TÜRKİYE’DE EĞİTİM VE SAĞLIK İLE İKTİSADİ BÜYÜME İLİŞKİLERİNİN NEDENSELLİK TESTLERİ İLE ANALİZLERİ; SOSYAL, EKONOMİK VE STRATEJİK PERSPEKTİF ANALİZLERİ

Author :  

Year-Number: 2018-21
Language : null
Konu :
Number of pages: 3611-3641
Mendeley EndNote Alıntı Yap

Abstract

Özellikle 21. yüzyılda gelişen bilgi teknolojisi ve kullanımı, ekonomik ve toplumsal dönüşümün katalizörü olarak kabul edilmektedir. Dolayısıyla beşeri sermayenin nitelikli hale dönüştürülmesi insanın iyi ve kaliteli bir şekilde yetiştirilmesi ile mümkün olacaktır. Bugün teknolojik yapı, emek (insan yetiştirme) faktörünün çok daha önemli olmasını sağlayacak şekilde dönüşmüş olması, emeğin üretim sürecindeki öneminin artmasından kaynaklanmaktadır. Bir toplumda emeğin yetiştirilmesinde ve donanımında eğitim ilk sırayı alırken, hayata karşı bağlılığını arttıran unsurların başında toplum sağlığını korumak, yaşam şartlarını geliştirmek ve iyi beslenmesini sağlatmak en önemli sosyal devlet ilkesi olmuştur. Bu çalışma, emeğin kaliteli ve nitelikli işgücü olarak yetiştirilmesinde rol oynayan eğitim ve sağlık alanındaki gelişmelerin iktisadi büyüme üzerinde yaptığı analizleri içermektedir. Türkiye’de 1960 ile 2009 dönemini kapsayan istatistiki veriler kullanılarak ekonometrik analizi yapılmıştır. Ekonometrik analizde iktisadi büyüme ile eğitim, sağlık ve hayatta kalma süresi gibi değişkenlerin kısa ve uzun dönemli bir nedensellik ilişkisi aranmıştır. Granger nedensellik testi ve Toda-Yamamoto (MWALD) nedensellik testleri kullanılmıştır. Birim kök testleri ve Zivot-Andrews kırılma testi yapılmıştır. Granger nedensellik testi ile kısa dönem nedensellik ilişkisi ele alınıp incelenirken, Toda-Yamamoto nedensellik testi ile uzun dönem nedensellik ilişkisi incelenmiştir. Her iki nedensellik testinde benzer sonuçlara ulaşılmıştır. Kısa ve uzun dönemde eğitim harcamaları ile iktisadi büyüme arasında çift yönlü pozitif bir nedensellik ilişkisi saptanmışken, okullaşma oranları ile iktisadi büyüme arasındaki ilişkileri incelediğimizde ise, ilkokullaşma oranından iktisadi büyümeye anlamlı bir nedensellik söz konusudur. Benzer biçimde yükseköğretim okullaşma oranından da iktisadi büyümeye anlamlı bir nedensellik söz konusu iken, lise düzeyinde okullaşma oranı ile büyüme arasında anlamlı bir nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilememiştir. Sağlık Bakanlığı Bütçesinden iktisadi büyümeye doğru bir nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilmiştir. Hayatta yaşam beklentisi ile iktisadi büyüme arasında bir nedensellik ilişkisi bulunamamıştır.

Keywords

Abstract

Especially in the 21st century, information technology and its use are considered as a catalyst for economic and social transformation. Therefore, the transformation of the human capital into qualified ones will be possible if the person is educated in good quality. Today, the technological structure has turned into a way to make the labor (human raising) factor much more important, stemming from the increased importance of labor in the production process. The most important social state principle was to protect the health of the community, improve living conditions and provide good nutrition at the top of the factors that increase the adherence to life while educating and educating the labor in a society. This study includes analysis of the developments in the field of education and health, which play a role in training labor as a qualified and qualified labor force, on economic growth. econometric analysis using statistical data covering the period 1960 to 2009 were made in Turkey. In econometric analysis, a short and long-term causality relationship between economic growth and variables such as education, health and survival was sought. Granger causality test and Toda-Yamamoto (MWALD) causality tests were used. Unit root tests and Zivot-Andrews fracture tests were performed. While the Granger causality test and the short-term causality relationship were examined and examined, the long-term causality relationship was examined by the Toda-Yamamoto causality test. Similar results were obtained in both causality tests. When we examine the relationship between schooling rates and economic growth, we find that there is a significant causal relationship between economic growth and primary schooling expenditures, while there is a positive positive causality relationship between educational expenditures and economic growth in the short and long term. Similarly, a meaningful causality between high school enrollment rate and economic growth has been determined, but no significant causality relationship between high school enrollment rate and growth has been found. A causality relationship has been identified from the Ministry of Health budget to economic growth. There is no causal relationship between life expectancy and economic growth.

