Journals / Çukurova Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 30 Sayı: 1

Credit, Exchange Rate and Inflation Dynamics in the Türkiye Economy: A VECM Analysis for the High Volatility Period (2018–2024)

Türkiye Ekonomisinde Kredi, Döviz Kuru ve Enflasyon Dinamikleri: Yüksek Volatilite Dönemi (2018–2024) İçin Bir VECM Analizi

Ömer Emirkadı(Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi)0000-0001-5808-249X
Pages
49–79
Publication Date
2026-09-12
🏛️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)

Forecast error variance decomposition results indicate that exchange rate shocks account for a substantial share of price level variance, whereas the explanatory power of credit shocks for exchange rate and industrial production variability may increase over time.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study empirically examines the dynamic interactions among nominal credit volume, the exchange rate, the price level, and industrial production in the Turkish economy over the period 2018:02–2024:12.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This period, which covers the 2018 currency shock, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the post-2021 policy regime shift, is characterized by intense structural breaks and high macroeconomic volatility.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Forecast error variance decomposition results indicate that exchange rate shocks account for a substantial share of price level variance, whereas the explanatory power of credit shocks for exchange rate and industrial production variability may increase over time.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2018 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Enflasyon · Kredi Genişlemesi · Vektör Hata Düzeltme Modeli

Abstract

This study empirically examines the dynamic interactions among nominal credit volume, the exchange rate, the price level, and industrial production in the Turkish economy over the period 2018:02–2024:12. This period, which covers the 2018 currency shock, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the post-2021 policy regime shift, is characterized by intense structural breaks and high macroeconomic volatility. After the Zivot-Andrews structural break unit root test and Johansen cointegration analysis indicate that the series generally exhibit I(1) properties and that a long-run relationship exists among the variables, a Vector Error Correction Model (VECM) is estimated. Bootstrap-based impulse response functions show that exchange rate shocks generate a positive and persistent pass-through effect on the price level, while the effect of credit shocks remains limited in the short run and becomes more pronounced over the medium horizon. Forecast error variance decomposition results indicate that exchange rate shocks account for a substantial share of price level variance, whereas the explanatory power of credit shocks for exchange rate and industrial production variability may increase over time. The direct use of nominal credit is adopted as a modelling choice aimed at reducing the mechanical dependency risk that may arise when CPI-deflated real credit is included in the same system with the price level. The findings suggest that a narrow policy framework relying solely on the interest rate instrument may be insufficient for price stability and point to the need for a broader policy approach that jointly considers exchange rate stability, credit growth, expectation management, and macroprudential instruments.

Özet

Bu çalışma, 2018:02–2024:12 döneminde Türkiye ekonomisinde nominal kredi hacmi, döviz kuru, fiyat düzeyi ve sanayi üretimi arasındaki dinamik etkileşimleri ampirik olarak incelemektedir. 2018 döviz kuru şoku, COVID-19 salgını ve 2021 sonrası politika rejimi dönüşümünü kapsayan söz konusu dönem, yoğun yapısal kırılmalar ve yüksek makroekonomik oynaklık içermektedir. Zivot-Andrews yapısal kırılmalı birim kök testi ve Johansen eşbütünleşme analizi aracılığıyla serilerin genel olarak I(1) özellik sergilediği ve değişkenler arasında uzun dönemli ilişki bulunduğu tespit edildikten sonra Vektör Hata Düzeltme Modeli (VECM) tahmin edilmiştir. Bootstrap güven bantlı etki-tepki fonksiyonları, döviz kuru şoklarının fiyat düzeyi üzerinde pozitif ve kalıcı bir geçişkenlik etkisi yarattığını; kredi şoklarının etkisinin ise kısa vadede sınırlı kalıp orta vadeden itibaren daha belirgin hâle geldiğini göstermektedir. Varyans ayrıştırması sonuçları, döviz kuru şoklarının fiyat düzeyi varyansında yüksek bir paya sahip olduğunu; kredi şoklarının ise döviz kuru ve sanayi üretimi üzerindeki açıklayıcı gücünün zaman içinde artabildiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Nominal kredi değişkeninin doğrudan kullanılması, TÜFE ile enflasyondan arındırılmış reel kredi serisinin fiyat düzeyiyle aynı sistemde kullanılmasından doğabilecek mekanik bağımlılık riskini azaltmaya yönelik bir modelleme tercihi olarak benimsenmiştir. Bulgular, fiyat istikrarını sağlamada yalnızca faiz aracına odaklanan dar bir politika çerçevesinin yetersiz kalabileceğini; döviz kuru istikrarı, kredi büyümesi, beklenti yönetimi ve makro ihtiyati araçları birlikte gözeten daha bütüncül bir politika yaklaşımına ihtiyaç olduğunu göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Emirkadı, Ö. (2026). Credit, Exchange Rate and Inflation Dynamics in the Türkiye Economy: A VECM Analysis for the High Volatility Period (2018–2024). Çukurova Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 30 Sayı: 1, 49–79. https://doi.org/10.51945/cuiibfd.1949236

