Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Yolsuzluk ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi ile Bir İnceleme

Year 2023, Volume: 5 Issue: Özel Sayı, 273 - 289, 18.08.2023

Nazmiye Tekdemir

https://doi.org/10.47103/bilturk.1324117

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın hazırlanmasındaki temel güdü ulusal ve uluslararası boyutta önemli bir gündem olan yolsuzluk ile kamu kesimi büyüklüğü arasındaki karşılıklı nedensellik ilişkisinin yönünü tespit etmektir. Bu çerçevede 1996-2021 yılları arasında verilerine ulaşılabilen 24 Avrupa ülkesi için yolsuzluğun kamu kesimi büyüklüğünü açıkladığı ve kamu kesimi büyüklüğünün yolsuzluğu açıkladığı 2 ayrı modelde tahminler yürütülmüştür. Sonuç olarak gerek eş bütünleşme testinde gerekse nedensellik analizinde kamu kesimi büyüklüğünden yolsuzluğa doğru bir ilişkinin olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Diğer bir ifadeyle ilişkinin yönünün kamu kesimi büyüklüğünden yolsuzluğa doğru olduğu doğrulanmıştır. Buna karşın elde edilen bulgular neticesinde yolsuzluktan kamu kesimi büyüklüğüne doğru ne kısa dönemli ne de uzun dönemli bir ilişkinin varlığı saptanamamıştır. Bu çerçevede kamusal politikaların yönlendirilmesinde, kamu kesiminin yolsuzluklar üzerindeki belirleyiciliğini belirginleştiren bu tahmin sonuçlarının dikkate alınması önem arz etmektedir.

Keywords

Yolsuzluk Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü Panel Veri

Supporting Institution

Doç. Dr. Hilmi Çoban özel sayısı

Thanks

Emekleriniz ve ince düşünceniz için teşekkürlerimi sunuyorum

References

  • Acemoglu, D., & Verdier, T. (2000). The choice between market failures and corruption. American economic review, 91(1), 194-211.
  • Alesina, A., & Angeletos, G.-M. (2005). Corruption, inequality, and fairness. Journal of Monetary Economics, 52, s. 1227–1244.
  • Arvate, P. R., Curi, A., & Rocha , F. (2010). Corruption and the size of government: causality tests for OECD and Latin American countries. Applied Economics Letters, 17(10).
  • Bel, G. (2022). Beyond government size: Types of government intervention and corruption. Regulation & Governance, 16(4), s. 1174-1196.
  • Bird, R. M., Martinez-Vazquez, J., & Torgler, B. (2006). Societal institutions and tax effort in developing countries. The challenges of tax reform in a global economy, 283.
  • Billger, S. M., & Goel , R. (2009). Do existing corruption levels matter in controlling corruption? Cross-country quantile regression estimates. Journal of Development Economics, 90, s. 299–305.
  • Dreher, A., & Schneider, F. (2006). Corruption and the shadow economy: an empirical analysis. CESifo Working Paper No. 1653.
  • Dumitrescu, E. I. & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
  • Elliott, K. A. (2017). Corruption as an international policy problem. In Political Corruption (pp. 925-942). Routledge.
  • Enste, D. H., & Heldman, C. (2017). Causes and consequences of corruption: An overview of empirical results. 4 30, 2023 tarihinde https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/157204/1/IW-Report-2017-02.pdf adresinden alındı
  • Goel, R. K., & Budak , J. (2006). Corruption in transition economies: Effects of government size, country size and economic reforms. Journal of Economics and Finance, 30(2), s. 240-250.
  • Goel, R. K., & Nelson , M. (1998). Corruption and government size: A disaggregated analysis. Public Choice, 97, s. 107–120.
  • Goel, R. K., & Nelson, M. (2010). Causes of Corruption: History, Geography and Government. Journal of Policy Modeling, 32, 433–447.
  • Gupta, S., Davoodi, H., & Alonso-Terme, R. (1998). Does Corruption Affect Income Inequality and Poverty? IMF Working Paper.
  • Güran, M. C. (2001). Etkin Devlet ve Türkiye. H.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 199-218.
  • Gwartney, J., Lawson, R., ve Holcombe, R. (1998). The size and functions of government and economic growth. Washington: Joint Economic Committee, 1-32.
  • IMF. (2021). World Economic Outlook Database. Erişim 30 Nisan 2023, https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2021/April/download-entire-database
  • Kotera, G., Okada, K., & Samreth, S. (2010). A study on the relationship between corruption and government size: the role of democracy. Munich Personal RePEc Archive, s. 1-19.
  • Kotera, G., Okada, K., & Samreth, S. (2012). Government size democracy and corruption: An empirical investigation. Economic Modelling, 29(6), s. 2340–2348.
  • Krueger, A. O. (1974). The political economy of the rent-seeking society. The American economic review, 64(3), 291-303.
  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1999). The quality of government. 15(1), s. 222–279.
  • Niskanen, W.A. (1971) Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
  • Ondo, A. (2017). Corruption and Economic Growth: The Case of EMCCA. Theoretical Economics Letters, s. 1292-1305.
  • Ott, J. (2018). Measuring economic freedom: Better without size of government. Social Indicators Research, 135(2), 479-498.
  • Pesaran M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. IZA Discussion Paper Series, No: 1240.
  • Pesaran M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265-312.
  • Persson, A., & Rothstein, B. (2015). It's my money: Why big government may be good government. Comparative Politics, 47(2), s. 231–249.
  • Rothstein B, Teorell JA (2008) What Is Quality of Government? A Theory of Impartial Government Institutions. Governance 21(2), 165–190.
  • Schneider, F. (2006), “Shadow Economies and Corruption All Over the World: What Do We Really Know?”, Discussion Paper No. 231.
  • Schneider, F., Buehn, A., & Montenegro, C. E. (2010). Policy Research Working Paper 5356. Policy. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1993). Corruption. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 599–617. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2118402
  • Themudo, N. S. (2014). Government Size, Nonprofit Sector Strength, and Corruption: A Cross-National Examination. American Review of Public Administration, 44(3), s. 309–323.
  • Torgler, B. & F. Schneider (2007), “Shadow Economy, Tax Morale,Governance And Institutional Quality: A Panel Analysis”, CESifo Working Paper No. 1923.
  • Tosun, U. (2001). Yolsuzluk Olgusuna Yönelik Yapılan Ampirik Çalışmalar Üzerine Notlar. H.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 97-122.
  • Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69: 709–748.
  • Williams, C. C., & Schneider, F. (2013). The Shadow Economy. The Institute of Economic Affairs.
  • World Bank. (2021). The Worldwide Governance Indicators. Erişim: 30 Nisan 2023, https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/

