İktisadi Görüşler Perspektifinden Kamu Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin Belirlenmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı; 7 üst orta gelirli Avrupa ve Merkezi Asya ülkesinin 1988-2017 dönemi için kamu harcama türleri ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemektir. Farklı bir örneklem grubunun seçilmesi ve zaman periyodunun uzun tutulması bu çalışmayı literatürden ayırmaktadır. Panel Dağıtılmış Gecikmeli Otoregresif Modeli’nin Panel ARDL kullanıldığı çalışmada Model 1’de; kamunun nihai tüketim, savunma, eğitim ve sağlık harcamalarının Gayri Safi Yurt İçi Hasılaya GSYİH ’e oranının kişi başı reel GSYİH’e etkisi ele alınmıştır. Model 2, Model 3, Model 4 ve Model 5’te ise kişi başı reel GSYİH’nin sırayla kamunun nihai tüketim harcamalarına, kamunun savunma harcamalarına, kamunun eğitim harcamalarına ve kamunun sağlık harcamalarına etkisi incelenmiştir. Analiz sonucunda; kamunun nihai tüketim harcamalarından ve kamunun sağlık harcamalarından ekonomik büyümeye doğru pozitif bir ilişki saptanmış ve böylece Keynesyen görüş bu harcama kalemleri için desteklenmiştir. Kamunun savunma ve kamunun eğitim harcamaları ise ekonomik büyümeyi negatif etkilemektedir. Bu sonuç; klasik görüş, arz yanlı iktisadi görüş, kamu tercihi teorisi, rasyonel beklentiler teorisi ve monetarist teori ile uyuşmaktadır. Ekonomik büyümenin ise kamunun nihai tüketim harcamalarını ve kamunun savunma harcamalarını pozitif etkilediği saptanmıştır. Bu sonuç, Wagner yasası ile uyumludur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kamu Harcamaları, Ekonomik Büyüme, Panel ARDL

Determination of The Relation between Public Expenditures and Economic Growth from The Perspective of Economıc Vıews

Öz

The aim of this paper is to research the relationship between public expenditures and economic growth for the period 1988-2017 for the 7 upper middle income Europe and Central Asian countries. The choice of different sample group and taking of time period longer distinguishes this work from the literature. Using of the method of panel ARDL; it was dealt in Model 1 with the effect of the final consumption, military, education and health expenditures of the public relation to the real Gross Domestic Product GDP per capita. In Model 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 the effect of real GDP per capita is researched on the final consumption, health, military and education expenditures of the public in order. According to the results of the analysis; the final consumption and health expenditures of the public effect the real GDP positively. This result support the Keynesian economics. Military and health expenditures of the public have negative effect on the economic growth. This result jibes with the classic economics, supply side economics, public choice theory, rational expectations theory and monetarist theory. Economic growth effects on the final consumption and military expenditures of public positively. This result corresponds with the Wagner law.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Public Expenditure, Economic Growth, Panel ARDL.

Kaynakça

1. Abu-Bader, S. ve Abu-Qarn, A. S. 2003 . Government expenditures, military spending and economic growth: causality evidence from Egypt, Israel, and Syria. Journal of Policy Modeling. 25 6-7 , 567-583.
2. Ahuja, D. ve Pandit, D. 2020 . Public Expenditure and Economic Growth: Evidence from the Developing Countries. FIIB Business Review. 9 3 , 228-236.
3. Altıner, A. 2019 . OECD Ülkelerinde Kamu Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Panel Simetrik ve Asimetrik Nedensellik Analizi. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi. 33 3 , 849- 870.
4. Ansari, M. A. vd. 2021 . Public Expenditure and Economic Development: New Evidence from the BRICS-SAARC-ASEAN Region. Theoretical and Applied Economics. XXVIII, 2 627 , 155-174.
5. Arısoy, İ. 2005 . Wagner ve Keynes Hipotezleri Çerçevesinde Türkiye’de Kamu Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi. Ç. Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi. 14 2 , 63-80.
