SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Alanya Akademik Bakış / 2024 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3

Validity of Unemployment Hysteresis in European Countries and Türkiye with Fourier Functions

Serhat Alpağut(AĞRI İBRAHİM ÇEÇEN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7326-4048
Pages
780–790
Publication Date
2024-09-30
🏛️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)

As a result of the tests applied, there is evidence that unemployment hysteresis does not valid for Türkiye and the EU.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Unemployment hysteresis means that rising unemployment does not return to the average over time.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The Flexible Fourier ADF (FF-ADF) test developed by Enders and Lee (2012) and the Fractional Frequency Flexible Fourier ADF (FFFF-ADF) test developed by Omay (2015) are used to investigate the existence of unemployment hysteresis in Türkiye and EU countries.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the tests applied, there is evidence that unemployment hysteresis does not valid for Türkiye and the EU.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:İşsizlik Histerisi · Doğal İşsizlik Oranı · Fourier Birim Kök Testleri

Abstract

Unemployment hysteresis means that rising unemployment does not return to the average over time. This situation underlines that unemployment in countries is not temporary but permanent. In the case of unemployment hysteresis, economists argue for intervention in the economy. The existence of unemployment hysteresis is therefore important for the applicability of economic policy. This issue, which is very important for economists, has been analyzed in the literature using different methods. In this study, we use the analyses obtained by adding the recently popular Fourier models to unit root tests. The Flexible Fourier ADF (FF-ADF) test developed by Enders and Lee (2012) and the Fractional Frequency Flexible Fourier ADF (FFFF-ADF) test developed by Omay (2015) are used to investigate the existence of unemployment hysteresis in Türkiye and EU countries. As a result, it is found that the Fourier properties are statistically significant for both Türkiye and the EU and that the series have nonlinear properties. As a result of the tests applied, there is evidence that unemployment hysteresis does not valid for Türkiye and the EU.

Özet

İşsizlik histerezisi, artan işsizliğin zaman içinde ortalamasına dönmediği anlamına gelir. Bu durum ülkelerde işsizliğin geçici değil kalıcı olduğunu vurgulamaktadır. İşsizlik histerezisi durumunda, ekonomistler ekonomiye müdahale edilmesi gerektiğini savunmaktadır. Böylece işsizlik histerisisinin varlığı, ekonomi politikalarının uygulanabilirliğini açısından önemlidir. Ekonomistler için oldukça önemli olan bu konu literatürde farklı yöntemlerle incelenmiştir. Bu çalışmada birim kök testlerine son dönemde popüler olan Fourier modellerinin eklenmesiyle oluşturulan analizleri kullanılmıştır. Enders ve Lee (2012) tarafından geliştirilen Flexible Fourier ADF (FF-ADF) ve Omay (2015) tarafından geliştirilen Fractional Frequency Flexible Fourier ADF (FFFF-ADF) testleri ile Türkiye ve AB ülkelerinde işsizlik histerezisinin varlığını araştırılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, Fourier özelliklerinin hem Türkiye hem de AB için istatistiksel olarak anlamlı olduğu ve serilerin nonlinear özellik taşıdığı tespit edilmiştir. Uygulanan testler sonucunda Türkiye ve AB için işsizlik histerezisinin geçerli olmadığına dair kanıtlar bulunmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Alpağut, S. (2024). Validity of Unemployment Hysteresis in European Countries and Türkiye with Fourier Functions. Alanya Akademik Bakış, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 3, 780–790. https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.1463030

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (45)

