Sosyo-Ekonomik Yapı ve İşsizlik-Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi Üzerine Ampirik Bir Uygulama: Danimarka Örneği

Öz

Makroekonomik göstergeler, bir ülkenin ekonomik performansını ortaya koyan temel göstergelerdir. Ekonomik büyüme ve işsizlik durumu da ülkelerin ekonomik performansını gösteren en önemli makroekonomik göstergeleri arasında yer almaktadır. Ekonomik büyüme her ülkenin öncelikli hedefleri arasında yer alırken, işsizlik olgusu bireyleri ve toplumu ekonomik, sosyal ve psikolojik yönden olumsuz etkilediği için, ülkelerin karşı karşıya olduğu en önemli sorunlar arasındadır. Danimarka, yaşam standartları ve refah seviyesi yüksek, oldukça gelişmiş bir ülkedir. Dolayısıyla bu çalışmada amaç, öncelikle Danimarka’nın sosyo-ekonomik yapısını çeşitli makroekonomik göstergelerle inceleyerek sosyo-ekonomik performansını ortaya koymak, daha sonra işsizlik ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkiyi ampirik olarak analiz etmektir. 1980-2021 dönemini dikkate alan çalışmada, değişkenler arasındaki nedensel ilişkiyi test etmek amacıyla Granger nedensellik analizi uygulanmış, ardından en küçük kareler yöntemi ile regresyon analizi yapılmıştır. Granger nedensellik analizinden elde edilen ampirik bulgular, işsizlik ile ekonomik büyüme arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisinin olduğunu göstermiştir. Bununla birlikte, en küçük kareler yöntemiyle gerçekleştirilen regresyon analizinden elde edilen sonuçlara göre, Danimarka’da ekonomik büyümede meydana gelen %1’lik bir artış işsizlik oranını %6,32 azaltmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Makroekonomik Göstergeler
• Ekonomik Büyüme
• İşsizlik
• Danimarka

Socio-Economic Structure and An Empirical Application on the Unemployment-Economic Growth Nexus: The Case of Denmark

Öz

Macroeconomic indicators are the basic indicators that reveal the economic performance of a country. Economic growth and unemployment status are among the most important macroeconomic indicators that show the economic performance of countries. While economic growth is among the priority targets of every country, unemployment is among the most significant problems faced by countries as it negatively affects individuals and the society economically, socially and psychologically. Denmark is a highly developed country with a high standard of living and well-being. Therefore, the aim of this study is to reveal the socio-economic performance of Denmark by examining the socio-economic structure with various macroeconomic indicators, and then to analyze empirically the relationship between unemployment and economic growth. In the study, which takes into account the period 1980-2021, Granger causality analysis was applied to test the causal relationship between the variables, and then regression analysis was performed with the least squares method. Empirical findings obtained from Granger causality analysis showed that there is a bidirectional causality relationship between unemployment and economic growth. Besides, according to the results obtained from the regression analysis performed with the least squares method, a 1% increase in economic growth in Denmark reduces unemployment by 6.32%.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Macroeconomic Indicators
• Economic Growth
• Unemployment
• Denmark

Kaynakça

1. Abbas, S. (2014). Long term effect of economic growth on unemployment level: In case of Pakistan. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 5(11), 103-107.
2. Acaroğlu, H. (2018). Is there a trade-off between output and unemployment? An evidence from Okun’s Law for G-20 countries. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 13(2), 147-162.
3. Adarkwa, S., Donkor, F. & Kyei, E. (2017). The impact of economic growth on unemployment in Ghana: Which economic sector matters most?. The International Journal Of Business & Management, 5(4), 1-3.
4. Ağır, H. & Tıraş, H. H. (2018). Sağlık harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Panel nedensellik analizi. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 17(4), 1558-1573.
5. Andersen, T. M. & Svarer, M. (2006). Flexicurity – Den danska arbetsmarknadsmodellen. Årgang 34, Nr. 1.
6. Bhat, T. A., Lone, T. A. & Din, T. M. U. (2019). The validity of Okun’s Law: Evidences from Indian economy. Theoretical and Applied Economics, 4(621), 273-278.
7. Biede, H. J. (2015). Makroøkonomi – i teori og praksis. 1. udgave, 1. oplag, København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
8. Boyce, T. & Brown, C. (2019). Economic and social impacts and benefits of health systems. World Health Organization (WHO). Report.

