Download Paper - IIOA!

A TIME SERIES SOCIAL ACCOUNTING MATRIX ASSEMBLY
SYSTEM:
Application to Turkey, 1996-20051
Çağatay Telli
State Planning Organization
[email protected]
Ebru Voyvoda
Middle East Technical University
[email protected]
and
Erinç Yeldan
Bilkent University
[email protected]
First Draft
May 2007
1
We thank to Fatih Kaya and Hakan Erten for their valuable assistance in updating the database and
colleagues at State Planning Organization for their precious comments and suggestions.
1
Abstract
The central issue of this study is to develop an assembly-line system for time series
schematic Social Accounting Matrices (SAMs) for the Turkish real economy. We focus on
the real side of the economy in the context of national accounting and applied general
equilibrium modeling. We utilize a from up to down approach, and implement an
integrated and interlocking system to define, collect, classify and manipulate the necessary
data, in order to build the time series of annual SAMs over 1996-to date.
The study generates three fundamental contributions to practical policy agenda and
economic analysis; i) a very detailed, integrated, consistent and flexible structure of public,
external and national accounts that can be accommodated to the demands of most modelers
is produced, ii) latest socio-economic dynamics have been incorporated when building
integrated national accounts; so that time(ly) series of SAMs have been generated; iii) the
simulation and decomposition capabilities as well as potential accuracy and reliability of
general equilibrium models have been improved by availability of yearly updated SAMs.
Key Words: Social Accounting Matrix (SAM), time series, integrated national accounting,
applied general equilibrium and policy analysis.
2
1. INTRODUCTION
Any scientific inquiry requires an elaborate observation of phenomena being material or
social. It is a well-known fact that availability and reliability of a data set is a real limit for
policy analysts and most empirical economists. To this end, new methods of data
compilation and refreshed information-accounting technologies as well as standardization
measures, should be developed and readily incorporated to cure serious potential pitfalls in
present databases.
Economic and social systems, subject to an increasing complexity and interdepence, urge
policy analyst to have quality and reliability in observation to properly and truly explain,
conceptualize, understand, make meaning and drive the underlying dynamics of the
scientific material. Otherwise “..Unreliable and biased data can result in seriously distorted (if not
altogether wrong) development policy recommendations2.”
For example if anyone takes the data about factor income shares at face value; Turkish
economy would be two to three times more capital-intensive than the U.S. or the Japanese
economy. Analysts and academicians unquestionably using these numbers, independent of
their methods employed, would find pathological policy recommendations.
Official growth statistics too, which reflects high performance of Turkish economy at rates
about 8,9 percent annually in 2004, and 7,4 percent in 2005, confronted with increasing
share of inventory stocks as an aggregate up to 7,9 percent of GDP. The doubtful character
Mercenier J. and Yeldan E. 1996. “How Prescribed Policy Can Mislead When Data Are Defective: A
Follow-up to Srinivasan (1994) Using General Equilibrium”. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research
Department Staff Report 207.
2
3
of this number raises the issue of presence of real measurement and methodological errors
in national accounting; even though Turkey is one of the countries having relatively a
modern statistical system among other developing nations. This case is unsurprisingly
common and even worse in most developing countries, which amplifies the problem at the
international level.
As Srinivasan states: “[u]nfortunately, it would appear that researchers either are not aware of or, worse
still, have chosen to ignore the fact that the published data, national and international, suffer from serious
conceptual problems, measurement biases and errors"3.
Instead we argue that policy analysts and public officials should always be aware of the
fact that whatever the sophistication of the analysis, it is only worth the quality of the
supporting data it utilizes.
Main Structural Vectors on Applied Research and Statistical System in Turkey
In the example of Turkey, structural vectors affecting policy analysis process through the
statistical system can be summarized as follows
 Socio economic environment and structure are subject to an everlasting and fast
change in the new emerging market economies, to which statistical system
generally may not adopt in time.
3
Srinivasan, T.N., 1994a, "Introduction," Journal of Development Economics 44 (1), 1-2..
4
 Statistical system currently operates in a highly fragmented structural process,
sources and-or compilers of data each very resembling to distant islands in an
ocean.
 Time series data of most variables in the Turkish case is available, but unfortunately
not perfectly reliable and comparable. Because concepts, definitions and accounting
rules adopted and employed are in a continuous movement, thus generating the
problem of data break down in most series.
 Under above circumstances, time series methodology (econometrics) fundamentally
produces erroneous results and even contradictory policy formulations4.
Hence a strategic set of action is vital to accompany the challenging data-policy
environment for empirical researchers and institutional public actors of the field in Turkey:
 Calibrative (Structural) Modeling should be improved and used in search of
relevant policy questions. Cooperative actions between international agencies,
public authorities and academicians are to be encouraged.
 Aiming to feed these models with the “correct” and reliable data, quality
investments in applied research of reliable and timely databases must be utilized
according to the integrated national accounting framework.
It is surely a balance to be achieved between time series and calibration approaches,
referring to the limits transmitted to policy modeling through more often than not broken
time series in countries like Turkey 5.
Telli Ç. 2005a. “A Time Series Social Accounting Matrix Assembly System and Application to Turkey”. P
5-6. Expert Dissertation in State Planning Organization at Turkish Prime Ministry. (In Turkish).
4
5
It is no doubt that for developing institutional and structural capacities for such policy
modeling further, researchers will face new problems like having even larger, (more)
integrated and timely databases. The principal input of any applied general equilibrium
effort is the construction of a micro-consistent benchmark dataset called Social Accounting
Matrices (SAMs).
The SAM basically can be defined as a matrix version and exposition of integrated national
accounts of current and capital flows of production, distribution and accumulation activities
in an economy. It is not surprising that such an endeavor is difficult to be estimated and
expensive to be built with proficient costs of time, labor and money.
The capabilities of applied general equilibrium modeling such as validation, timeliness and
domain of applicability to a large extent depend on the availability and qualities of SAMs.
In terms of empirical research, one of the most widely debated disadvantages of general
equilibrium modeling is the calibration of model behavior to the very historical data. A
recent good example of such backbone is Integrated Macro Model for Poverty Analysis
(IMMPA) for Turkey, which solves Turkish economy -say in 2005- with the structural
dynamics of a 1996 SAM6. Yet structural framework and macroeconomic dynamics of
Turkish economy has greatly evolved between these years.
5
For potential synergies of merging two approaches can be further read from Hertel T, Hummels D,Ivanic M,
Keeney Roman, How Confident Can We Be In CGE-Based Assessments of Free Trade Agreements, 2004
NBER.
6
Agenor P. R, Jensen H, Verghish M, Yeldan E. (2004). “Disinflation, Fiscal Sustainability and Labor
Market Adjustment in Turkey”. Second draft.
6
Thus it is deliberately clear that there is a strategic complementarity between strategic goal
one and two, in other words realizing strategic goal one is dependent to the success in goal
two.
Re-approaching To Construction of SAM
As in most other developing countries SAM data in Turkish case is scarce, model-specific,
historic, handmade (and hand-balanced), inconsistent and most of the time not reliable. In
order to achieve strategic goal 2, SAM data should be: available, compatible to demands of
modelers, updated (and annual), consistent and reliable.
RAS method (see Bacharach 1971) and entropy method (see Robinson et al. 2001) are first
to recall as previous studies of the issue. However these methods are i) driven mainly by
model purposes and focuses on the balancing calculus between SAM rows and columns, ii)
still lack a broader type, assembly line framework of annually updated and consistent
SAMs.
An integrated national accounting approach may be fruitful in terms of both developing
national accounts and applied general equilibrium models’ accuracy and capabilities. What
is the rationale behind such motive?
 When raw data from different official sources is integrated and reconciled;
inconsistencies are readily observed and structural flaws inherent in the system are
defined.
7
 Corrections and second order actions are employed accordingly, through
sequencing relative confidence degree of data itself.
Therefore the outline of present study is as follows: Second section gives definitions and
basic concepts about SAMs and national accounting frame and clarifies the structural
mechanism designed for an assembly line with the purpose of building time series SAM
plant called Interlocking System of SAMs (ISSAM). In the third part, we define the
necessary adjustments and manipulations for integrating public sector statistics into SAM’s
national borders. Section four describes the measures incorporating the foreign sector
whereas the fifth one reveals the corrective actions for remaining national statistics such as
production and income account as well as input output tables. We end with conclusions on
limitations of the current stage of analysis and offer further steps for research.
8
2. SOCIAL ACCOUNTING MATRIX (SAM)
A social accounting matrix (SAM) is a comprehensive, economy-wide data framework,
typically representing the economy of a nation.7 Being strictly a square matrix, the
underlying principle of SAM accounting is double entry bookkeeping by which revenues of
any account is depicted along its row whereas expenditures of the same account is shown
along its column. Therefore for a consistent SAM table, revenues and expenditures of each
account must balance.
In this study, the SAM definition we employed by and large depicts a typical aggregated
version. Table 2.1. depicts the analytical structure of the aggregated SAM. A number of
features worth further zooming:
The standard SAM distinguishes between activity account which carries out production and
commodity account which those domestically produced goods-services and the goods and
services from/to foreign countries are marketed. Activity account is equivalent to
productive sectors in input-output tables. Thus activity column allocate total production
costs in producer prices whilst activity row collects revenues of production activities from
home or foreign consumption. Commodity account’s column represents the supply of
composite commodity to home markets that arise from domestic production and import;
and
its
row
represents
7
Pyatt and Round (1985) and Reinert and Roland-Holst (1997); Pyatt (1988) and Robinson and Roland-Holst
(1988).
9
total interior demand. In other words commodity column disseminate aggregate
absorption in the economy to domestic production and world markets and tax revenues
of government in market prices whereas its row aggregates total domestic absorption of
the economy including intermediate inter-sectoral demands.
<Please insert Table 2.1 here>
Independent treatment of production activities from commodity accounts is preferred
because of (1) the effort to show different behavioral structure of commodity and factor
markets, (2) the aim to define the origin of export goods8, and finally (3) the aim to
capture the features of real world in which any commodity can be produced by multiple
activities and any activity to produce multiple commodities.
Factors of production are aggregate labor and aggregate capital. Factor columns
represent total factor expenditures (dispersion of income to various economic agents)
and factor rows show value added revenues of aggregate labor and capital (functional
income distribution). Public sector is disaggregated into first a core government account
incurring various tax activities and injecting its expenditures into the economy; second
a social security institutions (SSIs) account channeling social security funds into
government accounts and to related receivers as a mere intermediary.9
In SAM plant, exports are placed in activities account’s row. In this case, domestic total
supply is made up of domestic production and import, and only domestic goods can be
exported.
8
9
The distinct evaluation of government and social security institutions is because economic
interpretation of some payments may otherwise be vague, in terms of our most modeling
objectives.
10
Domestic non-governmental institutions consist of households, enterprises and domestic
banks. At least one household account is necessary for a SAM, to channel (1) revenues
from labor factor income directly, (2) to transfer net of enterprises capital income and
distributed profits of domestic banks indirectly (as well as transfers payments of
government) into final private consumption, after taxes and savings are incurred. On the
other hand, enterprises earn factor incomes and receive domestic/foreign transfers;
distribute profits, pay taxes and close foreign liabilities. As contrasted to households
enterprises do not consume.10 Domestic Banks account does not have any factor
income, assuming a zero interest on their earnings from their activities in marketing
financial instruments. As parallel to SSIs account, being a mere intermediary, domestic
banks here functions as a primitive banking sector in real world and channels flow of
funds among institutions and rest of the world in a way to reflect basic macro
investment-saving relations in walrasian matrix. Remaining agents of capital account is
generalized under private and public investment accounts to spend available funds to
investment goods.
Different accounting types of interest are as follows: (1) national income and national
product, (2) fund flow tables, (3) balance of payments, (4) national balance sheet tables
(wealth), and (5) input-output tables. National income accounting shows double
directional cyclic relations obtained from relation of demand and dividing between
production and income in current term; fund flow tables show changes in all movement
of money and credit in economy, with asset and liability of various institutions; balance
10
Under conditions of available data, it may be more convenient to separately model tax paying
and saving behaviors of enterprises rather than the assumption of having an unvaried structure
with households.
11
of payments exhibit exchange of all goods and services with exterior world, and lender
and borrower relations; national balance sheet tables show real and nominal assets and
their distributions; input-output tables exhibit inter-sectoral flow of goods and services.
These closely related accounting types have different relation networks of the same
economy.
SAM unifies these critical balances of the economy generated by various accounting
frameworks and different institutions into one single consistent system of national
accounts. So that SAM is considered as a highly comprehensive accounting system
since it overtly portrays both exterior and interior situation of a nation’s economy.
The structure above expresses the equality of (1) cost (distributed earnings included) to
obtained incomes; (2) incomes (tax and saving totals included) to expenditure; (3)
supply to demand for each goods, in equilibrium when the row and columns totals are
equal. It emphasizes when (n-1) account units from n units come to equilibrium; nth
unit comes to equilibrium automatically because of Walras Law.
However the process of constructing a consistent datum for an economy-wide model is
a real burden that researchers should overcome. Greater the extent of disaggregation
across sectors, factors and institutions the more difficult task of reconciliation will be.
Inconsistencies require modelers to make decisions about relative reliability and
accuracy of various data sources. It often occurs that input-output accounts and national
and trade accounts differ when various figures in interest are considered. Balance of
payments data and national accounts’ foreign trade and net factor income figures rarely
12
converge each other. Governments and other institutions flow of funds data are
generally hard to reconcile among different accounts because definition, coverage and
accuracy of various accounts are often incompatible.
Required technical conditions are further intensive if one is to come up with estimates
of SAM tables on annual basis since, for countries like Turkey, production and
consumption data depending on input-output balances have not been published at
desirable continuity11.
Robinson and El Said (2000) propose a GAMS version of balancing method of SAM
inconsistencies. Such a computer based reallocation of rows and columns minimizing
deviation parameters involved in the process works excellent for modelers, but
nevertheless at the last stage of reconciliation sequence. It lacks a complete set of
integrated accounts for manufacturing already balanced SAM lines annually, through
absorbing the statistics produced by different institutions of the economy.
What is our approach and style of SAM Plant?
Thus a new method of data assembling and need to sequence steps from starting with
the most reliable data sources and compelling others to be consistent with them are
necessary. Our method will fundamentally lie on improved usage of a compact
reconciliation sequence that is adopted from an integrated national accounting
approach.
11
State Institute of Statistics of Turkey, had generated input-output tables for years 1990 and
1996, 1998 and the latest one is about to be completed for 2000.
13
The System of National Accounts (SNA) consists of a coherent, consistent and
integrated set of macroeconomic accounts based on standard concepts, definitions,
classifications and accounting rules. The primary function of SNA is to facilitate
economists and analysts to measure the economic activity in the economy in a given
period of time. Thus the system helps policy makers to design various social and
economic policies as well as comparing performance of different economies12.
In theoretical vocabulary SNA constitutes a full blown system but in real life
implementations those vary regarding both sources of statistics and definitions adopted
due to various practical concerns. Therefore in many countries statistical process can
not be defined as being interlocking and integrated. Within the light of discussion
above, Turkish statistical process is not an exception to this issue, having real
institutional gaps the worse.
As highlighted before, we aim to employ concepts and approach of integrated national
accounting into real life praxis with strengthened enthusiasm and creative thinking. We
will try to make a system, a coherent and interlocking body from scores of organs, even
though there may exist procedural and methodological walls among hundreds of
indicators which are in our focus. The objective boundary in our effort then is
minimizing the distance between the products of SAM plant and official statistics. The
system created should balance between reflections and consolidations; it must mirror
12
For further reading please refer to the SNA Manual by United Nations,......
14
indispensable macroeconomic indicators as they are used by academic and policy maker
majority on the other.
Second methodological objective for the study will rely on from top to down approach
in manufacturing a SAM structure. A bottom-up methodology is neither practical nor
functional for our purpose of unifying statistical clans in a country. Nevertheless one
can make use of survey data and-or census data when generating updated micro SAM
balances according to diverse modeling cases.
Thirdly, the present study aims to construct a SAM “plant” for Turkey starting from
1996 and just for current and capital accounts in other words real economy. Following
pace will, with anticipation, smooth the progress of fabricating a full blown
consolidated SAM plant for Turkey.
Therefore the SAM plant, together with the Interlocking System of SAMs (ISSAM),
keeps figures such as GDP, final consumption, public investment and international
trade, PSBR and public saving investment gap unchanged. Nevertheless it implements
obligatory corrections and linkages in those figures.
We finally set up links among various macroeconomic indicators, concepts, definitions
and classifications in an iterative process. The process admittingly has to enclose
subjective judgment about the soundness of the data and data sources. For example
most figures are tied on the public accounts of SPO and macro variables of SIS and
conciliatory decisions will need to be made along.
15
3. ADAPTATION OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS WITH INTERLOCKING SYSTEM
OF SAM (ISSAM)
Public sector general equilibrium (PSGE) defines public sector revenues and disposable
income, that is used for government consumption and investment as well as current and
capital transfers.
The magnitude on these variables will be needed to depict out
necessary steps generating some critical macroeconomic and fiscal parameters like
public saving investment gap and public sector borrowing requirement (PSBR). It also
shows the financing process of these deficits both in institutional and functional terms.
The PSBR, most widely used measure of the fiscal deficit, is the difference between
public expenditures and public revenues in a period of time, usually a year.
Alternatively it can be defined as the portion of public deficits that has to be financed
with public sources. It is based on flows and double entry accounting like balance of
payments. It is calculated fundamentally with the above-the-line approach. However, as
stated above it provides the essential information about the financing breakdown. There
are three main types of financing public gap: (1) Domestic borrowing through interest
bearing assets, (2) money creation finance through Central Bank (CB) and (3) foreign
borrowing.
Definition of the Scope of the Public Sector
In Turkey PSBR coverage includes central government, local governments, financial
and non-financial SEE’s, social security institutions (SSIs), extra budgetary funds
16
(EBF’s) and finally revolving funds (RF’s).13 However, it excludes the Central Bank.14
As of the treatment of CB, in public finances CB is considered as a part of the private
sector.
Further improved measures of public fiscal deficits may be derived adjusting PSBR
15
by :
(1) taking into account the movements in general price level and exchange rates
(2) adopting a new approach that is basically concentrated on below-the-line datum
(3) a newly treatment of public sector such that isolates Central Bank (and Saving
Deposit Insurance Fund) from private sector16
(4) and finally advanced adaptation of public finance accounts (and PSBR) with
European Standards of Accounting (ESA) and General Finance Statistics (GFS) in a
comprehensive manner.17
13
Following the structural reforms of IMF led 1999-2001 era, financial state economic
enterprises (SEE’s) are excluded from SEE’s system, most extra budgetary funds were
terminated or rendered to the budget, revolving funds and unemployment insurance funds were
contained in public accounts. The reader should pay attention to this issue when comparing
annual PSBR figures.
14
Due to quasi-fiscal activities of CB, a more unified emphasis on the public accounts may be
to adopt the Consolidated Public Sector Deficits in real or nominal terms which should definitely
show the comprehensive public sector claims on private funds.
15
IMF uses some adjusters for PSBR such as net lending of the public sector to private
institutions and privatization receipts. Net lending normally having below-the-line position, is
treated as an above-the-line item due to (1) it is a consequence of a policy choice thus should
be reflected to the measures of fiscal activity and expenditures (2) governments’ lending rate is
usually below the market rate (concessional) and generally repayments are not received back
fully by public institutions. Privatization revenues are excluded from public revenues since the
way is a finance through liquidation of non-financial assets.
16
World Bank Office Memorandum, Turkey, Tevfik Yaprak, Sebnem Akkaya, Sven B.
Kjellstrom; Estimation of The Operational Deficit and Alternative Proposal, 26 th October 1989.
17
Towards generating an economy wide SAM assembling system, this section seeks to
construct integral bonds between public finance statistics and others, while making
necessary corrections and improvements within the implementation of public finance
accounting.
We present below the verbal structure of PSGE and hence PSBR which is generated by
SPO on annual basis.
I. Revenues (Normally having debit (positive) accounts)……
(IA+IB+IC)
A. Tax Revenues……………………………. ………………… (a+b)
a. Direct Taxes (proper)
b. Indirect Taxes
B. Non-Tax Revenues
C. Factor Income (net)
II. Expenditures (Normally having credit (negative)
accounts)…(IIA+IIB+IIC+IID+IIE+IIF)
A. Social Funds (net)
17
Indeed SPO has already initialized studies of the issue and produced some of the necessary
adjustments for such a structure in public accounts. Preliminary Economic Programme that has
been started to be prepared in line within the context of European Union reforms, gives an ESA
defined public budget, mainly adjusting the net revenue and net expenditure items to gross
figures of public accounting. But this study (1) does not generate any time series data back to
1996; instead it starts from the year 1999 (2) We use slightly different and more practical
measures when adopting PSBR with SAM. GFS also takes profit of accrual basis accounting
practice since it provides the best estimate of the macroeconomic impact of government fiscal
policy.
18
B. Transfers (proper) (net)
Memo: Public Disposable Income18……………………... (I-IIA-IIB)
C. Current Expenditures
Memo: Public Savings……………………………………(I-IIA-IIB-IIC)
D. Public Investment
Memo: Public Saving-Investment Balance………………(I-IIA-IIB-IIC-IID)
E. Capital Transfers (net)
F. Stock Changes Fund 19
Public Sector Borrowing Requirement…………………………(II-I)
III. Financing20
A. Consolidated Budget
B. SEE's (Including SEE's under privatization)
C. Local Administrations
D. Social Security Institutions
E. EBF's (Extra Budgetary Funds)
18
In the standard SPO format, Public Disposable Income is placed in the revenue block after
leaving room for social funds and current transfers as net of revenue items. We have preferred
this format for practical purposes and treated social funds and current transfers to come up in
expenditure block.
19
In the standard SPO format, stock revaluation fund is shown under financing items but added
up to the public expenditures to reach PSBR.
20
SPO has data of financing breakdown both at institutional basis and functional basis. We
preferred here to display institutional decomposition.
