Article Sidebar

Submitted
June 9, 2023
Accepted
October 16, 2023
Published
October 31, 2023
Download
Full text PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 332 Download : 551

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to add to the current poverty dynamics literature by investigating the underlying causes of poverty persistence in Turkey, with an emphasis on both entry and exit rates.


Methods: The study analyzes data from the Turkish Statistical Institute's "Survey on Income and Living Conditions" from 2018 to 2021 using dynamic probit models. This large dataset, which gives a detailed picture of socioeconomic situations, helps in properly understanding the complex aspects influencing poverty rates.


Findings: The analysis reveals significant poverty persistence in Turkey, influenced by factors such as gender, marital status, employment, and health conditions. According to the research, these variables frequently interact, forming a complex structure that maintains poverty throughout the country.


Implications: The findings necessitate targeted interventions to address persistent poverty, considering the diverse influencing factors. This could lead to a reduction in poverty rates and improved socioeconomic conditions for individuals.


Originality/Value: This study offers a unique perspective on poverty dynamics in Turkey, focusing on both entry and exit rates. It provides valuable insights for those formulating policies or strategies aimed at poverty reduction, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive approach to poverty alleviation.

Keywords

Poverty dynamics state dependence poverty durations poverty persistence probit model

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2023 Mustafa Bilik

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

Creative Commons License

Economic Journal of Emerging Markets by Center for Economic Studies, Universitas Islam Indonesia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Bilik, M. (2023). Examining entry and exit rates of poverty in Turkey: A dynamic probit regression analysis. Economic Journal of Emerging Markets, 15(2), 173–182. https://doi.org/10.20885/ejem.vol15.iss2.art5
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Alia, D. Y., Jossa-Jouable Alia, K. A. S. M., & Fiamohe, E. R. (2016). On poverty and the persistence of poverty in Benin. Journal of Economic Studies, 43(4), 661–676. https://doi.org/10.1108/JES-12-2014-0205
  2. Ayllón, S. (2013). Understanding poverty persistence in Spain. SERIEs, 4(2), 201–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13209-012-0089-4
  3. Ayllón, S., & Gábos, A. (2017). The interrelationships between the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion indicators. Social Indicators Research, 130(3), 1025–1049.
  4. Bane, M. J., & Ellwood, D. T. (1986). Slipping into and out of poverty: The dynamics of spells. The Journal of Human Resources, 21(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.2307/145955
  5. BaşakDalgıç AytekinGüven, P. İ. (2015). Yoksulluk ve yoksulluk geçişlerinin belirleyenleri: Türkiye orneği. Sosyoekonomi, 23(24), 51–70.
  6. Baulch, B., & Masset, E. (2003). Do monetary and nonmonetary indicators tell the same story about chronic poverty? A study of Vietnam in the 1990s. World Development, 31(3), 441–453. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00215-2
  7. Biewen, M. (2009). Measuring state dependence in individual poverty histories when there is feedback to employment status and household composition. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 24(7), 1095–1116. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.1081
  8. Bigsten, A., & Shimeles, A. (2008). Poverty transition and persistence in Ethiopia: 1994–2004. World Development, 36(9), 1559–1584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.09.002
  9. Bosco, B., & Poggi, A. (2019). Middle class, government effectiveness and poverty in the EU: A dynamic multilevel analysis: XXXX. Review of Income and Wealth, 66. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12403
  10. Buddelmeyer, H., & Verick, S. (2008). Understanding the drivers of poverty dynamics in Australian households. Economic Record, 84(266), 310–321. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.2008.00493.x
  11. Cappellari, L., & Jenkins, S. P. (2002). Who stays poor? Who becomes poor? Evidence from the British household panel survey. Economic Journal, 112(478), C60–C67. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00028
