi Literatürünün Bibliyometrik Analizi: Kamu Maliyesi Perspektifinden Bir Değerlendirme

Öz

Borç diplomasisi literatürünün kapsamlı bir bibliyometrik analizini yürüterek, bu literatürün evrimini ve disiplinlerarası dağılımını kamu maliyesi perspektifinden değerlendiren bu araştırma, özellikle borçlanma maliyetleri, borç sürdürülebilirliği ve kamu borç yönetimi hususlarında kamu maliyesi perspektiflerini entegre ederek bu boşluğu doldurmayı amaçlamaktadır. Web of Science veri tabanının bibliyometrik analizinden yararlanan çalışma; araştırma alanını haritalandırmakta, temel eğilimleri, etkili yazarları ve iş birliği ağlarını tanımlamaktadır. Bulgular, borç diplomasisi araştırmalarında önemli bir genişleme olduğunu; ancak mali olmayan disiplinlerde belirgin bir yoğunlaşma yaşandığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu analiz; diplomatik ilişkilerin, siyasi güvenilirliğin ve uluslararası iş birliğinin borçlanma koşullarını önemli ölçüde etkilediği devlet borçlanmasının mali boyutunu anlamanın kritik önemini vurgulamaktadır. Çalışma, literatüre bir kamu maliyesi perspektifi dahil edilmesi ihtiyacının altını çizmekte ve gelecekteki araştırmaların, borç diplomasisinin stratejik etkileşimlerini ve mali çıktılarını açıklamak için oyun teorik modellemeyi benimsemesi gerektiğini önermektedir. Böyle bir yaklaşım, borç diplomasisinin uluslararası finansal sistem içindeki rolüne dair daha kapsamlı ve mekanistik bir anlayışa katkı sağlayacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Borç diplomasisi
• kamu maliyesi
• kamu borç yönetimi
• bibliyometrik analiz
• oyun teorik yaklaşım

Bibliometric Analysis of the Debt Diplomacy Literature: An Evaluation from a Public Finance Perspective

Öz

Conducting a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of the debt diplomacy literature, this research evaluates its evolution and interdisciplinary distribution from a public finance perspective. The study aims to fill the identified gap by integrating public finance viewpoints, particularly regarding borrowing costs, debt sustainability, and public debt management. Utilizing a bibliometric analysis of the Web of Science database, the study maps the research landscape and identifies key trends, influential authors, and collaborative networks. The findings reveal a significant expansion in debt diplomacy research; however, they also point to a distinct concentration in non-fiscal disciplines. This analysis underscores the critical importance of understanding the fiscal dimension of sovereign borrowing, where diplomatic relations, political credibility, and international cooperation significantly influence borrowing conditions. The study highlights the necessity of incorporating a public finance perspective into the literature and suggests that future research should adopt game-theoretic modeling to explain the strategic interactions and fiscal outcomes of debt diplomacy. Such an approach will contribute to a more comprehensive and mechanistic understanding of the role of debt diplomacy within the international financial system.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Debt diplomacy
• public finance
• sovereign debt
• bibliometric analysis
• game-theoretic approach

Kaynakça

1. Akdemir, T., & Yeşilyurt, Ş. (2018). Devlet borçlarının kökeni, gelişimi ve iktisadi temelleri. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(16), 279–306.
2. Alden, C. (2020). Understanding debt and diplomacy: China,'debt traps' and development in the Global South. LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110974, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
3. Atkeson, A. (1991). International lending with moral hazard and risk of repudiation. Econometrica, 59(4), 1069–1089.
4. Brautigam, D. (2009). The dragon’s gift: The real story of China in Africa. Oxford University Press.
5. Brautigam, D. (2020). A critical look at Chinese ‘debt-trap diplomacy’: the rise of a meme. Area Development and Policy, 5(1), 1-14.
6. Bulow, J., & Rogoff, K. (1989). A constant recontracting model of sovereign debt. Journal of Political Economy, 97(1), 155–178.
7. Bunte, J. B., & Kinne, B. J. (2021). The politics of government-to-government loans: Competition and power in bilateral lending networks. https://fbf.eui.eu/wp-content/uploads/ 2022/06/ BUNTE _loans_influence.pdf
8. Carmody, P. (2020). Development theory and practice in a changing world. Routledge.