9. Danmarks Nationalbank. (2019). Halvdelen af direkte investeringer løber via transitlande.
10. Danmarks Statistik. (2020). Udgifter til uddannelse. https://www.dst.dk/Site/Dst/Udgivelser/nyt/GetPdf.aspx? cid=44276#:~:text=I%202020%20var%20der%20udgifter,kr. (Accessed: 06.03.2023).
11. Danmarks Statistik. (2023a). https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/emner/miljoe-og-energi/areal/arealopgoerelser (Accessed: 03.06.2023).
12. Danmarks Statistik. (2023b). https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/oekonomi/betalingsbalance-og- udenrigshandel/import-og-eksport-af-varer-og- tjenester#:~:text=Maritime%20transport%2C%20chemical%20products%20(including,are%20USA%2C%20Germa ny%20and%20Sweden. (Accessed: 22.05.2023).
13. Danmarks Statistik. (2023c). https://www.dst.dk/da/presse/Pressemeddelelser/2022/2022-06-16-danmarks- sundhedsudgifter#:~:text=Sundhedsudgifterne%20steg%20med%2036%2C2%20mia.&text=i%202019%20til%2027 0%2C8,gennemsnit%20med%207%2C4%20pct. (Accessed: 13.03.2023).
14. Danmarks Statistik. (2023d). https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/emner/oekonomi/offentlig-oekonomi/udgifter-til- sundhed (Accessed: 24.05.2023).
15. Dansk Energi. (2016). Verden investerer vedvarende i vedvarende energi. https://greenpowerdenmark.dk/udgivelser/verden-investerer-vedvarende-vedvarende- energi#:~:text=Det%20Internationale%20Energiagentur%20(IEA)%20offentliggjorde,kr. (Accessed: 11.03.2023).
16. Erhvervsministeriet. (2022). National strategi for bæredygtig vækst i dansk turisme. København K.
17. Finansministeriet. (2020). Ulighedsredegørelsen, København K.
18. Finansministeriet. (2021). Økonomisk analyse: Økonomisk status i Danmark og udlandet. København K.
19. Göçer, İ. (2015). Okun Yasası: Türkiye üzerine bir uygulama. Uluslararası Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 1(1), 1-12.
20. Granger, C. W. J. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37(3), 424-438.
21. Grell, H. & Rygner, E. (2018). Makroøkonomi: teori og beskrivelse. 6. udgave, 2. oplag, København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
22. Greve, B. (2016). Velfærdssamfundet – En grundbog, 4. udgave, 1. oplag, Hans Reitzels Forlag.
23. Hansen, C. J. & Goosse, T. (2020). Territorial patterns and relations in Denmark. ESPON.
24. IMF. (2019). Denmark: 2019 Article IV consultation – Press release; Staff report; and statement by the executive director for Denmark.
25. Jeppesen, T., Sunesen, E. R., Henriksen, J. J. & Thelle, M. H. (2018). Betydning af international handel for økonomi og beskæftigelse i Danmark. Erhvervsstyrelsen.
26. Kanca, O. C. (2012). Türkiye’de işsizlik ve iktisadi büyüme arasındaki nedenselliğin ampirik bir analizi. Ç.Ü. Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(2), 1-18.
27. Karadzic, V., Backovic, T. & Streimikis, J. (2021). Relevance of Okun’s Law in Montenegro. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, 17(1), 59-69.
28. Khalid, W., Akalpler, E., Khan, S., Shah, N. H. & Khan, S. (2021). The relationship between unemployment and economic growth in South Africa: VAR analysis. Forman Journal of Economic Studies, 17(1), 1-32.
29. Khrais, I. & Al-Wadi, M. (2016). Economic growth and unemployment relationship: An empirical study for MENA countries. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research, 4(12), 19-24.
30. Korkmaz, S. (2020). Unemployment and economic growth: The causality relationship between unemployment and economic growth in the OECD countries (Chapter 8). In: Dynamic Optics in Economics: Quantitative, Experimental and Econometric Analyses, Hale Kırer Silva Lecuna (Ed.), Berlin: Peter Lang.
31. Larsen, A. P. (2022). Gensyn med Okun’s lov i udvalgte OECD lande. Aalborg Universitet.
32. Legatum Institute. (2023). The 2023 Legatum Prosperity Index: A tool for transformation.
33. Linaa, J. G. & Smidt, J. (2014). Vækst på kort og langt sigt. Samfundsøkonomen, Nr. 1.
34. Louail, B. & Benarous, D. (2021). Relationship between economic growth and unemployment rates in the Algerian economy: Application of Okun’s Law during 1991–2019. Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, 12(1), 71-85.
35. Lundvall, B-Å. (2009). The Danish model and the globalizing learning economy: Lessons for developing countries. Working Paper.
36. Maraui, F. & Faramarzi, A. (2022). Okun’s Law in the Nordics: A time series analysis based on Okun’s Law. Södertörn University, Institute of Social Sciences, Bachelor's Thesis.
37. Marinov, M. A. (2020). Denmark and COVID-19. BSR Policy Briefing Series.
38. Obodoechi, D. N. & Onuoha, C. U. (2019). The validity of Okun’s Law: An empirical evidence for Nigeria. American International Journal of Social Science Research, 4(2), 136-144.
