Geçiş Ülkelerinde Devlet Harcamaları ile Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Kırgızistan ve Tacikistan Örneği

Öz

Sovyetler Birliği dağıldıktan sonra bu birliğe üye olan ülkeler piyasa ekonomisine geçmeye başlamışlardır. Geçişin ilk yıllarında ülkelerin çoğu ekonomik ve siyasi krizlerle karşılaşmışlardır. Her ülke, kendi ekonomik durumunu göz önüne alarak para ve maliye politikası seçmişlerdir. Ekonomik durumları benzer olmasına rağmen, Kırgızistan ve Tacikistan farklı maliye politikasını uygulamaktadırlar. Son yıllarda Kırgızistan genişletici maliye politikası uygularken, Tacikistan daraltıcı maliye politikasını seçmiş bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışmada Kırgızistan ile Tacikistan’da kamu harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki uzun ve kısa dönemli ilişkiler, 2000:1 – 2013:4 dönemine ait çeyrek veriler ve Engle-Granger eşbütünleşme ve Granger nedensellik testleri kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, her iki ülkede de GSYİH ile kamu harcamaları arasında eşbütünleşme ilişkisi vardır. Granger nedensellik testine göre, Kırgızistan’da kamu harcamalarından ekonomik büyümeye doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi mevcuttur. Fakat Tacikistan’da kamu harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme arasında herhangi bir nedensellik ilişkisi bulunmamıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ekonomik Büyüme,Kamu Harcamaları,Engle-Granger Eşbütünleşme Testi,Granger Nedensellik Testi,Daraltıcı Maliye Politikası,Genişletici Maliye Politikası

Relationship between Government Expenditure and Economic Growth in Transition Countries: Case of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan

Öz

After the collapse of Soviet Union the membercountries was accompanied by economic and political crises. Each country has chosen own monetary and fiscal policy considering the economic situation. Even though that their economic situation is similar, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are pursuing opposite fiscal policy. More precisely, Kyrgyzstan in recent years has changed its fiscal policy towards expansionary policy, when Tajikistan is continuing contractionary policy. This paper analyses the long and the short-run causality relationships between government expenditure and economic growth in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan to reveal the results of such fiscal policies on real output, using Engle-Granger Cointegration and Granger Causality Tests.Results show that, over the 2000:1-2013:4 period, there is a long run relationship between GDP and government expenditure in both countries. According to Granger Causality Test it was found anunidirectional causality from government expenditures to economic growth in Kyrgyzstan. But Granger causality test on economy ofTajikistan does not give any causality relations between these variables.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Economic Growth,Government Expenditure,Engle-Granger Cointegration Test,Granger Causality Test,Contractionary Fiscal Policy,Expansionary Fiscal Policy

Kaynakça

1. Aschauer, David Alan (1989). “Is Public Expenditure Productive?”. Journal of Monetary Economics 23: 177-200.
2. Barro, Robert J. (1990). “Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth”. Journal of Political Economy 98: 103-125.
3. Devarajan, Shantayanan et al. (1996). “The Composition of Public Expenditure and Economic Growth”. Journal of Monetary Economics 37: 313-344.
4. Dickey, David A. and Wayne A. Fuller (1981). “Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root”. Econometrica 49 (4): 1057-1072.
5. Engle, Robert F. and Clive W. J. Granger (1987). “Cointegration and Error Correction: Representation,Estimation, and Testing”. Econometrica 55: 251-276.
6. Engle, Robert F. and Byung Sam Yoo (1987). “Forecasting and Testing in Co-Integrated Systems”. Journal of Econometrics 35: 143-159.
7. Granger, Clive W. J. (1969). “Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Methods”. Econometrica 37: 424-438.
8. Granger, Clive W. J. (1980). “Testing for Causality”. Journal of Economic Dynamic and Control 4: 229-252.

