The Relationship Between Democracy, Environment and Economic Growth in Turkey
Abstract views: 115
/ 
PDF downloads: 64
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10459376Keywords:
Economic growth, Democracy, Environment, Hatemi-J cointegration, FMOLSAbstract
With the information society, it has been observed that although physical capital provides economic growth, it is not sufficient alone to make this growth sustainable. The aim of this study is to empirically reveal the impact of environmental and democratic variables that may affect economic growth other than physical capital on economic growth in Turkey. The study covers annual data from 2006 to 2022 due to data limitations. GDP and GDP per capita are used as indicators of economic growth, CO2 emissions per capita are used as indicators of environmental variables, and an index consisting of the sum of 8 different indicators is used as a democracy variable. While the existence of a long-run relationship is examined by Hatemi-J cointegration analysis, the FMOLS coefficient estimator is used to express this relationship numerically. The findings empirically reveal that there is a long-run relationship between democracy, environment and economic growth, while there is a weak relationship between democracy and economic growth and a strong relationship between environment and economic growth in Turkey.
Downloads
References
Acaravcı, A. ve Erdoğan S. (2015). Türkiye’de demokrasi, reel gelir ve dışa açıklık arasındaki uzun dönemli ve nedensel ilişkiler. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(31), 358-370.
Acemoglu, D., Naidu, S., Restrepo, P., ve Robinson, J. A. (2019). Democracy does cause growth. Journal of Political Economy, 127(1), 47-100.
Altay, H. ve Çelebioğlu F. (2011). Spatial analysis of relations among democracy, economic freedom and economik growth: A research on the European countries. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(2), 219-234.
Barış, S. ve Erdoğmuş, M. (2018). 21. yüzyılda demokrasi ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Bir literatür incelemesi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 9(20), 83-102.
Başar, S. ve Yıldız, Ş. (2012). İktisadi büyümenin demokratikleşmeye etkisi üzerine bir araştırma. Kafkas Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(3), 9-38.
Benhabib, J., Corvalan, A., ve Spiegel, M. M. (2013). Income and democracy: Evidence from nonlinear estimations. Economics Letters, 118(3), 489-492.
Beşkaya, A. ve Manan, Ö. (2009). Ekonomik özgürlükler ve demokrasi ile ekonomik performans arasındaki ilişkinin zaman serileri ile analizi: Türkiye örneği. ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(10), 47-76.
Bilecen, H. ve Kibis, E. Y. (2012). Economic growth and democracy in Turkey. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(20), 137-155.
Drury, A. C., Krieckhaus, J. ve Lusztig, M. (2006). Corruption, democracy, and economic growth. International Political Science Review, 27(2), 121-136.
Engle, R. F., ve Granger, C. W. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 251-276.
Erkuş, S. & Karamelikli, H. (2016) . Türkiye’de Demokrasi ve İktisadi Büyüme Arasındaki Uzun Dönemli İlişki. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/SefaErkus/publication/308779726
Freedom House.(2023). Data. https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world#Data
Gregory, A. W., ve Hansen, B. E. (1996). Residual-based tests for cointegration in models with regime shifts. Journal of econometrics, 70(1), 99-126.
Hatemi-J, A. (2008). Tests for cointegration with two unknown regime shifts with an application to financial market integration. Empirical Economics, 35(3), 497-505.
Hayaloğlu, P. (2015). MINT ülkelerinde demokrasi ekonomik büyümeyi nasıl etkilemektedir?. Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Yenilikler Dergisi, 1(1), 17-29.
Jamali, K., Wandschneider, K., ve Wunnava, P. V. (2007). The effect of political regimes and technology on economic growth. Applied Economics, 39(11), 1425-1432.
Jaunky, V. C. (2013). Democracy and economic growth in Sub-Saharan Africa: A panel data approach. Empirical Economics, 45(2), 987-1008.
Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(2-3), 231-254.
Johansen, S. (1991). Estimation and hypothesis testing of cointegration vectors in Gaussian vector autoregressive models. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1551-1580.
