Journals / Maliye Dergisi / 2012 / Sayı: 162

The criteria effects of fixed capital properties for domestic formation and The case of Turkey after 2000

Sabit sermaye mallarının yurt içi ölçek etkisi ve 2000 yılı sonrası Türkiye örneği

Pages
103–125
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)

The demanded fixed capital properties for private and public sector connected with the parametric values that are in spite of their effects have been determined the small criterion effects can also manipulate the market dynamics that directly related to GDP.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The real (or fixed) capital properties have fairly important effects in the forming process of GDP and countries aim to catch the desired economic growth generally need more investment of fixed capital properties increasing the demand of reel properties.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The criteria effects of reel properties in Turkey were taken up in the empirical frame work and they were interpreted in the last period after 2000.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The demanded fixed capital properties for private and public sector connected with the parametric values that are in spite of their effects have been determined the small criterion effects can also manipulate the market dynamics that directly related to GDP.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The real (or fixed) capital properties have fairly important effects in the forming process of GDP and countries aim to catch the desired economic growth generally need more investment of fixed capital properties increasing the demand of reel properties. The criteria effects of these properties create different parametric values in the measured criteria for these countries. The criteria effects of reel properties in Turkey were taken up in the empirical frame work and they were interpreted in the last period after 2000. The demanded fixed capital properties for private and public sector connected with the parametric values that are in spite of their effects have been determined the small criterion effects can also manipulate the market dynamics that directly related to GDP.

Özet

Sabit sermaye malları GSYİH’nin oluşum süreci içerisinde önemli bir role ve etkiye sahiptir ve ülkeler istenilen ekonomik büyümeyi yakalamak amacıyla genellikle artan sabit sermaye talepleriyle daha çok sabit sermaye mallarına ihtiyaç duymaktadır. Bu ülkeler için söz konusu bu malların ölçek etkisi ölçülen değerler kapsamında değişik parametrik değerler ortaya koymaktadır. 2000 yılı sonrası dönemde Türkiye’deki sabit sermaye mallarının ölçek etkileri ampirik bir çerçevede ele alınmış ve saptanan bulgular yorumlanmıştır. Kamu sektörü ve özel sektör tarafından talep edilen sabit sermaye malları saptanan küçük etki ölçeklerine rağmen ifade ettikleri parametrik değerlerle GSYİH ile doğrudan ilişkili pazar dinamiklerini de yönlendirebilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZKER, A. N. (2012). The criteria effects of fixed capital properties for domestic formation and The case of Turkey after 2000. Maliye Dergisi, Sayı: 162, 103–125. https://ajindex.com/articles/79026

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Altar, M., Necula C. ve Bobeica, G. (2010), “Estimating Potential GDP for the Romanian Economy an Eclectic Approach”, Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 3(1), 5-25.
  2. Arby, M.F. ve Batool, I. (2007), “Estimating Quarterly Gross Fixed Capital Formation”, Munich Personel RePEc Archive, SBP (State Bank of Pakistan) Working Paper Series, No:17, June, 1-16.
  3. Bebczuk, R.N. ve Berrettoni, N.D. (2006), Explaining Export Diversification:An Empirical Analysis. Argentina: Department of Economics, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Final Version January-2006.
  4. Brand, C., Reimers, H.E. ve Seitz, F. (2003), Forecasting Real GDP: What Role for Norrow Money. Frankfurt: European Central Bank-September 2003, Working Paper No. 254. Carliner, M. (2001), “Housing and GDP”, Housing Economics, October, 7-9.
  5. Cheng, M.Y. (2003), “Economic Fluctuations and Growth: An Emprical Study of the Malaysian Economy”, The Journal of Business in Developing Nations, 7(1), 51-73.
  6. Contessi, S., Pierangelo, D.P. ve Francis, J.L. (2010), The Cyclical Properties of Disaggregated Capital Flows. Research Division-Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Working Paper Series:2008-041C, July 2010.
  7. Davidson, R. ve MacKinnon, J.G. (1993), Estimation and Inference in Econometrics,Oxford University Press. DİE (Devlet İstatistik Enstitüsü), Türkiye Ekonomisi İstatistik ve Yorumlar, Şubat- Mart 2003. DPT (Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı), Ekonomik Gelişmeler, Temmuz 2001-2003-2005- 2008-2010. DPT (Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı), Ekonomik Gelişmeler, Aralık 2001-2003-2005- 2008-2010. DPT (Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı), Sekizinci Beş Yıllık Kalkınma Planı Sanayi Politikaları Özel İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu, Ankara: 2000. ECLAC (Economic Commision for Latin America and the Carabbiean), Domestic Performans Chapter III, Preliminary Overview of the Economies of Latin America and the Caribbean 2008.
  8. Edizdoğan, N. (2008), Kamu Maliyesi, 10. Baskı, Bursa: Ekin Kitabevi.
  9. Ege, İ. ve Saraç, T.H. (2011), “The Relation Ship Between Insurance Sector and Economic Growth: An Econometric Analysis”, Journal of Economics Resarch, 2(2), 1-9.
  10. European Research Area (2009),
  11. European Policy Brief, Belgium: Socio-Economic Sciences and Humanities Research, December, 1-8.
  12. Fedderke, J. (2004), “Investment in Fixed Capital Stock: Testing for the Impact of Sectoral and Systemic Uncertainty”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 66(2), 165-187.
  13. Gelos, R.G. ve Isgut, A. (2001), “Irreversibilities in Fixed Capital Adjustment: Evidence From Mexican and