6. Awuh, V. E. 2018 . The Composition of Public Expenditure: Does It Matter for Economic Growth? Submission for the Master of Science Degree in International and Development Economics. The University of San Francisco, 1-35.
7. Bai, J. ve Ng, S. 2004 . A Panic Attack on Unit Roots and Cointegration. Econometrica. 72 4 , 1127- 1177.
8. Bai, J. ve Ng, S. 2010 . Panel Unit‐Root Tests with Cross Section Dependence: A Further Investigation. Econometric Theory. 26, 1088-1114.

9. Balestra, P. ve Nerlove, M. 1966 . Pooling Cross Section and Time Series Data in the Estimation of a Dynamic Model: The Demand for Natural Gas. Econometrica. 34 3 , 585-612.
10. Barro, R. J. 1990 . Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth. Journal of Political Economy. 98, 103-125.
11. Bayat, T. 2011 . Türkı̇ye’de Fisher Etkı̇sı̇nı̇n Geçerlı̇lı̇ğı̇: Doğrusal Olmayan Eşbütünleşme Yaklaşımı. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 38, 47-60.
12. Breitung, J. 2000 . The Local Power of Some Unit Root Tests for Panel Data, in Advances in Econometrics, Vol. 15: Nonstationarity Panels and Dynamic Panels, Baltagi, B.H. Ed. , 161- 177. JAI Press. Amsterdam.
13. Breuer vd. 2001 . Misleading Inferences from Panel Unit‐Root Tests with an Illustration from Purchasing Power Parity. Review of International Economics, 9 3 , 482-493.
14. Breuer vd. 2001 . Series-Specific Unit Root Test with Panel Data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 64 5 , 527-546.
15. Breusch, T. S. ve Pagan, A. 1980 . The Lagrange Multiplier and Its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics. Review of Economic Research. 47 1 , 239-253.
16. Chirwa, T.G ve Odhiambo, N.M. 2016 . What Drives Long-Run Economic Growth? Empirical Evidence from South Africa. Economia Internazionale/International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova. 69 4 , 429–456.
17. Choi, I. 2001 . Unit Root Tests for Panel Data. Journal of International Money and Finance. 20, 249- 272.
18. Deverajan, S. vd. 1996 . The Composition of Public Expenditure and Economic Growth. Journal of Monetary Economics. 37 2 , 313-344.
19. Dickey, D. ve Fuller, W. 1979 . Distribution Of The Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association. 74, 427- 431.
20. Dudzevičiūtė, G. vd. 2018 . Government Expenditure and Economic Growth in the European Union Countries. International Journal of Social Economics. 45 2 , 372-386.
21. Edizdoğan, N. vd. 2011 . Kamu Maliyesi. Ekin Yayın Dağıtım. 3. Baskı. Bursa.
22. Fisher, R. A. 1932 . Statistical Methods for Research Workers. Oliver and Boyd. 4th Edition. London.
23. Getzner, M. ve Neck, R. 2002 . Die Entwicklung der Staatsausgaben in Österreich, in E. Theurl Ed. , Kompendium der österreichischen Finanzpolitik. Innsbruck: Österreich.
24. Ghali, K. H. 1999 . Government Size and Economic Growth: Evidence from a Multivariate Cointegration Analysis. Applied Economics. 31 8 , 975-987.
25. Gozgor, G. 2011 . Panel Unit Root Tests of Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis: Evidence from Turkey. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics. 61, 136-140.
26. Grunfeld, Y. ve Griliches, Z. 1960 . Is Aggregation Necessarily Bad?. Review of Economics and Statistics. 42 1 , 1-13.
27. Gupta, R. ve Shastri, S. 2020 . Public Expenditure and Economic Growth in India: An Empirical Analysis Using Vector Autoregression VAR Model. Journal of Business and Economics Review. 5 2 , 45-58.
28. Güriş, S. 2015 . Panel Veri Modelleri. S. Güriş Ed. , Stata ile Panel Veri Modelleri içinde ss. 3-38 . İstanbul: Der Yayınları.