19
F. Revolving Funds
G. Unemployment Insurance Fund.
<Please insert Table 3.1 here>
The reader should be aware of that some items above are explained as net in
parenthesis; referring to the fact the account has material offsets between revenues and
expenditures so understates/overstates its true gross volume. Factor income, social
funds, current and capital transfers of public sector institutions will constitute our basic
focus, for which a developed and consistent version of public accounts can be derived
as a fundamental input for the SAM structure. This point will serve as a further step in
designing accurate and distortion-proof SAM data in which public sector flows is
corrected for its real size over the economy, otherwise the volume of public institutions’
sphere will be underestimated by from 5 up to 12 percent of GDP between 1996-2003
periods. So that true impact of various fiscal measures as well as the accurate general
equilibrium effects within the whole economy can be analyzed correctly.
Adaptation of Social Funds Figure and Social Security Institutions (SSIs)
Social funds in standard SPO PSBR accounts show the net of social security
institutions’ proper revenues from social security taxes collected, over the social
security expenditures incurred by those institutions. In other words it is a deficit or
surplus measure of public sector orienting from proper social security activities within
the economy.
20
Scope of social funds figure contains all public social security institutions; The State
Pension Fund (Emekli Sandigi), Social Security Organization for Self Employed ( BagKur), Social Security Institution (SSK) and Unemployment Insurance Fund (Issizlik
Sigortasi), and at the same time is net of intra-transfer accounts between SSIs. Netting
up the revenues with expenditures statistically downsizes the volume of flows attained
and spent by public social security sector hence causing to overestimate the space held
by non-government units in the economy.
<Please insert Table 3.2 here>
Table 3.2. exhibits the structural nature of necessary adjustments to tackle with this
problem. Revenues and expenditures of social funds are derived in gross terms and on
institutional basis. A breakdown of social security receipts and expenditures on factor
basis is also obtained in order to capture sub account information required for SAM
Hence two major points worth to be focused on; first as Balance row of the Table 3.2
highlights, it is total proper revenues of SSIs minus total proper social security
expenditures what is actually presented as Social Funds in SPO‘s PSBR accounts. For
example for the year 1996, total social security premium revenues of SSIs was 537.167
billion TL whereas expenditures was 804.063 billion TL and social funds was –266.896
indicating the net revenues of the public social security system as a whole. Instead the
link with SAM is settled up on gross incomes and gross expenses of SSIs; 537.167
billion TL and 804.063 billion TL respectively for the same year.
21
Second, social security premium revenues are classified in the way to reflect the burden
on primary factors of production, labor and capital. In this respect Employee Share in
Table 3.2 shows burden of social security system on labor across SSIs in current prices.
Aggregate shares of premiums out of aggregate social security taxes that fix basis for
the table are obtained from SPO authorities. By this method, Social Security Institution
(SSK) collects 14 points out of 33,5 points total premiums from employees alone; The
State Pension Fund (Emekli Sandıgı) raises 6 points of the total 36 points and
Unemployment Insurance Fund gets 2 out of 5 points taxes from labor factor.21 Social
Security Organization for Self Employed (Bag-Kur) and the remaining portion of social
security contributions constitute the Employers Share.22
Linking Social Security Institutions (SSIs) with SAM
As revealed in preceding section, public sector is composed of a core government
account and a channel account of SSIs by which flows in and out of social security
system is tied to the public balances. Table 3.1. gives the merged SAM balances of
public sector; total factor payments and supplementary information of the burden on
capital and labor received by SSIs is shown under Direct Revenues classification and
expenditures out SSIs are placed under general definition of transfer expenditures. As it
21
In 2000-2001 years contribution rates are as follows: Employees 2 points, state 2 points and
employers 3 points whereas by 2002 there is 1 point of deduction across all contribution rates.
The state share in Unemployment Insurance Fund is shown under the separate account of
current transfers hence is not added up in the social funds.
22A
more elaborate study will definitely improve the accuracy of this data, although we believe it
does not change the general structural picture.
22
can easily be traced out from Table 2.1, labor account will give social security taxes to
SSIs; and the government account, by transferring social funds for the excess of SSIs
social security transfers to households, will close SSIs account.23
Adaptation of Public Sector Factor Income and Interest Cost
Public sector factor income is total net receipts of public institutions under coverage
that can be linked economically to the direct value added of public production factors,
primarily public financial capital. Public enterprises or institutions attain profits and
interest revenue as well as incur loss and bear interest cost. SEE’s, SSIs and EBF’s
factor incomes are netted out by their relevant factor expenditures when recording. In
parallel to the rationale behind the method we use for correcting SSIs by gross term
accounting measures; (1) factor income presented originally in SPO PSBR tables have
been cleared from interest costs (2) then these interest outlays have been pooled under a
general interest expenditure account.
Linking Public Sector Factor Income with SAM
Total public sector factor income for 1996 is 713.846 billion TL in net of SEEs, SSIs
and EBFs interest costs. In SAM, government account will acquire 713.846 plus
182.042 billion TL interest cost of these institutions and a total of 895.888 billion TL
factor income from enterprise sector. The relevant interest cost will be allocated to
Payroll taxes cover only employer’s compulsory social insurance contributions and excludes
withholding wage from workers on behalf of tax authority. Rather it is preferred to put
withholding wages onto household sector. Therefore the labor factor is assumed to be paying
the whole burden of social security premiums regardless of the economic identity of the cash
payers as employee or employers.
23
23
Domestic Banks account for domestic interest and Rest of The World account for
sources obtained from abroad.
Adaptation of Public Sector Current Transfers and Linking with SAM
The primary portion of current transfers goes to the interest cost of central and local
government bodies. The remaining portion is for transfers to households and enterprise
sector. Now, we define current transfers to include above adjustments; social security
payments and consolidated public sector interest cost by addition of SEE’s, SSIs and
EBF’s interest payments. Table 3.3. gives the reader such breakdown of total interest
cost across public budget units with the relevant supplementary information about
origins of financial sources, which in turn will be used to form SAM data.24
<Please insert Table 3.3. here>
For 1996, previous figure of current transfers 2.030.335 billion TL in PSGE accounts
now is increased by a 804.063 billion TL social security payments and a 182.042 billion
TL interest cost hence totaling 3.016.440 billion TL.
In SAM table, government account (including the sub account of SSIs) will allocate this
much current transfers among households, enterprises, domestic banks and rest of the
world. Through core government account households will receive current transfers
SEE’s foreign interest payments are forced to be compatible with CB accounts, the remaining
portion is treated as domestic interest to give the total interest cost of SEE’s system in SPO
PSGE accounts. EBF’s interest payments do not contain mandatory savings interest.
24
24
related to various fiscal policy measures whereas by channel of SSIs sub account they
will be paid for social security expenditures. Enterprises will get transfers in the nature
of production subsidies from core government which also link PSGE flows with inputoutput and national income accounting.
One major problem arises at this point. 1996 IO publication notes that for the
production subsidies, public sources that had been transferred for operating loss finance
of SEE system is used. However SAM balances in our study should isolate SEE’s from
the enterprise sector. We finally decide to use 1996 IO and national accounts’
production subsidy figure as an approximation of actual production subsidies by
government to private enterprise sector. No reliable data is available on the topic,
because public accounts usually rely upon a hybrid version of accrual and cash
accounting in Turkish practice, it is a complicated task to materialize and measure the
amount of subsidies.25
Domestic Banks are paid for government domestic interest bearing assets and rest of the
world is received foreign interest of public sector. Balance of payments accounting for
the interest cost of public sector is compelled to follow SPO accounts. Fiscal accounts
are based on timely exchange rates and are generally valued at the exact times that
payments occur. 26
25
GFS and ESA standards encourage analysts and accountants base public finance accounts
on accrual basis hence seeing macroeconomic impact of fiscal policies.
26
See Foreign Balance section for an elaborate discussion.
25
After above adjustments and assumptions; enterprises, domestic banks and rest of the
world accounts are closed in government column and household transfers are obtained
being simply a residual from total current transfers. By this way, we implicitly treat
transfers to enterprise sector is financed only by financial assets and borrowing from
abroad, leaving sources held through non-financial assets disposal (hence capital
transfers) out of our scope. Indeed we are only focused on adopting public finance
accounts that are related with saving investment balance which ties public finance
accounts to socio-economic structure of SAM in the framework of current national
accounts.
Remaining Issues: Adopting the Breakdown of Tax Accounts
When constructing an economy-wide consistent SAM, government revenues are
classified as revenues those levied either on production factors or on enterprises and
households directly, and others that come from production activities and sales of good
and services indirectly. General breakdown is below:
A. Direct Revenues
a. Factors’ Payments to SSIs
b. Enterprise Taxes
Gross Factor Income
Corporate Taxes
c. Household Taxes
Income Taxes (Withholding wages included)
26
Non-tax Revenues of Public Sector
B. Indirect Revenues
a. Indirect Tax on Activities (Production Taxes)
b. Commodity Taxes
Sales Taxes
Import Tariffs
<Please insert Table 3.4 here>
Direct Revenues
Factors’ payments to SSIs, as explained in preceding section, consists of all social
security payments in terms of employees or employers, which is regarded as direct cost
to its payers.
Enterprises pay gross factor income27 and corporate taxes to government account. The
point is that there is no breakdown of corporate taxes in PSGE accounting and Direct
Tax definition of PSGE contains both income and corporate taxes without any explicit
relevant line items. Only consolidated budget render this kind of information which we
have used to obtain a breakdown for the whole public sector. The relative rate of direct
taxes held by consolidated budget to the direct taxes held by public sector is assumed to
give the relative rate of income (residual is corporate taxes from total direct taxes) tax
Factor income is in gross amounts: SEE’s, SSIs and EBF’s interest expenditures were
cleaned from net factor income of public sector and transferred to the expenditure items in
preceding section.
27
27
recorded by these budget bodies respectively.28 979.788 billion TL direct taxes in PSGE
accounts is then subdivided between a 764.468 billion TL income tax share and a
corporate tax portion which amounts 215.301 billion TL for 1996.
The remaining institution, households, will pay income taxes and non tax revenues of
public sector to government account. Two major points here stand for further
explanation:
(1) Income taxes include wage withholdings of labor factor so that labor income
channeled to the household sector is gross of wage withholdings.
(2) Following general rules of national accounting system, we employed wealth taxes in
the capital transfers of conventional PSGE accounting for keeping public sector saving
investment balance unchanged.
Indirect Revenues
Productive sectors incur taxes on activities whereas commodity account pay for sales
taxes and import tariffs to government account in SAM.
However indirect taxes in PSGE accounts is total of indirect production taxes, sales
taxes (VAT) and import tariffs at the public sector aggregation level and no breakdown
Consolidated budget, local administrations and EBF’s corporate tax shares are adjusted for
negative SEE’s taxes to reach public sector aggregate tax figures.
28
28
is available except for consolidated budget. A relevant system of disaggregation is
required which also must be compatible with IO accounting also.
Box 1. summarizes the necessary steps to be followed in the process. The method is
similar to the one we have used in splitting direct taxes across corporate and income tax
portions. Consolidated budget works as a key reference point, and then one makes the
tax share ratio among various budget types to be stable over time as far as any structural
changes occur.
