Journals / Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1

An Analysis about Determining The Regional Distribution Of Investment Incentives: Turkey Case

Yatırım Teşvik Politikalarının Bölgesel Belirleyicilerine Yönelik Bir Analiz: Türkiye Örneği

Pages
525–556
Publication Date
2016-04-01
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)

According to the analysis results, it has been observed that the degree of benefitting from investment incentives in Turkey exhibited parallelism with developmental status of the regions, and this situation indicated that the incentive policies implemented in order to eliminate the regional imbalances deviated from the desired objectives.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In literature, the “incentive” concept includes the concepts such as encouragement, subvention, supporting and governmental aids, or is considered to be same with these concepts.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Besides closing the gap between the countries and developed countries or developed countries’ effort for sustaining their leadership in strategic domains, the incentives are also applied in order to decrease the developmental differences between the regions or cities.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the analysis results, it has been observed that the degree of benefitting from investment incentives in Turkey exhibited parallelism with developmental status of the regions, and this situation indicated that the incentive policies implemented in order to eliminate the regional imbalances deviated from the desired objectives.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Incentive · Investment · Regional Development

Abstract

In literature, the “incentive” concept includes the concepts such as encouragement, subvention, supporting and governmental aids, or is considered to be same with these concepts. Besides closing the gap between the countries and developed countries or developed countries’ effort for sustaining their leadership in strategic domains, the incentives are also applied in order to decrease the developmental differences between the regions or cities. The presence of the investment incentives in Turkey in order to eliminate the developmental differences between the regions has become more attention-grabbing especially after the implementation of incentive packages after the year 2000. Within this context, what the socioeconomic and political determinants of the incentives given to 26 regions of Turkey grouped according to nomenclature d'unités territoriales statistiques (NUTS) and being within the scope of Level II are has been investigated for the period of 2004-2012. According to the analysis results, it has been observed that the degree of benefitting from investment incentives in Turkey exhibited parallelism with developmental status of the regions, and this situation indicated that the incentive policies implemented in order to eliminate the regional imbalances deviated from the desired objectives.

Özet

Literatürde teşvik kavramı; özendirme, sübvanse etme, destekleme ve devlet yardımı gibi kavramları kapsamakta veya bu kavramlarla eş tutulmaktadır. Ülkeler gelişmiş ülkelerle aralarındaki farkı kapama veya gelişmiş ülkelerin stratejik önemi olan alanlarda liderliğini sürdürme çabaları yanı sıra bölgeler veya iller arasındaki gelişmişlik farklarını azaltmak amacıyla da teşvik düzenlemelerine başvurmaktadır. Türkiye’de de bölgeler arası gelişmişlik farklarını gidermek amacıyla teşvik uygulamalarının varlığı özellikle 2000 yılı sonrasında uygulamaya konan teşvik paketleriyle daha dikkat çeker olmuştur. Bu bağlamda Türkiye’de İstatistiki Bölge Birimleri Sınıflandırmasına göre ayrımı yapılan ve Düzey-2 kapsamında olan 26 alt bölgeye verilen yatırım teşviklerinin sosyo-ekonomik ve siyasal belirleyicilerinin neler olduğu 2004-2012 arası dönem için inceleme konusu yapılmıştır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre Türkiye’de yatırım teşviklerinden faydalanma derecesinin bölgelerin gelişmişlik düzeyleriyle paralellik arz ettiği gözlenmiş ve bu durum bölgesel dengesizlikleri giderme amaçlı uygulanan teşvik politikalarının arzulanan amaçlarının saptığına işaret etmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SEVİNÇ, H., EMSEN, Ö. S., BOZKURT, E. (2016). An Analysis about Determining The Regional Distribution Of Investment Incentives: Turkey Case. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1, 525–556. https://ajindex.com/articles/154817

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Alp, A. (2011). Panel Veri Analizi ve Panel Ridge Regresyon Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Akıncı, M. (2014). Ekonomik Özgürlükler ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişki. Bursa: Dora Basım-Yayın ve Dağıtım A.Ş. Asteriou, D. ve Hall, S. (2007). Applied Econometrics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Aydın, U. (2004). Industrial Subsidies in OECD Countries 1989-1995.
  2. Second Pan-European Conference, Standing Group on EU Politics Bologna. Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. England: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 8SQ. Barbieri, L. (2006). Panel Unit Root Tests: A Review. Quaderni Del Dipartimento Di Scienze Economiche E Socıali, Serie Rossa: EconomiaQuaderno N. 43. Bartik, T. J. (2007). Solving the Problems of Economic Development Incentives. In Reining in the Competition for Capital. Ann Markusen, ed. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, http://research.upjohn.org/up_bookchapters/240
  3. Blais, A. (1986). Industrial Policy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  4. Blomström, M. ve Kokko, A. (2003). The Economics of Foreign Direct Investment Incentives. Working Paper 168. Bracewell-Milnes, B. ve Huiskamp, J. C. L. (1977). Investment Incentives A Comparative Analysis of The Systems in The EEC, The USA and Sweden. Springer-Science+Bnsiness Media, B. V. Brooks, C. (2008). Introductory Econometrics for Finance. Cambridge University Press,
  5. Cambridge. Buccllato, T. ve Santangelo, F. (2009). Foreign Direct Investments Distribution in The Russian Federation: Do Spatial Effects Matter. Centre for the Study of Economic and Social Change in Europe, Economics Working Paper No.99. Charlton, A. (2003). Incentive Bidding for Mobile Investment: Economic Consequences and Potential Responses. OECD Development Center Working Paper No. 203. Chen, C.H. (1996). Regional Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in Mainland China. Journal of Economic Studies, 23(2), 18-30.
  6. Christiansen, H., Oman, C. ve Charlton, A. (2003). Incentives-based Competition for Foreign Direct Investment: The Case of Brazil. Directorate For Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs, Working Papers on International Investment, Number: 2003/1. OECD, Cornia, G. C. ve Nelson, R. D. (2010). State Tax Revenue Growth and Volatility. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louıs Regıonal Economıc Development, 6(1). Coşkun, R. (2001). Determinant