KURUMLAR VE EKONOMİK GELİŞME: PANEL VERİ ANALİZİ İLE BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Yıl 2017, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 9, 80 - 104, 05.01.2017

Harun Bal , Pınar Özdemir

Öz

North’un kavramsallaştırması ile "oyunun kuralları" olarak tanımlanan kurumlar, bireylerin davranış
kalıplarını belirleyen kısıtları koyan birer yapı olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Bu kısıtlar resmi veya gayri
resmi nitelikte olabilmektedir. İnsan davranışları üzerindeki etkisi her geçen gün daha fazla kabul gören
kurumlar, iktisadi ve siyasi olarak sistemin işleyişini, sistemin kazanan ve kaybedenlerini de belirleme
gücüne sahiptir. Kurumların işleyişi birçok araştırmacı tarafından farklı yönleri ile incelenerek
kavramsallaştırılmıştır. Kurumların gelişmişlik düzeyi üzerindeki etkisini ele alan birçok kuram
geliştirilmiştir. Bu kuramlar, makroekonomik politik ekonomi yaklaşımlarından mikroekonomik işlem
maliyetleri yaklaşımına kadar uzanmaktadır. Literatürde kuramsal çerçevesi tartışılan kurumların
ölçülmesi de kurumların tanım ve işlevleri konusunda uzlaşma sağlanamadığından kısıtlar içeren bir diğer
konudur. Bu çalışmanın amacı panel veri analiziyle 127 ülkenin 2006-2010 yılları arasındaki verileri
kullanılarak hangi kurumsal yapının gelişme düzeyi üzerinde etkili olduğunu saptamaktır. Elde edilen
bulgular ülke karakteristiklerinin ve gayrı resmi kurumların etkisine işaret etmektedir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kurumlar, Yeni Kurumsal İktisat, İktisadi Gelişme

Institutions and Development: An Assessment with Panel Data

Öz

Related to North, we can define institutions as "rules of games" which means they put constraints on
individuals’ behaviour. These constraints can be formal as well as informal. Human behaviour being
designed by institutions is a well accepted idea more and more each day. Therefore, it follows that
institutions determine the winners and losers of society in terms of both economic and social features.
This process with its different sides has been investigated by scientists. Several theories have been put
forth to understand these relationships. Institutional theories change from macroeconomic approaches,
which seek political economy, to microeconomic transaction cost approaches between institutions and
development levels. The measurement of instiutions is another area of conflict because of conceptual and
therotical debates. The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between development and
institutions using panel data from 127 countries for the years 2005-2010. The results indicate that country
specific qualifications and informal institutions have crucial roles on development.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Institutions, New Institutional Economics, Economic Development, Panel Data Analysis

