SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting / 2018 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3

RELATION OF DIRECT FOREIGN INVESTMENTS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH: PANEL DATA ANALYSIS ON APEC COUNTRIES

Nazife Ozge KİLİC
İlhan GULLU
Pages
261–267
Publication Date
2018-09-30
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)

For this reason, developing countries are encouraging foreign direct investment.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose- In this study, relation between direct foreign investments and economic growth had been analyzed for 11 APEC countries (Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia and USA) in between era of 1990-2016 with the help of panel data analysis.Methodology- In this purpose, stability of variables had been searched by Im,Peseran and Shin Panel Unit Root Tests, Maddala and Wu Panel Unit Root Tests and Coi Panel Unit Root Tests to obtain unbiased predictions in study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Then, panel cointegration and causality tests had been applied.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:For this reason, developing countries are encouraging foreign direct investment.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2016 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Direct foreign investments · economic growth · APEC countries

Abstract

Purpose- In this study, relation between direct foreign investments and economic growth had been analyzed for 11 APEC countries (Australia, Canada, Chile, China, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia and USA) in between era of 1990-2016 with the help of panel data analysis.Methodology- In this purpose, stability of variables had been searched by Im,Peseran and Shin Panel Unit Root Tests, Maddala and Wu Panel Unit Root Tests and Coi Panel Unit Root Tests to obtain unbiased predictions in study. Then, panel cointegration and causality tests had been applied. Findings- At the end of the research, it had been determined that existence of causality relation between series and there is unidirectional causality from direct foreign investments to economic growth. Conclusion- Although direct foreign investment in most of the developing countries is not directly linked to economic development, capital, technology and knowledge transfer which indirectly contributes. For this reason, developing countries are encouraging foreign direct investment.

🔖

Cite This Article

KİLİC, N. O., GULLU, İ. (2018). RELATION OF DIRECT FOREIGN INVESTMENTS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH: PANEL DATA ANALYSIS ON APEC COUNTRIES. Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3, 261–267. https://ajindex.com/articles/835393

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Ayaydın, H. (2010). Doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar ile ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi: Türkiye örneği. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 26 (1), ss.133-145.
  2. Alfaro, L., Charlton, A. (2007). Growth and the quality of foreign direct invesment equal?. Working Paper. Harward University. Blomstorm, M., Lipsey, A. R., Zejan, M. (1992). What explains developing country growth?. NBER Working Paper, No.4132. Bozuklu, Ş., Yılancı, V. (2013). Finansal gelişme ve iktisadi büyüme arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi: gelişmekte olan ekonomiler için analiz. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi Cilt:28, Sayı: 2, Yıl:2013, ss.161-187.
  3. Carcovic, M., Levine, R. (2002). Does foreign direct ınvestment accelerate economic growth? financial globalization: a blessing or curse. World Bank Conference Washinghton. Choi, I. (2001). Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance 20 (2001), pp. 249–272.
  4. Çeştepe, H., Mıstaçoğlu, T. (2010). Gelişmekte olan ülkelerde doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar ve ekonomik entegrasyon: ASEAN ve MERCOSUR örneği. Yönetim ve Ekonomi, Cilt:17, Sayı:2. Dumitrescu, E. I., Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
  5. Ekinci, A. (2011). Doğrudan yabancı yatırımların ekonomik büyüme ve istihdama etkisi: türkiye uygulaması (1980-2010). Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 6 (2), ss.71-76.
  6. Im, K. S., Pesaran, H. M., Yongcheol, S. (2013). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, c.115, s.53-74.
  7. Işık, C. (2016). Doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımları ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: sınır testi yaklaşımıyla Türkiye örneği. IUJEAS, Vol. 1, Issue 1, January 2016.
  8. Kahveci, Ş., Terzi, H. (2017). Türkiye’de doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişkilerin nedensellik analizleri ile testi. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı:49, Ocak-Haziran, ss. 135-154.
  9. Kao, C. (1999). Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. Journal of Econometrics 90 (1999), pp.1-44.
  10. Karagöz, K. (2007). Bir sosyal politika aracı olarak doğrudan yabancı yatırımların istihdama etkisi. Sosyoloji Konferansları Dergisi, 36, ss.99-114.
  11. Kholdy, S., Ahmad, S. (2005).
  12. Financial market, FDI and economic growth: granger causality tests in panel data model. Working Paper, California State Polytechnic University. Koyuncu, T. F. (2011