Fiscal Sustainability of Provincial Municipalities in Turkey: Dynamic Panel Data Analysis

Öz

Fiscal sustainability is an important issue for ensuring the public fiscal balance (in terms of budgetary and borrowing concerns) and as well as for the provision of local services, financing of expenditures, and a balanced fiscal structure for the municipalities. Local fiscal sustainability (ensuring the fiscal balance of municipalities) is a subject that needs to be examined due to its role in affecting the local public fiscal balance as well as the quantity and quality of the local services. This study examines the local fiscal sustainability in the 81 provincial municipalities of Turkey using dynamic panel data techniques during the period of 2006-2019. In the study, in order to test the long-term fiscal sustainability, the panel cointegration test based on the error correction model developed by Westerlund (2007) is employed. In addition, Emirmahmutoglu and Kose (2011) panel causality test is applied to investigate the causal relationship between public revenues and expenditures. According to the panel cointegration test results, the fiscal structure of municipalities in Turkey are unsustainable. The causality test results show that the causal relationship between public revenues and public expenditures is two-way, but the results differ across the provincial municipalities. In order to ensure the fiscal balance of municipalities, it is necessary to improve the structure and diversity of financial resources, to solve the resource problem, -and to provide an effective resource management and financial discipline.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Local Fiscal Sustainability
• Turkey
• Panel Data Analysis

Türkiye’deki İl Belediyelerinin Mali Sürdürülebilirliği: Dinamik Panel Veri Analizi

Öz

Mali sürdürülebilirlik, hem kamu mali dengesinin (bütçe ve borçlanma) sağlanması hem de belediyeler bakımından yerel hizmetlerin sunumu, harcamaların finansmanı ve dengeli bir mali yapı açısından oldukça önemlidir. Yerel mali sürdürülebilirlik (belediyelerin mali dengelerini sağlamaları), yerel kamu mali dengesinin sağlanmasının yanı sıra yerel hizmetlerin niceliğini ve niteliğini de etkilemesi bakımından incelenmesi gereken bir konudur. Bu çalışma, Türkiye’deki 81 il belediyesinin mali sürdürülebilirliğini 2006-2019 dönemi için dinamik panel veri teknikleri kullanarak incelemektedir. Çalışmada uzun dönemde mali sürdürülebilirliğin test edilmesi amacıyla Westerlund (2007) tarafından geliştirilen hata düzeltme modeline dayalı panel eşbütünleşme testi kullanılmaktadır. Ayrıca kamu gelirleri ve harcamaları arasındaki nedensel ilişkinin araştırılması için Emirmahmutoglu ve Kose (2011) panel nedensellik testi uygulanmıştır. Eşbütünleşme testi sonuçlarına göre, Türkiye’deki 81 il belediyesinin mali yapısı sürdürülemezdir. Nedensellik testi sonuçları ise, kamu gelirleri ile kamu harcamaları arasındaki ilişkinin iki yönlü olduğunu, ancak sonuçların iller arasında değiştiğini göstermektedir. Belediyelerin mali dengesini sağlamak için mali kaynakların yapısının ve çeşitliliğinin iyileştirilmesi, kaynak sorununun çözülmesi ve etkin bir kaynak yönetimi ve mali disiplinin sağlanması gerekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yerel Mali Sürdürülebilirlik
• Türkiye
• Panel Veri Analizi

Kaynakça

1. Adedeji, O. S. and Thornton, J. (2010). Fiscal sustainability in a panel of Asian countries. Applied Economics Letters, 17(7), 711-715. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850802297871
2. Afonso, A. (2005). Fiscal sustainability: The unpleasant European case. FinanzArchiv/Public Finance Analysis, 19-44. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
3. Afonso, A. and Rault, C. (2010). What do we really know about fiscal sustainability in the EU? A panel data diagnostic. Review of World Economics, 145(4), 731-755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-009-0034-1
4. Ahmed, S. and Rogers, J. H. (1995). Government budget deficits and trade deficits: Are present value constraints satisfied in long-term data? Journal of Monetary Economics, 36(2), 351-374. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(95)01215-X
5. Akduğan, U. ve Agun, B. H. (2018). Türkiye’de belediyelerin mali sürdürülebilirliği: birincil denge yaklaşımı. Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(2), 207-222. doi:10.26468/trakyasobed.452043
6. Akduğan, U. ve Doğan, S. (2020). Türkiye’de kamu borcu ve bütçe açığının sürdürülebilirliği: sınır testi yaklaşımı. Finansal Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi, 12(22), 15-30. doi:10.14784/marufacd.688369
7. Akkoç, U. ve Akkoç, G. K. (2017). Türkiye’de mali sürdürülebilirliğinin kantil eşbütünleşme yöntemiyle analizi. Maliye Dergisi, 172, 15-29. Erişim adresi: https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/
8. Akkuş, Ö. ve Durmaz, A. (2019). Türkiye’de bütçe açığının sürdürülebilirliği: saklı eşbütünleşme ilişkisi. Maliye Dergisi, 176, 52-71. Erişim adresi: https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/

9. Akram, V. and Rath, B. N. (2019). Fiscal sustainability in India: Evidence from Markov switching and threshold regression models. Studies in Economics and Finance. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEF-09-2018-0281
10. Akram, V. and Rath, B. N. (2020). What do we know about fiscal sustainability across Indian states? Economic Modelling, 87, 307-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2019.08.005
11. Al, İ. (2019). Mali sürdürülebilirlik analizi: Türkiye üzerine bir uygulama. İşletme ve İktisat Çalışmaları Dergisi, 7(2), 67-84. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iicder
12. Altun, N. (2017). Türkiye’de bütçe açıklarının sürdürülebilirliğinin ampirik olarak analizi: 1950-2015 dönemi. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 13(1), 13-22. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/esad/
13. Arestis, P., Cipollini, A. and Fattouh, B. (2004). Threshold effects in the U.S. budget deficit. Economic Inquiry, 42(2), 214-222. https://doi.org/10.1093/ei/cbh055
14. Arghyrou, M. G. and Luintel, K. B. (2007). Government solvency: revisiting some EMU countries. Journal of Macroeconomics, 29(2), 387-410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2005.09.001
15. Arıkboğa, Ü. (2019). Belediyelerin mali sorunları. Türkiye Belediyeler Birliği Dergisi, 851-852, 20-25. Erişim adresi: https://www.tbb.gov.tr/
16. Arısoy, İ. ve Ünlükaplan, İ. (2009). Türkiye’de mali açıkların sürdürülebilirliği ile kamu gelirleri ve harcamaları ilişkisinin analizi. Maliye Dergisi, 159, 444-462. Erişim adresi: https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/
17. Aslan, A. (2009). Bütçe açığı sürdürülebilirliğinin dinamik analizi: Türkiye örneği. Maliye Dergisi, 157, 227-234. Erişim adresi: https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/
18. Azgün, S. ve Taşdemir, M. (2010). Bütçe açıklarının sürdürülebilirliği: Türkiye’nin zamanlararası borçlanma kısıtının testi (1980-2004). Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 20 (2), 35-45. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/atauniiibd
19. Baglioni, A. and Cherubini, U. (1993). Intertemporal budget constraint and public debt sustainability: the case of Italy. Applied Economics, 25(2), 275-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849300000033
20. Baharumshah, A. Z. and Lau, E. (2007). Regime changes and the sustainability of fiscal imbalance in east Asian countries. Economic Modelling, 24(6), 878-894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2007.03.002
21. Baharumshah, A. Z., Soon, S-V. and Lau, E. (2017). Fiscal sustainability in an emerging market economy: when does public debt turn bad? Journal of Policy Modelling, 39(1), 99-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2016.11.002
22. Bai, J. and Ng, S. (2010). Panel unit root tests with cross-section dependence: a further investigation. Econometric Theory, 26(4), 1088-1114. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466609990478
23. Bajo-Rubio, O., Diaz-Roldan, C. and Esteve, V. (2006). Is the budget deficit sustainable when fiscal policy is non-linear? The case of Spain. Journal of Macroeconomics, 28(3), 596-608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2004.08.002
