Vol. 7 No. 5 (2019): Business & Management Studies: An International Journal
Articles

AN ECONOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR DETERMINING DIFFERENT INFLATION REGIMES OF THE TURKISH ECONOMY

PDF (Türkçe)
  • Uğur SİVRİ
Uğur SİVRİ
Assoc. Prof. Dr., Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v7i5.1209

Published 2019-12-25

Keywords

  • Inflation Rate, Inflation Volatility, Structural Break, Turkish Economy, GARCH Model
  • Enflasyon Oranı, Enflasyon Oynaklığı, Yapısal Kırılma, Türkiye Ekonomisi, GARCH Modeli

How to Cite

SİVRİ, U. (2019). AN ECONOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR DETERMINING DIFFERENT INFLATION REGIMES OF THE TURKISH ECONOMY. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 7(5), 2308–2324. https://doi.org/10.15295/bmij.v7i5.1209

Abstract

Inflation has imposes several costs on a society and an economy. An existence of these costs, which devastate the economy and are expected to increase with increasing inflation rate, reveal the importance of the price stability. This study has two aims. Firstly, relatively low and high inflation regimes of the Turkish economy are determined by applying Bai and Perron (1998, 2003) structural break methodology. Secondly, whether there is a change in the volatility of the inflation rate according to different inflation regimes is investigated. The structural break analysis shows that there are two structural breaks at the inflation rate. The first break is occurred in the year of 1977. With this break, the Turkish economy passed to the high inflation regime from the creeping inflation regime. The second break is occurred in the year of 1999. With this break, although the inflation rate is decreased, the Turkish economy still has been at the high inflation regime. Results of the volatility analysis show that creeping (high) inflation regimes have associated with low (high) inflation volatility. Therefore different inflation regimes of the Turkish economy have differentiated with not only mean inflation rate but also variance of the inflation rate. Structural break dates obtained in this study imply that any policies which have detrimental effects on the independence of the central bank, fiscal discipline or fundamentals of the banking sector might increase the inflation rate.

PDF (Türkçe)

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Andrews, D. W. K. (1993). Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point. Econometrica, 61 (4), 821-856.
  2. Bai, J. ve Perron, P. (1998). Estimating and Testing Linear Models with Multiple Structural Changes. Econometrica, 66 (1), 47-78.
  3. Bai, J. ve Perron, P. (2003). Computation and Analysis of Multiple Structural Change Models. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 18 (1), 1-22.
  4. Ben Aissa, M. S. ve Jouini, J. (2003). Structural Breaks in the U.S. Inflation Process. Applied Economics Letters, 10 (10), 633-636.
  5. Ben Aissa, M. S., Boutahar, M. ve Jouini, J. (2004). Bai and Perron's and Spectral Density Methods for Structural Change Detection in the US Inflation Process. Applied Economics Letters, 11 (2), 109-115.
  6. Bollerslev, T. (1986). Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity. Journal of Econometrics, 31 (3), 307-327.
  7. Caporale, T. ve Paxton, J. (2011). From Debt Crisis to Tequila Crisis: Inflation Stationarity through Mexico's Turbulent Decades. Applied Economics Letters, 18 (16), 1609-1612.
  8. Caporale, T. ve Paxton, J. (2013). Inflation Stationarity during Latin American Inflation: Insights from Unit Root and Structural Break Analysis. Applied Economics, 45 (15), 2001-2010.
  9. Dickey, D. A. ve Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74 (366), 427-431.
  10. Engle, R. F. (1982). Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation. Econometrica, 50 (4), 987-1007.
  11. Jouini, J. ve Boutahar, M. (2003). Structural Breaks in the U.S. Inflation Process: A Further Investigation. Applied Economics Letters, 10 (15), 985-988.
  12. MacKinnon, J. G. (1996). Numerical Distribution Functions for Unit Root and Cointegration Tests. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11 (6), 601-618.
  13. Önel, G. (2005). Testing For Multiple Structural Breaks: An Application of Bai-Perron Test to the Nominal Interest Rates and Inflation in Turkey. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 20 (2), 81-93.
  14. Phillips, P. C. B. (1987). Time Series Regression with a Unit Root. Econometrica, 55 (2), 277-301.
  15. Phillips, P. C. B. ve Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression. Biometrika, 75 (2), 335-346.
  16. SBB, (2019). Ekonomik ve Sosyal Göstergeler, Ankara. 02 Haziran 2019 tarihinde http://www.sbb.gov.tr/ekonomik-ve-sosyal-gostergeler/#1540021349004-1497d2c6-7edf adresinden alınmıştır.
  17. Shiamptanis, C. (2010). Did the Euro Give Us a Break in Inflation? Empirical Economics, 39 (2), 395-411.
  18. Sivri, U. (2017). Is Inflation Rate of Turkey Stationary? Evidence from Unit Root Tests with and without Structural Breaks. Review of Economic and Business Studies, 10 (2), 29-52.
  19. Zhang, C. (2009). Structural Instability of China Inflation Dynamics. Frontiers of Economics in China, 4 (1), 30-45.