The Effect of Social Expenditures on Poverty: An Empirical Investigation

Yıl 2014, Cilt: 14 Sayı: 4, 127 - 138, 01.12.2014

Ferdi Çelikay , Erdal Gümüş

https://doi.org/10.18037/ausbd.16935

Cited By: 7

Öz

The purpose of this study is to identify how and in which direction social expenditures, carried out in the struggle with poverty in Turkey, affect poverty problem. In this context, social spending and poverty rate data of Statistical Territorial Units (26 regions) for the years 2004-2011, were analyzed with static panel data analysis methods. According to the results of the analysis, as the share of social expenditures in gross value added increases, the rate of poverty decreases. Similar results were also observed for sub components of social expenditure such as education, social security and social assistance expenditures. Findings obtained from this study and recommendations in line with the findings are expected to contribute the social policy development process. In addition, the quantitative analysis of the relationship between poverty rate and social expenditures of Turkey exclusively, is expected to provide an important contribution to the literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Keywords: Social Expenditures, Poverty, Static Panel Data Analysis

Sosyal Harcamaların Yoksulluk Üzerine Etkileri: Ampirik Bir İnceleme

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’de yoksullukla mücadele sürecinde gerçekleştirilen sosyal harcamaların yoksulluk problemini nasıl ve hangi yönde etkilediğini tespit edebilmektir. Bu bağlamda İstatistiki Bölge Birimleri (26 bölge) temel alınarak derlenen 2004-2011 yıllarına ait sosyal harcama ve yoksulluk oranı verileri statik panel veri analizi yöntemleri ile incelenmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına göre sosyal harcamaların gayri safi katma değer içerisindeki payı arttıkça yoksulluk oranının azaldığı görülmektedir. Benzer sonuçlara sosyal harcamaların alt bileşenleri olan eğitim harcamaları ve sosyal güvenlik ile sosyal yardım harcamaları kullanılarak da ulaşılmıştır. Çalışmada elde edilen bulgular ve bu bulgular paralelinde geliştirilen önerilerin sosyal politikaların oluşum sürecine katkı sağlaması beklenmektedir. Ayrıca yoksulluk oranı ile sosyal harcamalar arasındaki ilişkinin nicel olarak Türkiye özelinde bölgesel bir analize tabi tutulması vesilesiyle literatüre de önemli katkı sağlanacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sosyal Harcamalar, Yoksulluk, Statik Panel Veri Analizi