  1. Arestis, P., & Mariscal, I. B. F. (1999). Unit roots and structural breaks in OECD unemployment. Economics Letters, 65(2), 149-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0165-1765(99)00131-7
  2. Bayat, T., Temiz, M., & Konat, G. (2020). Türkiye’de işsizlik histerisi hipotezinin geçerliliği üzerine amprik bir çalışma (1923-2019). Pearson Journal, 5(7), 1-8.
  3. Belliler, İ. S., & Demiralp, A. (2021). Türkiye’de işsizlik histerisi: doğrusal olmayan birim kök testinden kanıtlar. Pearson Journal, 7(22), 167-178. https://doi.org/10.46872/pearson.402
  4. Blanchard, O. J., & Summers, L. H. (1986a). Hysteresis in unemployment. Nber Workıng Paper Serıes. Working Paper No. 2035. https://doi.org/10.3386/w2035
  5. Blanchard, O. J., & Summers, L. H. (1986b). Hysteresis and the European unemployment problem. NBER Macroeconomics Annual, 1, 15-78. https://doi.org/10.3386/w1950
  6. Brunello, G. (1990). Hysteresis and “the Japanese unemployment problem”: a preliminary investigation. Oxford Economic Papers, 42(3), 483-500. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041959
  7. Cai, Y., & Omay, T. (2021). Using double frequency in Fourier Dickey–Fuller unit root test. Computational Economics, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-020-10075-5
  8. Camarero, M., Carrion‐i‐Silvestre, J. L., & Tamarit, C. (2006). Testing for hysteresis in unemployment in OECD countries: New evidence using stationarity panel tests with breaks. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 68(2), 167-182. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2006.00157.x
  9. Caporale, G. M., Gil-Alana, L. A., & Trejo, P. V. (2022). Unemployment persistence in Europe: Evidence from the 27 EU countries. Heliyon, 8(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e08898
  10. Chang, T. (2011). Hysteresis in unemployment for 17 OECD countries: Stationary test with a Fourier function. Economic Modelling, 28(5), 2208-2214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2011.06.002
  11. Cheng, S. C., Wu, T. P., Lee, K. C., & Chang, T. (2014). Flexible Fourier unit root test of unemployment for PIIGS countries. Economic Modelling, 36, 142-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.09.021
  12. Christopoulos, D. K., & León‐Ledesma, M. A. (2007). Unemployment hysteresis in EU countries: What do we really know about it? Journal of Economic Studies. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443580710745353
  13. Coşgun, Ş. N., & Erdayı, A. U. (2023). Türkiye’de işsizlik ve sosyal dışlanma ilişkisi: Yozgat ilinde bir alan araştırması. Alanya Akademik Bakış, 7(1), 581-598. https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.1224625
  14. Çınar, M., & Sevüktekin, M. (2017). Ekonometrik zaman serileri analizi (Eviews Uygulamalı), 5. Baskı, İstanbul: Dora Yayınları.
  15. Çiçen, Y. B. (2021). 2008 global krizinde cinsiyet ve yaş gruplarına göre işsizlik histerisi: Türkiye için Fourier durağanlık analizi. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 17(1), 79-101. https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.783454
  16. Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366a), 427-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1979.10482531
  17. Dursun, G. (2017). Unemployment hysteresis in central and eastern European countries: Further evidence from Fourier unit root test. Rome Proceedings, Econ-World2017, Rome. https://rome2017.econworld.org/papers/Dursun_Unemployment.pdf
  18. Enders, W., & Lee, J. (2012). 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
  19. Friedman, M. (1995). The role of monetary policy (pp. 215-231). Macmillan Education UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-24002-9_11
  20. García-Cintado, A., Romero-Ávila, D., & Usabiaga, C. (2015). Can the hysteresis hypothesis in Spanish regional unemployment be beaten? New evidence from unit root tests with breaks. Economic Modelling, 47, 244-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2015.02.035
  21. Ghoshray, A., & Stamatogiannis, M. P. (2015). Centurial evidence of breaks in the persistence of unemployment. Economics Letters, 129, 74-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2015.02.012
  22. Jaeger, A., & Parkinson, M. (1994). Some evidence on hysteresis in unemployment rates. European Economic Review, 38(2), 329-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(94)90061-2
  23. Kahyaoğlu, H., Tuzun, O., Ceylan, F., & Ekinci, R. (2016). İşsizlik histerisinin geçerliliği: Türkiye ve seçilmiş AB ülkeleri üzerine bir uygulama. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14(4), 103-128. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.280055
