SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Tarsus Üniversitesi Uygulamalı Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1

Public Employment and Economic Growth in Türkiye: Empirical Evidence on the Armey Curve

TÜRKİYE’DE KAMU İSTİHDAMI VE EKONOMİK BÜYÜME: ARMEY EĞRİSİ ÜZERİNE AMPİRİK BULGULAR

Osman Cenk Kanca(Atatürk Üniversitesi)0000-0003-3381-381X
Nebiye Yamak(Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi)0000-0003-3336-4735
Pages
1–16
Publication Date
2026-06-05
🏛️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)

Therefore, it can be concluded that the relationship between long-run economic growth and public sector size is a nonlinear quadratic relationship.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The optimal size of the public sector has long been a significant issue in fiscal policy and economic literature.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Armey (1995) proposed that the relationship between economic growth and public sector size follows an inverted U-shaped curve.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Therefore, it can be concluded that the relationship between long-run economic growth and public sector size is a nonlinear quadratic relationship.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Armey Eğrisi · Kamu İstihdamı · Ekonomik Büyüme

Abstract

The optimal size of the public sector has long been a significant issue in fiscal policy and economic literature. However, the question of what the optimal size of the public sector should be is still debated, both theoretically and empirically. Armey (1995) proposed that the relationship between economic growth and public sector size follows an inverted U-shaped curve. Given the significance of the impact of public sector size on economic growth, this study examines the validity of the Armey curve hypothesis the Turkish economy for the period 2007Q1-2025Q3, specifically in the context of public employment. The study utilizes the ARDL bounds test approach to evaluate the validity of the Armey curve using the long-run component of economic growth. Long-run economic growth series was generated using the Hodrick-Prescott technique. The findings demonstrate the validity of the Armey curve for the Turkish economy. Therefore, it can be concluded that the relationship between long-run economic growth and public sector size is a nonlinear quadratic relationship. It is considered that public employment management is crucial for achieving the optimal public sector size in Turkish’s long-run sustainable economic growth policies.

Özet

Kamu kesiminin optimal büyüklüğü, uzun zamandır mali politikada ve ekonomi literatüründe önemli bir konu olmuştur. Bununla birlikte, kamu kesiminin optimal büyüklüğü ne olmalıdır sorusu hem teorik olarak hem de ampirik olarak hala tartışılmaktadır. Armey (1995), ekonomik büyüme ile kamu kesimi büyüklüğü arasındaki ilişkinin ters U şeklinde bir eğri olduğunu öne sürmüştür. Kamu kesimi büyüklüğünün ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisinin önemi nedeniyle, bu çalışmada, 2007Ç1-2025Ç3 dönemi için Türkiye ekonomisinde Armey eğrisi hipotezinin varlığı kamu istihdamı bağlamında araştırılmıştır. Çalışmada, uzun dönem ekonomik büyüme serisi kullanılarak Armey eğrisinin geçerliliğini değerlendirmek için ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı kullanılmıştır. Uzun dönem ekonomik büyüme serisi Hodrick-Prescott tekniği kullanılarak oluşturulmuştur. Bulgular, Armey eğrisinin Türk ekonomisi bağlamında geçerli olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu nedenle, uzun dönemli ekonomik büyüme ile kamu sektörü büyüklüğü arasındaki ilişkinin doğrusal olmayan, ikinci dereceden fonksiyonel bir ilişki olduğu sonucuna varılabilir. Optimal kamu kesimi büyüklüğüne ulaşmak için kamu istihdamı yönetiminin, Türkiye için uzun dönemli sürdürülebilir ekonomik büyüme politikalarında önemli olduğu değerlendirilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kanca, O. C., Yamak, N. (2026). Public Employment and Economic Growth in Türkiye: Empirical Evidence on the Armey Curve. Tarsus Üniversitesi Uygulamalı Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.66316/tauubf.1918132

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (48)

