Journals / Maliye Dergisi / 2018 / Sayı: 174

The Unemployment Insurence Benefıt as an Automatic Stabilizator: Turkey Case

Otomatik Stabilizatör Olarak İşsizlik Sigortası Ödeneği: Türkiye Örneği

Pages
154–174
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)

According to the results, in line with expectations, it was determined that there is a short-term causality relationship among the industrial production index, given unemployment benefit and unemployment rate.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, whether the unemployment benefit is an automatic stabilizer in the business cycle of Turkey analyzed by Johansen Cointegration, Vector Error Correction model and Granger causality test.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The data set covers the period from January, 2004 to October, 2017.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results, in line with expectations, it was determined that there is a short-term causality relationship among the industrial production index, given unemployment benefit and unemployment rate.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2004 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, whether the unemployment benefit is an automatic stabilizer in the business cycle of Turkey analyzed by Johansen Cointegration, Vector Error Correction model and Granger causality test. The data set covers the period from January, 2004 to October, 2017. According to the results, in line with expectations, it was determined that there is a short-term causality relationship among the industrial production index, given unemployment benefit and unemployment rate. Moreover, there is a bidirectional relationship between the industrial production index and the unemployment benefit, while there is a unidirectional relationship among the other variables.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, Türkiye’de ekonomik konjonktür dönemlerinde işsizlik ödeneğinin otomatik stabilizatör olup olmadığı Johansen eşbütünleşme, vektör hata düzeltme modeli ve Granger nedensellik testi ile analiz edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Çalışmada, 2005 Ocak ve 2017 Ekim dönemini kapsayan aylık veriler kullanılmıştır. Sonuçta beklentilerle uyumlu olarak sanayi üretim endeksi ile verilen işsizlik ödeneği arasında; sanayi üretim endeksi ile işsizlik oranı arasında; verilen işsizlik ödeneği ile işsizlik oranı arasında; işsizlik oranı ile sanayi üretim endeksi arasında kısa dönemli nedensellik ilişkisi olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, sanayi üretim endeksi ile verilen işsizlik ödeneği arasında çift yönlü, diğer değişkenler arasında ise tek yönlü bir ilişki bulunmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKAR, S. (2018). The Unemployment Insurence Benefıt as an Automatic Stabilizator: Turkey Case. Maliye Dergisi, Sayı: 174, 154–174. https://ajindex.com/articles/78873

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Akmaz, M. (2000),
  2. İşsizlik Sigortası, Hazine Müsteşarlığı Uzmanlık Tezi, Ankara.
  3. Andaç, F. (2010), “İşsizlik Sigortası”, Türk Ağır Sanayi ve Hizmet Sektörü Kamu İşverenleri Sendikası, No:66. Andersen, T.M. (2014), “Tuning Unemployment Insurance to the Business Cycle”, IZA World of Labor, 54, 1-11, http://dx.doi.org/10.15185/ izawol.54 (Erişim Tarihi: 25.12.2017)
  4. Andersen, M.T. (2016), “Automatic Stabilizers-The Intersecti on of Labour Market and Fiscal Policies”, IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, 5(11), 1-18.
  5. Andor, L. (2014), "Basic European Unemployment Insurance-The Best Way Forward in Strengthening the EMU's Resilience and Europe's Recovery", in Designing a European Unemployment Insurance Scheme (Ed. László Andor, Sebastian Dullien, H. XavierJara, Holly Sutherland, Daniel Gros), ZBW-Leibniz Information Centre for Economics Forum, 49(4), 184-203.
  6. Andor, L. (2016), “Towards Shared Unemployment Insurance in the Euro Area”, IZA Journal of European Labor Studies, 5(10), 1-15.
  7. Auerbach, A.J. ve Feenberg, D. (2000), “The Significance of Federal Taxes as Automatic Stabilizers”, NBER Working Paper, No.7662, 1-25.
  8. Baunsgaard, T. ve Symansky, A.S. (2009), “Automatic Fiscal Stabilizers: How Can They Be Enhanced Without Increasing the Size of Government?”, IMF Staff Position Note, SPN/09/23. Beblavy, M. Marconi, G. ve Maselli, I. (2015), “A European Unemployment Benefits Scheme: The Rationale and The Challenges Ahead”, Centre for European Policy Studies, 1-30, www.ceps.eu (Erişim Tarihi: 15.12.2017) Birleşmiş Milletler İnsan Hakları Evrensel Beyannamesi (1948), https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/komisyon/insanhaklari/pdf01/203-208.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 01.11.2017)
  9. Boeri, T. ve Jimeno, F.J. (2016), “Learning from the Great Divergence In Unemployment In Europe During the Crisis”, Labour Economics, 41, 32-46.
  10. Budnevich, L.C. (2002), “Counter CyclicalF iscal Policy: A Review of the Literature, Empirical Evidence and Some Policy Proposals”, World Institute for Development Economics Research, Discussion Paper No. 2002/41, 1-22.
  11. Bülbül, O.G. (2012), “İşsizlik Sigortasının Ortaya Çıkışı ve Tarihsel Gelişimi”, İstihdam ’da 3İ: Geniş Açı, Sayı 6, Temmuz-Ağustos-Eylül, İŞKUR Yayını, 40-43.
  12. Chimerine, L. Black, S.T. ve Coffey, L. (1999), “Unemployment Insurance As An Automatic Stabilizer: Evidence of Effectiveness Over Three Decades”, Ed. Martha K. Matzke, UI Occasional Papers, Washington, DC. Darby, J. ve Melitz, J. (2006), “Retirement, Health, Unemployment, The Business Cycle and Au