SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Maliye Dergisi / 2017 / Sayı: 173

Marketization Process Effect on Welfare State in Transition Ekonomics

Piyasalaşma Sürecinin Geçiş Ekonomilerinde Refah Devleti Anlayışı Üzerine Etkileri

Pınar ÖZDEMİR ÇUKADAR
Pages
244–264
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)

Findings supports marketization and puclic sector size variations explains the changes in socio economic indicators.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to investigate how social policies and welfare state institutions have changed during the transition process in Central and Esastern Europe.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The second step of the study is to analyze the marketization process and public sector size effect on socieconomic indicators of Central and Eastern countires for 2000-2015 by using Dumitrescu Hurlin panel Granger Causality test.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings supports marketization and puclic sector size variations explains the changes in socio economic indicators.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000-2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate how social policies and welfare state institutions have changed during the transition process in Central and Esastern Europe. The first step of the study is to explore the studies explaining how transition process affects welfare state. The second step of the study is to analyze the marketization process and public sector size effect on socieconomic indicators of Central and Eastern countires for 2000-2015 by using Dumitrescu Hurlin panel Granger Causality test. The reason why Dumitrescu Hurlin panel Granger causality test used is related to its power even in small time dimension panel data. Findings supports marketization and puclic sector size variations explains the changes in socio economic indicators.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Merkezi ve Doğu Avrupa geçiş ekonomilerinde sosyal politikaların ve refah devleti kurumlarının değişimini incelemektir. Çalışmanın ilk aşamasında geçiş sürecinin refah devleti üzerindeki etkilerini inceleyen araştırmalar ele alınacaktır. İkinci aşamada 2000-2015 yılları arasında ekonomik serbestleşme düzeyi ve kamu kesimi büyüklüğünün 11 Merkezi ve Doğu Avrupa geçiş ekonomisine ait sosyoekonomik göstergeler üzerindeki etkisi Dumitrescu Hurlin panel Granger nedensellik analizi ile sınanmaktadır. Dumitrescu Hurlin panel Granger nedensellik analizinin kullanılmasının nedeni zaman boyutu dar olan panel veride de güçlü sonuçlar vermesidir. Bulgular ekonomik serbestleşme ve kamu kesimi büyüklüğünün sosyoekonomik göstergelerde ortaya çıkan değişimi açıkladığı yönündedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇUKADAR, P. Ö. (2017). Marketization Process Effect on Welfare State in Transition Ekonomics. Maliye Dergisi, Sayı: 173, 244–264. https://ajindex.com/articles/78899

References (12)

  1. Adascalitei, D. (2012), "Welfare State Development in Central and Eastern Europe", Studies of Transition States and Societies, 4(2), 59-70.
  2. Aidukaite, J. (2009), "Old Welfare State Theories and New Welfare", Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 42, 23-39.
  3. Arcanjo, M. (2011), "Welfare State Regimes and Reforms: A Classification of Ten", Social Policy & Society, 10(2), 139-150. Ar?n, T. (2013),
  4. Kriz, Devlet, øktisat ve Sosyal Güvenlik Politikalar? Seçilmiú Yaz?lar, østanbul: Bilgi Üniversitesi Yay?nlar?. Arts, W. ve Gelissen, J. (2002), "Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism or More? A State-of-the-art Report", Journal of European Social Policy, 12(2)137-158. Bozoklu, ù. ve Y?lanc?, V. (2013), "Finansal Geliúme ve øktisadi Büyüme Aras?ndaki Nedensellik ølúkisi: Geliúmekte Olan Ülkeler øçin Analiz", Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi øktisadi ve ødari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 161-187.
  5. Breznau, N. (2016), "Dimensions of Welfare State Attitudes: The Cold War and Cultural Causes", Working Paper, 3rd ESS International Users Conference, Lausanne, Switzerland, July 13-15th. Bul÷urcu, B. ve Özdemir, P. (2015), Geçiú Ekonomilerinde Sa÷l?k Harcamalar?n?n?n Etkinli÷i Üzerine Bir ønceleme, Ege Akademik Bak?ú, 15(4), 523-537.
  6. Castles, F.G. ve Obinger, H. (2008), "Worlds, Families, Regimes: Country Clusters in Europe and OECD Area Public Policy", West European Politics, 31, 321-344.
  7. Cazes, S. (2002), "Do Labour Market Institutions Matter in Transition Economies? An Analysis of Labour Market Flexibilty in The Late Nineties", Decent Work Research Programme Discussion Paper, DP/140/2002, 1-29.
  8. Cerami, A. (2008), "New Social Risk in Central and Eastern Europe: The Need for a New Empowering Politics of Welfare State", Sociologick? ?asopis/Czech Sociological Review, 44(6), 1089-1110.
  9. Dumitrescu, E.-I. ve Hurlin, C. (2012), "Testing for Granger Non-Causality in Heterogeneous Panels", Economic Modeling, 29,1450-1460.
  10. Esping Andersen, G. (1999), "Toplumsal Riskler ve Refah Devleti" içinde Sosyal Politika Yaz?lar? (Derleyen Ayúe Bu÷ra ve Ça÷lar Keyder), øletiúim Yay?nlar?: østanbul. Eurostat (2017), Sosyal Güvenlik østatistikleri (Social Protection Statistics), http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/socialprotection/data/database (Eriúim Tarihi: 06.07.2017)
  11. Fenger, H. (2007), "Welfare Regimes in Central and Eastern Europe:Incorporating Post-communist Countries in a Welfare Regime Typology", Contemporary Issues and Ideas in Social Sciences, Agust,1-30.
  12. Frel, J. (2009), Welfare State Classif