Search

The growth theories preceding the endogenous growth theories assume that firms do not have the resources to devote to technology development because of full competitive conditions. While there is a consensus in the these theorems that technological development is the engine of growth; Lucas (1988)'s "Endogenous Growth Model Based on Human Capital", explains technological progress and economic growth with human capital. In a significant part of the empirical studies, it has been concluded that the effect of human capital on economic growth is positive. However, there are results that the increase in human capital has no effect on economic growth. Economic growth instability, which began after the "2008 global crisis", still continue. Based on this situation, it has become very important to determine the long-term impact of human capital on economic growth in Fragile Five countries. In this study, the effect of human capital on economic growth between 1987-2019 in terms of Fragile Five economies was estimated using the panel data method. The findings obtained reveal that human capital plays an important role in order for these countries to increase their economic growth. In this context, human capital has an important role in raising the economic growth of these countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study; human capital, innovation and economic growth for Turkey's economy were investigated by time series analysis methods using the 1995-2018 period annual data. Real GDP per capita representing economic growth was taken as a dependent variable, domestic patent registration numbers representing innovation from independent variables, and students graduating from higher education representing the human capital variable. Besides, variables of labor and capital investments, which are considered as indicators of growth, are also included in the model. Extended Dickey-Fuller and Phillips- Perron unit root tests in determining the stability of variables, Johansen cointegration analysis in determining long term relationship, the existence of a cointegration relationship between variables, were used. Granger causality analysis was used to determine the causality relationship. As a result of the analyzes applied to the model, it was determined that there is a cointegration relationship between the variables. It has been observed that human capital and innovation have no effect on economic growth in the short term, but they have a positive effect in the long term, and capital investments and workforce affect economic growth both in the short and long term. As a result of the Granger causality analysis, bidirectional causality relationships between capital investments and economic growth, from the workforce to economic growth, from the workforce to capital investments, from human capital to innovation, were determined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health is expressed as an affecting factor of economic growth, which is one of the human capital factors. The improvement in health level with the increase in population, education, labor productivity, lifetime and life quality, may have a decisive effect on economic stability and growth by preventing future diseases. Although there is mostly a two-way relationship between health and economic growth in the findings of researches, some studies find no relationship. Different findings may be due to the neglect of health policy differences between countries in studies. Unlike previous studies in the literature, this study explores the impact of health on economic growth in all provinces of a country where the same health policy is applied with the panel data analysis method. For this purpose, covering the 2007-2017 period, the model including the variables that the gross domestic product, public investment, exports, imports, the infant mortality rate, the number of hospital beds, the number of people graduated from high school and the number of people has a bachelor's degree for all provinces in Turkey was estimated by the system GMM analysis. According to the findings, Turkey's health variables; 1% reduction in infant mortality rate causes an increase of 0.03% on GDP, 1% increase in the number of hospital beds causes an increase of 0,16% on GDP. The education variables, however, contribute to economic growth more than health variables, it is an undeniable fact that health is a prerequisite for education and economic growth. In this context, policy makers should pursue policies to improve individual and community health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]