Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

COMPARATIVE EFFECT OF SECTORAL R&D EXPENDITURES ON ECONOMIC GROWTH: THE CASE OF TURKEY IN THE SHORT AND LONG TERM

Year 2023, Volume: 10 Issue: 21, 517 - 548, 28.04.2023
https://doi.org/10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312

Abstract

Abstract
The impact of R&D on growth can be understood through the lens of endogenous growth theory, which emphasizes the role of knowledge and technology in driving economic growth. According to this theory, R&D activities lead to the creation of new knowledge and technologies, which increase productivity and drive economic growth. Thus, one of the key mechanisms by which R&D can influence growth is the creation of new products and processes. Sectorial R&D activities are the processes produced by the public, companies and higher education institutions. Which sector is effective in its activities is important in terms of applied R&D policies, allocation of resources and created externalities.
The aim of this study is to analyze the effect of R&D expenditures made according to sectors on economic growth comparatively. In the study, ARDL analysis was used for the example of the Turkish economy between the years 1990-2021. In particular, the effect of R&D expenditures made by each sector on individual growth was investigated and the effects of sectorial R&D activities were compared with each other. The findings support the theories and other empirical studies in the literature.

References

  • Aghion, P. (2004). Growth and development: A Schumpeterian approach. Annals of Economics and Finance, 5(1), 1-25.
  • Aghion, P., Akcigit, U., & Howitt, P. (2015). Lessons from Schumpeterian growth theory. American Economic Review, 105(5), 94-99. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151067
  • Aghion, P., & P. Howitt. (1990). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60, 323–351. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3223
  • Aghion, P. (2018). Innovation and growth from a schumpeterian perspective. Revue d'economie Politique, 128 (5), 693-711. https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.285.0693
  • Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, AC- 19, 716-723. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_16
  • Akarsu, Y. , Dilbaz Alacahan, N. & Atakişi, A. (2020). Ülke karşılaştırmaları ile araştırma geliştirme harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Panel veri analizi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 9 (4), 159- 167.
  • Alene, A.D. (2010). Productivity growth and the effects of R&D in African agriculture. Agricultural Economics, 41, 223–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2010.00450.x
  • Altın, O. & Kaya, A.A. (2009).Türkiye'de Ar-Ge harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki nedensel ilişkinin analizi. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 9 (1), 192. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ege:journl:v:9:y:2009:i:1:p:251-259
  • Archibald, R. B., & Pereira, A. M. (2003). Effects of public and private R&D on private-sector performance in the United States. Public Finance Review, 31(4), 429-451. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142103031004005
  • Arthur, W. B. (1990). Positive Feedbacks in the Economy. Scientific American. 262(2), 92-99. https://doi.org/10.1038/SCIENTIFICAMERICAN0290-92
  • Assimakopoulos, D. (2007). Technological communities and networks: Triggers and drivers for innovation. London: Routledge.
  • Barro, R. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 103-125. https://doi.org/10.1086/261726
  • Barro, R.J. & Sala-i Martin X. (1995). Economic growth. London: McGraw-Hill.
  • Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S. & Sandén, B. A. (2008). ‘Legitimation’ and ‘development of positive externalities’: Two key processes in the formation phase of technological innovation systems. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20(5), 575-592. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320802292768
  • Breschi, S. & Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral innovation systems: Technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions, and organizations içinde (s. 130-156). London: Pinter.
  • Carlsson, B. (Ed.). (1997). Technological systems and industrial dynamics (10). Springer Science & Business Media.
  • Carolyn, S.S. (1951). Innovation in the capitalist process: A critique of the Schumpeterian theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Pres, 65(3), 417-428. https://doi.org/10.2307/1882222
  • Coe, D.T., Helpman, E. & Hoffmaister, A.W. (1995). International R&D Spillovers and Institutions. IMF Working Paper. No: WP/08/104,1-37.
  • Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Economic Journal, 99 (397), 569-96. https://doi.org/10.2307/2233763.
  • Cooke, P., Uranga, M. G. & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research policy, 26(4-5), 475-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00025-5.
  • Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366a), 427-431. https://doi.org/10.2307/2286348
  • Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1057-1072. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912517
  • Dodgson, M., Gann, D. & Salter, A. (2008). The Management of Technological Innovation: Strategy and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Domar, E.D. (1946). Capital Expansion, Rate of growth, and employment. Econometric, 14, 137-147. https://doi.org/10.2307/1905364
  • Elk, v.R., Weel, t.B., Wiel, v.d.K. & Wouterse, B.(2019). Estimating the returns to public R&D investments: Evidence from production function models. De Economist, 167(1), 45-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-019-09331-3
  • Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. econometrica, 55(2), 251–276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236
  • Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic perfor-mance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.
  • Freeman, C. (2004). Technological infrastructure and international competitiveness. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(3), 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/13.3.541
  • Freimane, R. & Baliņa, S. (2016). Research and development expenditures and economic growth in the EU: A panel data analysis. Economics and Business, 29 (1), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.1515/eb-2016-0016
  • Genç, M. C. & Tandoğan, D. (2020). Türkiye’de Ar-Ge’nin ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi: Furier yaklaşımla kalıntı temelli eşbütünleşme testi. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18 (2) , 339-348. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.709287
  • Goel, R., Payne, J. & Ram, R. (2008). R&D expenditures and U.S. economic growth: A disaggregated approach. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(2), 237-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.04.008
  • Greenwood, J. & Jovanovic, B. (1990). Financial development, growth, and the distribution of income. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1076-1107. https://doi.org/10.1086/261720
  • Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, 10(1), 92-116. https://doi.org/10.2307/3003321
  • Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1990). Comparative advantage and long- run growth. The American Economic Review, 80(4), 796-815.
  • Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1991). Innovation and growth: in the global economy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 1.Baskı.
  • Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1994). Endogenous innovation in the theory of growth. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 23-44. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.8.1.23
  • Guellec, D., & De La Potterie, B. V. P. (2002). R&D and productivity growth: Panel data analysis of 16 OECD countries. OECD Economic studies, 2001(2), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1787/652870318341
  • Harrod, R. (1939). An essay in dynamic theory. Economic Journal, 49,14-33. https://doi.org/10.2307/2225181
  • Jennings, A. & Waller, W. (1994). Evolutionary economics and cultural hermeneutics: Veblen, cultural relativism, and blind drift. Journal of Economic Issues, 28(4), 997-1030. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.1994.11505610
  • Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(2-3), 231-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(88)90041-3
  • Jyrki, A.Y. (2004). Impact of public R&D financing on private R&D; Does financial constraint matter? ENEPRI Working Paper, No. 30.
  • Kaiser, U. (2006). Private R&D and public R&D subsidies: Microeconometric evidence for Denmark. Nationaløkonomisk tidsskrift, Nationaløkonomisk Forening, 2006(1), 1-17.
  • Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C., Schmidt, P. & Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root: How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root? Journal of Econometrics, 54(1-3), 159-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(92)90104-Y
  • Lebe, Fuat (2016). Çevresel Kuznets eğrisi hipotezi: Türkiye için eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 17(2), 177-194. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2152170
  • Leonard, W.N, (1971). Research and development in industrial growth. Journal of Political Economy, 79(2), 232-56. https://doi.org/10.1086/259741
  • Leyden, D. P., & A. N. Link. (1991). Why are government R&D and private R&D complements? Applied Economics, (23), 1673-1681.
  • Lichtenberg, F. R. (1993). R&D investment and international productivity differences. NBER Working Paper Series, No: 4161,1-34. https://doi.org/10.3386/w4161
  • Lichtenberg, F. R. (1984). The relationship between federal contract R&D and company R&D. American Economic Review, American Economic Association, 74(2), 73-78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1816333 Lorenz, E. & Lundvall, B. Å. (Eds.). (2006). How Europe's economies learn: coordinating competing models. Oxford: OUP.
  • Lucas, R. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7
  • Lundvall, B.A. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.
  • Mairesse, J.& Hall, B. H. (1996). Estimating the productivity of research and development: An exploration of GMM methods using data on French & United States manufacturing firms. NBER Working Papers. No. 5501. https://doi.org/10.3386/w5501
  • Malerba, F. (2004). Sectoral system of innovation basic concepts. F.Malerba (Ed.) Sectoral system of innovation: Concepts issues and analyses six major sector in Europe içinde (s.9-41). UK: Cambridge Unv. Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493270.002
  • Malthus, T. (1798). An essay on the principle of population. 1st ed., J. Johnson.
  • Nadiri, M.I. (1993). Innovations and technological spillovers. NBER Working Paper. No. 4423. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nbr:nberwo:4423
  • Narayan, P.K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: Evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics, (37), 1979–1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840500278103
  • Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. Oxford University Press.
  • Park, W. G. (1995). International R&D spillovers and OECD economic growth. Economic Inquiry, (33), 571-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1995.tb01882.x
  • Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2678547
  • Phillips, P. C. B. & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, (75), 335–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/2336182
  • Rebelo, S. (1991). Long run policy analysis and long run growth. Journal of Political Economy, (99), 500-521. https://doi.org/10.1086/261764
  • Ricardo, D. (1817). On the principles of political economy and taxation. London: John Murray.
  • Robert J. B. & Sala-i-Martin, X. (1990). Economic growth and convergence across the United States. NBER Working Papers. No. 3419. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3419
  • Roberto F., Aldo G. & Mireille M. (2006). Factors affecting university– industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling. Research Policy, 35(2006), 309–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.12.001
  • Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing return and long run growth. Journal of Political Economy, (94), 1002-1037. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1833190
  • Saxenian, A. (1991). The origins and dynamics of production networks in Silicon Valley. Research Policy, 20(5), 423-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90067-Z
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Harvard University Press.
  • Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, (6), 461-464. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2958889
  • Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.Https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/smith/index.html.
  • Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, (70), 65-94. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884513
  • Swan, T.W. (1956) Economic growth and capital accumulation. Economic Record, (32), 334-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.1956.tb00434.x
  • Sylwester, K. (2001). R&D and economic growth. Know Techn Pol., (13), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02693991
  • Uçak, S., Kuvat, Ö. & Aytekin, A. G. (2018). Türkiye’de Arge harcamaları– büyüme ilişkisi: ARDL yöntemi. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16(2), 129-160. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cbayarsos/issue/38081/439428
  • Taban, S. & Şengür, M. (2014). Türkiye'de Ar-Ge ve ekonomik büyüme. AİBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14(1), 355-376.
  • Terleckyj, N.E. (1974). Effects of R&D on the productivity growth of industries: an exploratory study. Washington: National Planning Association.
  • Yaylalı, P. M., Akan, P. Y. & Işık, C. (2010). Türkiye’de Ar&Ge yatırım harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki eş-bütünleşme ve nedensellik ilişkisi: 1990–2009. Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 5(2). https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/beyder/issue/3477/47303

SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Year 2023, Volume: 10 Issue: 21, 517 - 548, 28.04.2023
https://doi.org/10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312

Abstract

Ar-Ge'nin büyüme üzerindeki etkisi, ekonomik büyümeyi yönlendirmede bilgi ve teknolojinin rolünü vurgulayan içsel büyüme teorisinin merceğinden anlaşılabilir. Bu teoriye göre, Ar-Ge faaliyetleri yeni bilgi ve teknolojilerin yaratılmasına yol açar, bu da verimliliği artırır ve ekonomik büyümeyi yönlendirir. Dolayısıyla, Ar-Ge'nin büyümeyi etkileyebileceği kilit mekanizmalardan biri, yeni ürün ve süreçlerin yaratılmasıdır. Sektörel Ar-Ge faaliyetleri ise kamu, firmalar ve yükseköğretim kurumları tarafından üretilen süreçlerdir. Hangi sektörün faaliyetlerinde ne kadar etkili olduğu uygulanan Ar-Ge politikaları, kaynakların tahsisi ve yaratılan dışsallıklar açısından önemlidir.
Bu çalışmanın amacı sektörlere göre yapılan Ar-Ge harcamalarının ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisini karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz etmektir. Çalışmada 1990-2021 yılları arasında Türkiye ekonomisi örneği için ARDL analizi kullanılmıştır. Özellikle her sektör tarafından yapılan Ar-Ge harcamasının bireysel olarak büyüme üzerindeki etkisi araştırılmış ve sektörel Ar-Ge faaliyetlerinin etkileri birbiri ile karşılaştırılmıştır. Bulgular literatürde yer alan teorileri ve diğer ampirik çalışmaları desteklemektedir.

