SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 4

DETERMINANTS OF BUSINESS CYCLES: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN G7 AND E7 COUNTRIES

KONJONKTÜR DALGALARININ BELİRLEYİCİLERİ: G7 VE E7 ÜLKELERİ ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI BİR ANALİZ

Ali Gökhan Yücel(ERCİYES ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İKTİSADİ VE İDARİ BİLİMLER FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-7509-7693
Pages
762–793
Publication Date
2020-12-31
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the results of cointegration model estimation, government expenditures and money supply are negatively related to business cycles both in E7 and G7 countries, while trade openness is positively related to business cycles.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Although business cycles have been investigated for nearly a century, there is still no clear conclusion on the causes and the nature of business cycles.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To achieve this aim, panel time series analysis was performed using the variables of government expenditure, money supply, total factor productivity, dummy variable representing elections, trade openness and agricultural production for G7 and E7 countries covering the period of 1960-2017.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results of cointegration model estimation, government expenditures and money supply are negatively related to business cycles both in E7 and G7 countries, while trade openness is positively related to business cycles.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Konjonktür dalgaları · Hodrick-Prescott Filtresi · Panel Veri Analizi

Abstract

Although business cycles have been investigated for nearly a century, there is still no clear conclusion on the causes and the nature of business cycles. In order to combat the crises and stagnation as a result of the fluctuations experienced by market economies, the structure of business cycles must be well analyzed. The aim of this study is to empirically test the determinants of business cycles for developed and developing countries. To achieve this aim, panel time series analysis was performed using the variables of government expenditure, money supply, total factor productivity, dummy variable representing elections, trade openness and agricultural production for G7 and E7 countries covering the period of 1960-2017. In the empirical part of the study, cross sectional dependency tests, second-generation panel unit root tests and second-generation panel cointegration tests were applied. According to the empirical findings, business cycles are not stationary in both G7 and E7 countries. Therefore, business cycles which could be defined as deviations from the long-term economic growth trend of gross domestic product do not spontaneously return to the long-term trend value over time. For this reason, policy makers need to intervene in the business cycles by using active economic policies. According to the results of cointegration model estimation, government expenditures and money supply are negatively related to business cycles both in E7 and G7 countries, while trade openness is positively related to business cycles. Total factor productivity and dummy variable representing elections are positively related to business cycles in G7 and E7 countries, respectively. Finally, there is no statistically significant relationship between the share of agricultural production and business cycles.

Özet

