İhracat-Büyüme İlişkisi: Yapısal Kırılmalı Bir Analiz

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 4, 57 - 87, 01.10.2013

İsmet Göçer Nur Hepkarşı

Öz

Bu çalışmada; Türkiye’de ihracatın ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkileri 1989:Q1-2013:Q1 dönemi için Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik analizi ve çoklu yapısal kırılmalı eşbütünleşme yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Yapılan ampirik analizler sonucunda; ihracattaki %10’luk artışın milli geliri %2.7, sabit sermaye yatırımlarındaki %10’luk artışın milli geliri %1.4, işgücündeki %10’luk artışın milli geliri %2.9 ve dünya milli gelirindeki %10’luk artışın milli geliri %0.6 oranında arttırdığı, reel döviz kurundaki artışın milli gelir üzerindeki etkisinin ise oldukça küçük olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

hracat Öncüllü Büyüme Hipotezi, Yap sal K ve Eúbütünleúme Testleri, Toda-Yamamoto Nedensellik Analizi.

Relationship of Export-Growth: An Analysis with Structural Breaks

Öz

In this study; the effects of exports on economic growth in Turkey were analyzed for 1989:Q1-2013:Q1 period’s data via the Toda-Yamamoto causality and cointegration with multi structural breaks. As a result of the empirical analysis; it was determined that 10% increases in export by 2.7%, 10% increases in fixed capital formation by 1.4%, 10% increases in labor by 2.9% and 10% increases in gross domestic product of the world by 0.6% increases the gross domestic product of Turkey, the effects of the increases in the real exchange rate on the gross domestic product is quite small

Anahtar Kelimeler

Export-Led Growth Hypothesis, Unit Root and Cointegration Tests with Structural Breaks, Toda-Yamamoto Causality Analysis.