9. Grier, Kevin B. and Tullock Gordon (1989). “An Empirical Analysis of Cross-National Economic Growth 1951-1980”. Journal of Monetary Economics 24: 259-276.
10. Holms, James M. and A. Patricia Hutton (1990). “On the Causal Relationship between Government Expenditures and National Income”. Review of Economics and Statistics 72: 87-95.
11. Hsieh, Edward and Lai S. Kon (1994). “Government Spending and Economic Growth: the G-7 Experience”. Applied Economic 26: 535-42.
12. International Monetary Fund (2004). “Kyrgyz Republic Expenditure Review Fiscal Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction”. Report No. 28123-KG.
13. International Monetary Fund (2011). “Staff Report for the 2011 Article IV Consultation and Request for a Three-Year Arrangement under the Extended Credit Facility”. Country Report No. 11/155, June.
14. Islam, Anisul M. and Nazemzadeh Ashgar (2001). “Causal Relationship between Government Size and Economic Development: An Empirical Study of the U. S.”. Southwestern Economic Review 28: 75-88.
15. Landau, Daniel (1983). “Government Expenditure and Economic growth: a Cross-Country Study”. Southern Economic Journal 49: 783-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1058716, (02.03.15).
16. Miller, Stephen M. and Frank S. Russek (1997). “Fiscal Structures and Economic Growth: International Evidence”. Economic Inquiry 35: 603-613.
17. National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic (2010). Annual Report 2009, LLC “Triada Print”, Bishkek.
18. National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic (2011). Annual Report 2010, LLC “Triada Print”, Bishkek.
19. National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic (2013). Annual Report 2012, LLC “Triada Print”, Bishkek.
20. National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic (2014). Annual Report of the National Bank of the Kyrgyz Republic for 2013, LLC “Triada Print”. (available at: http://www.nbkr.kg/DOC/23062014/000000000027435.pdf (08.06.17).
21. Niloy, Bose et al. (2003). “Public Expenditure and Economic Growth: A Disaggregated Analysis for Developing Countries”. The Manchester School 25 (5): 533-556.
22. Phillips, Peter C. B. and Pierre Perron (1988). “Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression”. Biometrika 75: 335-346.
23. Ram, Rati (1986). “Government Size and Economic Growth: A New Framework and Some Evidence from Cross-Section and Time Series”. American Economic Review 76: 191-203.
24. Ramayandi, Arief (2003). “Economic Growth and Government Size in Indonesia: Some Lessons for the Local Authorities”. Working Paper in Economics and Development Studies. No. 200302.
25. Sáez, Marta Pascual and Alvarez-García Santiago (2006). “Government Spending and Economic Growth in the European Union Countries: An Empirical Approach”. Working Paper Series (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=914104, 05.03.15)
26. Seddighi, Hamid R. et al. (2000). Econometrics: A Pratical Approach. London: Routledge.
27. Statistics Committee of Kyrgyz Republic, http://stat.kg/en/statistics/finansy/ 07.06.2017.
28. Taiwo, Muritala (2011). “Government Expenditure and Economic Development: Empirical Evidence from Nigeria”. European Journal of Business and Management 3 (9): 18-28.
29. Tajikistan Statistics Committee, http://www.stat.tj/ru/analytical-tables/real-sector/ (08.06.17).
30. Terasawa, Katsuaki L. and William R. Gates (1998). “Relationships between Government Size and Economic Growth: Japan’s Reforms and Evidence from OECD”. International Public Management Journal 1 (2):195-223.
31. Yamak, Nebiye ve Yakup Küçükkale (1997). “Türkiye’de Kamu Harcamaları Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi”. İktisat- İşletme ve Finans Dergisi 12 (131): 5- 14.
32. Asanov, Turusbek (2004). «Fiskal’naya politika Kyrgyzskoy Respubliki v perekhodnom mire k rynochnoy ekonomike». Vestnik KRSU 4 (2): 6-12.
33. Boimirzoev, Boimirzo (2002). Byudzhetnoye regulirovaniye ekonomiki v usloviyakh perekhoda k rynochnomu khozyaystvu: na materialakh Respubliki Tadzhikistan. PhD thesis. Khudzhand, Nauchnaya biblioteka dissertatsiy i avtoreferatov dissercat (available at: http://www.dissercat.com)
34. Ziyaev, Rustam D. (2011). “ Etapy byudzhetnoy reformy v Tadzhikistane ”. Izvestiya Sankt- Peterburgskogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta 1:101-103.
35. Zoidov, K. H. and Z. K. Zoidov (2012). “Retrospektivnyy analiz i prognozirovaniye tsiklicheskikh resheniy makroekonomicheskoy dinamiki Respubliki Tadzhikistan na osnove ekonometricheskikh metodov”. Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (available at: www.ipr-ras. ru/articles/zoidov12-1-int.pdf (10.05.15)).
36. Secretariat under the Committee Majlisi Namoyandagon Majlisi Oli of Republic of Tajikistan for Economy and Finance. (2014). “Analiz rezul’tatov gosudarstvennogo byudzheta Respubliki Tadzhikistan za 2013 god”. Proyekt
37. ‘Ukrepleniye potentsiala parlamenta Respubliki Tadzhikistan v oblasti gosudarstvennykh finansov’. (available at: http://www.pbo.tj/upload/Analysis/).
38. Tyulyundieva, Nazira (2011). Kontseptsiya upravleniya byudzhetom gosudarstva. Bishkek (available at: www2.hss.de/fileadmin/centralasia/Kirgistan/images/Publikationen/lehrbuch_29.pdf, 10.06.17).
39. Chorshanbiev, Payrav (2010). “Nalogovyye stavki v Tadzhikistane ne takiye vysokiye po sravneniyu s drugimi stranami - Nalogovyy komitet pri pravitel’stve RT”. (available at: http://www.news.tj/ru/news/ , 12.06.2013).