Import tariffs for example is calculated by the addition of custom duties, Support Price
Stabilization Fund (SPSF) premiums, other funds premiums and tax shares,
transportation and infrastructure duty, stamp duty and non-deductible value added tax.29
Referring to the Table 3.4 for 1997 we have the consolidated budget share of import
tariffs 123.622 billion TL; other budget units get a portion of 35.780 billion TL to keep
constant the sharing ratio among budget types at 1996. By this method we try to
neutralize the impact of our initial assumptions on tax structure since (1) we only try to
keep the tax share ratio between different budget types stable (2) and major taxes have
been already collected by consolidated budget.
29
1996 IO table manual SIS
29
Box 1. Adopting The Breakdown of Indirect Taxes
Input-Output Table
1. If it is available for the current year: Get actual activity and commodity tax
structure (Check the total direct taxes equal to the PSGE accounts)
2. Else: Go to the Disaggregation SubBox
Disaggregation SubBox
1. Go to the latest available IO; get the latest breakdown of commodity taxes to its
line items being sales taxes and import tariffs.
2. Split sales taxes and import tariffs in terms of consolidated budget and other
public’s shares. (other public’s portion of taxes will be calculated as a residual from
total taxes in excess of consolidated budget tax shares.)30
3. Enlarge import tariffs recorded in the consolidated budget as to keep constant
the tax revenue sharing ratio between consolidated budget and other public institutions.
4. Impose structural changes in tax shares in relevant years.
5. Repeat the procedure above for the sales taxes.
6. Derive production taxes by subtracting yearly total of sales taxes and import
tariffs from the total indirect taxes.
7. Force national income accounting to follow tax structure and volume obtained
above (GDP by value added and by income statistics).
8. Impose the structure onto yearly estimated IO accounting.
30
Other Public Institutions in this context is the merged structure of local governments and
EBF’s.
30
The tax shifts across budget units should be taken into account. For example by the end
of 2000, major EBF’s were either removed into the budget or terminated permanently.
As a result consolidated budget’s fund revenues decreased from 2.933.055 billion TL in
2001 to 1.961.079 billion TL in 2002. After adjusting for the economic growth rate and
GDP deflator, it may be concluded that EBF system was downsized by 56.5 percent.
This rate, as an exogenous shock, is then imposed to the relative ratios of tax shares
between budget units. In table … share ratio between consolidated budget and other
public institutions decreased from 0.29 to 0.13.31
<Please insert Table 3.5 here>
SAM Public Revenues:
SPO Volume
+ Social security payroll taxes and total employee contribution to social security
+ SEE’s , EBF’s and SSIs interest expenditures ( for grossing the public factor income)
SAM Public Expenditures:
SPO Volume
31
One of the valuable contributions to this work may be a study on elaborative tax structures of
different types of budgets.
31
+ Total social security expenditures related with ‘ Social Funds’ account in SPO
balances.
- Social Funds
+ SEE’s , EBF’s and SSIs interest expenditures
Table 3.5. makes it clear to trace out the discrepancies between two definitions in terms
of saving investment gap and PSBR. When collated with SPO balances, both saving
investment gap and PSBR figures remain same in public sector determination of SAM
system.
32
4. ADAPTATION OF BALANCE OF PAYMENTS ACCOUNTING WITH
INTERLOCKING SYSTEM OF SAM (ISSAM): FOREIGN BALANCE
Balance of payments accounting is closely related with national income and flow of
funds accounting (public budget).
It is known that, national income accounting exposes the relationship between goods
and services produced in an economy and the demand that absorbs this supply.
Aggregate level of equilibrium is as the conventional algebraic form below:
(1)
Y = C+I+X-M 32
From national income equation (1) two main types of identities can be derived:
Balance of Total Sources and Total Uses
(2) Y + (M-X) = C+I
Domestic Sources+ Exterior Sources = Domestic Absorption (Total Ultimate Domestic
Demand)
This identity algebraically forms the underlying sources of domestic capital formation
and consumption. The left hand-side of the equation (2) represents total sources
32
C, I: Total (public + private) consumption and investment (stock accumulation included);
X, M: Export and import of goods and services respectively
Y: Production (Income)
33
available for an economy whilst right hand-side of the equation exposes domestic
absorption. Ultimate consumption at home country can only be raised either by larger
foreign trade deficits or through an increased production if not both.
Total Saving and Total Investment Balance
Defining savings (S) as the linear distance between income (Y) and the amount of
income that is consumed (C)
S = Y-C and substituting into the balance of total sources and uses identity (2)
S+C + (M-X) = C+I
(3.a.) S + (M-X) = I
The third identity overlays total investments in an economy that will be financed by
domestic savings and foreign saving inflows. It also can be rearranged in 3.b. below;
domestic saving investment gap is going to be closed by current account deficits (deficit
in goods and services here) in other words exterior sources.
(3.b.) S - I = (X-M)
If one wishes to disaggregate between public and private positions and g denoting to
public and p to private institutions;
34
S = Sp + Sg, I = Ip +Ig the identity takes the form:
(Sp + Sg) – ( Ip +Ig) = (X-M)
(3.c.) (Sp– Ip) + (Sg - Ig) = (X-M)
When Sg  Ig , Sp  Ip as in case of Turkey, the identity depicts that public saving
investment gap is going to be financed through private saving investment surplus and/or
flows of foreign resources into the country.33 In this manner, identity (3.c.) strongly
highlights the fundamental linkages between public finance accounting and balance of
payments.
Definition of Income/Production : GDP, GNP or GNI and Exterior Sources ?
What one uses as a definition of production, underlines the definition of exterior sources
also, since these two algebraically mirrors on each other.
-GDP Used as Income
GDP = C+I+(X-M)
GDP + (M-X) = C+I
33
If private saving investment surplus can not close public saving investment deficit then the
result will be an ultimate current account gap which is called Twin Deficits.
35
When GDP is used for national income the exterior sources will be equal to the term
(M-X) or -(X-M) where foreign trade deficit gives trade balance of goods and services
other than factor income.
-GNP Used as Income
GNP = C+I+(X-M) + NFI
GNP + (M-X-NFI) = C+I
In this context, exterior sources are (M-X-NFI) or -(X-M+NFI), including net factor
income from abroad. Net factor income is obtained by subtracting factor expenditures of
a nation from its total factor earnings abroad34. If NFI is positive then exterior sources
will be less for the given level of domestic absorption.
-Gross National Disposable Income (GNI) Used as Income
GNI = C+I+(X-M) + NFI+UT
GNI + (M-X-NFI-UT) = C+I
GNI shows disposable national income in gross terms after addition of Net Unrequited
Transfers from Abroad (UT’s). When domestic sources are defined to be GNI, then
exterior sources will be exactly equal to the volume of current account balance (CAB)
34
Interest cost (or revenue), workers remittances, profit transfers (into-out of the country),
entrepreneur service income are main items of NFI.
36
35
. UT’s are in nature of net current transfers and contain mainly imports with waver and
official or private grants. The breakdown of net unrequited transfers as current and
capital sub-accounts is key to assembling an accurate national income datum.36
In all GDP, GNP or GNI defined versions of national production above, total resources
available for domestic capital formation or consumption do not change. Only the way
that ultimate domestic absorption is financed differs. Extending the definition of
production from GDP to GNI, the coverage of exterior sources expands towards CAB
which in turn shifts the finance between domestically raised funds and foreign capital
inflows. So when NFI and UT exist, GNI definition should be used for domestic
production to calculate an accurate private disposable income and private savings. 37
Adopting National Income Accounting and Balance of Payments
In Turkey SIS is responsible public agency for national system of accounts whereas CB
prepares balance of payment statistics. Between SIS and CB there are considerable
differences about the coverage of various balance of payments items:
(1) SIS assumes that some portion of other income sub-item of Other Invisible Income
is not a current account service income. By this method 2/3 of the base which is
35
Following the identity here, Absorption Approach to balance of payments states that GNI(C+I)= CAB: Current Account deficits can be alleviated by increasing domestic production or
through increased domestic savings.
36
For the information about the different treatments of balance of payments accounts please
refer to the following section.
37
As it is expressed in equation 3.c. public saving investment gap will be given by fiscal
accounts and private saving surplus is going to be a residual after a given level of exterior
resources.
37
calculated by subtracting entrepreneurs’ service revenues, other transportation and
domestic currency conversions from foreign exchange accounts from other incomes; is
used for obtaining export and import figures.38
In this study, parallel to the SPO’s conventional adaptation we follow the case of SIS
considering relevant foreign trade data.
(2) With the Shuttle Trade adjustment in export accounts by CB, the discrepancy further
widens between two definitions. SPO and SIS use balance of payments in the way to
exclude shuttle trade. We also have selected the same path and displaced shuttle trade
from current account.
(3) Tourism Revenues data as an integral item of balance of payments, are based on the
Foreign Visitors Questionnaires which entail significant differences in terms of target,
coverage and method between SIS and CB since 1996. Beginning from January 2003,
tourism revenues surveys are carried out with the cooperation of the Central Bank,
Ministry of Culture and Tourism and the State Institute of Statistics.39
(4) Workers’ remittances incorporated of the following three transactions of citizen
visitors residing abroad: (a) Foreign exchange remittances converted into Turkish Lira
(b) Turkish lira conversions from their foreign exchange accounts and (c) Money spent
38
Starting from January 2004, a revision is also associated with the calculation method of
“Construction Services”, “Other Business Services” and “Other Services” items under Current
Account/Services item within context of a wider rearrangement of balance of payments account
by CB. See http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/yeni/announce/2004/ANO2004-20.htm
39
See http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/yeni/announce/2004/ANO2004-20.htm
38
during their visit to Turkey. Following the adoption of the revised balance of payments
accounting by CB, last two items were deducted from workers’ remittances. In other
words, workers’ remittances and tourism revenues were reclassified and the changes
were applied to the years following 2003 data accordingly. 40
We treat workers’ remittances as a part of factor income, and accept the classification of
SIS. However with the implementation of new balance of payments method, there are
still major obstacles to reconcile CB and SIS data.
<Please insert Table 4.1. here>
(5) Decomposition of unrequited transfers is key to calculation of an accurate domestic
private savings and gross disposable national income (GNI), current and capital
transfers should be apart. In general private unrequited transfers are evaluated as
current, and unrequited public transfers are recorded as capital transfers moving it down
to below-the-line.41 However, CB or SIS still could have not proposed any decayed
presentation of unrequited transfers into its current and capital transfer components. The
resulting choice in this study; UT’s are assumed to be negligible, thus GNP defines the
production-income. In cases of UT’s are positive (there is net unrequited transfers
inflows into the country) private savings should have to be leveraged at the same
amount.
Consequently in CB tables, workers’ remittances declined from USD 2.321 million to USD 729
million, while the tourism revenues increased from USD 9.676 million to USD 13.203 million in
2003.
40
41
Poul HOST-MADSEN, Macro Economic Acounts- An Overview, IMF-1979
39
Linking Foreign Balance with SAM
Table 4.1. exposes the primary structure of the foreign flows. Exports, imports and NFI
all have SIS defined coverage and decomposed into necessary accounts accordingly.
NFI is allocated to receipts from rest of the world and payments to rest of the world
accounts. Receipts from rest of the world, collects foreign exchange earnings of
domestic institutions through export activities and institutional budget equations.