Keywords


  • AFŞAR, Muharrem, (2009). “Türkiye’de Eğitim Yatırımları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi”, Anadolu

  • AFŞAR, Muharrem, (2009). “Türkiye’de Eğitim Yatırımları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi”, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt:9, No:1, s.85-98.

  • AKSU, Levent, (1998a). Türk Milli Eğitim Sisteminde Yabancı Dille Eğitim ve Öğretim Meselesi ile BazıÜlke Örnekleri, İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Temmuz 1998, İstanbul.

  • AKSU, Levent, (1998). “Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Nüfus Analizleri”, Sosyoloji Konferansları, 25. Kitap,İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi, Sosyoloji Metodoloji Araştırmalar Merkezi Yayınları, Çantay Kitabevi, İstanbul, 1998, s.219-309.

  • AKSU, Levent, (2005). “Türk Milli Eğitim Sisteminde Yabancı Dille Eğitim ve Öğretim Meselesinin OrtayaÇıkarttığı Genel Sonuçlar ve Dilin Tanımı, Kavramı ve Önemi”, Türk Dünyası Araştırmaları Vakfı Yayını, Yayın No:159, Kasım-Aralık 2005, İstanbul, s.37-66.

  • AKSU, Levent, (2013). “Türkiye’de İktisadi Büyümenin Kaynakları”, T.C.Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Kasım 2013, Balıkesir.

  • AKSU, Levent, (2016). “Türkiye’de Beşeri Sermayenin Önemi: İktisadi Büyüme ile İlişkisi, Sosyal veStratejik Analizi”, İktisat Politikası Araştırmaları Dergisi, (Journal of Economic Policy Researches) Cilt/Volume:3, Sayı/Issue:2, Yıl/Year: 2016, s.68-129.

  • AKSU, Levent, (2016a). “Türkiye’de ve Ortadoğu’da Hidro Politikanın Önemi: Ekonomik, Sosyal ve Stratejik Analizleri”, AKADEMİK BAKIŞ DERGİSİ, Sayı:55, Mayıs - Haziran 2016, s.727-760.

  • AKSU, Levent, (2017). “Türkiye’de İstihdam, Verimlilik ve İktisadi Büyüme İlişkilerinin Analizi”, İktisatPolitikası Araştırmaları Dergisi, (Journal of Economic Policy Researches), Cilt/Volume:4, Sayı/Issue:1, Yıl/Year: 2017, s.39-94.

  • AKSU, Levent, (2018). “Türkiye’de Bilim ve Teknoloji ile İktisadi Büyüme İlişkilerinin; Sosyal, Ekonomik ve Stratejik Analizi”, Social Sciences Studies Journal, Volume:4, Issue:20, pp. 2635-2670.

  • AKSU, Levent, (2018a). “İşsizlik, Suç, Boşanma, İntihar Oranları İle İktisadi Büyüme İlişkisinin;Nedensellik Testleri İle Analizi: Türkiye Örneği”, Journal of Economic Policy Researches, Cilt/Volume:5, Sayı/Issue:2, Yıl/Year: 2018, s.58-100.

  • AKYÜZ, Hüseyin, (1992). Eğitim Sosyolojisinin Temel Kavram ve Alanları Üzerine Bir Araştırma, M.E.B. Yayınları, İstanbul.

  • ALLEN, Roy, G.D., (1964). Statics for Economists, Mc-Millan,UK, pp.133-152.

  • AY, Ahmet & YARDIMCI, Pınar, (2008). “Türkiye’de Beşeri Sermaye Birikimine Dayalı Ak Tipi İçselEkonomik Büyümenin Var Modeli İle Analizi (1950-2000)”, Maliye Dergisi, Sayı:155, Temmuz-Aralık 2008, Ankara, s.39-54.

  • AY, Ahmet; KIZILKAYA, Oktay & KOÇAK, Emrah, (2013). “Sağlık Göstergeleri ile Ekonomik BüyümeArasındaki İlişki: Türkiye Örneği”, Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2013, Cilt: 6, Sayı: 1, s.163-172.

  • BALTAGI, Badi, H. & MOSCONE, Francesco, (2010). “Health Care Expenditures And Income in The Oecd Reconsidered: Evidence From Panel Data”, IZA Discussion Paper Series, No:4851, pp.1-22.

  • BARRO, Robert J., (1991), “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries”. Quarterly Journal of Economics,106(2), pp.407-443.

  • BASSANINI, Andrea & SCARPETTA, Stefano, (2001). “Does Human Capital Matter For Growth ın OECDCountries? Evidence From Pooled Mean-Group Estimates”, OECD, Economic Department Working Papers, No:282, pp.1-30.

  • BEGG, David; Stanley FISCHER & Rudiger DORNBUSCH, (2010). İktisat, Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 8. Baskı, İstanbul.

  • BENHABIB, Jess & SPIEGEL, Mark, M. (1994). “The Role of Human Capital in Economic DevelopmentEvidence from Aggregate Cross-Country and Regional U.S. Data”, Economic Research Reports, C.V. STARR Center For Applied Economics, New York University, Vol:46, pp.1-41.