39. OECD. (2021). OECD Economic surveys: Denmark 2021. OECD publishing, Paris. https://read.oecd- ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-surveys-denmark-2021_86f7b2d9-en#page1 (Accessed: 05.03.2023).
40. OECD. (2023). https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm (Accessed: 02.03.2023).
41. OECD. (2023). https://data.oecd.org/rd/gross-domestic-spending-on-r-d.htm (Accessed: 17.04.2023).
42. Özçelik, Ö. & Erdem, C. (2020). İşsizlik ve ekonomik çıktı ilişkisi: Türkiye için Okun Yasası ile incelenmesi. Econder International Academic Journal, 4(2), 326-341.
43. Özel, H. A. (2012). Ekonomik büyümenin teorik temelleri. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(1), 63-72.
44. Pedersen, K. N. (1994). Adjustment with growth: The case of Denmark in the 1980s. Journal of Policy Modeling, 16(4), 395-415.
45. Pedersen, L. H. (2020). Dansk økonomi 1979-2019: Økonomisk-politiske bidrag til 40 års fremgang. Samfundsøkonomen, Djøf Forlag.
46. Serawitu, A. (2020). Unemployment and economic growth in Ethiopia. Developing Country Studies, 10(3), 15-23.
47. Soylu, Ö. B., Çakmak, İ. & Okur, F. (2018). Economic growth and unemployment issue: Panel data analysis in Eastern European countries. Journal of International Studies, 11(1), 93-107.
48. Sørensen, P. B. (2010). Nedturen i dansk økonomi: Hvor meget var selvforskyldt?. Samfundsøkonomen, Nr 1.
49. Srinivas, B. (2018). GDP, unemployment and Okun’s Law: Evidence from India. International Journal of Applied Social Science, 5(5), 409-419.
50. Şahin, D. & Temelli, F. (2019). OECD ülkelerinde sağlık harcamalarının belirleyicileri: Panel veri analizi. Avrasya Uluslararası Araştırmalar Dergisi, 7(16), s. 946-961.
51. Tumanoska, D. (2019). The validity of Okun’s Law in North Macedonia. Business and Economic Research, 9(2), 160-168.
52. Uyar Bozdağlıoğlu, E. Y. (2008). Türkiye’de işsizliğin özellikleri ve işsizlikte mücadele politikaları. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 10(20), 45-65.
53. Uysal, D. & Alptekin, V. (2009). Türkiye ekonomisinde büyüme – işsizlik ilişkisinin Var modeli yardımıyla sınanması (1980 – 2007). Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 25, 69-78.
54. Üzar, U. & Akyazı, H. (2018). Ekonomik büyüme ve işsizlik arasındaki ilişkinin OECD ülkeleri düzeyinde ekonometrik bir analizi. C.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 19(2), 463-479.
55. Vang, C. (2021). Okun’s Law in the Nordics. Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Bachelor’s Thesis in Economics.
56. World Bank. (2023). https://data.worldbank.org (Accessed: 02.03.2023).
57. Zanin L. & Marra, G. (2012). Rolling regression versus time-varying coefficient modelling: An empirical investigation of the Okun’s Law in some euro area countries. Bulletin of Economic Research, 64(1), 91-108. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8586.2010.00376.x
58. Zolfaghari, A. (2015). The necessity and importance of education for social and cultural development of societies in developing countries. Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Science, 36(3), Special Issue, 3380-3386.
59. https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/denmark-market-overview (Accessed: 13.03.2023).
60. https://www.statista.com/topics/2522/denmark/#dossierKeyfigures (Accessed: 09.03.2023);
61. https://alphatrad.dk/en/news/largest-industries-denmark (Accessed: 09.03.2023).
62. https://www.state.gov/reports/2020-investment-climate-statements/denmark/ (Accessed: 06.03.2023).
63. https://www.danskindustri.dk/politik-og-analyser/di-mener/danskoekonomi/international- okonomi/#:~:text=Danmark%20er%20en%20lille%2C%20%C3%A5ben,eksport%20og%20etableringer%20i%20udla ndet. (Accessed: 11.03.2023).
64. https://www.britannica.com/place/Denmark/Economy (Accessed: 05.03.2023)
65. https://www.norden.org/en/information/facts-about-denmark (Accessed: 05.03.2023).
66. https://cepos.dk/abcepos-artikler/0210-danmark-er-nr-6-paa-oecd-s-velstandsrangliste-i-2021-foran- sverige-men-efter-usa-og-schweiz (Accessed: 11.03.2023).
67. https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=102&langId=en (Accessed: 13.03.2023)
68. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/digpub/keyfigures/ (Accessed: 11.03.2023).
69. https://www.lloydsbanktrade.com/en/market-potential/denmark/economical-context (Accessed: 05.03.2023).
70. https://www.justlanded.com/english/Denmark/Denmark-Guide/Business/The-Danish-advantage (Accessed: 13.03.2023).
71. https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI (Accessed: 02.03.2023).
72. https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/specific-country-data#/countries/DNK (Accessed: 05.03.2023).