Households account gets net workers’ remittances from abroad42 ; enterprises earn
entrepreneur service income and get interest income and the calculation is based on a
residual of exterior sources after all institutions earn incomes and incur foreign
exchange expenses.
Payments to rest of the world contain the uses of foreign exchange fund flows by
residents of a country for foreign transactions. Enterprises pay for foreign resources
held; make profit transfers to abroad when government is paying foreign interest also.
Two primary points stand for detailed focus (1) Debt Service data utilized to sustain
necessary breakdown of interest payments for private sector institutions since newly
implemented balance of payments method still lacks elaborative explanations and sub
accounts for one to calculate interest incurred on institutional basis. (2) Government’s
foreign interest cost is established by employing SPO data.43 Timeliness of exchange
rate is often the case to form cash-based budgetary process, which also explains the
42
Before 2003 SIS and CB generates exactly equal data for workers’ remittances.
43
SEE’s foreign interest in SPO accounts are obliged to follow CB’s balance of payments data.
40
essential motive behind our preference to do so rather than relying upon an average
annual exchange rate only.
41
5. ADAPTATION OF CENTRAL INDICATORS OF NATIONAL INCOME
ACCOUNTING WITH INTERLOCKING SYSTEM OF SAM (ISSAM)
In former section, indispensable identities were presented that binds national income
accounting and balance of payments together and cardinal bonds were settled in dealing
with coverage and definition mismatches. In this section prevailing essential points are
aimed at being finalized and national income accounting will be reconciled with SAM
system.
Table 5.1. reveals unadjusted GDP table from expenditure side. Public stock
accumulation figure is from PSGE accounting, private stock accumulation is residual
from SIS total stock figure. The statistical discrepancy in some years can be sizable so
that at first iteration we allocated it onto demand side GDP parameters according to
their relative shares at the second iteration remaining sum is transferred onto the public
and private stock investments. By this way, Table …Adjusted GDP table is generated
and utilized in SAM accounts. Ultimate demand components of IO table(s) and national
income and institutional budget identities both employ these figures.
Table 5.1. exhibits the value added (cost components) version of GDP and supplements
the crucial figures like production cost (value added) and tax structure. Recalling tax
structure is a product of PSGE accounting, this table gets taxes as an intermediate input.
Value added at factor cost contains labor wages and operating surplus plus depreciation
of capital. Based on labor surveys of SIS, an informal labor factor is estimated and
42
assumed to have a constant proportion over time compared with the total wage earnings.
Capital value added is got smaller by this amount.
GDP at Market Prices is presented in Table 4.3. between years 1996-2005. In the first
row of the table, production taxes and import tariffs account is net of production
subsidies.
Desired adaptation between account of national incomes and balance of payments is
also very important with respect to determination of SAM’s macro equilibrium. This
relation has been explained mathematically in former sections. Macro economic
equilibrium is given the Table 5.2. Foreign flows are transmitted from foreign balance
section and when added with GNP it reveals total resources in the economy ready for
capital formation or consumption activities.
<Please insert Table 5.1. here>
<Please insert Table 5.2. here>
Then aggregate absorption is decomposed into its instruments and one reaches to private
savings from given level of public saving investment gap, private investments and
exterior resources obtained.
Adaptation of Input-Output Table with SAM:
43
Indeed one can think SAM structures as an advanced version of any input output core.
Like many standard SAMs input output tables display supply and use sides of economic
activities between various agents. Such economic activities are production of goods and
services including intermediate costs of production, generation of income and uses of
income by economic agents.
By no surprise, the probability of consistency is nearly zero between any years’ national
accounts and related I-O tables, although both are products of the same institution in our
country. Numerous chief figures of the same period like value added, factor shares,
consumption, investment and international trade are subject to serious discrepancies
between national accounts and I-O surveys.
One may argue that it is neither necessary nor required to depict the accounts in a
uniform way because I-O surveys are generally more up-to-date than national
accounting database and their purpose are not entirely identical either. But in our
intention, building an interlocking system of national accounts in the form of a time
series SAM framework, frequently oblige us to sweep out any differential among
national statistics.
Consequently our efforts in order to manufacture schematic SAMs demand
manipulation of I-O tables to facilitate compulsory adjustments of such numbers. The
linkage between SAM line and I-O core is set up on the basic rule that whole big box
will follow national accounts rather than relying on individual I-O surveys. By this
method, our SAM skeleton imposes total production account and income account into
44
any I-O, in turn absorbs their sectoral shares in any account as far as no other survey or
external data is available on the issue.
The latest official I-O Table belongs to the year 1998 but 1996 I-O is favored for further
use in the analysis even though the latter one is not symmetrical. The reason behind
such partiality is because 1996 I-O structurally mirrors the fiscal parameters like some
tax and subsidy figures much closer to the official public accounts than the fiscal
definitions engaged in 1998 I-O. Without a doubt 1998 I-O and that of 1996, are not
identical in their treatment and definition of certain fiscal items like production taxes.
According to the figures total production taxes by 1998 is well below its level in 1996 in
current terms.
Subsequently when fabricating aggregated SAM line, what we need from I-O core is
nothing but intermediate demand (or cost) share contrasted to total value added. In the
above mentioned surround, for 1996-2005 periods only 1996 I-O is employed to invent
intermediate supply or demand components.
The remaining task of I-O manipulation is the subject of micro SAM generation and it is
out
of
our
boundaries
at
the
moment.
45
6. CONCLUSION
Generation of I-O tables and SAM structures are commonly based on a down to up
approach. This method yet requires large costs of money and time to build up. The
advance herein falls apart and lies on a top to down focus. Radically noting, a full blown
interlocking system is designed to facilitate yearly production of schematic real SAM
tables for Turkish economy starting from 1996.
Potential accuracy of any applied CGE activity significantly depends on the availability
and reliability of data. This study is assumed to provide confident donations to applied
policy modeling, in specific to CGE generations, by maintaining an up-to-date databasemodel surface in countries that has rapid structural transitions.
The Interlocking System of SAM (ISSAM) is a system and with reserved evaluations,
may be employed for any countries national accounting for any period of time as far as
required macro data provided. Analysts and researchers then are with no trouble able to
decompose schematic SAMs into micro SAM structures for model purposes.
Projects Ahead for Turkey
Following the present study, a (consolidated) SAM assembly line should be developed
to integrate current, capital, financial and other changes in volume of assets and
revaluation accounts, in terms of sectoral units and financial instruments .
46
So that proxy of informal activities and leakages out of statistical system may be traced
out in the economy .
Modeling financial sector and real sector interdependency elaborately with reference to
the informal sector dynamics will be possible .
Regional data set of national accounts and SAM balances must be introduced. In the
context of European Union membership negotiations, it is supportive and
complimentary –if not a cornerstone- to the national and institutional capacities of
sectoral and regional planning system.
Applied interregional general equilibrium framework must be developed and utilized in
search of relevant policy questions in Turkey.
Linking strategic management initiative at public organizations via capacities of
positive policy making is an issue of extreme importance. By this way a real value
added and productive synergy will be created between macro-sectoral (regional) and
organizational level policy formulation and management .
To conclude, through the example of Turkey, present study tries to propose what
necessary action sets are for a methodologically undistorted policy-making; why we
should focus on database problem so much and how policy analysts and public officials
can give their jobs a real methodological push.
47
What offered is a two way strategic set of actions closely interdependent: i) Structural
modeling should be improved and used in search of relevant policy questions, ii) quality
investments in applied research of reliable and timely databases must be utilized
according to the integrated national accounting framework.
48
Table 2.1 : Schematic (Aggregated) Social Accounting Matrix
Factors
Activities
Activities
Commodities
Labor
Capital
Commodities
Domestic
Supply
Labor
Households
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
Private
Consumption
Government
Consumption
Private
Investment
Public
Investment
Distributed Profits
(Net)
Labor Income
Social Security
Expenditures
Capital
Income
Soc. Security
Premiums
Social Sec. Inst.
Transfers to
Households
Transfers to
Enterprises
Distributed Profits (Net)
Remittances
Private For
Transfers
Direct Tax + Pub. Sector Factor
NonTax Rev
Income +
+Wealth Taxes Corporate Taxes
Public
Income
Interest Paym on
Dom Debt
Private savings
Domestic Banks
Foreign
Banking
Resources Sector Funds
Private
Investment
Public
Investment
Private Investment
Private Investment
Public savings
(Pub I-Pub S)
Foreign Interest
Foreign Interest
Payments on Ext Payments on Ext Priv.
Pub. Debt
Debt
Public Investment
Imports
Production
Costs
Aggregate
Absorption
Labor Costs
Capital
Expenditures
Private HH
Expenditures
Corporate
Expenditures
Capital
Income
Private
Income
Corporate
Income
Social
Security
Income
Transfers to Soc
Sec Institutions
Net Indirect
Taxes on
Sales Taxes
Production (VAT) + Tariffs
Rest of the World
Total
Receipts
Total Sales
Revenue
Domestic
Absorption
Labor Income
Wages
Operating
Surplus +
Depreciation
Enterprises
Total Expenditures
ROW
Exports
Intermediate
Inputs
Households
Government
Capital
Capital Account
Private
Public
Domestic Banks Investment Investment
Social Security
Expenditures
Public
Expenditures
Banking Sector Use of
Private
Funds
Investment
For. Exch.
Earnings
Public
Investment
For. Exch.
Expenses
49
Memorandum Table of Sam Accounts,
3.1.