  • BİRCAN, İsmail, (1990). "Eğitimde Yeni Finansman Modelleri ve Stratejik Planlama" 1. Eğitim BilimleriUlusal Kongresine Sunulmuş Tebliğ, Ankara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi, 24-28 Eylül 1990, s. 3.BLOOM, David, E.; CANNING, David & SEVILLA, Jaypee, (2004). “The effect of health on economic growth: A production function approach”, World Development, Vol:32, No:1, pp. 1-13.

  • BOZKURT, Veysel, (1996). Enformasyon Toplumu ve Türkiye, Sistem Yayıncılık, İstanbul.

  • BREMPONG, Kwabena, G. & WILSON, Mark, (2004). “Health human capital and economic growth inSub-Saharan African and OECD Countries”, The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, (May 2004), pp. 296-320.

  • BULUTAY, Tuncer, (2005). “Türk Ekonomisinde Uluslar arası Ticaret ve Döviz Piyasalarında 1980 SonrasıGelişmelerin Temel Nitelikleri”, Editör:Haluk ERLAT: “Bölgesel Gelişme Stratejileri Ve Akdeniz Ekonomisi”, Türk Ekonomi Kurumu, Ankara, s.21-86.

  • CASTELLS, Manuel, (1994). “The University System:Engine of Development in the New WorldEconomy”, içerik:“Revitalizing Higher Education”, Editors: Jamil SALMI and Adrian M.Verspoor, Oxford: Published for the IAU press by Pergamon, pp.14-40.

  • CHAKRABORTY, Shankha, (2003). “Endegenous Lifetime and Economic Growth”, Journal of Economic Theory,Vol:116, No:1, (March 2001), pp.119-137.

  • ÇAKMAK, Erol & GÜMÜŞ, Sevda, (2005). “Türkiye’de Beşeri Sermaye ve iktisadi büyüme: Ekonometrik Bir Analiz (1960-2002)”, Ankara Üniversitesi, Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Yayınları, Sayı:60, s.59-72.

  • ÇETİN, Murat & ECEVİT, Eyyup, (2010). “Sağlık Harcamalarının Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerindeki Etkisi:Oecd Ülkeleri Üzerine Bir Panel Regresyon Analizi”, Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 11 (2) 2010, İstanbul, s.166-182.

  • DAĞDEMİR, Özcan, (2009). “Sağlık ve Ekonomik Büyüme: 1960-2005 Döneminde Gelişmekte OlanÜlkelerde Sağlık ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki Karşılıklı İlişkinin Analizi”, Ankara Üniversitesi, SBF Dergisi, 64-2, s.76-96.

  • DELİKTAŞ, Ertuğrul, (2001), “Malthusgil Yaklaşımdan Modern Ekonomik Büyümeye”, Ege Akademik Bakış, Cilt:1,Sayı.1, İzmir, s.92-113.

  • DENISON, Edward, W., (1962). “Education,Economic Growth and Gaps in Information”, The Journal of Political Economy, Vol:LXX, No:5, Part:2, pp.124-128.

  • De MEULEMEESTER, Jean-Luc & ROCHAT, Denis, (1995). “A Causality Analysis of the Link BetweenHigher Education and Economic Development”, Economics of Education Review, Vol:14(4), pp.351-361.

  • DOĞAN, Seyhun & Bozkurt, Hilal, Y., (2003). "Eğitim-İktisadi Büyüme İlişkisi ve Türkiye İçinKoentegrasyon Analizi" II. Bilgi, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı, İzmit, s.193-202. (İnternet:http:// www.bilgiyonetimi.org. erişim.08.11.2008).

  • DREGER, Christian & REIMERS, Hans-Eggert, (2005). "Health Care Expenditures in OECD Countries: APanel Unit Root and Cointegration Analysis," IZA Discussion Paper Series, No:1469, (January 2005), pp.1- DURKHEIM, Emile, (1956). Education and Sociology, The Free Press Glencoe, Illinois, USA.

  • DURUSOY, Serap; KÖSE, Seyit & KARADENİZ, Oğuz, (2007). Türkiye’de Eğitim ve Beşeri Sermaye, Gazi Kitabevi, Ankara.

  • ERDOĞAN, Seyfettin & YILDIRIM, Çağrı D., (2009). “Türkiye’de Eğitim-İktisadi Büyüme İlişkisiÜzerine Ekonometrik Bir İnceleme”, The Journal of Knowledge Economy &Knowledge Management, Vol:IV (Fall), s.11-22.

  • ERGEN, Hüseyin, (1999), “Türkiye’de Eğitimin İktisadi büyümeye Katkısı”, Ekonomik Yaklaşım Dergisi, Cilt:10, Sayı:35, s.21-52.

  • ERİÇOK, Recep, E. & YILANCI, Veli, (2013). “Eğitim Harcamaları ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Sınır Testi Yaklaşımı”, Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, 8(1), s.87-101.

