SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sosyoekonomi / 2011 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 16

Alternative Measures of Rate of Capacity Utilization for the Turkish Economy: A Comparative Analysis in Means of Adequacy for Empirical Investigation and Growth Models

Benan ERES
Pages
—
Publication Date
2011-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️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)

Together with its technical simplicity in compilation and calculation as compared to the widely used survey based series its theoretical advantages makes it the best measure for use in empirical investigations and macroeconomic modeling.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims at calculating the rate of capacity utilization for the Turkish economy with the cointegration method which is based on the relation between capital stock and the output and compare it with several other measures.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The cointegration method is developed in accordance with the long run perspective of the classical/Marxian conceptualization.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Together with its technical simplicity in compilation and calculation as compared to the widely used survey based series its theoretical advantages makes it the best measure for use in empirical investigations and macroeconomic modeling.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims at calculating the rate of capacity utilization for the Turkish economy with the cointegration method which is based on the relation between capital stock and the output and compare it with several other measures. The cointegration method is developed in accordance with the long run perspective of the classical/Marxian conceptualization. It also takes into account the Keynesian short-run cycles. For comparative purposes the Wharton index and the output-capital ratio measures are also calculated. These three measures as well as the available series based on the survey data are compared and contrasted to each other. The cointegration measure proves to be the most adequate measure in means of the classical/Marxian long-run as well as the Keynesian short-run theoretical considerations. Together with its technical simplicity in compilation and calculation as compared to the widely used survey based series its theoretical advantages makes it the best measure for use in empirical investigations and macroeconomic modeling.

Özet

This study aims at calculating the rate of capacity utilization for the Turkish economy with the cointegration method which is based on the relation between capital stock and the output and compare it with several other measures. The cointegration method is developed in accordance with the long run perspective of the classical/Marxian conceptualization. It also takes into account the Keynesian short-run cycles. For comparative purposes the Wharton index and the output-capital ratio measures are also calculated. These three measures as well as the available series based on the survey data are compared and contrasted to each other. The cointegration measure proves to be the most adequate measure in means of the classical/Marxian long-run as well as the Keynesian short-run theoretical considerations. Together with its technical simplicity in compilation and calculation as compared to the widely used survey based series its theoretical advantages makes it the best measure for use in empirical investigations and macroeconomic modeling.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERES, B. (2011). Alternative Measures of Rate of Capacity Utilization for the Turkish Economy: A Comparative Analysis in Means of Adequacy for Empirical Investigation and Growth Models. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 16. https://ajindex.com/articles/139622

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Baxter, M. and R. King (1995), “Measuring Business Cycles: Approximate Band Pass Filters for Economic Time Series, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working Paper, 5022: 1-53.
  2. Brendt, E.R. and C.J. Morrison (1981), “Capacity Utilization Measures: Underlying Economic Theory and an Alternative Approach”, The American Economic Review, 71(2): 48-52.
  3. CBRT (2010), “Information Note Regarding the Capacity Utilization Rate of Manufacturing Industry”, CBRT Online Document,, 05.07.2011.
  4. Chagny, O. and J. Döpke (2001), “Measures of the Output Gap in the Euro-Zone: An Empirical assessment of Selected Methods”, Kiel Working Paper, 1053, Institut für Weltwirtschaft, Kiel. Cihan, C., Ş. Saygılı, H. Yurtoğlu (2005), Türkiye Ekonomisi’nde Sermaye Birikimi, Verimlilik ve Büyüme (1972-2003),
  5. TÜSİAD Büyüme stratejileri dizisi, DPT-TÜSİAD. No. TÜSİAD-T/2005-12/413. Deigrades, T. and L. Tsoulfidis (2007), “A New Method for the Estimation of Capacity Utilization: Theory and Empirical Evidence from 14 EU Countries”, Bulletin of Economic Research, 59(4): 361-81.
  6. Foley, D. and T. Michl (1999),
  7. Growth and Distribution, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  8. Gökçekuş, Ö. (1998), “Trade Liberalization and Capacity Utilization: New Evidence from the Turkish Rubber Industry”, Empirical Economics, 23(4): 561-71.
  9. Klein, L.R. (1960), “Theoretical Issues in Measurement of Capacity”, Econometrica, 28(2): 272-86.
  10. Klein, L.R. and R. Summers (1966), “The Wharton Index of Capacity Utilisation”, Studies in Quantitative Economics No. 1. University of Pennsylvania. Klein, L.R., V. Long, A. Greenspan, D. Greenwald, N. Edmonson, and G. Perry (1973), “Capacity Utilization: Concept, Measurement and Recent Estimates, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1973(3): 743-63.
  11. Lavoi, M., G. Rodriguez and M. Seccareccia (2004), “Similitudes and Discrepancies in Post-Keynesian and Marxist Theories of Investment: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation”, International Review of Applied Economics, 18(2): 127-49.
  12. Lin, L. I-K. (1989), “A Concordance Correlation Coefficient to Evaluate Reproducibility”, Biometrics, 45(1): 255-68.
  13. Marx, K. ([1894]1991), Capital,A Critique of Political Economy, Volume 3, London: Penguin Books. Maddison, A. (1991), Dynamic Forces in Capitalist Development: A Long-Run Comparative View, New York: Oxford University Press.
  14. Morrison, C.J. (1988), “Quasi-fixed Inputs in U.S. and Japanese Manufacturing: a Generalized Leontief Restricted Cost Function Approach”, The Review of E