Türkiye’de İşsizlik Histerisi Hipotezi: Fourier Birim Kök Testleri’nden Yeni Kanıtlar

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 1, 70 - 80, 23.02.2021

Süleyman Yurtkuran

Öz

Türkiye için 2006q1-2019q2 döneminde Narayan-Popp, Fourier ADF ve Fourier KSS birim kök testleri yardımıyla gerçekleştirilen bu çalışmada işsizlik histerisi hipotezinin geçerli olup olmadığı test edilmektedir. Narayan-Popp birim kök testi sonuçlarına göre doğal işsizlik oranı hipotezinin geçerli olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Fourier fonksiyonlarının kullanıldığı testlere göre ise işsizlik oranı serisinin birim kök içerdiği belirlenmiştir. Fourier fonksiyonlarının kullanıldığı birim kök testleri lineer birim kök testlerine göre daha gerçekçi sonuçlar vermektedir. Bu yüzden, bu çalışmada işsizlik histerisi hipotezinin geçerli olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Türkiye’de meydana gelen şoklar işsizlik oranı üzerinde kalıcı bir etki bırakmaktadır. Dolayısıyla politika yapıcıların işsizlik oranını azaltmak için yapısal reformları uygulamaları önem arz etmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fourier Fonksiyonu, İşsizlik, Histeri, Türkiye

Unemployment Hysteresis Hypothesis in Turkey: New Evidence from Fourier Unit Root Tests

Öz

In this study, the validity of unemployment hysteresis is analyzed by Narayan-Popp, Fourier ADF and Fourier KSS unit root tests covering the period of 2006q1-2019q2 in Turkey. The findings obtained from the Narayan-Pop unit root test indicate that natural unemployment rate hypothesis is valid. According to tests using Fourier functions, it is determined that the unemployment rate series contains a unit root. Unit root tests with Fourier functions give more reliable results than linear unit root tests. Therefore, the results obtained in this study indicate that the unemployment hysteresis is valid. Shocks have a permanent impact on the unemployment rate in Turkey. So, policy makers need to implement structural reforms to reduce unemployment rate.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Fourier Function, Unemployment, Hysteresis, Turkey