  • ERKAL, Mustafa, E., (1990). Bölge Açısından Az Gelişmişlik, Der Yayınları, No:68, İstanbul.

  • ERKAN, Hüsnü, (1998), Bilgi Toplumu ve Ekonomik Gelişme,Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları, No:326, 2.Baskı, İstanbul.

  • GLOMM, Gerhard & RAVIKUMAR, Balasubrahmanian, (1997). "Productive Government Expenditures and Long-run Growth," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Vol:21, pp.183-204.

  • GÜMÜŞ, Erdal & ŞİŞMAN, Mehmet, (2014). Eğitim Ekonomisi ve Planlaması, Pegem Akademi Yayınları, 2.Baskı, Ankara.

  • GÜNGÖR, Nevin D., (1997). “Education and Economic Growth in Turkey 1980-1990: A Panel Study”, METU (ODTÜ) Studies in Development, 24(2), pp.185-214.

  • GÜLOĞLU, B. & YILMAZER, M., (2002), “İktisadi Büyüme Ve İnsani Kalkınma: Panel VerilerEkonometrisi Neler Getiriyor?”,I.Ulusal Bilgi,Ekonomi ve Yönetim Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı,Kocaeli- Hereke, s.429-440.

  • HADDAD, Wadi, D.; CARNOY Martin, RINALDI, Rosemary & REGEL, Omporn, (1990). "Education andDevelopment: Evidence for New Priorities,",The World Bank Economic Review, (August 1990), pp.1-110.

  • HAN, Ergül & KAYA, Ayşe A., (2006). Kalkınma Ekonomisi Teori ve Politika, Nobel Yayınları, Beşinci Basım, Ankara.

  • HITIRIS,Theo, & POSNETT, John, (1992). “The Determinants and Effeects of Health Expenditures in Developed Countries”, Journal of Health Economics, Vol:11, pp.173-181.

  • KARAGÜL, Mehmet, (2002). Beşeri Sermayenin İktisadi Gelişmedeki Rolü ve Türkiye’deki Önemi, Afyonkarahisar Kocatepe Üniversitesi Yayınları, Anıt Matbaa, Yayın No. 37. Ankara.

  • KAR, Muhsin. & AĞIR, Hüseyin, (2003). “Türkiye’de Beşeri Sermaye ve iktisadi büyüme: NedensellikTesti”, II.Ulusal Bilgi,Ekonomi ve Yönetim Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı, Kocaeli-Derbent, s.181-190. (http://www.bilgiyönetimi.org /cm/ pages/mkl-gos.php?nt=234).

  • KAR, Muhsin & TABAN, Sami, (2003). “Kamu Harcama Çeşitlerinin Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerine Etkileri”, Ankara Üniversitesi, SBF Dergisi ,Yıl-Sayı: 58-3, s.145-169.

  • KAVAK, Yüksel & EKİNCİ, C. Ergin, (1994). “Eğitimin Finansmanı Sorunu ve Maliyetlerin Azaltılmasına İlişkin Alternatif Stratejiler”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı:10, s.65-72.

  • KAYNAK, Muhteşem, (2005). Kalkınma İktisadı, Gazi Kitabevi Yayınları, Ankara.

  • KELLER, R.I. Katarina, (2006). “Investment in Primary, Secondary and Higher Education and The Effects on Economic Growth”, Contemporary Economic Policy, Vol.24, No.1, January, pp.18-34.

  • KELLY, Trish, (1997). “Public Expenditures and Growth”, Journal of Development Studies, Vol:34/1, pp. 60-84.

  • KENNEDY, Peter, (2006). Ekonometri Kılavuzu, çev.:Muzaffer Sarımeşeli ve Şenay Açıkgöz, Gazi Kitabevi, 5.baskı, Ankara.

  • KESKİN, Abdullah, (2011). “Ekonomik Kalkınmada Beşeri Sermayenin Rolü ve Türkiye”, Atatürk Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Erzurum, Cilt:25, Sayı:3-4, s.146-149.

  • KOTLER, Philip; JATUSRIPITAK, Somkid & MAESINCEE, Suvit, (2000). Ulusların Pazarlanması, Çeviren:Ahmet BUĞDAYCI, Türkiye İş Bankası Yayınları, No:489, İstanbul.

  • KÜÇÜKKALAY, A.Mesut, & TÜRKCAN, Kemal, (2005). “Nüfus ve Kalkınma” içinde Editör: Sami Taban ve Muhsin Kar, Kalkınma Ekonomisi, Ekin Kitabevi, Bursa, s.71-110.

  • LANDAU, Daniel, (1986). “Government and Economic Growth in the Less Developed Countries: An Empirical Study for 1960-1980”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol:35, pp.35-75.

  • LOPEZ- Casasnovas Guillem; RIVERA, Berta & CURRAIS, Luis, (2005). “Introduction: The role healthplays in economic growth”, in G. Lopez- Casasnovas, B. Rivera, L. Currais edition, Health and Economic Growth, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 1-16.

