Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis

Mikail Pehlivan

doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1743740

TR EN

HIC ve IBT Grupları İçin Feldstein–Horioka Bulmacasının Test Edilmesi: Gizli Simetrik ve Asimetrik Nedensellik Analizinden Kanıtlar

Öz

Bu çalışma, yatay kesit bağımlılığını, eğim heterojenliğini ve asimetrik şokları dikkate alan bootstrap panel nedensellik yaklaşımıyla 1970-2024 döneminde yüksek gelirli (HIC) ve IDA-IBRD borçlu (IBT) ekonomiler için Feldstein–Horioka bulmacasını yeniden incelemektedir. Simetrik ve asimetrik tam-örneklem testleri, ulusal tasarrufun yurt içi yatırımın nedeni olmadığını ve yüksek sermaye hareketliliğini göstermektedir. Buna karşın kayan pencere tahminleri, gizli ve zamanla değişen bağları ortaya çıkarmakta; tasarruf kaynaklı yatırım, HIC grubunda 1993’teki ERM krizi ve 2021 pandemi toparlanması sırasında yeniden belirirken; IBT grubunda 1990-95, 2000-02 ve 2004’te ortaya çıkmaktadır. Ayrıca IBT için 1984-85 ve 1987-88’de pozitif şok; 2020’de ise HIC için negatif şok gözlemlenmektedir. Katsayı işaretlerindeki değişim, yüksek kredi artışları sırasında yatırım-çekişli bir süreci desteklemektedir. Bulgular, sermaye hareketliliğinin kalıcı değil, dönemsellik gösterdiğini ortaya koymakta; politika önerileri, dış finansmanın aniden kesildiği dönemlerde yatırımı korumak için iç tasarrufun güçlendirilmesi, yerel finansman araçlarının çeşitlendirilmesi ve karşıt-döngüsel tamponların önemini vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sermaye hareketliliği, iç tasarruf, bootstrap panel nedensellik, asimetrik şoklar, kayan pencere analizi

Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis

Öz

Using a bootstrap panel-causality framework that accommodates cross-sectional dependence, slope heterogeneity and asymmetric shocks, this study re-examines the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle for high-income (HIC) and IDA-IBRD borrower (IBT) economies during 1970–2024. Symmetric and asymmetric full-sample tests indicate no significant causality from national saving to domestic investment, implying high average capital mobility. Rolling-window estimation, however, uncovers hidden, time-varying linkages. Saving-led investment re-emerges in HIC during the 1993 ERM turmoil and the 2021 pandemic rebound, while IBT exhibit pronounced causality in 1990-95, 2000-02 and 2004, with additional positive-shock episodes in 1984-85 and 1987-88 and a negative-shock episode for HIC in 2020. Coefficient signs switch over time, supporting an investment-pull narrative during credit booms. The evidence therefore portrays capital mobility as episodic rather than permanent. Policy implications highlight the importance of strengthening domestic saving mechanisms, broadening local funding instruments and maintaining counter-cyclical buffers to safeguard investment when external finance suddenly retreats.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Capital mobility, domestic saving, bootstrap panel causality, asymmetric shocks, rolling-window analysis

Kaynakça

Ansar, A., Flyvbjerg, B., Budzier, A., & Lunn, D. (2016). Does infrastructure investment lead to economic growth or economic fragility? Evidence from China. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 32(3), 360–390.
Apergis, N., & Tsoumas, C. (2009). A survey of the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle: What has been done and where we stand. Research in Economics, 63(2), 64–76.
Attanasio, O. P., Picci, L., & Scorcu, A. E. (2000). Saving, growth, and investment: A macroeconomic analysis using a panel of countries. Review of Economics and Statistics, 82(2), 182–211.
Baxter, M., & Crucini, M. J. (1993). Explaining saving–investment correlations. American Economic Review, 83(3), 416–436.
Bayoumi, T., Sarno, L., & Taylor, M. P. (1999). European capital flows and regional risk. The Manchester School, 67(1), 21–38.
Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The Lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model selection in econometrics. Review of Economic Studies, 47, 239–253.
Brooks, C., & Hinich, M. J. (1998). Episodic nonstationarity in exchange rates. Applied Economics Letters, 5(11), 719–722.
Cadoret, I. (2001). The saving-investment relation: A panel data approach. Applied Economics Letters, 8, 517–520.
Camarero, M., Muñoz, A., & Tamarit, C. (2021). 50 years of capital mobility in the Eurozone: Breaking the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle. Open Economies Review, 32(5), 867–905.
Caspi, I. (2017). Rtadf: Testing for bubbles with Eviews. Journal of Statistical Software, 81, 1–16.

