In Turkey, The Relationship of Agricultural Sector and Economic Variables: Panel Cointegration Analysis

hat agricultural sector is examined closer from every point of view and is restructured in complied with the requirements of the age has to be structured comes to our face as a reality any longer accepted by every sector of the society. The various developments experienced in the world in the recent years have directly or indirectly affected agricultural sector. In the economy of Turkey, one of the countries attracting attention with its rapidly growing, there are many theoretical studies dealing with the direct or indirect contribution of agricultural sector.However, it is necessary to increasethe number oftheapplied studies introducing the existing situation of thesector and enabling to develop the effective policies for the sector. For, it is highly important for the theories put forward in theoretical framework to be supported by empirical analyses in terms of forming effective policy suggestions.In the study, the three sub-sectors were considered such as the subsectors of cereal, legume, and fruit-vegetable and the existing situation of the sector was analyzed by moving from the macro variables. In order to identify the effects of macroeconomic variables (inflation, exchange rate, interest, monetary supply), selected in the direction of the aim of the study, panel cointegration test was utilized. Setting off from this point, when the analysis made in the study is examined for all sectors, it was identified that the variable affecting the sector the most was interest rate. When the results of panel cointegration test between interest rate and agricultural production were examined, while there was a negative directional relationship between the production of subsector “fruit vegetable” and the variable “interest” as expected,it attracts attention that therewas a positive relationship between the subsector of cereal legume and interest in contrast to this.

PDF

___

AktanCoşkun C. 2003. “Türkiye’de Üretim ve İstihdamaYönelik Ulusal Rekabet Gücü Politikası”. Ekonomi Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt 2, No 2, 2010 ISSN: 1309-8020 (Online), 166-197.

Altunoğlu Y.2009. Emisyon Hacmi: Temel Belirleyiciler ve Tahmin modeli. Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası Emisyon Genel Müdürlügü Uzmanlık tezi, Eylül, Ankara.

ChambersC. 1984. “Agricultural and Financial Market Interdependence in the Short Run”. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 66 (1):12-24.

ÇınarS. 2011. “Gelir ve CO2 Emisyonu İlişkisi: Panel Birim Kök veEşbütünleşme Testi”. Uludağ Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. Uludağ Journal of Economy And Society.30(2):71-83.

Güvenek B, AlptekinV, Çetinkaya M. 2010. Enflasyon ve Dolaylı Vergilerden Elde Edilen Gelirler Arasındakiİlişkinin VAR Yöntemiyle Analizi”. Kamu-İş; C:11,1-28.

KökR,Şimşek N. 2006. “Endüstri-içi Dış Ticaret, patentler ve uluslararası teknolojik yayılma, http://www.deu.edu.tr/userweb/recep.kok/dosyalar/eidtpatentyayilma.pdf. (Erişim Tarihi: 12.06.2019).

KökR, İspir SM,Arı A. 2010. “Zengin Ülkelerden Azgelişmiş Ülkelere Kaynak Aktarma Mekanizmasının Gerekliliği ve Evrensel Bölüşüm Parametresi Üzerine Bir Deneme”. http://kisi.deu.edu.tr/recep.kok/Zengin_ispir.pdf

Levin A, LinC, ChuJ. 2002. “Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties”. Journal of Econometrics. 108(1):1-24.

MaddalaGS, WuS.1999. “A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data a New Simple Test”. Oxford Economic Bulletin ofEconomics and Statistics. 61:631-652.

ÖnderT. 2005. “Para Politikası: Araçları ve Türkiye Uygulaması”. Uzmanlık Tezi, Türkiye Cumhuriyet Merkez Bankası Piyasalar Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara.

PedroniP. 2000. “Fully Modified OLS for Heterogeneous Cointegrated Panel”, In:Baltagi, B.H. (Ed.).Nonstationary Panel. Panel Cointegration and DynamicPanels, Advances in Econometrics.15. 93–130.

PedroniP. 2000. “Fully Modified OLS for Heterogeneous Cointegrated Panel”, In:Baltagi, B.H. (Ed.).Nonstationary Panel. Panel Cointegration and DynamicPanels, Advances in Econometrics.15. 93–130.

PedroniP. 2001. “Purchasing Power Parity Tests in Cointegrated Panels”.Review of Economics and Statistics. 83:727-931.

PedroniP. 2004.“Panel Cointegration, Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties of Pooled Time Series Tests with an Application to the Purchasing Power Parity Hypothesis”. Econometric Theory. 20(3):597-625.

PesaranHM.2004. “General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels”.Cambridge Working Papers in Economics.

PorterM. 1990. “The Competitive Advantage of Nation”., Harvard Business Review. IMF World Economic Outlook.

ŞakN. 2006. OECD Ülkelerinde Satınalma Gücü Paritesinin Geçerliliğinin Panel Eşbütünleşme Yaklaşımı ile İncelenmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Marmara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.

StarleafDİ, MeyersW,WomackA.1985. “The Impact Of Inflation On The Real Income of U.S. Farmers”. American Journal of AgriculturalEconomics. 67(2):384-389.

TatoğluF. 2012. Panel Veri Ekonometrisi (1. Baskı). Beta Yayınları, İstanbul.

TegeneA.1990. “The Impact of Macrovariables on the Farm Sector: Some Further Evidence”.Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics. 22(1):77-85.

WesterlundJ, David E. 2007. “Panel Bootstrap Cointegration Test”.. Economics Letters. 97:185-190.