DEVELOPED-NESS DILEMMA: ECONOMIC AND DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENTS IN TURKEY

Öz

The main aim of the paper is to discover if a long term of a ruling political party provides economic development or decreases democratic quality of a country since more than two terms rule of a political party is considered as a tendency from democracy to authoritarianism. This paper analytically compares the long and short term governments in terms of various economic indicators and employs a regression model to estimate the relationships between economic growth and political stability. Time span of the paper starts in 1950 when Turkey changed political party system from single party to multi-party system and ends in 2018. The paper concludes that average GDP difference between the long and short term governments is 75 per cent more on average in longer term governments. Predicted GDP per capita is approximately 65 per cent higher in longer term of ruling political party. It can be eventually argued that more than two terms of ruling party create economic development, even though there has been a transition from democracy to autocracy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Democratization
• Economic Growth
• Long-Short Term Governments
• Developed-ness
• Turkey

KALKINMIŞLIK İKİLEMİ: TÜRKİYE’DE EKONOMİK VE DEMOKRATİK GELİŞME

Öz

Bir siyasi partinin uzun süreli iktidarda kalması (en az iki dönem) demokrasiden otoriterliğe doğru bir eğilim olarak kabul edilebilirken aynı zamanda bir ülkenin ekonomik kalkınmasını sağlayabilmektedir. Bu makale, Türkiye’de 1950-2018 yılları arasında, uzun ve kısa vadeli hükümetleri çeşitli ekonomik göstergeler açısından analitik olarak karşılaştırmakta ve ekonomik büyüme ile siyasi istikrar arasındaki ilişkileri tahmin etmek için bir regresyon modeli kullanmaktadır. Rapor, uzun ve kısa vadeli hükümetler arasındaki ortalama GSYİH farkının, uzun vadeli hükümetlerde ortalama olarak yüzde 75 daha fazla olduğu sonucuna varıyor. İktidardaki siyasi partinin uzun vadede kişi başına tahmini GSYİH'si yaklaşık yüzde 65 daha yüksektir. Demokratik düzeyde bir düşüş olsa da iktidar partisinin ikiden fazla döneminin ekonomik kalkınma yarattığı iddia edilebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Demokratikleşme
• Ekonomik Büyüme
• Kısa-Uzun Dönem Hükümetler
• Kalkınmışlık
• Türkiye

Kaynakça

1. Acemoglu Daron - Johnson Simon - Robinson James A. (2002), “Reversal of Fortune: Geography and Institutions in the Making of the Modern World Income Distribution”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Cilt. 117, Sayı. 4, s. 1231-1294.
2. Arısan, Mehmet (2019), “From ‘Clients’ to ‘Magnates’: The (not so) Curious Case of Islamic Authoritarianism in Turkey”, Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, Cilt. 19, Sayı. 1, s. 11-30.
3. Barro, Robert J. (1991), “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Cilt. 106, Sayı. 2, s. 407-443.
4. Barro, Robert J. (1996), “Democracy and Growth”, Journal of Economic Growth, Cilt. 1, Sayı. 1, s. 1-27.
5. Barro, Robert J. ve Lee, Jong-Wha (2013), “A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950-2010”, Journal of Development Economics, Cilt. 104, s. 184-198.
6. Baum, Matthew A. ve Lake, David A. (2003), “The Political Economy of Growth: Democracy and Human Capital”, American Journal of Political Science, Cilt. 47, Sayı. 2, s. 333-347.
7. Bayraktar, Gonca (2002), “Populism, Culturalism and Political Representation in the Context of An Authoritarian Politics: Lessons Drawn from the History”, Gazi Üniversitesi Iktisadi ve Idari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt. 4, Sayı. 2, s. 25-52.
8. Bobba, Matteo ve Coviello, Decio (2007), “Weak Instruments and Weak Identification, In Estimating the Effects of Education, on Democracy”, Economics Letters, Cilt. 96, Sayı. 3, s. 301-306.

