Araştırma Makalesi
PDF Zotero Mendeley EndNote BibTex Kaynak Göster

Hükümet İstikrarı ve Ticari Açıklık Arasındaki Nedensellik İlişkisi: Türkiye Örneği

Yıl 2021, Cilt 6, Sayı 16, 422 - 431, 31.10.2021
https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.840909

Öz

Uluslararası ticaret siyasi riske çok fazla maruz kalmaktadır ve belirli bir piyasadaki siyasi risk bileşenlerinin varlığı hem ihracat hem de ithalat faaliyetlerinde sorunlara neden olabilmektedir. Hükümet istikrarsızlığı, ticarete açıklıkla ilgili siyasi risk bileşenlerinden biridir. Makale, 1984-2016 dönemini kapsayan Vektör Hata Düzeltme Modeli (VECM) ve VECM tabanlı Granger Nedensellik testi kullanılarak Türkiye için hükümetin istikrar-ticaret açıklık bağını incelemektedir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, uzun vadede ticarete açıklıktan hükümet istikrarına doğru tek yönlü bir nedensellik olduğunu göstermiştir. Türkiye’nin nihai mal üretimi genellikle ithalata dayandığından, döviz kurundaki artış genellikle ticaret açıklığını ithalat lehine dalgalandırır. Bu da dış ticaret açığı yaratmaktadır. Kötüleşen ekonomik koşullar hükümetin istikrarını etkiler. Türkiye'deki olumsuz tablo ve ekonomik kriz nedeniyle 1990-2003 yılları arasında kurulan hükümetlerin ortalama görev süreleri bir yıl olmuştur. Buna rağmen, 2002 yılından başlayarak üç seçim dönemi içinde ihracatın liderliğinde büyüme ve yüksek miktarda doğrudan yabancı yatırım bireylerin hükümet istikrarının önemini kavramalarını sağlamıştır. Türkiye 2010'lu yıllar boyunca da yüksek döviz kurunun getirdiği dış ticaret açığı, yüksek enflasyon ve işsizlik oranları ile mücadele etmiş, kötüleyen ekonomik durum kabinedeki bakanların ve hatta cumhurbaşkanlığı sisteminin değişmesine neden olmuştur. Bu nedenle çalışma, Türkiye için ticari açıklığın politikayla ilgili sonuçları etkileyebileceği ve döviz kurlarındaki değişim ile Türk lirasının değer kaybı aracılığıyla hükümet istikrarsızlığı yaratabileceği sonucuna ulaşmıştır. 