29. Hadri, K. 2000 . Testing for Stationarity in Heterogeneous Panel Data. The Econometrics Journal, 3 2 , 148-161.
30. Handler, H. 2006 . Staatsausgaben und Wirtschaftswachstum in Europa. Der Beitrag der Öffentlichen Ausgaben zur Lissabon-Strategie. Österreichisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung WIFO. 1-146.
31. Harris, R. ve Tzavalis, E. 1999 . Inference for Unit Roots in Dynamic Panels Where the Time Dimension is Fixed. Journal of Econometrics. 91 2 , 201-226.
32. Hasnul, A. G. 2015 . The Effects of Government Expenditure on Economic Growth: The Case of Malaysia. MPRA Paper. 71254
33. Hildreth, C. 1950 . Combining Cross-Section Data and Time Series. Cowles Commission Discussion Paper. No. 347, 1-13
34. Im, K. S. vd. 2003 . Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels. Journal of Econometrics. 115 1 , 53-74.
35. Işık, N. ve Alagöz, M. 2005 . Kamu Harcamaları ve Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 24, 63-75.
36. Karhan, G. 2018 . The Relationship between Public Expenditure and Economic Growth: A Panel VAR Approach. C.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi. 19 2 , 35-43.
37. Kiraz, H. ve Gümüş, E. 2017 . Kamu Harcamalarının Büyümeye Etkisi: OECD Ülkeleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumlar. 54 631 , 9-22.
38. Kuh, E. 1959 . The Validity of Cross-Sectionally Estimated Behaviour Equations in Time Series Applications. Econometrica. 27, 197-214.
39. Kunwar, K. B. 2019 . Impact of Government Expenditure of Nepal: ARDL Approach. Contemporary Research: An Interdisciplinary Academic Journal. 3 1 , 33-40.
40. Levin, A. vd. 2002 . Unit Roots Tests In Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties. Journal of Econometrics. 108, 1–24.
41. Mackinnon, J. 1991 . Critical Values For Cointegration Tests in Long-Run Economic Relationships. New York Oxford University Press. 266–276.
42. Mackinnon, J. 1996 . Numerical Distribution Functions for Unit Root and Cointegration Tests. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 11, 601–618.
43. Maddala, G.S. and Wu, S. 1999 . A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics. 61, 631-652.
44. Mamun, M. A. vd. 2013 . A Dynamic Panel Analysis of CSR in Bangladeshi Banking Industry. Asian Economic and Financial Review. 3 5 , 560-578.
45. Mokoena, S. K. vd. 2020 . The Nexus between Public Expenditure and Economic Growth. Euro Economica. 39 2 , 135-144.
46. Moon, H. R. ve Perron, B. 2004 . Testing for a Unit Root in Panels with Dynamic Factors. Journal of Econometrics. 1, 81-126.
47. Mose, N. G. 2020 . Government Sectoral Expenditure and Economic Growth. African Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development. 3 3 , 32-42.
48. Nadaroğlu, H. 2000 . Kamu Maliyesi Teorisi. Beta Yayınevi. 11. Baskı. İstanbul.
49. Ogar, A. vd. 2019 . Public Expenditure and Economic Growth in Nigeria: VAR Approach. European Journal of Economic and Financial Research. 3 3 , 36-60.
50. Pesaran, M. H. 2004 . General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels. Cambridge Working Papers in Econometrics. 435, 1-39.
51. Pesaran, M. H. 2004 . A Simple Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of Cross-Section Dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 22, 265-312.
52. Pesaran, M. H. ve Shin, Y. 1995 . An Autoregressive Distributed Lag Modelling Approach to Cointegration Analysis. Cambridge Working Papers in Econometrics. 9514, 1-33.
53. Pesaran, M. H. vd. 2001 . Bounds Testing Approaches to the Analysis of Level Relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 16, 289-326.
54. Pesaran, M. H. vd. 2008 . A Bias-Adjusted LM Test of Error Cross Section Independence. Econometrics Journal. 11, 105-127.
55. Pesaran, M. H. vd. 2013 . Panel Unit Root Test in the Presence of a Multifactor Error Structure. Journal of Econometrics. 175, 94-115.
