Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar

Murat BELKE (Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi, İktisadi İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, İktisat Bölümü, Burdur, Türkiye)
Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi
6 2
Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 11 Sayı: Ek Sayfa Aralığı: 56 - 73 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 05-03-2021

Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar

Öz:
İşsizlik oranlarında doğal oran veya histeri hipotezlerinin geçerliliğinin test edilmesi uygulanacak istihdam politikalarının belirlenmesiaçısından önemlidir. Söz konusu hipotezlerinin varlığının belirlenmesi için genellikle birim kök testleri kullanılmaktadır. Histeri hipotezibirim kök süreci ile temsil edilirken, birim kökün reddedilmesi halinde işsizlik serisinin durağan olduğu ve doğal oran hipotezinin geçerliolduğu sonucuna ulaşılmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, 28 Avrupa Birliği ülkesinde toplam işsizlik, kadın işsizliği, genç işsizliği ve gençkadın işsizliği oranlarında doğal oran veya histeri hipotezinin geçerliliğini test etmektir. Bu nedenle, 2003Q2-2019Q1 dönemi toplam,genç, kadın ve genç kadın işsizlik serilerine Fourier panel KSS birim kök testi uygulanmıştır. Bulgulara göre, sabit ve trende sahipmodelde toplam işsizlikte Macaristan ve Portekiz hariç tüm ülkelerde işsizlik serileri ortalamaya dönme eğilimindedir. Bu durumdabahsedilen iki ülke için toplam işsizlikte histeri hipotezi geçerli iken, diğer ülkelerde doğal oran hipotezinin geçerli olduğunu söylemekmümkündür. Kadın, genç ve genç kadın işsizlik serilerine uygulanan panel birim kök testinden elde edilen bulgular, kadın işsizliğindeİngiltere, İspanya, Macaristan, Almanya, Slovenya ve Portekiz hariç diğer 22 ülkede; genç işsizliğinde tüm ülkelerde ve genç kadınişsizliğinde ise İngiltere hariç diğer 27 ülkede serilerin doğal oran hipotezinin geçerli olduğunu göstermektedir.
Anahtar Kelime:

Testing the Hypotheses of Hysteresis and Naturel Rate of Unemployment for Youth and Female Unemployment: Evidence from Fourier Panel Unit Root Tests for European Union Countries

Öz:
Testing the Hypotheses of Hysteresis and Naturel Rate of Unemployment for Youth and Female Unemployment: Evidence from Fourier Panel Unit Root Tests for European Union Countries
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Akcan, A. T. (2019). Türkiye’de gençlerin işsizlik histerisi. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(1), 31-47.
  • Akdogan, K. (2016). Unemployment hysteresis and structural change in Europe. Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey Working Papers, 16/18, 1-30.
  • Arestis, P. & Mariscal, I. B.-F. (2000). OECD unemployment: Structural breaks and stationarity. Applied Economics, 32(4), 399-403.
  • Ayala, A., Cunado, J. & Gil-Alana, L. (2012). Unemployment hysteresis: Empirical evidence for Latin America, Journal of Applied Economics, 15(2), 213-233.
  • Bai, J. & Ng, S. (2004). A panic attack on unit roots and cointegration. Econometrica, 72(4), 1127-1177.
  • Bai, J. & Ng, S. (2010). Panel unit root tests with cross-section dependence: A further investigation. Econometric Theory, 26(4), 1088-1114.
  • Bakas, D. & Papapetrou, E. (2014a). Unemployment in Greece: Evidence from Greek regions using panel unit root tests. The Quarterly Review of Economic and Finance, 54(4), 551-562.
  • Bakas, D. & Papapetrou, E. (2014b). Unemployment by gender: Evidence from EU countries. International Advances in Economic Research, Springer; International Atlantic Economic Society, 20(1), 103-111.
  • Ball, L. M. (2009). Hysteresis in unemployment: Old and new evidence. NBER Working Paper,14818, 1-35.
  • Ball, L. M. & Mankiw, N. G. (2002). The NAIRU in theory and practice. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(4), 115-136.
  • 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.
  • Bekmez, S. & Özpolat, A. (2016). Hysteresis effect on unemployment for men and women: A panel unit root test for OECD countries. International Journal of Financial Research, 7(2), 122-133.
  • Blanchard, O. J. & Summers, L. H. (1986). Hysteresis and the European unemployment problem. NBER Working Paper Series, 1950, 1-78.
