Journals / BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1

The Intermingling Relationship of Economic Growth and Institutional Quality: A Panel Data Analysis

Ekonomik Büyüme ve Kurumsal Kalite İlişkisi: Bir Panel Veri Analizi

Pages
65–91
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)

Analysis results imply that protection of property rights, rule of law and control of corruption have a positive effect on economic growth, but judicial independence and regulatory quality have a negative effect.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between economic growth and institutional quality.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, the relationship between economic growth and institutional quality is analyzed econometrically by using Mankiw-Romer-Weil (MRW) growth model and employing panel data regression analysis in the sample of 11 countries including Germany, Belgium, France, England, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Netherlands, Portugal and Turkey for the period between the years 1990 and 2015.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Analysis results imply that protection of property rights, rule of law and control of corruption have a positive effect on economic growth, but judicial independence and regulatory quality have a negative effect.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between economic growth and institutional quality. In this study, the relationship between economic growth and institutional quality is analyzed econometrically by using Mankiw-Romer-Weil (MRW) growth model and employing panel data regression analysis in the sample of 11 countries including Germany, Belgium, France, England, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Greece, Netherlands, Portugal and Turkey for the period between the years 1990 and 2015. Analysis results imply that protection of property rights, rule of law and control of corruption have a positive effect on economic growth, but judicial independence and regulatory quality have a negative effect.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı kurumsal kalite faktörlerinin ülkelerin ekonomik büyümeleri üzerinde etkili olup olmadığını incelemektir. Bu amaçla, Almanya, Belçika, Fransa, İngiltere, İspanya, İrlanda, İtalya, Yunanistan, Hollanda, Portekiz ve Türkiye olmak üzere toplam 11 ülkede 1990-2015 dönemini kapsayan sürede ekonomik büyüme ile kurumsal kalite arasında bir ilişki olup olmadığı Mankiw-Romer-Weil (MRW) büyüme modeli kullanılarak panel veri analiziyle ekonometrik açıdan araştırılmıştır. Bu çalışmada, kurumsal kalite faktörlerinden mülkiyet haklarının korunması, hukukun üstünlüğü ve yolsuzluğun kontrolü değişkenleri ile ekonomik büyüme arasında pozitif yönde bir ilişki olduğu, yargı bağımsızlığı ve düzenlemelerin kalitesi ile ekonomik büyüme arasında negatif yönde bir ilişki olduğu ekonometrik olarak tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

FİGANKAPLAN, T. (2017). The Intermingling Relationship of Economic Growth and Institutional Quality: A Panel Data Analysis. BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 1, 65–91. https://ajindex.com/articles/142595

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Abeyasinghe, R. (2004). “Democracy, Political Stability, and Developing Country Growth: Theory and Evidence” IWU Honors Projects. Paper 17
  2. Acemoğlu, D., Johnson, S., Robinson, J. ve Thaicharoen, Y. (2003). Institutional Causes, Macroeconomic Symptoms: Volatility, Crises and Growth. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper 9124
  3. Acemoğlu, D. ve Robinson, J. (2008). The Role of Institutions in Growth and Development. World Bank Working Paper No.10
  4. Aghion, P., Alesina, A., ve Trebbi, F. (2007). Democracy, Technology and Growth. NBER Working Paper, no:13180 (2007), s.1-20
  5. Alesina, A. ve Wagner, A. (2003). Choosing and Reneging on Exchange Rate Regimes. NBER Working Paper. No. 9809, June 2003
  6. Barro, R. ve Lee, J.W. (2000). A New data Set of Educational Attainment in the World.
  7. Bayar, G., Güloğlu, B. ve Tokpunar, S. (2011). Ekonomik Yaklaşım Kongresi: “Türkiye Ekonomisinin Dinamikleri: Politika Arayışları”, 22-23 Aralık
  8. Breusch, T. ve Pagan, A. R., (1980). “The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Modelspecification Tests in Econometrics”, Review of Economic Studies, 47: 239-53
  9. Brooks, C. (2008). Introductory Econometrics for Finance (2th Ed.). UK, Cambridge University Press
  10. Bussiere, M. ve Mulder, C. (1999). Political Instability and Economic Vulnerability. IMF Working Paper. No. WP/99/46
  11. Calvo, G. ve Mishkin, F. (2003). The Mirage of Exchange Rate Regimes for Emerging Market Countries. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 2003, v17 (4,Fall), 99-118
  12. Chong, A. ve Calderon, C. (2000). Institutional Quality and Income Distribution. Economic Development and Cultural Change. Vol. 48, No.4, 761-786
  13. Dawson, J., (2013). Causality in the Freedom-Growth Relationship. European Journal of Political Economy, Cilt 19, Sayı 3, s. 479-495
  14. Du, J. (2010). Institutional Quality and Economic Crises, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Cilt 92, Sayı 1, s. 173–179
  15. Dünya Bankası, (2018), Dünya Gelişmişlik Göstergeleri. https://datacatalog. worldbank.org/dataset/world-development-indicators
  16. Fraser Enstitüsü, (2018), Dünya Ekonomik Özgürlükler Endeksi. https:// www.fraserinstitute.org/economic-freedom/map?geozone=world&page=m ap&year=2016 17. Greene, W.H. (2003), Econometric Analysis, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Press
  17. Hall, R. ve Jones, C. (1998). Why Do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker Than Others?