Kaynakça

• Adelantado, J. ve E.C. Cuveas (2006). Globalization And The Welfare State: The Same Strategies for Si- milar Problems?. Journal of European Social Policy, 16 (4), 374-386.
• Ahn, S.C. ve H.R. Moon (2001). Large-N And Large-T Properties Of Panel Data Estimators And The Haus- man Test. USC Center for Law, Economics & Orga- nization, Research Paper No: C01-20.
• Anderson, G. (2004). Making Inferences about The Polarization, Welfare and Poverty of Nations: A Study of 101 Countries 1970-1995. Journal of App- lied Econometrics, 19 (5), 537-50.
• Arellano, M. (1987). Computing Robust Standart Er- rors for Within-Groups Estimators. Oxford Bulle- tin of Economics and Statistics, 49 (4), 431-434.
• Atkinson, A.B., E. Marlier ve B. Nolan (2004). Indica- tors and Targets for Social Inclusion in The Euro- pean Union. Journal of Common Market Studies, 42 (1), 47-75.
• Balestra, P. ve J. Krishnakumar (2008). Fixed Effects Models and Fixed Coefficients Models. L. Matyas ve P. Sevestre (Ed.), The Econometrics of Panel Data içinde. (s. 23-48). (3. baskı). Verlag: Springer.
• Baltagi, B.H. (2005). Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. (3. baskı). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
• Baltagi, B.H. (2011). Econometrics. (5.baskı). Berlin: Springer.
• Baltagi, B.H. ve P.X. Wu (1999). Unequally Spaced Panel Data Regressions with AR(1) Disturbances. Econometric Theory, 15, 814-823.
• Behrendt, C. (2000). Holes in the safety net? Social Se- curity and The Alleviation of Poverty in A Compara- tive Perspective. Helsinki: The Year 2000 Internatio- nal Research Conference on Social Security.
• Bhargava, A., L. Franzini ve W. Narendranathan (1982). Serial Correlation and The Fixed Effects Model. The Review of Economic Studies, 49 (4), 533-549.
• Brady, D. (2003). The Politics of Poverty: Left Political Institutions, The Welfare State and Poverty. Social Forces, 82 (2), 557-88.
• Brown, D.S. ve W. Hunter (1999). Democracy and So- cial Spending in Latin America, 1980-92. American Political Science Review, 93 (4), 779-90.
• Caminada, K. ve K. Goudswaard (2009). Effectiveness of Poverty Reduction in The EU: A Descriptive Analysis. Poverty & Public Policy, Policy Studies Or- ganization, 1 (2), 5-64.
• Caminada, K. ve K. Goudswaard (2012). The Relati- onship between Alternative Measures of Social Spending and Poverty Rates. International Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 1 (5), 8-25.
• Caminada, K., K. Goudswaard, ve F. Koster (2011). Social Income Transfers and Poverty: A Cross- Country Analysis for OECD Countries. Internati- onal Journal of Social Welfare, 20 (1), 1-12.
• Castles, F.G. (2002). Developing New Measures of Welfare State Change and Reform. European Jour- nal of Political Research, 41, 613-41.
• Creedy, J. (1996). Comparing Tax and Transfer Systems: Poverty, Inequality and Target Efficiency. Economica, New Series, 63 (250), 163-74.
• Çalışkan, A., A. Civan ve M. Karakuyu (2011). Where Should We Spend Government’s Money? The Ef- fect Of Public Sector Investments On Socioecono- mic Development In Turkey. European Journal of Economic and Political Studies (EJEPS), 4 (1), 1-11.
• Driscoll, J. ve A. Kraay (1995). Spatial Correlations in Panel Data. The World Bank Policy Research De- partment, Policy Research Working Paper, No: 1553.
• Driscoll, J. ve A. Kraay (1998). Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimation with Spatially Dependent Data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 549-560.
• Esping-Andersen, G. ve J. Myles (2009). Economic Ine- quality and The Welfare State. B.N.Salverda, ve T. Smeeding (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Economic Inequality içinde (s. 639-664), Oxford University Press.
• Ferragina, E. ve M. Seeleib-Kaiser (2011). Thematic Review: Welfare Regime Debate: Past, Present, Fu- tures?. Policy & Politics, 39 (4), 583-611.
• Friedman, M. (1962). Capitalism and Freedom. Chica- go: University of Chicago Press.
• Froot, K.A. (1989). Consistent Covariance Matrix Es- timation with Cross-Sectional Dependence and Heteroskedasticity in Financial Data. The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 24 (3), 333-355.
• Gough, I. (2005). European Welfare States: Explanations and Lessons for Developing Countries. Arusha Confe- rence, “New Frontiers of Social Policy”, 12 (15), 39-71.
• Gujarati, D.N. (2006). Temel Ekonometri. Ü.Şenesen ve G.G.Şenesen (Çev.), İstanbul: Literatür Yayıncılık.
• Hayek, F.A. (1960). The Constitution of Liberty. Chica- go: University of Chicago Press.
• Hayes, A.F. ve L. Cai (2007). Using Heteroskedasticity- Consistent Standard Error Estimators in OLS Reg- ression: An Introduction and Software Implemen- tation. Behavior Research Methods, 39 (4), 709-722.
• Hoechle, D. (2007). Robust Standard Errors for Panel Regressions with Cross-Sectional Dependence. The Stata Journal, 7 (3), 281-312.
