Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2003 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2

Combating Corruption and the Evaluation of Turkish Case

Yolsuzlukla Mücadele Olgusu ve Türkiye Açısından Bir Değerlendirme

Pages
139–168
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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, some developing country experiences are compared with the Turkish experience in terms of the corruption strategies and it is concluded that Turkey has a lot to do in curbing corruption.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Economic convergence between developed and developing countries depends on the economic growth performance of the latter.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Since the corruption has detrimental effects on economic growth, combating corruption is needed on the basis of continous and conscious strategies.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this study, some developing country experiences are compared with the Turkish experience in terms of the corruption strategies and it is concluded that Turkey has a lot to do in curbing corruption.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Economic convergence between developed and developing countries depends on the economic growth performance of the latter. It is important to prevent corruption in developing countries because corruption undermines the economic growth and the social structure of these countries. Since the corruption has detrimental effects on economic growth, combating corruption is needed on the basis of continous and conscious strategies. In this study, some developing country experiences are compared with the Turkish experience in terms of the corruption strategies and it is concluded that Turkey has a lot to do in curbing corruption.

Özet

Gelişmekte olan ülkelerin ekonomik olarak gelişmiş ülkeleri yakalamaları ekonomik büyüme performanslarına bağlıdır. Yolsuzluk, ekonemik büyümeyi ve sosyal yapıyı zayıflatmakta olduğundan söz konusu ülkelerde yolsuzluğu önlemek son derece önemlidir. Yolsuzluğun ekonomik büyüme üzerinde zararlı etkileri, yolsuzlukla mücadelede sürekli ve bilinçli stratejilere ihtiyaç göstermektedir. Bu çalışmada, Türkiye deneyimi ile gelişmekte olan bazı ülkelerin deneyimleri yolsuzluk stratejileri açısından karşılaştırılmış ve Türkiye'nin yolsuzlukları önlemede daha çok yol alması gerektiği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

TOSUN, M. U., GÜRAN, M. C. (2022). Combating Corruption and the Evaluation of Turkish Case. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 2, 139–168. https://ajindex.com/articles/533347

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Adaman, F., A. Çarkoğlu ve B. Şenatalar (2001), Hanehalkı Gözünde Türkiye'de Yolsuzluğun Nedenleri ve Önlenmesine İlişkin Öneriler, İstanbul:
  2. TESEV Yayınları, No: 24. Alesina, A. ve B. Weder (1999), "Do Corrupt Governments Receive Less Foreign Aid?", National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, No: 7108. Al-Mahrubi, F. (2000), "Corruption and Inflation", Economic Letters, 66, 199-202.
  3. Berkman, Ü. (1983), Azgelişmiş Ülkelerde Kamu Yönetiminde Yolsuzluk ve Rüşvet, Ankara:
  4. TODAİE Yayınları.
  5. Bhargava, V., ve E. Bolongaita (2004),
  6. Challeging Corruption in Asia, Washington: The World Bank. Cingi, S. (1994), "Yolsuzluk Olgusu ve Ekonomik Analizi Üzerine Notlar", Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 12, s. 1-8.
  7. De Lozada, A.S. (1999), "In Pursuit of Public Accountability in Bolivia", Stapenhurst R. ve S. Shahrzad (der), Curbing Corruption: Toward a Model for Building National Integrity içinde, Washington: World Bank, 67-86.
  8. De Speville, B.E. (1999), "The Experience of Hong Kong, China, in Combating Corruption", Stapenhurst R. ve S. Shahrzad (der), Curbing Corruption: Toward a Model for Building National Integrity içinde, Washington: World Bank, 51-58.
  9. Ekelund, R.B. ve R.D. Tolison (1997), Politicized Economies: Monarchy, Monopoliy and Mercantilism, Texas: Texas A&M University Press.
  10. Friedman, E., S. Johnson, D, Kaufmann ve P. Zoido-Lobaton (2000), "Dodging the Grabbing Hand: the Determinants of Unofficial Activity in 69 Countries", Journal of Public Economics, 76, 459-493.
  11. Ghura, D. (1998), "Tax Revenue in Sub-Saharan Africa: Effects of Economic Policies and Corruption", International Monetary Fund Working Paper, No: 135. Gupta, S., H. Davoodi ve E. Tiongson (2000), "Corruption and the Provision of Health Care and Education Services", International Monetary Fund Working Paper, No: 116. Gupta, S., L. de Mello ve R. Saharan (2000), "Corruption and Military Spending", International Monetary Fund Working Paper, No: 23. Hines, J.R. (1995), "Forbidden Payment: Foreign Bribery and American Business After 1977", National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, No: 5266. Huntington, P.S. (1968), Political Order in Changing Societies, New Haven and London: Yale Univesty Press.
  12. Huntington, P.S. (1989), "Modernization and Corruption", Heidenheimer A. vd. (der.) Political Corruption: A Handbook içinde, New Jersey: Transaction Publishers, 377-389.
  13. Johnson, B.T., K.R. Holmes ve M.Kirkpatrik (1999), 7999 Index of Economic Freedom, Washington: The H