56. Pesaran, M. H. ve Yamagata, T. 2008 . Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels. Journal of Econometrics. 142, 50-93.
57. Pula, L. ve Elshani, A. 2018 . Role of Public Expenditure in Economic Growth: Econometric Evidence from Kosovo 2002-2015. Baltic Journal of Real Estate Economics and Contruction Management. 6, 74-87.
58. Ram, R. 1986 . Government Size and Economic Growth: A New Framework and Some Evidence from Cross-Section and Time-Series Data. The American Economic Review. 76 1 , 191– 203.
59. Reese, S. ve Westerlund, J. 2016 . Panicca: Panic on Cross-Section Averages. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 31, 961-981.
60. Shahid, A. vd. 2013 . The Composition of Public Expenditures and Economic Growth: Evidence from Pakistan. International Journal of Social Economics. 40 11 , 1010–1022.
61. Soubbotina, T. P. ve Sheram, K. A. 2000 . Beyond Economic Growth: Meeting the Challenges of Global Development. The Worldbank. Washington, USA.
62. Swamy, P. A. 1970 . Efficient Inference in a Random Coefficient Regression Model. Econometrica, 38 2 , 311-322.
63. Taminselvan, M. ve Manjula, V. 2019 . A Study on Causality Testing between Public Expenditure and Economic Growth. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 6 4 , 1-6.
64. Tanzi, V. ve Schuknecht, L. 1997 . Reforming Government: An Overview of Recent Experience. European Journal of Political Economy, 13, 395-417.
65.  Taylor, M. ve Sarno, L. 1998 . The Behavior of Real Exchange Rates During the PostBretton Woods Period. Journal of International Economics. 46 2 , 281-312.
66. Ulusoy, A. ve Zengin, A. 1998 . Türkiye’de Kamu Ekonomisi ve Mali Kriz. XII. Uluslararası Maliye Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı içinde ss. 297-326 . İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Maliye Araştırma Merkezi Yayınları. İstanbul.
67. Uremadu, S. vd. 2019 . Testing Relationship between Government Current Expenditures and Economic Growth in Nigeria. Theoretical Economics Letters. 9, 584-604.
68. Wagner, A. 1893 . Grundlegung der Politischen Ökonomie. Teil 1: Grundlagen der Volkswirtschaft. C. F. Wintersche Verlagshandlung. Leibzig, Germany.
69. WB 2021 . The World Bank https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx?source=2&type =metadata&series=FP.CPI.TOTL.ZG#, Erişim: 29.12.2021 .
70. Yamak, R. ve Erdem, H. F. 2018 . Türkiye Ekonomisinde Armey Eğrisi Geçerli midir?. International Journal of Economic and Administrative Studies. Prof Dr. Harun Terzi Özel Sayısı, 335-346.
71. Yaraşır Tülümce, S. ve Zeren, F. 2017 . Türkiye’de Kamu Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin Asimetrik Nedensellik Testi ile Analizi. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi.13 2 , 299-310.
72. Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. 2013 . İleri Panel Veri Analizi Stata Uygulamalı. Beta Yayınları. 2. Baskı. İstanbul.
73. Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. 2018 . Panel Veri Ekonometrisi Stata Uygulamalı. Beta Yayınları. 4. Baskı. İstanbul.
74. Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. 2020 . Panel Zaman Serileri Analizi. Beta Yayınları. 3. Baskı. İstanbul.
75. Yılancı, V. ve Canpolat Gökçe, E. 2020 . OECD Ülkelerinde Yakınsama Hipotezinin Geçerliliği: Kalıntılarla Genişletilmiş Panel Fourier SURADF Birim Kök Testi. Sosyoekonomie. 28 44 , 395-407.
76. Yılmaz, Ö. ve Kaya, V. 2005 . Kamu Harcama Çeşitleri ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi. SÜ İİBF Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi. 5 9 , 257-271.
77. Zellner, A. 1962 . An Efficient Method of Estimating Seemingly Unrelated Regressions and Tests for Aggregation Bias. Journal of American Statistical Association. 57, 348-368.