  12. Devicienti, F., & Poggi, A. (2011). Poverty and social exclusion: Two sides of the same coin or dynamically interrelated processes? Applied Economics, 43(25), 3549–3571. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036841003670721
  13. Fusco, A., & Islam, N. (2020). Household size and poverty. In J. G. Rodríguez & J. A. Bishop (Eds.), Inequality, Redistribution and Mobility (Vol. 28, pp. 151–177). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1049-258520200000028006
  14. Garza-Rodriguez, J., Ayala-Diaz, G. A., Coronado-Saucedo, G. G., Garza-Garza, E. G., & Ovando-Martinez, O. (2021). Determinants of poverty in Mexico: A quantile regression analysis. In Economies (Vol. 9, Issue 2, p. 60). https://doi.org/10.3390/economies9020060
  15. Giarda, E., & Moroni, G. (2018). The degree of poverty persistence and the role of regional disparities in Italy in comparison with France, Spain and the UK. Social Indicators Research, 136(1), 163–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1547-3
  16. Heckman, J. (1981). Heterogeneity and state dependence. In Studies in labor markets (pp. 91–140). University of Chicago Press.
  17. Justino, P., & Litchfield, J. (2003). Poverty dynamics in rural Vietnam: winners and losers during reform (10; PRUS Working Papers, Issue 10). Poverty Research Unit at Sussex.
  18. Kedir, A. M., & Mckay, A. (2005). Chronic poverty in urban Ethiopia: Panel data evidence. International Planning Studies, 10(1), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563470500159246
  19. Klasen, S. (2008). Economic growth and poverty reduction: Measurement issues using income and non-income indicators. World Development, 36(3), 420–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.03.008
  20. Kudebayeva, A. (2018). Chronic poverty in Kazakhstan (627; CERGE-EI Working Paper Series).
  21. Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2013). Avoiding biased versions of Wooldridge’s simple solution to the initial conditions problem. Economics Letters, 120(2), 346–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.05.009
  22. Ravallion, M. (2011). On multidimensional indices of poverty. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 9(2), 235–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-011-9173-4
  23. Ribas, R. P., & Machado, A. F. (2007). Distinguishing chronic poverty from transient poverty in Brazil: Developing a model for pseudo-panel data (36; International Poverty Centre Working Paper).
  24. Roberts, B. (2000). Chronic and transitory poverty in post-apartheid South Africa: Evidence from KwaZuluNatal (28; CSDS Working Paper).
  25. Şahin, S. Ç., & Kılıç, İ. E. (2021). Poverty dynamics in Turkey: A multinomial logit model. In Ekonomika (Vol. 100, Issue 2, pp. 133–143). https://doi.org/10.15388/Ekon.2021.100.2.6
  26. Şeker, S. D., & Dayioğlu, M. (2015). Poverty dynamics in Turkey. Review of Income and Wealth, 61(3), 477–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12112
  27. Şeker, S. D., & Jenkins, S. P. (2015). Poverty trends in Turkey. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 13(3), 401–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-015-9300-8
  28. Stevens, A. H. (1999). Climbing out of poverty, falling back in: Measuring the persistence of poverty over multiple spells. Journal of Human Resources, 34(3), 557–588. https://doi.org/10.2307/146380
  29. Tran, V. Q., Alkire, S., & Klasen, S. (2015). Static and dynamic disparities between monetary and multidimensional poverty measurement: Evidence from Vietnam. In Measurement of Poverty, Deprivation, and Economic Mobility (Vol. 23, pp. 249–281). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1049-258520150000023008
  30. Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press.
  31. Wooldridge, J. M. (2005). Simple solutions to the initial conditions problem in dynamic, nonlinear panel data models with unobserved heterogeneity. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 20(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.770
  32. Yildirim, J., Bakır, M. A., & Savas, A. (2018). State dependence in poverty: The case of Turkey. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 54(9), 1963–1972. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2017.1386097
  33. You, J. (2017). Asset-based poverty transition and persistence in rural China. Agricultural Economics, 48(2), 219–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12328
No Related Submission Found