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (52)

  1. Ağaslan, E. (2025). Zamanla değişen parametreli TVP-VAR yaklaşımıyla Türkiye ekonomisinde kredi kanalının etkinliğinin analizi. Gazi İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 11(3), 301-314. https://doi.org/10.30855/gjeb.2025.11.3.007
  2. Akçacı, T. & Yöntem, T. (2011) Tüketici kredisi çeşitlerinin enflasyona etkisi: (2005-2010), Finans Politik & Ekonomik Yorumlar, 48(558), 61-69. https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/en/yayin/detay/229118
  3. Aliyeva, L. (2026). Döviz kuru volatilitesinin Türk bankacılık sektörüne etkisi. Parion Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 5(1), 158-178. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/5388535
  4. Arsène, M., & Guy-Paulin, N. (2013). An Econometric Analysis of the Nexus between credit, inflation and economic growth in Cameroon. Journal of Economics and International Finance, 13(7), 40–53. https://globaljournals.org/GJMBR_Volume13/7-An-Econometric-Analysis-of-the.pdf
  5. Arslan, İ., & Yapraklı, S. (2008). Banka kredileri ve enflasyon arasındaki ilişki: Türkiye üzerine ekonometrik bir analiz (1983-2007). Istanbul University Econometrics and Statistics E-Journal, 7, 88-103. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/iuekois/article/112067
  6. Asongu, S. A. (2012). Financial Determinants of Consumer Price Inflation. What Do Dynamics in Money, Credit, Efficiency and Size Tell Us? African Governance and Development Institute WP/12/019, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2493256
  7. Aydın, D., & İgan, D. (2010). Bank lending in Turkey: Effects of monetary and fiscal policies (IMF Working Paper No. 10/233). International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781455209330.001
  8. Bernanke, B. S. (1983). Irreversibility, uncertainty, and cyclical investment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 98(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.2307/1885568
  9. Bernanke, B. S., & Blinder, A. S. (1988). Credit, money, and aggregate demand. American Economic Review, 78(2), 435–439. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1818164
  10. Bernanke, B. S., & Gertler, M. (1995). Inside the black box: The credit channel of monetary policy transmission. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.9.4.27
  11. Bernanke, B. S., Gertler, M., & Gilchrist, S. (1999). The financial accelerator in a quantitative business cycle framework. In J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (Eds.), Handbook of Macroeconomics. 1(c), 1341-1393. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0048(99)10034-X
  12. Blanchard, O., & Perotti, R. (2002). An empirical characterization of the dynamic effects of changes in government spending and taxes on output. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(4), 1329–1368. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355302320935043
  13. Bordo, M. D., & Lane, J. L. (2013). Does expansionary monetary policy cause asset price booms? Some historical and empirical evidence. NBER Working Paper, No. 19585. https://doi.org/10.3386/w19585
  14. Boyd, J. H., Levine, R., & Smith, B. D. (2001). The impact of inflation on financial sector performance. Journal of Monetary Economics, 47(2), 221–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3932(01)00049-6
  15. Calvo, G. A., & Reinhart, C. M. (2002). Fear of floating. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(2), 379–408. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355302753650274
  16. Calza, A., Manrique, M., & Sousa, J. (2006). Credit in the euro area: An empirical investigation using aggregate data. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 46(2), 211–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2005.02.001