References

  • Aghion, P. (2004). Growth and development: A Schumpeterian approach. Annals of Economics and Finance, 5(1), 1-25.
  • Aghion, P., Akcigit, U., & Howitt, P. (2015). Lessons from Schumpeterian growth theory. American Economic Review, 105(5), 94-99. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151067
  • Aghion, P., & P. Howitt. (1990). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60, 323–351. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3223
  • Aghion, P. (2018). Innovation and growth from a schumpeterian perspective. Revue d'economie Politique, 128 (5), 693-711. https://doi.org/10.3917/redp.285.0693
  • Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, AC- 19, 716-723. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1694-0_16
  • Akarsu, Y. , Dilbaz Alacahan, N. & Atakişi, A. (2020). Ülke karşılaştırmaları ile araştırma geliştirme harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: Panel veri analizi. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 9 (4), 159- 167.
  • Alene, A.D. (2010). Productivity growth and the effects of R&D in African agriculture. Agricultural Economics, 41, 223–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2010.00450.x
  • Altın, O. & Kaya, A.A. (2009).Türkiye'de Ar-Ge harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki nedensel ilişkinin analizi. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 9 (1), 192. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ege:journl:v:9:y:2009:i:1:p:251-259
  • Archibald, R. B., & Pereira, A. M. (2003). Effects of public and private R&D on private-sector performance in the United States. Public Finance Review, 31(4), 429-451. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142103031004005
  • Arthur, W. B. (1990). Positive Feedbacks in the Economy. Scientific American. 262(2), 92-99. https://doi.org/10.1038/SCIENTIFICAMERICAN0290-92
  • Assimakopoulos, D. (2007). Technological communities and networks: Triggers and drivers for innovation. London: Routledge.
  • Barro, R. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 103-125. https://doi.org/10.1086/261726
  • Barro, R.J. & Sala-i Martin X. (1995). Economic growth. London: McGraw-Hill.
  • Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S. & Sandén, B. A. (2008). ‘Legitimation’ and ‘development of positive externalities’: Two key processes in the formation phase of technological innovation systems. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 20(5), 575-592. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320802292768
  • Breschi, S. & Malerba, F. (1997). Sectoral innovation systems: Technological regimes, Schumpeterian dynamics, and spatial boundaries. C. Edquist (Ed.), Systems of innovation: Technologies, institutions, and organizations içinde (s. 130-156). London: Pinter.
  • Carlsson, B. (Ed.). (1997). Technological systems and industrial dynamics (10). Springer Science & Business Media.
  • Carolyn, S.S. (1951). Innovation in the capitalist process: A critique of the Schumpeterian theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Pres, 65(3), 417-428. https://doi.org/10.2307/1882222
  • Coe, D.T., Helpman, E. & Hoffmaister, A.W. (1995). International R&D Spillovers and Institutions. IMF Working Paper. No: WP/08/104,1-37.
  • Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Economic Journal, 99 (397), 569-96. https://doi.org/10.2307/2233763.
  • Cooke, P., Uranga, M. G. & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research policy, 26(4-5), 475-491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(97)00025-5.
  • Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366a), 427-431. https://doi.org/10.2307/2286348
  • Dickey, D. A., & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 1057-1072. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912517
  • Dodgson, M., Gann, D. & Salter, A. (2008). The Management of Technological Innovation: Strategy and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Domar, E.D. (1946). Capital Expansion, Rate of growth, and employment. Econometric, 14, 137-147. https://doi.org/10.2307/1905364
  • Elk, v.R., Weel, t.B., Wiel, v.d.K. & Wouterse, B.(2019). Estimating the returns to public R&D investments: Evidence from production function models. De Economist, 167(1), 45-87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10645-019-09331-3
  • Engle, R. F., & Granger, C. W. J. (1987). Co-integration and error correction: representation, estimation, and testing. econometrica, 55(2), 251–276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236
  • Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic perfor-mance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter.
  • Freeman, C. (2004). Technological infrastructure and international competitiveness. Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(3), 551–569. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/13.3.541
  • Freimane, R. & Baliņa, S. (2016). Research and development expenditures and economic growth in the EU: A panel data analysis. Economics and Business, 29 (1), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.1515/eb-2016-0016
  • Genç, M. C. & Tandoğan, D. (2020). Türkiye’de Ar-Ge’nin ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi: Furier yaklaşımla kalıntı temelli eşbütünleşme testi. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 18 (2) , 339-348. https://doi.org/10.18026/cbayarsos.709287
  • Goel, R., Payne, J. & Ram, R. (2008). R&D expenditures and U.S. economic growth: A disaggregated approach. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(2), 237-250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.04.008
  • Greenwood, J. & Jovanovic, B. (1990). Financial development, growth, and the distribution of income. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1076-1107. https://doi.org/10.1086/261720
  • Griliches, Z. (1979). Issues in assessing the contribution of research and development to productivity growth. Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, 10(1), 92-116. https://doi.org/10.2307/3003321
  • Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1990). Comparative advantage and long- run growth. The American Economic Review, 80(4), 796-815.
  • Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1991). Innovation and growth: in the global economy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 1.Baskı.
  • Grossman, G. M. & Helpman, E. (1994). Endogenous innovation in the theory of growth. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(1), 23-44. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.8.1.23
