SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ege Akademik Bakış / 2014 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2

The Testing Feldstein-Horioka Hypothesis For EU-15 and Turkey: Structural break dynamic panel data analysis under cross section dependency

Feldstein-Horioka hipotezinin AB-15 ve Türkiye ekonomisi için sınanması: Yatay kesit bağımlılığı altında yapısal kırılmalı dinamik panel veri analizi

Mehmet MERCAN
Pages
231–245
Publication Date
2022-10-12
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)

As a result of the analysis , for the countries overall a weak cointegration relationship between investment-saving series was obtained and it was found that F-H hypothesis is valid for these countries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Investments and savings are significant macroeconomic determiners for countries to maintain their sustainable economic growth.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Although investment-saving relationship is subject to many studies, Feldstein-Horioka (1980) explain the investment-saving relationship with international capital mobility.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result of the analysis , for the countries overall a weak cointegration relationship between investment-saving series was obtained and it was found that F-H hypothesis is valid for these countries.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Investments and savings are significant macroeconomic determiners for countries to maintain their sustainable economic growth. Although investment-saving relationship is subject to many studies, Feldstein-Horioka (1980) explain the investment-saving relationship with international capital mobility. They suggest that investments will be financed with domestic savings and investment-saving relationship will be strong, otherwise there will be no relationship or the relationship will be in the low level in the case of restrictions on capital movements. In this study Feldstein-Horioka (F-H) hypothesis was tested with the new generation dynamic panel data analysis considering the structural breaks in EU-15 countries and Turkey. Unit root and cointegration tests considering the hypothesis that a macroeconomic shock in a country would affect the other countries, in other words the cross sectional dependency were implemented in this analysis. As a result of the analysis , for the countries overall a weak cointegration relationship between investment-saving series was obtained and it was found that F-H hypothesis is valid for these countries. However, it was found that the level of savings to meet investments was lower in the short term analysis.

Özet

Yatırım ve tasarruflar ülkelerin sürdürülebilir ekonomik büyümeyi sağlayabilmelerinde önemli makroekonomik belirleyicilerdir. Yatırım-tasarruf ilişkisi birçok çalışmaya konuolmakla birlikte Feldstein-Horioka (1980), yatırım-tasarruf ilişkisini uluslararası sermaye hareketliliği ile izah etmektedir. Sermaye hareketleri üzerinde kısıtlamaların olduğu durumda, yatırımların yurt içi tasarruflarla finanse edileceğini ve yatırım- tasarruf ilişkisinin güçlü olacağını, aksi takdirde ilişkinin olmayacağını ya da düşük düzeyde olacağı savını öne sürmektedir. Bu çalışmada; Feldstein-Horioka (F-H) hipotezi, AB ülkeleri ve Türkiye Ekonomisi örneğinde yapısal kırılmaları dikkate alan yeni nesil dinamik panel veri analizi ile sınanmıştır. Analizde, herhangi bir ülkede meydana gelen bir makroekonomik şokun diğer ülkeleri de etkileyeceği varsayımını yani yatay kesit bağımlılığını dikkate alan birim kök ve eş-bütünleşme testleri uygulanmıştır. Analiz sonucunda ülkelerin geneli için yatırım-tasarruf serileri arasında zayıf eş-bütünleşme ilişkisi elde edilmiş ve bu ülkelerde F-H hipotezinin geçerli olduğu bulgusu elde edilmiştir. Kısa dönem analizinde ise tasarrufların yatırımları karşılama düzeyinin daha düşükolduğu görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

MERCAN, M. (2022). The Testing Feldstein-Horioka Hypothesis For EU-15 and Turkey: Structural break dynamic panel data analysis under cross section dependency. Ege Akademik Bakış, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 2, 231–245. https://ajindex.com/articles/495324

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Abbott, A. ve De Vita, V. (2003) “Another Piece in the Feldstein-Horioka Puzzle” Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 25:69-89.
  2. Altıntaş, H. ve Taban, S. (2011) “Twin Deficit Prob- lem and Feldstein-Horioka Hypothesis in Turkey: ARDL Approach and Investigation of Causality” International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 74: 30-45.
  3. Ang, J.B. (2007) “Are Saving and Investment Co- integrated? The Case of Malaysia (1965-2003)” Applied Economics, 39-17:2167-2174.
  4. Apergis, N. ve Tsoulfidis, L. (1997) “The Relationship Between Saving and Finance: Theory and Evidence From EU Countries” Research in Economics, 51:333-358.
  5. Bai, J. ve Perron, P. (1998) “Estimating and Testing Linear Models with Multiple Structural Changes” Econo- metrica, 66(1):47-78.
  6. Bai, J. ve Ng, S. (2004) “A Panic Attack on Unit Ro- ots and Cointegration” Econometrica, 72(4):1127-1178.
  7. Basher, S.A. ve Westerlund, J. (2009) “Panel Cointeg- ration and the Monetary Exchange Rate Model” Econo- mic Modelling, 26:506-513.
  8. Baxter, M. ve Crucini, M.J. (1993) “Explaining Sa- ving-Investment Correlations” The American Economic Review, 83(3):416-436.
  9. Beyaert, A. ve Camacho, M. (2008) “TAR Panel Unit Root Tests and Real Convergence: An Application to the EU Enlargement Process” Review of Development Econo- mics, 12(3):668-681.
  10. Bhagwati, J. (1998) “The Capital Myth: The Diffe- rence between Trade in Widgets and Trade in Dollars” Foreign Afairs, 77:7-12.
  11. Blanchard, O. ve Giavazzi, F. (2002) “Current Ac- count Deficits in The Euro Area: The End of The Feld- stein_Horioka Puzzle?” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2:147-209.
  12. Bolatoğlu, N. (2005) “Türkiye’de Yurt içi Yatırım ve Yurt içi Tasarruf Oranları Arasındaki İlişki” Ekonomik Yaklaşım, 16(56):19-32.
  13. Boratav, K. (2009)
  14. Küreselleşme, Kriz ve Türkiye’de Neoliberal Dönüşüm İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, No:234. Brezis, E.S. (1995) “Foreign Capital Flows in the Century of Britian’s Industrial Revolution: New Estima- tes, Controlled Conjectures” The Economic History Revi- ew, 48(1):46-67.
  15. Breusch, T.S. ve Pagan, A.R. (1980) “The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Modelspecification Tests in Econometrics” Review of Economic Studies, 47(1):239-53.
  16. Breitung, J. (2005) “A Parametric Approach to the Estimation of Cointegrating Vectors in Panel Data” Eco- nometric Reviews, 24(2):151‐173. Breuer, B., Mcnown, R. ve Wallace, M. (2002) “Seri- es-Specific Unit Root Test with Panel Data” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 64(5)