SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sosyoekonomi / 2010 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 11

Evaluation of Structural Fiscal Transformation Reforms in Turkey: Reform Fatigue and Reform Ownership Problems

Hakkı YILMAZ
Pages
—
Publication Date
2010-06-01
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)

Such commitment necessitates a strategic management for the reforms in the medium term.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Distinctive features of the IMF supported fiscal adjustment programs is the implementation of structural fiscal reforms.Turkeycompleted many structural reforms aiming at an efficient market system and an effective public sector from 2000 to 2005.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However due to the resistance against the reforms and changes experienced particularly in the second half of 2000 and 2002 and to the lack of “commitment” and “ownership” in the reforms the reforms were neither designed duly nor implemented completely.Turkeyshould commit and undertake structural reforms to be performed in public fiscal management.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Such commitment necessitates a strategic management for the reforms in the medium term.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Distinctive features of the IMF supported fiscal adjustment programs is the implementation of structural fiscal reforms.Turkeycompleted many structural reforms aiming at an efficient market system and an effective public sector from 2000 to 2005. However due to the resistance against the reforms and changes experienced particularly in the second half of 2000 and 2002 and to the lack of “commitment” and “ownership” in the reforms the reforms were neither designed duly nor implemented completely.Turkeyshould commit and undertake structural reforms to be performed in public fiscal management. Such commitment necessitates a strategic management for the reforms in the medium term.

Özet

Distinctive features of the IMF supported fiscal adjustment programs is the implementation of structural fiscal reforms.Turkeycompleted many structural reforms aiming at an efficient market system and an effective public sector from 2000 to 2005. However due to the resistance against the reforms and changes experienced particularly in the second half of 2000 and 2002 and to the lack of “commitment” and “ownership” in the reforms the reforms were neither designed duly nor implemented completely.Turkeyshould commit and undertake structural reforms to be performed in public fiscal management. Such commitment necessitates a strategic management for the reforms in the medium term.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILMAZ, H. (2010). Evaluation of Structural Fiscal Transformation Reforms in Turkey: Reform Fatigue and Reform Ownership Problems. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 11. https://ajindex.com/articles/139665

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Alesina, A. and R. Perotti (1996), “Fiscal Adjustment in OECD Countries: Composition and Macroeconomic Effects”, NBER Working Paper 5730. Atiyas, I. and F. Emil (2005), “Turkey: Governance and Institutional Issues -Political Economy of Governance Failures, Crises and Opportunities for Reform-”, Background paper of FEMISE, Country Profiles Project. Barro R.J. and J.W. Lee (2003), “IMF Programs: Who Is Chosen and What Are the Effects?”, National Bureau of Economic Research, No.8951. Bankacılık Düzenleme ve Denetleme Kurumu (2004), Bankalar Kanunu ve Bankalar Kanununa İliskin Değişiklikler ve Düzenlemeler, Mevzuat. Büyükcan, T. (2005), “IMF Destekli Yapısal Uyum Programları ile İlişkili Olarak Türkiye’de Gerçekleştirilen Yasal Düzenlemeler (1999–2004)”,
  2. TBMM, Yayımlanmamış Uzmanlık Tezi. Dell, S. (1981), On Being Grandmotherly: The Evolution of IMF Conditionality, Edited by P. Kenen. Vol. 144, Princeton Essays in International Finance. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
  3. Dixion, G. (2000), “Budget Reform in Change Resistant Enviroments”, Draft PREM Note, World Bank. Emil, F., H.H. Yılmaz (2004), How Did the Public Debt Arise and How Did We Get Here?, TESEV Publication, İstanbul.
  4. Emil, F., H.H. Yılmaz (2003), “Kamu Borçlanması İstikrar Programları ve Uygulanan Maliye Politikasının Kalitesi”, METU Economic Research Center, Working Paper, September. Goldsteın M. (2000), “IMF Structural Conditionality: How Much Is Too Much?” Paper prepared for NBER Conference on Economic and Financial Crisis in Emerging Market Economies. Gupta, S., E. Baldacci, B. Clements and E.R. Tionngson (2003), “What Sustains Fiscal Consolidations in Emerging Market Countries?”, International Monetary Fund, Working Paper, No: 224, November. IMF (2003), “Fiscal Adjustment in IMF-Supported Programs”, IMF Independent Evaluation Office Report. IMF (2003), Operational Guidelines on the New Conditionality Guidelines, May 8. IMF (2002), Fiscal Adjustment in IMF Supported Programs: Issues Paper for an Evaluation by the Independent Evaluation Office. IMF and Turkey (1998–2004),
  5. Intention Letters, Staff Reports, Public Information Notices, Financial Positions in the Fund, Statements, News Briefs and Surveys. IMF (2004), Ex Post Assesment of Longer Term Program Engagement. IMF (2001–2005),
  6. Staff papers for Turkey. IMF (2004),
  7. Opening Remarks, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy-International Monetary Fund Conference Fiscal Policy in India, Krueger, A. O. Speech, January 16, New D