  • Guellec, D., & De La Potterie, B. V. P. (2002). R&D and productivity growth: Panel data analysis of 16 OECD countries. OECD Economic studies, 2001(2), 103-126. https://doi.org/10.1787/652870318341
  • Harrod, R. (1939). An essay in dynamic theory. Economic Journal, 49,14-33. https://doi.org/10.2307/2225181
  • Jennings, A. & Waller, W. (1994). Evolutionary economics and cultural hermeneutics: Veblen, cultural relativism, and blind drift. Journal of Economic Issues, 28(4), 997-1030. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.1994.11505610
  • Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 12(2-3), 231-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1889(88)90041-3
  • Jyrki, A.Y. (2004). Impact of public R&D financing on private R&D; Does financial constraint matter? ENEPRI Working Paper, No. 30.
  • Kaiser, U. (2006). Private R&D and public R&D subsidies: Microeconometric evidence for Denmark. Nationaløkonomisk tidsskrift, Nationaløkonomisk Forening, 2006(1), 1-17.
  • Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C., Schmidt, P. & Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the null hypothesis of stationarity against the alternative of a unit root: How sure are we that economic time series have a unit root? Journal of Econometrics, 54(1-3), 159-178. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(92)90104-Y
  • Lebe, Fuat (2016). Çevresel Kuznets eğrisi hipotezi: Türkiye için eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 17(2), 177-194. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2152170
  • Leonard, W.N, (1971). Research and development in industrial growth. Journal of Political Economy, 79(2), 232-56. https://doi.org/10.1086/259741
  • Leyden, D. P., & A. N. Link. (1991). Why are government R&D and private R&D complements? Applied Economics, (23), 1673-1681.
  • Lichtenberg, F. R. (1993). R&D investment and international productivity differences. NBER Working Paper Series, No: 4161,1-34. https://doi.org/10.3386/w4161
  • Lichtenberg, F. R. (1984). The relationship between federal contract R&D and company R&D. American Economic Review, American Economic Association, 74(2), 73-78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1816333 Lorenz, E. & Lundvall, B. Å. (Eds.). (2006). How Europe's economies learn: coordinating competing models. Oxford: OUP.
  • Lucas, R. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7
  • Lundvall, B.A. (1992). National systems of innovation: Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. London: Pinter.
  • Mairesse, J.& Hall, B. H. (1996). Estimating the productivity of research and development: An exploration of GMM methods using data on French & United States manufacturing firms. NBER Working Papers. No. 5501. https://doi.org/10.3386/w5501
  • Malerba, F. (2004). Sectoral system of innovation basic concepts. F.Malerba (Ed.) Sectoral system of innovation: Concepts issues and analyses six major sector in Europe içinde (s.9-41). UK: Cambridge Unv. Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493270.002
  • Malthus, T. (1798). An essay on the principle of population. 1st ed., J. Johnson.
  • Nadiri, M.I. (1993). Innovations and technological spillovers. NBER Working Paper. No. 4423. https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nbr:nberwo:4423
  • Narayan, P.K. (2005). The saving and investment nexus for China: Evidence from cointegration tests. Applied Economics, (37), 1979–1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840500278103
  • Nelson, R. R. (Ed.). (1993). National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. Oxford University Press.
  • Park, W. G. (1995). International R&D spillovers and OECD economic growth. Economic Inquiry, (33), 571-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1995.tb01882.x
  • Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2678547
  • Phillips, P. C. B. & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, (75), 335–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/2336182
  • Rebelo, S. (1991). Long run policy analysis and long run growth. Journal of Political Economy, (99), 500-521. https://doi.org/10.1086/261764
  • Ricardo, D. (1817). On the principles of political economy and taxation. London: John Murray.
  • Robert J. B. & Sala-i-Martin, X. (1990). Economic growth and convergence across the United States. NBER Working Papers. No. 3419. https://doi.org/10.3386/w3419
  • Roberto F., Aldo G. & Mireille M. (2006). Factors affecting university– industry R&D projects: The importance of searching, screening and signalling. Research Policy, 35(2006), 309–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.12.001
  • Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing return and long run growth. Journal of Political Economy, (94), 1002-1037. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1833190
  • Saxenian, A. (1991). The origins and dynamics of production networks in Silicon Valley. Research Policy, 20(5), 423-437. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(91)90067-Z
  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Harvard University Press.
  • Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, (6), 461-464. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2958889
  • Smith, A. (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.Https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/smith/index.html.
  • Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, (70), 65-94. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884513
  • Swan, T.W. (1956) Economic growth and capital accumulation. Economic Record, (32), 334-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.1956.tb00434.x
  • Sylwester, K. (2001). R&D and economic growth. Know Techn Pol., (13), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02693991
  • Uçak, S., Kuvat, Ö. & Aytekin, A. G. (2018). Türkiye’de Arge harcamaları– büyüme ilişkisi: ARDL yöntemi. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 16(2), 129-160. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cbayarsos/issue/38081/439428
  • Taban, S. & Şengür, M. (2014). Türkiye'de Ar-Ge ve ekonomik büyüme. AİBÜ Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14(1), 355-376.
  • Terleckyj, N.E. (1974). Effects of R&D on the productivity growth of industries: an exploratory study. Washington: National Planning Association.
  • Yaylalı, P. M., Akan, P. Y. & Işık, C. (2010). Türkiye’de Ar&Ge yatırım harcamaları ve ekonomik büyüme arasındaki eş-bütünleşme ve nedensellik ilişkisi: 1990–2009. Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 5(2). https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/beyder/issue/3477/47303
There are 75 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Tüm Sayı
Authors

