Ticari Açıklığın Siyasal İktisadı ve Yolsuzluk Üzerindeki Etkileri

Öz

Gelişmekte olan ülkelerin dışa açılma ile beraber maruz kaldıkları çeşitli riskler söz konusudur. Küresel ekonomiyle daha fazla bütünleşmenin ve ticari engellerin kaldırılmasının, kaynak dağılımında verimliliği sağlaması ve refahı artırması beklenirken, bu durum birçok ülkede gerçekleşmemektedir. Gelişmekte olan ülkeler için ticari serbestleşme arayışında ticari engellerin kaldırılması, rant arama faaliyetlerine yol açabileceğinden ticari açıklığın ekonomik sonuçlarına ilave olarak, politik ve kurumsal yapılar üzerindeki etkisi de önemlidir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye ve seçilmiş MENA ülkelerinde 1996-2018 dönemi verileriyle Genişletilmiş Ortalama Grup (AMG) yöntemi kullanılarak dışa açıklığın yolsuzluk üzerindeki etkisini analiz etmektedir. Sonuçlar, ticari açıklığın yolsuzluğun kontrolünü azalttığını; buna karşılık ekonomik büyüme, hukukun üstünlüğü ve kamu harcamalarının ise yolsuzluğun kontrolünü artırdığını göstermektedir. Bunun yanında Dumitrescu-Hurlin (2012) nedensellik testi bulguları, değişkenler arasında farklı ilişkinin varlığını ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ticari açıklık
• Yolsuzluk
• Küreselleşme

The Political Economics of Trade Openness and Its Impacts on Corruption

Öz

Developing countries are exposed to various risks as they open their economies. While becoming more integrated with the global economy and removing trade barriers is expected to improve efficiency in resource allocation and increase welfare, in many countries this does not occur. In addition to the economic consequences of trade openness, its impact on political and institutional structures is significant for developing countries as removing trade barriers in pursuit of trade liberalization can lead to rent-seeking activities. This study investigates the impact of trade openness on corruption using the Augmented Mean Group (AMG) method with data from Turkey and selected MENA countries over the period 1996-2018. The results show that trade openness reduces control of corruption, while economic growth, the rule of law, and public expenditures increase control of corruption. n addition, Dumitrescu-Hurlin’s (2012) causality test findings reveal the existence of different linkages between variables.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Trade openness
• Corruption
• Globalization

Kaynakça

1. Alesina, A. & Angeletos, G. M. (2005). Corruption, inequality, and fairness. Journal of Monetary Economics, 52(7), 1227-1244. google scholar
2. Altıntaş, H. ve Alancıoğlu, E. (2021). Dış borçlanma ve ekonomik büyüme: Gelişmekte olan ülkeler üzerine yatay kesit bağımlılığı altında panel veri analizi. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(1), 261-279. google scholar
3. Atasoy, B. S. (2017). Testing the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis across the U.S.: Evidence from panel mean group estimators. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 77, 731-747. google scholar
4. Awokuse, T. O. (2008) Trade openness and economic growth: is growth export-led or import-led?. Applied Economics, 40(2), 161-173. DOI: 10.1080/00036840600749490. google scholar
5. Baksi, S., Bose, P., & Pandey, M. (2009). The impact of liberalization on bureaucratic corruption. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 72(1), 214-224. google scholar
6. Barro, R. (1991). Economic growth in a cross section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 407-443. google scholar
7. Bayraç, H. N. ve Doğan, E. (2018). Teknoloji yoksulluğu ve Türkiye’de ihracatın ithalata olan bağımlılığı. International Journal of Social Inquiry, 11(1), 17-42. google scholar
8. Bhattacharyya, S. & Jha, R. (2013). Economic growth, law, and corruption: Evidence from India. Comparative Economic Studies, 55, 287-313. doi:10.1057/ces.2013.4. google scholar

