KENTLEŞME VE EKONOMİK BÜYÜME İLİŞKİSİNİN EKONOMETRİK ANALİZİ (AB ÜLKELERİ VE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ)
u çalışmanın amacı, Avrupa Birliği’nin 13 Ülkesi ve Türkiye açısından kentleşme ve ekonomik büyüme arasında bir ilişki olup olmadığını, ilişki var ise bu ilişkinin yönünü belirlemektir. Çalışmada, kişi başına GSYH bağımlı değişken, kentleşmeyi temsilen kentsel nüfus yoğunluğu, sanayi, hizmetler sektörü istihdam oranları ve ayrıca modele dahil edilen tarım sektörü istihdam oranı ve genel istihdam oranı bağımsız değişken olarak ele alınmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında oluşturulan modelin değişkenlerine ait 1990-2014 yıllık serileri panel eşbütünleşme yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Panel nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre, hizmetler sektörü istihdam oranı ve sanayi sektörü istihdam oranı ve tarım sektörü istihdam oranı ile kişi başına GSYH arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi vardır. Bununla birlikte kişi başına GSYH’den kentsel nüfus yoğunluğu ve genel istihdam oranına doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi vardır. Ayrıca, DOLS ve FMOLS sonuçlarına göre kentsel nüfus yoğunluğu ve hizmet sektörü istihdam oranındaki artışlar kişi başına GSYH’yi pozitif yönde etkilemektedir. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulgular kentleşme ve ekonomik büyümenin 13 AB ülkesi ve Türkiye’de birbirlerini besleyen süreçler olduğunu göstermektedir
THE ECONOMETRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN URBANISATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH (THE CASE OF EU COUNTRIES AND TURKEY)
The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a relationship between urbanisation and economic growth in terms of 13 European Union Member countries and of Turkey as well as to determine the direction of this relationship, if it exists. In the study, GDP per capita was used as a dependant variable where population density and employment rates of industry and services sectors, which represent the urbanisation, as well as the employment rate of agriculture sector and general employment rate, which were included in our model, were used as independent variables. The annual series of the variables of the model that was created within the scope of the study for the period between 1990-2014 were analysed by panel co-integration method. According to panel causality test, there is a bilateral causality relationship between GDP and employment rates of services, industry, and agriculture sectors. Additionally, there was a unilateral causality relationship from GDP towards urban population density and towards general employment rate. Also, according to the DOLS and FMOLS results, the increases in urban population density and in the employment rate of services sector have a positive effect on GDP per capita. Findings from the study show that urbanisation and economic growth are mutually dependent processes in 13 EU member countries and in Turkey.
___
- Arouri, M., Youssef, A.B., Cuong, N. ve Soucat., A. (2014). Effect of Urbanization on Economic Growth and Human Capital Formation in Africa. Working paper Series No:119, 2-22. The Program on the Global Demography of Aging at Harvard University publishing. Erişim Adresi http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/pgda/working.htm.
- Bala, A. P. (2009). Urban Concentration and Economic Growth: Checking for Specific Regional Effects. CORE Discussion Paper, 38, 1-43.
- Baltagi, B. H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
- Berke, B., Özcan, B. ve Dizdarlar, H. I. ( 2014). Döviz Piyasasının Etkinliği: Türkiye için Bir Analiz. Akademik Bakış, 14(4), 621-636.
- Bertinelli, L. ve Black, D. (2004). Urbanization and Growth. Journal of Urban Economics, 56(1), 80-96.
- Bertinelli, L. ve Strobl, E. (2003). Urbanization, Urban Concentration and Economic Growth in Developing Countries. Core Discussıon Paper (C76), 1-24.
- Castells, D. ve Royuela, V. (2013). Malthus Living in a Slum: Urban Concentration, Infrastructures and Economic Growth. Smart Regionsfor a Smarter Growth Strategy, 21(22), 2-22.
- Black, D. ve Henderson, V. (1999). A Theory of Urban Growth. Journal of Political Economy, 107(2), 252-282.
- Chen, M., Zhang, H., Liu, W. ve Zhang, W. (2014). The Global Pattern of Urbanization and Economic Growth: Evidence from the Last Three Decades. PLoS ONE, 9(8), 3-34.
- Cheng, C. (2012). A Study of Dynamic Econometric Relationship between Urbanization and Service Industries Growth in China. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, 6(1), 8-15.
- Cohen, B. (2006). Urbanization in Developing Countries: Current Trends, Future Projections, and Key Challenges for Sustainability. Technology in Society, 28, 63-80.
- Dimou, M. ve Schaffar, A. (2014). Urban Trends and Economic Development in China: Geography Matters!, Current Urban Studies, 2, 163-167.
- Farahmand, S., Sameti, M. ve Sasan, S. S. (2010). Does the Development Level Influence the Relationship between Economic Growth and Urban Gardner, B. L. (2005). Causes of Rural Economic Development. Agricultural Economics, 32(1), 21-41.
- Henderson, V. (2002). Urbanization in Developing Countries. The World Bank Research Observer, 17(1), 89-112.
- Henderson, V. (2003). The Urbanization Process and Economic Growth: The so-what Question. Journal of Economic Growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(1), 47-71.
- Hoang, N. T. ve Mcnown, R. F. (2006). Panel Data Unit Roots Tests Using Various Estimation Methods. University of Colorado Publishing, Erişim Adresi http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.566.1129&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
- Huang, M., Hu, S. ve Su, X. (2013). Exploring the Relation between the Urbanization and Urban Employment in China Based on Panel Data and Time Series. Ninth International Conference on Natural Computation (ICNC), 1814-1819.
- Dumitrescu, E. ve Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger Non-causality in Heterogeneous Panels. Economic Modelling, 29(2012), 1450–1460.
- 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. ve Chu, C.-S. J. (2002). Unit Root Tests in Panel Data:Asymptotic and Nite-Sample Properties. Journal of Econometrics , 108(1), 1-24.
- Lewis, B. D. (2014). Urbanization and Economic Growth in Indonesia:Good News, Bad News and (Possible) Local Government Mitigation. Regional Studies, 48(1), 192-200.
- Liddle, B. ve Messinis, G. (2014). Which Comes First Urbanization or Economic Growth? Evidence from Heterogeneous Panel Causality Tests. Applied Economics Letters, 22(5), 349-355.
- Moomaw, R. L. ve Shatter, A. M. (1996). Urbanization and Economic Development: A Bias toward Large Cities? Journal Of Urban Economics, 40, 13-37.
- Phillips, P. ve Hansen, B. (1990). Statistical Inference in Instrumental Variables Regression with I(1) Processes. Review of Economic Studies, 57, 99-125.
- Shabu, T. (2010). The Relationship Between Urbanizatıon And Economic Development In Developıng Countrıes. International Journal of Economic Development Research and Investment, 1, 30-36.
- Stock, J. ve Watson, M. W. (1993). A Simple Estimator of Cointegrating Vectors in Higher Order Integrated Systems. Econometrica, 61(4), 783–820.
- Tatoğlu, F. Y. (2013). İleri Panel Veri Analizi (Stata Uygulamalı). İstanbul: Beta Basım A.Ş.
- Westerlund, J. (2008). Panel Cointegratıon Tests of the Fisher Effect. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 23, 193–233.
- Wheaton, W. ve Shishido, H. (1981). Urban Concentration, Agglomeration Economies and Economic Development. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 30, 17-30
- ISSN: 1307-9832
- Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
- Başlangıç: 2008
- Yayıncı: Kenan ÇELİK
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler
KENTLEŞME VE EKONOMİK BÜYÜME İLİŞKİSİNİN EKONOMETRİK ANALİZİ (AB ÜLKELERİ VE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ)
Ali Rıza SANDALCILAR, Önder DİLEK
GEÇİŞ EKONOMİLERİNDE YOLSUZLUĞUN DYY ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİ: PANEL VERİ ANALİZİ
DOĞU ASYA’DA İHRACATA DAYALI BÜYÜME VE İÇ TALEP ÇEKİŞLİ BÜYÜME HİPOTEZLERİNİN AMPİRİK ANALİZİ