SavedAdd your journal

Journals / TESAM Akademi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2

The Impact of Technology and Accountability on Regional Economic Growth in Türkiye: An Augmented Solow-Swan Model Analysis

Teknoloji ve Hesap Verebilirliğin Bölgesel Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerindeki Etkisi: Genişletilmiş Solow-Swan Modeli Analizi

Fatih Koç(ISTANBUL OKAN UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-0333-7456
Banu Has(OKAN UNIVERSITY)0000-0001-7693-8490
Sinan Çinar(EGE UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-2756-5875
Pages
747–778
Publication Date
2026-07-31
🏛️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)

Results indicate that technology, investment, and labor positively influence economic growth in Turkey, whereas human capital exerts a negative effect, suggesting that robust accountability in human capital development and deployment may be crucial for maximizing its benefits and ensuring its productive utilization.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The capacity for innovation and competitiveness are pivotal concepts in determining a country's development.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Innovation, closely tied to technological advancements, plays a key role in fostering transformative progress, which is significantly enhanced by transparent and responsible governance.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results indicate that technology, investment, and labor positively influence economic growth in Turkey, whereas human capital exerts a negative effect, suggesting that robust accountability in human capital development and deployment may be crucial for maximizing its benefits and ensuring its productive utilization.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2008–2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Teknoloji · Hesap Verilebilirlik · Türkiye Ekonomik Büyümesi

Abstract

The capacity for innovation and competitiveness are pivotal concepts in determining a country's development. In this context, the significance of technology for an economy is undeniable. Technology emerges as a crucial factor influencing economic growth and development processes, yet its full potential is often realized through an enabling environment that prioritizes strong accountability. Innovation, closely tied to technological advancements, plays a key role in fostering transformative progress, which is significantly enhanced by transparent and responsible governance. Particularly for developing countries, technology assumes a critical role in bridging the development gap with advanced economies, contingent on effective policies implemented with accountability to ensure their intended impact. This study examines the impact of technology on economic growth at the regional level in Turkey for the period 2008–2020. Dynamic panel data analysis explores this relationship within the Augmented Solow-Swan model framework. The study contributes to the literature by analyzing the relationship between the variables through the lens of the Augmented Solow-Swan model; and offering a region-specific analysis, implicitly underscoring the importance of localized accountability structures in driving regional development. Results indicate that technology, investment, and labor positively influence economic growth in Turkey, whereas human capital exerts a negative effect, suggesting that robust accountability in human capital development and deployment may be crucial for maximizing its benefits and ensuring its productive utilization.

Özet

İnovasyon ve rekabet gücü, bir ülkenin gelişimini belirlemede çok önemli kavramlardır. Bu bağlamda, teknolojinin bir ekonomi için önemi yadsınamaz. Teknoloji, ekonomik büyüme ve kalkınma süreçlerini etkileyen kritik bir faktör olarak ortaya çıkarken, tam potansiyeli genellikle güçlü bir hesap verebilirliğe öncelik veren elverişli bir ortam aracılığıyla gerçekleşir. Teknolojik gelişmelerle yakından bağlantılı olan inovasyon, şeffaf ve sorumlu yönetişimle önemli ölçüde artan dönüştürücü ilerlemeyi teşvik etmede kilit bir rol oynamaktadır. Özellikle gelişmekte olan ülkeler için teknoloji, ileri ekonomilerle olan kalkınma farkını kapatmada kritik bir rol üstlenir ve bu, amaçlanan etkilerini sağlamak için hesap verebilirlik ile uygulanan etkili politikalara bağlıdır. Bu çalışma, 2008-2020 dönemi için Türkiye'de bölgesel düzeyde teknolojinin ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisini incelemektedir. Dinamik panel veri analizi, bu ilişkiyi Güçlendirilmiş Solow-Swan modeli çerçevesinde araştırmaktadır. Çalışma, değişkenler arasındaki ilişkiyi Güçlendirilmiş Solow-Swan modeli merceğinden analiz ederek; ve bölgesel kalkınmayı yönlendirmede yerelleşmiş hesap verebilirlik yapılarının önemini zımnen vurgulayan bölgeye özgü bir analiz sunarak literatüre katkıda bulunmaktadır. Sonuçlar, teknoloji, yatırım ve işgücünün Türkiye'de ekonomik büyümeyi olumlu yönde etkilediğini, insan sermayesinin ise olumsuz bir etki yarattığını göstermektedir. Bu durum, insan sermayesi geliştirme ve konuşlandırmada sağlam bir hesap verebilirliğin, faydalarını en üst düzeye çıkarmak ve üretken kullanımını sağlamak için kritik olabileceğini düşündürmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Koç, F., Has, B., Çinar, S. (2026). The Impact of Technology and Accountability on Regional Economic Growth in Türkiye: An Augmented Solow-Swan Model Analysis. TESAM Akademi Dergisi, Cilt: 13 Sayı: 2, 747–778. https://doi.org/10.30626/tesamakademi.1784159