1996
1.Taxes
2.671.876
A.Direct
979.788
B.Indirect
1.692.089
2.Nontax Revenues
168.400
3.Factor Incomes
713.846
4.Social Funds
-266.896
5.Current Transfers
-2.030.335
I.Public Sector Disposable Income
1.256.891
II.Current Expenditures
-1.477.841
III.Public Saving
-220.950
IV.Investments
-795.969
A.Gross Fixed Investment
-763.420
B.Stock Changes
-32.549
V.Saving Investment Gap
-1.016.919
VI.Capital Transfers
-105.697
1.Wealth Taxes
31.957
2.Other Capital Transfers
-56.824
3.Expropration and Others
-80.831
VII.Financing
1.122.616
1.Cash and Banks
-377.985
2.Foreign Borrowing NET
-186.979
-Repayment
-650.310
-Borrowing
463.331
3.Receivables and Payables NET
1.859.142
4.Stock Changes Fund
-171.562
VIII.Financing Requirement
0
Public Sector Borrowing Requirement (NET)
1.294.178
1997
1998
1999
5.735.999 10.901.408 17.084.521
2.122.651 4.775.833
7.218.413
3.613.349 6.125.575
9.866.108
341.928
676.171
1.193.786
1.462.539 2.687.241
3.722.130
-671.249 -1.253.672 -2.370.118
-3.406.562 -8.062.811 -14.415.476
3.462.656 4.948.337
5.214.843
-3.167.000 -5.922.674 -10.438.349
295.656
-974.337 -5.223.506
-1.923.737 -3.638.333 -5.200.504
-1.782.699 -3.359.433 -5.172.831
-141.038
-278.899
-27.673
-1.628.080 -4.612.670 -10.424.010
-235.872
188.115
-688.366
51.896
179.258
329.932
-94.285
203.238
-529.936
-193.483
-194.381
-488.362
1.863.952 4.424.555 11.112.376
-543.101
-718.639
-998.500
-289.286
-491.577
1.426.825
-892.480 -2.224.237 -2.747.977
603.194 1.732.660
4.174.801
3.090.394 6.226.952 11.760.848
-394.055
-592.181 -1.076.797
0
0
0
2.258.007 5.016.735 12.189.173
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
(In Current Billion TL)
29.672.535 44.732.053
11.616.600 18.001.607
18.055.935 26.730.446
2.796.822
3.859.986
4.363.705
9.572.830
-2.411.122 -4.306.531
-24.661.305 -47.829.009
9.760.636
6.029.330
-15.481.452 -23.141.351
-5.720.815 -17.112.021
-8.667.291 -9.835.396
-8.602.119 -11.300.047
-65.172
1.464.651
-14.388.106 -26.947.417
653.340
772.795
497.834
602.839
751.089
328.719
-595.583
-158.762
13.734.767 26.174.621
-1.136.198 -2.410.542
4.409.718 -3.868.850
-4.419.586 -11.082.628
8.829.303
7.213.778
11.575.290 35.309.867
-1.114.043 -2.855.854
0
0
14.848.810 29.030.476
59.756.761
20.934.081
38.822.680
8.358.913
20.169.651
-8.836.903
-61.752.413
17.696.011
-34.686.871
-16.990.860
-17.222.808
-17.307.674
84.865
-34.213.668
1.100.297
1.166.915
-92.741
26.123
33.113.371
-1.773.702
17.400.427
-10.871.469
28.271.897
19.380.919
-1.894.272
0
35.007.644
80.663.413
26.467.698
54.195.715
10.040.484
20.660.827
-13.961.501
-72.248.778
25.154.446
-43.999.678
-18.845.232
-16.714.839
-17.287.520
572.681
-35.560.071
3.099.743
3.158.287
390.765
-449.309
32.460.328
-1.388.092
2.360.617
-12.351.701
14.712.318
32.382.535
-894.732
0
33.355.060
97.790.169
30.400.267
67.389.903
12.619.689
24.405.488
-16.707.554
-71.749.401
46.358.391
-51.476.631
-5.118.240
-17.941.049
-18.051.594
110545,157
-23.059.290
3.867.290
2.677.766
1.172.503
17.021
19.192.000
-3.691.886
4.503.630
-11.151.141
15.654.772
19.291.049
-910.793
0
20.102.793
116.620.925
35.513.108
81.107.816
14.169.477
29.968.396
-21.089.014
-64.376.240
75.293.545
-57.802.172
17.491.373
-25.949.241
-24.539.620
-1409621,22
-8.457.868
9.166.995
3.778.236
4.324.664
1.064.095
-709.127
-1.911.327
-969.636
-18.411.452
17.441.817
2.307.068
-135.233
0
-573.894
Source: SPO data and own calculations
50
Memorandum Table of Sam Accounts, 3.2.
Total Social Security Revenues
BAĞKUR
Social Insurance Institution
Pension Fund
Premiums
Receivables
Unemployment Insurance Fund
Total Social Security Expenditures
BAĞKUR
Social Insurance Institution
Pension Fund
1996
1997
1998
1999
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
537.167
1.223.522
2.366.976
41.790
280.821
214.556
214.556
0
126.012
640.923
456.587
456.587
0
214.814
1.254.108
898.054
733.054
165.000
402.963
2.246.165
1.490.328
1.301.328
189.000
628.879
4.402.160
1.912.217
1.657.217
255.000
238.569
804.063
1.894.772
3.620.648
6.509.574
9.592.947 15.343.588 25.396.422 37.564.010 46.386.821 53.831.469
89.826
459.898
254.339
292.499
1.025.755
576.518
622.310
1.898.640
1.099.698
1.000.702
3.475.993
2.032.879
1.508.102
5.084.252
3.000.590
Unemployment Insurance Fund
Balance
2000
(In Current Billion TL)
4.139.456 7.181.825 11.037.057 16.559.519 23.602.509 29.679.267 32.742.455
1.155.379
6.158.198
2.945.213
2.530.213
415.000
778.267
1.884.811 2.731.624 3.776.455 3.547.781
9.597.501 13.613.000 17.397.000 19.865.378
4.318.699 6.222.668 7.157.642 7.824.204
3.818.699 5.498.116 6.357.642 7.285.847
500.000
724.552
800.000
538.357
758.509 1.035.217 1.348.170 1.505.092
2.323.292 3.945.630 6.881.484 8.385.175 9.383.317
8.163.028 13.305.799 19.329.387 24.373.934 29.220.542
4.856.873 8.089.302 11.200.248 13.386.813 14.902.079
3
394
55.692
152.891
240.899
325.531
-266.896
-671.250
-1.253.672
-2.370.118
-2.411.122
-4.306.531
-8.836.903 -13.961.501 -16.707.554 -21.089.014
Premiums on Employee
Social Insurance Institution
Pension Fund
Unemployment Insurance Fund
209.311
117.358
91.953
463.529
267.848
195.680
838.271
524.105
314.166
1.496.408
938.696
557.712
2.645.372
1.839.709
710.236
95.428
3.969.259
2.573.575
1.084.377
311.307
Premiums on Employer
BAĞKUR
Social Insurance Institution
Pension Fund
Unemployment Insurance Fund
327.856
41.790
163.463
122.603
759.993
126.012
373.075
260.907
1.528.705
214.814
730.003
583.888
2.643.048
402.963
1.307.469
932.616
4.536.453
628.879
2.562.451
1.201.981
143.142
7.067.798 10.659.202 15.142.996 19.133.870 20.700.654
1.155.379 1.884.811 2.731.624 3.776.455 3.547.781
3.584.623 5.586.605 7.923.985 10.126.612 11.563.429
1.860.836 2.682.114 3.797.242 4.332.023 4.586.050
466.960
505.672
690.145
898.780 1.003.395
5.900.317
4.010.896
1.636.585
252.836
8.459.513 10.545.397 12.041.801
5.689.015 7.270.388 8.301.949
2.425.426 2.825.619 3.238.154
345.072
449.390
501.697
Source: SPO data and our own calculations
51
Memorandum Table of Sam Accounts, 3.3.
Public Sector Total Interest Payments
Interest on Foreign Liabilities
Interest on Domestic Liabilities
Consolidated Budget Interest Payments
Interest on Foreign Liabilities
Interest on Domestic Liabilities
SEE's Interest Payments
Interest on Foreign Liabilities
Interest on Domestic Liabilities
SSI's Interest Payments
Interest on Foreign Liabilities
Interest on Domestic Liabilities
EBF's Interest Payments
Interest on Foreign Liabilities
Interest on Domestic Liabilities
Local Government's Interest Payments
Interest on Foreign Liabilities
Interest on Domestic Liabilities
1996
1.725.413
224.779
1.500.635
1.497.401
168.314
1.329.087
115.803
27.684
88.119
27.446
0
27.446
38.793
9.370
29.423
45.970
19.411
26.559
1997
2.613.294
391.366
2.221.928
2.277.917
299.950
1.977.967
171.671
45.429
126.242
6.605
0
6.605
79.450
13.200
66.250
77.651
32.788
44.863
1998
1999
6.763.371 12.015.335
698.627 1.178.353
6.064.745 10.836.982
6.176.595 10.720.840
547.081
896.218
5.629.514 9.824.622
244.313
720.817
65.530
113.854
178.783
606.963
48.799
49.059
0
3
48.799
49.056
158.591
191.683
28.981
27.696
129.610
163.987
135.073
332.936
57.034
140.582
78.039
192.354
2000
2001
(In Current Billion TL)
21.832.436 42.886.752
2.091.537 4.420.854
19.740.899 38.465.899
20.439.862 41.062.226
1.648.000 3.567.925
18.791.862 37.494.301
653.631
649.777
192.725
352.919
460.906
296.858
67.093
3.041
93
16
67.000
3.025
156.248
110.775
33.007
52.015
123.241
58.760
515.602 1.060.933
217.713
447.978
297.889
612.955
2002
2003
2004
2005
54.024.191
5.877.823
48.146.368
51.870.659
5.063.621
46.807.038
521.199
305.685
215.514
95
95
0
570.250
59.998
510.252
1.061.988
448.424
613.564
60.983.460
6.732.603
54.250.857
58.609.163
5.890.277
52.718.886
516.960
267.259
249.701
34
34
0
624.634
54.539
570.095
1.232.669
520.493
712.175
58.313.908
6.826.800
51.487.108
56.578.001
6.256.953
50.321.048
480.782
248.556
232.226
289
289
0
597.248
43.336
553.912
657.588
277.666
379.922
47.276.984
7.012.741
40.264.243
45.731.076
6.388.914
39.342.162
476.304
246.241
230.063
323
323
0
254.560
33.248
221.312
814.722
344.016
470.706
Source: SPO data and own calculations
52
Memorandum Table of Sam Accounts, 3.4.
1996
1997
159.402
123.622
386.358
415.502
35.780
0,29
0,04
1998
1999
227.005 308.351
176.051 239.138
644.988 1.149.314
557.414 630.420
50.954
69.213
0,29
0,29
0,04
0,04
2002
2003
2004
2005
(In Current Billion TL)
497.891
492.870
669.535
386.134
382.240
594.697
2.220.151 3.048.711 3.063.106
1.174.991 2.042.396
294.449
111.757
110.630
74.838
0,29
0,29
0,13
0,03
0,02
0,02
2000
2001
1.001.275
889.356
3.642.674
0
111.919
0,13
0,03
1.373.463
1.219.942
5.574.670
0
153.521
0,13
0,03
1.541.947
1.369.594
7.315.765
0
172.353
0,13
0,02
Public Sector Import Tariffs
Consolidated Budget Import Tariffs (A)
Indirect Taxes to Local Governments (B)
Indirect Taxes to EBF's (C)
Total Other Public's Import Tariffs (D)
RATE to Consolidated Budget (D)/A
RATE to Other Public Indirect Taxes D/(B+C)
80.085
62.109
180.963
153.083
17.976
0,29
0,05
Public Sector Sales Taxes (VAT)
Consolidated Budget Sales Taxes (VAT) (A)
Indirect Taxes to Local Governments (B)
Indirect Taxes to EBF's (C)
Total Other Public's Sales Taxes (D)
RATE to Consolidated Budget (D)/A
RATE to Other Public Indirect Taxes D/(B+C)
864.862 1.817.616 3.171.922 4.847.171 9.753.572 14.478.495 21.854.640 28.958.291
743.026 1.561.562 2.725.083 4.164.334 8.379.554 12.438.861 20.400.201 27.031.100
180.963 386.358 644.988 1.149.314 2.220.151 3.048.711 3.063.106 3.642.674
153.083 415.502 557.414 630.420 1.174.991 2.042.396
294.449
0
121.836 256.054 446.839 682.837 1.374.018 2.039.634 1.454.439 1.927.191
0,16
0,16
0,16
0,16
0,16
0,16
0,07
0,07
0,36
0,32
0,37
0,38
0,40
0,40
0,43
0,53
31.480.436 33.827.257
29.385.394 31.576.033
5.574.670 7.315.765
0
0
2.095.042 2.251.224
0,07
0,07
0,38
0,31
Source: SPO data and own calculations
53
Memorandum Table of Sam Accounts, 3.5.