Chang, Y., & Smith, R. T. (2014). Feldstein-Horioka puzzles. European Economic Review, 72, 98–112.
Colecchia, A., & Schreyer, P. (2002). ICT investment and economic growth in the 1990s: Is the United States a unique case? A comparative study of nine OECD countries. Review of Economic Dynamics, 5(2), 408–442.
Coakley, J., Fuertes, A. M., & Spagnolo, F. (2004). Is the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle history? The Manchester School, 72(5), 569–590.
Coakley, J., Hasan, F., & Smith, R. (1999). Saving, investment, and capital mobility in LDCs. Review of International Economics, 7(4), 632–640.
Coakley, J., Kulasi, F., & Smith, R. (1998). The Feldstein–Horioka puzzle and capital mobility: A review. International Journal of Finance and Economics, 3, 169–188.
De Long, J. B., & Summers, L. H. (1991). Equipment investment and economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), 445–502.
Dlamini, J., Balcilar, M., Gupta, R., & Inglesi-Lotz, R. (2015). Revisiting the causality between electricity consumption and economic growth in South Africa: A bootstrap rolling-window approach. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 8(2), 169–190.
Dornbusch, R. (1991). Comment to Feldstein and Bacchetta. In B. D. Bernheim & J. B. Shoven (Eds.), National saving and economic performance (pp. 201–226). University of Chicago Press.
Dooley, M., Frankel, J. A., & Mathieson, D. (1987). International capital mobility in developing countries vs. industrial countries: What do the savings-investment correlations tell us? IMF Staff Papers, 34, 503–529.
Duran, H. E., & Ferreira-Lopes, A. (2022). The revival of the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle and moderation of capital flows after the global financial crisis. Research in International Business and Finance, 60, 101580.
Dzhumashev, R., & Cooray, A. (2017). The Feldstein-Horioka hypothesis revisited. The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, 17(1), 1–30.
Eyuboglu, S., & Uzar, U. (2020). Is the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle valid in Lucky Seven countries? The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 29(4), 399–419.
Feldstein, M. (1983). Domestic saving and international capital movements in the long run and the short run. European Economic Review, 21(1–2), 129–151.
Feldstein, M., & Bacchetta, P. (1991). National saving and international investment. In National saving and economic performance (pp. 201–226). University of Chicago Press.
Feldstein, M., & Horioka, C. (1980). Domestic saving and international capital flows. The Economic Journal, 90(358), 314–329.
Foon, T. (2008). A re-examination of the role of foreign direct investment and exports in Malaysia's economic growth: A time series analysis, 1970–2006. International Journal of Management Studies, 15, 47–67.
Ford, N., & Horioka, C. Y. (2016). The "real" explanation of the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle. NBER Working Paper No. 22081.
Fry, M. J. (1980). Saving, investment, growth and the cost of financial repression. World Development, 8(4), 317–327.
Ghosh, D., & Dutt, S. (2011). International capital mobility and the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle: An empirical examination for the G5 nations. Southwestern Economic Review, 38(1), 27–36.
Giannone, D., & Lenza, M. (2010). The Feldstein-Horioka fact. European Central Bank Working Paper Series No. 873.
Golub, S. S. (1990). International capital mobility: Net vs. gross stocks and flows. Journal of International Money and Finance, 9, 424–439.
Gregorio, J., & Guidotti, P. E. (1995). Financial development and economic growth. World Development, 23(3), 433–448.
Johnson, M. A., & Lamdin, D. J. (2014). Investment and saving and the Euro crisis: A new look at Feldstein-Horioka. Journal of Economics and Business, 76, 101–114.
Ketenci, N. (2010). The Feldstein-Horioka puzzle by groups of OECD members: The panel approach. MPRA Paper No. 25848.
Khan, M. S., & Reinhart, C. M. (1990). Private investment and economic growth in developing countries. World Development, 18(1), 19–27.
Kim, W. Y., & Jeon, B. N. (2013). Has international capital mobility increased in Asia? Evidence from the post-1997 financial crisis period. Contemporary Economic Policy, 31(2), 345–365.
Kónya, L. (2006). Exports and growth: Granger causality analysis on OECD countries with a panel data approach. Economic Modelling, 23(6), 978–992.
Kumar, S. D., Webber, J., & Fargher, S. (2012). Testing the validity of the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle for Australia. Applied Economics, 44(5), 599–605.
Lane, P., & Milesi-Ferretti, G. M. (2001). Long term capital movements. NBER Macroeconomics Annual 16, 73–115.
Martins, A. (2024). Macro fundamentals and the resurgence of the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle in Europe. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 93, 102006.
Mastroyiannis, A. (2007). Current account dynamics and the Feldstein and Horioka puzzle: The case of Greece. The European Journal of Comparative Economics, 4(1), 91–99.
McKinnon, R. I. (1973). Money and capital in economic development. The Brookings Institution.
Narayan, P. K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: Evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics, 37(17), 1979–1990.
Nakhli, M. S., Dhaoui, A., & Chevallier, J. (2022). Bootstrap rolling-window Granger causality dynamics between momentum and sentiment: Implications for investors. Annals of Finance, 18(2), 267–283.
Obstfeld, M. (1986). Capital mobility in the world economy: Theory and measurement. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 24(1), 55–103.
Obstfeld, M., & Rogoff, K. (2000). The six major puzzles in international macroeconomics: Is there a common cause? NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 15, 339–390.
Özcan, B., Apergis, N., & Shahbaz, M. (2018). A revisit of the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis for Turkey: New evidence from bootstrap rolling window causality. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(32), 32381–32394.
Özdemir, O. (2022). High-Income Countries and the Feldstein–Horioka puzzle: Econometric evidence from dynamic common correlated effects model. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 25(1), 45–67.
Özmen, E., & Parmaksız, K. (2003). Policy regime change and the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle: The UK evidence. Journal of Policy Modeling, 25(2), 137–149.
Padhan, R., Bhat, J. A., & Prabheesh, K. P. (2025). The Feldstein–Horioka puzzle in India: Some asymmetric evidence. Asian Economic Letters, 6(3), 6–10.
Pata, U. K. (2018). The Feldstein-Horioka puzzle in E7 countries: Evidence from panel cointegration and asymmetric causality analysis. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 27(8), 968–984.
Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross-section dependence in panels. CESifo Working Paper No. 1229.
Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105–127.
Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50–93.
Shaw, E. (1973). Financial deepening in economic development. Oxford University Press.
Shibata, A., & Shintani, M. (1998). Capital mobility in the world economy: An alternative test. Journal of International Money and Finance, 17, 741–756.
Sinn, S. (1992). Saving-investment correlations and capital mobility: On the evidence from annual data. The Economic Journal, 102, 1162–1170.
Summers, L. H. (1988). Tax policy and international competitiveness. In J. Frenkel (Ed.), International Aspects of Fiscal Policies. NBER Conference Report, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Swamy, P. A. (1970). Efficient inference in a random coefficient regression model. Econometrica, 38(2), 311–323.
Taylor, A. (1994). Domestic saving and international capital flows reconsidered. NBER Working Paper No. 4892.
Tesar, L. L. (1991). Savings, investment and international capital flows. Journal of International Economics, 31(1), 55–78.
Tumanoska, D., Mojsoska-Blazevski, N., & Petreski, M. (2016). To what extent are small economies exposed to foreign capital? Insight into the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle in Macedonia. Ekonomski Pregled, 67(2), 116–134.
Yilanci, V., & Aydin, M. (2017). Oil Prices and Stock Prices: An Asymmetric Panel Causality Approach. Journal of Applied Research in Finance and Economics, 2(4), 9–19.
Yilanci, V., & Kilci, E. N. (2021). The Feldstein-Horioka puzzle for the Next Eleven countries: A panel data analysis with Fourier functions. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 30(3), 341–364.
Yilanci, V., & Ozgur, O. (2019). Testing the environmental Kuznets curve for G7 countries: Evidence from a bootstrap panel causality test in rolling windows. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 26, 24795–24805.
Younas, J., & Chakraborty, D. (2011). Globalization and the Feldstein-Horioka puzzle. Applied Economics, 43(16), 2089–2096.
Zellner, A. (1962). An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regressions and tests for aggregation bias. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 57(298), 348–368.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Makroekonomik Teori, Büyüme, Kalkınma Ekonomisi - Makro, Maliye Politikası

