THE VALIDITY OF EFFICIENCY AND COMPENSATION HYPOTHESIS FOR G7 COUNTRIES

Tayfur BAYAT, Izzet TASAR, Selim KAYHAN

Abstract


National economies tend to protect individuals from external risks that depend mostly as a result of globalization of the trade. There is question that needs an answer at that point; the increase in the government expenditures is a result of the fact that increasing population or the compensation hypothesis? In order to answer that question, openness ration, government expenditures, gross domestic product per capita and population will be analyzed in order for G7 using panel data for the period 1980-2015. The empirical test will check the validity of the compensation and efficiency hypothesis. According to test results, only in Japan and Canada compensation hypothesis is valid for the selected period. On the other hand, the increase in the government expenses has no causality relation with the increase in the population.


Keywords


Compensation Hypothesis; Efficiency Hypothesis; Co-integration; Causality

References


Alesina, A., Wacziarg, R., 1998. Openness, country size and government. Journal of Public Economics 69, 305–321.

Altay, A., Aysu, A. 2013. Etkinlik ve Telafi Edici Etki Hipotezi: Seçilmiş Ülkeler Üzerine Ampirik İnceleme. TİSK Akademi, 1,130-154

Benarroch, M., Pandey, M. 2008, Trade Openness and Government Size. Economics Letters,101, 157–159.

Benarroch, M., Pandey, M. 2012, The Relationship Between Trade Openness and Government Size: Does Disaggregating Government Expenditure Matter? Journal of Macroeconomics, 34, 239–252.

Breusch, T., Pagan, A., 1980. The Lagrange multiplier test and its application to model specification in econometrics. Rev. Econ. Stud. 47, 239–253.

Borghi, E., 2008. Trade Openness and Public Expenditure on Labor Market Prices. ETSG Working Paper, No:23

Cameron, D.R., 1978. The expansion of the public economy: a comparative analysis. American Political Science Review 72, 237–269.

Cavallo, E., 2007. Openness to Trade and Output Volatility: A Reassessment. Inter-American Development Bank Research Department Working Paper #604.

Emirmahmutoğlu, F. And Kose, N. (2011), “Testing for Granger Causality in Heterogeneous Mixed Panels”, Economic Modelling , 28, 870–876.

Garen, J., Trask, K. (2005), Do More Open Economies Have Bigger Governments? Another Look. Journal of Development Economics,77, 533–551.

Garret, G., Mitchell, D., 2001. Globalization, Goverment Spending and Taxation in the OECD. European Journal of Political Research, 39(2), 145-177

Gemmel, N., Kneller, R., and Sanz, I., 2008. Foreign Investment, International Trade and the Size and Structure of Publice Expenditures, European Journal of Political Economy, 24, 151-171

Islam, M.Q., 2004. The long run relationship between openness and government size: evidence from bounds test. Applied Economics 36, 995–1000.

Kimakova, Alena. (2009), "Government size and openness revisited: the case of financial globalization." Kyklos 62.3 (2009): 394-406.

Liberati, P. (2007), Trade Openness, Financial Openness and Government Size. Journal of Public Policy, 27, 215–247.

Molana, H., Montagna, C., Violato, M., 2004. On the Causal Relationship between Trade-openness and Government Size: Evidence from 23 OECD Countries.University of Dundee Discussion Paper No. 164

Pesaran, Hasem, M., (2004), “General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels”, Working Paper No:0435, University of Cambridge.

Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.

Pesaran, M.H., Ullah, A., Yamagata, T., 2008. A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross section independence. Econometrics Journal 11, 105–127.

Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93.

Petrou K. (2014). Government size and trade openness using Bayesian model average. http://www.ucy.ac.cy/econ/documents/seminar-papers/2014/Article_1_Draft_2.pdf

Ram, R. (2009), Openness, Country Size, and Government Size: Additional Evidence from a Large Cross-Country Panel. Journal of Public Economics, 93, 213–218.

Ruggie, J.G., 1982. International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. International Organization 36,379–415.

Rodrik, D., 1998. Why do more open economies have bigger governments? Journal of Political Economy 106, 997–1032

Schulze, G., Ursprung, H., 1999. Globalisation of the Economy and the National State. The World Economy, 22(3), 295-352

Shelton, C. 2007. The size and composition of government expenditure. Journal of Public Economics, 91, 2230-2260.

Shahbaz, M. Rehman, H.U., Amir, N. (2010), The Impact of Trade and Financial-Openness on Government Size: A Case Study of Pakistan. Journal of Quality and Technology Management, 6(1), 105-118.

Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics, 69(6), 709-748.


Full Text: PDF

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.