Year 2023, Volume: 5 Issue: Özel Sayı, 273 - 289, 18.08.2023

Nazmiye Tekdemir

https://doi.org/10.47103/bilturk.1324117

Abstract

References

  • Acemoglu, D., & Verdier, T. (2000). The choice between market failures and corruption. American economic review, 91(1), 194-211.
  • Alesina, A., & Angeletos, G.-M. (2005). Corruption, inequality, and fairness. Journal of Monetary Economics, 52, s. 1227–1244.
  • Arvate, P. R., Curi, A., & Rocha , F. (2010). Corruption and the size of government: causality tests for OECD and Latin American countries. Applied Economics Letters, 17(10).
  • Bel, G. (2022). Beyond government size: Types of government intervention and corruption. Regulation & Governance, 16(4), s. 1174-1196.
  • Bird, R. M., Martinez-Vazquez, J., & Torgler, B. (2006). Societal institutions and tax effort in developing countries. The challenges of tax reform in a global economy, 283.
  • Billger, S. M., & Goel , R. (2009). Do existing corruption levels matter in controlling corruption? Cross-country quantile regression estimates. Journal of Development Economics, 90, s. 299–305.
  • Dreher, A., & Schneider, F. (2006). Corruption and the shadow economy: an empirical analysis. CESifo Working Paper No. 1653.
  • Dumitrescu, E. I. & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
  • Elliott, K. A. (2017). Corruption as an international policy problem. In Political Corruption (pp. 925-942). Routledge.
  • Enste, D. H., & Heldman, C. (2017). Causes and consequences of corruption: An overview of empirical results. 4 30, 2023 tarihinde https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/157204/1/IW-Report-2017-02.pdf adresinden alındı
  • Goel, R. K., & Budak , J. (2006). Corruption in transition economies: Effects of government size, country size and economic reforms. Journal of Economics and Finance, 30(2), s. 240-250.
  • Goel, R. K., & Nelson , M. (1998). Corruption and government size: A disaggregated analysis. Public Choice, 97, s. 107–120.
  • Goel, R. K., & Nelson, M. (2010). Causes of Corruption: History, Geography and Government. Journal of Policy Modeling, 32, 433–447.
  • Gupta, S., Davoodi, H., & Alonso-Terme, R. (1998). Does Corruption Affect Income Inequality and Poverty? IMF Working Paper.
  • Güran, M. C. (2001). Etkin Devlet ve Türkiye. H.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(1), 199-218.
  • Gwartney, J., Lawson, R., ve Holcombe, R. (1998). The size and functions of government and economic growth. Washington: Joint Economic Committee, 1-32.
  • IMF. (2021). World Economic Outlook Database. Erişim 30 Nisan 2023, https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2021/April/download-entire-database
  • Kotera, G., Okada, K., & Samreth, S. (2010). A study on the relationship between corruption and government size: the role of democracy. Munich Personal RePEc Archive, s. 1-19.
  • Kotera, G., Okada, K., & Samreth, S. (2012). Government size democracy and corruption: An empirical investigation. Economic Modelling, 29(6), s. 2340–2348.
  • Krueger, A. O. (1974). The political economy of the rent-seeking society. The American economic review, 64(3), 291-303.
  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1999). The quality of government. 15(1), s. 222–279.
  • Niskanen, W.A. (1971) Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
  • Ondo, A. (2017). Corruption and Economic Growth: The Case of EMCCA. Theoretical Economics Letters, s. 1292-1305.
  • Ott, J. (2018). Measuring economic freedom: Better without size of government. Social Indicators Research, 135(2), 479-498.
  • Pesaran M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. IZA Discussion Paper Series, No: 1240.
  • Pesaran M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 265-312.
  • Persson, A., & Rothstein, B. (2015). It's my money: Why big government may be good government. Comparative Politics, 47(2), s. 231–249.
  • Rothstein B, Teorell JA (2008) What Is Quality of Government? A Theory of Impartial Government Institutions. Governance 21(2), 165–190.
  • Schneider, F. (2006), “Shadow Economies and Corruption All Over the World: What Do We Really Know?”, Discussion Paper No. 231.
  • Schneider, F., Buehn, A., & Montenegro, C. E. (2010). Policy Research Working Paper 5356. Policy. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1993). Corruption. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3), 599–617. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2118402
  • Themudo, N. S. (2014). Government Size, Nonprofit Sector Strength, and Corruption: A Cross-National Examination. American Review of Public Administration, 44(3), s. 309–323.
  • Torgler, B. & F. Schneider (2007), “Shadow Economy, Tax Morale,Governance And Institutional Quality: A Panel Analysis”, CESifo Working Paper No. 1923.
  • Tosun, U. (2001). Yolsuzluk Olgusuna Yönelik Yapılan Ampirik Çalışmalar Üzerine Notlar. H.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(2), 97-122.
  • Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69: 709–748.
  • Williams, C. C., & Schneider, F. (2013). The Shadow Economy. The Institute of Economic Affairs.
  • World Bank. (2021). The Worldwide Governance Indicators. Erişim: 30 Nisan 2023, https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/
There are 36 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Microeconomics (Other)
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Nazmiye Tekdemir 0000-0002-7292-569X