  1. Akdede, S. H. ve Keyifli, N. (2021). Politik kutuplaşma ve kamu sektörü istihdamı. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 23(1), 203-218.
  2. Altunç, Ö. F. ve Aydın, C. (2012). Türkiye’de kamu sektörü büyüklüğü ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisinin ampirik analizi. Ekonomik Yaklaşım, 23, 79-98.
  3. Altunakar, Ş., ve Buyrukoğlu, S. (2020). Türkiye’de Abrams ve Armey eğrilerinin geçerliliği. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 19(76), 1862-1878.
  4. Al-Abdulrazag, B. (2021). The Optimal government size in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: An ARDL bounds testing approach to cointegration. Cogent Economics & Finance, 9(1), 2001960.
  5. Armey, D. (1995). The freedom revolution: why big government failed, why freedom works, and how we will rebuild America. Regnery Publishing: Washington.
  6. Bayrak, R. (2021). How does the development level of countries affect optimal size of government: an empirical study with panel data analysis. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 11(1), 391-405.
  7. Binay, M. (2019). OECD Ülkelerinde sağlık harcamalarının ekonomik büyümeyi maksimize edecek şekilde optimizasyonu. Sosyal Güvenlik Dergisi, 9(2), 449-476.
  8. Bozma, G., Başar, S., ve Eren, M. (2019). “Investigating validation of Armey curve hypothesis for G7 countries using ARDL model. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 20 (1), 49-59.
  9. Chen, S. T. ve Lee, C. C. (2005). Government size and economic growth in Taiwan: a threshold regression Approach. Journal of Policy Modeling, 27(9), 1051-1066.
  10. De Vita, G. ve Abbott, A.(2002). Are saving and investment cointegrated? An ARDL bounds testing approach. Economics Letters, 77, 293-299.
  11. De Witte, K., ve W. Moesen (2010). Sizing the government. Public Choice, 145(1-2), 39-55.
  12. Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators of autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427-431.
  13. Dickey, D. A. ve Fuller W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica, 49, 1057-72.
  14. Durucan, A. (2022). Testing the validity of the BARS curve for Turkey. Economic Annals, 67(232),153-192.
  15. Facchini, F. ve Melki, M. (2011). Optimal government size and economic growth in France (1871-2008): an explanation by the state and market failures. CES Working Papers, ISSN: 1955-611X, Paris, 1-38.
  16. Kalabak, A. Y., Karatepe, S., ve Avunduk, O. (2021). Devletin ekonomideki boyutu üzerine ampirik bir analiz: 1960-2019 Türkiye örneği. Maliye Dergisi, 181, 72-96.
  17. Karras, G., (1997). On the optimal government size in Europe: Theory and empirical evidence. The Manchester School of Economic & Social Studies, 65(3), 280-294.
  18. Kasal, S. (2023). Analysing the Armey curve based on the fourier cointegration approach for Turkey. Economic Annals, 68(236), 139-158.
  19. Kim, M. H., Han, Y., Tierney, H. L. ve Lopez, E. Y. (2020). The Economic consequences of government spending in South Korea. Economics Bulletin. 40(1), 308-315.
  20. Krasa, S. ve Villamil, A. P. (1992). Monitoring the monitor: an incentive structure for a financial intermediary. Journal of Economic Theory, 57(1), 197-221.
  21. Krasa, S. ve Villamil, A. P. (1994). Optimal multilateral contracts. Economic Theory, 4(2), 167-187.
  22. Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P.C.B., Schmidt, P. ve Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root: How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root?. Journal of Econometrics, 54(1-3), 159-178.
  23. Lazarus, W. Z., Khobai, H., ve Le Rou, P. (2017). Government size and economic growth in Africa and the organization for economic cooperation and development countries. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 7(4), 628-637.
  24. Lee, J. ve Strazicich, M. C. (2003). Minimum lagrange multiplier unit root test with two structural breaks. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 1082-1089.