Konjonktür dalgaları konusunda yaklaşık bir asırdır araştırma yapılmasına rağmen, konjonktür dalgalarının nedenleri ve niteliği ile ilgili halen net bir sonuca ulaşılmış değildir. Piyasa ekonomilerinin yaşadığı dalgalanmalar sonucu yaşanılan krizlerle ve durgunluklarla mücadele edebilmek için dalgaların yapısının iyi analiz edilmesi gerekmektedir. Bu çalışmanın amacı konjonktür dalgalarının belirleyicilerini gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkeler için ampirik olarak test etmektir. Bu amaca ulaşmak için G7 ve E7 ülkelerinin 1960-2017 dönemine ait yıllık verileri kullanılarak konjonktür dalgaları, kamu harcamaları, para arzı, toplam faktör verimliliği, seçimleri temsil eden kukla değişken, ticari açıklık oranı ve tarımsal üretim değişkenleri kullanılarak panel zaman serisi analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Uygulama kısmında yatay kesit bağımlılığı, ikinci nesil birim kök testleri ve ikinci nesil panel eşbütünleşme testleri gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmanın bulgularına göre hem G7 ülkelerinde hem de E7 ülkelerinde konjonktür dalgaları durağan bir sürece sahip değildir. Dolayısıyla, gayrisafi yurtiçi hasılanın uzun dönem büyüme trendinden sapması olan nitelendirilen konjonktür dalgalanmaları zaman içerisinde uzun dönem trend değerine kendiliğinden dönmemektedir. Bu nedenle, politika yapıcıların aktif iktisat politikaları kullanarak konjonktür dalgalarına müdahale etmeleri gerekmektedir. Eşbütünleşme modeli tahmini sonuçlarına göre hem gelişmiş ülkelerde hem de gelişmekte olan ülkelerde hükümet harcamalarının ve para arzının konjonktür dalgalarını azaltıcı; ticari açıklığın ise konjonktür dalgalarını artırıcı etkisi vardır. Gelişmiş ülkelerde toplam faktör verimliliğinin konjonktür dalgalarını artırıcı etkisi var iken, gelişmekte olan ülkelerde seçimlerin konjonktür üzerinde pozitif bir etkisi vardır. Tarımsal üretimin hasıladaki payı ile konjonktür dalgaları arasında anlamlı bir ilişki tespit edilememiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yücel, A. G. (2020). DETERMINANTS OF BUSINESS CYCLES: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN G7 AND E7 COUNTRIES. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 4, 762–793. https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.784320

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (133)

  1. Abuaf, N., & Jorion, P. (1990). Purchasing Power Parity in the Long Run. The Journal of Finance, 45(1), 157–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1990.tb05085.x
  2. Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., Robinson, J., & Thaicharoen, Y. (2003). Institutional causes, macroeconomic symptoms: volatility, crises and growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, 50(1), 49–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3932(02)00208-8
  3. Alesina, A., Campante, F. R., & Tabellini, G. (2008). Why is fiscal policy often procyclical? Journal of the European Economic Association, 6(5), 1006–1036. https://doi.org/10.1162/JEEA.2008.6.5.1006
  4. Artis, M. J., & Zhang, W. (1997). International business cycles and the ERM: Is there a European business cycle? International Journal of Finance & Economics, 2(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1158(199701)2:1 3.0.CO;2-7
  5. Bacchetta, P., & Caminal, R. (2000). Do capital market imperfections exacerbate output fluctuations? European Economic Review, 44(3), 449–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(98)00083-X
  6. Bai, J., & Kao, C. (2006). On the estimation and inference of a panel cointegration model with cross-sectional dependence. Içinde B. H. Baltagi (Ed.), Contributions to Economic Analysis (C. 274, ss. 3–30). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0573- 8555(06)74001-9
  7. Bai, J., Kao, C., & Ng, S. (2009). Panel cointegration with global stochastic trends. Journal of Econometrics, 149(1), 82–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JECONOM.2008.10.012
  8. Bai, J., & Ng, S. (2004). A PANIC attack on unit roots and cointegration. Econometrica, 72(4), 1127–1177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2004.00528.x
  9. Bai, J., & Ng, S. (2010). Panel unit root tests with cross-section dependence: A further investigation. Econometric Theory, 26(4), 1088–1114.
