Savunma Harcamaları ve Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma İlişkisi: Panel Fourier Toda-Yamamoto Nedensellik Testinden Kanıtlar

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, savunma harcamaları ile sürdürülebilir kalkınma arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisini gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan 108 ülkede 2000-2023 dönemi için incelemektir. Savunma harcamaları GSYH’nin yüzdesi olarak SIPRI’dan, sürdürülebilir kalkınma verisi Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma Amaçları Endeksinden elde edilmiştir. Nedensellik ilişkisini belirlemek amacıyla yapısal kırılmaları dikkate alan Panel Fourier Toda-Yamamoto (PFTY) testi uygulanmıştır. Sonuçlar savunma harcamalarından sürdürülebilir kalkınmaya %10, sürdürülebilir kalkınmadan savunma harcamalarına %5 düzeyinde nedensellik olduğunu göstermektedir. Bununla birlikte, ilişki homojen değildir. 108 ülkenin 4’ünde çift yönlü, 28’inde tek yönlü nedensellik tespit edilirken, diğer ülkelerde anlamlı ilişki bulunmamıştır. Bulgular, savunma ve sürdürülebilir kalkınma politikalarının ülke koşulları dikkate alınarak birlikte değerlendirilmesi gerektiğine işaret etmektedir. Alt amaçlar incelendiğinde, 15 sürdürülebilir kalkınma amacının 10’unda çift ve 4’ünde tek yönlü nedensellik bulunduğu ve 1’inde nedensellik bulunmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Bu durum, nedenselliğin sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın tek bir boyutuyla sınırlı olmadığını kalkınmanın ekonomik, sosyal, çevresel ve kurumsal amaçlarında farklı yönlerde ortaya çıktığını göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Savunma harcamaları
• sürdürülebilir kalkınma
• panel Fourier Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi

The Relationship between Defense Expenditures and Sustainable Development: Evidence from the Panel Fourier Toda-Yamamoto Causality Test

Öz

This study examines the causal relationship between defense expenditures and sustainable development in 108 developed and developing countries over 2000-2023. Defense expenditures, measured as a percentage of GDP, are obtained from SIPRI, while sustainable development data come from the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) Index. The Panel Fourier Toda-Yamamoto (PFTY) test, accounting for structural breaks, is applied to determine causality. The results indicate causality from defense expenditures to sustainable development at the 10% level and from sustainable development to defense expenditures at the 5% level. However, the relationship is heterogeneous: bidirectional causality is found in four countries, unidirectional causality in 28, and no significant relationship in the others. Findings suggest that defense and sustainable development policies should be considered jointly, considering country-specific conditions. Across the 15 SDG, bidirectional causality is found for 10, unidirectional causality for four, and no causality for one, indicating that causality extends across economic, social, environmental, and institutional dimensions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Defense expenditures
• sustainable development
• Panel Fourier Toda–Yamamoto causality test

Kaynakça

1. Akusta, E. (2024). Does military expenditure impede sustainable development? Empirical evidence from NATO countries. Güvenlik Stratejileri Dergisi, 20(48), 195-214.
2. Akusta, E. (2025). Can renewable energy sources alleviate the pressure of military expenditures on the environment? Empirical evidence from Turkiye. Environmental Research and Technology, 8(2), 410-424.
3. Aydın, B. (2021a). Theoretical and empirical literature of the relationship between defense expenditures and economic growth. Finans Ekonomi ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 6(2), 208-215.
4. Aydın, B. (2021b). Türkiye ekonomisi için Benoit hipotezinin geçerliliği. Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, (39), 1-27.
5. Aydın, M. (2020). Askeri harcamalar, ekonomik büyüme ve çevre kirliliği arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye için yapısal kırılmalı nedensellik testinden kanıtlar. Ekonomi Politika ve Finans Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(2), 261-275.
6. Barro, R. J. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Part 2), 103-125.
7. Benoit, É. (1973). Defense and economic growth in developing countries. Lexington Books.
8. Benoit, É. (1978). Growth and defense in developing countries. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 26(2), 271-280.