1996
1997
1998
1999
9.021.714 17.083.500 27.101.452
7.798.192 14.716.524 22.961.996
1.223.522 2.366.976 4.139.456
5.408.366 10.957.925 17.235.345
4.184.844 8.590.949 13.095.889
2.164.823 3.985.355 6.427.784
2.020.021 4.605.594 6.668.105
1.223.522 2.366.976 4.139.456
1.223.522 2.366.976 4.139.456
3.613.349 6.125.575 9.866.108
1.636.331 2.726.648 4.710.585
1.977.017 3.398.927 5.155.523
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
(In Current Billion TL)
44.891.860 69.965.520 105.936.389 136.108.862 165.572.933 194.232.440
37.710.035 58.928.463 89.376.870 112.506.353 135.893.665 161.489.985
7.181.825 11.037.057 16.559.519 23.602.509 29.679.267 32.742.455
26.835.925 43.235.074 67.113.708 81.913.146 98.183.030 113.124.623
19.654.100 32.198.017 50.554.189 58.310.637 68.503.763 80.382.168
8.065.510 14.569.732 27.298.084 30.702.736 34.282.254 40.600.526
11.588.590 17.628.284 23.256.105 27.607.901 34.221.509 39.781.642
7.181.825 11.037.057 16.559.519 23.602.509 29.679.267 32.742.455
7.181.825 11.037.057 16.559.519 23.602.509 29.679.267 32.742.455
18.055.935 26.730.446 38.822.680 54.195.715 67.389.903 81.107.816
7.804.472 11.759.081 16.298.505 24.236.149 34.536.004 45.738.612
10.251.463 14.971.365 22.524.175 29.959.566 32.853.899 35.369.204
I. Revenues
Public Sector Other Than SSI
SSI
1.Direct Revenues
Public Sector Other Than SSI
Taxes from Enterprises
Taxes from Households
SSI
Factors Payments to SSI's
2.Indirect Revenues
i. Indirect Taxes on Production
ii. Indirect Taxes on Sales
4.273.331
3.736.164
537.167
2.581.243
2.044.076
1.111.190
932.886
537.167
537.167
1.692.089
747.142
944.947
II. Expenditures
Public Sector Other Than SSI
SSI
1. Public Consumption
2. Public Investment
3. Transfers
i. Total Household Transfers
Transfers By Public Sector Other than SSI
Transfers By SSI
ii. Enterprises
Production Subsidies
Domestic Interest on Gov. Bonds
iii. Interest on Foreign Liabilities
5.290.250 10.649.795 21.696.169 37.525.462 59.279.967 96.912.937 140.150.057 171.668.933 188.632.222 202.690.307
4.486.187 8.755.024 18.075.522 31.015.888 49.687.020 81.569.349 114.753.635 134.104.923 142.245.402 148.858.839
804.063 1.894.772 3.620.648 6.509.574 9.592.947 15.343.588 25.396.422 37.564.010 46.386.821 53.831.469
1.477.841 3.167.000 5.922.674 10.438.349 15.481.452 23.141.351 34.686.871 43.999.678 51.476.631 57.802.172
795.969 1.923.737 3.638.333 5.200.504 8.667.291 9.835.396 17.222.808 16.714.839 17.941.049 25.949.241
3.016.440 5.559.059 12.135.162 21.886.609 35.131.224 63.936.190 88.240.378 110.954.416 119.214.542 118.938.895
1.047.618 2.567.805 4.499.407 8.275.062 11.627.452 18.712.430 32.975.710 49.020.457 60.096.277 70.751.634
243.555
673.034
878.760 1.765.488 2.034.505 3.368.843
7.579.287 11.456.447 13.709.456 16.920.165
804.063 1.894.772 3.620.648 6.509.574 9.592.947 15.343.588 25.396.422 37.564.010 46.386.821 53.831.469
1.744.043 2.599.888 6.937.128 12.433.194 21.412.235 40.802.906 49.386.846 55.201.356 52.291.465 41.174.520
243.409
377.960
872.384 1.596.212 1.671.336 2.337.008
1.240.478
950.499
804.357
910.277
1.500.635 2.221.928 6.064.745 10.836.982 19.740.899 38.465.899 48.146.368 54.250.857 51.487.108 40.264.243
224.779
391.366
698.627 1.178.353 2.091.537 4.420.854
5.877.823
6.732.603
6.826.800
7.012.741
Public Saving-Investment Gap
Public Sector Borrowing Requirement(PSBR)
1.016.918
1.294.178
1.628.081
2.258.008
4.612.670 10.424.010 14.388.106 26.947.417
5.016.735 12.189.173 14.848.810 29.030.476
34.213.668
35.007.644
35.560.071
33.355.060
23.059.290
20.102.793
8.457.868
-573.894
Source: SPO data and own calculations
54
Adjusted SAM Data:Table 4.1.
Receipts from Rest of World
Exports of goods and services
Household Foreign Receipts
Enterprise Foreign Receipts
Payments to Rest of World
Imports of goods and services
Enterprise Foreign Interest Payments
Enterprise Profit Transfers Abroad
Government Foreign Payments
1996
1998
1999
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
(In Current Billion TL)
35.152.119
67.427.254
29.959.128
60.150.878
2.844.090
3.413.997
2.348.901
3.862.379
43.464.995
65.066.545
39.284.673
55.861.684
2.088.785
4.784.008
-55.510
-63.721
2.091.537
4.420.854
2000
88.831.485
81.134.076
2.915.305
4.782.103
95.469.611
85.232.383
4.359.405
134.020
5.877.823
106.484.265
98.496.338
1.088.446
6.899.480
121.404.331
110.334.367
4.337.362
604.692
6.732.603
133.292.866
124.348.181
1.143.562
7.801.123
159.822.928
149.299.109
3.697.019
1.132.184
6.826.800
143.912.714
133.575.227
1.141.012
9.196.474
176.706.696
165.567.880
4.126.075
1.098.107
7.012.741
3.751.866
3.182.305
287.555
282.006
4.474.188
4.110.584
138.825
14.207
224.779
8.381.146
7.088.355
635.545
657.245
9.498.235
8.762.823
344.046
21.503
391.366
15.333.308
12.713.300
1.392.772
1.227.236
15.899.846
14.573.224
627.996
59.029
698.627
21.278.494
17.972.068
1.902.751
1.403.675
23.239.887
20.801.155
1.260.378
70.161
1.178.353
722.322
722.322
1.117.089
1.117.089
566.538
566.538
1.961.392
1.961.392
8.312.875
8.312.875
-2.360.710
-2.360.710
6.638.126
6.638.126
14.920.067
14.920.067
26.530.062
26.530.062
32.793.982
32.793.982
3.182.305
4.110.584
205.957
7.088.355
8.762.823
557.379
12.713.300
14.573.224
1.293.386
17.972.068
20.801.155
867.695
29.959.128
39.284.673
1.012.670
60.150.878
55.861.684
-1.928.485
81.134.076
85.232.383
-2.539.820
98.496.338
110.334.367
-3.082.038
124.348.181
149.299.109
-1.579.134
133.575.227
165.567.880
-801.330
340.974
202.149
174.465
27.684
62.512
76.313
694.754
350.708
305.280
45.429
138.254
205.791
1.254.171
626.175
560.645
65.530
226.494
401.501
2.289.688
1.029.309
915.455
113.854
410.463
849.915
3.928.711
1.839.927
1.647.202
192.725
533.891
1.554.894
8.742.088
3.958.080
3.605.162
352.919
1.528.089
3.255.919
9.640.385
5.280.979
4.975.294
305.685
1.819.054
2.540.351
10.429.078
6.091.716
5.824.457
267.259
2.054.461
2.282.901
10.158.361
6.461.342
6.212.786
248.556
1.765.125
1.931.893
10.663.303
6.537.227
6.290.987
246.241
1.545.931
2.580.145
4.200
2.490
2.149
341
770
940
4.588
2.316
2.016
300
913
1.359
4.823
2.408
2.156
252
871
1.544
5.450
2.450
2.179
271
977
2.023
6.299
2.950
2.641
309
856
2.493
7.134
3.230
2.942
288
1.247
2.657
6.402
3.507
3.304
203
1.208
1.687
6.985
4.080
3.901
179
1.376
1.529
7.142
4.543
4.368
175
1.241
1.358
7.953
4.876
4.692
184
1.153
1.924
81.184
81,2
151.429
151,4
260.040
260,0
420.126
420,1
623.704
623,7
1.225.412
1225,4
1.505.840
1505,8
1.493.068
1493,1
65,96910119
1.422.341
1422,3
1.340.790
1340,8
3.542
287.555
905
73.472
555
45.057
350
28.414
-175
-14.207
4.197
635.545
669
101.306
314
47.549
355
53.757
-142
-21.503
5.356
1.392.772
371
96.475
159
41.346
212
55.128
-227
-59.029
4.529
1.902.751
646
271.401
362
152.086
284
119.316
-167
-70.161
4.560
2.844.090
665
414.763
214
133.473
451
281.290
89
55.510
2.786
3.413.997
2.006
2.458.176
207
253.660
1.799
2.204.516
52
63.721
1.936
2.915.305
2.962
4.460.297
500
752.920
2.462
3.707.377
-89
-134.020
729
1.088.446
2.920
4.359.758
298
444.934
2.622
3.914.824
-405
-604.692
804
1.143.562
4.649
6.612.464
323
459.416
4.326
6.153.048
-796
-1.132.184
851
1.141.012
4.503
6.037.577
617
827.267
3.886
5.210.310
-819
-1.098.107
Foreign Savings Inflows(uptodown)
Foreign Savings Inflows(downtoup)
Exports of goods and services
Imports of goods and services
Net Factor Income
1997
Billion TL
Interest Payments
Public Sector
General Government
SEE's
CB
Private Sector
Million USD
Interest Payments
Public Sector
General Government
SEE's
CB
Private Sector
Average Exch. Rate =E (TL/Dolar)
ER Scale =E/1000
Sub Account Information:
Workers Remittances (Mil. USD)
Workers Remittances (Bil. TL)
Unrequited Transfers (Mil. USD)
Unrequited Transfers (Bil. TL)
Official Public Transfers (Mil. USD)
Official Public Transfers (Bil. TL)
Private Unrequited Transfers (Mil. USD)
Private Unrequited Transfers (Bil. TL)
Profit Transfers (Mil. USD)
Profit Transfers (Bil. TL)
Source: SPO, CB and SIS data and own calculations
55
Unadjusted SAM Data of National Accounts
5.1.
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
(In Current Billion TL)
Unadjusted GDP from Expenditure Side
14.345.413
28.720.649
53.522.970
82.925.538
127.844.312
188.141.291
278.220.631
358.699.629
427.151.940
480.922.787
3.706.404
7.618.372
12.839.212
16.930.592
27.847.893
32.408.979
46.043.018
55.618.335
76.722.408
95.307.113
Private Sector
3.019.239
5.982.097
9.636.188
12.488.072
20.377.462
22.410.367
31.258.910
40.626.213
60.664.380
74.606.738
Public Sector
687.164
1.636.275
3.203.024
4.442.520
7.470.431
9.998.612
14.784.108
14.992.122
16.058.028
20.700.374
-79.656
-377.455
-211.639
1.148.533
2.685.223
-2.475.258
13.133.761
26.328.924
33.973.663
25.394.479
Private Stock Accumulation
-112.205
-518.493
-490.538
1.120.861
2.620.050
-1.010.607
13.218.626
26.901.605
34.084.208
23.984.858
Public Stock Accumulation
32.549
141.038
278.899
27.673
65.172
-1.464.651
-84.865
-572.681
-110.545
1.409.621
11.646.944
23.154.200
42.755.321
67.675.499
106.636.742
153.918.375
223.142.158
288.590.399
341.406.798
392.213.847
Private Cons.
