EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF KNOWLEDGE BASED ECONOMIC GROWTH APPROACH: THE CASE OF TURKEY

Yıl 2019, , 370 - 389, 01.04.2019

Murat Çetin Çiler Yakut Işık

https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.2019252100

Cited By: 1

Öz

The aim of this study is to analyze the link between knowledge economy and economic growth in Turkey for the period of 1975-2016. Here, patent number was used as a determinant of knowledge economy. Three different regression equations were constituted for analyses. The unit root analyses of the variables were conducted by the ADF, PP and KPSS tests. The presence of cointegration between the variables was examined through the ARDL bounds test. The causal linkages between the variables were determined by using Toda-Yamamoto causality method. Empirical findings taken from the analyses supported that knowledge economyoriented economic growth approach is valid for Turkish economy. In addition, these results presented important policy implications for Turkey

Anahtar Kelimeler

Knowledge Economy, Economic Growth, Patent Applications, ARDL Bounds Test, Causality Analysis, Turkey

BİLGİ ODAKLI EKONOMİK BÜYÜME YAKLAŞIMININ AMPİRİK ANALİZİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, bilgi ekonomisi ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi Türkiye ekonomisinde 1975-2017 dönemi için analiz etmektir. Burada, bilgi ekonomisinin bir belirleyicisi olarak patent sayısı kullanılmıştır. Analizler için üç farklı regresyon denklemi kurulmuştur. Değişkenlerin birim kök analizleri ADF, PP ve KPSS testleriyle gerçekleştirilmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki eşbütünleşmenin varlığı, ARDL sınır testi ile incelenmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkileri, Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik metodu kullanılarak belirlenmiştir. Analizlerden elde edilen ampirik bulgular, Türkiye ekonomisi için bilgi ekonomisi odaklı ekonomik büyüme yaklaşımının geçerli olduğunu kanıtlamıştır. Ayrıca, bu sonuçlar Türkiye için önemli politika önerileri sunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Bilgi Ekonomisi, Ekonomik Büyüme, Patent Sayısı, ARDL Sınır Testi, Nedensellik Analizi, Türkiye