Karaca, C. (2012). Ekonomik kalkınma ve çevre kirliliği ilişkisi: Gelişmekte olan ülkeler üzerine ampirik bir analiz. ÇÜ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 21(3), 139-156.
Keskin, F. B. A. (2023). Çok partili hayata geçişin sosyolojisi. SDE akademi dergisi, 3(1), 57-77.
Lee, J., ve Strazicich, M. C. (2003). Minimum lagrange multiplier unit root test with two structural breaks. Review of economics and statistics, 85(4), 1082-1089.
Lumsdaine, R. L., ve Papell, D. H. (1997). Multiple trend breaks and the unit-root hypothesis. Review of economics and Statistics, 79(2), 212-218.
Maki, D. (2012). Tests for cointegration allowing for an unknown number of breaks. Economic Modelling, 29(5), 2011-2015.
Masaki, T., ve Van de Walle, N. (2014). The impact of democracy on economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa. WIDER Working Paper, 1982-2012.
Oliva, M. A., ve Rivera‐Batiz, L. A. (2002). Political institutions, capital flows, and developing country growth: An empirical investigation. Review of Development Economics, 6(2), 248-262.
Önder, F. (2023). Türkiye’de demokrasi ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisinin ampirik analizi. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences, 22(Cumhuriyet'in 100. Yılı Özel Sayısı), 386-398.
Özdemir, B. (2009). Küresel kirlenme sürdürülebilir ekonomik büyüme ve çevre vergileri. Maliye Dergisi, 156(1), 1-36.
Papaioannou, E., ve Siourounis, G. (2008). Democratisation and growth. The Economic Journal, 118(532), 1520-1551.
Phillips, P. C., ve Hansen, B. E. (1990). Statistical inference in instrumental variables regression with I (1) processes. The Review of Economic Studies, 57(1), 99-125.
Rachdi, H., ve Saidi, H. (2015). Democracy and economic growth: Evidence in MENA countries. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 616-621.
Razmi M. J. ve Refaei R. (2013). The effect of trade openness and economic freedom on economic growth: The case of middle east and east asian countries. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 3(2), 376-385.
Saatcioğlu, C. ve Karaca, O. (2015). İktisadi kalkınmanın demokrasi üzerindeki etkisi: Panel veri analizi. Atatürk Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 29(4), 775-796.
Sucu, M. B. (2017). Yükselen piyasa ekonomilerinde ekonomik özgürlük, büyüme ve kalkınma ilişkisi: Bir panel veri analizi. Bulletin of Economic Theory and Analysis, 2(2), 135-167.
Şahin, İ. (2016). Türkiye’de 1980-2015 yılları arası demokrasi, ekonomik özgürlük ve yolsuzlukların ekonomik büyümeye etkileri. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 6 (2), 317-334.
Şahin, Y. (2000). Ekonomik büyüme-çevre ilişkisi üzerine bir değerlendirme. Mülkiye, 220(24), 339-347.
Tavares, J. ve Wacziarg, R. (2001). How democracy affects growth. European Economic Review, 45, 1341-1378.
Ulucak, R. ve Erdem, E. (2012). Çevre-İktisat ilişkisi ve Türkiye’de çevre politikalarının etkinliği. Akademik Araştırmalar ve Çalışmalar Dergisi, 6(4), 78-98.
Williams, K. (2017). Does democracy dampen the effect of finance on economic growth?. Empirical Economics, 52(2), 635-658.
World Bank. (2023). Çevre Göstergeleri, www.databank.worldbak.com
World Bank. (2023). Kalkınma Göstergeleri, www.databank.worldbak.com
Zivot, E., ve Andrews, D. W. (1992). Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. Journal of business & economic statistics, 251-270.
Zouhaier, H., Karim, K. M. (2012). Democracy, investment and economic growth. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 2(3), 233-240.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Premium e-Journal of Social Science (PEJOSS)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