  • LUCAS, Robert, (1990). "Why Doesn't Capital Flow from Rich to Poor Countries". American Economic Review,Vol: 80, No:2, (May 1990), pp. 92–96.

  • MANKIW, N.Gregory; ROMER David & WEIL, David, N., (1992). “A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol:107, No. 2, (May 1992), pp.407-437.

  • MAYER, David, (2000). “ On The Role Of Health in The Economic And Demographic Dynamics Of Brazil, 1980-1995”, Institute For Futures Studies, Vol:4, (September 2000), pp.1-17.

  • MAYER, David, (2001). “The long-term impact of health on economic growth in Mexico:1950-1995”, Journal of International Development Vol:13, pp.123-126.

  • MAZGİT, İsmail, (2002). “Bilgi Toplumu ve Sağlığın Artan Önemi”, I. Ulusal Bilgi, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Kongresi, (Hereke-Kocaeli), s. 405-415.

  • McDONALD, Scott & ROBERTS, Jennifer, (2002). “Growth and Multiple Forms of Human Capital in anAugmented Solow Model: A Panel Data İnvestigation”, Economic Letters, Vol:74, (January 2002), pp.271-MERCAN, Mehmet & SEZER, Sevgi, (2014). “The Effect of Education Expenditure on Economic Growth:The Case of Turkey”, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 109, 8 January 2014, pp.925-930.

  • MURTHY, N.R.Vasudeva & UKPOLO, Victor, (1994). “Aggregate Health Care Expenditure in the United States:Evidence From Cointegration Tests,” Applied Economics,26, pp.797-802.

  • MUSHKIN, Selma, J., (1962). “Health as an Investment”, Journal of Political Economy, 70(5,part 2), October, pp.129-157.

  • OCHAA, Orlando O., (1996). Growth, Trade and Endogenous Technology: A Study of OECD Manufacturing, New York , St. Martin Press, First Published, USA.

  • OVALI, Serap, (2014). “Küresel Rekabet Gücü Açısından Türkiye’nin Konumu Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme”, International Journal of Economic and Administrative Studies, 7(13), s.17-36.

  • ÖYMEN, Onur, (2007). Geleceği Yakalamak, Türkiye’de ve Dünyada Küreselleşme ve Devlet Reformu, Remzi Kitabevi, 3.Baskı, İstanbul.

  • ÖZLALE, Ümit, (2007). “Sağlıklı İktisadi Büyüme”, Makro Bakış Dergisi, Kasım 2007,.

  • ÖZSOY, Osman, (1999). “Health Expenditures and Their Impact on the Economic Growth and Social Well-being of Turkey” ERC/METU, International Conference in Economics III, September 8-11, 1999, Ankara. (http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/ekonomi/ tik2004/ cilt11.pdf/2004 -Türkiye İktisat Kongresi, 2004:22).

  • ÖZSOY, Ceyda, (2008). “Türk Yükseköğretim Sisteminin Durumu Ve İktisadi Büyüme PerformansınaKatkısı”, Nigde Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Aralık 2008, Cilt: 1, Sayı: 2, s. 31-ÖZSOY, Ceyda, (2009). “Türkiye’de Eğitim ve İktisadi Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin VAR Modeli ile Analizi”, Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi, Cilt:4, Sayı:1, s.71-83.

  • PAMUK, Şevket, (2012). Türkiye’nin 200 Yıllık İktisadi Tarihi, Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, No: 2910, 4.Basım, İstanbul.

  • PAMUK, Mürüvvet & BEKTAŞ, Hakan, (2014). “Türkiye’de Eğitim Harcamaları ve Ekonomik BüyümeArasındaki İlişki: ARDL Sınır Testi Yaklaşımı”, Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, Yıl:2, Cilt:2, Sayı:2, s.77-90.

  • PARASIZ, İlker, (2003). İktisadi Büyüme Teorileri, Ezgi Yayınları, Bursa.

  • PENCAVEL, John, (1991). “Higher Education, Economic Growth and Earnings”, “Higher Education andEconomic Growth” Editör: William E. Becker and D.R. Lewis, Kluwer, (Ayrıca aynı makale yayını;Higher education, productivity, and earnings: A review, Journal of Economic Education, 22(4), pp.331- 359).pp.53.

  • RAMIREZ, Alejandro; RANIS, Gustav & STEWART, Frances, (1998). “Economic Growth and Human Development”, QEH Working Paper Series, No:18, Yale Center, pp. 1-56.

  • RANIS, Gustav; STEWART, Frances & RAMIREZ, Alejandro, (2000). “Economic Growth and Human Development”, World Development, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 197-219.

  • SARI, Ramazan & SOYTAŞ, Uğur, (2006). “Income and Education in Turkey: A Multivariate Analysis”, Education Economics, 14(2), s.181-196.