  17. Can, A., & Koç Yurtkur, A. (2024). Enflasyon belirsizliğinin enflasyon ve ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki asimetrik etkileri: Türkiye örneği. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 20(ICMEB’24 Özel Sayı), 308-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.1497310
  18. Cecchetti, S. G., & Li, L. (2008). Do capital adequacy requirements matter for monetary policy? Economic Inquiry, 46(4), 643–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2008.00122.x
  19. Christiano, L. J., Eichenbaum, M., & Evans, C. L. (1999). Monetary policy shocks: What have we learned and to what end? In J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (Eds.), Handbook of macroeconomics. 1, Part A, 65–148. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0048(99)01005-8
  20. Dellale, O. (2022). Döviz Kuru Enflasyon İlişkisi: Türkiye Örneği. International Journal of Social and Humanities Sciences Research (JSHSR), 9(85), 1305–1310. https://doi.org/10.26450/jshsr.3073
  21. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R.J. (1994). An Introduction to the Bootstrap (1st ed.). Chapman and Hall/CRC. 1-456. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429246593
  22. Eren, B. (2025). Dynamics of inflation in Türkiye: Evidence from Fourier ADL cointegration test. Journal of International Management Educational and Economics Perspectives, 13(2), 201-217. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/jimeep/article/1792110
  23. Erkan, S., & Ceylan, S. (2021). Enflasyon belirsizliğinin kredi hacmi üzerindeki etkisi. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(79), 1370-1384. https://doi.org/10.17755/esosder.713423
  24. Ersin, İ. (2025). Türkiye’de seçilmiş finansal göstergeler ile enflasyon arasındaki asimetrik ilişkinin incelenmesi. Business Economics and Management Research Journal, 8(1), 35-51. https://doi.org/10.58308/bemarej.1630161
  25. Eryılmaz, Z. ve Sarı, M. (2025). Enflasyon-Kredi Genişlemesi İlişkisinin VAR Analizi: Türkiye Üzerine Bir Uygulama. BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi, 19(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.46520/bddkdergisi.1723920.
  26. Friedman, M. (1968). The Role of Monetary Policy. The American Economic Review, 58(1), 1-17.
  27. Gambetti, L., & Musso, A. (2017). Loan supply shocks and the business cycle, Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 32(4), 764-782. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.2537
  28. Goodhart, C., & Hofmann, B. (2008). House prices, money, credit, and the macroeconomy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 24(1), 180–205. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grn009
  29. Gourinchas, P.-O., & Obstfeld, M. (2012). Stories of the twentieth century for the twenty-first [PDF]. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, 4(1), 226–265. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.4.1.226
  30. Gregory, A. W., & Hansen, B. E. (1996). Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. Journal of Econometrics, 70(1), 99–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(69)41685-7
  31. Groen, J. J. J. (2004). Corporate credit, stock price inflation and economic fluctuations, Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, 36(18), 1995-2006. https://doi.org/10.1080/0003684042000258251
  32. Huybens, E., & Smith, B. D. (1999). Inflation, financial markets, and long-run real activity. Journal of Monetary Economics, 43(2), 283–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3932(98)00060-9
  33. Ize, A., & Levy Yeyati, E. (2003). Financial dollarization. Journal of International Economics, 59(2), 323–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1996(02)00017-X
  34. Kara, H., ve Öğünç, F. (2012). Döviz kuru ve ithalat fiyatlarının yurt içi fiyatlara etkisi. İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 27(317), 9-28. https://doi.org/10.3848/iif.2012.317.3396
  35. Karahan, Ö., & Gürbüz, Y. (2017). Türkiye'de Bireysel Banka Kredileri ile Enflasyon İlişkisi. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 13(13), 410-416.
  36. Korkmaz, S. (2015). Impact of Bank Credits on Economic Growth and Inflation. Journal of Applied Finance & Banking, 5(1), 1-4. https://ideas.repec.org/a/spt/apfiba/v5y2015i1f5_1_4.html
  37. MacKinnon, J. G. (1996). Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. Journal of Applied Econometrics. 11(6), 601–618. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1255(199611)11:6 3.0.CO;2-T
  38. Mendoza, E. G., & Terrones, M. E. (2008). An anatomy of credit booms. NBER Working Paper, 14049. 1-59. https://doi.org/10.3386/w14049
  39. Öğünç, F., & Özel, O. (2025). Büyük kur şokları ve kur geçişkenliğinde doğrusal olmayan etkiler (Çalışma Tebliği No. 25/05). Central Bank of the Republic of Türkiye. https://www.tcmb.gov.tr/wps/wcm/connect/e2056935-cc6f-48fb-925d-9784016ecae0/wp2505.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-e2056935-cc6f-48fb-925d-9784016ecae0-pnS6CAv
  40. Oshaibat, S., & Banikhalid, A. (2019). The Impact of Bank Credit on Inflation in Jordan by Using Vector Auto Regression Model: A Case Study of Jordan during 1968-2017," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education. 12(5), 34-39.
  41. Peker, O. & Canbazoğlu, B. (2011). Türkiye’de Banka Kredi Kanalının İşleyişi: Ampirik Bir Analiz. Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi. 18(12), 127-143. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/yonveek/article/165750
  42. Perron, P. (1989). The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis. Econometrica, 57(6), 1361–1401. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913712
  43. Sezal, L., & Şerbetçi, A. (2023). The relationship between inflation and consumer credits: findings of the asymmetric causality test for Türkiye. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 45(2), 234-246. https://doi.org/10.14780/muiibd.1343460
  44. Sims, C. A. (1980). Macroeconomics and reality. Econometrica. 48(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912017
  45. Stiglitz, J. E., & Weiss, A. (1981). Credit rationing in markets with imperfect information. American Economic Review. 71(3), 393–410.
  46. Taylor, J. B. (2000). Low inflation, pass-through, and the pricing power of firms. European Economic Review. 44(7), 1389–1408. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(00)00037-4
  47. Tinoco, M., Torres, A., & Vásquez, F. (2014). Inflation and private sector credit in Mexico: evidence from an ARDL-bounds testing approach. Latin American Economic Review. 23(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.12.017
  48. Yiğitbaş, Ş. B. (2014). Türkiye’de banka kredileri ve konjonktür dalgalanmaları arasındaki ilişkinin analizi. Bankacılar Dergisi, 25(90), 19-32.
  49. Ziramba, E. (2008). Bank lending, expenditure components and inflation in South Africa: Assessment from bounds testing approach. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences. 11(2), 217–228. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v11i2.310
  50. Zivot, E., & Andrews, D. W. K. (1992). Further evidence on the Great Crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics. 10(3), 251–270. https://doi.org/10.2307/1391541
  51. Christiano, L. J., Eichenbaum, M., & Evans, C. L. (1999). Monetary policy shocks: What have we learned and to what end? In J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (Eds.), Handbook of macroeconomics. 1, Part A, 65–148. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0048(99)01005-8
  52. Sezal, L., & Şerbetçi, A. (2023). The relationship between inflation and consumer credits: findings of the asymmetric causality test for Türkiye. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 45(2), 234-246. https://doi.org/10.14780/muiibd.1343460