SavedAdd your journal

Journals / BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 1

Foreign direct ınvestments’ effects on the balance of current account: cointegration analysis with multiple structural breaks in Turkey, China and India sample

Yabancı doğrudan yatırımların cari işlemler dengesi üzerindeki etkileri: Türkiye, Çin ve Hindistan örnekleminde çoklu yapısal kırılmalı eşbütünleşme analizi

İsmet GÖÇER
OSMAN PEKER
Pages
87–116
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)

According to the empirical findings; 10% increase of FDI leads to an decrease on the current account deficit in Turkey by 3%, India by 4.1%; on the contrary, it has been determined an increase on the current account surplus in China by 3.8%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study the effects of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on current account deficit were analyzed with multiple structural breaks unit root test of Carrion-i-Silvestre et al. (2009), multiple structural breaks cointegration test of Maki (2012) and dynamic ordinary smallest square method for Turkey, China and India by using 1980-2011 period data.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study the effects of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on current account deficit were analyzed with multiple structural breaks unit root test of Carrion-i-Silvestre et al. (2009), multiple structural breaks cointegration test of Maki (2012) and dynamic ordinary smallest square method for Turkey, China and India by using 1980-2011 period data.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the empirical findings; 10% increase of FDI leads to an decrease on the current account deficit in Turkey by 3%, India by 4.1%; on the contrary, it has been determined an increase on the current account surplus in China by 3.8%.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study the effects of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on current account deficit were analyzed with multiple structural breaks unit root test of Carrion-i-Silvestre et al. (2009), multiple structural breaks cointegration test of Maki (2012) and dynamic ordinary smallest square method for Turkey, China and India by using 1980-2011 period data. According to the empirical findings; 10% increase of FDI leads to an decrease on the current account deficit in Turkey by 3%, India by 4.1%; on the contrary, it has been determined an increase on the current account surplus in China by 3.8%.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, YDY’nin cari işlemler dengesi üzerindeki etkileri, Türkiye, Çin ve Hindistan için, Carrion-i-Silvestre vd. (2009) çoklu yapısal kırılmalı birim kök testi, Maki (2012) çoklu yapısal kırılmalı eşbütünleşme testi ve dinamik en küçük kareler yöntemi yardımıyla, 1980-2011 dönemi verileriyle analiz edilmiştir. Ampirik bulgulara göre; YDY %10 oranında arttığında, cari işlemler açığının Türkiye’de %3, Hindistan’da %4.1 oranında azaldığı, Çin’de ise %3.8 oranında cari işlemler fazlasının gerçekleştiği tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖÇER, İ., PEKER, O. (2014). Foreign direct ınvestments’ effects on the balance of current account: cointegration analysis with multiple structural breaks in Turkey, China and India sample. BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 1, 87–116. https://ajindex.com/articles/144237

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Arısoy, E., Bayar, G. ve Soranlar, B. (2004). Asya’nın Devi: Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti, Dış Ticaret Dergisi, 32: 1-17
  2. Audet, K. M. ve Gagné, R. (2010). Openess to Foreign Direct Investment and Productivity in Canada. Productivity and Prosperity In Quebec, 1-19
  3. Aydoğuş, İ. ve Öztürkler, H. (2006). Türkiye’de Cari İşlemler Açığı Sorununun Analizi, Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi
  4. Bai, J. ve Perron, P. (2003). Computation and Analysis of Multiple Structural Change Models. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18: 1-22
  5. Barrell, R ve Pain, N. (1997). Foreign Direct Investment, Technological Change and Economic Growth Within Europe. Te Economic Journal, 107(445): 1770- 1786
  6. Bay, M., Seymen Oskay, C. ve Çiçek, E. (2007). Doğrudan Yabancı Yatırımları Türkiye’ye Çekmek İçin Yapılması Gereken Düzenlemeler, Selçuk Üniversitesi Karaman İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi, 12(9): 253-263
  7. Borensztein, E., Gregoria, J.D. ve Lee, J.W. (1998). How Does Foreign Direct Investment Afect Economic Growth? Journal of International Economics, 45(1): 115-138
  8. Bozkurt, H. ve Dursun, G. (2006). Bilgi ve İletişim Teknolojileri ile Yabancı Doğrudan Yatırım Akımları Arasındaki Etkileşim: Türkiye İçin Kointegrasyon Analizi, 1980-2004. Journal of Knowledge Economy & Knowledge Management, 2: 37-49
  9. Campbell, T. (2001). Foreign Direct Investment Inflows and Their Impact on Barbados’ Current Account: Implications for Policy. 22nd Annual Seminar, 24-27 July, Barbados
  10. Carrion-i-Silvestre, J.L. ve Sanso, A. (2006). Testing the Null of Cointegration with Structural Breaks. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 68(5): 623-646
  11. Carrion-i-Silvestre, J.L., Kim, D ve Perron, P. (2009). GLS-Based Unit Root Tests with Multiple Structural Breaks Under Both the Null and the Alternative Hypotheses. Econometric Theory, 25: 1754-1792
  12. Chakraborty, C. ve Nunnenkamp, P. (2006). Economic Reforms, Foreign Direct Investment and its Economic Effects in India, Kiel Working Paper, No. 1272
  13. Çeştepe, H. ve Tüylüoğlu, Ş. (2006). Yabancı Yaptırımlar Yoluyla Teknoloji Transferi: İrlanda Örneğinden Türkiye için Dersler. Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 61(2): 45-62
  14. Çin Ülke Raporu. (2008). Pekin Büyükelçiliği, Ticaret Müşavirliği
  15. Davies, K. (2003). Attracting Investment to China, OECD Policy Brief, http:// www.eldis.org/vfile/upload/1/document/0708/DOC15553.pdf
  16. DEİK. (2003). Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Ekonomisi ve Türkiye ile İlişkileri, http:// www.deik.