  • Blanchard, O. J. & Summers, L. H. (1987). Hysteresis in unemployment. European Economic Review, 31(1-2), 288-295.
  • Blanchard, O. J. & Summers, L. H. (1988). Beyond the natural rate hypothesis. The American Economic Review, 78(2), 182-187.
  • Bolat, S. & Koçbulut, Ö. (2019). Gelişmiş ve gelişmekte olan ülkelerde işsizlik histerisi ve doğal oran hipotezinin ampirik bir analizi. Maliye Dergisi, 176, 201-224.
  • Bolat, S., Tiwari, A. K., & Erdayı, A. U. (2014). Unemployment hysteresis in the Eurozone area: evidences from nonlinear heterogeneous panel unit root test. Applied Economics Letters, 21(8), 536-540.
  • Breitung, J. (2000). The local power of some unit root tests for panel data. Nonstationary Panels, Panel Cointegration, and Dynamic Panels (Advances in Econometrics, 15), (Ed. Badi H. Baltagi; Thomas B. Fomby; R. Carter Hill), JAI Press, Amsterdam, 161-177.
  • Breuer, J. B., McNown, R. & Wallace, M. (2002). Series-specific unit root tests with panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 64(5), 527-546.
  • Brunello, G. (1990). Hysteresis and the Japanese unemployment problem: A preliminary investigation. Oxford Economic Papers, 42(3), 483-500.
  • Candelon, B., Dupuy, A. & Gil-Alana, L. (2009). The nature of occupational unemployment rates in the United States: Hysteresis or structural?. Applied Economics, 41(19), 2483–2493.
  • Caporale, G. M. & Gil-Alana, L. (2014). Youth unemployment in Europe: Persistence and macroeconomic determinants. CESifo Working Paper, 4696, 1-19.
  • Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L., Barrio-Castro, T. & Lopez-Bazo, E. (2005). Breaking the panels: An application to the GDP per capita. The Econometrics Journal, 8(2), 159-175.
  • Chang, T. (2011). Hysteresis in unemployment for 17 OECD countries: Stationary test with a Fourier function. Economic Modelling, 28(5), 2208-2214.
  • Chang, C. K. & Chang, T. (2012). Statistical evidence on the mean reversion of real interest rates: SPSM using the panel KSS test with a fourier function. Applied Economics Letters, 19(13), 1299-1304.
  • 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.
  • Cheng, S., Wu, T., Lee, K. & Chang, T. (2014). Flexible Fourier unit root test on unemployment for PIIGS countries. Economic Modelling, 36(C), 142-148.
  • Choi, I. (2001). Unit root tests for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272.
  • Chortareas, G. & Kapetanios, G. (2009). Getting PPP right: Identifying mean-reverting real exchange rates in panels. Journal of Banking and Finance, 33(2), 390-404.
  • Chou, H. C. & Zhang, Y. C. (2012). Unemployment hysteresis in G20 countries: Evidence from non-linear panel unit-root tests. African Journal of Business Management, 6(49), 11887-11890.
  • Christopoulos, D. K. & Leon-Ledesma, M. (2007). Unemployment hysteresis in EU countries: What do we really know about it?, Journal of Economic Studies, 34(2), 80-89.
  • Coeure, B. (2017). Scars or scratches? Hysteresis in the euro area. https://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/key/date/2017/html/ecb.sp170519.en.html
  • Cuestas, J. C. & Gil-Alana, L. A. (2011). Unemployment hysteresis, structural changes, non-linearities and fractional integration in European transition economies. Sheffield Economic Research Paper Series, 2011005, 1-35.
  • Cuestas, J., Gil-Alana, L. & Staehr, K. (2011). A further investigation of unemployment persistence in European transition economies. Journal of Comparative Economics, 39(4), 514-532.
  • Dickey, D. A. & 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.
  • Dickey, D. A. & Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood ratio statistics for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Econometrica, 49(4), 1057-1072.
  • Doğan, C. & Erdoğan, S. (2016). An empirical analyses of unemployment hysteresis and natural rate of unemployment approaches for MENA countries. Optimum Ekonomi ve Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 3(2), 41-50.
  • Dritsaki, C. & Dritsaki, M. (2013). "Hysteresis in unemployment: An empirical research for three member states of the European Union." Theoretical and Applied Economics, 20(4), 35-46.