9. Canbaz, A. (2025). Savunma harcamalarının çevresel ve ekonomik etkileri: Türkiye için ampirik bir inceleme [Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Osmaniye Korkut Ata Üniversitesi.
10. Ceyhan, T. ve Köstekçi, A. (2021). The effect of military expenditures on economic growth and unemployment: Evidence from Turkey. Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences, 31(2), 913-928.
11. Clements, B., Gupta, S. ve Khamidova, S. (2019). Is military spending converging across countries? An examination of trends and key determinants (IMF Working Paper No. 2019/196). International Monetary Fund https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/wp/2019/wpiea2019196-print-pdf.pdf
12. d’Agostino, G., Dunne, J. P. ve Pieroni, L. (2019). Military expenditure, endogeneity and economic growth. Defence and Peace Economics, 30(5), 509-524.
13. Deger, S. (1985). Human resources, government education expenditure, and the military burden in less developed countries. The Journal of Developing Areas, 20(1), 37-48.
14. Deger, S. ve Smith, R. (1983). Military expenditure and growth in less developed countries. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 27(2), 335-353.
15. Dunne, J. P., Smith, R. P. ve Willenbockel, D. (2005). Models of military expenditure and growth: A critical review. Defence and Peace Economics, 16(6), 449-461.
16. Dunne, J. P. ve Tian, N. (2015). Military expenditure, economic growth and heterogeneity. Defence and Peace Economics, 26(1), 15-31.
17. Eğri, T., Timur, B., Eğri, C. Ö. ve Bayraktar, Y. (2017). Seçilmiş Ortadoğu ülkeleri için ekonomik büyüme ve savunma harcamaları ilişkisi: Panel veri analizi. Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 5(5), 139-153.
18. Elgin, C., Elveren, A. Y., Özgür, G. ve Dertli, G. (2022). Military spending and sustainable development. Review of Development Economics, 26(3), 1466-1490.
19. Elish, E., Ahmed, H. ve AboElsoud, M. (2023). Military spending crowding out health and education spending: Which views are valid in Egypt? Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1-9.
20. Elveren, A. Y., Töngür, Ü. ve Elgin, C. (2025). Military spending and growth: Empirical evidence from a post-Keynesian model. Defence and Peace Economics, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2025.2609794
21. Emirmahmutoglu, F. ve Kose, N. (2011). Testing for Granger causality in heterogeneous mixed panels. Economic Modelling, 28(3), 870-876.
22. Enders, W. ve Lee, J. (2012). The flexible Fourier form and Dickey-Fuller type unit root tests. Economics Letters, 117(1), 196-199.
23. Erdoğan, S., Gedikli, A., Çevik, E. İ. ve Öncü, M. A. (2022). Does military expenditure impact environmental sustainability in developed Mediterranean countries? Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(21), 31612-31630.
24. Ferraz, R. (2026). Is military spending really related to growth? New evidence from NATO allies. Defence and Peace Economics, 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2026.2622024
25. Fisher, R. A. (1932). Statistical methods for research workers (4th ed.). Oliver and Boyd.
26. Gbadegesin, T. K. (2025). Defense expenditure and national well-being: Evidence from the G7 countries. Defence and Peace Economics, 36(7), 1030-1041.
27. Gökmenoğlu, K. K., Taspinar, N. ve Rahman, M. M. (2021). Military expenditure, financial development and environmental degradation in Turkey: A comparison of CO2 emissions and ecological footprint. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 26(1), 986-997.
28. Herrera, R. ve Gentilucci, E. (2013). Military spending, technical progress, and economic growth: A critical overview on mainstream defense economics. Journal of Innovation Economics and Management, 12(2), 13-35.
29. İnal, V., Gurdal, T., Değirmenci, T. ve Aydın, M. (2024). The effects of military expenditures on labor productivity, innovation and economic growth for the most militarized countries: Panel data analysis. Kybernetes, 53(3), 821-840.
30. Johansen, S. ve Juselius, K. (1990). Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration-with applications to the demand for money. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 52(2), 169-210.
31. Knight, M., Loayza, N. ve Villanueva, D. (1996). The peace dividend: Military spending cuts and economic growth. IMF Staff Papers, 43(1), 1-37.
32. Konuk, F., Kaya, E., Akpınar, S. ve Yıldız, Ş. (2024). The relationship between military expenditures, financial development and environmental pollution in G7 countries. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(1), 1087-1102.
33. Korkmaz, S. (2015). The effect of military spending on economic growth and unemployment in Mediterranean countries. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 5(1), 273-280.
