Türkiye’de Sanayi Üretim Endeksinin Periyodik Durağanlık Özellikleri

Öz

Katı şekilde takvime bağlı olmayan periyodik hareketler, genellikle seride istenen özellikler değildir sorunlardan ötürü genelde seriden filtrelenerek atılmaya çalışılmaktadır. Bu yaklaşıma karşın, günümüzde yapısının önemli özellikler taşıdığı ve bu nedenle serilerin periyodiklik özellikleri ile baş edebilen teknikler çerçevesinde incelenmesi gerektiği görüşü yaygınlaşmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, ikinci görüş dikkate alınarak, Türkiye’de sanayi üretim endeksinin periyodik yapısı zaman bölgesi teknikleri ile detaylı olarak incelenmekte ve sanayi üretim serisinin durağanlık özellikleri periyodik bağlamda ele alınmaktır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sanayi Üretim Endeksi, Durağanlık, Zaman Serileri, Periyodik Özellikler

Periodic Stationarity Properties of Industrial Production Index in Turkey

Öz

Periodic movements which do not strictly depend on calendar time are usually undesirable properties in series and it is generally tried to dispose from series by filtering due to the problems posed in the empirical analysis. Despite this approach, nowadays the opinion that periodic structure of an economical series has important properties and thus series need to be examined within the framework of techniques which are able to cope with periodicity properties becomes widespread. In this study, considering the second opinion, periodic structure of Turkey's industrial production index is examined in detail by time domain techniques and stationarity properties of the industrial production series are dealt with in the periodic context

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Industrial Production Index, Stationarity, Time Series, Periodic Properties

Kaynakça

1. Bilgin, C. ve A. Şahbaz (2009), “Türkiye’de Büyüme ve İhracat Arasındaki Nedensellik İlişkileri”, Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8(1), 177-198.
2. Campbell, J. Y. ve Y. Perron (1991), “Pitfalls and Opportunities: What Macroeconomists Should Know about Unit Roots”, Ed. Olivier Jean Blanchard ve Stanley Fischer, NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 6, Cambridge: MIT Press, 141-200.
3. Caner, M. ve B. Hansen (2001), “Threshold Autoregression with a Unit Root”, Econometrica, 69(6), 1555-1596.
4. Dickey, D. A. ve W. A. Fuller (1979), “Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series With a Unit Root”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427–431.
5. Enders, W. ve C. W. J. Granger (1998), “Unit-Root Tests and Asymmetric Adjustment with an Example Using the Term Structure of Interest Rates”, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 16, 304-311.
6. Ertuğrul, H. M. ve U. Soytaş (2013), “Sanayi Üretim Endeksinin Durağanlık Özellikleri”, İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 28(328), 51-66.
7. Franses, P. H. (1996), Periodicity and Stochastic Trends in Economic Time Series, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. Gasmi, A. (2013), “Seasonal Adjustment versus Seasonality Modelling: Effect on Tourism Demand Forecasting”, Advances in Management & Applied Economics, 3(4), 119-132.

9. Gil-Alana, L. A. (2005), “Modelling International Monthly Arrivals Using Seasonal Univariate Long-Memory Processes”, Tourism Management, 26, 867–878.
10. Granger, C. W. J. ve P. Newbold (1974), “Spurious Regressions in Econometrics”, Journal of Econometrics, 2, 111-120.
11. Gürel, S. P. ve M. Tiryakioğlu (2012), “Seasonal Unit Root: An Application to Turkish Industrial Production Series”, Business and Economics Research Journal, 3(4), 77-90.
12. Hasanov, M. (2008), “Enflasyon Belirsizliğinin Üretim Üzerindeki Etkileri: Türkiye Örneği”, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 9(2), 191-206.
13. Hyndman, R. (2011), “Cyclic and Seasonal Time Series”, http://robjhyndman.com/hyndsight/cyclicts/ , (Erişim: 01.09.2014).
14. Koçak, N. A. (2009), “Sanayi Üretiminde Tatil Etkileri”, Ekonometri ve İstatistik, 10, 20-28.
15. Kwiatkowski, D., P. C. B. Phillips, P. Schmidt, ve Y. Shin (1992), “Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity Against the Alternative of a Unit Root”, Journal of Econometrica, 54, 159-178.
16. Lee, J. ve M. C. Strazicich (2003), “Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 85, 1082-1089.
17. Lee, J. ve M. C. Strazicich (2004), “Minimum LM Unit Root Test with One Structural Break”, Manuscript, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
18. López-de-Lacalle, J. (2005), “Periodic Autoregressive Time Series Models in R: The partsm Package”, BILCODEC 2005 Working Paper, Universidad del País Vasco UPV/EHU - De- partamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística). http://www.ehu.eus/repec/bilcodec/bc200501.pdf , (Erişim: 06.09.2014).
19. Lumsdaine, R. L. ve D. H. Papell (1997), “Multiple Trend Breaks and the Unit-Root Hypothesis”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 79, 212-218.
20. Ng, S. ve P. Perron (1995), “Unit Roots Tests in ARMA Models with DataDependent Methods for the Selection of the Truncation Lag”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 268-281.
21. Phillips, P. ve P. Perron (1988), “Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression”, Biometrica, 75, 335-346.
22. Perron, P. (1989), “The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis”, Econometrica, 57(6), 1361-1401.
23. Zivot, E. ve D. Andrews (1992), “Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis”, Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.