  • SAYGILI, Şerif; CİHAN Cengiz & YURTOĞLU, Hasan, (2005). “Türkiye Ekonomisinde Sermaye BirikimiVerimlilik ve Büyüme:1972-2003”, Ekonomik Modeller ve Stratejik Araştırmalar G.Müdürlüğü, DPT, Yayın No:2686, Ankara.

  • SCHULTZ, Theodore, W., (1968). “Education and Economic Growth: Return to Education”, Readings in the Economics of Education, UNESCO, France, pp.277-292.

  • SINGER, Hans, W., (1964). International Development: Growth and Change, McGraw-Hill, New York.

  • SMITH, Adam, (2008). Milletlerin Zenginliği, Çeviren:Haldun DERİN, Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, 2.Baskı, İstanbul.

  • ŞAKAR, Müjdat, (1990). 1982 Anayasası ve Önceki Anayasalar, Beta Yayınları, İstanbul.

  • ŞEN, Arzu, (2003). “İnsan Sermayesi ve Sosyo-Ekonomik Gelişme Aşamalarına Göre İnsan SermayesininRolü”, İş Güç Endüstri İlişkileri ve İnsan Kaynakları Dergisi, Yıl: 2003/ Cilt: 5, Sayı: 2, Sıra: 9, No: 138, İstanbul.

  • ŞİMŞEK, Muammer & KADILAR, Cem, (2010). “Türkiye’de Beşeri Sermaye, İhracat Ve EkonomikBüyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin Nedensellik Analizi”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt 11, Sayı 1, 2010, s.115-140.

  • TABAN, Sami & KAR, Muhsin, (2004). “Beşeri Sermaye ve Kalkınma”, Kalkınma Ekonomisi, Ekin Kitabevi, Bursa, s.279-299.

  • TABAN, Sami & KAR, Muhsin, (2008) (Editör). Kalkınma Ekonomisi, Ekin Yayınevi, 2.Baskı, Bursa.

  • TABAN, Sami, (2006). “Türkiye’de Sağlık ve Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki Nedensellik İlişkisi”, SosyoEkonomi Dergisi, Temmuz-Aralık, 2, s.31-46.

  • TEAL, Francis, (2010). “Higher Education and Economic Development in Africa: a Review of Channels andInteractions”, Centre for the Study of African Economies University of Oxford, No:25, August 2010, pp.1- TEZCAN, Mahmut, (1996). Eğitim Sosyolojisi, Feryal Matbaası, 10. Baskı, Ankara.

  • TODA, Hiro Y. & Yamamoto, Taku, (1995). ”Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated processes”, Journal of Econometrics, Vol:66, pp.225-250.

  • TOSUN, Kemal, (1974). İşletme Yönetimi Genel Esaslar, İstanbul: Fakülteler Matbaası.

  • TÜRK EKONOMİ KURUMU (TEK), (2003). Büyüme Stratejler Türkiye İktisat Kongresi Büyüme Stratejileri Çalışma Grubu, Büyüme Çalışma Stratejileri Metni,2003/5,Ankara.( http://www.tek.org.tr).

  • TÜRKİYE İKTİSAT KONGRESİ (2004), Çalışma Grubu Raporları – I, Cilt 11, İzmir.(Büyüme Stratejileri Çalışma Grubu Raporu) (http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/ekonomi/ tik2004/cilt11.pdf).s.1-49.

  • TÜRİYE İSTATİSTİK KURUMU (TÜİK), (2015, 2016, 2017). İstatistiklerle Türkiye 2015, 2016, 2017 Verileri, Ankara.

  • TÜRKMEN, Fatih, (2002). Eğitimin Ekonomik Ve Sosyal Faydaları Ve Türkiye'de Eğitim İktisadi büyüme İlişkisinin Araştırılması, DPT Uzmanlık tezi, DPT Yayını; No:2655, Ankara.

  • UÇAN, Okyay & YEŞİLYURT, Hilal, (2016). “Türkiye’de Eğitim Harcamaları ve Büyüme İlişkisi”, Niğde Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(2), Nisan 2016, s.179-185.

  • UZAY, Nısfet, (2005). Verimlilik ve Büyüme, Nobel Yayınları, Birinci Basım, Ankara.

  • ÜÇDOĞRUK, Şenay, (1996). “Türkiye’de Sağlık Harcamalarının Ekonometrik Analizi:Eşbütünleşme Testi”, Ekonomik Yaklaşım, Cilt:7,Sayı:21,(Yaz 1996), s.101-112.

  • WEBBER, Don, J., (2002). “Policies to Stimulate Growth: Should We Invest in Health or Education? ”, Applied Economics, 34(13), pp.1633-1643.

  • WEIL, David N., (2013). Economic Growth, Pearson Education Ltd., Third Edition, Essex, England.

  • WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (WHO), World Health Statistics 2018: Monitoring Health for The Sustainable Development Goals, Geneva, Switzerland.