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Mikail Pehlivan ^*
0000-0002-7273-333X
Türkiye

Yayımlanma Tarihi

17 Mart 2026

Gönderilme Tarihi

16 Temmuz 2025

Kabul Tarihi

10 Aralık 2025

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2026 Cilt: 27 Sayı: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1743740

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA54GY79PE

APA

Pehlivan, M. (2026). Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 27(1), 154-173. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1743740

AMA

1.Pehlivan M. Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2026;27(1):154-173. doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1743740

Chicago

Pehlivan, Mikail. 2026. “Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 27 (1): 154-73. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1743740.

EndNote

Pehlivan M (01 Mart 2026) Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 27 1 154–173.

IEEE

[1]M. Pehlivan, “Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis”, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, c. 27, sy 1, ss. 154–173, Mar. 2026, doi: 10.17494/ogusbd.1743740.

ISNAD

Pehlivan, Mikail. “Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 27/1 (01 Mart 2026): 154-173. https://doi.org/10.17494/ogusbd.1743740.

JAMA

1.Pehlivan M. Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2026;27:154–173.

MLA

Pehlivan, Mikail. “Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis”. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, c. 27, sy 1, Mart 2026, ss. 154-73, doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1743740.

Vancouver

1.Mikail Pehlivan. Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 01 Mart 2026;27(1):154-73. doi:10.17494/ogusbd.1743740

HIC ve IBT Grupları İçin Feldstein–Horioka Bulmacasının Test Edilmesi: Gizli Simetrik ve Asimetrik Nedensellik Analizinden Kanıtlar

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

Testing the Feldstein–Horioka Puzzle for HIC and IBT Groups: Evidence from Hidden Symmetric and Asymmetric Causality Analysis

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kaynakça

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Konular

Bölüm

Yazarlar

Yayımlanma Tarihi

Gönderilme Tarihi

Kabul Tarihi

Yayımlandığı Sayı

DOI

IZ

Kaynak Göster