Journals / Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 1

DETERMINANTS OF SELF-EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCE IN TURKEY

TÜRKİYE’DE BİREYLERİN SERBEST ÇALIŞMA TERCİHİNİN BELİRLEYİCİLERİ

Pages
27–50
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

Elimination of regional disparities, encouraging young people, making arrangements in education system to encourage self-employment, and reducing working time especially for women may be effective for individuals to choose self-employment.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, determinants of self-employment preferences of individuals employed in Turkey were examined.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For this purpose, a two-step method was used to analyze the data by using the TURKSTAT Household Labor Force Survey data.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Elimination of regional disparities, encouraging young people, making arrangements in education system to encourage self-employment, and reducing working time especially for women may be effective for individuals to choose self-employment.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, determinants of self-employment preferences of individuals employed in Turkey were examined. For this purpose, a two-step method was used to analyze the data by using the TURKSTAT Household Labor Force Survey data. Since the data set also includes individuals other than employers, Heckman sample selection was applied primarily to avoid sample selection bias. Existence of sample selection bias and necessity to use this method is determined. Then the probit method was used for all individuals, men and women. According to the findings, the region, age, education level, marital status, enrollment to social security, the possibility of working at home and working time were determined as effective factors. Elimination of regional disparities, encouraging young people, making arrangements in education system to encourage self-employment, and reducing working time especially for women may be effective for individuals to choose self-employment.

Özet

Bu çalışmada Türkiye’de istihdam içinde yer alan bireylerin serbest çalışmatercihinin belirleyicileri incelenmiştir. Bu amaca uygun şekilde, TÜİK Hanehalkıİşgücü Anketi verileri kullanılarak, iki aşamalı bir yöntem ile analiz yapılmıştır.Veri seti, istihdamda bulunanlar haricinde bireyleri de içerdiğinden, örnek seçimyanlılığı sorundan kaçınmak için öncelikle Heckman örnek seçimi uygulanmıştır.Örnek seçim yanlılığı sorununun varlığı ve bu yöntemin uygulanmasının gerekliolduğu görülmüştür. Sonrasında ise probit yöntemi tüm bireyler, erkekler vekadınlar için kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre yaşanılan bölge, yaş, eğitimdüzeyi, medeni durum, sosyal güvenliğe kayıtlı olma, evde çalışma imkanı veçalışma süresi etkili faktörler olarak belirlenmiştir. Bölgeler arası farklılıklarıngiderilmesi, gençlerin teşvik edilmesi, eğitim sisteminde serbest çalışmayı teşvikedici düzenlemelerin yapılması, çalışma süresinin ise özellikle kadınlar içindüşürülmesi bireylerin serbest çalışmayı tercih etmesi için etkili olabilecektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENTÜRK, İ. (2022). DETERMINANTS OF SELF-EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCE IN TURKEY. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 1, 27–50. https://ajindex.com/articles/426623

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Abreu, M., Oner, O., Brouwer, A. ve van Leeuwen, E. (2019), Well-Being Effects of Self-Employment: A Spatial Inquiry, Journal of Business Venturing, 34(4), s.589-607.
  2. Allub, L. ve Erosa, A. (2019),
  3. Financial Frictions, Occupational Choice and Economic Inequality, Journal of Monetary Economics, 107, s.63-76.
  4. Banerjee, A., Duflo, E., Glennerster, R. ve Kinnan, C. (2015), The Miracle of Microfinance? Evidence from a Randomized Evaluation, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 7(1), s.22–53.
  5. Baumeister, R. ve Leary, M. R. (1995), The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation, Psychological Bulletin, 117, s.497–529.
  6. Benz, M. ve Frey, B. S., (2008), Being Independent is a Great Thing: Subjective Evaluations of Self-Employment and Hierarchy, Economica, 75(298), s.362–383.
  7. Bianchi, M. ve Bobba, M, (2013),
  8. Liquidity, Risk, and Occupational Choices, The Review of Economic Studies, 80, s.491–511.
  9. Binder, M. ve Coad, A. (2013), Life Satisfaction and Self-Employment: A Matching Approach, Small Business Economics, 40(4), s.1009- 1033. Blanchflower, D. G. ve Oswald, A. J. (1998), What Makes an Entrepreneur?, Journal of Labour Economics, 16(1), s.26–60.
  10. Blanchflower, D.G. ve Oswald, A.J., (1990), Self-employment and the Enterprise Culture, (Eds.: R. Jowell, S. Witherspoon, L. Brook), British Social Attitudes: The 1990 Report. Aldershot: Gower Press.
  11. Blau, D. M. (1987), A Time-Series Analysis of Self-Employment in the United States, Journal of Political Economy, 95(3), s.445-467.
  12. Block, J. ve Koellinger, P. (2009), I Can’t Get No Satisfaction - Necessity Entrepreneurship and Procedural Utility, Kyklos, 62(2), s.191–209.
  13. Bogan, V. L., Fertig, A. R. ve Just, D. R. (2014), Self-Employment and Mental Health, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2259765, (Erişim tarihi: 08.12.2019).
  14. Borjas, G. (1987),
  15. The Self-Employment of Immigrants, Journal of Human Resources, 21, s.485–506.
  16. Bruce, D. (2000), Effects of the United States Tax System on Transitions into Self-Employment, Labour Economics, 7(5), s.545– 574. Burchell, B. J. ve Coutts, A. P. (2019), The Experience of SelfEmployment Among Young People: An Exploratory Analysis of 28 Low-to Middle-Income Countries, American Behavioral Scientist, 63(2), s.147-165.
  17. Cagetti, M. ve De Nardi, M. (2006),
  18. Entrepreneurship, Frictions, and Wealth, Journal of Political Economy, 114(5), s.835-70.
  19. Cameron, A. C. ve Trivedi, P. K. (2005), Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications, Cambridge: Cambridge U