9. Brunello, Giorgio - Fort Margherita - Weber Guglielmo (2009), “Changes in Compulsory Schooling, Education and the Distribution of Wages in Europe”, The Economic Journal, Cilt. 119, Sayı. 536, s. 516-539.
10. Cagaptay, Soner (2017), The New Sultan: Erdogan and the Crisis of Modern Turkey, New York, Bloomsbury Publishing.
11. Carey, John M. (2003), “The Reelection Debate in Latin America”, Latin American Politics and Society, Cilt. 45, Sayı. 1, s. 119-133.
12. Corke, Susan - Finkel Andrew - Kramer David C. - Robbins Carla Anne - Schenkkan Nate (2014). Democracy in Crisis: Corruption, Media, and Power in Turkey (pp. 1-20). Washington: Freedom House.
13. Dag, Rahman (2018), “The Spillover Effect of the Syrian Crisis on the Peace Process in Turkey”, Journal of Asian and African Studies, Cilt. 53, Sayı. 8, s. 1251-1270.
14. De Long, J. Bradford ve Shleifer Andrei (1993), “Princes and Merchants: European City Growth Before the Industrial Revolution”, The Journal of Law and Economics, Cilt. 36, Sayı. 2, s. 671-702.
15. Djankov, Simeon - Glaeseri Edward - La Porta Rafael - Lopez-de-Sılanes Fulorencio - Shleifer Andrei (2003), “The New Comparative Economics”, Journal of Comparative Economics, Cilt. 31, Sayı. 4, s. 595-619.
16. Donno, Daniela (2013), “Elections and Democratization in Authoritarian Regimes”, American Journal of Political Science, Cilt. 57, Sayı. 3, s. 703-716.
17. Elhauge, Einer - John R. Lott Jr. - Manning Richard L. (1997), “How Term Limits Enhance the Expression of Democratic Preferences”, Supreme Court Economic Review, Cilt. 5, s. 59-80.
18. Feenstra, Robert C. - Inklaar Robert - Timmer Marcel P. (2015), “The Next Generation of the Penn World Table”, American Economic Review, Cilt. 105, Sayı. 10, s. 3150-3182.
19. Fulginiti, Lilyan E. (2010), “What Comes First, Agricultural Growth or Democracy?”, Agricultural Economics, Cilt. 41, Sayı. 1, s. 15-24.
20. Gerring, John - Bond Philip - Barndt William T. - Moreno Carola (2005), “Democracy and Economic Growth: A Historical Perspective”, World Politics, Cilt. 57, Sayı. 3, s. 323-364.
21. Glaeser, Edward L. - La Porta Rafael - Lopez-de-Sılanez, Florencio - Shleifer Andrei (2004), “Do Institutions Cause Growth?”, Journal of Economic Growth, Cilt. 9, Sayı. 3, s. 271-303.
22. Glaeser, Edward L. - Ponzetto Giacomo - Shleifer Andrei (2007), “Why Does Democracy Need Education?”, Journal of Economic Growth, Cilt. 12, Sayı. 2, s. 77-99.
23. Helliwell, John F. (1994), “Empirical Linkage Between Democracy and Economic Growth”, British Journal of Political Science, Cilt. 24, s. 225-248.
24. Heper, Metin ve Güney Aylin (1996), “The Military and Democracy in the Third Turkish Republic”, Armed Forces & Society, Cilt. 22, Sayı. 4, s. 619-642.
25. Hernandez-Murillo, Rubbeb ve Christopher J. Martinek (2008), “Which Came First: Democracy or Growth?”, The Regional Economist, Cilt. 16, Sayı. 2, s. 4-6.
26. Huber, Evelyne - Rueschemeyer Dietrich - Stephens John D. (1993), “The Impact of Economic Development on Democracy”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Cilt. 7, Sayı. 3, s. 71-86.
27. Iğsız, Aslı (2014), Brand Turkey and the Gezi Protests: Authoritarianism in Flux, Law and Neoliberalism. In The Making of a Protest Movement in Turkey:# occupygezi, ed. Umut Ozkırımlı, 25-49. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
28. Jackman, Robert W. (1973), “On the Relation of Economic Development to Democratic Performance”, American Journal of Political Science, Cilt. 17, Sayı. 3, s. 611-621.
29. Kalaycioğlu, Ersin (2001), “Turkish Democracy: Patronage Versus Governance”, Turkish Studies, Cilt. 2, Sayı. 1, s. 54-70.
30. Karaveli, Halil (2016), “Erdogan's Journey: Conservatism and Authoritarianism in Turkey”, Foreign Affairs, Cilt. 95, s. 121.
