Doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımları ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Geçiş ekonomileri örneğinde panel eştümleşme ve panel nedensellik analizleri

Bu çalışmada doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımları ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki ilişki, panel eştümleşme ve panel nedensellik yöntemleri kullanılarak 25 geçiş ekonomisi için incelenmiştir. Teorik olarak, doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımları gittiği ülkenin tasarruf yetersizliği sorununun çözümüne veya sermaye birikimine katkıda bulunarak ekonomik büyümeye neden olacağı beklenir. Diğer yönden, doğrudan yabancı sermaye akımlarının yönü yüksek büyüme performansına, ekonomik ve siyasi istikrara sahip ülkelere doğru olacaktır. Bu çalışmada uygulanan Pedroni panel eştümleşme, geleneksel Granger nedensellik, Holtz-Eakin ve diğerleri (1988) tarafından önerilen ve iki aşamalı EKK yöntemine dayanan panel nedensellik sonuçları teoriyi desteklemektedir. Böyle ki, panel eştümleşme analizine göre doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımları ve ekonomik büyüme değişkenleri uzun dönemde birlikte hareket etmekteler ve ortak bir yönelime sahipler. Kısa dönem ilişkinin incelendiği panel nedensellik sınamalarının sonuçları doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımlarından ekonomik büyümeye doğru güçlü, tersi yönde ise daha zayıf bir nedensellik ilişkisinin olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu sonuçlar, geçiş ekonomilerinde doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımları ile ekonomik büyüme arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi olduğunu gösterir. Ekonomik büyümeden yabancı sermaye yatırımlarına doğru nedensellik ilişkisinin varlığı, içsel büyüme teorilerindeki büyüme dinamiklerinin sistem içinde olduğu görüşünü desteklemektedir.

Relationship between foreign direct investment and economic growth: Panel coıntegration and panel sausalıty analysis in transition economıes case

The aim of this paper is to contribute to the empirical literature on the relationship between foreign direct investment and economic growth in the case of twenty-five transition economies. According to the standard economic theory foreign direct investment is expected to cause economic growth by contributing to the betterment of inadequate savings and volume of investment. Thus, foreign direct investment augments capital stock in the host country. In addition, bring-about developed management knowledge, manufacturing method, and production technology. Foreign direct investment inflows cause to economic growth indirectly through competition, effectiveness and productivity increases in host country. On the other hand, the economic growth performance of country can affect foreign direct investment inflows. In endogenous growth theory dynamics of economic growth is determined inside the system. Namely, theoretically it is possible that economic growth affects total investments and also foreign direct investment. Country which has high economic growth rates, economical and political stabilization or expected to growth high may induce more foreign direct investment. The foreign capital, when choosing country to investigate, considers the growth performance of host country together with risks. Thus, in economic theory growth can attract more foreign direct investment flows and foreign direct investment can boost economic growth.Existing empirical researchs searching relationship between foreign direct investment and economic growth show inconclusive results. Studies which investigating this relationship in transition economies also show mixed results. For example Campos and Kinoshita (2002), Merlevede and Schoors (2004) show that foreign direct investment has robust impact on economic growth. But, Lyroudi et al (2004) find that foreign direct investment has no impact on growth. Using fixed effects panel data approach, Nath (2004) find that in presence of trade in growth equation, foreign direct investment does not seem to have any significant effect on growth. Conclusion of the panel study Değer and Emsen (2006) indicate that in transition countries which have political stability, a position to developed countries, and a given development level foreign direct investment is a dynamic factor of economic growth. Another study, concerned transition economies is Aleksynska et al (2008). Their main fainding indicates that there is little empirical evidence that foreign direct investment stimulates economic growth beyond the current year, it is also reveals that there is little empirical evidence of reverse causation. The empirical analysis, which uses data on twenty-five transition economies and performed in three steps, is based on panel cointegration and panel causality tests. First, the paper uses LLC and IPS panel unit root tests to investigate stationary characteristics and determined the integration order of foreign direct investment and economic growth series. Second, it is investigated the long run relationship using panel cointegration test which developed by Pedroni (1999, 2004). Pedroni’s panel cointegration analysis is based on Engle-Granger two step cointegration tests. Third, in this study are used two type of causality tests to investigate short run relationship between foreign direct investment and economic growth in transition economies case. First of the causality tests is traditional Granger causality approach for panel ordinary least squares, fixed effects, and random effects models. Finally, panel causality tests which developed by Holtz- Eakin et al (1988) and based on two stages least square method are performedResults obtained from panel cointegration and panel causality analysis confirm the endogenous growth theory. Pedroni panel cointegration test indicate that foreign direct investment and economic growth series have a long run equilibrium relationship. Traditional Granger causality and two stage least square method developed by Holtz-Eakin et al (1988) suggest there is robust evidence that the foreign direct investment causes to economic growth. Results from causality tests about reverse causation indicate lesser affection of economic growth on foreign direct investment. Thus, there is bidirectional causality between foreign direct investment and economic growth in twenty-five transition economies panel. This results shows that foreign direct investment inflows accelerate economic growth. On the other hand, high economic growth rates attract more foreign direct investment. Causal relationship from economic growth to foreign direct investment confirms the opinion that determinants of economic growth is inside the system in endogenous growth theory