  10. Baltagi, B. H., & Pesaran, M. H. (2007). Heterogeneity and cross section dependence in panel data models: theory and applications introduction. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 229–232. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.955
  11. Becker, R., Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2006). A stationarity test in the presence of an unknown number of smooth breaks. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 27(3), 381–409. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9892.2006.00478.x
  12. Bejan, M. (2006). Trade openness and output volatility. MPRA Paper No. 2759. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/2759/1/MPRA_paper_2759.pdf
  13. Bekaert, G., Harvey, C. R., & Lundblad, C. (2006). Growth volatility and financial liberalization. Journal of International Money and Finance, 25(3), 370–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JIMONFIN.2006.01.003
  14. Billmeier, A. (2014). Ghostbusting: Which Output Gap Measure Really Matters? Içinde IMF Working Papers (IMF Working Paper WP/04/146, C. 04, Sayı 146). https://doi.org/10.5089/9781451856675.001
  15. Blackburn, K., & Ravn, M. O. (1992). Business cycles in the United Kingdom: Facts and fictions. Economica, 59(236), 383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2554886
  16. Breitung, J. (2001). The local power of some unit root tests for panel data. Içinde Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, dynamic panels (Advances in econometrics) (C. 15, ss. 161–177). JAI Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0731-9053(00)15006-6
  17. Breitung, J. (2005). A parametric approach to the estimation of cointegration vectors in panel data. Econometric Reviews, 24(2), 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1081/ETC-200067895
  18. Breuer, J. B., McNown, R., & Wallace, M. (2002). Series-specific unit root tests with panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 64(5), 527–546. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.00276
  19. Buch, C. M., & Pierdzioch, C. (2005). The integration of imperfect financial markets: Implications for business cycle volatility. Journal of Policy Modeling, 27(7), 789–804. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JPOLMOD.2005.06.004
  20. Çakır, M. Y., & Kabundi, A. (2013). Business cycle co-movements between South Africa and the BRIC countries. Applied Economics, 45(33), 4698–4718. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2013.797562
  21. Camarero, M., D’adamo, G., & Tamarit, C. (2016). The role of institutions in explaining wage determination in the Eurozone: A panel cointegration approach. International Labour Review, 155(1), 25–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/ilr.12004
  22. Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L., Kim, D., & Perron, P. (2009). GLS-based unit root tests with multiple structural breaks both under the null and the alternative hypotheses. Econometric Theory, 25(6), 1754–1792. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466609990326
  23. Carrion‐i‐Silvestre, J., Del Barrio‐Castro, T., & López‐Bazo, E. (2005). Breaking the panels: An application to the GDP per capita. The Econometrics Journal, 8(2), 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368-423X.2005.00158.x
  24. Cavallo, E. A., Powell, A. P., & Rigobon, R. (2008). Do Credit Rating Agencies Add Value? Evidence from the Sovereign Rating Business Institutions (IDB Working Paper No. 546). http://www.ssrn.com/abstract=1820934
  25. Çetin, G., Yıldırım, H. H., Koy, A., & Köksal, C. (2018). Defense expenditures and economic growth relationship: A panel data approach for NATO. Içinde H. Dincer, Ü. Hacioglu, & S. Yüksel (Ed.), Contributions to Economics (ss. 131–149). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78494-6_6
  26. Cetin, M., Ecevit, E., & Yucel, A. G. (2018). The impact of economic growth, energy consumption, trade openness, and financial development on carbon emissions: empirical evidence from Turkey. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25(36), 36589–36603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3526-5
  27. Chebbi, A., Louafi, R., & Hedhli, A. (2014). Financial fluctuations in the Tunisian repressed market context: A Markov-switching–GARCH approach. Macroeconomics and Finance in Emerging Market Economies, 7(2), 284–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/17520843.2013.781048
  28. Chistè, C., & van Vuuren, G. (2014). Investigating the cyclical behaviour of the dry bulk shipping market. Maritime Policy & Management, 41(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2013.780216
  29. Choi, I. (2001). Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2), 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5606(00)00048-6
  30. Cogley, T., & Nason, J. M. (1995). Effects of the Hodrick-Prescott filter on trend and difference stationary time series Implications for business cycle research. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 19(1–2), 253–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(93)00781-X
  31. Croes, R., & Ridderstaat, J. (2017). The effects of business cycles on tourism demand flows in small island destinations. Tourism Economics, 23(7), 1451–1475. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816617697837
  32. Danthine, J.-P., & Donaldson, J. B. (1993). Methodological and empirical issues in real business cycle theory. European Economic Review, 37(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(93)90068-L
  33. Darrat, A. F., Abosedra, S. S., & Aly, H. Y. (2005). Assessing the role of financial deepening in business cycles: the experience of the United Arab Emirates. Applied Financial Economics, 15(7), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/09603100500039417
  34. Davis, J. S. (2014). Financial integration and international business cycle co-movement. Journal of Monetary Economics, 64, 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2014.01.007
  35. Denizer, C. A., Iyigun, M. F., & Owen, A. (2002). Finance and macroeconomic volatility. The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, 2(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.2202/1534-6005.1048
  36. Dickerson, A. P., Gibson, H. D., & Tsakalotos, E. (1998). Business cycle correspondence in the European Union. Empirica, 25(1), 49–75. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006888704954
  37. Djennas, M. (2016). Business cycle volatility, growth and financial openness: Does Islamic finance make any difference? Borsa Istanbul Review, 16(3), 121–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIR.2016.06.003
  38. Dreher, A., & Vaubel, R. (2004). Do IMF and IBRD cause moral hazard and political business cycles? Evidence from panel data. Open Economies Review, 15(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:OPEN.0000009422.66952.4b
  39. Dreher, A., & Vaubel, R. (2009). Foreign exchange intervention and the political business cycle: A panel data analysis. Journal of International Money and Finance, 28(5), 755–775. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JIMONFIN.2008.12.007
  40. Easterly, W., Islam, R., & Stiglitz, J. E. (2001). Shaken and stirred: Explaining growth volatility. Içinde B. Pleskovic & N. Stern (Ed.), Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics (ss. 191–211). The World Bank.