24. Bilginoğlu, M. A. ve Bolat, S. (2013). Avrupa Birliği’nde maliye politikalarının sürdürülebilirliği: durağan olmayan panel veri’den kanıt. Maliye Dergisi, 164, 27-46. Erişim adresi: https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/
25. Bohn, H. (1998). The behavior of U.S. public debt and deficits. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(3), 949-963. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/
26. Bolat, S., Emirmahmutoglu, F. and Belke, M. (2014). The dynamic linkages of budget deficits and current account deficits nexus in EU countries: bootstrap panel Granger causality test. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2), 16-26. Retrieved from https://www.ebsco.com/
27. Bröthaler, J., Getzner, M. and Haber, G. (2015). Sustainability of local government debt: a case study of Austrian Municipalities. Empirica, 42, 521-546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10663-014-9261-3
28. Burnside, C. (2005). Theoretical prerequisites for fiscal sustainability analysis. In C. Burnside (Ed.), Fiscal sustainability in theory and practice: a handbook (pp. 11-33). Washington, DC: The World Bank Publication.
29. Burret, H. T., Feld, L. P. and Köhler, E. A. (2017). Fiscal sustainability of the German lander: time series evidence. FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, 73(1), 103-132. doi:10.1628/001522117X14864674910029
30. Caporale, G. M. (1995). Bubble finance and debt sustainability: A test of the government’s intertemporal budget constraint. Applied Economics, 27(12), 1135-1143. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849500000096
31. Ceylan, R. (2010). Türkiye’de mali sürdürülebilirlik göstergeleri istikrarlı mı? Maliye Dergisi, 158, 388-397. Erişim adresi: https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/
32. Chapman, J. I. (2008). State and local fiscal sustainability: The challenges. Public Administration Review, 68(1), 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00983.x
33. Chen, S.W. (2014). Testing for fiscal sustainability: new evidence from the G-7 and some European countries. Economic Modelling, 37, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.10.024
34. Cipollini, A. (2001). Testing for government intertemporal solvency: A smooth transition error correction model approach. The Manchaster School, 69(6), 643-655. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9957.00275
35. Corsetti, G. and Roubini, N. (1991). Fiscal deficits, public debt, and government solvency: Evidence from OECD countries. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 5(4), 354-380. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-1583(91)90004-A
36. Dağ, M., Kızılkaya, O. ve Kızılkaya, F. (2018). Türkiye’de büyükşehir belediyelerinin bütçe sürdürülebilirliği üzerine bir uygulama. Finans Politik & Ekonomik Yorumlar, 55(635), 65-72. Erişim adresi: http://www.ekonomikyorumlar.com.tr
37. Davig, T. (2005). Periodically expanding discounted debt: A threat to fiscal policy sustainability? Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20(7), 829-840. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.807
38. Dickey, D. A. and Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica, 49(4), 1057-1072. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912517
39. Dökmen, G. ve Boz, A. (2017). Türkiye’de mali sürdürülebilirliğe teorik bir yaklaşım: mali tepki fonksiyonu. AİBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 17(4), 85-106. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/basbed/
40. Dumitrescu, E. I. and Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
41. Ehrhart, C. and Llorca, M. (2008). The sustainability of fiscal policy: Evidence from a panel of six South-Mediterranean countries. Applied Economics Letters, 15(10), 797-803. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850600749156
42. Emirkadı, Ö. (2017). Türkiye ekonomisinde mali sürdürülebilirlik: teori ve uygulama. Uludağ Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 36(2), 39-56. Erişim adresi: https://www.ebsco.com/