PDF

___

AFŞAR, Muhammet (2007), “The Causality Relationship between Economic Growth and Foreign Direct Investment in Turkey”, Business and Economics Society International, July 16–20, 2007, Antibes, France.
ALEKSYNSKA, M., GAISFORD, J. and KERR, W. (2008), “Foreign Direct Investment and Growth in Transition Economies”,University Library of Munich MPRA Paper, No. 7668.
AL-IRIANI, Mahmoud and AL-SHAMSI Fatima (2007), “Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth in the GCC Countries A Causality Investigation Using Heterogeneous Panel Analysis”, 27th Annual Meeting of Middle East Economic Association, January 4–7, 2007, Chicago, USA.
BALTAGI, Badi H. (2005), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, Third Edition, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, England.
BLOMSTRÖM, M., LIPSEY, R.E. and ZEJAN, M. (1994), “What explains developing country growth”, NBER Working Paper No. 4132.
BORENSZTEIN, E., DE GREGORIO, J., and LEE, J. (1998), “How Does Foreign Direct Investment Affect Economic Growth?”, Journal of International Economics, 45, 115–135.
CAMPOS, Nauro F. and KINOSHITA Yuko (2002), “Foreign Direct Investment as Technology Transferred: Some Panel Evidence from the Transition Countries”, William Davidson Institute Working Paper, No. 438.
DE MELLO, Luiz R. (1999), “Foreign Direct Investment in Developing Countries and Growth: A Selective Survey”, Journal of Development Studies, 34 (1), 1–34.
DEĞER, Kemal M. ve EMSEN, Selçuk Ö. (2006), “Geçiş Ekonomilerinde Doğrudan Yabancı Sermaye Yatırımları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkileri: Panel Veri Analizleri (1990–2002)”, C.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 7(2), 121–137.
DHAKAL, D., RAHMAN, S. and UPADHYAYA, K.P. (2007), “Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth in Asia” Indian Journal of Economics and Business, 15-26
ERÇAKAR, M. Emin ve YILGÖR, Metehan (2008), “Gelişmekte Olan Ülkelerde Doğrudan Yabancı Sermaye Yatırımları ve Gayri Safi Yurtiçi Hasıla Arasındaki İlişki: Panel Birim Kök Testi ve Panel Koentegrasyon Testi Uygulamaları” Uluslararası Sermeye Hareketleri ve Gelişmekte Olan Piyasalar Sempozyumu, 24–27 Nisan 2008, Balıkesir.
ERLAT, Haluk (2006), Panel Data: A Selective Survey, Unpublished Lecture Notes, Department of Economics, Middle East Technical University.
ESSO, Loesse J. (2010), “Long-Run Relationship and Causality between Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth: Evidence from Ten African Countries”, International Journal of Economics and Finance, 2(2), 158–177.
FARAS, Reyadh Y. and GHALI, Khalifa H. (2009), “Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth: The Case of the GCC Countries”, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 29, 134–145.
GREENE, William H. (2000), Econometric Analysis, Fourth Edition, Upper Saddle River Prentice Hall, New Jersey.
HANSEN, Henrik and RAND, John (2004), “On the Causal Links between FDI and Growth in Developing Countries”, Institute of Economics, University of Copenhagen and Development Economics Research Group (DERG), Discussions Papers, 04–30.
HOLTZ-EAKIN, D., NEWEY, W. and ROSEN, H. (1988), “Estimating Vector Autoregressions with Panel Data”, Econometrica, 56(6), 1371–1395.
HSIAO, Cheng (2003), Analysis of Panel Data, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
IM, K. S., PESARAN, M. H. and SHIN, Y. (2003), “Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 115, 53–74.
LEVIN, A., LIN, C. F. and CHU, C. (2002), “Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties,” Journal of Econometrics, 108, 1–24.
LYROUDI, K., PAPANASTASIOU, J. and VAMVAKIDIS, A. (2004), “Foreign Direct Investment and Economic Growth in Transition Economies”, South Eastern Europe Journal of Economics, 1, 97–110.
MADDALA, G. S. (2001), Introduction to Econometrics, Third Edition, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, England.
MAGNUS, Frimpong J. and FOSU, Oteng-Abayie E. (2008), “Bivariate Causality Analysis between FDI Inflows and Economic Growth in Ghana”, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 15, 103–112.
MERLEVEDE, Bruno and SCHOORS, Koen (2004), “Reform, FDI and Economic Growth: Tale of the Tortoise and the Hare”, William Davidson Institute, Working Paper No.730.
NAIR-REICHERT, Usha and WEINHOLD, Diana (2001), “Causality Tests for Cross-Country Panels: New Look at FDI and Economic Growth in Developing Countries”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 63(2), 153-171.
NATH, Hiranya K. (2005), “Trade, Foreign Direct Investment and Growth: Evidence from Transition Economies”, Sam Houston State University Department of Economics and International Business, Working Paper, No. 05–04.
PEDRONI, Peter (1999), “Critical Values for Cointegration Tests in Heterogeneous Panels with Multiple Regressors”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 61, 653–670.
PEDRONI, Peter (2004), “Panel Cointegration; Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the PPP Hypothesis”, Econometric Theory, Vol. 20, 597–625.
SAMUELSON, Paul A., NORDHAUS, Willam D. (2001), Macroeconomics, Seventeenth Edition, Mc Graw Hill, New York.
SRIDHARAN, P., VIJAYAKUMAR, N., and RAO, C.S.K. (2009), “Causal Relationship between Foreign Direct Investment and Growth: Evidence from BRICS Countries”, International Business Research, 2(4), 198–203.
STOCK, James H., and WASTON, Mark W. (2003), Introduction to Econometrics, Addison-Wesley, Boston USA.