Kaynakça

• Bacchetta, M., Ernst, E. & Bustamante, J. (2009). Globalization and informal jobs in developing countries: a joint study of the international labour office and the secretariat of the world trade organization, WTO Publications, Geneva.
• Barışık, S. & Çevik, E.İ. (2008). Yapısal kırılma testleri ile Türkiye’de işsizlik histerisinin analizi: 1923-2006”, KMU İİBF Dergisi, 10(14): 1-26.
• Barro, R. (1988). The persistence of unemployment, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 32-37.
• Bayrakdar, S. (2015). Türkiye için işsizlik histerisi ya da doğal işsizlik oranı hipotezinin geçerliliğinin sınanması, İktisat Politikası Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 45-61.
• Becker, R., Enders, W. & Lee, J. (2006). A stationarity test in the presence of an unknown number of smooth breaks, Journal of Time Series Analysis, 27(3), 381-409.
• Blanchard, O. & Summers, L. (1986). Hysteresis and the european unemployment problem, In NBER Macroeconomics Annual Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Bolat S., Tiwari, A.T. & Erdayı, A.U. (2014). Unemployment hysteresis in the eurozone area: evidences from nonlinear heterogeneous panel unit root test, Applied Economic Letters, 21(8), 536-540.
• Brunello, G. (1990). Hysteresis and the japanese unemployment problem: A preliminary ınvestigation, Oxford Econ Paper, 42(3), 483-500.
• Camarero M., Carrion-I-Silvestre, J.L. & Tamarit, C. (2006). Testing for hysteresis in unemployment in OECD countries: New evidence using stationarity panel tests with breaks, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 68(2), 167-182.
• Camarero, M, Carrion-I-Silvestre, J.L. & Tamarit, C. (2005). Unemployment dynamics and naıru estimates for accession countries: A univariate approach. Journal of Comparative Economics, 33(3), 584-603.
• Camarero, M. & Tamarit, C. (2004). Hysteresis vs. natural rate of unemployment: New evidence for OECD countries, Economic Letters, 84(3), 413-417.
• Chang, T. (2011). Hysteresis in unemployment for 17 OECD countries: Stationary test with a fourier function, Economic Modelling, 28(5), 2208-2214.
• Chang, T., Lee, K. C., Nieh, C. C., & Wei, C. C. (2005). An empirical note on testing hysteresis in unemployment for ten european countries: Panel SURADF approach, Applied Economics Letters, 12(14), 881-886.
• Christopoulos, D. K. & León-Ledesma, M. A. (2010). Smooth breaks and non-linear mean reversion: Post-bretton woods real exchange rates, Journal of International Money and Finance, 29(6), 1076-1093.
• Çınar, M., Akay, H. K. & Yılmaz, F. (2014). İşsizlik histerisinin sektörel bir analizi: Türkiye örneği, Türk Dünyası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 69, 29-52.
• Cross, R. (ed.) (1988). Unemployment hysteresis and the natural rate hypothesis, Blackwells, Oxford.
• Dickey, D. A. & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood Ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root, Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 49(4), 1057-1072.
• Ener, M. & Arica, F. (2011). Unemployment hysteresis in Turkey and 15 EU countries: A panel approach, Research Journal of Economics, Business and ICT, 1, 65-71.
• Franz, W. (ed.) (1990). Hysteresis effects in economic models, Physica Verlag, Heidelberg.
• Friedman, M. (1968). The role of Monetary Policy, American Economic Review, 58, 1-17.
• Furuoka, F. (2014). Are unemployment rates stationary in Asia-Pacific countries? New findings from Fourier ADF test, Economic Resarch, 27(1), 34-45.
• Furuoka, F. (2017). A new approach to testing unemployment hysteresis, empirical economics, 53(3), 1253-1280.
• Gallant, R. (1981). On the basis in flexible functional form and an essentially unbiased form: The flexible fourier Form, Journal of Econometrics, 15(1), 211-353.
• Güriş, B., Tiftikçigil, B. Y. & Tıraşoğlu, M. (2017). Testing for in Turkey: evidence from nonlinear unit root tests, Quality & Quantity, 51(1), 35-46.
• Gustavsson, M. & Österholm, P. (2006). Hysteresis and non-linearities in unemployment rates, Applied Economics Letters, 13(9), 545-548.
• Jones, S. R. G. (1996). The Persistence of Unemployment, Queens University Press, McGill.
• Kula, F. & Aslan, A. (2014). Unemployment hysteresis in Turkey: Does education matter?, International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 4(1), 35-39.
• Layard, R., & Nickell, S. & Jackman, R. (1991). Unemployment: Macroeconomic Performance and the Labour Market.
• Layard, R., & Nickell, S. (1986). Unemployment in Britain, Economica, 53(210), 121-169.
• Lee, H.Y., Wu, J.L. & Lın, C.H. (2010). Hysteresis in east asian unemployment, Applied Economics, 42(7), 887-898.
• Lee, J.D., Lee, C.C. & Chang C.P. (2009). Hysteresis in unemployment revisited: evidence from panel lm unit root tests with heterogeneous structural breaks. Bulletin of Economic Research, 61(4), 325-334.
• Leon-Ledesma M.A. (2002). Unemployment hysteresis in the US states and the EU: A panel approach, Bulletin of Economic Research, 54(2), 95-103.
• Lindbeck, A. & Snower, D. J. (1988). Cooperation, harassment, and involuntary unemployment: An insider-outsider approach, The American Economic Review, 167-188.
• List, J. & Strazicich, M. (2003). Are CO2 emission levels converging among industrial countries?, Environmental and Resource Economics, 24, 263-271.
• Lumsdaine, R.L. & Papell, D.H. (1997). Multiple trend breaks and the unit-root hypothesis, Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(2), 212-218.
• Marques, A. M., Lima, G. T. & Troster, V. (2017). Unemployment persistence in OECD countries after the great recession, Economic Modelling, 64, 105-116.
• Mitchell, W.F. (1993). Testing for unit roots and persistence in OECD unemployment rates, Applied Economics, 25(12), 1489-1501.
• Narayan, P. K. & Popp, S. (2013). Size and power properties of structural break unit root tests, Applied Economics, 45(6), 721-728.
• Neudorfer, P., Pichelmann, K. & Wagner, M. (1990). Hysteresis, NAIRU and long term unemployment in Austria, Empirical Economics, 15(2), 217-229.
• Özcan, B. (2012). İşsizlik histerisi hipotezi oecd ülkeleri için geçerli mi? yapısal kırılmalı birim kök analizi, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 40, 95-117.
• Özkan, Y. & Altınsoy, A. (2015). İşsizlik ve istihdamda histeri etkisi (Türkiye, 1988-2014), Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Özel Sayı, 123-130.
• Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica, 57(6), 1361-1401.
• Phelps, E. (1968). Money-Wage Dynamics and Labor-Market Equilibrium, Journal of Political Economy, 76, 678-711.
• Phelps, E. S. (1972). The statistical theory of racism and sexism, The American Economic Review, 62(4), 659-661.
• Roed, K. (1996). Unemployment hysteresis-macro evidence from 16 OECD countries, Empirical Economics, 21(4), 589-600.
• Saraç, T. B. (2014). İşsizlikte histeri etkisi: Türkiye örneği, Ege Akademik Bakış, 14(3), 335-344.
• Smyth, R. (2003). Unemployment hysteresis in australian states and territories: Evidence from panel data unit root tests, Australian Economic Review, 36(2), 181-192.
• Song, F.M. & Wu, Y. (1998). Hysteresis in unemployment: evidence from OECD countries, Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 38, 181-192.
• Summers, L. (1986). Why is the unemployment rate so high near full employment, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 17(2), 339-383.
• Tekin, İ. (2018). Türkiye’de işsizlik histerisi: Fourier fonksiyonlu durağanlık sınamaları, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 33(1), 97-127.
• Yalçınkaya, Ö. & Kaya, V. (2017). Doğal işsizlik oranı mı yoksa; işsizlik histerisi mi? OECD ülkeleri için yeni nesil panel birim kök testlerinden kanıtlar (1980-2015), Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 17(33), 1-18.
• Yılancı, V. (2008). Are unemployment rates nonstationary or nonlinear? Evidence from 19 OECD countries, Economics Bulletin, 3(47), 1-5.
• Yılancı, V. (2009). Yapısal kırılmalar altında türkiye için işsizlik histerisinin sınanması, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 10(2), 324-335.
• Yıldırım, S. & İnançlı, S. (2018). Türkiye’de işsizlik histerisi hipotezinin geçerliliğinin ampirik olarak değerlendirilmesi, Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 14, 45-54.
• Zivot, E. & Andrews, D.W.K. (1992). Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.