31. Kubicek, Paul (2013), “Democratization and Relations with the EU in the AK Party Period: Is Turkey Really Making Progress?”, Insight Turkey, Cilt. 15, Sayı. 4, s. 41-49.
32. Kurfirst, Robert (1996), “Term-limit Logic: Paradigms and Paradoxes”, Polity, Cilt. 29, Sayı. 1, s. 119-140.
33. Lauth, Hans-Joachim (2015), “Formal and Informal Institutions. In Routledge Handbook of Comparative Political Institutions, 70-83. London: Routledge.
34. Lipset, Seymour Martin (1959), “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy”, American Political Science Review, Cilt. 53, Sayı. 1, s. 69-105.
35. Luo, Zhaotian ve Przeworski Adam (2019) “Why Are the Fastest Growing Countries Autocracies?”, The Journal of Politics, Cilt. 81, Sayı. 2, s. 663-669.
36. Madsen, Jakob B. - Raschky Paul A. - Skali Ahmed (2015), “Does Democracy Drive Income in the World, 1500–2000?”, European Economic Review, Cilt. 78, s. 175-195.
37. Mousseau, Demet Y. (2006), “Democracy, Human Rights and Market Development in Turkey: Are They Related?”, Government and Opposition, Cilt. 41, Sayı. 2, s. 298-326.
38. Önis, Ziya (1992), “Redemocratization and Economic Liberalization in Turkey: The Limits of State Autonomy”, Studies in Comparative International Development, Cilt. 27, Sayı. 2, s. 3-23.
39. Önis, Ziya (2004), “Turgut Özal and His Economic Legacy: Turkish Neo-liberalism in Critical Perspective”, Middle Eastern Studies, Cilt. 40, Sayı. 4, s. 113-134.
40. Önis, Ziya (2009), “Conservative Globalism at the Crossroads: The Justice and Development Party and the Thorny Path to Democratic Consolidation in Turkey”, Mediterranean Politics, Cilt. 14, Sayı. 1, s. 21-40.
41. Paul, Jeremy (2011), “If It Quacks Like A Lame Duck, Can It Lead the Free World: The Case for Relaxing Presidential Term Limits”, Conn. L. Rev. Cilt. 43, s. 1097-1104.
42. Peabody, Buruce G. (2001), “George Washington, Presidential Term Limits, and the Problem of Reluctant Political Leadership”, Presidential Studies Quarterly, Cilt.31, Sayı. 3, s. 439-453.
43. Psacharopoulos, George (1994), “Returns to Investment in Education: A Global Update”, World Development, Cilt. 22, Sayı. 9, s. 1325–1343.
44. Schwarz, Gerhard (1992), “Democracy and Market-oriented Reform: A Love-hate Relationship?”, Economic Education Bulletin, Cilt. 32, Sayı. 5, s. 13-128.
45. Szyliowicz, Joseph S. (1962), “The Political Dynamics of Rural Turkey”, Middle East Journal, Cilt. 16, Sayı. 4, s. 430-442.
46. Tachau, Frank (2000), “Turkish Political Parties and Elections: Half A Century of Multiparty Democracy”, Turkish Studies, Cilt. 1, Sayı. 1, s. 128-148.
47. Tocci, Nathalie (2005), “Europeanization in Turkey: Trigger or Anchor for Reform?”, South European Society and Politics, Cilt. 10, Sayı. 1, s. 73-83.
48. Topak, Özgün E. (2019), “The Authoritarian Surveillant Assemblage: Authoritarian State Surveillance in Turkey”, Security Dialogue, Cilt. 50, Sayı. 5, s. 454-472.
49. Tufekci, Ozgur (2017), “Turkey: A Pivotal Exemplary State”. In Domestic and Regional Uncertainties in the New Turkey, ed. Husrev Tabak, Ozgur Tufekci, and Alessia Chiriatti, 125-141. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
50. Kinik, Hulya, and Tufekci, Ozgur (2018), “Rising Powers and the Dynamics of Conflict and Cooperation Within Eurasia”, In Politics of Conflict and Coopeartion in Eurasia, ed. Ozgur Tufekci, Husrev Tabak, and Rahman Dag, 18-35. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
51. United Nations (2019), “World Population Prospects 2019”, United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, Online Edition. Access Date: 08.19.2019.
52. Wejnert, Barbara (2005), “Diffusion, Development, and Democracy, 1800-1999”, American Sociological Review, Cilt. 70, Sayı. 1, s. 53-81.
53. Zakaria, Fareed (1997), “The rise of illiberal democracy”, Foreign Affairs, Cilt. 76, s. 22.