  24. Karakuş, M., & Atabey, A. Ö. (2021). Genç işsizlik, ihracat ve büyüme arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye için ampirik bir analiz. Alanya Akademik Bakış, 5(2), 865-882. https://doi.org/10.29023/alanyaakademik.889070
  25. Lee, C. C., & Chang, C. P. (2008). Unemployment hysteresis in OECD countries: Centurial time series evidence with structural breaks. Economic Modelling, 25(2), 312-325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2007.06.002
  26. 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
  27. 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
  28. Omay, T., & Baleanu, D. (2021). Fractional unit-root tests allowing for a fractional frequency flexible Fourier form trend: predictability of Covid-19. Advances in Difference Equations, 2021(1), 167. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-021-03317-9
  29. Omay, T., Shahbaz, M., & Stewart, C. (2021). Is there really hysteresis in the OECD unemployment rates? New evidence using a Fourier panel unit root test. Empirica, 48(4), 875-901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10663-021-09510-z
  30. Mitchell, W. F. (1993). Testing for unit roots and persistence in OECD unemployment rates. Applied Economics, 25(12), 1489-1501. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849300000153
  31. Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1361-1401. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913712
  32. Phelps, E. S. (1994). Structural slumps: The modern equilibrium theory of unemployment, interest, and assets. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/1060754
  33. Pissarides, C. A. (1992). Loss of skill during unemployment and the persistence of employment shocks. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(4), 1371-1391. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118392
  34. Røed, K. (1996). Unemployment hysteresis-macro evidence from 16 OECD countries. Empirical Economics, 21, 589-600. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01180703
  35. Sigeze, Ç., Coşkun, N., & Ballı, E. (2019). AB ülkelerinde ve Türkiye'de işsizlik histerisinin Fourier-KPSS birim kök testi ile incelenmesi. İzmir İktisat Dergisi, 34(1), 15-24. https://doi.org/10.24988/ije.2019341761
  36. Song, F. M., & Wu, Y. (1998). Hysteresis in unemployment: Evidence from OECD countries. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 38(2), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1062-9769(99)80111-2
  37. Srinivasan, N., & Mitra, P. (2012). Hysteresis in unemployment: Fact or fiction? Economics Letters, 115(3), 419-422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2011.12.070
  38. Tarı, R. (2015). Ekonometri. Umuttepe Yayınları. Kocaeli
  39. Tekin, İ. (2018). Türkiye'de işsizlik histerisi: Fourier fonksiyonlu durağanlık sınamaları. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 33(1), 97-127. https://doi.org/10.24988/deuiibf.2018331685
  40. Yaya, O. S., Ogbonna, E., Gil-Alana, L. A., Furuoka, F., & Vo, X. V. (2022). Testing Unemployment Hysteresis in European Countries: Argument based on Three-Generation unit root tests. SSRN 4158893. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4158893
  41. Yazgan, Ş., Yalçınkaya, Ö., & Kadanalı, E. (2019, June). Analysing natural unemployment rate or unemployment hysteresis in Turkish economy: An Application on agricultural and non-agricultural unemployment rate series. In 4th Internatıonal Conference on Advances in Natural & Applıed Scıences (p. 732).
  42. Yilanci, V., & Eris, Z. A. (2013). Purchasing power parity in African countries: Further evidence from fourier unit root tests based on linear and nonlinear models. South African Journal of Economics, 81(1), 20-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1813-6982.2012.01326.x
  43. Yilanci, V., Ozkan, Y., & Altinsoy, A. (2020). Testing the unemployment hysteresis in G7 countries: Fresh evidence from fourier threshold unit root test. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 23(3), 49-59.
  44. Yılmaz, M. (2023). An Econometric study on the validity of the unemployment hysteresis hypothesis in EU-15 and EU-28. OPUS Journal of Society Research, 20 (Special Issue-Human Behavior and Social Institutions), 842-851. https://doi.org/10.26466/opusjsr.1329033
  45. Zivot, E., & Andrews, K. (1992), Further evidence on the great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 10(10), 25–70. https://doi.org/10.2307/1391541