Ters-U Hipotezi BağlamındaEkonomik Büyüme, Finansal Kalkınmave Gelir Eşitsizliği MekanizmalarıÜzerine

Öz

Bu çalışmada; ekonomik büyüme, finansal kalkınma ve gelir eşitsizliği arasındaki ilişkiler Ters-U Hipotezi bağlamında Türkiye ekonomisi 1960-2014 dönemi için incelenmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki eşbütünleşme ilişkisinin belirlenebilmesi amacıyla Enders-Siklos eşbütünleşme analizi uygulanmış ve TAR ile M-TAR analiz bulguları, ilgili değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli ilişkilerin geçerli olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Bunun yanı sıra, değişkenler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkileri TECM temelli Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi ile sınanmış ve beklentilerle uyumlu olan nedensellik ilişkilerinin varlığı kanıtlanmıştır. Nedensellik bulgularını destekleyen eşanlı denklem sistemi tahmin sonuçları, arz-önderliği hipotezinin geçerli olduğunu ve ekonomik büyüme sürecinin hızlanmasına paralel olarak gelir eşitsizliklerinin azaldığını göstermiştir. Genel olarak belirtmek gerekirse, Türkiye ekonomisinde Kuznets Ters-U Hipotezi’nin geçerli olduğu söylenebilir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ekonomik Büyüme,Finansal Kalkınma,Gelir Eşitsizliği

On the Mechanics of Economic Growth, Financial Development and Income Inequality in the Context of Inverted-U Hypothesis

Öz

In this study, the relationship among economic growth, financial development and income inequality is examined in the context of Inverted-U Hypothesis in the period 1960-2014 in Turkish economy. Enders-Siklos cointegration analysis is applied to determine the cointegration relationship among the variables and the findings of the TAR and M-TAR analysis show the validity of long-run relationships among the variables. Besides, the causality nexus among the variables is tested using Toda-Yamamoto causality analysis based on TECM and the causal linkages among the variables are found that are compatible with the expectations. The results of the simultaneous equation system supporting the causality findings point out that supply-leading hypothesis is valid and income inequality declines in parallel with rising economic growth. In general, the validity of Kuznets Inverted-U Hypothesis can be said for Turkish economy

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Economic Growth,Financial Development,Income Inequality,In

Kaynakça

1. AGHION, Philippe and Patrick BOLTON; (1997), “A Theory of Trickle-Down Growth and Development”, The Review of Eco- nomic Studies, 64(2), pp. 151-172. AKINCI, Merter; (2015), “Bulanık Suda Balık Avlamak: Trickle
2. Down Etkisinin Türkiye Ekonomisinde Bölgeler-Arası Tahmini”, Çalışma ve Toplum, 44(1), ss. 195-220. ANG, James B.; (2010), “Finance and Inequality: The Case of
3. India”, Southern Economic Journal, 76(3), pp. 738-761. BANERJEE, Abhijit V. and Andrew F. NEWMAN; (1993), “Oc- cupational Choice and the Process of Development”, Journal of
4. Political Economy, 101(2), pp. 274-298. BROUWER, Gordon ve James GILBERT; (2005), “Monetary
5. Policy Reaction Functions in Australia”, Economic Record, (253), pp. 124-134. CHANDAVARKAR, Anand; (1992), “Of Finance and Develop- ment: Neglected and Unsettled Questions”, World Develop- ment, 20(1), pp. 133-142.
6. ÇİL-YAVUZ, Nilgün; (2006), “Türkiye’de Turizm Gelirlerinin Ekonomik Büyümeye Etkisinin Testi: Yapısal Kırılma ve Ne- densellik Analizi”, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 7(2), ss. 162- DEININGER, Klaus and Lyn SQUIRE; (1997), “Economic
7. Growth and Income Inequality: Reexamining the Links”, Fi- nance & Development, March97, pp. 38-41. DICKEY, David A. and Wayne A. FULLER; (1979), “Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series With a Unit
8. Root”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366), pp. 427-431. DICKEY, David A. and Wayne A. FULLER; (1981), “Likelihood

9. Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series With a Unit Root”, Econometrica, 49(4), pp. 1057-1072.
10. DUASA, Jarita; (2009), “Asymmetric Cointegration Relation- ship Between Real Exchange Rate and Trade Variables: The Case of Malaysia”, MPRA Working Paper, No: 14535.
11. ENDERS, Walter and Pierre L. SIKLOS; (2001), “Cointegration and Threshold Adjustment”, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 19(2), pp. 166-176.
12. FELTHAM, Sandra G. and David E. A. GILES; (2003), “Testing for Unit Roots in Semiannual Data”, David E. A. GILES (Eds)
13. Computer-Aided Econometrics, Routledge, New York, pp. 153- GALOR, Oded and Joseph ZEIRA; (1993), “Income Distribu- tion and Macroeconomics”, The Review of Economic Studies, (1), pp. 35-52.
14. GALOR, Oded and Omer MOAV; (2004), “From Physical to Hu- man Capital: Inequality and the Process of Development”, The Review of Economic Studies, 71(4), pp. 1001-1026.
15. GHASSAN, Hassan B.; (2009), “Non Linear Adjustment in the MLR Condition Evidence from Threshold Cointegration”, Jour- nal of Economic Cooperation and Development, 30(3), pp. 63
16. GRAFF, Michael; (2002), “Causal Links Between Financial Ac- tivity and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from a Cross
17. Country Analysis, 1970-1990”, Bulletin of Economic Research, (2), pp. 119-133.
18. GRANGER, Clive W. J. and Patrick NEWBOLD; (1974), “Spuri- ous Regressions in Econometrics”, Journal of Econometrics, (2), pp. 111-120.
19. GREENWOOD, Jeremy and Boyan JOVANOVIC; (1990)
20. “Financial Development, Growth and Distribution of Income”, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), pp. 1076-1107.
21. GÜRİŞ, Selahattin, Ebru ÇAĞLAYAN ve Burak GÜRİŞ; (2011)
22. EViews İle Temel Ekonometri, DER Yayınları, İstanbul. HONOHAN, Patrick; (2004), “Financial Development, Growth and Poverty: How Close Are the Links?”, World Bank Policy
23. Research Working Paper, No: 3203.
24. JALILIAN, Hossein and Colin KIRKPATRICK; (2005), “Does
25. Financial Development Contribute to Poverty Reduction?”, The Journal of Development Studies, 41(4), pp. 636-656. KUZNETS, Simon; (1955), “Economic Growth and Income In- equality”, The American Economic Review, 45(1), pp. 1-28.
26. KUZNETS, Simon; (1963), “Quantitative Aspects of the Eco- nomic Growth of Nations: VIII. Distribution of Income by Size”
27. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 11(2), pp. 1-80. LAW, Siong H. and Hui B. TAN; (2009), “The Role of Finan- cial Development on Income Inequality in Malaysia”, Journal of
28. Economic Development, 34(2), pp. 153-168. LEWIS, Arthur; (1955), The Theory of Economic Growth, Allen and Unwin, London.
29. LUCAS, Robert E.; (1988), “On the Mechanics of Economic
30. Development”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), pp. 42. LUNDBERG, Mattias and Lyn SQUIRE; (2003), “The Simul- taneous Evolution of Growth and Inequality”, The Economic Journal, 113(487), pp. 326-344.
31. MACKINNON, James; (1991), “Critical Values for Cointegra- tion Tests”, R. F. ENGLE and Clive W. J. GRANGER (Eds.)
32. Long-Run Economic Relationships: Readings in Cointegration, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 267-276. ODHIAMBO, Nicholas M.; (2009), “Finance-Growth-Poverty
33. Nexus in South Africa: A Dynamic Causality Linkage”, The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(2), pp. 320-325. PATRICK, Hugh T; (1966), “Financial Development and Eco- nomic Growth in Underdeveloped Countries”, Economic Devel- opment and Cultural Change, 14(2), pp. 174-189.
34. PRADHAN, Rudra; (2010), “The Nexus Between Finance
35. Growth and Poverty in India: The Cointegration and Causality Approach”, Asian Social Science, 6(9), pp. 114-122. RAJAN, Raghuram G. and Luigi ZINGALES; (2003), Saving
36. Capitalism from the Capitalists, Crown Business, New York. REHMAN, Hafeez U., Sajawal KHAN and Imtiaz AHMED; (2008), “Income Distribution, Growth and Financial Develop- ment: A Cross Countries Analysis”, Pakistan Economic and Social Review, 46(1), pp. 1-16.
37. ROBINSON, Joan; (1952), The Rate of Interest and Other Es- says, Macmillian, London.
38. SCHUMPETER, Joseph A.; (1911), The Theory of Economic
39. Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge. TARI, Recep; (2011), Ekonometri, 7. Baskı, Umuttepe Yayınları, Kocaeli.
40. TODA, Hiro Y. and Taku YAMAMOTO; (1995), “Statistical Infer- ence in Vector Autoregressions with Possibly Integrated Pro- cesses”, Journal of Econometrics, 66(1-2), pp. 225-250.
41. UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME; (1996)
42. Human Development Report 1996, Oxford University Press, USA.
43. YAMAK, Nebiye ve Yakup KÜÇÜKKALE; (1997), “Türkiye’de
44. Kamu Harcamalarının Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi”, İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 12(131), ss. 5-14. YÜCE AKINCI, Gönül, Merter AKINCI ve Ömer YILMAZ; (2013), “Demand Following or Supply Leading? A Panel Data
45. Analysis for Developed, Developing and Less Developed Countries”, METU Studies in Development, 40(3), ss. 553-574. YÜCE AKINCI, Gönül, Merter AKINCI ve Ömer YILMAZ; (2014), “Finansal Kalkınma Sürecinin Ar-Ge Harcamaları Üzer- indeki Etkisi: Schumpeter Haklı mıydı?”, Maliye Dergisi, 166, ss. 56-74.
46. Ek-1: Modelde Kullanılan Değişkenlerin İlgili Dönem İçerisindeki Hareketleri