Kadınların Sivil Topluma Katılımnda Kamusal Politikaların Rolü

Öz

Öz Bu çalışma, kadınların sivil topluma katılımında kamusal politikaların rolünü kamu maliyesi perspektifinden incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu doğrultuda, 2006–2023 döneminde 45 gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkeye ait panel veri kullanılmıştır. Analiz sürecinde öncelikle sabit etkiler modeli ile kamusal politikaların kadınların sivil topluma katılımı üzerindeki doğrusal etkileri test edilmiş, ardından söz konusu ilişkinin kamu kesimi etkinliğine bağlı olarak değişip değişmediğini belirlemek amacıyla Hansen (1999) panel eşik modeli uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, sosyal koruma harcamalarının kadınların sivil katılımını özellikle kurumsal kapasitesi yüksek ülkelerde artırdığını, kamu kesimi etkinliğinin ise tüm ülke gruplarında belirleyici bir rol oynadığını göstermektedir. Eşik model sonuçları, sosyal harcamaların etkisinin kamu yönetiminin etkinlik düzeyine bağlı olarak farklılaştığını ve düşük kurumsal kapasite koşullarında beklenen sonuçları üretmeyebileceğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu sonuçlar, kadınların sivil topluma katılımını artırmaya yönelik politikaların yalnızca harcama düzeyine değil, aynı zamanda kamu yönetiminin etkinliğini ve kurumsal kapasitesini güçlendirmeye odaklanması gerektiğine işaret etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kadınların Sivil Topluma Katılımı
• Sosyal Koruma Harcamaları
• Kamu Kesimi Etkinliği
• Kurumsal Kalite
• Panel Eşik Modeli

The Role of Public Policies in Women’s Participation in Civil Society

Öz

This study aims to examine the role of public policies in women's participation in civil society from a public finance perspective. To this end, panel data from 45 developed and developing countries for the period 2006–2023 were used. During the analysis process, the linear effects of public policies on women's participation in civil society were first tested using a fixed effects model. Subsequently, Hansen's (1999) panel threshold model was applied to determine whether this relationship varied depending on public sector efficiency. The findings show that social protection expenditures increase women's civic participation, particularly in countries with high institutional capacity, while public sector efficiency plays a decisive role in all country groups. The threshold model results reveal that the impact of social spending varies depending on the level of public administration effectiveness and may not produce the expected results in conditions of low institutional capacity. These results indicate that policies aimed at increasing women's participation in civil society should focus not only on the level of spending but also on strengthening public administration effectiveness and institutional capacity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Women’s Civic Participation
• Social Protection Expenditure
• Government Effectiveness
• Institutional Quality
• Panel Threshold Model

Kaynakça

1. Aslan, S. (2010). Türkiye’de sivil toplum. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(31), 260–283.
2. Baumgartner, F. R., & Mahoney, C. (2005). Social movements, the rise of new issues, and the public agenda. In Routing the opposition: Social movements, public policy, and democracy (pp. 65–86).
3. Bektaş, A. (2007). Kamuoyu, iletişim ve demokrasi. Baglam Publications.
4. Brehm, J., & Rahn, W. (1997). Individual-level evidence for the causes and consequences of social capital. American Journal of Political Science, 41(3), 999–1023. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111684
5. Budlender, D. (2002). Gender budgets make cents: Understanding gender responsive budgets. Commonwealth Secretariat.
6. Casey, T., & Christ, K. (2005). Social capital and economic performance in the American states. Social Science Quarterly, 86(4), 826-845. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0038-4941.2005.00358.x
7. Cohen, J. L., & Arato, A. (2020). Civil society and political theory. In Crime, inequality and the state (pp. 628–631). Routledge.
8. de Tocqueville, A. (1835). Government of the democracy in America. Democracy in America.