43. Emirmahmutoglu, F. and Kose, N. (2011). Testing for Granger causality in heterogeneous mixed panels. Economic Modelling, 28, 870-876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2010.10.018
44. Engle, R. F. and Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251-276. doi:10.2307/1913236
45. Escario, R., Gadea, M. D. and Sabate, M. (2012). Multi cointegration, seigniorage and fiscal sustainability. Spain 1857–2000. Journal of Policy Modelling, 34(2), 270-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2011.09.001
46. Flood, R. P. and Garber, P. M. (1980). Market Fundamentals versus price-level bubbles: the first tests. Journal of Political Economy, 88(4), 745-770. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
47. Göktan, A. (2008). Türkiye’de mali sürdürülebilirlik üzerine ampirik bir çalışma. Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 25(2), 25-445. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/muiibd
48. Göktaş, Ö. (2008). Türkiye ekonomisinde bütçe açığının sürdürülebilirliğinin analizi. Ekonometri ve İstatistik Dergisi, 8, 45-64. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iuekois
49. Hakkio, C. S. and Rush, M. (1991). Is the budget deficit “too large?”. Economic Inquiry, 29(3), 429-445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1991.tb00837.x
50. Hamilton, J. D. and Flavin, M. A. (1986). On the limitations of government borrowing: a framework for empirical testing. The American Economic Review, 76(4), 808-819. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/
51. Hatemi-J, A. (2002). Fiscal policy in Sweden: effects of EMU criteria convergence. Economic Modelling, 19(1), 121-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-9993(00)00066-3
52. Haug, A. A. (1991). Cointegration and government borrowing constraints: evidence for the United States. Journal of Business & Economics Statistics, 9(1), 97-101. doi:10.2307/1391944
53. Haug, A. A. (1995). Has federal budget deficit policy changed in recent years? Economic Inquiry, 33(1), 104-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1995.tb01849.x
54. Hepsağ, A. (2011). Mali politikaların sürdürülebilirliğinin yapısal kırılmalı periyodik birim kök testi ile analizi: Türkiye örneği. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 12(1), 32-45. Erişim adresi: https://app.trdizin.gov.tr/
55. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H. and Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
56. Kalyoncu, H. (2005). Fiscal policy sustainability: test of intertemporal borrowing constraints. Applied Economics Letters, 12(15), 957-962. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850500119104
57. Karatay Gögül, P. (2016). Türkiye’de mali sürdürülebilirliğin yapısal değişimler çerçevesinde analizi (2002-2015). Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(4), 87-109. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/seyad
58. Keynes, J. M. (1923). A tract on monetary reform. London: Macmillan.
59. Kia, A. (2008). Fiscal sustainability in emerging countries: evidence from Iran and Turkey. Journal of Policy Modelling, 30(6), 957-972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2008.01.004
60. Ko, H. (2020). Measuring fiscal sustainability in the welfare state: fiscal space as fiscal sustainability. International Economics and Economic Policy, 17, 531-554. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-019-00453-2
61. Ko, J.-H. and Morita, H. (2015). Fiscal sustainability and regime shifts in Japan. Economic Modelling, 46, 364-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2015.02.008
62. Koo, C. M. (2002). Fiscal sustainability in the wake of economic crisis in Korea. Journal of Asian Economics, 13(5), 659-669. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1049-0078(02)00178-1
63. Korlu, R. K. (2019). Financial sustainability and assessment for municipalities in Turkey. In Ü. Çağlar, H. Şimşek and İ. Şiriner (Eds.), Current debates in economic growth & public finance & game theory studies (pp. 143-158). London: Ijopec Publication.