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (77)

  1. REFERENCES Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277–297. Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29–51.
  2. Astarani, J., Putra, W., & Bustami. (2024). The influence of knowledge-based economy and accountability on economic growth. Asian Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting, 24(9), 328–349.
  3. Attar, M. A. (2017). Economic growth and technological progress in Turkey: An analysis of Schumpeterian mechanisms. ODTÜ Gelişme Dergisi, 44(2), 129–154. http://www2.feas.metu.edu.tr/metusd/ojs/index.php/metusd/article/view/914
  4. Avcı, Ş., & Işık, N. (2023). İleri teknoloji ihracatı ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye üzerine bir uygulama. Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(1), 157–182.
  5. Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric analysis of panel data (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  6. Barro, R. J. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S103–S125.
  7. Barış, S. (2019). Türkiye’de teknolojik yenilik ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi. Verimlilik Dergisi, (1), 83–112.
  8. Bassanini, A., Scarpetta, S., & Hemmings, P. (2001). Economic growth: The role of policies and institutions. Panel data evidence from OECD countries (Economics Department Working Papers No. 283). OECD.
  9. Blanco, L., Prieger, J., & Gu, J. (2013). The impact of research and development on economic growth and productivity in the U.S. states (Working Paper No. 48). Pepperdine University School of Public Policy.
  10. Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115–143.
  11. Bond, S. R. (2002). Dynamic panel data models: A guide to micro data methods and practice. Portuguese Economic Journal, 1(2), 141–162.
  12. Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W. W. Norton & Company.
  13. Brynjolfsson, E., Rock, D., & Syverson, C. (2021). Artificial intelligence and the modern economy. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 35(4), 7–30.
  14. Coe, D. T., & Helpman, E. (1995). International R&D spillovers. European Economic Review, 39(5), 859–887.
  15. De Hoyos, R. E., & Sarafidis, V. (2006). Testing for cross-sectional dependence in panel-data models. Stata Journal, 6(4), 482–496.
  16. Domar, E. D. (1946). Capital expansion, rate of growth, and employment. Econometrica, 14(2), 137–147.
  17. Ercan, M., Temiz, D., & Gökmen, A. (2025). The impact of technology on economic growth in Turkey. International Journal of Economics and Business Research, 29(6), 465–485. https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijecbr/v29y2025i6p465-485.html
  18. European Commission. (2020). Digital economy and society index (DESI) report. Fagerberg, J. (1987). A technology gap approach to why growth rates differ. Research Policy, 16(2–4), 87–99.
  19. Falk, M. (2007). R&D spending in the high-tech sector and economic growth. Research in Economics, 61, 40–147.
  20. Freeman, C., & Soete, L. (2003). Yenilik iktisadı (E. Türkcan, Çev.). TÜBİTAK Yayınları.
  21. Gittleman, M., & Wolff, E. N. (1995). R&D activity and cross-country growth comparisons. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 189–207.
  22. Goel, R. K., & Ram, R. (1994). Research and development expenditures and economic growth: A cross-country study. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 42(2), 403–411.
  23. Goel, R. K., James, E. P., & Ram, R. (2008). R&D expenditures and U.S. economic growth: A disaggregated approach. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(2), 237–250.
  24. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1991). Innovation and growth in the global economy. MIT Press.
  25. Gyekye, A. B., Oseifual, E. K., Quarshie, G. N. K., & Vukor, G. (2012). The impact of research and development on socio-economic development: Perspectives from selected developing economies. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences, 3(6), 915–922.
  26. Harrod, R. F. (1939). An essay in dynamic theory. The Economic Journal, 49(193), 14–33.