Kaynakça

• Abou-Stait F. (2005), “Are Exports the Engine of Economic Growth? An Application of Cointegration and Causality Analysis for Egypt, 1977- 2003”, Economic Research, Working Paper No.76.
• ayev, S. (2011), “ hracat ve Ekonomik Büyüme ili kisi: 12 Geçi
• Ekonomisi Örne inde Panel E bütünle me ve Panel Nedensellik
• Analizleri”, Ege Akademik Bak , 11(2), 241-254.
• Ahmad, J. ve Harnhirun, S. (1995), “Unit Roots and Cointegration in Estimating Causality Between Exports and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from the ASEAN Countries”, Economics Letters, 49, 329-334.
• Ahmad, J. (2001), “Causality between Exports and Economic Growth: What Do the Econometric Studies Tell Us?” Pacific Economic Review, 6(1)
• Alam, H. (2011), “Econometric Analysis of Export-Led Growth Hypothesis: Reflections from Pakistan”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 2(12), 329-341.
• Alimi, S. R. ve Muse, B. (2013), “Export - Led Growth or Growth – Driven Exports? Evidence from Nigeria”, British Journal of Economics, Management & Trade, 3(2), 89-100.
• Al-Yousif, Y. (1997), “Exports and Economic Growth: Some Empirical Evidence from the Arab Gulf Countries”, Applied Economics, 29, 693- 697.
• Alt nta , H. ve Çetinta , H. (2010), “Türkiye’de Ekonomik Büyüme, Be eri Sermaye ve hracat Aras ndaki li kilerin Ekonometrik Analizi: 1970- 2007”, Erciyes Üniversitesi ktisadi ve dari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 36, 33-56.
• Anoruo, E. (2000), “Exports And Economic Growth: An Error Correction Model”, Department of Management Science and Economics, Coppin State College, macroeconometrics4r.pdf, [31.07.2013].
• http://coin.wne.uw.edu.pl/~lgoczek/pdf/
• Bayrak, M. ve Kanca, O.C. (2013), “Türkiye’de 1970-2011 Y llar Aras nda Olu an Ekonomik ve Siyasi Geli melerin Seyri”, Akademik Bak Dergisi, 35, 1-20.
• Blecker, R.A. ve Razmi, A. (2009), “Export-Led Growth, Real Exchange Rates and the Fallacy of Composition”, RePEc Working Paper, No. 22.
• Berg, A. ve Kruger, A. (2003), “Trade, Growth, and Poverty: A Selective Survey”, http://www.internationalmonetaryfund.com/external/ pubs/ft/wp/2003/wp0330.pdf, [13.08.2013].
• Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L. ve Sanso, A. (2006), “Testing the Null of Cointegration with Structural Breaks”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 68(5), 623-646.
• Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L., Kim, D ve Perron, P. (2009), “GLS-Based Unit Root Tests with Multiple Structural Breaks Under Both the Null and the Alternative Hypotheses”, Econometric Theory, 25, 1754-1792.
• Castiglione, C. (2011), “Verdoorn-Kaldor’s Law: An Empirical Analysis with Time Series Data in the United States”, Advances in Management & Applied Economics, 1(3), 135-151.
• Çakmak, E. ve Temurlenk, M.S. (1995), “Causality Relationship Between Export Expansion and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence for Turkey”, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 50(1- 2), 129-143.
• Çil Yavuz, N. (2006), “Türkiye’de Turizm Gelirlerinin Ekonomik Büyümeye Etkisinin Testi: Yap sal K lma ve Nedensellik Analizi”, Do Üniversitesi Dergisi, 7 (2), 162-171.
• Demirhan, E. (2005), “Büyüme ve hracat Aras ndaki Nedensellik li kisi: Türkiye Örne i”, Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 60-4, 75-88.
• Dilrukshini, W. A. (2008), “Is the Export-Led Growth Hypothesis Valid for Sri Lanka? A Time-Series Analysis of Export-Led Growth Hypothesis”, Staff Studies, 38(1-2), 75-94.
• Dollar, D. (1992) “Outward-Oriented Developing Economies Really Do Grow More Rapidly: Evidence From 95 Ldcs, 1976-85”, Economic Development And Cultural Change, 40(3), 523-544.
• Dreger, C. ve Herzer, D. (2012), “A Further Examination of The Export-Led Growth Hypothesis”, Empir Econ FIW Working Paper, No. 84.
• Ekanayake, E.M. (1999), “Exports and Economic Growth in Asian Developing Countries: Cointegration and Error-Correction Models”, Journal of Economic Development, 24(2), 43-56.
• Esfahani, H.S. (1991), “Exports, Imports, and Economic Growth in Semi- Industrialized Countries”, Journal of Development Economics, 35, 93- 116.
• Feder, G. (1982), “On Export and Economic Growth”, Journal of Development Economics, 12, 59-73.
• Glasure, Y. ve Lee, A. (1999), “The Role of the Exchange Rate, Money and Government Expenditure from Korea”, Atlantic Economic Journal, 27(3), 260-272.
• Göçer, ., Mercan, M. ve Peker, O. (2013), “Kredi Hacmi Art n Cari Aç a Etkisi: Çoklu Yap sal K lmal E bütünle me Analizi”, Ekonometri ve
• statistik, 18, 1-17.
• Granger, C.W.J. (1969), “Investigating Causal Relations By Econometric Models and Cross-Spectral Methods”, Econometrica, 37, 424-438.
• Granger, C.W.J. (1980), “Testing for Causality: A Personal Viewpoint” Journal of Economic Dynamic and Control, 2, 329-352.
• Gregory, A.W. ve Hansen, B.E. (1996), “Residual-Based Tests for Cointegration in Models With Regime Shifts”, Journal of Econometrics, c. 70, s. 1, ss. 99-126.
• Grossman, G.M. ve Helpman, E. (1991), “Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth”, The Review of Economic Studies, 58(1), 43-61.
• Gujarati, N.D. ve Porter, D.C. (2012), Temel Ekonometri, Be inci Bas mdan Çeviri, Çevirenler: Ümit enesen ve Gülay Günlük enesen, Literatür Yay nlar , stanbul.
• Gül, E. ve Kamac , A. (2012), “D Ticaretin Büyüme Üzerine Etkileri: Bir Panel Veri Analizi”, Uluslararas Alanya letme Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(3), 81-91.
• Harrison, A. (1996), “Openness And Growth: A Time Series, Cross-Country Analysis for Developing Countries”, Journal For Development Economics, 48(2), 419-447.
• Hatemi- J, A. (2002), “Export Performance and Econom c Growth Nexus in Japan: a Bootstrap Approach”, Japan and The World Economy, 14, 25- 33.
• Hatemi-J, A. (2008), “Tests For Cointegration With Two Unknown Regime Shifts With an Application to Financial Market Integration”, Empirical Economics, 35, 497-505.
• Islam, M. (1998), “Export expansion and Economic Growth: Testing for Cointegration and Causality”, Applied Economics, 30, 415-425.
• Karagöz, M. ve en, A. (2005), “Exports and Economic Growth of Turkey: Co- integration and Error- Correction Analysis”, Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(13), 1-15.
• Kazgan, G. (1998), ktisat Kuram -Politikas ve Büyüme Stratejisi, Serin, V. (eds.) ktisat Politikas , 1. Bask , stanbul.
• lavuz, E. ve Topçu, A. (2012), “Export and Economic Growth in the Case
• ofthe Manufacturing Industry: Panel Data Analysis of
• DevelopingCountries”, International Journal of Economics and
• Financial Issues, 2(2), 201-215.
• Kónya, L. (2006), “Exports and Growth: Granger Causality Analysis on OECD Countries with a Panel Data Approach”, Economic Modelling, 23, 978-992.
• Kösekahyao lu, L. ve entürk, C. (2006), “ hracata Dayal Büyüme Hipotezinin Testi: Türkiye ve Yedi Geli en Ekonomiler Üzerine Bir
• nceleme”, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi S.B.E. Dergisi, 2(4), 23-45.
• Krueger, A. (1990), Perspectives on Trade and Development, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Lee, J. ve Strazicich, M.C. (2003), “Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root TestWith Two Structural Breaks”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 1082-1089.
• Liu, X., Shu, C. ve Sinclair, P. (2009), “Trade, Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth in Asian Economies”, Applied Economics, 41, 1603- 1612.
• Lumsdaine, R.L. ve Papell, D.H. (1997), “Multiple Trend Breaks and The Unit Root Hypothesis”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 79, 212- 218.
• Mahadevan, R. (2009) “The Sustainability of Export- Led Growth: The Singaporean Experience”, In Developing Areas of The Journal Academic Journal Article, 43(1), 233-247.
• Maki, D. (2012), “Tests For Cointegration Allowing For an Unknown Number of Breaks”, Economic Modelling, 29(5), 2011-2015.
• Miller, S.M. ve Russek, F.S. (1990), “Cointegration and Errorcorrection Models: The Temporal Causality Between Government Taxes and Spending”, Southern Economic Journal, 57, 221-229.
• Nain, A. ve Ahmad, W. (2010), “Export-Led Growth Hypothesis in India: Some Further Evidences”, The IUP Journal of Monetary Economics, 8(3), 69-82.
• Ng, S. ve Perron, P. (2001), “Lag Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power”, Econometrica, 69, 1519- 1554.
• Paul, B. (2011), “Revisiting Export- Led Graoth for Bangladesh: A Synthesis of Cointegration and Innovation Accounting”, International Journal of Economics and Finance, 3(6), 3-15.
• Perron, P. (1989), The Great Crash, The Oil Price Shock, and The Unit Root Hypothesis, Econometrica, 57(2), 1361-1401.
• Perron, P. (1997), “Further Evidence on Breaking Trend Functions in Macroeconomic Veriables”, Journal of Econometrics, 80, 355-385.
• Romer, P.M. (1989), “What Determines the Rate of Growth and Technological Change?”, World Bank Working Paper, No. 279.
• Sandalc lar, A. (2012), “BRIC Ülkelerinde Ekonomik Büyüme Ve hracat Aras ndaki li ki: Panel E bütünle me ve Panel Nedensellik”, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi BF Dergisi, 17(1), 161-179.
• Saraç, T. B. (2013), “ hracat ve thalat n Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerindeki Etkisi: Türkiye Örne i”, Ege Akademik Bak , 13(2), 181-194.
• Shan, U. ve Sun, F. (1998), “On the Export-Led Growth Hypothesis for he Little Dragons: An Empirical Reinvestigation”, Atlantic Economic Journal, 26(4), 353-371.
• Shirazi, N.S. ve Manap, T. (2005), “Exports-Led Growth Hypothesis: Further Econometric Evidence from Pakistan”, The Developing Economies, 4
• Shujaat, A. (2012), “Causality between Exports and Economic Growth: Investigating Suitable Trade Policy for Pakistan”, Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics, 5 (10), 91-98.
• Stock, J. ve Watson, M.W. (1993), “A Simple Estimator of Cointegrating Vectors in Higher Order Integrated Systems”, Econometrica, 61(4), 783-820.
• Stokey, N.L. (1996), Free Trade, Factor Returns, and Factor Accumulation, Journal of Economic Growth, 1, 421-47. entürk, C. (2007), “
• Ticaret- Büyüme li kisi Üzerine Bir nceleme
• Türkiye ve Geli mekte Olan Ülkelerde hracata Dayal Büyüme
• Hipotezinin Testi”, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel
• Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü: Isparta.
• im ek, M. ve Kad lar C. (2010), “Türkiye‘de Be eri Sermaye, hracat ve
• Ekonomik Büyüme Aras ndaki li kinin Nedensellik Analizi”
• Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi ktisadi ve dari Bilimler Dergisi, 11(1), 115- 140.
• Taban, S. ve Aktar, . (2008), “An Empirical Examination of the Export-led Growth Hypothesis in Turkey”, Journal of Yasar University, 3(11), 1535-1551.
• Tak m, A. (2010), ‘‘Türkiye’de GSY H ile hracat Aras ndaki li ki: Granger Nedensellik Testi”, Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14 (2), 1-16.
• Toda, H.Y. ve Yamamoto, T. (1995) “Statistical Inference in Vector Autoregressions with Possbly Integrated Process”, Journal of Econometrics, 66, 225-250.
• Uzay, N. (2000), Geli mekte Olan Ülkelerde hracat Art ktisadi Büyüme
• li kisi, Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9, 37-55.
• Varol, G.M. (2003), “Cumhuriyetin 80. y nda 1923-2003 Türk D Ticaretinin Geli iminin K sa Tarihçesi”, Yay nlar -Ekim.
• Ticaret Dergisi, DTM
• Vohra, R. (2001), “Export and Economic Growth: Further Time Series Evidence from Less-Developed Countries”, International Advances in Economic Research, 7(3), 345-350.
• Westerlund, J. ve Edgerton, D. (2006), “Simple Tests for Cointegration in Dependent Panels with Structural Breaks”, Lund University, Department of Economics, Working Papers, No.13.
• Waithe, T., Lorde, T. ve Francis, B. (2011), “Export-Led Growth: A Case Study of Mexico”, International Journal of Business, Humanities and Technology, 1(1), 33-44.
• Yaprakl , S. ve Sa lam, T. (2010), “Türkiye’de Bilgi leti im Teknolojileri ve Ekonomik Büyüme: Ekonometrik Bir Analiz (1980-2008)”, Ege Akademik Bak ,10 (2), 575-596. Yard mc
• lu, F. ve Gülmez, A. (2013), “Türk Cumhuriyetlerinde hracat ve
• Ekonomik Büyüme li kisi: Panel E bütünle me ve Panel Nedensellik
• Analizi”, Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 8(1), 145-161.
• Zivot, E. ve Andrews, D. (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.