Kaynakça

• Agenor, P. R. & Neanidis, K. C. (2015). Innovation, public capital, and growth. Journal of Macroeconomics, 44, 252-275.
• Aghion, P. & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323-351.
• Akcomak, I. S. & Weel, B. (2009). Social capital, innovation and growth: Evidence from Europe. European Economic Review, 53(5), 544-567.
• Aksu, L. (2018). Türkiye’de bilim ve teknoloji ile iktisadi büyüme ilişkilerinin sosyal, ekonomik ve stratejik analizi. Sosyal Bilimler Çalışmaları Dergisi, 4(20), 2635-2670.
• Arrow, K. J. (1962). The economic implications of learning by doing. Review of Economic Studies, 29(3)
• Barro, R. (1990). Goverment spending in a sample model for endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98(S5), 103-124.
• Blind, K. & Jungmittag, A. (2008). The impact of patents and standards on macroeconomic growth: A panel approach covering four countries and 12 sectors. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 29(1), 51-60.
• Chang, H. (1995). Patent scope, antitrust policy and cumulative innovation. Rand Journal of Economics, 26(1), 34-57.
• Crosby, M. (2000). Patents, innovation and growth. The Economic Record, 16(23), 255-262.
• DeBrock, L. M. (1985). Market structure, innovation and optimal patent life. Journal of Law and Economics, 28(1), 223-44.
• Denison, E. F. (1967). Why growth rates differ: Postwar experience in nine Western countries. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC.
• Frietsch, R., Neuhäusler, P., Jung, T., & Looy, B. V. (2014). Patent indicators for macroeconomic growth- the value of patents estimated by export volume. Technovation, 34, 546-558.
• Futagamia, K. & Iwaisako, T. (2007). Dynamic analysis of patent policy in an endogenous growth model. Journal of Economic Theory, 132, 306-334.
• Galindo, M. A. & Mendez, M. T. (2014). Entrepreneurship, economic growth, and innovation: Are feedback effects at work? Journal of Business Research, 67(5), 825-829.
• Gelgeç, G. & Hatırlı, A. A. (2018). Bilgi ekonomisi ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye örneği. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(1), 97-122.
• Ghosh, S. & Kanjilal, K. (2014). Long-term equilibrium relationship between urbanization, energy consumption and economic activity: Empirical evidence from India. Energy, 66(1), 324-331.
• Gould, D. & Gruben, W. (1996). The role of intellectual property rights in economic growth. Journal of Development Economics, 48(2), 323-350.
• Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28(4), 1661-1707.
• Grossman, G., & Helpman, E. (1991). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
• Hu, A. G. Z. & Png, I. P. L. (2013). Patent rights and economic growth: Evidence from cross-country panels of manufacturing industries. Oxford Economic Papers, 65(3), 675-698.
• Iftekhar, H. & Tucci, C. L. (2010). The innovation-economic growth nexus: Global evidence. Research Policy, 39, 1264-1276.
• Işık, C. (2014). Patent harcamaları ve iktisadi büyüme arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye örneği. Sosyoekonomi, Ocak, 69-86.
• Jokanovic, B., Lalic, B., Milovancevic, M., Simeunovic, N., & Markovic, D. (2017). Economic development evaluation based on science and patents. Physica A, 481, 141-145.
• Jones, C. I. (1995). R&D-based models of economic growth. Journal of Political Economy, 103(4), 759- 784.
• Jones, C. I. & Williams, J. C. (2000). Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R&D. Journal of Economic Growth, 5, 65-85.
• Jorgenson, D. W. (2001). Information technology and the U.S. economy. The American Economic Review, 91(1), 1-32.
• Josheski, D. & Koteski, C. (2011). The causal relationship between patent growth and growth of gdp with quarterly data in the G7 countries: Cointegration, ARDL and error correction models. MPRA Paper No. 33153.
• Kim, Y. K., Lee, K., Park, W. G., & Choo, K. (2012). Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Research Policy, 41(2), 358-375.
• Langinier, C. & Moschini, G. C. (2002). The economics of patents: An overview. Iowa State University, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Working Paper, No. 02-WP 293.
• Leila, B. & Djilali, B. (2014). The impact of knowledge economy on the economic growth, an econometric study: Case of Algeria from 1995 to 2007. International Journal of Humanities Social Sciences and Education, 1(5), 41-47.
• Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3-42.
• Mankiw, N., Romer, D., & Weil, D. (1992). A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(May), 407-437.
• Mansfield, E. (1994). Intellectual property protection, foreign direct investment, and technology transfer. International Finance Corporation Discussion Paper No. 19.
• Merges, R. P. & Nelson, R. R. (1990). On the complex economics of patent scope. Columbia Law Review, 90(4), 839-916.
• Mohammad, S. & Gow, J. (2016). The effects of internet usage, financial development and trade openness on economic growth in South Africa: A time series analysis. Telematics and Informatics, 33(4), 1141-1154.
• Moser, P. (2016). Patents and innovation in economic history. NBER Working Paper No. 21964.
• Özkan, G. S. & Çelik, H. (2018). Bilişim teknolojileri ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye için bir uygulama. Uluslararası Ticaret ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1), 1-15.
• Park, W. & Ginarte, J.C. (1997). Intellectual property rights and economic growth. Contemporary Economic Policy, 15(3), 51-61.
• Pece, A. M., Simona, O. E. O., & Salisteanu, F. (2015). Innovation and economic growth: An empirical analysis for CEE countries. Procedia Economics and Finance, 26, 461-467.
• Poorfaraj, A., Samimi, A. J., & Keshavarz, H. (2011). Knowledge and economic growth: Evidence from some developing countries. Journal of Education and Vocational Research, 1(1), 21-25.
• Pradhan, R. P., Arvin, M. B., Hall, J. H., & Nair, M. (2016). Innovation, financial development and economic growth in Eurozone countries. Applied Economics Letters, 23(16), 1141-1144.
• Pradhan, R. P., Arvin, M. B., Bahmani, S., & Bennett, S. E. (2017). The innovation-growth link in OECD countries: Could other macroeconomic variables matter?. Technology in Society, 51, 113-123.
• Rogers, M. (1999). Monopoly power, innovation and economic growth. Australian Economic Review, 32(1), 96-104.
• Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 71-102.
• Singh, L. (2006). Innovations, high-tech trade and industrial development: Theory, evidence and policy. UNU-WIDER Research Paper No. 2006/27. United Nations University-World Institute for Development Economics Research, Helsinki, Finland.
• Torstensson, J. (1994). Property rights and economic growth: An empirical study. Kyklos, 47(May), 231- 247.
• TÜİK (2018). Erişim tarihi: 18.12.2018, http://www.tuik.gov.tr.
• Zeira, J. (2011). Innovations, patent races and endogenous growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 16(2)