You are here

Home » Content

KALDOR YASASI ÇERÇEVESİNDE TÜRKİYE’DE SANAYİ SEKTÖRÜ VE İKTİSADİ BÜYÜME İLİŞKİSİNİN SINANMASI

Testing for the Relationship Between Industrial Sector and Economic Growth in the Context of Kaldor Hypothesis: The Case for Turkey

Journal Name:

  • Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
This study, unlike the previous studies dealing with Kaldor’s engine of economic growth hypotheses, provides an outline of Kaldor's growth model and tests its relevance to the economic experience of Turkey during the period 1963- 2005 by using recent cointegration and causality tests. Kaldor's first law states that manufacturing is the engine of economic growth, whereas the second proposition, also known as Verdoorn's law, asserts that there is a strong positive casual relationship between manufacturing productivity growth and output growth, due to static and dynamic increasing returns to scale. Kaldor's third law purports that overall growth is positively correlated to employment growth in manufacturing output, and negatively correlated to employment in non-manufacturing sectors. The empirical results, regardless of the specification and estimation techniques employed, suggest that the models can partly explain the developments in the economy to a certain degree.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmanın amacı Kaldor Yasasını tanıtarak bu yasanın Türkiye ekonomisi için ampirik geçerliliğini 1963-2005 dönemine ilişkin verilerle daha önceki çalışmalardan farklı olarak güncel eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik yöntemlerle sınamaktır. Kaldorun birinci yasası imalat sanayinin ekonomik büyümenin motoru olduğunu belirtirken; Verdoorn yasası olarakta bilinen ikinci yasası sanayi sektöründeki işgücü verimliliği ile üretim miktarı arasında pozitif bir ilişki olduğunu ima etmektedir. Kaldor’un üçüncü yasası, sanayi sektöründe işgücü verimliliği ile üretim miktarı arasında pozitif, ancak sanayi sektörü dışındaki diğer sektörlerde işgücü verimliliği ile üretim miktarı ve istihdam hacmi arasında negatif bir ilişki olduğunu varsaymaktadır. Analiz sonuçları kısmen de olsa Kaldor Yasasını destekleyici bulgular sunmaktadır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastrmx_14926_8_pp_.pdf
  • 1
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Ateşoğlu, H.S. (1993), "Manufacturing and Economic Growth in the United States",
Applied Economics, 25, 67-69.
Bairam, E. (1987), “The Verdoorn law, returns to scale and industrial growth: a
review of the literature”, Australian Economic Papers, June, 20–44.
Bairam, E. (1991), "Economic Growth and Kaldor’s Law: The Case of Turkey", Applied
Economics, 23, 1277-1280.
Choi, Kwang. (1983) “Theories of Comparative Economic Growth”, Iowa State
University Press, Ames, Iowa
Cripps, T.F. and Roger J.Tarling (1973),”Growth in Advanced Capitalist Economies
1950–70”, Occasional Paper 40, Cambridge University Pres.
Diaz-Bautista, A. (2003), ”Mexico’s Industrial Engine of Growth: Cointegration and
Causality” www.ejournal.unam.mx/momento_economico/no126/MOE12605.pdf
(Erişim: 07.06.2007)
Drakopolous, S.A and I.T. Theododiou (1991) “Kaldorian Approach to Greek Economic
Growth” Applied Economics, 23, 1683-1689.
Harris, R. I. D. and A. Liu (1999), “Verdoorn's Law and Increasing Returns to Scale:
Country Estimates Based on the Cointegration Approach”, Applied Economics
Letters, 6(1).
Johansen, S., R., Mosconi, and B. Nielsen (2000), “Cointegration analysis in the
presence of structural breaks in the deterministic trend”, Econometrics Journal, 3,
216–249.
Kaldor, N. (1966), Causes of the Slow Rate of Economic Growth in the United
Kingdom: An Inaugural Lecture (London: Cambridge University Press).
Kaldor, N. (1968), “Productivity and Growth in Manufacturing Industry: a reply”,
Economica, 35, 385-391.
Kaldor, N. (1975), “Economic Growth and the Verdoorn Law – A Comment on Mr.
Rowthorn’s Article”, Economic Journal, 85, 891–6.
Leybourne, S. and P. Newbold (2003), “Spurious rejections by cointegration tests
induced by structural breaks”, Applied Economics, 35(9).
Mamgain, V. (1999), “Are the Kaldor–Verdoorn Laws Applicable In The Newly Industrializing
Countries”, Review of Development Economics, 3(3).
Mccombie, J.S.L. (1982), ”Economic Growth, Kaldor’s Laws And The Static-
Dynamic Verdoorn Law Paradox”, Applied Economics, 14, 279–94.
ESKİŞEHİR OSMANGAZİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ İİBF DERGİSİ
162
Mccombie, J.S.L. (1983), “Kaldor's Laws In Retrospect”, Journal of Post Keynesian
Economics, Vol:5, 414-429.
Mccombie, J.S.L. and A.P. Thirlwall (1994), Economic Growth and the Balance-of-
Payment Constraint (London: St Martin’s Press).
Millin, Mark and T. Nichola, (2005), “Explaining Economic Growth in South Africa:
A Kaldorian Approach”, International Journal of Technology Management and
Sustainable Development, Volume 4 Number 1, 47-62
Necmi, S. (1999), “Kaldor’s Growth Analysis Revisited”, Applied Economics, 31,
Perron, P. (1997), “Further Evidence from Breaking Trend Functions in Macroeconomic
Variables”, Journal of Econometrics, 80, 355-385.
Stoneman, P. (1979), “Kaldor’s law and British Economic Growth: 1800-1970”,
Applied Economics, Vol. 11, pp. 309-319.
Şimşek, M. (1995), “Türkiye’de İmalat Sanayi Üretimiyle Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki
İlişkinin Kaldor Yaklaşımı İle Analizi”, Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari
Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt XI, Sayı 1-2, ss.141-156.
Terzi, H. ve Oltulular, S. (2004), “Türkiye’de Sanayileşme ve Ekonomik Büyüme
Arasındaki Nedensel İlişki”, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 5(2),
Thirlwall, A.P.(1983), “A Plain Man's Guide To Kaldor's Growth Laws”, Journal of
Post Keynesian Economics,Vol:5, 345-358
Yamak, N. (2000), “Cointegration, Causality and Kaldor's Hypothesis:Evidence
from Turkey,1946-1995”, Gazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, Cilt:2, Sayı:1
Yamak, R. ve Sivri, U. (1997),”Ekonomik Büyüme ve Kaldor Yasası: Türkiye Örneği”,
İktisat, İşletme ve Finans Dergisi, Sayı: 12 / 139, s. 9-21.
Zivot, E. and Donald W. K. Andrews, (1992). “Further Evidence on Great Crash, the
Oil-Price Shock, and Unit-Root Hypothesis,” Journal of the Business and Economic
Statistics, 10, 251-270.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com