BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar

Yıl 2010, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 11, - , 01.06.2010

Öz

İktisadi büyüme literatürünün en önemli konularından birisi Solow modelinin temel çıkarımı olan yakınsama hipotezidir. Bu hipoteze göre, kapalı ekonomi koşulları altında sermayenin azalan getirisi nedeniyle ülkeler arası kişi başı reel gelir farklılıkları zaman içinde azalma eğiliminde olacaktır. Her ne kadar yakınsama hipotezi 1980’li yıllarda ülkelere ait uzun dönemli makroekonomik serilerin derlenmesi ve ekonometrik tekniklerin geliştirilmesi nedeni ile yaygın bir uygulama alanı bulmuş olsa da, bu hipotez 18. yüzyıl ortalarından beri iktisatçıların zihinlerini meşgul eden bir konudur. Yakınsama hipotezinin tarihsel süreç içinde geçirdiği evrim ve sahip olduğu zengin terminolojinin ortaya konması bu çalışmanın temel amacıdır.

Kaynakça

  • Abramowitz, M. (1986), “Cathing Up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind”, Journal of Economic History, 46(2): 385–406.
  • Barro, R. J. (1991), “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2): 407–43.
  • Barro, R. J., Sala-i Martin, X. (1992), “Convergence”, Journal of Political Economy, 100:223–51.
  • Barro, R. J. (1994), “Economic Growth and Convergence”, International Center for Economic Growth.
  • Baumol, W. J. (1986), “Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: What the Long-Run Data Show?”, The American Economic Review, 76 (5): 1072–85.
  • Baumol, W. J., Wolff, E. N. (1988), “Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: Reply”, The American Economic Review, 78 (5): 1155–59.
  • Ben-David, D. (1998), “Convergence Clubs and Subsistence Economies”, Journal of Development Economics, 55: 155–71.
  • Ben-David, D., Kimhi, A. (2004), “Trade and the Rate of Income Convergence”, Journal of International Trade &Economic Development, 13 (4): 419–41.
  • Bernard, A. B., Durlauf, S. N. (1995), “Convergence in International Output”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 10 (2): 97–105.
  • Bernard, A. B., Durlauf, S. N. (1996), “Interpreting Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis”, Journal of Econometrics, 71 (1996) 161–173.
  • Bernard, A. B., Jones, C. I. (1996a), “Technology and Convergence”, Economic Journal, 106 (43): 1037–44.
  • ----------------- (1996b), “Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement Across Industries and Countries”, The American Economic Review, 86 (5): 1216–38.
  • --------------- (1996c), “Productivity Across Industries and Countries: Time Series Theory and Evidence”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78 (1): 135–146.
  • Bloom, D., Canning, D., Sevilla, J. (2002), “Technological Diffusion, Conditional Convergence and Economic Growth”, NBER Working Paper, No: 8713.
  • Cho, D. (1994) “Industrialization, Convergence, and Patterns of Growth”, Southern Economic Journal, 61 (2): 398–414.
  • ---------- (1996), “An Alternative Interpretation of Conditional Convergence Results”, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 28 (4): 669–81.
  • Crespo-Cuaresma, J., Dimitiz, M. A., Ritzberger-Grünwold, D. (2004), “Growth, Convergence and EU Membership”, Oesterreichische Nationalbank Working Paper, No: 62.
  • DeLong, B. J. (1988), “Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: A Comment”, The American Economic Review, 78 (5): 1138–54.
  • Dowrick, S., Nguyen, D. (1989), “OECD Comperative Economic Growth 1950-85: Catch-Up and Convergence”, The American Economic Review, 79 (5): 11030.
  • Durlauf, S.N. (1996), “Controversy On The Convergence and Divergence of Growth Rates: An Introduction”, Economic Journal, 106 (437): 1016–18.
  • Durlauf, S. N., Johnson, P. A. (1995), “Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behavior”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 10(4): 365–84.
  • Durlauf, S. N. (2003), “The Convergence Hypothesis After 10 Years”, University of Wisconsin at Madison.
  • Eaton, J., Kortum, S. (1995), “Trade in Ideas: Patenting and Productivity in The OECD”, NBER Working Paper, No: 5049.
  • Elmslie, B. T. (1995) “The Convergence Debate Between David Hume and Josiah Tucker”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4): 207–16.
  • Evans, P., Karras, G. (1996), “Convergence Revisited”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 37: 249–65.
  • Friedman, M. (1992), “Do Old Fallacies Ever Die?”, Journal of Economic Literature, 30: 2129–32.
  • Galor, O. (1996), “Convergence? Inference from Theoretical Models”, Economic Journal, 206: 1056–69.
  • Islam, N. (1995), “Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110: 1127–70.
  • ------------- (2003), “What Have We Learnt From The Convergence Debate?”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 17 (3): 309–62.
  • Maddison, A. (1982), Phases of Capitalist Development, Oxford University Pres, Oxford.
  • Mankiw, G. N., Romer, D., Weil, D. (1992) “A Contribution to The Empirics of Economic Growth”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107: 407-37.
  • Mathunjwa, S. J., Temple R. W. J. (2006) “Convergence Behaviour in Exogenous Growth Models”, Bristol University Discussion Paper, No:06/590.
  • Nahar, S., Inder, B. (2002), “Testing Convergence in Economic Growth for OECD Countries”, Applied Economics, 34: 2011–2022.
  • Qi, Q., Papel, D. (1999), “Convergence of International Output: Time Series Evidence for 16 OECD Countries”, International Review of Economics and Finance, 8: 267–80.
  • Quah, D. (1993), “Galton’s Fallacy and Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 95: 427–43.
  • Rassekh, F. (1998), “The Convergence Hypothesis: History, Theory, and Evidence”, Open Economies Review, 9: 85–105.
  • Romer, P. (1994), “Origins of Endogeneous Growth”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8: 3–22.
  • Sachs, J., Andrew M. Warner (1995), “Economic Convergence and Economic Policies”, NBER Working Paper, No: 5039.
  • Sala-i Martin, X. (1996a), “Regional Cohesion: Evidence and Theories of Regional Growth and Convergence”, European Economic Review, 40: 1325–52.
  • ------------ (1996b), “The Classical Approach to Convergence Analysis”, Economic Journal, 106: 1019–36.
  • ------------ (2002), “15 Years of New Growth Economics: What Have We Learnt?”, Central Bank of Chile, Working Papers, No: 172.
  • Slaughter, M. T. (1997), “Per capita income convergence and the role of international trade”, American Economic Review, 87(2): 194–199.
  • Temple, J. (1999), “The New Growth Evidence”, Journal of Economic Literature, 37: 112–36.
  • Williamson, J. G. (1995), “Globalization, Convergence, and History”, NBER Working Paper, No: 5259.

Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar

Yıl 2010, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 11, - , 01.06.2010

Öz

İktisadi büyüme literatürünün en önemli konularından birisi Solow modelinin temel çıkarımı olan yakınsama hipotezidir. Bu hipoteze göre, kapalı ekonomi koşulları altında sermayenin azalan getirisi nedeniyle ülkeler arası kişi başı reel gelir farklılıkları zaman içinde azalma eğiliminde olacaktır. Her ne kadar yakınsama hipotezi 1980’li yıllarda ülkelere ait uzun dönemli makroekonomik serilerin derlenmesi ve ekonometrik tekniklerin geliştirilmesi nedeni ile yaygın bir uygulama alanı bulmuş olsa da, bu hipotez 18. yüzyıl ortalarından beri iktisatçıların zihinlerini meşgul eden bir konudur. Yakınsama hipotezinin tarihsel süreç içinde geçirdiği evrim ve sahip olduğu zengin terminolojinin ortaya konması bu çalışmanın temel amacıdır.

Kaynakça

  • Abramowitz, M. (1986), “Cathing Up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind”, Journal of Economic History, 46(2): 385–406.
  • Barro, R. J. (1991), “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2): 407–43.
  • Barro, R. J., Sala-i Martin, X. (1992), “Convergence”, Journal of Political Economy, 100:223–51.
  • Barro, R. J. (1994), “Economic Growth and Convergence”, International Center for Economic Growth.
  • Baumol, W. J. (1986), “Productivity Growth, Convergence and Welfare: What the Long-Run Data Show?”, The American Economic Review, 76 (5): 1072–85.
  • Baumol, W. J., Wolff, E. N. (1988), “Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: Reply”, The American Economic Review, 78 (5): 1155–59.
  • Ben-David, D. (1998), “Convergence Clubs and Subsistence Economies”, Journal of Development Economics, 55: 155–71.
  • Ben-David, D., Kimhi, A. (2004), “Trade and the Rate of Income Convergence”, Journal of International Trade &Economic Development, 13 (4): 419–41.
  • Bernard, A. B., Durlauf, S. N. (1995), “Convergence in International Output”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 10 (2): 97–105.
  • Bernard, A. B., Durlauf, S. N. (1996), “Interpreting Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis”, Journal of Econometrics, 71 (1996) 161–173.
  • Bernard, A. B., Jones, C. I. (1996a), “Technology and Convergence”, Economic Journal, 106 (43): 1037–44.
  • ----------------- (1996b), “Comparing Apples to Oranges: Productivity Convergence and Measurement Across Industries and Countries”, The American Economic Review, 86 (5): 1216–38.
  • --------------- (1996c), “Productivity Across Industries and Countries: Time Series Theory and Evidence”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78 (1): 135–146.
  • Bloom, D., Canning, D., Sevilla, J. (2002), “Technological Diffusion, Conditional Convergence and Economic Growth”, NBER Working Paper, No: 8713.
  • Cho, D. (1994) “Industrialization, Convergence, and Patterns of Growth”, Southern Economic Journal, 61 (2): 398–414.
  • ---------- (1996), “An Alternative Interpretation of Conditional Convergence Results”, Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 28 (4): 669–81.
  • Crespo-Cuaresma, J., Dimitiz, M. A., Ritzberger-Grünwold, D. (2004), “Growth, Convergence and EU Membership”, Oesterreichische Nationalbank Working Paper, No: 62.
  • DeLong, B. J. (1988), “Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: A Comment”, The American Economic Review, 78 (5): 1138–54.
  • Dowrick, S., Nguyen, D. (1989), “OECD Comperative Economic Growth 1950-85: Catch-Up and Convergence”, The American Economic Review, 79 (5): 11030.
  • Durlauf, S.N. (1996), “Controversy On The Convergence and Divergence of Growth Rates: An Introduction”, Economic Journal, 106 (437): 1016–18.
  • Durlauf, S. N., Johnson, P. A. (1995), “Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behavior”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 10(4): 365–84.
  • Durlauf, S. N. (2003), “The Convergence Hypothesis After 10 Years”, University of Wisconsin at Madison.
  • Eaton, J., Kortum, S. (1995), “Trade in Ideas: Patenting and Productivity in The OECD”, NBER Working Paper, No: 5049.
