SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Bankacılar / 2018 / Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 105

Government Size, External Shocks, and Economic Growth Nexus: An Econometric Study on Selected OECD Countries

Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü, Dış Şoklar ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi:Seçilmiş OECD Ülkeleri Üzerine Ekonometrik Bir Çalışma

HÜSEYİN ŞEN
AYŞE KAYA
Pages
27–46
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)

The results of the study obtained by employing Bootstrap panel Granger causality analysis reveal that there exists a one-way causality running from government size and external shocks to economic growth for Finland, Denmark, and Japan, but not for other countries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to analyze empirically the nexus among government size, external shocks, and economic growth in the context of selected 7 OECD countries (Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Norway, France, Canada, and Japan) by using annual data set for the period 19802015.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aims to analyze empirically the nexus among government size, external shocks, and economic growth in the context of selected 7 OECD countries (Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Norway, France, Canada, and Japan) by using annual data set for the period 19802015.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results of the study obtained by employing Bootstrap panel Granger causality analysis reveal that there exists a one-way causality running from government size and external shocks to economic growth for Finland, Denmark, and Japan, but not for other countries.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims to analyze empirically the nexus among government size, external shocks, and economic growth in the context of selected 7 OECD countries (Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Norway, France, Canada, and Japan) by using annual data set for the period 19802015. The results of the study obtained by employing Bootstrap panel Granger causality analysis reveal that there exists a one-way causality running from government size and external shocks to economic growth for Finland, Denmark, and Japan, but not for other countries.

Özet

Bu çalışma, seçilmiş 7 OECD ülkesi (Belçika, Finlandiya, Danimarka, Norveç, Fransa, Kanada ve Japonya) özelinde kamu kesimi büyüklüğü, dış şoklar ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisini, 19802015 dönemi için yıllık veri seti kullanmak suretiyle ampirik olarak analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bootstrap panel Granger nedensellik analizinden istifade edilerek elde edilen bulgular, Finlandiya, Danimarka ve Japonya’da kamu kesimi büyüklüğü ve dış şoklardan ekonomik büyümeye doğru tek yönlü bir nedensellik ilişkisinin olduğunu; diğer ülkelerde ise böyle bir ilişkinin olmadığını ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞEN, H., KAYA, A. (2018). Government Size, External Shocks, and Economic Growth Nexus: An Econometric Study on Selected OECD Countries. Bankacılar, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 105, 27–46. https://ajindex.com/articles/143994

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Yamamura, E. (2011). Decomposition of the Effect of Government Size on Growth. Economics Letter, 112, 230-232.
  2. Wahab, M. (2004). Economic Growth and Government Expenditure: Evidence from a New Test Specification. Applied Economics, 36(19), 2125-2135.
  3. Şen, H., Kaya, A., and Alpaslan, B. (2015).
  4. Education, Health, and Economic Growth Nexus: A Bootstrap Panel Granger Causality Analysis for Developing Countries. The University of Manchester, Economics Discussion Paper Series, No: EDP-1502, p. 21. Swamy, P. A. V. B. (1970). Efficient Inference in a Random Coefficient Regression Model. Econometrica, 38(2), 311-323.
  5. Scully, G. W. (1995). The “Growth Tax” in the United States. Public Choice, 85, 71-80.
  6. Saunders, P. (1985). Public Expenditure and Economic Performance in OECD Countries. Journal of Public Policy, 5, 1-21.
  7. Sakashita, Y. and Yoshizaki, Y. (2016). The Effects of Oil Price Shocks on IIP and CPI in Emerging Countries. Economies, 4(4), 1-9.
  8. Rodrik, D. (1998). Why Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments. Journal of Political Economy, 106(5), 997-1032.
  9. Rahn, R. and Fox, H. (1996). What is the Optimal Size of Government?. Vernon K. Kriebe Foundation. Ram, R. (1986). Government Size and Economic Growth: A New Framework and Some Evidence from Cross-Section and Time-Series Data. American Economic Review, 76, 191-203.
  10. Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A. and Yamagata, T. (2008). A Bias-Adjusted LM Test of Error Crosssection Independence. Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127.
  11. Pesaran, M.H. and Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93.
  12. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels. CESifo Working Paper Series, No: 1229, p. 42. Oto-Peralías, D. and Romero-Ávila, D. (2013). Tracing the Link Between Government Size and Growth: The Role of Public Sector Quality. KYKLOS, 66(2), 229-255.
  13. OECD (2017). 13 Kasım 2017 tarihinde https://data.oecd.org/trade/terms-of-trade.htm adresinden erişildi. Nguyen, T. L. H., Tran, T. G. and Le, T. H. M. (2014). The Impact of External Shocks on Small Economies: Evidence from East Asian Countries. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 6(2), 206- 217. Mohanty, M. and Zampolli, F. (2009). Government Size and Macroeconomic Stability. BIS Quarterly Review, December 2009, 14. Kónya, L. (2006). Exports and Growth: Granger Causality Analysis on OECD Countries with a Panel Data Approach. Economic Modelling, 23, 978-992.
  14. Kormendi, R. C. and