  • VARSAK, Serkan & BAKIRTAŞ, İbrahim, (2009). “Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerinde Beşeri SermayeninEtkisi:1970-2008 Türkiye Örneği”, Dumlupınar Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı:25, Aralık 2009, s.49-59.

  • YANIKKAYA, Halit, (2002). “Beşeri Sermaye Birkiminin İktisadi büyüme Sürecindeki Rolü Üzerine Bir Çalışma”, İstatistik Araştırma Dergisi, Sayı:2, s.287-306.

  • YARDIMCIOĞLU, Fatih; GÜRDAL, Temel & ALTUNDEMİR, Mehmet, Emin, (2014). “Eğitim veEkonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: OECD Ülkelerine İlişkin Panel Eş-bütünleşme Analizi (1980-2008)”, Eğitim ve Bilim Dergisi, 39(173), s.1-12.

  • YEĞİNBOY, Emin & YEĞİNBOY, E. Yasemin, (1993). “Uluslararası Sağlık Hizmetleri EtkinlikGöstergelerinin Türkiye Açısından İrdelenmesi”, Sağlık Hizmetleri ve İşletmeleri Serisi, Doğruculuk Matbaası, Sayı:2, İzmir, s.1-144.

  • YILMAZ, Kuzey, (2009). “Beşeri Sermaye ve Türkiye”, Türk Bilim Araştırma Vakfı, Tübav Bilim Dergisi, Cilt:2,Yıl:1, s.73-81.

  • ZIVOT, Eric & ANDREWS, Donald W. K., (1992). “Further Evidence on Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and Unit-Root Hypothesis,” Journal of the Business and Economic Statistics,Vol: 10, pp.251-270.

  • In this study, when analyzing the importance of human capital in Turkey's economy is considered as anessential element of economic growth. Econometric analysis using statistical data for the period between2009 and 1960 were made in Turkey. These parameters were used to analyze the Human DevelopmentIndex. Mainly depends on the development of human capital factor for the economic development and stablegrowth of a developing country such as Turkey. In this study human capital factors, economic, social and strategic importance was emphasized.

  • This study includes analysis of the developments in the field of education and health, which play a role intraining labor as a qualified and qualified labor force, on economic growth. econometric analysis usingstatistical data covering the period 1960 to 2009 were made in Turkey. In econometric analysis, a short andlong-term causality relationship between economic growth and variables such as education, health andsurvival was sought. Granger causality test and Toda-Yamamoto (MWALD) causality tests were used. Unitroot tests and Zivot-Andrews fracture tests were performed. While the Granger causality test and the short-term causality relationship were examined and examined, the long-term causality relationship was examinedby the Toda-Yamamoto causality test. Similar results were obtained in both causality tests. When weexamine the relationship between schooling rates and economic growth, we find that there is a significantcausal relationship between economic growth and primary schooling expenditures, while there is a positivepositive causality relationship between educational expenditures and economic growth in the short and longterm. Similarly, a meaningful causality between high school enrollment rate and economic growth has beendetermined, but no significant causality relationship between high school enrollment rate and growth hasbeen found. A causality relationship has been identified from the Ministry of Health budget to economic growth. There is no causal relationship between life expectancy and economic growth in life.

  • By playing an important role in the development of the educational phenomenon, ferdin, he fulfilledimportant functions and functions in achieving status within the society and acquiring personality (Aksu, 1998a: 14);

  • 1. It has been determined that the starting stock of the human capital (high school status) has a significant effect on growth (Küçükkalay and Turkcan, 2004:102).

  • 2. In terms of the effect of education on growth, high school and higher education were found to be moreimportant than primary education. Examples are Pencavel (1991: 331-359), De Meulemeester and Rochat(1995: 351-361) and Teal (2010: 1-24). In these studies, they analyzed that the effects of higher education on growth were positive.

  • 3. The education at primary and high school level is relatively high, especially for the underdevelopedcountries, over the economic growth. The rate of enrollment in middle and high school and the effect of percapita expenditure on income growth per capita is more important than lower education levels. Likewise, it isseen that in countries with higher public expenditure per pupil for primary and secondary education, growth is higher (Keller, 2006: 18-34).

  • 4. Although there is a statistically strong correlation between growth and human capital in empirical studiesinvolving all countries, these factors, which have a serious causality relationship, have been found to have a weaker correlation in studies on OECD countries (Küçükkalay and Turkcan, 2004: 103).

  • ** Data covering the years 1960-2009 of education and health were used in the study process in Turkey. Itwas easier to analyze the data with the Planned Development Periods starting from this period. The data setin this study was prepared by using the data of TURKSTAT, SPO, CBRT, Ministry of Finance, Ministry ofHealth, Ministry of National Education, Undersecretariat of Treasury and Undersecretariat of Foreign Trade.Due to the constraints of Turkey to obtain reliable data, we used data between 1960 and 2009 belong toTurkey. In our analyzes, the Stata / SE 9.1 program was used as well as the Eviews.10 program for the realization of KPSS tests, Granger Causality test and Toda-Yamamoto (MWALD) Causality test.