  • Elmslie, B. T. (1995) “The Convergence Debate Between David Hume and Josiah Tucker”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4): 207–16.
  • Evans, P., Karras, G. (1996), “Convergence Revisited”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 37: 249–65.
  • Friedman, M. (1992), “Do Old Fallacies Ever Die?”, Journal of Economic Literature, 30: 2129–32.
  • Galor, O. (1996), “Convergence? Inference from Theoretical Models”, Economic Journal, 206: 1056–69.
  • Islam, N. (1995), “Growth Empirics: A Panel Data Approach”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110: 1127–70.
  • ------------- (2003), “What Have We Learnt From The Convergence Debate?”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 17 (3): 309–62.
  • Maddison, A. (1982), Phases of Capitalist Development, Oxford University Pres, Oxford.
  • Mankiw, G. N., Romer, D., Weil, D. (1992) “A Contribution to The Empirics of Economic Growth”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107: 407-37.
  • Mathunjwa, S. J., Temple R. W. J. (2006) “Convergence Behaviour in Exogenous Growth Models”, Bristol University Discussion Paper, No:06/590.
  • Nahar, S., Inder, B. (2002), “Testing Convergence in Economic Growth for OECD Countries”, Applied Economics, 34: 2011–2022.
  • Qi, Q., Papel, D. (1999), “Convergence of International Output: Time Series Evidence for 16 OECD Countries”, International Review of Economics and Finance, 8: 267–80.
  • Quah, D. (1993), “Galton’s Fallacy and Tests of the Convergence Hypothesis”, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 95: 427–43.
  • Rassekh, F. (1998), “The Convergence Hypothesis: History, Theory, and Evidence”, Open Economies Review, 9: 85–105.
  • Romer, P. (1994), “Origins of Endogeneous Growth”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8: 3–22.
  • Sachs, J., Andrew M. Warner (1995), “Economic Convergence and Economic Policies”, NBER Working Paper, No: 5039.
  • Sala-i Martin, X. (1996a), “Regional Cohesion: Evidence and Theories of Regional Growth and Convergence”, European Economic Review, 40: 1325–52.
  • ------------ (1996b), “The Classical Approach to Convergence Analysis”, Economic Journal, 106: 1019–36.
  • ------------ (2002), “15 Years of New Growth Economics: What Have We Learnt?”, Central Bank of Chile, Working Papers, No: 172.
  • Slaughter, M. T. (1997), “Per capita income convergence and the role of international trade”, American Economic Review, 87(2): 194–199.
  • Temple, J. (1999), “The New Growth Evidence”, Journal of Economic Literature, 37: 112–36.
  • Williamson, J. G. (1995), “Globalization, Convergence, and History”, NBER Working Paper, No: 5259.
Toplam 44 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Reşat Ceylan Bu kişi benim

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Haziran 2010
Gönderilme Tarihi 12 Aralık 2014
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2010 Cilt: 11 Sayı: 11

Kaynak Göster

APA Ceylan, R. (2010). Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar. Sosyoekonomi, 11(11). https://doi.org/10.17233/se.31488
AMA Ceylan R. Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar. Sosyoekonomi. Nisan 2010;11(11). doi:10.17233/se.31488
Chicago Ceylan, Reşat. “Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar”. Sosyoekonomi 11, sy. 11 (Nisan 2010). https://doi.org/10.17233/se.31488.
EndNote Ceylan R (01 Nisan 2010) Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar. Sosyoekonomi 11 11
IEEE R. Ceylan, “Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar”, Sosyoekonomi, c. 11, sy. 11, 2010, doi: 10.17233/se.31488.
ISNAD Ceylan, Reşat. “Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar”. Sosyoekonomi 11/11 (Nisan 2010). https://doi.org/10.17233/se.31488.
JAMA Ceylan R. Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar. Sosyoekonomi. 2010;11. doi:10.17233/se.31488.
MLA Ceylan, Reşat. “Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar”. Sosyoekonomi, c. 11, sy. 11, 2010, doi:10.17233/se.31488.
Vancouver Ceylan R. Yakınsama Hipotezi: Teorik Tartışmalar. Sosyoekonomi. 2010;11(11).