Kaynakça

• Acemoğlu, D. (2008). Introduction to Modern Economic Growth. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
• Acemoğlu, D., Johnson, S., Robinson, J. (2001). The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Emprical Investigation. The American Economic Review, 91(5), 1369-1401.
• Ali, A. (2006). Growth, Poverty and Institutions: Is There a Missing Link?", Seminar Paper in Poverty, Growth and Institutions, Resource: http://www.api.org.kw/images/publication/pdfs/269/269_wps0601.pdf(02.02.2014).
• Arrufıada, B.(2007), to Avoid when Measuring Institutions:Is Doing Business Damaging Business?, Journal of Comparative Economics, 35(4), 729-47.
• Arslan, Ü. (2007). Kurumların İktđsadi Büyüme Üzerindeki Etkisi. Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, Ankara.
• Ata, Ahmet Y. (2009). Kurumsal İktisat Çerçevesinde Yolsuzluğun Fırsat ve Motivasyonları: AB Ülkeleri Üzerine Bir İnceleme, Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Doktora Tezi, Adana.
• Aysan, Ahmet F. (2007). Yönetişim ve Kurumlar Kavramlarının İktisat Literatüründeki Yükselişi Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme. Uluslararası Ticaret ve Dış Ticaret Politikaları, 1(2), 27-52.
• Bardhan, P. (1989). The New Institutional Economics and Development Theory: A Brief Critical Assesment. World Development, 17(9), 1389-1395.
• Bardhan, P. (2006). Institutions and Development", in David Clark (ed.), Elgar Companion to Development Studies, Elgar Publishing.
• Bates, R., Greif, A., Humpreyes, M., Singh, S. (2004). Institutions and Development, CID Working Paper No. 107. Bontempi, M., Golinelli, R. (2012). Static Panel Data Analysis Lecture 9.1.
• Chang, J. (2005). Understanding the Relationship between Institutions and Economic Development- Some Key Theoretical Issues. Paper to be presented at the WIDER Jubilee Conference, 17-18 June, Helsinki.
• De, P. (2010). Governance, Institutions, and Regional Infrastructure in Asia. ADBI Working Paper Series, 83.
• Deaton, A. (1995). Data and Econometric Tools for Development Analysis. Handbook of Development Economics, Elsevier Publishing, 1801-18.
• Ergil, D. (2012). Toplum ve İnsan. Ankara: Hayat Akademi
• Gwenhamo, F., Federke, J., Kadth, R. (2012). Measuring Institutions: Indicators of Political Rights, Property Rights and Political Instability in Zimbabve, Journal of Peace Research, 49(4), 593–603.
• Hsiao, C.(2005). Why Panel Data?.IEPR Working Paper, 5.33.
• Hsiao, C. (2006), Panel Data Analysis – Advantages and Challenge. IEPR Working Paper . 06.49.
• Jutting, J. (2003). Institutions and Development. OECD Development Center, Working Paper: 210.
• Knowles , S., Wheatherston, C. (2006).Informal Institutions and Cross-Country Income Differences. CREDIT Research Paper, No. 06/06.
• Kuncic, A. (2013). Institutional Quality Datase. the 8. Young Economısts Semınar to19th Dubrovnik Economic Conference, Crotea.
• Lin, Y., Nugent, J. (1995). Institutions and Development in Handbook of Development, In: J. Behrman, T. N. Srinivasan, (Ed) Handbook of Economic Development. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
• Myhrman, J. (1989). The New Institutional Economics and Process of Economic Development. Journal of Economic Institutions and Theorotical Economics, 145, 38-59.
• Morgan, J., Olsen, W. (2011). Conceptiual Issues in Institutional Economics: Clarifying the Fludity of Rules. Journal of Institutional Economics, 3(1), 425-453.
• North, D. (1991), Institutions. The Journal of Economic Perspectives. 5(1), 97-112
• North, D. (1992). Transaction Costs, Institutions and Economic Performance, Occasional International Center of Economic Growth, Papers, 30.
• Pamuk, Ş. (2012). Türkiye’nin 200 Yıllık İktisadi Tarihi (3. Baskı). Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, İstanbul.
• Przeworskı, A., Curvale, C. (2006). Political Institutions and Economic Development in the Americas: the Long Run, , unpublished manuscript, Department of Politics, New York University
• Sen, A. (1983). Development:Which waynow?, The Economic Journal, 93(972), 745-762.
• Sheirly, M. (2003). Institutions and Development, Erişim: http://http://www.coase.org/wshirley2003institutionsand development.pdf
• Siba, E. (2008). Determinants of Institutional Quality in Sub-Saharan African Countries. University of Gothenburg , School of Business, Economics and Law Workıng Papers ın Economıcs, 310.
• Tabellini, G. (2006). Institutions and Culture, European Economic Association Conference, Budapest, Hungary.
• Voight, S. (2007). How (Not) to Measure Institutions. Workshop Measuring Law & Institutions, December 15-16, Paris, France.
• Williamson, O. (2000). The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking. Ahead, Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 595-613.
• Williamson C., Kerekes, C. (2011).Securing Private Property: Formal versus Informal Institutions. Journal of Law and Economics, 54(3), 537-572.
• Yaffee, R.(2003), A Primer for Panel Data Analysis, Access: http://localgov.fsu.edu/readings_papers/Resear ch%20Methods/Yafee_Promer_for_Panel_Data_Analysis.pdf (Erişim:10.08.2014).