  27. Has, B., & Çınar, S. (2022). Türkiye’de askeri harcamalar ve ekonomik büyüme: Eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 9(2), 256–270.
  28. Has, B., & Çınar, S. (2022). Türkiye’de imalat sanayi ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi. Bucak İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 7–22.
  29. Hu, A. G., & Png, I. P. L. (2013). Patent rights and economic growth: Evidence from cross-country panels of manufacturing industries. Oxford Economic Papers, 65(3), 675–698.
  30. Huang, X., Wang, J., & Liu, Z. (2020). Digital economy and economic growth in China: Empirical evidence from provincial panel data. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 152, 119948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119948
  31. International Monetary Fund. (2022, June 13). Governance and accountability in Africa: Progress and road ahead. https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2022/06/13/sp061322-governance-and-accountability-in-africa-progress-and-road-ahead
  32. Kara, M. A., & Aksu, T. (2022). Teknolojik değişim ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Türkiye üzerine bir uygulama. Journal of Economics and Research, 3(2), 17–35. https://doi.org/10.53280/jer.1078623
  33. Khan, M., Luintel, K. B., & Theodoridis, K. (2010). How robust is the R&D–productivity relationship? Evidence from OECD countries (WIPO Economic Research Working Paper No. 1). World Intellectual Property Organization.
  34. Lichtenberg, F. R. (1993). R&D investment and international productivity differences (NBER Working Paper No. 4161). National Bureau of Economic Research.
  35. Lucas, R. E. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3–42.
  36. Luintel, K. B., & Khan, M. (2005). An empirical contribution to knowledge production and economic growth (OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Paper No. 2005/10). OECD Publishing.
  37. Malthus, T. R. (1798). An essay on the principle of population. J. Johnson.
  38. Mankiw, N. G., Romer, D., & Weil, D. N. (1992). A contribution to the empirics of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(2), 407–437.
  39. Middle East Council on Global Affairs. (2023, April 30). Voice, accountability, and economic growth in the MENA region. https://www.mecouncil.org/publication/voice-accountability-and-economic-growth-in-the-mena-region/
  40. Mokyr, J. (1990). The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress. Oxford University Press.
  41. Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica, 49(6), 1417–1426.
  42. Number Analytics. (2025a, May 25). The power of accountability in shaping development. https://numberanalytics.com/blog/the-power-of-accountability-in-shaping-development
  43. Number Analytics. (2025b, April 27). A real look at government accountability in economics. Retrieved July 20, 2024, from https://numberanalytics.com/blog/a-real-look-at-gov-accountability-in-econ
  44. Number Analytics. (2025c, June 17). Accountability in public sector economics. Retrieved July 20, 2024, from https://numberanalytics.com/blog/accountability-in-public-sector-economics
  45. Number Analytics. (2025d, June 24). Financial policy framework essentials. Retrieved July 20, 2024, from https://numberanalytics.com/blog/financial-policy-framework-essentials
  46. Number Analytics. (2025e, May 25). Unlocking accountability in economic geography. Retrieved July 20, 2024, from https://numberanalytics.com/blog/unlocking-accountability-in-economic-geography
  47. OECD. (2005). Oslo manual: Guidelines for collecting and interpreting innovation data. OECD Publishing.
  48. OECD. (2019). Measuring the digital transformation: A roadmap for the future. OECD Publishing. Özhan, M., & Keyifli, N. (2020). Vergi gelirleri, kentleşme ve demokrasi: G20 ülkeleri üzerine ekonometrik bir çalışma. Ekev Akademi Dergisi, 24(84), 391–408.
  49. Özkurt, İ. C. (2024). Türkiye’de inovasyon faaliyetleri ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Nedensellik analizi. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 26(1), 164–176. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.1103377
  50. Park, G. W. (1995). International R&D spillovers and OECD economic growth. Economic Inquiry, 33(4), 571–591.