Melike Pekel Çetin 0000-0001-6744-9337

Publication Date April 28, 2023
Submission Date January 30, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 10 Issue: 21

Cite

APA Pekel Çetin, M. (2023). SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Akademik Hassasiyetler, 10(21), 517-548. https://doi.org/10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312
AMA Pekel Çetin M. SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Akademik Hassasiyetler. April 2023;10(21):517-548. doi:10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312
Chicago Pekel Çetin, Melike. “SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”. Akademik Hassasiyetler 10, no. 21 (April 2023): 517-48. https://doi.org/10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312.
EndNote Pekel Çetin M (April 1, 2023) SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Akademik Hassasiyetler 10 21 517–548.
IEEE M. Pekel Çetin, “SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”, Akademik Hassasiyetler, vol. 10, no. 21, pp. 517–548, 2023, doi: 10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312.
ISNAD Pekel Çetin, Melike. “SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”. Akademik Hassasiyetler 10/21 (April 2023), 517-548. https://doi.org/10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312.
JAMA Pekel Çetin M. SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Akademik Hassasiyetler. 2023;10:517–548.
MLA Pekel Çetin, Melike. “SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”. Akademik Hassasiyetler, vol. 10, no. 21, 2023, pp. 517-48, doi:10.58884/akademik-hassasiyetler.1244312.
Vancouver Pekel Çetin M. SEKTÖREL AR-GE HARCAMALARININ EKONOMİK BÜYÜME ÜZERİNE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ETKİSİ KISA VE UZUN DÖNEMDE TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Akademik Hassasiyetler. 2023;10(21):517-48.