Publication Date August 18, 2023
Acceptance Date July 14, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 5 Issue: Özel Sayı

Cite

APA Tekdemir, N. (2023). Yolsuzluk ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi ile Bir İnceleme. BİLTÜRK Journal of Economics and Related Studies, 5(Özel Sayı), 273-289. https://doi.org/10.47103/bilturk.1324117
AMA Tekdemir N. Yolsuzluk ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi ile Bir İnceleme. BILTURK. August 2023;5(Özel Sayı):273-289. doi:10.47103/bilturk.1324117
Chicago Tekdemir, Nazmiye. “Yolsuzluk Ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi Ile Bir İnceleme”. BİLTÜRK Journal of Economics and Related Studies 5, no. Özel Sayı (August 2023): 273-89. https://doi.org/10.47103/bilturk.1324117.
EndNote Tekdemir N (August 1, 2023) Yolsuzluk ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi ile Bir İnceleme. BİLTÜRK Journal of Economics and Related Studies 5 Özel Sayı 273–289.
IEEE N. Tekdemir, “Yolsuzluk ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi ile Bir İnceleme”, BILTURK, vol. 5, no. Özel Sayı, pp. 273–289, 2023, doi: 10.47103/bilturk.1324117.
ISNAD Tekdemir, Nazmiye. “Yolsuzluk Ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi Ile Bir İnceleme”. BİLTÜRK Journal of Economics and Related Studies 5/Özel Sayı (August 2023), 273-289. https://doi.org/10.47103/bilturk.1324117.
JAMA Tekdemir N. Yolsuzluk ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi ile Bir İnceleme. BILTURK. 2023;5:273–289.
MLA Tekdemir, Nazmiye. “Yolsuzluk Ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi Ile Bir İnceleme”. BİLTÜRK Journal of Economics and Related Studies, vol. 5, no. Özel Sayı, 2023, pp. 273-89, doi:10.47103/bilturk.1324117.
Vancouver Tekdemir N. Yolsuzluk ve Kamu Kesimi Büyüklüğü: Panel Nedensellik Analizi ile Bir İnceleme. BILTURK. 2023;5(Özel Sayı):273-89.
 Download Cover Image

 13294       13362     13366       13368         13372        13374      13376       13378    


 13379     13380      13382        13383       13384   14686      

88x31.png BILTÜRK Journal of Economics and Related Studies Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) altında çalışmaktadır.