1995-2000 Dönemi İç Göç Hareketlerinde Emeğin Varış Yerlerindeki Çekim Türlerine Göre Mukayeseli Duyarlılık Düzeyleri

Öz

Bu çalışma, göçmenlerin varış yerlerindeki çekici iktisadi faktörlere duyarlılık düzeylerini konu almıştır. Uygulamada kullanılan veriler TÜİK’ ten alınmış olup uygulama yöntemi Atkinson bölgesel eşitsizlik endeksine dayanmaktadır. Uygulama sonuçları, göçmenlerin varış yerlerindeki devlet hizmetlerine karşı en yüksek duyarlılıkta olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu sonuç ise Türkiye’deki “sadaka ekonomisi” düzeyi için istatistiksel kanıt olarak açıklayıcı gösterge olarak yorumlanabilir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kalkınma iktisadı, sosyal politika, iktisadi demografi, beşeri coğrafya, istatistik

The Internal Mıgratıon Process From 1995 To 2000, The Level Of Comparatıve Senstıvıty To The Kınds Of Economıc Gravıty In The Destınatıons For Turkısh Labor Force

Öz

This paper looks at level of sensitivity for migrants to pull economic factors in the destination provinces. Using data from TUIK and applying method is based on Atkinson regional inequality index. It is shown that the level of sensitivity for immigrants to public service in the destination provinces is the highest. Therefore, it can be explained that this result is a statistical evidence for the level of charity economics in Turkey

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Development economics, social politics, demography of economics, human geography, statistics

Kaynakça

1. Atkinson, A. B. (1970), “On the Measurement of Inequality”, Journal of Economic Theory, 2: 244–263.
2. Chakravarty, S. (1996), “A Measurement of Spatial Disparity: The Case of Income Inequality”, Urban Studies, 33 (9): 1671–1686.
3. Çiftçi M. (2008), “Ülkeler arası küresel eşitsizlikte uzun dönemli bozulma (1950–1998)”. Journal of International Social Research: 1 (5):156-79.
4. Fedorov, L. (2002), “Regional Inequality and Regional Polarization in Russia, 1990–99”, World Development, 30 (3): 443–456.
5. García, I. ve Molina, J. A. (2001), “The Effects of Region on the Welfare and Monetary Income of Spanish Families”, Urban Studies, 38 (13): 2415-2424.
6. Harvey, J. (2005), “A note on the ‘natural rate of subjective inequality’hypothesis and the approximate relationship between the Gini coefficient and the Atkinson index”, Journal of Public Economics, 89: 1021–1025.
7. Moran, T. P. (2003), “On the Theoretical and Methodological Context of Cross-National Inequality Data”, International Sociology, 18 (2): 351-378.
8. Pedersen, A. W. (2004), “Measurement Inequality as Relative Deprivation: A Sociological Approach to Inequality”, Acta Sociologica, 47: 31-49.

9. Ravallion, M. (2001), Growth, Inequality and Poverty: Looking Beyond the Averages, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper. 2558, Washington, DC.
10. Regidor, E.; Calle, M. E.; Navarro, P. ve Dominguez, V. (2003), “Trends in the Association between Average Income, Poverty and Income Inequality and Life Expectancy in Spain”, Social Science & Medicine, 56: 961–971.
11. Salas, R. (1997), “Welfare-consistent inequality indices in changing populations: The marginal population replication axiom A note”, Journal of Public Economics, 67: 145–150.
12. Sen, A. K. (1973), On Economic Inequality, Oxford University Press, Oxford, etc. Spatz, J. (2006), Poverty and Inequality in the Era of Structural Reforms: The Case of Bolivia, Springer Verlag, Berlin.