Türkiye’de Yığınlaşma ve Büyüme, 1980-1995

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 1, 1 - 24, 01.01.2020

Alpay Filiztekin

Öz

Bu çalışma imalat endüstrisi panel verisi kullanarak Türkiye’de 1980-1995 döneminde dinamik ölçek dışsallıklarının istihdam büyümesini ne ölçüde etkilediğini inceliyor. Kısa dönemde yerelleşme gösteren ekonomik faaliyetlerin istihdam büyümesini negatif etkilediği ancak gecikmelere izin verince ihtisaslaşma lehine bulgular olduğu bulunuyor. Çalışma yüksek teknoloji endüstriler hariç büyük endüstrilerdeki çeşitlilik lehine herhangi bir işaret bulamıyor. Bu sonuçlar aynı zamanda ileri ve geri bağlantıların da pozitif etkilerine işaret etmektedir. Bunun ötesinde, yüksek yoğunluktaki alanların başlangıçta firmaları çektiği ancak zaman içinde sıkışıklığın firmaları böyle merkezlerden dışarı attığı sonucuna da varılıyor. Son olarak çalışma rekabetin etkisinin sektöre bağlı olarak farklı olduğunu bulgusuna ulaşıyor. Ağır sanayi gibi girdiler için rekabetin çok önemli olduğu endüstrilerin istihdam büyümesini düşürdüğü ancak farklılaşan ürünlere sahip ve yüksek teknoloji endüstrileri gibi sürekli yeniliklerin önemli olduğu endüstrilerde rekabetin büyüme üzerindeki etkisi ise pozitif olarak kendini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yığınlaşma, sanayi yer seçim, ölçek dışsallıkları, Türkiye

Agglomeration and Growth in Turkey, 1980-1995

Öz

This paper examines the extent at which dynamic scale externalities affected employment growth in Turkey during 1980-1995 period, using panel data on manufacturing industry. Localization economies are found to have negative effect on employment growth in the short run but there is evidence in favor of specialization once additional lags are allowed for. The paper finds no evidence in favor of diversity in major industries but for high-tech industry. The results also indicate positive effects of backward- and forward linkages. Moreover, highly dense areas are found to attract firms at the beginning but over time congestion drives firms out of such centers. Finally, the paper reports that the effect of competition is differential depending on the sector. In industries where competition for inputs is crucial, such as heavy industries, it reduces employment growth but in industries that have differentiated products and continuous innovations are important, such as high-tech industries, the effect of competition on growth is positive.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Agglomeration, industry location, scale externalities, Turkey

Kaynakça

• Aricanli, T. and D. Rodrik (1990), The Political Economy of Turkey: Debt, Adjustment and Sustainability, Saint Martin’s Press, New York.
• Baysan, T. and C. Blitzer (1990), “Turkey’s Trade Liberalization in the 1980s and Prospects for Sustainability,” in Aricanli and Rodrik, Eds., The Political Economy of Turkey: Debt, Adjustment and Sustainability, Saint Martin’s Press, New York.
• Black D. and J. V. Henderson (1999), “Urban Evolution in the U.S.A.,” Brown University Working Paper No.: 98-21.
• Combes, P.-Ph. (1997), “Industrial Agglomeration Under Cournot Competition,” Annales d’Economie et Statistique, 45: 161-182.
• Combes, P.-Ph. (1999), “Marshall-Arrow-Romer Externalities and City Growth: A Methodological Note,” CERAS Working paper No. 99-06.
• Combes, P.-Ph. (2000), “Economic Structure and Local Growth: France 1984-1993,” Journal of Urban Economics, 47: 329-355.
• Domowitz, I., G. Hubbard and C. Petersen (1988), “Market Structure and Cyclical Fluctuations in U.S. Manufacturing,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 70: 55-66.
• Ellison, G. and E. Glaeser (1997), “Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach,” Journal of Political Economy, 105: 889-927.
• Glaeser, E., H. Kallal, J. Scheinkman and A. Schleifer (1992), “Growth in Cities,” Journal of Political Economy, 100: 1126-1152.
• Hanson, G. (1998), “Regional Adjustment to Trade Liberalization,” Regional Science and Urban Economics, 28. 419-444.
• Hanson. G. (2000), “Scale economies and the geographic concentration of industry,” NBER Working paper No. 8013.
• Henderson, J. V. (1974), “The Sizes and Types of Cities,” American Economic Review, 64: 640-656.
• Henderson, J. V. (1997), “Externalities and Industrial Development,” Journal of Urban Economics, 42: 449-470.
• Henderson, J. V. (1999), “Marshall’s Scale Economies,” NBER Working paper No. 7358.
• Henderson, J. V., A. Kuncoro and M. Turner, (1995), “Industrial Development in Cities,” Journal of Political Economy, 103: 1067-1090.
• Henderson, J. V., T. Lee and Y. J. Lee, (2001), “Scale Externalities in Korea,” Journal of Urban Economics, 49: 479-504.
• Krugman, P. (1991), “Increasing Returns and Economic Geography,” Journal of Political Economy, 99: 484-499.
• Krugman, P. and A. Venables, (1995), “Globalization and The Inequality of Nations,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110: 857-880.
• Lucas, R. (1988), “On the Mechanics of Economic Development,” Journal of Monetary Economics, 22: 3-42.
• Quigley, J. M. (1998), “Urban Diversity and Economic Growth,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12: 127-138.
• Romer, P. (1986), “Increasing Returns and Long Run Growth,” Journal of Political Economy, 94: 1002-1037.
• Senses, F. (1994), Recent Industrialization Experience of Turkey in A Global Context, Contributions in Economics and Economic History, no. 155. Westport, Conn. and London: Greenwood Press.
• Togan, S. and Balasubramanyam, (1996), The Economy of Turkey Since Liberalization, New York: St. Martin's Press, London: Macmillan Press.