Kaynakça

  • Aisen, A. and Vega, F. J. (2011). How does political instability affect economic growth? IMF Working Paper.
  • Al-Marhubi, F. (2005). Openness and governance: evidence across countries. Oxford Development Studies, 33, 453-471.
  • Ari, Y. O. and Yıldız, Ü. (2018). Causality relationship between transfer expenditures and labor force participation rate in Turkey. Eastern European Journal of Regional Studies, 4(2), 58-72.
  • Arslan, Ü. (2011). Siyasi istikrarsızlık ve ekonomik performans: Türkiye örneği. [Political instability and economic performance: The case of Turkey]. Ege Akademik Bakış, 11(1), 73-80.
  • Bayar, Y. and Yener, B. (2019). Political stability and tourism sector development in Mediterranean Countries: a panel cointegration and causality analysis. European Journal of Tourism Research, 21, 23-32.
  • Bilgin, M. H., Gozgor, G. and Demir, E. (2018). The determinants of Turkey’s exports to Islamic countries: the impact of political risks. The Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 27(5), 486-503.
  • Bönnal, M. and Yaya, M.E. (2015). Political institutions, trade openness, and economic growth: new evidence. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 51, 1276-1291.
  • Çalışkan, A.E. (2009). Dış ticaret işlemlerinde risk yönetimi [Risk management in foreign trade operations]. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. İstanbul.
  • Can, E., Özmutlu, S. Y. and Aykaç, C. (2019). Politik iklim değişikliklerinin ülkelerarası ticaretle ilişkisi: Türkiye-Rusya uçak krizi üzerine ekonometrik bir inceleme [The effect of changes in the political climate on intercountry trade: An econometric analysis on Turkey-Russia aircraft crisis]. Siyasal: Journal of Political Sciences, 28(1), 1-18.
  • Chermack, J.M. (1992). Political risk analysis: past and present. Resources Policy, September, 167-178.
  • Dankumo, A. M., Ishak, S., Bani, Y. and Hamzah, H. Z. (2020). Relationship between governance and trade: evidence from Sub-Saharan African countries. Research in World Economy, 11(6), 139-154.
  • De Jong, D. N., Nankervis, J.C., Savin, N.E. and Whiteman, C.H. (1992). The power problem of unit root tests in time series with autoregressive errors. Journal of Econometrics, 53, 323-343.
  • Dickey, D.A. and Fuller, W.A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427-431.
  • Engle, R. F. and Granger, C.W.J. (1987). Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251-276.
  • Fitzpatrick, M. (1983). The definition and assessment of political risk in international business: a review of the literature. Academy of Management Review, 8(2), 249-254.
  • Fosu, A. K. (2003). Political instability and export performance in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 39(4), 68-83.
  • Grechyna, D. (2017). Trade openness and political distortions. Munich Personal Repec Archive, Paper No. 79951.
  • Hjalmarsson, E. and Österholm, P. (2007). Testing for co-integration using the Johansen Methodology when variables are near integrated. IMF Working Paper, June 2007.
  • Karamelikli, H. and Kesgingöz, H. (2017). Finansal gelişme bileşenlerinin ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi: Türkiye örneği [Financial development components impact on economic growth: Evidence from Turkey]. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(1), 683-701.
  • Kartal, G. and Öztürk, S. (2017). Türkiye’de politik istikrarsızlık ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi. [Politic instability and economic growth relationship in Turkey]. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 10(4), 250-270.
  • Knight, F.H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. The Riverside Press: Cambridge.
  • Kobrin, S. J. (1978). When does political instability result in increasing investment risk? Columbia Journal of World Business, 113-122.
  • Koşar, A. (2018). Türkiye’nin son on yılda en çok ihracat ve ithalat yaptığı ülkelerin hiyerarşik kümeleme analizi ile gruplandırılması ve değerlendirilmesi. [Hierarchical clustering analysis of Turkey’s exporting and importing countries in the last decade]. Bucak İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(1), 17-28.
  • Lebe, F. and Akbaş, Y.E. (2014). Türkiye’de konut talebinin analizi. [Analysis of home demand in Turkey]. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 28(1), 57-83.
  • Miller, K. D. (1992). A framework for integrated risk management in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(2), 311-331.
  • Moser, C., Nestmann, T. and Wedow, M. (2008). Political risk and export promotion: evidence from Germany, The World Economy, 31(6), 781-803.
  • Ng, S. and Perron, P. (2001). Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica, 69(6), 1519-1554.
  • Ozbozkurt, O. B. and Satrovic, E. (2018). Causal relationship between foreign direct investment and macro-level political stability in Turkey. 27th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social Development, Rome, 1-2 March 2018.
  • Özek, Y. (2019). Politik istikrar ve ekonomik belirleyiciler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi: Avrupa Birliği üyesi merkezi ve doğu Avrupa geçiş ekonomileri. [Causality relation between political stability and economic determinants: European Union member Center and Eastern European transition economies] Turkish Studies, 14(2), 465-481.
  • Phillips, P.C.B. and Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75, 335-346.
  • Qadri, N., Shah, N. and Qureshi, M. N. (2020). Impact of political instability on international investment and trade in Pakistan. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 9(2), 283-305.
  • Şanlısoy, S. (2010). Politik istikrarsızlık-ekonomik süreç politikaları etkileşimi. [Political instability-economic process policies interaction] Sosyoekonomi, Aralık Sayısı, 192-214.
  • Sidek, N.Z.M. and Hanif, A. (2013). The impact of political risk on imports in Malaysia. Journal of Emerging Economies and Islamic Research, 1(1), 51-63.
  • Simon, J. D. (1984). A theoretical perspective on political risk. Journal of International Business Studies, 15(3), 123-143.
  • Şimşek, T. (2015). Politik istikrarsızlık çerçevesinde politika ve iktisat etkileşimi. [The interaction of politics and economics in the context of political instability]. Journal of International Management, Educational and Economics Perspectives, 3(2), 39-54.
  • Sürmen, Y. E. (2019). Siyasi krizlerin Türkiye’nin dış ticaretine etkisi: rahip Brunson davası. [The effects of political crises on Turkey’s foreign trade: pastor Brunson case] Academic Review of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(2), 189-207.
  • Topallı, N. (2015). Turizm sektörünün Türkiye’nin ekonomik büyümesi üzerine etkisi. [The effect of tourism sector on the economic growth of Turkey: 1963-2011]. International Journal of Economic and Administrative Studies, 14, 339-352.
  • Yahaya, H. S. (2020, October 3rd). An Evaluation on Political Risk and its Involvement in International Trade of Goods (Importing and Exporting) and the Legal Means of Managing the Risk.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319315886_An_Evaluation_on_Political_Risk_and_its_involvement_in_international_trade_of_goods_importing_and_exporting_and_the_legal_means_of_managing_the_risk

Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey

Yıl 2021, Cilt 6, Sayı 16, 422 - 431, 31.10.2021
https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.840909

Öz

International trade is very exposed to political risk and the existence of political risk components in a given market may cause problems in both export and import activities. Government instability is one of the political risk components that is related with trade openness. The paper examines the government stability-trade openness nexus for Turkey using Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) and VECM based Granger Causality test covering the period of 1984-2016. Results have shown that there is a unidirectional causality in the long run from trade openness to government stability. Because Turkey’s production of final goods usually is based on imports, an increase in exchange rate usually floats trade openness in favor of imports. This creates foreign trade deficit. Worsening economic conditions affects the government stability. Due to the unfavorable picture and economic crises in Turkey, the average duty time of the governments established between 1990-2003 was one year. Despite this, export-led growth and highest amount of foreign direct investment within three election periods starting from 2002, enabled the individuals to grasp the importance of stability in governance. During the 2010s, Turkey struggled with the foreign trade deficit, high inflation and unemployment rates brought about by the high exchange rate, and the deteriorating economic situation caused the ministers in the cabinet and even the presidential system to change. Thus, the study concluded that trade openness may affect the policy-relevant implications and create government instability for Turkey through changes in exchange rates and depreciation of Turkish lira.

Kaynakça

  • Aisen, A. and Vega, F. J. (2011). How does political instability affect economic growth? IMF Working Paper.
  • Al-Marhubi, F. (2005). Openness and governance: evidence across countries. Oxford Development Studies, 33, 453-471.
  • Ari, Y. O. and Yıldız, Ü. (2018). Causality relationship between transfer expenditures and labor force participation rate in Turkey. Eastern European Journal of Regional Studies, 4(2), 58-72.
  • Arslan, Ü. (2011). Siyasi istikrarsızlık ve ekonomik performans: Türkiye örneği. [Political instability and economic performance: The case of Turkey]. Ege Akademik Bakış, 11(1), 73-80.
  • Bayar, Y. and Yener, B. (2019). Political stability and tourism sector development in Mediterranean Countries: a panel cointegration and causality analysis. European Journal of Tourism Research, 21, 23-32.
  • Bilgin, M. H., Gozgor, G. and Demir, E. (2018). The determinants of Turkey’s exports to Islamic countries: the impact of political risks. The Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 27(5), 486-503.
  • Bönnal, M. and Yaya, M.E. (2015). Political institutions, trade openness, and economic growth: new evidence. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 51, 1276-1291.
  • Çalışkan, A.E. (2009). Dış ticaret işlemlerinde risk yönetimi [Risk management in foreign trade operations]. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. İstanbul.
  • Can, E., Özmutlu, S. Y. and Aykaç, C. (2019). Politik iklim değişikliklerinin ülkelerarası ticaretle ilişkisi: Türkiye-Rusya uçak krizi üzerine ekonometrik bir inceleme [The effect of changes in the political climate on intercountry trade: An econometric analysis on Turkey-Russia aircraft crisis]. Siyasal: Journal of Political Sciences, 28(1), 1-18.
  • Chermack, J.M. (1992). Political risk analysis: past and present. Resources Policy, September, 167-178.
  • Dankumo, A. M., Ishak, S., Bani, Y. and Hamzah, H. Z. (2020). Relationship between governance and trade: evidence from Sub-Saharan African countries. Research in World Economy, 11(6), 139-154.
  • De Jong, D. N., Nankervis, J.C., Savin, N.E. and Whiteman, C.H. (1992). The power problem of unit root tests in time series with autoregressive errors. Journal of Econometrics, 53, 323-343.
  • Dickey, D.A. and Fuller, W.A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427-431.
  • Engle, R. F. and Granger, C.W.J. (1987). Cointegration and error correction: representation, estimation and testing. Econometrica, 55(2), 251-276.
  • Fitzpatrick, M. (1983). The definition and assessment of political risk in international business: a review of the literature. Academy of Management Review, 8(2), 249-254.
  • Fosu, A. K. (2003). Political instability and export performance in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Development Studies, 39(4), 68-83.