9. Draksaitea, A., Snieskaa, V., Valodkienea, G., & Daunoriene, A. (2015). Selection of government debt evaluation methods based on the concept of sustainability of the debt. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 213, 474–480.
10. Eaton, J., & Gersovitz, M. (1981). Debt with potential repudiation: Theoretical and empirical analysis. Review of Economic Studies, 48(2), 289–309.
11. Garrett, G. (2010). G2 in G20: China, the United States and the world after the global financial crisis. Global Policy, 1(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2009.00014.x
12. Gelpern, A., Horn, S., Morris, S., Parks, B., & Trebesch, C. (2021). How China Lends: A Rare Look into 100 Debt Contracts with Foreign Governments. Peterson Institute for International Economics, Kiel Institute for the World Economy, Center for Global Development, and AidData at William & Mary.
13. Gennotte, G., Kharas, H. J., & Sayheed, S. (1987). A valuation model for developing country debt with applications to Mexico. World Bank Economic Review, 1(3), 467–486.
14. Himmer, M., & Rod, Z. (2022). Chinese debt trap diplomacy: Reality or myth? Journal of the Indian Ocean Region, 18(3), 250–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2023.2195280
15. Horn, S., Reinhart, C. M., & Trebesch, C. (2021). China’s overseas lending. Journal of International Economics, 133, 103539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2021.103539
16. Hurley, J., Morris, S., & Portelance, G. (2018). Examining the debt ımplications of the belt and road ınitiative from a policy perspective.” CGD policy paper. Washington, DC: Center for Global Development. https://www.cgdev.org/publication/examining-debt-implications-belt-and-roadinitiative- policy-perspect Kapur, D., & Mistry, J. (2019). The global governance of debt. Oxford University Press.
17. Lai, D., Lin, W., & Wu, W. (2024). The perils of Chinese foreign aid. Routledge.
18. Lobont, O.-R., Țăran, A. M., & Costea, F. (2020). E-government research still matter? A bibliometric analysis. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati: Economics & Applied Informatics, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.35219/eai15840409106
19. Ma, Z., Stice, D., Vasvari, F. P., & Zhang, Y. (2024). Bilateral political relationships and cross-border lending. HKU Jockey Club Enterprise Sustainability Global Research Institute Paper No. 2024/001
20. Malik, A., Parks, B., Russell, B., Lin, J. J., Walsh, K., Solomon, K., Zhang, S., Elston, T., & Goodman, S. (2021). Banking on the belt and road: Insights from a new dataset of 13,427 Chinese development projects.
21. Manuputty, T., & Nugroho, A. Y. (2020). Analysis of lobbying and negotiations of Sri Lanka with China regarding the acquisition of Hambantota Port in 2017. Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 2(8), 1797–1812.
22. Mitchener, K. J., & Weidenmier, M. (2005). Empire, public goods, and the Roosevelt corollary. Journal of Economic History, 65(3), 658–692. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022050705000240
23. Mitchener, K. J., & Weidenmier, M. D. (2010). Supersanctions and sovereign debt repayment. Journal of International Money and Finance, 29(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.jimonfin. 2008.12.011
24. Opuş, S. (2002). Dış borçlanmanın sınırı ve Türkiye. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (19), 183–206.
25. Önden, A. (2023). Artificial intelligence in management information system: Bibliographical review. In International research in social, human and administrative sciences XVIII (pp. 41–56). Eğitim Yayınevi.
26. Reinhart, C. M., & Trebesch, C. (2016). Sovereign debt relief and its aftermath. Journal of the European Economic Association, 14(1), 215–251. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeea.12148
27. Rubinstein, A. (1982). Perfect equilibrium in a bargaining model. Econometrica, 50(1), 97–109.
28. Sachs, J. D. (1984). Theoretical issues in international borrowing. Princeton University.
29. Singh, A. (2020). The myth of “debt-trap diplomacy” and realities of Chinese development finance. Third World Quarterly, 42(2), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2020.1807318
30. Sluga, G. (2017). Who hold the balance of the world? American Historical Review, 122(5), 1403–1430. https://doi.org/10.1093/ahr/122.5.1403
31. Spence, M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374.
32. Wignaraja, G., & Sirimane, S. (2021). Is China’s belt and road initiative a debt trap? sian Development Bank Institute.
33. Xuanli Liao, J. (2021). China’s energy diplomacy towards Central Asia and the implications on its belt and road initiative. Pacific Review, 34(3), 490–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748. 2019.1705882
34. Yurdadoğ, V., Akça, H., & Albayrak, M. (2021). 2000 sonrası dönemde Türkiye’nin iç ve dış borç yapısının analizi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 30(3), 88–101.
35. Zajontz, T. (2022). Debt, distress, dispossession. Review of African Political Economy, 49(171), 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/03056244.2021.1950669
36. Zeitz, A. O., & Mosley, L. (2023). Terms and conditions: The pricing and politics of bilateral sovereign lending [Working paper]. https://static1.squarespace.com/ static/6481deeed 0153f18f9 Zecde16/t/655798eddfe5660aa0302b2b/1700239597304/mosley_paper.pdf