Journals / Turkish Studies - Economics, Finance, Politics / 2020 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 4

Public Debt-Growth Nexus: Heterogeneous Panel Data Analysis for Fragile Eight Countries

Kamu Borcu Büyüme İlişkisi: Kırılgan Sekizli Ülkeler için Heterojen Panel Veri Analizi

Pages
1955–1971
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)

According to the results, an increase in public debt stock at both group and country-level has a negative effect on growth.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:There is a growing interest in the literature on the question of how the increased debt stock affects growth in the public sector.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Panel data analysis was carried out for these countries subject to research, using annual data from 1992-2017.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results, an increase in public debt stock at both group and country-level has a negative effect on growth.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

There is a growing interest in the literature on the question of how the increased debt stock affects growth in the public sector. Although researches focus on developed countries, the debt-growth relationship is important for developing countries also. In this connection, due to high inflation, current account deficit and foreign resource dependency, the relationship between public debt stock and growth are discussed for "Fragile Octet" named as Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia, South Africa, India, Russia, Chile, and Turkey. Panel data analysis was carried out for these countries subject to research, using annual data from 1992-2017. Error correction model based on Extended Average Group (AMG) and Common Associated Effects Model (CCE) estimators were used for the estimation of the long-term coefficients of the data set discussed. These methods are effective methods considering both the cross-section dependency and the parameter differences between the cross-sections. According to the results, an increase in public debt stock at both group and country-level has a negative effect on growth. The underlying reason for this situation is especially the continuity of budget deficit and current account deficit problems in these countries and the use of debt to finance these deficits. For this reason, governments of the country should be reviewed how important to provide the legal, economic, physical, and human infrastructure required for foreign direct investments to prefer themselves.

Özet

Kamu kesiminde artan borç stokunun büyümeyi nasıl etkilediği sorusuna literatürde gösterilen ilgi giderek artmaktadır. Geçmişte yapılan araştırmalar gelişmiş ülkeler üzerine yoğunlaşsa da borç-büyüme ilişkisi gelişmekte olan ülkeler için de önem arz etmektedir. Bu bağlamda, yüksek enflasyon, cari açık ve dış kaynak bağımlılığından dolayı “Kırılgan Sekizli” olarak isimlendirilen Arjantin, Brezilya, Endonezya, Güney Afrika, Hindistan, Rusya, Şili ve Türkiye için kamu borç stoku ve büyüme arasındaki ilişki ele alınmıştır. İncelemeye konu olan bu ülkeler için 1992-2017 dönemine ait yıllık veriler kullanılarak panel veri analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Ele alınan veri setinin uzun dönem katsayılarının tahmini için Genişletilmiş Ortalama Grup (AMG) ve Ortak İlişkili Etkiler Modeli (CCE) tahmincilerine dayalı hata düzeltme modeli kullanılmıştır. Bu yöntemler hem kesit bağımlılığını, hem de kesitler arasındaki parametrelerin değişkenliklerini göz önüne aldığından bunların varlığı etkin bir yöntemlerdir. Bulunan sonuçlara göre hem grup düzeyinde hem de ülke düzeyinde kamu borç stokunda yaşanan bir artışın büyüme üzerinde negatif bir etkisi bulunmaktadır.Bu durumun altında yatan neden söz konusu ülkelerde özellikle bütçe açığı ve cari açık sorunlarının süreklilik arz etmesi ve alınan borcun bu açıkların finansmanında kullanılmasıdır. Bu sebeple ülke hükümetleri doğrudan yabancı yatırımların kendilerini tercih etmesi için gerekli olanhukuki, iktisadi, fiziki ve beşerî altyapıyı sağlamalarının ne kadar önemli olduğu gözden geçirilmelidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILDIZ, F., EĞRİ, T., ÇANAKCI, M. (2020). Public Debt-Growth Nexus: Heterogeneous Panel Data Analysis for Fragile Eight Countries. Turkish Studies - Economics, Finance, Politics, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 4, 1955–1971. https://ajindex.com/articles/309604

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2007). Disease and development: the effect of life expectancy on economic growth. Journal of Political Economy, 115(6), 925-985.https://doi.org/10.1086/529000
  2. Aizenman, J., & Lee, J. (2007). International reserves: precautionary versus mercantilist views, theory and evidence. Open Economies Review, 18(2), 191-214.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-007-9030-z
  3. Anaya, P., & Pienkowski, A. (2015). What really drives public debt: A holistic approach, (No. 15-137). International Monetary Fund. Aschauer, D.A., (2000). Do states optimize? Public capital and economic growth. The Annals of Regional Science 34, 343–363.
  4. Ayadi, F. S., & Ayadi, F. O. (2008). The impact of external debt on economic growth: A comparative study of Nigeria and South Africa. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, 10(3), 234-264.
  5. Babu, J. O., Kiprop, S., Kalio, A. M., & Gisore, M. (2014). External debt and economic growth in the East Africa community. African Journal of Business Management, 8(21), 1011-1018.https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM2014.7418
  6. Baltagi, B. H., Feng, Q. & Kao, C. (2012). A lagrange multiplier test for cross-sectional dependence in a fixed effects panel data model. Journal of Econometrics, 170, 164-177.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2012.04.004
  7. Barro, R. J. (1974). Are government bonds net wealth?. Journal of Political Economy, 82(6), 1095-1117.
  8. Baum, A., Checherita-Westphal, C., & Rother, P. (2013). Debt and growth: New evidence for the euro area. Journal of International Money and Finance, 32, 809-821.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2012.07.004
  9. Bloom, D. E., Canning, D., & Sevilla, J. (2003). The demographic dividend: A new perspective on the economic consequences of population change. Rand Corporation. Bloom, D. E., Sachs, J. D., Collier, P., & Udry, C. (1998). Geography, demography, and economic growth in Africa. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1998(2), 207-295.https://doi.org/10.2307/2534695
  10. Breusch, T. S. & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239-253.https://doi.org/10.2307/2297111
  11. Cecchetti, S. G., & Kharroubi, E. (2012). Reassessing the impact of finance on growth. (BIS Working Paper No. 381).Bank for International Settlements. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2117753 Čeh Časni, A., Andabaka Badurina, A., & Basarac, M. (2014, June). Public debt and growth: evidence from Central, Eastern and Sou