SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2011 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2

The Relationship Between Corruption And Public Investment: The Case Of Turkey

Arş. Gör. Dr. Ünal ARSLAN
Yrd. Doç. Dr. Yıldız SAĞLAM
Pages
365–378
Publication Date
2011-06-01
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)

Öz This study examines the relationship between corruption and public investment in Turkey for the annual sample period between 1975 2007 using Johansen 1988 and Johansen and Juselius 1990 cointegration analysis The results of cointegration analysis provide an evidence of a long run relationship between corruption and public investment On the other side it is concluded that corruption effects public investment positively in Turkey Keywords: Public Investment Corruption Cointegration

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz This study examines the relationship between corruption and public investment in Turkey for the annual sample period between 1975 2007 using Johansen 1988 and Johansen and Juselius 1990 cointegration analysis The results of cointegration analysis provide an evidence of a long run relationship between corruption and public investment On the other side it is concluded that corruption effects public investment positively in Turkey Keywords: Public Investment Corruption Cointegration
📊
Key Findings & Data:Öz This study examines the relationship between corruption and public investment in Turkey for the annual sample period between 1975 2007 using Johansen 1988 and Johansen and Juselius 1990 cointegration analysis The results of cointegration analysis provide an evidence of a long run relationship between corruption and public investment On the other side it is concluded that corruption effects public investment positively in Turkey Keywords: Public Investment Corruption Cointegration
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Öz This study examines the relationship between corruption and public investment in Turkey for the annual sample period between 1975 2007 using Johansen 1988 and Johansen and Juselius 1990 cointegration analysis The results of cointegration analysis provide an evidence of a long run relationship between corruption and public investment On the other side it is concluded that corruption effects public investment positively in Turkey Keywords: Public Investment Corruption Cointegration
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Öz This study examines the relationship between corruption and public investment in Turkey for the annual sample period between 1975 2007 using Johansen 1988 and Johansen and Juselius 1990 cointegration analysis The results of cointegration analysis provide an evidence of a long run relationship between corruption and public investment On the other side it is concluded that corruption effects public investment positively in Turkey Keywords: Public Investment Corruption Cointegration

🔖

Cite This Article

ARSLAN, A. G. D. Ü., SAĞLAM, Y. D. D. Y. (2011). The Relationship Between Corruption And Public Investment: The Case Of Turkey. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2, 365–378. https://ajindex.com/articles/73711

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Akçay, S. (2002), “Corruption and Economic Growth: A Cross-National Study”, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 57 (1): 1-13.
  2. Alt, J. E.-Lassen, D., D. (2003), “The Political Economy of Institutions and Corruption in American States”, Journal of Theoretical Politics, 15 (3): 341-365.
  3. Bardhan, P., (1997), “Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues”, Journal of Economic Literature 35 (3): 1320-1346.
  4. Chang, T.,-Caudill, S., B. (2005), “Financial Development and Economic Growth: The Case of Taiwan”, Applied Economics, 37 (12): 1329-1335.
  5. Delavallade, C., (2006), “Corruption and Distribution of Public Spending in Developing Countries”, Journal of Economics and Finance, 30 (2): 222-239
  6. Dickey, D., A./Fuller, W., A. (1981), “Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root”, Econometrica, 49 (4): 1057-72.
  7. Enders, W., (1995),
  8. Applied Econometric Time Series, John Willey and Sons inc., U.S.A. Canada. Erb, C. B.- Campell R. H.-Tadas E. V., (1996), “Political Risk, Economic Risk and Financial Risk”, Fuqua School of Business Working Paper no. 9606: 1-26.
  9. Ghura, D., (1998), “Tax Revenue in Sub-Saharan Africa: Effects of Economic Policies and Corruption”, IMF (International Monetary Fund) Working Paper, no. 135: 1-25. Gupta S.- Luiz de M.- Raju S., (2000), “Corruption and Military Spending”, IMF (International Monetary Fund) Working Paper, 23: 1-31.
  10. Habib, M.- Zurawicki, L., (2002), “Corruption and Foreign Direct Investment”, Journal of International Business Studies, 33 (2): 291-307.
  11. Haque M. E.- Kneller, R. (2008), “Public Investment and Growth: The Role of Corruption”, The University of Manchester: Discussion Paper Series, 098: 1-21.
  12. Harris, Richard, I.D. Using Cointegration Analysis In Econometric Modelling, T.J.Press(Padstow) Ltd: Great Britain:1995.
  13. Hwang, J., (2002), “A Note on The Relationship Between Corruption and Government Revenue”, Journal of Economic Development, 27 (2): 161-178.
  14. Imam, Patrick.A./Jacobs, Davina F. (2007), “Effect of Corruption on Tax Revenues in the Middle East”, IMF (International Monetary Fund) Working Paper, 270: 1-34.
  15. Jain, A. K., (2001), “Corruption: A Review”, Journal of Economic Surveys, 15 (1): 71-121.
  16. Johansen, S., (1988), “Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors”, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12 (2)-3: 231–254. Johansen, S.- Juselius, K., (1990), “Maximum likelihood estimation and inference on cointegration– with applications to the demand for Money”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics an