Dergiler / Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 2

POLITICAL BUSINESS CYCLES IN THE TURKISH ECONOMY: 1977-2001

Sayfa
185–213
Yayın Tarihi
2015-03-16
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

And it is also important to learn which policies can be manipulated in order to prevent thePBC in the future.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This study is about political business cycles (PBC) and investigates the Turkish case in the 1977-2001 period.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The results show that there have been political cycles in some macroeconomic variables which are currency issued, broad money (M1), public sector credits and agricultural credits extended by Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (CBRT), and tax revenues.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:And it is also important to learn which policies can be manipulated in order to prevent thePBC in the future.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2001 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Politik devresel hareketler · otoregresyon analizi · zaman serisi analizi

Özet

This study is about political business cycles (PBC) and investigates the Turkish case in the 1977-2001 period. The PBC literature has been developed in the last four-five decades and links economics and politics in several ways.In the first part of the study, developments in the literature are mentioned and the link between New Classical Economics and New Political Economics is introduced. In the second part, Turkish case is analyzed in details to determine whether therehave been PBC during the above mentioned period. The results show that there have been political cycles in some macroeconomic variables which are currency issued, broad money (M1), public sector credits and agricultural credits extended by Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (CBRT), and tax revenues. CBRT has not allowed PBC especially on the targeted variables (CBRT balance sheet size, net domestic assets and monetary base), after 1989. Due to the high legal ceilings of CBRT credits to the public sector, CBRT was not able to limit those credits, especially before 1991 general elections.There had been similar PBC on agricultural credits which had been extended in the 1977-1991 period by CBRT. In addition to the regression analysis, comparative tables and figures for personnel expenditures of State Economic Enterprises (SEEs),agricultural credits which had been extended by Agricultural Bank of the Republic of Turkey (ABRT) in the 1964-1998 period and agricultural prices which had been declared by governments in the 1986-1999 period are provided in the paper.The study provides some evidence to PBC literature and determines which policy instruments could have been used to produce PBC in the Turkish economy. And it is also important to learn which policies can be manipulated in order to prevent thePBC in the future.

Abstract

This study is about political business cycles (PBC) and investigates the Turkish case in the 1977-2001 period. The PBC literature has been developed in the last four-five decades and links economics and politics in several ways. In the first part of the study, developments in the literature are mentioned and the link between New Classical Economics and New Political Economics is introduced. In the second part, Turkish case is analyzed in details to determine whether there have been PBC during the above mentioned period. The results show that there have been political cycles in some macroeconomic variables which are currency issued, broad money (M1), public sector credits and agricultural credits extended by Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey (CBRT), and tax revenues. CBRT has not allowed PBC especially on the targeted variables (CBRT balance sheet size, net domestic assets and monetary base), after 1989. Due to the high legal ceilings of CBRT credits to the public sector, CBRT was not able to limit those credits, especially before 1991 general elections. There had been similar PBC on agricultural credits which had been extended in the 1977-1991 period by CBRT. In addition to the regression analysis, comparative tables and figures for personnel expenditures of State Economic Enterprises (SEEs), agricultural credits which had been extended by Agricultural Bank of the Republic of Turkey (ABRT) in the 1964-1998 period and agricultural prices which had been declared by governments in the 1986-1999 period are provided in the paper. The study provides some evidence to PBC literature and determines which policy instruments could have been used to produce PBC in the Turkish economy. And it is also important to learn which policies can be manipulated in order to prevent the PBC in the future

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

GEZGİN, Y. (2015). POLITICAL BUSINESS CYCLES IN THE TURKISH ECONOMY: 1977-2001. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 36 - Sayı: 2, 185–213. https://ajindex.com/articles/6482

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. ALESINA, A. (1987), "Macroeconomic Policy in a Two-Party System as a Repeated Game", Quarterly Journal of Economics, 102, 650-678.
  2. ALESINA, A., Cohen, G.D. and Roubini, N. (1992), "Macroecomic Policy and Elections in OECD Democracies. Centre for Economic Policy Research, Discussion Paper No. 608. ALESINA, A., Cohen, G.D. and Roubini, N. (1997), Political Cycles and the Macroeconomy, Cambridge, Mass. (USA): The MIT Press.
  3. BERGER, H. and Woitek, U. (1997), "Searching for Political Business Cycles in Germany", Public Choice, 91, 2, 179-97.
  4. BERGER, H. and Woitek, U. (1999), Further Observations on the Political Business Cycle in German Monetary Aggregates, CES, University of Munich and University of Glasgow. BERGER, H. and Woitek, U., (2001), "The German political business cycle: money demand rather than monetary policy" European Journal of Political Economy 17, 3, 609-631.
  5. BLOCK, S. A. (2002),
  6. Political Business Cycles, Democratization, and Economic Reform: The Case of Africa, Journal of Development Economics, 67, 1, 205- 228. BOX G., Jenkins, G. (1976),
  7. Time Series Analysis, Forecasting, and Control. San Francisco, Calif. Holden Day. CAMERON, L. and Crosby, M. (2000), "It's the Economy Stupid: Macroeconomics and Federal Elections in Australia", The Economic Record, Vol. 76, No. 235, (354-364).
  8. CAMPBELL, J.Y. and Perron, P. (1991), "Pittfalls and Opportunities: What Macroeconomists Should Know About Unit Roots", National Bureau of Economic Research, Technical Working Paper No: 100. DOWNS, A. (1957),
  9. An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper & Row. ENDERS, W. (1995),
  10. Applied Econometric Time Series, USA and Canada: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. EREN, E. and Bildirici, M. (1999), "Siyasal Konjonktür Dalgaları ve Türkiye'de Seç- men Davranışı". İktisat, İşletme ve Finans Dergisi, Ekim, 27-37.
  11. ERGUN, M. (2000), Electoral Political Business Cycles in Turkey, Thesis (Master's) Bilkent University. ERSEL, H. and Öztürk, E. (1992), Para Politikası Uygulamaları ve Para Miktarı, TCMB Araştırma Genel Müdürlüğü, Tartışma Tebliği, 9207. HALL, A. (1994) Testing for a unit root in time series with pretest data-based model selection, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 12, 461-70.
  12. HALLERBERG, M. and Souza, L. V. (2000), "The Political Business Cycles of EU Accession Countries", Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper, TI 2000-085/2. HIBBS, D. (1977), "Political Parties and Macroeconomic Policy", American Political Science Review, 71, 1466-1487.
  13. KYDLAND, F. and Prescot