  51. Poorfaraj, A., Samimi, A. J., & Keshavarz, H. (2011). Knowledge and economic growth: Evidence from some developing countries. Journal of Education and Vocational Research, 1(1), 21–25.
  52. Rebelo, S. (1991). Long-run policy analysis and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 99(3), 500–521.
  53. Ricardo, D. (1817). On the principles of political economy and taxation. John Murray.
  54. Roodman, D. (2009). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. The Stata Journal, 9(1), 86–136.
  55. Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5), 1002–1037.
  56. Romer, P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), S71–S102.
  57. Rostow, W. W. (1960). The stages of economic growth: A non-communist manifesto. Cambridge University Press.
  58. Sadraoui, T., Ali, T. B., & Deguachi, B. (2014). Testing for panel Granger causality relationship between international R&D cooperation and economic growth. International Econometrics and Financial Management, 2(1), 7–21.
  59. Samimi, J. A., & Alerasoul, S. M. (2009). R&D and economic growth: New evidence from some developing countries. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3(4), 3464–3469.
  60. Schmidt, M., & Schumann, M. (2020). Industry 4.0 and economic productivity: A global perspective. Economic Systems, 44(3), 101023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2020.101023
  61. Schuh, A., & Melzer, T. (2022). R&D investments and growth in the European Union. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(1), 104–119. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-03-2021-0150
  62. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. Harper & Brothers.
  63. Schwab, K. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution. Crown Business.
  64. Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. W. Strahan & T. Cadell.
  65. Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70(1), 65–94.
  66. Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 39(3), 312–320.
  67. Söderling, L., & Tasci, O. (2014). Public spending and growth: The role of government accountability. Journal of Public Economics, 116, 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.02.003
  68. Stern, D. I., & Zeng, Z. (2023). Green technology and economic growth: A meta-analysis. Ecological Economics, 190, 107188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107188
  69. Swan, T. W. (1956). Economic growth and capital accumulation. Economic Record, 32(2), 334–361.
  70. Ünsal, E. M. (2007). İktisada giriş. İmaj Yayınevi.
  71. Vandenbussche, J., Aghion, P., & Meghir, C. (2006). Growth, distance to frontier, and composition of human capital. Journal of Economic Growth, 11(2), 97–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10887-006-9002-y
  72. Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross-section and panel data (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
  73. Yapraklı, S., & Sağlam, T. (2010). Information and communications technology and economic growth in Turkey: An econometric analysis (1980–2008). Ege Academic Review, 10(2), 575–596.
  74. Yelkikalkan, N., Aydın, E., & Kurt, U. (2017). Impact on economic growth of technological progress in the Turkey economy: Empirical analysis on political and financial stability channel. International Business Research, 10(3), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v10n3p80
  75. Yıldız, F., Kavak, Z. N., & Aktan, M. N. (2023). Türkiye’de kamu yatırım harcamalarının ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi. Biltürk Journal of Economics and Related Studies, 5(3), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.47103/bilturk.1306908
  76. Zachariadis, M. (2004). R&D-induced growth in the OECD. Review of Development Economics, 8(3), 423–439. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9361.2004.00246.x
  77. Zhao, L., & Zhang, J. (2021). Technological innovation, financial development, and economic growth in the digital economy. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 6(4), 317–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2021.06.001