  41. Eberhardt, M., & Bond, S. (2009). Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: A novel estimator (MPRA Paper No. 17692).
  42. Ecevit, E., Yücel, A. G., & Yücel, Ö. (2016). Are some taxes better than others for economic growth? An ARDL approach for Turkey. The Empirical Economics Letters, 15(11), 1129–1136. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312586370
  43. Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2012a). A unit root test using a Fourier series to approximate smooth breaks. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 74(4), 574–599. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2011.00662.x
  44. Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2012b). The flexible Fourier form and Dickey–Fuller type unit root tests. Economics Letters, 117(1), 196–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONLET.2012.04.081
  45. Erdem, E. (2014). Para Banka ve Finansal Sistem (6. Baskı). Detay Yayıncılık.
  46. Erdem, E., & İlgün, F. (2017). Mali disiplin üzerinde politik faktörlerin etkisi: Az gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkelere yönelik uygulamalı bir analiz. İktisat Fakültesi Mecmuası, 67(1), 1–23.
  47. Erdem, E., & Yucel, A. G. (2017). Does agricultural sector matter for business cycles? Evidence from Turkey. The Empirical Economics Letters, 16(11).
  48. Erdem, E., Yücel, A. G., & Köseoglu, A. (2016). Female Labour Force Participation and Economic Growth: Theoretical and Empirical Evidence. Içinde The Empirical Economics Letters (C. 15, Sayı 10). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312586284
  49. Evans, P., & Karras, G. (1996). Convergence revisited. Journal of Monetary Economics, 37(2), 249–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3932(96)90036-7
  50. Fatas, A., & Mihov, I. (2003). The case for restricting fiscal policy discretion. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1419–1447. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552838
  51. Feenstra, R. C., Inklaar, R., & Timmer, M. P. (2015). The Next Generation of the Penn World Table. American Economic Review, 105(10), 3150–3182. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130954