  • Grechyna, D. (2017). Trade openness and political distortions. Munich Personal Repec Archive, Paper No. 79951.
  • Hjalmarsson, E. and Österholm, P. (2007). Testing for co-integration using the Johansen Methodology when variables are near integrated. IMF Working Paper, June 2007.
  • Karamelikli, H. and Kesgingöz, H. (2017). Finansal gelişme bileşenlerinin ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi: Türkiye örneği [Financial development components impact on economic growth: Evidence from Turkey]. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimler Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(1), 683-701.
  • Kartal, G. and Öztürk, S. (2017). Türkiye’de politik istikrarsızlık ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi. [Politic instability and economic growth relationship in Turkey]. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 10(4), 250-270.
  • Knight, F.H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. The Riverside Press: Cambridge.
  • Kobrin, S. J. (1978). When does political instability result in increasing investment risk? Columbia Journal of World Business, 113-122.
  • Koşar, A. (2018). Türkiye’nin son on yılda en çok ihracat ve ithalat yaptığı ülkelerin hiyerarşik kümeleme analizi ile gruplandırılması ve değerlendirilmesi. [Hierarchical clustering analysis of Turkey’s exporting and importing countries in the last decade]. Bucak İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(1), 17-28.
  • Lebe, F. and Akbaş, Y.E. (2014). Türkiye’de konut talebinin analizi. [Analysis of home demand in Turkey]. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 28(1), 57-83.
  • Miller, K. D. (1992). A framework for integrated risk management in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 23(2), 311-331.
  • Moser, C., Nestmann, T. and Wedow, M. (2008). Political risk and export promotion: evidence from Germany, The World Economy, 31(6), 781-803.
  • Ng, S. and Perron, P. (2001). Lag length selection and the construction of unit root tests with good size and power. Econometrica, 69(6), 1519-1554.
  • Ozbozkurt, O. B. and Satrovic, E. (2018). Causal relationship between foreign direct investment and macro-level political stability in Turkey. 27th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social Development, Rome, 1-2 March 2018.
  • Özek, Y. (2019). Politik istikrar ve ekonomik belirleyiciler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi: Avrupa Birliği üyesi merkezi ve doğu Avrupa geçiş ekonomileri. [Causality relation between political stability and economic determinants: European Union member Center and Eastern European transition economies] Turkish Studies, 14(2), 465-481.
  • Phillips, P.C.B. and Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75, 335-346.
  • Qadri, N., Shah, N. and Qureshi, M. N. (2020). Impact of political instability on international investment and trade in Pakistan. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 9(2), 283-305.
  • Şanlısoy, S. (2010). Politik istikrarsızlık-ekonomik süreç politikaları etkileşimi. [Political instability-economic process policies interaction] Sosyoekonomi, Aralık Sayısı, 192-214.
  • Sidek, N.Z.M. and Hanif, A. (2013). The impact of political risk on imports in Malaysia. Journal of Emerging Economies and Islamic Research, 1(1), 51-63.
  • Simon, J. D. (1984). A theoretical perspective on political risk. Journal of International Business Studies, 15(3), 123-143.
  • Şimşek, T. (2015). Politik istikrarsızlık çerçevesinde politika ve iktisat etkileşimi. [The interaction of politics and economics in the context of political instability]. Journal of International Management, Educational and Economics Perspectives, 3(2), 39-54.
  • Sürmen, Y. E. (2019). Siyasi krizlerin Türkiye’nin dış ticaretine etkisi: rahip Brunson davası. [The effects of political crises on Turkey’s foreign trade: pastor Brunson case] Academic Review of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(2), 189-207.
  • Topallı, N. (2015). Turizm sektörünün Türkiye’nin ekonomik büyümesi üzerine etkisi. [The effect of tourism sector on the economic growth of Turkey: 1963-2011]. International Journal of Economic and Administrative Studies, 14, 339-352.
  • Yahaya, H. S. (2020, October 3rd). An Evaluation on Political Risk and its Involvement in International Trade of Goods (Importing and Exporting) and the Legal Means of Managing the Risk.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319315886_An_Evaluation_on_Political_Risk_and_its_involvement_in_international_trade_of_goods_importing_and_exporting_and_the_legal_means_of_managing_the_risk