  25. Martins, S., ve Veiga, F. J. (2014). Government size, composition of public expenditure, and economic development. International Tax and Public Finance, 21 (4), 578–597.
  26. Mehdi, S., ve Shoorekchali, M. J. (2012). The impact of government size on economic growth: A case study in Italy. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 6(9), 616-621.
  27. Mutaşcu, M., ve Miloş, M. (2009). Optimal size of government spending. the CASE of european union member states. Annales Universitas Apulensis Series Oeconomica, 11(1), 447- 456.
  28. Nuta, A. C. ve Nuta, F. (2014). A discussion regarding the Armey model validity for Romania. EIRP Proceedings, 9, 173-180.
  29. Olaleye, S. O., Edun, F., Bello, H. T. ve Taiwo, S. B. (2014). Government expenditure and economic growth: An empirical analysis of the Armey curve in Nigeria. Romanian Economic Journal, 17, 47-66.
  30. Pesaran, M. H. Shin, Y. ve Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289-326.
  31. Pevcin, P. (2004). Economic output and the optimal size of government. Economic and Business Review for Central and South - Eastern Europe, 6(3), 213-227.
  32. Pamuk, Y. ve Dündar, U. (2016). Kamu harcamalarının optimal boyutu: Türkiye örneği. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 34(3), 23-50.
  33. Raheem, A. J. ve Ogunleye, A. G. (2025). Investigating the Armey curve hypothesis ın Nigeria: an empirical analysis. ADSU International Journal of Applied Economics, Finance & Management, 10(2), 581-596.
  34. Ram, R. (1986). Government size and economic growth: A new framework and some evidence from cross-section and time-series data. American Economic Review, 76(1), 191-203.
  35. Savaş, Y. (2025). Government expenditure and growth in MIST countries: Testing the armey curve. The International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 16(60), 1095-1114.
  36. Scully, G. (1994). What is the optimal size of government in the US?. Policy Report 188, National Center for Policy Analysis.
  37. Stiglitz, J. (2003). La economía del sector público. Barcelona: Antoni Bosch.
  38. Şen, H., ve Kaya, A. (2019). Alternatif göstergeler bazında Türkiye’de optimal kamu kesimi büyüklüğünün tahmini. Bankacılar Dergisi, 109, 49-81.
  39. Toptaş, S. (2024). Optimal kamu harcaması oranı: Türkiye için bir uygulama. International Journal of Public Finance, 9(1), 175-194.
  40. Turan, T. (2014). Optimal size of government in Turkey. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 4(2), 286-294.
  41. Varol İyidoğan, P. ve Turan, T. (2017). Government size and economic growth in Turkey: A threshold regression analysis. Prague Economic Papers. 26 (2), 142-154.
  42. Vasilev, A. (2020). The “Armey curve” in Bulgaria (2000–18): theoretical considerations and empirical results. Theoretical and Practical Research in Economic Fields, 11(1), 21-26.
  43. Vaziri, H., Nademi, Y., Paghe, A., ve Nademi, A. (2011). Does Armey curve exist in Pakistan and Iran economies?. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 7(5), 562–565.
  44. Vedder, R., ve Gallaway, L. (1998). Government size and economic growth. Joint Economic Committee, Washington D.C., 1-15.
  45. Yamak, R. ve Erdem, H. F. (2018). Türkiye ekonomisinde Armey eğrisi geçerli midir. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, Prof. Dr. Harun Terzi Özel Sayısı, 335-346.
  46. Yamak, R. ve Erdem, H. F. (2017). Uygulamalı Zaman Serisi Analizleri. Celepler Matbaa Yayın ve Dağıtım, Trabzon.
  47. Yüksel, C. (2019). The size of the public sector and the Armey curve: the case of Turkey. Critical Debates in Public Finance, pp.137-154. Peter Lang GmbH: Berlin.
  48. Zungu, L. T., ve Greyling, L. (2022). Government size and economic growth in African emerging economies: Does the BARS curve exist?. International Journal of Social Economics, 49(3), 356-371.