  52. Ferreira-Tiryaki, G. (2008). The informal economy and business cycles. Journal of Applied Economics, 11(1), 91–117.
  53. Ferreira da Silva, G. (2002). The impact of financial system development on business cycles volatility: cross-country evidence. Journal of Macroeconomics, 24(2), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-0704(02)00021-6
  54. Fiorito, R., & Kollintzas, T. (1994). Stylized facts of business cycles in the G7 from a real business cycles perspective. European Economic Review, 38(2), 235–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(94)90057-4
  55. Furceri, D., & Karras, G. (2007). Country size and business cycle volatility: Scale really matters. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 21(4), 424–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JJIE.2007.04.001
  56. Gali, J., & Perotti, R. (2003). Fiscal policy and monetary integration in Europe. Economic Policy, 18(37), 533–572. https://doi.org/10.3386/w9773
  57. Gengenbach, C., Urbain, J.-P., & Westerlund, J. (2016). Error correction testing in panels with common stochastic trends. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 31(6), 982–1004. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.2475
  58. Gong, C., & Kim, S. (2018). Regional business cycle synchronization in emerging and developing countries: Regional or global integration? Trade or financial integration? Journal of International Money and Finance, 84, 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2018.02.006
  59. Greenwald, B. C., & Stiglitz, J. E. (1993). Financial market imperfections and business cycles. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(1), 77–114. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118496
  60. Hadri, K. (2000). Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data. The Econometrics Journal, 3(2), 148–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-423X.00043
  61. Hadri, K., & Kurozumi, E. (2012). A simple panel stationarity test in the presence of serial correlation and a common factor. Economics Letters, 115(1), 31–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONLET.2011.11.036
  62. Harvey, A. C., & Jaeger, A. (1993). Detrending, Stylized Facts and the Business Cycle. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 8(3), 231–247. http://ideas.repec.org/a/jae/japmet/v8y1993i3p231-47.html
  63. Hodrick, R. J., & Prescott, E. C. (1997). Postwar U.S. business cycles: An empirical investigation. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 29(1), 1–16.
  64. Hsiao, C. (2014). Analysis of panel data (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  65. Hurlin, C., & Valérie, M. (2007). Second Generation Panel Unit Root Tests. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00159842/document
  66. Ibrahim, M., & Alagidede, P. (2017). Financial sector development, economic volatility and shocks in sub-Saharan Africa. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 484, 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSA.2017.04.142
  67. Im, K. S., Lee, J., & Tieslau, M. (2005). Panel LM unit-root tests with level shifts. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 67(3), 393–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2005.00125.x
  68. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7 IMF. (2005). World Economic Outlook: Building Institutions.
  69. Kao, C. (1999). Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 90(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00023-2
  70. Kapetanios, G., Shin, Y., & Snell, A. (2003). Testing for a unit root in the nonlinear STAR framework. Journal of Econometrics, 112(2), 359–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(02)00202-6
  71. Karras, G., & Song, F. (1996). Sources of business-cycle volatility: An exploratory study on a sample of OECD countries. Journal of Macroeconomics, 18(4), 621–637. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-0704(96)80055-3
  72. King, R. G., & Rebelo, S. T. (1993). Low frequency filtering and real business cycles. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 17(1–2), 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1889(06)80010-2
  73. Kılınç, E. C., & Berberoğlu, C. N. (2018). Kar oranları konjonktür yönlü müdür? Akademik Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi (AKAD), 10(19), 606–621. https://doi.org/10.20990/kilisiibfakademik.441368
  74. Klomp, J., & de Haan, J. (2009). Political institutions and economic volatility. European Journal of Political Economy, 25(3), 311–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJPOLECO.2009.02.006
  75. Konstantakopoulou, I., & Tsionas, E. G. (2014). Half a century of empirical evidence of business cycles in OECD countries. Journal of Policy Modeling, 36(2), 389–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2014.01.006
  76. Kose, M. A. (2002). Explaining business cycles in small open economies: ‘How much do world prices matter?’ Journal of International Economics, 56(2), 299–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(01)00120-9
  77. Kose, M. A., Prasad, E. S., & Terrones, M. E. (2003). Financial integration and macroeconomic volatility. Içinde SSRN Electronic Journal (IMF Working Paper No. 03/50). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.393420
  78. Kožić, I. (2014). Detecting international tourism demand growth cycles. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(5), 397–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.808607
  79. Lane, P. R. (2003). The cyclical behaviour of fiscal policy: Evidence from the OECD. Journal of Public Economics, 87(12), 2661–2675. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(02)00075-0
  80. Larsson, R., Lyhagen, J., & Löthgren, M. (2001). Likelihood‐based cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels. The Econometrics Journal, 4(1), 109–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-423X.00059
  81. Lee, J., & Strazicich, M. C. (2003). Minimum Lagrange multiplier unit root test with two structural breaks. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 1082–1089. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465303772815961
  82. Levin, A., Lin, C.-F., & Chu, J. C.-S. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
  83. Leybourne, S. J., C. Mills, T., & Newbold, P. (1998). Spurious rejections by Dickey–Fuller tests in the presence of a break under the null. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00014-1
  84. Lin, C.-P., Huang, C.-J., & Chuang, C.-M. (2018). Corruption and business cycle volatility: A corporate governance perspective. Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, 25(5), 586–606. https://doi.org/10.1080/16081625.2017.1378114
  85. Lin, S.-C., & Kim, D.-H. (2014). The link between economic growth and growth volatility. Empirical Economics, 46(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-013-0680-y
  86. Maddala, G. S., & Wu, S. (1999). A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(s1), 631–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1631
  87. Magazzino, C. (2016). Is per capita energy use stationary? Panel data evidence for the EMU countries. Energy Exploration & Exploitation, 34(3), 440–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144598716631666
  88. Malik, A., & Temple, J. R. W. (2009). The geography of output volatility. Journal of Development Economics, 90(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JDEVECO.2008.10.003
  89. Massmann, M., Mitchell, J., & Weale, M. (2003). Business cycles and turning points: A survey of statistical techniques. National Institute Economic Review, 183, 90–106.
  90. Mobarak, A. M. (2005). Democracy, volatility, and economic development. Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(2), 348–361. https://doi.org/10.1162/0034653053970302
  91. Montoya, L. A., & de Haan, J. (2008). Regional business cycle synchronization in Europe? International Economics and Economic Policy, 5(1–2), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-008-0106-z
  92. Nazlioglu, S., & Karul, C. (2017). A panel stationarity test with gradual structural shifts: Re-investigate the international commodity price shocks. Economic Modelling, 61, 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONMOD.2016.12.003
  93. O’Connell, P. G. J. (1998). The overvaluation of purchasing power parity. Journal of International Economics, 44(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(97)00017-2
  94. Omay, T. (2015). Fractional frequency flexible Fourier form to approximate smooth breaks in unit root testing. Economics Letters, 134, 123–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONLET.2015.07.010
  95. Papageorgiou, T., Michaelides, P. G., & Tsionas, E. G. (2016). Business cycle determinants and fiscal policy: A Panel ARDL approach for EMU. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 13, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JECA.2015.12.001
  96. Pawęta, B. (2018). Impact of the global financial crisis on the business cycle in the Visegrad Group. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 6(3), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2018.060303
  97. Pedroni, P. (1999). Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 653–670. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1653
  98. Pedroni, P. (2000). Fully modified OLS for heterogeneous cointegrated panels. Içinde B. H. Baltagi, T. B. Fomby, & R. Carter (Ed.), Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration, and Dynamic Panels (Advances in Econometrics, Volume 15) (ss. 93–130). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0731-9053(00)15004-2
  99. Pedroni, P. (2001). Purchasing power parity tests in cointegrated panels. Review of Economics and Statistics, 83(4), 727–731. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465301753237803
  100. Pedroni, P. (2004). Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Econometric Theory, 20(03), 597–625. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466604203073
  101. Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica, 57(6), 1361. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913712
  102. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels (IZA DP No. 1240). Cambridge Working Papers in Economics.
  103. Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74(4), 967–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x
  104. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
  105. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. (1999). Pooled mean group estimation of dynamic heterogeneous panels. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(446), 621–634.
  106. Pesaran, M. H., Smith, V. L., & Yamagata, T. (2013). Panel unit root tests in the presence of a multifactor error structure. Journal of Econometrics, 175(2), 94–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JECONOM.2013.02.001
  107. Quinn, D. P., & Woolley, J. T. (2001). Democracy and national economic performance: The preference for stability. American Journal of Political Science, 45(3), 634. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669243
  108. Raddatz, C. (2006). Liquidity needs and vulnerability to financial underdevelopment. Journal of Financial Economics, 80(3), 677–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JFINECO.2005.03.012
  109. Rand, J., & Tarp, F. (2002). Business cycles in developing countries: Are they different? World Development, 30(12), 2071–2088. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00124-9
  110. Ravn, M. O., & Uhlig, H. (2002). On adjusting the Hodrick-Prescott filter for the frequency of observations. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 84(2), 371–375.
  111. Reese, S., & Westerlund, J. (2016). Panicca: Panic on cross-section averages. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 31(6), 961–981. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.2487
  112. Rodrigues, P. M. M., & Taylor, A. M. R. (2012). The flexible Fourier form and local generalised least squares de-trended unit root tests. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 74(5), 736–759. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2011.00665.x
  113. Rodrik, D. (1998). Why do more open economies have bigger governments? Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 997–1032. https://doi.org/10.1086/250038
  114. Rodrik, D. (1999). Where did all the growth go? External shocks, social conflict, and growth collapses. Journal of Economic Growth, 4(4), 385–412. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009863208706
  115. Rubaszek, M., & Serwa, D. (2014). Determinants of credit to households: An approach using the life-cycle model. Economic Systems, 38(4), 572–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOSYS.2014.05.004
  116. Rumler, F., & Scharler, J. (2011). Labor market institutions and macroeconomic volatility in a panel of OECD countries. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 58(3), 396–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9485.2011.00552.x
  117. Senhadji, A. (1998). Time-series estimation of structural import demand equations: A cross-country analysis. Staff Papers - International Monetary Fund, 45(2), 236. https://doi.org/10.2307/3867390
  118. Shamim, F. (2006). International evidence on the role of financial sector in economic growth with less volatile business cycles. Forum of International Development Studies, 31, 233–251.
  119. Şimşek, T. (2015). Politik istikrarsızlık çerçevesinde politika ve iktisat etkileşimi. Uluslararası Yönetim, Eğitim ve Ekonomik Perspektifler Dergisi, 3(2), 39–54.
  120. Smith, L. V., Leybourne, S., Kim, T.-H., & Newbold, P. (2004). More powerful panel data unit root tests with an application to mean reversion in real exchange rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 19(2), 147–170. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.723
  121. Tang, S. H. K. (2018). Does scientific and technical research reduce macroeconomic volatility? Bulletin of Economic Research, 70(1), 68–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/boer.12129
  122. Tiryaki, G. F. (2003). Financial development and economic fluctuations. METU Studies in Development, 30(1), 89–106.
  123. Ulucak, R., Yücel, A. G., & İlkay, S. Ç. (2020). Dynamics of tourism demand in Turkey: Panel data analysis using gravity model. Tourism Economics, 135481662090195. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816620901956
  124. Westerlund, J. (2005). A panel CUSUM test of the null of cointegration. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 67(2), 231–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2004.00118.x
  125. Westerlund, J. (2007a). Estimating cointegrated panels with common factors and the forward rate unbiasedness hypothesis. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 5(3), 491–522. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjfinec/nbm006
  126. Westerlund, J. (2007b). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x
  127. Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel cointegration tests of the Fisher effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23(2), 193–233. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.967
  128. Westerlund, J. (2012). Testing for unit roots in panel time-series models with multiple level breaks. The Manchester School, 80(6), 671–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9957.2012.02270.x
  129. Westerlund, J., & Edgerton, D. L. (2007). A panel bootstrap cointegration test. Economics Letters, 97(3), 185–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONLET.2007.03.003
  130. Westerlund, J., & Larsson, R. (2009). A note on the pooling of individual PANIC unit root tests. Econometric Theory, 25(06), 1851. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466609990351
  131. Yang, B. (2008). Does democracy lower growth volatility? A dynamic panel analysis. Journal of Macroeconomics, 30(1), 562–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JMACRO.2007.02.005
  132. Zivot, E., & Andrews, D. W. K. (1992). Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251. https://doi.org/10.2307/1391541
  133. Zouaoui, H., Mazioud, M., & Ellouz, N. Z. (2018). A semi-parametric panel data analysis on financial development-economic volatility nexus in developing countries. Economics Letters, 172, 50–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECONLET.2018.08.010