  • Dursun, G., & Kara B. (2016). Analysis of youth unemployment hysteresis in high income OECD countries: evidence from panel unit root test with structural breaks. Econworld, The Third International Conference in Economics, 1-3 Şubat 2016, Barcelona, Spain.
  • Dursun, G., & Yakite, H., (2017). Youth unemployment hysteresis in the CEMAC countries: Evidences from SURADF and panel data analysis with multiple structural breaks under cross-sectional dependence. European Congress on Economic Issues-ECOEI 2017, Kocaeli, Turkey.
  • European Commission. (2020). Joint employment report 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/2020-europeansemester-joint-employment-report_en.pdf
  • European Parliament. (2017). Young women’s unemployment in EU. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/- /publication/4f43c85f-ffe3-11e6-8a35-01aa75ed71a1 Eurostat. (2020). Europe 2020 indicators-employment. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisticsexplained/pdfscache/29302.pdf
  • Elike, U., Anoruo, E. & Nwala, K. (2018). Testing for hysteresis in unemployment for African countries using wavelet unit root tests. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, 8(3), 185-197.
  • Feve, P., Henin, P. Y. & Jolivaldt, P. (2003). Testing for hysteresis: unemployment persistence and wage adjustment. Empirical Economics, 28, 535–552.
  • Friedman, M. (1968). The role of monetary policy. American Economic Review, 58(1), 1-17.
  • Furuoka, F. (2014a). Does hysteresis exist in unemployment? New findings from fourteen regions of the Czech Republic. Finance a úvěr-Czech Journal of Economics and Finance, 64(1), 59-78.
  • Furuoka, F. (2014b). Hysteresis in European labour market. MPRA Paper, 60946, 1-14.
  • Furuoka, F. (2017). A new test for analysis hysteresis in European unemployment. Applied Economic Letters, 24(15), 1102-1106.
  • Garcia-Cintado, A., Romero-Avila, D. & Usabiaga C. (2015). Can the hysteresis hypothesis in Spanish regional unemployment be beaten? New evidence from unit root tests with breaks. Economic Modelling, 47, 244-252.
  • Gil-Alana, L. A., Özdemir, Z. A. & Tansel, A. (2017). Long memory in Turkish unemployment rates. IZA Institute of Labor Economics Discussion Paper Series, 11053, 1-36.
  • Gustavsson, M. & Osterholm, P. (2006). Hysteresis and non-linearities in unemployment rates. Applied Economics Letters, 13(9), 545-548.
  • Güloğlu, B. & İspir S. (2011). Doğal işsizlik oranı mı? İşsizlik histerisi mi? Türkiye için sektörel panel birim kök sınaması analizi. Ege Akademik Bakış, 11(2): 205-215.
  • Hadri, K. (2000). Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data. The Econometrics Journal, 3(2), 148-161.
  • Hadri, K. & Kurozumi, E. (2011). A locally optimal test for no unit root in cross-sectionally dependent panel data. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, 52(2), 165-184.
  • Hadri, K. & Rao, Y. (2008). Panel stationarity test with structural breaks. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 70(2), 245-269.
  • Hall, R. (1975). The rigidity of wages and the persistence of unemployment. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 6(2), 301-350.
  • Im, K. S., Lee, J. & Tieslau, M. (2005). Panel LM unit-root tests with level shifts. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 67(3), 393-419.
  • Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H. & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74.
  • Jump, R. & Stockhammer, E. (2018). New evidence on unemployment hysteresis in the EU. https://www.euroframe.org/files/user_upload/euroframe/docs/2018/Conference/Session%204/EUROF18_Jump _Stockhammer.pdf
  • Kanalıcı Akay, H., Nargeleçekenler, M. & Yılmaz, F. (2011). Hysteresis in unemployment: Evidence from 23 OECD countries. Ekonomický časopis, 59(5), 488-505.
  • Kapetanios, G., Shin, Y. & Snell, A. (2003). Testing for a unit root in the nonlinear STAR framework”, Journal of Econometrics, 112(2), 359-379.
  • Kılıç, N.Ö., Karabulut, K. & Uğurlu, S. (2018). Is unemployment hysteresis hypothesis valid for France, Germany and Turkey? Unit root analysis with structural break. Turkish Studies- İktisat, Finans ve Siyaset, 13(30), 213-223.
  • Kim, N. (2018). The analysis of hysteresis in youth unemployment (in Korean). Bank of Korea Economic Research Institute Working Papers, 2018-37.