9. Bonaglia, F., Macedo, J. B. D. & Bussolo, M. (2001). How globalisation improves governance. OECD Working Paper No. 181, 1-40. google scholar
10. Breusch, T. S. & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification tests in econometrics. Review of Economic Studies, 47, 239-53. google scholar
11. Carvalho, M., Azevedo, A., & Massuquetti, A. (2019). Emerging countries and the effects of the trade war between US and China. Economies, 7(45), 1-21. doi:10.3390/economies7020045. google scholar
12. Das, J. & DiRienzo, C. (2009). The nonlinear impact of globalization on corruption. The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, 3(2), 33-46. google scholar
13. Deraniyagala, S. (2007). Uluslararası ticarette neoliberalizm: Sağlam bir iktisat kuramı mı, yoksa bir iman sorunu mu? Alfredo Saad-Filho ve Deborah Johnston (Haz.), Neoliberalizm: Muhalif bir seçki (2. Baskı, Şeyda Başlı & Tuncel Öncel, Çev.), içinde (s. 168-178). İstanbul: Yordam Kitap. google scholar
14. Dumitrescu, E. I. & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460. google scholar
15. Eberhardt, M. & Bond, S. (2009). Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: a novel estimator. MPRA Paper No. 17692, 1-26. google scholar
16. Gezikol, B. ve Tunahan, H. (2018). The econometric analysis of the relationship between perceived corruption, foreign trade and foreign direct investment in the context of international indices. Alphanumeric Journal, 6(1), 117-132. google scholar
17. Gokcekus, O., Muchova, E., & Brincikova, Z. (2015) Level and quality of openness and corruption in the ECA countries. Applied Economics Letters, 22(16), 1340-1344. DOI: 10.1080/13504851.2015.1031863. google scholar
18. Göçer, İ., Mercan, M., & Hotunluoğlu, H. (2012). Seçilmiş OECD ülkelerinde cari işlemler açığının sürdürülebilirliği: Yatay kesit bağımlılığı altında çoklu yapısal kırılmalı panel veri analizi. Maliye Dergisi, 163, 449-470. google scholar
19. Gygli, S., Haelg, F., Potrafke, N., & Sturm, J. E. (2019). The KOF globalisation index-revisited. The Review of International Organizations, 14(3), 543-574. google scholar
20. Hashiguchi, Y. & Hamori, S. (2010). Small sample properties of CIPS panel unit root test under conditional and unconditional heteroscedasticity. MPRA Paper No. 24053, 1-22. google scholar
21. Irwin, D. A. (2002). Did import substitution promote growth in the late nineteenth century. NBER Working Paper No.8751, 1-36. google scholar
22. Kay, C. (2011). Latin American theories of development and underdevelopment. London & New York: Routledge. google scholar
23. Knack, S. & Azfar, O. (2003). Trade intensity, country size and corruption. Economics of governance, 4(1), 1-18. google scholar
24. Kotera, G., Okada, K., & Samreth, S. (2012). Government size, democracy, and corruption: An empirical investigation. Economic Modelling, 29(6), 2340-2348. google scholar
25. Krueger, A. O. (1974). The political economy of the rent-seeking society. The American Economic Review, 64(3), 291-303. google scholar
26. Mahmood, H., Tanveer, M., Ahmad, A. R., & Furqan, M. (2021). Rule of law and control of corruption in managing CO2 emissions issue in Pakistan. MPRA Paper No. 109250, 1-15. google scholar
27. Majeed, M. T. (2014). Corruption and trade. Journal of Economic Integration, 29(4), 759-782. http:// dx.doi.org/10.11130/jei.2014.29.4.759. google scholar
28. Marjit, S., Mandal, B., & Roy, S. (2014). Trade openness, corruption and factor abundance: Evidence from a dynamic panel. Review of Development Economics, 18(1), 45-58. google scholar
29. Musila, J. W. & Yiheyis, Z. (2015). The impact of trade openness on growth: The case of Kenya. Journal of Policy Modeling, 37(2), 342-354. google scholar
30. Musila, J. W. & Sigue, S. P. (2010). Corruption and International trade: an empirical investigation of African countries. World Economy, 33(1), 129-146. google scholar
31. Neeman, Z., Paserman, M. D., & Simhon, A. (2008). Corruption and openness. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 8(1), 1-38. https://doi.org/10.2202/1935-1682.2013. google scholar
32. Nketia, E. B. & Kong, Y. (2021). Deciphering African financial development interaction with institutional quality and economic growth nexus. Etikonomi, 20(1), 24-44. google scholar
33. O’Rourke, K. H. (2000). Tariffs and growth in the late 19th century. Economic Journal, 110, 456-483. google scholar
34. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. CESifo Working Paper, No. 1229, Center for Economic Studies and ifo Institute (CESifo), Munich, 1-40. google scholar
35. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265-312. google scholar
36. Pesaran, M. H. & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. google scholar
37. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. Econometrics Journal, 11, 105-127. google scholar
38. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1999). Corruption and government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. google scholar
39. Saad-Filho, A. (2005). The rise and decline of Latin American structuralism and dependency theory. In Jomo KS & Erik S. Reinert (Eds.), The origins of development economics: How schools of economic thought have addressed development (pp. 128-145). New Delhi: Tulika Books. google scholar
40. Sachs, J. & Warner, A. (1995). Economic reform and the process of global integration. Brookings Paper on Economic Activity, 1, 1-117. google scholar
41. Sarkar, P. (2008). Trade openness and growth: Is there any link?. Journal of Economic Issues, 42(3), 763-785. DOI: 10.1080/00213624.2008.11507178. google scholar
42. Senderovic, A. (2009). Trade restrictiveness or trade openness? The effects on corruption: A panel data study of the relation between trade restrictiveness and corruption in Europe in Jönköping University (Bachelor thesis). Retrieved from: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/ diva2:228955/FULLTEXT01.pdfAuthor google scholar
43. Swamy, P. A. (1970). Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model. Econometrica, 38(2), 311-323. google scholar
44. Tahir, M. & Azid, T. (2015). The relationship between international trade openness and economic growth in the developing economies: Some new dimensions. Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies, 8(2), 123-139. google scholar
45. Tanzi, V. (1998). Corruption around the world: Causes, consequences, scope, and cures. IMF Staff Papers, 45(4), 559-594. google scholar
46. The Global Economy (2021). Indicators. Retrieved from https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/ download-data.php Accessed 10.03.2020. google scholar
47. Torrez, J. (2002). The effect of openness on corruption. Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 11(4), 387-403. google scholar
48. Wei, S. J. (2001). Natural openness and good government. Center for International Development at Harvard University Working Paper No. 61, 1-30. google scholar
49. Williamson, J. (1990). What Washington means by policy reform. In John Williamson (Ed.), Latin American adjustment: How much has happened? (pp. 7-20). Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics. google scholar
50. World Bank (2021). World Bank open data. Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org/ Accessed 14.03.2020. google scholar
51. Zakaria, M. (2009). Openness and corruption: A time-series analysis. Zagreb International Review of Economics & Business, 12(2), 1-14. google scholar