Journals / Uygulamalı Ekonomi ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1

INFLATION AS A SINGLE COMPOSITE PRESSURE: A QUARTERLY COINTEGRATION ANALYSIS FOR TURKEY (2000–2023)

TEK BİLEŞİK BASKI OLARAK ENFLASYON: TÜRKİYE İÇİN ÇEYREKLİK BİR EŞBÜTÜNLEŞME ANALİZİ (2000–2023)

Pages
142–156
Publication Date
2026-03-28
🏛️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)

Overall, the findings empirically support the view that while inflation has multiple determinants, the resulting pressure is single and composite.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study tests the hypothesis that inflation is not primarily the outcome of isolated macroeconomic variables, but rather the result of a long-run single composite pressure arising from the structural interaction between consumption and income, while in the short run it is driven by the mismatch between money supply and GDP.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Using quarterly, index-based macroeconomic data for Turkey over the period 2000–2023, the interaction-based regression model demonstrates that inflation cannot be explained solely by demand or income growth; instead, it emerges meaningfully when these two variables move jointly.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Overall, the findings empirically support the view that while inflation has multiple determinants, the resulting pressure is single and composite.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2000–2023 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Enflasyon · Bileşik Baskı Teorisi · Eşbütünleşme

Abstract

This study tests the hypothesis that inflation is not primarily the outcome of isolated macroeconomic variables, but rather the result of a long-run single composite pressure arising from the structural interaction between consumption and income, while in the short run it is driven by the mismatch between money supply and GDP. Using quarterly, index-based macroeconomic data for Turkey over the period 2000–2023, the interaction-based regression model demonstrates that inflation cannot be explained solely by demand or income growth; instead, it emerges meaningfully when these two variables move jointly. Unit root and cointegration tests indicate that the model does not suffer from spurious regression and represents a stable long-run structural relationship. During periods of monetary expansion, such as 2021–2023, the explanatory power of the model appears statistically insufficient; however, once money supply is incorporated into the framework, the underlying causes of inflation become evident. Overall, the findings empirically support the view that while inflation has multiple determinants, the resulting pressure is single and composite.

Özet

Bu çalışma, enflasyonun tekil makroekonomik değişkenlerden ziyade, tüketim ve gelir arasındaki yapısal etkileşimden doğan uzun dönemli tek bileşik bir baskının sonucu, kısa dönemde ise para arzı ile GSYİH ile arasındaki uyumsuzluğun sonucu olduğu hipotezini test etmektedir. Türkiye için 2000–2023 dönemini kapsayan çeyreklik, endeks bazlı makroekonomik veriler kullanılarak kurulan etkileşimli regresyon modeli, enflasyonun ne yalnızca talep ne de yalnızca gelir artışıyla açıklanabildiğini, ancak bu iki değişkenin birlikte hareketiyle anlamlı biçimde ortaya çıktığını göstermektedir. Birim kök ve eşbütünleşme testleri, modelin sahte regresyon içermediğini ve uzun dönemli istikrarlı bir yapısal ilişkiyi temsil ettiğini ortaya koymaktadır. 2021-2023 gibi para arzının genişlediği dönemlerde modelin açıklayıcılığı istatistiksel olarak yetersiz görünürken para arzının da modele dahil olmasıyla enflasyonun nedenleri ortaya çıkmış gözükmekte. Bulgular, enflasyonun çoklu nedenlere sahip olduğu, ancak ortaya çıkan baskının tek ve bileşik olduğu yönündeki yaklaşımı ampirik olarak desteklemektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Tosun, G. (2026). INFLATION AS A SINGLE COMPOSITE PRESSURE: A QUARTERLY COINTEGRATION ANALYSIS FOR TURKEY (2000–2023). Uygulamalı Ekonomi ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 142–156. https://doi.org/10.46959/jeess.1885639

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Calvo, G. A. (1983) “Staggered Prices in A Utility-Maximising Framework”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 12(3), 383–398.
  2. Clarida, R., Galí, J., ve Gertler, M. (1999) “The Science of Monetary Policy: A New Keynesian Perspective”, Journal of Economic Literature, 37(4), 1661–1707.
  3. Darıcı, B., İnce Yenilmez, M., Levent, C., ve Özen, K. (2025) “The Impact of Foreign Direct Investments on Economic Growth and International Trade: The Example of E7 countries”, Third Sector Social Economic Review, 60(1), 411–425. https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.25.02.2593.
  4. Engle, R. F., ve Granger, C. W. J. (1987) “Co-integration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation, and Testing”, Econometrica, 55(2), 251–276.
  5. Friedman, M. (1968) “The Role of Monetary Policy”, The American Economic Review, 58(1), 1–17.
  6. Gürkaynak, R. S., Kısacıkoğlu, B., ve Tüzemen, D. (2023) “Exchange Rate and Inflation under Weak Monetary Policy”,(Working paper).
  7. İnce Yenilmez, M., Ertuğrul, H. M., ve Mangır, F. (2025) “Modelling Volatility in the Interest Rate Using ARCH, GARCH and SWARCH Models: The Case of Türkiye (1964–2024)”, International Conference on Applied Economics and Finance (ICOAEF XIII), April 30–May 1, 2025, Thessaloniki, Greece.
  8. Phelps, E. S. (1967) “Phillips Curves, Expectations of Inflation and Optimal Unemployment Over Time”, Economica, 34(135), 254–281.
  9. Phillips, A. W. (1958) “The Relation between Unemployment and the Rate of Change of Money Wage Rates in the United Kingdom, 1861–1957”, Economica, 25(100), 283–299.
  10. TCMB. (2023) “Inflation Report 2023-III”, Central Bank of the Republic of Türkiye.
  11. TÜİK. (2024) “Tüketici Fiyat Endeksi İstatistikleri”.
  12. Woodford, M. (2002) “Interest and Prices: Foundations of A Theory of Monetary Policy”, Princeton University Press.
  13. Wooldridge, J. M. (2013) “Introductory Econometrics”, 5th ed., Cengage Learning.
  14. World Bank. (2024) “World Development Indicators”.