  • The inadequacy of vocational education, the inadequacy of education formation to gain the profession andqualification of the workforce, the application of the memorization and blind training model and theimperialist education model, the lack of equal opportunity in education, the lack of qualifications ineducation and the inability to gain a quality education model and the teachers and university lecturers as aresult of the fact that salaries are far below the standard of living and that this profession is taken away frombeing an ideal profession and as a result it is seen as a result of the escape of quality education personnelabroad or away from the profession and the fact that the teachers in primary education can not win the futuregeneration awareness and realize that they constitute the future of the country, a mathematics and a goodhistory of knowledge can not be passed on to future generations, for example examinations and competitions(PISA, etc.) is a very sad situation (Aksu, 2016: 114-115). Educational investments are at the top of the mostimportant investments that are very costly and require a lot of patience as well as continuity and patience.The Chinese have a famous promise; "Whether a year's worth of wheat, ten-year existence, tree, or hundred-year existence, human beings grow." With this thought, rational education policies are urgently needed to raise conscious and conscious new generations (Aksu, 2018: 2660-2661).

  • ** National education policy in Turkey, lifelong learning culture (life-long learning culture- LLC) is implementing toinclude all members and sections of society in every field should be the main objective. The importance of education inan underdeveloped society, reducing the inequality of opportunity, and the increase of skilled and knowledgeable personnel will be important in the development of the community in the long run (Erkal, 1990: 79).

  • ** The higher the level of qualification in the case of human capital, the higher the level of human capital,the more important it will be in development. For this, taxation in education should be removed or reset,education activities of private sector should be supported. Basic education should be twelve years, duringwhich students should have good mathematics, good history and language education and 2-3 foreignlanguages (at least one western language, one language is very good in one language). In this context,equality of opportunity should be provided to address all segments of education society. The financialresources needed for this should be arranged in the budget and the children of the poor people should be well educated and the opportunity inequality should be abolished (Keskin, 2011: 146-149).

  • ** In order for the human capital to be used effectively and efficiently, the complementarity relation withphysical capital needs to be well established. Otherwise, the country will not be able to adequately assess thehuman capital it has. This can lead to shifts in other countries where human capital can work moreproductively and more satisfactorily. For this reason, it should not be possible to create the conditions thatmay cause "Brain Migration" (Erkal, 1990: 93-94). This is like giving your "precious diamonds" to a foreigncountry at zero cost, without working for your country with your precious children you raised with high cost.Therefore, developed countries that receive immigration are transferring their education savings to the AR-GE studies they are in "monopoly" in the world, without "costing education and training". In other words,brain migration, quality human power, opposition to the social and economic development, culture andnational interests of the country as a process of neutralizing. This is a serious handicap for developingcountries like ours against developed countries (Aksu, 1998: 234; Aksu, 2005: 37-66). Turkey's "brain drainfield," the charm of a country should be ensured to become high. Brain drain will be created with the acquisition of power, a great added value in Turkey's influence will bring about economic development.

  • In our study, a bi-directional positive causality relationship was found between education and GNP. It isunderstandable that education is both a cause and a consequence of economic growth. Individuals with agrowing income can devote more resources to education. But in our study of "education" variable wemeasure with the Ministry of Education budget, the issue of individuals in Turkey not with allocate moreresources to education is related to the GNP growth together with entering the internal facilities able also allocated more resources to the Ministry of Education budget (Aksu, 2013: 234).

  • From the "Health" variable, a one-way positive causality relationship to growth was found. Some studies inthe literature suggest that an increase in health spending has an effect on growth through a mechanism suchas increasing productivity. But we saw above, such as whether a statistically significant relationship betweenthe efficiency of GNP in Turkey, are occurring from year to year changes in productivity is not at asignificant level. In this case, we can not ask ourselves, "How is health, health, and affection positivelyaffecting health?" Two possibilities come to mind in this case. Firstly, as is known, health spending is anecessity that is absolutely necessary for society and must be done every year. Affecting growth - just as it isin the influenza - may be demand. Secondly, the fact that growing up is "sustainable" necessitates a healthygathering and this is reflected in the empirical implications. The second mechanism seems to be moremeaningful to us, as the first mechanism may actually be of particular relevance for each expenditure item (Aksu, 2013: 234-235).

  • There was no relationship between birth expectancy and GNP. The increase in expectation of life isinfluenced by increasing the savings to economic growth. But the increase of the individual's savingshappens in the early stages of life. In the future life of the individual, the individual will make "minussavings". When we consider a long enough period in our work, we can say that the negative savings in thelater years will neutralize the effect of the initial increase in savings, and thus the result we have come toexpect. Besides, this result is not in contradiction with saying that saving is affecting positively. It is anotherthing to say that the increase in the expectation of life from birth is what increases or decreases the savings inthe long run, and it is another thing to say that the savings made are positively affecting growth (Aksu, 2013: 235-236).

                                                                                                                                                                                                        
  • Article Statistics