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular İktisat
Yayınlanma Tarihi Sonbahar
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Yilmaz Onur ARİ (Sorumlu Yazar)
BAYBURT ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ, İKTİSAT BÖLÜMÜ
0000-0001-7634-2531
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi 31 Ekim 2021
Yayınlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021, Cilt 6, Sayı 16

Kaynak Göster

Bibtex @araştırma makalesi { iktisad840909, journal = {İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi}, issn = {}, eissn = {2564-7466}, address = {}, publisher = {H. Mustafa PAKSOY}, year = {2021}, volume = {6}, pages = {422 - 431}, doi = {10.25204/iktisad.840909}, title = {Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey}, key = {cite}, author = {Ari, Yilmaz Onur} }
APA Ari, Y. O. (2021). Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey . İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi , 6 (16) , 422-431 . DOI: 10.25204/iktisad.840909
MLA Ari, Y. O. "Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey" . İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi 6 (2021 ): 422-431 <https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/iktisad/issue/65412/840909>
Chicago Ari, Y. O. "Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey". İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi 6 (2021 ): 422-431
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey AU - Yilmaz Onur Ari Y1 - 2021 PY - 2021 N1 - doi: 10.25204/iktisad.840909 DO - 10.25204/iktisad.840909 T2 - İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 422 EP - 431 VL - 6 IS - 16 SN - -2564-7466 M3 - doi: 10.25204/iktisad.840909 UR - https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.840909 Y2 - 2021 ER -
EndNote %0 İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey %A Yilmaz Onur Ari %T Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey %D 2021 %J İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi %P -2564-7466 %V 6 %N 16 %R doi: 10.25204/iktisad.840909 %U 10.25204/iktisad.840909
ISNAD Ari, Yilmaz Onur . "Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey". İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi 6 / 16 (Ekim 2021): 422-431 . https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.840909
AMA Ari Y. O. Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey. İKTİSAD. 2021; 6(16): 422-431.
Vancouver Ari Y. O. Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 2021; 6(16): 422-431.
IEEE Y. O. Ari , "Causality Relationship Between Government Stability and Trade Openness: The Case of Turkey", İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, c. 6, sayı. 16, ss. 422-431, Eki. 2021, doi:10.25204/iktisad.840909


Creative Commons Lisansı

Bu dergide yayınlanan tüm makaleler Creative Commons Atıf-GayriTicari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.