34. Kwakwa, P. A. (2022). The effect of industrialization, militarization, and government expenditure on carbon dioxide emissions in Ghana. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(56), 85229-85242.
35. Lütkepohl, H. (2005). New introduction to multiple time series analysis. Springer.
36. Meng, B., Lucyshyn, W. ve Li, X. (2015). Defense expenditure and income inequality: Evidence on co-integration and causality for China. Defence and Peace Economics, 26(3), 327-339.
37. Nazlıoğlu, Ş., Görmüs, N. A. ve Soytaş, U. (2016). Oil prices and real estate investment trusts (REITs): Gradual-shift causality and volatility transmission analysis. Energy Economics, 60, 168-175.
38. Nguyen, T. N. N., Nguyen, N. T., Nguyen, N. T. ve Nguyen, V. D. (2026). The impact of military spending on sustainable development: A Bayesian analysis for BRICS countries. Statistika: Statistics and Economy Journal, 106(1), 61-82.
39. Özsoy, O. (2002). Budgetary trade-offs between defense, education and health expenditures: The case of Turkey. Defence and Peace Economics, 13(2), 129-136.
40. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels (IZA Discussion Paper No. 1240). Institute for the Study of Labor. https://docs.iza.org/dp1240.pdf
41. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
42. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A. ve Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127.
43. Pesaran, M. H. ve Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93.
44. Ping, G. ve Saud, M. A. M. (2017). Revisiting the causal nexus between defense expenditure and economic growth: Time series analysis for Saudi Arabia. Asian Journal of Economic Modelling, 5(1), 35-43.
45. Qayyum, U., Anjum, S. ve Sabir, S. (2021). Armed conflict, militarization and ecological footprint: Empirical evidence from South Asia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 281, 125299.
46. Sachs, J. D., Lafortune, G. ve Fuller, G. (2024). The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future: Sustainable development report 2024. Sustainable Development Solutions Network. https://doi.org/10.25546/108572
47. Saputro, G. E., Tarigan, H. ve Rajab, D. D. A. (2021). The role of defense economic in economic growth. Jurnal Pertahanan, 7(2), 330-341.
48. Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. The Annals of Statistics, 6(2), 461-464.
49. Solarin, S. A., Al-Mulali, U. ve Ozturk, I. (2018). Determinants of pollution and the role of the military sector: Evidence from a maximum likelihood approach with two structural breaks in the USA. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(31), 30949-30961.
50. Sönmez, A. ve Gandou, A. S. O. (2024). Military expenditures and income inequality: Evidence from a panel analysis. Fiscaoeconomia, 8(3), 1085-1099.
51. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. (2026). SIPRI military expenditure database [Data set]. https://www.sipri.org/databases/milex
52. Toda, H. Y. ve Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes. Journal of Econometrics, 66(1-2), 225-250.
53. Tsitouras, A. ve Tsounis, N. (2026). Guns versus butter for economic growth: A disaggregated analysis of the impact of military expenditure. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 13, 1-23.
54. United Nations. (2025). The security we need: Rebalancing military spending for a sustainable and peaceful future. https://www.un.org/en/peace-and-security/the-true-cost-of-peace
55. von Boemcken, M. ve Bolaños Suárez, R. (2026). A good investment in sustainable development? A literature review on the economic and social effects of military spending. Defence and Peace Economics, 37(3), 287-314.
56. Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709-748.
57. Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193-233.
58. Wing, M. M. (1991). Defence spending and employment in Indonesia. Defence and Peace Economics, 3(1), 83-92.
59. Yardımcı, M. C. (2022). Savunma harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Benoit hipotezinin geçerliliğinin sınanması. Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 7(1), 436-445.
60. Yılancı, V. ve Görüş, M. Ş. (2020). Does economic globalization have predictive power for ecological footprint in MENA countries? A panel causality test with a Fourier function. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(32), 40552-40562.
61. Yıldırım, J., Sezgin, S. ve Öcal, N. (2005). Military expenditure and economic growth in Middle Eastern countries: A dynamic panel data analysis. Defence and Peace Economics, 16(4), 283-295.
62. Yolal, M. ve Gacar, B. K. (2026). Türkiye’de savunma harcamaları ile ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Vektör otoregresif (VAR) analizi ve Granger nedensellik testi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (71), 301-320.