MAKALE DEĞERLENDİRME SÜRECİ

Yazar tarafından gönderilen bir makale, gönderim tarihinden itibaren 10 gün içinde dergi sekreteri tarafından makalenin, telif sözleşmesinin ve benzerlik raporunun (Turnitin programı) eksiksiz ve düzgün bir şekilde gönderilip gönderilmediği yönünden incelenir. İstenilen bu dosyalar eksiksiz ve düzgün bir şekilde gönderilmiş ise makale; ikinci aşamada derginin yayın çizgisine uygun olup olmadığı yönünden değerlendirilir. Bu süreçte makale yayın çizgisine uygun değilse yazara iade edilir. Makale yayın çizgisine uygun ise şablona uygun bir şekilde gönderilip gönderilmediği yönünden değerlendirilir. Şayet makale şablona uyarlanıp gönderilmemiş ise değerlendirme sürecine alınmaz. Bu süreçte yazarın derginin belirlediği şartlara uygun bir şekilde sisteme makale yüklemesi beklenir. Makale şablona uygun bir şekilde hazırlanıp gönderilmiş ise son aşamada makale derginin yayın ilkeleri, yazım kuralları, öz, abstract, extented abstract, kaynakça gösterimi vb. yönlerden incelenir. Bu ayrıntılarda makalede bir sorun varsa yazarın bu hususları tamamlaması istenir ve verilen süre içerisinde eksiksiz bir şekilde yeniden makaleyi göndermesi istenir.
Tüm bu aşamaları geçen makale, editör tarafından bilimsel yeterliliğinin denetlenmesi amacıyla ikinci 7 günlük süre içerisinde çalışmaya uygun iki hakeme değerlendirmeleri için gönderilir. Hakemlerin değerlendirme süreleri 15 gündür. Bu süre zarfında hakemlik görevini tamamlamayan bir hakem olursa ilgili hakeme değerlendirmeyi tamamlaması için 7 günlük ek süre verilebilir. Bu süre zarfında hakem görevini yerine getirmezse yerine yeni bir hakem ataması yapılır. En az iki hakemden gelen raporlar olumlu ise makale yayın aşamasına alınır. Hakem raporlarından birisi olumlu diğeri olumsuz ise makale üçüncü bir hakeme gönderilir. Üçüncü hakem raporu da olumsuz ise makale ret edilir. Üçüncü hakemin değerlendirmesi olumlu ise makaleyle ilgili hakem raporları dergi alan editörlerinden oluşan Editörler Kurulu tarafından incelenir. Makalenin yayınlanmasıyla ilgili nihai karar alan editörlerinden oluşan Editörler Kurulu tarafından verilir. Hakem raporlarının yetersiz ve tatmin etmekten uzak olması veya İngilizce editör tarafından abstract ve extented abstract’ın yetersiz görülmesi hallerinde de yine makaleyle ilgili son karar Editörler Kurulu tarafından verilir. Tüm bu aşamalardan geçen bir makale en yakın sayıya yayınlanmak üzere eklenir. İlgili sayıda yer kalmaması halinde makalenin yayımı bir sonraki sayıya kaydırılır. Bu durumda ve tüm değerlendirme sürecinde yazar isterse makalesini geri çekme hakkına sahiptir. Ancak bu durumu dergiye bildirmesi gerekir. Makale gönderim tarihinden makalenin yayına kabul tarihine kadar tüm bu işlemler için ortalama 3 aylık bir süre öngörülmektedir.