  • Koçbulut, Ö. & Bolat, S. (2017). Balkan ülkelerinde işsizlik histerisi ve doğal oran hipotezinin geçerliliği: ampirik bir değerlendirme. Kafkas Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 8(16), 297-317.
  • Kurozumi, E. (2002). Testing for stationarity with a break. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 63-99.
  • Lanzafame, M. (2010). Hysteresis and the regional NAIRU’s in Italy”, Bulletin of Economic Research, 64(3), 415-429.
  • Lee, C.-F. (2010). Testing for unemployment hysteresis in nonlinear heterogeneous panels: International evidence. Economic Modelling, 27, 1097-1102.
  • Lee, H. Y., Wu, J. L. & Chiung, H. L. (2010). Hysteresis in East Asian unemployment”, Applied Economics, 42(7), 887- 898.
  • Lee, J. & Strazicich, M. C. (2003). Minumum lagrange multiplier unit root test with two structural breaks. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(4), 1082-1089.
  • Lee, J. & Strazicich, M. C. (2013). Minumum LM unit root test with one structural break. Economics Bulletin, 33(4), 2483- 2492.
  • Lee, J. & Tieslau, M. (2019). Panel LM unit-root tests with level and trend shifts. Economic Modelling, 80, 1-10.
  • Leon-Ledesma, M. A. (2002). Unemployment hysteresis in the US states and the EU: A panel approach. Bulletin of Economic Research, 54(2), 95-104.
  • Leon-Ledesma, M. A. & McAdam, P. (2004). Unemployment, hysteresis and transition. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 51(3), 377-401.
  • Levin, A., Lin, C. F. & Chu, C. S. J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1-24.
  • Liew, V. K.-S., Chia, R. C.-J. & Puah, C.-H. (2012). Does hysteresis in unemployment occur in OECD countries? Evidence from parametric and non-parametric panel unit roots tests. International Journal of Economics and Management, 6(2), 446-458.
  • Liu, D., Sun, C. & Lin, P. (2012). Hysteresis hypothesis in unemployment and labour force participation rates: Evidence from Australian states and territories. Australian Economic Papers, 51(2), 71-84.
  • Lumsdaine, R. L. & Papell, D. H. (1997). Multiple trend breaks and the unit-root hypothesis. Review of Economics and Statistics, 79(2), 212-218.
  • Maddala, G. S. & Wu, S. (1999). A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 631-652.
  • Marjanovic, G. & Mihajlovic, V. (2014). Analysis of hysteresis in unemployment rates with structural breaks: The case of selected European countries. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 25(4), 378-386.
  • Mednik, M., Rodriguez, C. & Ruprah I. (2012), Hysteresis in unemployment: Evidence from Latin America, Journal of International Development, 24(4), 448-466.
  • Mohan, R., Kemegue, F. & Sjuib, F. (2008). Hysteresis in unemployment: panel unit roots tests using state level data. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 6(2), pp. 53-60.
  • Moon, H. R. & Perron, B. (2004). Testing for a unit root in panels with dynamic factors. Journal of Econometrics, 122(1), 81-126.
  • Nelson, C. R. & Plosser, C. I. (1982). Trends and random walks in macroeconomic time series: Some evidence and implications. Journal of Monetary Economics, 10(2), 139-162.
  • Neudorfer, P., Pichelmann, K. & Wagner, M. (1990). Hysteresis, NAIRU and long term unemployment in Austria. Empirical Economics, 15(2), 217-229.
  • Nsenga, D., Nach, M., Khobai, H., Moyo, C. & Phiri, A. (2019): Is it the natural rate or hysteresis hypothesis for unemployment rates in Newly Industrialized Economies? Comparative Economic Research Central and Eastern Europe, 22(4), 39-55.
  • Omay, T., Ozcan, B. & Shahbaz, M. (2020) Testing the hysteresis effect in the US state-level unemployment series, Journal of Applied Economics, 23(1), 329-348.
  • Perron, P. (1989). The great crash, the oil price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica, 57(6), 1361-1401.
  • Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312.
  • Phelps, E. S. (1967). Phillips curves, expectations of inflation and optimal unemployment overtime. Economica, 34(135), 254-281.
  • Phelps, E. S. (1968). The role of monetary policy. American Economic Review, 58(1), 1-17.
  • Phelps, E.S. (1994). Structural slumps: The modern equilibrium theory of unemployment, ınterest, and assets. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
  • Phillips, P. C. B. & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346.
