Journals / Journal of Life Economics / 2016 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 1

THE EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF TRIPLET DEFICIT HYPOTHESIS IN THE BRIC AND THE MINT COUNTRIES

BRIC VE MINT EKONOMİLERİNDE ÜÇÜZ AÇIK HİPOTEZİNİN AMPİRİK ANALİZİ

Pages
57–70
Publication Date
2016-01-29
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)

The empirical findings showed that the triplet deficit hypothesis is valid for BRIC, but not for MINT.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The fact that current account deficit is one of the leading indicators is the reason that the determinants of current account deficit are investigated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study aims to analyze the presence of the triplet deficits in the BRIC and the MINT as an emerging two groups of countries between 1998 and 2014 via Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012)’s panel non-causality test.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The empirical findings showed that the triplet deficit hypothesis is valid for BRIC, but not for MINT.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Cari hesap · Bütçe · Tasarruf-Yatırım

Abstract

The fact that current account deficit is one of the leading indicators is the reason that the determinants of current account deficit are investigated. In the literature, the presence of current account deficit along with the budget deficit is denoted with the twin deficits notion, while it has been mentioned from triplet deficits, which has a limited number of work, with the addition of the savings-investment imbalance to the twin deficits. The study aims to analyze the presence of the triplet deficits in the BRIC and the MINT as an emerging two groups of countries between 1998 and 2014 via Dumitrescu and Hurlin (2012)’s panel non-causality test. The empirical findings showed that the triplet deficit hypothesis is valid for BRIC, but not for MINT.

Özet

Ülkelerde cari açığın krizin öncü göstergelerinden biri olması cari açığın belirleyenlerinin araştırılmasına yönelik çalışmaların artmasına neden olmuştur. Literatürde cari açıkla birlikte bütçe açığının varlığı ikiz açık olgusu ile ifade edilirken, ikiz açık olgusuna tasarruf-yatırım dengesizliğinin ilave edilmesi ile sınırlı çalışma sayısına sahip olan üçüz açık olgusundan bahsedilmektedir. Bu çalışma gelişen iki ülke grubu olarak BRIC (Brezilya, Rusya, Hindistan ve Çin) ve MINT (Meksika, Endonezya, Nijerya ve Türkiye) ekonomilerinde 1998-2014 yılları arasında üçüz açık hipotezinin geçerliliğini Dumitrescu ve Hurlin (2012)’nin panel nedensellik testi aracılığıyla analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bulgular, üçüz açık hipotezinin BRIC ülkelerinde geçerli olduğunu, MINT ülkelerinde ise geçerli olmadığını göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BALAN, F. (2016). THE EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF TRIPLET DEFICIT HYPOTHESIS IN THE BRIC AND THE MINT COUNTRIES. Journal of Life Economics, Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 1, 57–70. https://ajindex.com/articles/2604

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. AKINCI, M. ve YILMAZ, Ö., 2013, Türkiye Ekonomisinde Üçüz Açık Hipotezinin Geçerliliği: Sınır Testi Yaklaşımı, İMKB Dergisi, 13 (50), 1-27.
  2. ALKSVANI, M. A., 2000, The Twin Deficit Phenomenon in Petroleum Economy, Evidence From Saudi Arabia [Online], King Saud University Department of Economıcs, 1-25, http://www.erf.org.eg/CMS/uploads/pdf/1185358196_finance1.pdf [Erişim Tarihi: 29.08.2015].
  3. BAHARUMSHAH, A. Z. ve EVAN L., 2007, Dynamics of Fiscal and Current Account Deficits in Thailand: An Empirical Investigation, Journal of Economic Studies, 34 (6), 454-475.
  4. BOLAT, S., DEĞİRMEN S. ve ŞENGÖNÜL A., 2015, The Dynamics of Triple Deficits in European Countries: New Insights from Panel Granger Causality Tests [Online], 22nd International Economic Conference, Romania. [Erişim Tarihi: 20.11.2015].
  5. CHOWDHURY, K. ve SALEH. A. S., 2007, Testing the Keynesian Proposition of Twin Deficits in the Presence of Trade Liberalisation: Evidence from Sri Lanka, Wollongong Economics Working Paper, No: 07-09, 1-33.
  6. ÇELİK, S. ve DENİZ, P., 2009, An Empirical Investigation of Twin Deficits Hypothesis for Six Emerging Countries [Online], SSRN Working Paper Series, Available at SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1389242 [Erişim Tarihi: 21.08.2015].
  7. DARRAT, F. A., 1988, Have Large Budge Deficits Caused Rising Trade Deficits?, Southern Economic Journal, 54 (4), 879-887.
  8. DUMITRESCU, E-I. ve HURLİN, C., 2012, Testing for Granger non-Causality in Heterogeneous Panels, Economic Modelling, 29 (4), 1450–1460.
  9. EISNER, R., 1994,
  10. National Saving and Budget Deficits, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 76 (1), 181-186.
  11. FISHER, S. ve EASTERLY, W., 1990, The Economics of The Government Budget Constraint, The World Bank Research Observer, 5 (2), 127-142.
  12. GRANGER, C. W. J., 1969, Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Modelsand Cross Spectral Method, Econometrica, 37, 424–438.
  13. GÜLOĞLU, B. ve İSPİR, S., 2009, Yeni Gelişmeler Işığında Türkiye’de Satın Alma Gücü Paritesi Önsavının Panel Birim Kök Sınaması, Pamukkale Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F.İktisat Bölümü Yayınları.
  14. HADRI, K. ve KUROZUMI, E., 2012, A Simple Panel Stationarity Test in the Presence of Serial Correlation and a Common Factor, Economics Letters, 115, 31–34.
  15. HSIAO, C., 2003,
  16. Analysis of Panel Data, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  17. KARAÇOR, Z., ALPTEKİN, V., AKAR, T. ve AKAR, G., 2012,
  18. İstikrar Mı, İstikrarsızlık Mı? Türkiye’de Üçüz Açık Analizi, Türkiye Ekonomisi Kurumu 3. Uluslararası Ekonomi Konferansı,