64. Kremer, J. J. M. (1989). U.S. federal indebtedness and conduct of fiscal policy. Journal of Monetary Economics, 23(2), 219-238. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(89)90049-4
65. Kurtuluş, B. (2006). Türkiye’de belediyelerin mali yapısı ve harcamalarının finansmanı (Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı, Yayın No 2692). Ankara. Erişim adresi: https://sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Turkiyede_Belediyelerin_Mali_Yapisi_ve_Harcamalarinin_Finansmani%E2%80%8B.pdf
66. Kuştepeli, Y. and Önel, G. (2006). Fiscal deficit sustainability with a structural break: An application to Turkey. Review of Social, Economic & Business Studies, 5/6, 189-208. Retrieved from https://kisi.deu.edu.tr/
67. Larin, B. and Süssmuth, B. (2014). Fiscal autonomy and fiscal sustainability: subnational taxation and public indebtedness in contemporary Spain (Cesifo Working Paper No. 4726). Retrieved from https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp4726.pdf
68. Levin, A., Lin, C.-F and Chu, C.-S. J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
69. Lima, L. R., Gagliaone, W. P. and Sampaio, M. B. (2008). Debt ceiling and fiscal sustainability in Brazil: A quantile autoregression approach. Journal of Development Economics, 86(2), 313-335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2007.11.002
70. MacDonald, R. (1992). Some tests of the government's intertemporal budget constraint using US data. Applied Economics, 24(12), 1287-1292. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849200000087
71. MacKinnon, J. G. (1996). Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11(6), 601-618. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1255(199611)11:6<601::AID-JAE417>3.0.CO;2-T
72. Magazzino, C. and Mutascu, M. A. (2019). A wavelet analysis of Italian fiscal sustainability. Journal of Economic Structures, 8, 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-019-0151-5
73. Magazzino, C., Brady, G. L. and Forte, F. (2019). A panel data analysis of the fiscal sustainability of G-7 countries. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 20, e00127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeca.2019.e00127
74. Mahdavi, S. (2014). Bohn’s test of fiscal sustainability of the American state governments. Southern Economic Journal, 80(4), 1028–1054. https://doi.org/10.4284/0038-4038-2012.223
75. Mahdavi, S. and Westerlund, J. (2011). Fiscal stringency and fiscal sustainability: panel evidence from the American state and local governments. Journal of Policy Modeling, 33(6), 953-969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2011.08.015
76. Makrydakis, S., Tzavalis, E. and Balfoussias, A. (1999). Policy regime changes and the long-run sustainability of fiscal policy: An application to Greece. Economic Modelling, 16(1), 71-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-9993(98)00026-1
77. Martin, G. M. (2000). US deficit sustainability: a new approach based on multiple endogenous breaks. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 15(1), 83-105. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1255(200001/02)15:1<83::AID-JAE543>3.0.CO;2-J
78. McCoskey, S. and Kao, C. (1998). A residual-based test of the null of cointegration in panel data. Econometric Reviews, 17(1), 57-84. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474939808800403
79. Mendoza, E. G. and Ostry, J. D. (2008). International evidence on fiscal solvency: is fiscal policy “responsible”? Journal of Monetary Economics, 55(6), 1081-1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2008.06.003
80. Moon, H. R. and Perron, B. (2004). Testing for a unit root tests in panels with dynamic factors. Journal of Econometrics, 122(1), 81-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2003.10.020
81. Ndoricimpa, A. (2020). The sustainability of Swedish fiscal policy: a re-examination. Journal of Economics and Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/JED-04-2020-0045
82. Olekalns, N. (2000). Sustainability and stability? Australian fiscal policy in the twentieth century. Australian Economic Papers, 39(2), 138-151. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8454.00081
83. Özkaya, A. (2013). Public debt stock sustainability in selected OECD countries. Central Bank Review, 13, 31-49. Retrieved from https://www.ebsco.com/
84. Payne, J. E. and Mohammadi, H. (2006). Are adjustments in the U.S. budget deficit asymmetric? another look at sustainability. Atlantic Economic Journal, 34(1), 15-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293-006-6116-8
85. Persyn, D. and Westerlund, J. (2008). Error-correction–based cointegration tests for panel data. The STATA journal, 8(2), 232-241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0800800205
86. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels (IZA Discussion Paper No. 1240). Retrieved from http://ftp.iza.org/dp1240.pdf
87. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence [Special Issue]. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
88. Pesaran, M. H. and Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010
89. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A. and Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368-423X.2007.00227.x
90. Quintos, C. E. (1995). Sustainability of the deficit process with structural shifts. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 13(4), 409-417. doi:10.2307/1392386
91. Sarno, L. (2001). The behavior of US public debt: a nonlinear perspective. Economics Letters, 74(1), 119-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(01)00529-8
92. Schoeman, N. J. (2011). Fiscal performance and sustainability of local government in South Africa- an empirical analysis (University of Pretoria Working Paper No. 201). Retrieved from https://www.up.ac.za/media/shared/61/WP/wp201.zp39413.pdf
93. Şen, H., Sağbaş, İ. ve Keskin, A. (2010). Türkiye’de mali sürdürülebilirliğin analizi: 1975-2007. Maliye Dergisi, 158, 103-123. Erişim adresi: https://ms.hmb.gov.tr/
94. Smith, G. W. and Zin, S. E. (1991). Persistent deficits and the market value of government debt. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 6(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.3950060104
95. Stine, R. A. (1987). Estimating properties of autoregressive forecasts. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(400), 1072-1078. https://doi.org/10.2307/2289383
96. Swamy, P. A. V. B. (1970). Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model. Econometrica, 38(2), 311-323. doi:10.2307/1913012
97. Tanner, E. (2013). Fiscal sustainability: A 21st century guide for the perplexed (IMF Working Paper No. 13/89). Retrieved from https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2016/12/31/Fiscal-Sustainability-A-21st-Century-Guide-for-the-Perplexed-40482
98. Tanner, E. and Liu, P. (1994). Is the budget deficit “too large”?: some further evidence. Economic Inquirt, 32(3), 511-518. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1994.tb01347.x
99. Tekeli, R. ve Hotunluoğlu, H. (2014). Türkiye’de merkezi yönetimle yerel yönetimlerde mali sürdürülebilirlik analizi. Business and Economics Research Journal, 5(3), 113-127. Erişim adresi: https://www.berjournal.com/tr/
100. Trehan, B. and Walsh, C. E. (1988). Common trends, the government’s budget constraint, and revenue smoothing. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(2-3). 425-444. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(88)90048-6
101. Trehan, B. and Walsh, C. E. (1991). Testing intertemporal budget constraints: theory and applications to U.S. federal budget and current account deficits. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 23(2), 206-223. doi:10.2307/1992777
102. Ucal, M. and Alici, A. (2010). Is fiscal policy sustainable in Turkey? Emergings Markets Finance and Trade, 46(sup1), 83-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/REE1540-496X4603S106
103. Uzunali, E. ve Görmez, A. H. (2019). Türkiye’de büyükşehir belediyelerinin mali yapıları ve bütçe sürdürülebilirliklerinin oran analiz yöntemiyle karşılaştırılması. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 12(25), 95-118. doi:10.18092/ulikidince.549210
104. Vural, G. (2018). Sustainability of fiscal policy: estimating a fiscal reaction function for Turkey. International Journal of Management, Economics and Business, 14(2), 357-362. https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2018239936
105. Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709-748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x
106. Westerlund, J. and Prohl, S. (2010). Panel cointegration tests of the sustainability hypothesis in rich OECD countries. Applied Economics, 42(11), 1355-1364. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840701721323
107. Wilcox, D. W. (1989). The sustainability of government deficits: implications of the present-value borrowing constraint. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 21(3), 291-306. doi:10.2307/1992415
108. Wu, J.-L. (1998). Are budget deficits “too large”?: the evidence from Taiwan. Journal of Asian Economics, 9(3), 519-528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1049-0078(99)80101-8
109. Yıldırım, K. ve Özcan, S. E. (2011). Bütçe açıklarının sürdürülebilirliği: 1970-2005 Türkiye örneği. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 30, 39-50. Erişim adresi: https://app.trdizin.gov.tr/
110. Yoshida, M. (2020). Fiscal sustainability of local governments in Japan. Asian Economic Journal, 34(2), 127-162. https://doi.org/10.1111/asej.12210