  • Phillips, P. C. B. & Sul, D. (2003). Dynamic panel estimation and homogeneity testing under cross section dependence. The Econometrics Journal, 6(1), 217-259.
  • Pikoko, V. & Phiri, A. (2019). Is there hysteresis in South African unemployment? Evidence from the post-recessionary period. Acta Universitatis Danubius Œconomica AUDŒ, 15(3), 365-387.
  • Pissarides, C. (1992). Loss of skill during unemployment and the persistence of employment shocks. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107(4), 1371-1391.
  • Queneau, H. & Sen, H. (2008). Evidence on the dynamics of unemployment by gender. Applied Economics, 40(16), 2099- 2108.
  • Roed, K. (1996). Unemployment hysteresis – macro evidence from 16 OECD countries. Empirical Economics, 21(4), 589- 600.
  • Romero-Avila, D. & Usabiaga, C. (2007). Unit root tests and persistence of unemployment: Spain vs. the United States. Applied Economics Letters, 14(6), 457-461.
  • Sessions, J. G. (1994). Unemployment stigma and multiple labour market equilibria: A social-psychological explanation of hysteresis. Labour, 8(3), 355-376.
  • Smyth, R. (2003). Unemployment hysteresis in Australian states and territories: Evidence from panel data unit root tests. Australian Economic Review, 36(2), 181-192.
  • Snowdon, B., & Vane, H. R. (2005). Modern macroeconomic – Its origins, development and current state. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham.
  • Song, F. & Wu, Y. (1997). Hysteresis in unemployment: Evidence from 48 U.S. states”, Economic Inquiry, 35(2), 235-243.
  • Song, F. & Wu, Y. (1998). Hysteresis in unemployment: Evidence from OECD countries. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 38(2), 181-192.
  • Ucar, N. & Omay, T. (2009). Testing for unit root in nonlinear heterogeneous panels. Economics Letters, 104(1), 5-8.
  • Vogelsang, T. J & Perron, P. (1998). Additional tests for a unit root allowing for a break in the trend function at an unknown time. International Economic Review, 39(4), 1073-1100.
  • Westerlund, J. (2012). Testing for unit roots in panel time-series models with multiple level breaks. The Manchester School, 80(6), 671-699.
  • Wu, L.-H. (2015). Hysteresis in unemployment for Taiwan’s regional data: Panel KSS unit root test with a fourier function through the sequential panel selection method. HOLISTICA Journal of Business and Public Administration, Association Holistic Research Academic, 6(3), 9-24.
  • Yılancı, V. (2008). Are unemployment rates non-stationary or non-linear? Evidence from 19 OECD countries. Economic Bulletin, 3(47), 1-5.
  • Yılancı, V. (2009). Yapısal kırılmalar altında Türkiye için işsizlik histerisinin sınanması. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 10(2), 324-335.
  • Yılancı, V., Ozkan, Y. & Altınsoy, A. (2020). Testing the unemployment hysteresis in G7 countries: A fresh evidence from Fourier threshold unit root test. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, XXIII(3), 49-59.
  • Zivot, E. & Andrews, D. W. K. (1992). Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit root hypothesis. Journal Business & Economic Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.
APA Belke M (2020). Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. , 56 - 73.
Chicago Belke Murat Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. (2020): 56 - 73.
MLA Belke Murat Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. , 2020, ss.56 - 73.
AMA Belke M Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. . 2020; 56 - 73.
Vancouver Belke M Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. . 2020; 56 - 73.
IEEE Belke M "Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar." , ss.56 - 73, 2020.
ISNAD Belke, Murat. "Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar". (2020), 56-73.
APA Belke M (2020). Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(Ek), 56 - 73.
Chicago Belke Murat Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 11, no.Ek (2020): 56 - 73.
MLA Belke Murat Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, vol.11, no.Ek, 2020, ss.56 - 73.
AMA Belke M Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2020; 11(Ek): 56 - 73.
Vancouver Belke M Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. 2020; 11(Ek): 56 - 73.
IEEE Belke M "Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar." Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11, ss.56 - 73, 2020.
ISNAD Belke, Murat. "Genç ve Kadın İşsizliğinde Histeri ve Doğal Oran Hipotezlerinin Test Edilmesi: Avrupa Birliği Ülkeleri İçin Fourier Panel Birim Kök Testlerinden Kanıtlar". Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 11/Ek (2020), 56-73.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
23-04-2024 16:49

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları