SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ege Akademik Bakış / 2014 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3

Hysteresis effect in unemployment: Turkey case

İşsizlikte histeri etkisi: Türkiye örneği

Taha Bahadır SARAÇ
Pages
335–344
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)

In this study which examines the hysteresis effect between Jan- uary 2005 and July 2013 in Turkey and whether the unemploy- ment series rates can be used in studying hysteresis effect or not, it has been concluded that the unemployment series and labor force participation rate series are stable according to the results of linear unit root test and the unemployment series are stable only at one regime according to the result of nonlinear unit root test.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study which examines the hysteresis effect between Jan- uary 2005 and July 2013 in Turkey and whether the unemploy- ment series rates can be used in studying hysteresis effect or not, it has been concluded that the unemployment series and labor force participation rate series are stable according to the results of linear unit root test and the unemployment series are stable only at one regime according to the result of nonlinear unit root test.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study which examines the hysteresis effect between Jan- uary 2005 and July 2013 in Turkey and whether the unemploy- ment series rates can be used in studying hysteresis effect or not, it has been concluded that the unemployment series and labor force participation rate series are stable according to the results of linear unit root test and the unemployment series are stable only at one regime according to the result of nonlinear unit root test.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In the light of these results, it has been suggested that the hysteresis effect at unemployment in Turkey is valid only in one regime and the unemployment rates variable can be used to reflect hysteresis effect at unemployment.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2005 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study which examines the hysteresis effect between Jan- uary 2005 and July 2013 in Turkey and whether the unemploy- ment series rates can be used in studying hysteresis effect or not, it has been concluded that the unemployment series and labor force participation rate series are stable according to the results of linear unit root test and the unemployment series are stable only at one regime according to the result of nonlinear unit root test. In the light of these results, it has been suggested that the hysteresis effect at unemployment in Turkey is valid only in one regime and the unemployment rates variable can be used to reflect hysteresis effect at unemployment.

Özet

Türkiye’de (2005:01-2013:07) döneminde işsizlikte histeri etkisiile işsizlikte histeri etkisinin araştırılmasında işsizlik oranları serisinin kullanılıp kullanılamayacağının incelendiği bu çalışmada, doğrusal birim kök testi sonuçlarına göre işsizlik ve işgücü- ne katılma oranı serilerinin durağan olduğu, doğrusal olmayanbirim kök testi sonucuna göre sadece işsizlik oranları serisininbir rejimde durağan olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Bu sonuçlarışığında, Türkiye’de işsizlikte histeri etkisinin sadece bir rejimdegeçerli olduğu ve işsizlikte histeri etkisini yansıtması anlamında işsizlik oranları değişkeninin kullanılabileceği ortaya konulmuş olmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARAÇ, T. B. (2022). Hysteresis effect in unemployment: Turkey case. Ege Akademik Bakış, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3, 335–344. https://ajindex.com/articles/495338

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Andersen, T.M. (2010) “Unemployment Persistence” CESifo Forum, 11(1):23-28.
  2. Arısoy, İ. (2013) “Türkiye’de İşgücü Piyasasına Etki Eden Şokların Kalıcılığının Analizi” TİSK Akademi, 8(15): 22-41.
  3. Alp, E.A. (2008) “Türkiye’de Sanayi Üretim Endeksinin TAR Modeli ile Analizi ve Birim Kök Sınaması” 1. Mühendislik ve Teknoloji Sempozyumu, Ankara.
  4. Blanchard, O.J. ve Summers, L.H. (1986) “Hysteresis and the European Unemployment Problem” Fischer, S. (ed.) NBER Macroeconomics Annual, Cambridge, MIT Press.
  5. Blanchard, O.J. ve Summers, L.H.(1987) “Hysteresis in Unemployment” European Economic Review, 31:288-295.
  6. Barışık, S. ve Çevik, E.İ. (2008) “Yapısal Kırılma Testleri ile Türkiye’de İşsizlik Histerisinin Analizi: 1923- 2006 Dönemi” KMU Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 10(14): 109-134.
  7. Barışık, S. ve Çevik, E.İ. (2008) “Türkiye’de İşsizlik Histerisinin Yapısal Kırılma ve Güçlü Hafıza Modellemesi ile Sektörel Analizi” TİSK Akademi, 3(6):67-87.
  8. Barro, R. (1988) “The Persistence of Unemployment” The American Economic Review, 78(2): 32-37.
  9. Bayat, T., Kayhan, S. ve Koçyiğit, A. (2013) “Türkiye’de İşsizliğin Asimetrik Davranışının Rejim Değişim Modeliyle İncelenmesi” Business and Economics Research Journal, 4(2): 79-90.
  10. Bildirici, M., Ersin, Ö. Ö., Türkmen, C., ve Yalçınkaya, Y. (2012) “The Persistence Effect of Unemployment in Turkey: An Analysis of the 1980-2010 Period” Journal of Business Economics & Finance, 1(3): 22-32.
  11. Burda, M. (1988) “Is There a Capital Shortage in Europe? Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 124: 38-57.
  12. Camero, M. ve Tamarit, C. (2004) “Hysteresis vs. Natural Rate Of Unemployment: New Evidence For OECD Countries” Economics Letters, 84: 413–417.
  13. Camero, M., Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L. ve Tamarit, C. (2008) “Unemployment Hysteresis in Transition Countries: Evidence Using Stationary Panel Tests with Breaks” Review of Development Economics, 12(3):620-635.
  14. Caner, M. ve Hansen, B.E. (2001) “Threshold Autoregression with a Unit Root” Econometrica, 69(6):1555-1596.
  15. Chang, T., Lee, K-C., Nieh, C-C. ve Wei, C-C. (2005) “An Empirical Note on Testing Hysteresis in Unemployment for Ten European Countries: Panel SURADF Approach” Applied Economic Letters, 12: 881- 886. Chang, T. ve Lee, C-H. (2011) “Hysteresis in Unemployment for G-7 Countries: Threshold Unit Root Test” Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 4: 5-14.
  16. Cross, R. (1987) “Hysteresis and Instability in the Natural Rate of Unemployment” Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 89(1): 71–89.
  17. Cuestas, J.C.,