9. Diamond, L. (1994). Rethinking civil society: Toward democratic consolidation. Journal of Democracy, 5(3), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1994.0041
10. Elson, D. (2006). Budgeting for women’s rights. Monitoring government budgets for compliance with CEDAW. Nueva York: Fondo de Desarrollo de las Naciones Unidas para la Mujer (UNIFEM).
11. Erdoğan, M. (1998). Liberal toplum liberal siyaset. Siyasal Bookstore.
12. Erkan, G. (2021). Toplumsal cinsiyet bağlamında sivil toplum ve yeni medya: Kadın odaklı sivil toplum kuruluşlarının yeni medya kullanımı (Doctoral dissertation, Akdeniz University).
13. Fine, B. (2008). Sosyal sermaye sosyal bilime karşı: Bin yılın eşiğinde ekonomi politik ve sosyal bilimler (A. Kars, Çev.). Yordam Kitap. (Original work published 2001).
14. Fukuyama, F. (2001). Social capital, civil society and development. Third World Quarterly, 22(1), 7-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/713701144
15. Hansen, B.E. (1999). Threshold effects in non-dynamic panels: Estimation, testing, and inference. Journal of Econometrics. 93, 345-368. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(99)00025-1
16. Htun, M., & Weldon, S. L. (2012). The civic origins of progressive policy change: Combating violence against women in global perspective, 1975–2005. American Political Science Review, 106(3), 548–569. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055412000226
17. Keane, J. (1988). Civil society and the state: New European perspectives. Univ. of Westminster Press.
18. Keane, J. (1994). Democracy and civil society [Demokrasi ve sivil toplum]. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Publishing. Keck, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists beyond borders. Cornell University Press.
19. Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Little, Brown.
20. Kuçuradi, I. (1998). Sivil toplum kuruluşları: Kavramlar. In Üç sempozyum: Sivil toplum kuruluşları. History Foundation Publications.
21. Mansbridge, J. (1995). Does participation make better citizens?. The Good Society, 5(2), 1-7.
22. Marcoux, A. (1998). The feminization of poverty: Claims, facts, and data needs. Population and Development Review, 24(1), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.2307/2808125
23. Mazur, A. G. (2002). Theorizing feminist policy. Oxford University Press.
24. Pearce, D. (1978). The feminization of poverty: Women, work, and welfare. The Urban & Social Change Review, 1(2), 28–36.
25. Putnam, R. D. (1993). Social capital and institutional success. In R. D. Putnam, R. Leonardi, & R. Nonetti (Eds.), Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press.
26. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. In Culture and politics: A reader (pp. 223-234). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
27. Putzel, J. (1997). Accounting for the ‘dark side’ of social capital: Reading Robert Putnam on democracy. Journal of International Development, 9(7), 939–949. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1328(199711)9:7%3C939::AID-JID497%3E3.0.CO;2-4
28. Sarıbay, A. Y. (1997). Küreselleşme, sivil toplum ve İslam. Vadi Publishing.
29. Schüring, E. (2021). Social transfers. In E. Schüring & M. Loewe (Eds.), Handbook on social protection systems. Edward Elgar Publishing.
30. Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom. The Journal of Philosophy, 82(4), 169–221. https://doi.org/10.2307/2026184
31. Sen, A. (1993). Capability and well-being. Quality of Life, 30, 1–445. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198287976.003.0005 Sen, A. (1999). Commodities and capabilities. Oxford University Press.
32. Simmons, B. A. (2009). Mobilizing for human rights: International law in domestic politics. Cambridge University Press.
33. Springer, C. (1998). Electronic Eros. Sarmal Publishing.
34. Tekdemir, N. (2023). The effect of social capital on economic growth: An empirical analysis based on public sector effectiveness (Doctoral dissertation, Hacettepe University, Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Public Finance).
35. Tosun, E. G. (2007). Hak örgütleri ve halkla ilişkiler. In G. E. Tosun (Ed.), Hak örgütleri medyada görünür olmak (pp. 33–50). IPS İletişim Vakfı.
36. United Nations. (1995). Beijing declaration and platform for action: Fourth world conference on women. United Nations.
37. UNDP. (2023). What are the sustainable development goals? Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals
38. UN Sustainable Development Group. (2025, March 7). The Beijing declaration and platform for action at 30, and why that matters for gender equality. Retrieved from https://unsdg.un.org/latest/stories/beijing-declaration-and-platform-action-30-and-why-matters-gender-equality
39. UN Women. (2025). Beijing+30: Accelerating gender equality and women’s empowerment. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem) Institute. (2026). V-Dem core dataset. Retrieved from The V-Dem Dataset – V-Dem.
40. Wang, Q. (2015). Fixed-Effect Panel Threshold Model Using Stata. The Stata Journal, 15(1), 121 134.
41. Weldon, S. L. (2002). Protest, policy and the problem of violence against women. University of Pittsburgh Press.
42. Yılmaz, A. (1997). Civil society, democracy and Türkiye [Sivil toplum, demokrasi ve Türkiye]. Yeni Türkiye: Special Issue on Civil Society, 18.
43. Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford University Press.