Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

ÇOKLU LOJİSTİK VE ÇOKLU KOŞULLU LOJİSTİK REGRESYON MODELLERİ: AVRUPA BİRLİĞİ ÜYELİĞİ İÇİN MODELLERİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

A COMPARISON OF MULTINOMIAL LOGISTIC AND MULTINOMIAL CONDITIONAL LOGISTIC REGRESSION MODELS IN ASSESSING EUROPEAN UNION MEMBERSHIP

Journal Name:

  • Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2009

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Multinomial logistic (ML) and multinomial conditional logistic (MCL) regression models are used for modeling the relationships between a polytomous response variable and a set of explanatory variables. In this study, key factors affecting the European Union (EU) membership process are determined using ML and MCL models. We compare the ML and MCL models and argue that MCL is more preferable than the more complex ML model. Then for each candidate or potential candidate country, the probability of the accession time for the EU membership is predicted. The findings indicate that human development index, gdp per capita, exports of goods and services are important factors in determining which of the countries will join the EU and when they will do so. Furthermore, the probabilities of the accession time for both candidate and potential candidate countries are predicted as more than six years.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Çoklu lojistik (ÇL) ve çoklu koşullu lojistik (ÇKL) regresyon çözümlemesi modelleri, çok düzeyli cevap değişkeni ile açıklayıcı değişkenler kümesi arasındaki ilişkileri modellemek için kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada, Avrupa Birliği (AB) üyelik sürecini etkileyen temel faktörler ÇL ve ÇKL modelleri kullanılarak belirlenmiştir. ÇL ve ÇKL modelleri karşılaştırılmış ve ÇKL modelinin daha karmaşık olan ÇL modeline tercih edileceği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Daha sonra, her aday ve olası aday ülke için AB'ye üyelik zamanı olasılığı tahmin edilmiştir. Bulgular, insani gelişim indeksi, kişi başına düşen gayri safi milli hasıla, mal ve hizmet ihracatının hangi ülkelerin hangi tarihte AB'ye katılacağını belirlemede önemli faktörler olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca, hem aday hem de olası aday ülkeler için giriş süresinin altı yıldan daha uzun olacağı tahmin edilmiştir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-coklu-lojistik-coklu-kosullu-lojistik-regresyon-modelleri-avrupa-birligi-uyeligi-icin-modellerin-karsilastirilmasi.pdf
  • 2
199-212
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

ARCHICK K, KIM J, 2008. European Union Enlargement, Crs Report for Congress, Belgium, 1-6.
BALDWIN RE, FRANCOIS JF, PORTES R, 1997. The costs and benefits of eastern enlargement: the impact on the EU and Central Europe, Economic Policy, 24, 127¬176.
BARYSCH K, 2003. Does Enlargement Matter for the EU Economy?, Policy Brief,
Centre For European Reform, 1-6. BREUSS F, 2002. Benefits and dangers of EU enlargement, Empirica, 29(3), 245-274.
211
Y. A. ÜNVAN, G. ÖZEL
COCKBURN J, DOSTIE B, 2007. Child work and schooling: the role of household asset profiles and poverty in rural Ethiopia, Journal of African Economies, 16(4), 519-563.
DOYLE O, FIDRMUC J, 2003. Who is in favor of enlargement? Determinants of
Support for EU Membership in the Candidate Countries' Referenda, ZEI/WDI Conference on Political Economy of Transition: Job Creation and Job Destruction, Bonn, 1-30. DRAGAN G, 2007. Romania's accession to EU: Challenges and opportunities, EUIJ Workshop: EU Enlargement and Its Economic Impacts on Transitional Countries,Romania, 1- 24.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2009. Enlargement, Potential Candidate Countries,
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/potential-candidate-countries/index_en.htm. EUROSTAT, 2008. Eurostat Indicators, Statistical Office of the European
Communities, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page? HENDRICKX J, 1995. Multinomial conditional logit models for the analysis of status
attainment and mobility, The Institute of China Studies (ICS) Working Papers, 1,
75-96.
KAUSHAL N, 2005. New immigrants' location choices: magnets without welfare,
Journal of Labor Economics, 23 (1), 59-80. MARTINEZ F, AGUILA F, HURTUBIA R, 2009. The constrained multinomial logit:
A semi-compensatory choice model, Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological
43 (3), 365-377.
NICOLAIDES P, 2003. The Application of EU competition rules to services of general economic interest: How to reduce competitive distortions. Springer Verlag,
Berlin, pp. 88-96.
SHABBIR T, 1993. Multinomial logit model of occupational choice: A latent variable approach, The Pakistan Development Review, 32 (4), 687-698.
TAYLOR MR, 2009. Does Food Safety Information Affect Consumers' Decision to Purchase Meat and Poultry? Evidence from U.S. Household Level Data, School of Economic Sciences Seminar, 27 February,Washington State University, USA, 1-33.
UNDP, 2008. Human Development Report, http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/.
WANNER RA, 2005. Twentieth-century trends in occupational attainment in Canada, The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 30 (4), 441-469.
WOJCIK C, 2000. Alternative models of demand for automobiles, Economics Letters, 68, 113-118.
WORLDBANK, 2008. World Development Indicators (Washington, D.C.: World
Bank), http://www.worldbank.org/data/wdi2003/index.htm

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