• Hoyos, R.E. ve V. Sarafidis, (2006). Testing for Cross- Sectional Dependence in Panel Data Models. The Stata Journal, 6 (4), 482-496.
• Hsiao, C. (2003). Analysis of Panel Data. (2. baskı), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Huber, E., T. Mostrillo ve J. Stephen (2008). Politics and Social Spending in Latin America. The Journal of Politics, 70, 420-36.
• Huber, Peter J. (1967). The Behavior of Maximum Li- kelihood Estimates Under Nonstandard Conditions. Proceedings of the Fifth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 221–233.
• Kaufman, R.R. ve A. Segura-Ubiergo (2001). Globa- lization, Domestic Politics, and Social Spending in Latin America: A Time-Series Cross-Section Analysis, 1973–97. World Politics, 53, 553-587.
• Kenworthy, L. (1999). Do Social-Welfare Policies Re- duce Poverty? A Cross-National Assessment. The University of North Carolina Press, Social Forces, 77 (3), 1119-1139.
• Kim, H. (2000). Anti-povery Effectiveness of Taxes And Income Transfers in Welfare States. New York: Max- well School of Citizenship and Public Affairs Syra- cuse University, Working Paper No.228.
• Kühner, S. (2007). Country-level Comparisons of Wel- fare State Change Measures: Another Facet of The Dependent Variable Problem within The Compa- rative Analysis of The Welfare State?. Journal of Eu- ropean Social Policy, 17 (5), 6-18.
• Lange, F. ve R. Topel (2006). The Social Value of Edu- cation And Human Capital. E.A. Hanushek ve F. Welch (Ed.), Handbook of The Economics of Edu- cation içinde (s.460-509), Volume 1, Amsterdam: North Holland.
• Lindbeck, A. (2003). An Essay on Welfare State Dyna- mics. Cesifo Working Paper No. 976.
• Lindert, P.H. (1996). What Limits Social Spending?. Explorations in Economic History, 33 (1), 1-34.
• Logue, J. (1979). The Welfare State: Victim of Its Suc- cess. The MIT Press and American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 108 (4), 69-87.
• Özdemir, S. (2007). Küreselleşme Sürecinde Refah Dev- leti. (2. baskı). İstanbul: İstanbul Ticaret Odası.
• Patrinos, H.A. ve G. Psacharopoulos (2011). Education Past, Present and Future Global Challenges. Policy Research Working Paper, The World Bank, Human Development Network, No: 5616.
• Ravallion, M. (1994). Poverty Comparisons. Chur, Switzerland: Harwood Academic Press.
• Rogers, W.H. (1993). Regression Standard Errors in Clus- tered Samples. Stata Technical Bulletin, 13 (3), 19-23.
• Ross, M. (2011). Is Democracy Good for The Poor?. American Journal of Political Science, 50 (4), 860-874.
• Sarafidis, V, T. Yamagatab ve D. Robertson (2009). A Test of Cross Section Dependence for A Linear Dynamic Panel Model With Regressors. Journal of Econometrics, 148, 149-161.
• Sarısoy, İ. ve S. Koç (2010). Türkiye’de Kamu Transfer Harcamalarının Yoksulluğu Azaltmadaki Etkilerinin Ekonometrik Analizi. Maliye Dergisi, 158, 326-48.
• Scharpf, F.W. (2000a). The Viability of Advanced Wel- fare States in The İnternational Economy: Vulne- rabilities And Options. Journal of European Public Policy, 7 (2), 190-228.
• Scharpf, F.W. (2000b). Globalization and The Welfare State: Contraints, Challenges and Vulnerabilities. Helsinki: “Social Security in The Global Village” The Year 2000 International Research Conference on Social Security.
• Schmitt, C. ve P. Starke (2011). Explaining Convergence of OECD Welfare States: A Conditional Approach. Journal of European Social Policy, 21 (2), 120-135.
• Segura-Ubiergo, A. (2007). The Political Economy of The Welfare State in Latin America: Globalization, Democracy and Development. Cambridge: Camb- ridge University.
• Sinn, H.W. (1995). A Theory of The Welfare State. Scan- dinavian Journal of Economics, 97 (4), 495–526.
• Smeeding, T.M. (2006). Poor People in Rich Nations: The United States in Comparative Perspective. Jo- urnal of Economic Perspectives, 20 (1), 69-90.
• Spicker, P. (2002). Poverty and The Welfare State. A Ca- talyst Working Paper, London.
• Stasavage, D. (2005). Democracy and Education Spen- ding in Africa. American Journal of Political Scien- ce, 49 (2), 343-58.
• Stock, J.H. ve M.W. Watson (2008). Heteroskedasti- city-robust Standard Errors for Fixed Effects Panel Data Regression. Econometrica, 76 (1), 155-174.
• Tatoğlu, F.Y. (2012). Panel Veri Ekonometrisi. (1. bas- kı). İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
• Wibbels, E. (2006). Dependency Revisited: Internatio- nal Markets, Business Cycles, and Social Spending in The Developing World. International Organiza- tion, 433-469.
• Williams, R. L. (2000). A Note on Robust Variance Es- timation For Cluster-Correlated Data. Biometrics, 56: 645–646.
• Wooldridge, J.M. (2003). Cluster-sample Methods in Applied Econometrics. The American Economic Review, 93 (2), 133-138.
• http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1013