9.937.697
19.619.096
36.122.555
55.927.761
89.097.791
128.513.017
184.420.201
239.585.900
284.631.317
328.560.589
Public Cons.
1.709.247
3.535.104
6.632.766
11.747.738
17.538.951
25.405.358
38.721.957
49.004.499
56.775.481
63.653.258
Exports of Goods and Serv.
3.182.305
7.088.355
12.713.300
17.972.068
29.959.128
60.150.878
81.134.076
98.496.338
124.348.181
133.575.227
Imports of Goods and Serv.
4.110.584
8.762.823
14.573.224
20.801.155
39.284.673
55.861.684
85.232.383
110.334.367
149.299.109
165.567.880
426.698
115.234
-1.298.025
-5.510.265
-3.260.854
-9.728.852
-646.573
1.063.297
3.359.537
6.279.575
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Gross Fixed Capital Formation
Total Stock Accumulation
Total Consumption
Statistical Discrepancy of GDP
Gross National Product
Sectors
(In Current Billion TL)
Agriculture
2.489.774
4.170.001
9.113.454
11.851.055
17.540.631
21.521.043
32.114.870
42.126.246
48.394.672
49.957.330
Industry
3.716.528
7.293.186
11.970.299
17.973.866
29.027.782
45.881.462
70.034.336
88.813.240
107.061.273
123.669.004
Mining & Quarrying
183.080
336.889
563.270
883.737
1.422.903
2.135.427
2.914.077
3.858.087
5.174.424
6.962.712
3.123.034
6.218.627
10.128.256
14.839.451
23.888.136
36.730.882
55.764.399
71.910.797
87.609.625
101.246.002
410.414
737.669
1.278.773
2.250.677
3.716.743
7.015.153
11.355.859
13.044.356
14.277.224
15.460.290
857.762
1.743.240
3.124.593
4.362.039
6.483.106
9.240.878
11.398.698
12.662.006
15.380.670
21.311.774
Trade
3.022.315
5.985.402
10.404.501
14.750.945
24.906.513
37.403.001
55.935.190
71.329.760
88.714.047
99.739.960
Transport & Communication
1.941.574
4.018.613
7.102.826
10.868.376
17.645.564
28.159.160
41.820.643
53.846.171
62.009.162
71.654.589
Financial Institutions
732.340
1.474.426
3.280.526
4.228.349
4.698.024
6.639.387
12.944.723
17.884.644
21.603.584
21.484.542
Ownership of Dwellings
442.935
850.332
1.761.711
3.465.420
5.772.955
8.491.897
11.637.781
14.653.025
18.398.553
22.393.509
Business & Personel Services
554.080
1.067.451
1.956.339
2.830.826
4.430.360
6.592.344
9.753.592
12.429.089
14.889.331
16.914.421
(-) Imputed Bank Serv. Charges
709.235
1.371.710
3.049.158
4.284.141
4.097.693
11.534.431
8.095.559
7.911.747
10.821.250
12.477.618
13.048.072
25.230.941
45.665.092
66.046.733
106.407.242
152.394.742
237.544.273
305.832.435
365.630.042
414.647.511
1.238.527
2.579.910
4.915.736
8.781.478
12.633.650
18.525.724
27.838.383
36.561.477
42.548.483
47.719.600
26.922
53.021
98.742
272.486
477.141
918.063
1.663.999
3.610.383
3.530.102
2.996.961
458.588
972.011
1.545.375
2.314.575
5.065.425
6.573.910
10.527.402
13.758.630
18.802.850
21.838.290
G.D.P. (In Purchasers' Value)
14.772.110
28.835.883
52.224.945
77.415.272
124.583.458
178.412.438
277.574.057
359.762.926
430.511.477
487.202.362
N.F.I. From Abroad
G.N.P. (In Purchasers' Value)
205.957
14.978.067
557.379
29.393.262
1.293.386
53.518.332
867.695
78.282.967
1.012.670
125.596.129
-1.928.485
176.483.953
-2.541.692
275.032.366
-3.082.038
356.680.888
-1.579.134
428.932.343
-801.330
486.401.032
Manufacturing
Energy
Construction
Sectoral Total
Government Services
Private Non-Profit Institutions
Import Duties
Source: SIS data
56
Adjusted SAM Data of National Accounts
GDP
NFI
GNP
FF(Foreign Flows)
GNI (Ass:Unreq. Tr=0)
Aggregate Absorbtion
Private Consumption
Private Savings
Private Investment
Public Consumption
Public Savings
Public Investment
Public Saving-Investment Gap
Private Saving-Investment Surplus
Adjusted GDP from Expenditure Side
Total Gross Investment
Private Investment
Public Investment
Total Stock Accumulation
Private Stock Accumulation
Public Stock Accumulation
Total Consumption
Private Cons.
Public Cons.
Exports of Goods and Serv.
Imports of Goods and Serv.
GDP from Income Side
Indirect Taxes
Activity Taxes
Commodity Taxes
Value Added
Formal Labor
Informal Labor
Capital (+depreciation)
GDP at Market Prices
Taxes on Production and Imports (NET)
Consumption of Fixed Capital
Compensation of Employees
Operating Surplus
Memo: Production Subsidies:
Informal labor wages
5.2.
1996
1997
1998
1999
14.772.110
205.957
14.978.067
722.322
15.700.389
15.700.389
10.533.245
3.187.931
2.893.335
1.477.841
-220.950
795.969
1.016.919
294.596
14.772.110
3.756.807
2.993.387
763.420
-67.503
-100.052
32.549
12.011.086
10.533.245
1.477.841
3.182.305
4.110.584
28.835.883
557.379
29.393.262
1.117.089
30.510.351
30.510.351
20.061.580
5.869.026
5.358.034
3.167.000
295.656
1.923.737
1.628.080
510.992
28.835.883
7.641.051
5.858.353
1.782.699
-359.281
-500.318
141.038
23.228.580
20.061.580
3.167.000
7.088.355
8.762.823
52.224.945
1.293.386
53.518.331
566.538
54.084.869
54.084.869
35.986.031
12.583.962
8.537.831
5.922.674
-974.337
3.638.333
4.612.670
4.046.132
52.224.945
12.613.366
9.253.933
3.359.433
-437.203
-716.102
278.899
41.908.706
35.986.031
5.922.674
12.713.300
14.573.224
77.415.273
867.695
78.282.968
1.961.392
80.244.360
80.244.360
53.643.445
19.424.679
10.962.062
10.438.349
-5.223.506
5.200.504
10.424.010
8.462.617
77.415.273
16.128.156
10.955.325
5.172.831
34.409
6.736
27.673
64.081.795
53.643.445
10.438.349
17.972.068
20.801.155
1996
1997
1998
1999
14.772.110
1.692.089
747.142
944.947
-1.690.093
3.534.765
1.755.326
-6.980.184
14.772.110
1480217,44
930.442
3.534.765
8.826.686
243.409
1.755.326
28.835.883
3.613.349
1.636.331
1.977.017
-3.611.352
7.440.184
3.694.715
-14.746.250
28.835.883
3188893,613
1.747.711
7.440.184
16.459.094
377.960
3.694.715
52.224.945
6.125.575
2.726.648
3.398.927
-6.123.577
13.297.031
6.603.161
-26.023.769
52.224.945
5505409,627
3.270.051
13.297.031
30.152.454
872.384
6.603.161
77.415.272
9.866.108
4.710.585
5.155.523
-9.864.109
23.749.549
11.793.769
-45.407.427
77.415.272
8.521.227
5.338.965
23.749.549
39.805.531
1.596.212
11.793.769
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
(In Current Billion TL)
124.583.458
178.412.439
1.012.670
-1.928.485
125.596.128
176.483.954
8.312.875
-2.360.710
133.909.004
174.123.244
133.909.004
174.123.244
89.037.224
123.976.535
26.798.268
46.478.089
20.723.037
17.169.962
15.481.452
23.141.351
-5.720.815
-17.112.021
8.667.291
9.835.396
14.388.106
26.947.417
6.075.231
29.308.126
124.583.458
178.412.439
27.363.472
31.223.096
18.761.353
19.923.049
8.602.119
11.300.047
2.026.856
-4.217.737
1.961.684
-2.753.087
65.172
-1.464.651
104.518.675
147.117.886
89.037.224
123.976.535
15.481.452
23.141.351
29.959.128
60.150.878
39.284.673
55.861.684
277.574.057
-2.539.820
275.034.237
6.638.126
281.672.364
281.672.364
188.032.924
69.305.303
41.729.761
34.686.871
-16.990.860
17.222.808
34.213.668
27.575.542
277.574.057
45.971.428
28.663.755
17.307.674
12.981.141
13.066.006
-84.865
222.719.794
188.032.924
34.686.871
81.134.076
85.232.383
359.762.926
-3.082.038
356.680.888
14.920.067
371.600.954
371.600.954
245.278.238
86.248.204
65.608.199
43.999.678
-18.845.232
16.714.839
35.560.071
20.640.005
359.762.926
55.734.916
38.447.396
17.287.520
26.588.122
27.160.803
-572.681
289.277.916
245.278.238
43.999.678
98.496.338
110.334.367
430.511.477
-1.579.134
428.932.343
26.530.062
455.462.405
455.462.405
292.045.238
90.528.715
93.999.488
51.476.631
-5.118.240
17.941.049
23059289,79
-3.470.773
430.511.477
77.173.199
59.121.605
18.051.594
34.767.337
34.877.883
-110.545
343.521.869
292.045.238
51.476.631
124.348.181
149.299.109
487.202.362
-801.330
486.401.032
32.793.982
519.195.014
519.195.014
338.434.212
72.673.276
97.009.390
57.802.172
17.491.373
25.949.241
8457867,727
-24.336.114
487.202.362
96.220.516
71.680.896
24.539.620
26.738.115
25.328.494
1.409.621
396.236.383
338.434.212
57.802.172
133.575.227
165.567.880
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
(In Current Billion TL)
124.583.458
178.412.438
18.055.935
26.730.446
7.804.472
11.759.081
10.251.463
14.971.365
-18.053.935
-26.728.445
36.368.142
50.562.315
18.060.025
25.108.698
-72.482.103
-102.399.458
124.583.458
178.412.438
16758516,55
25044393,67
8.162.148
14.758.317
36.368.142
50.562.315
63.294.651
88.047.412
1.671.336
2.337.008
18.060.025
25.108.698
277.574.057
38.822.680
16.298.505
22.524.175
-38.820.678
72.923.558
36.213.048
-147.957.285
277.574.057
41945074,85
23.982.154
72.923.558
138.723.270
1.240.478
36.213.048
359.762.926
54.195.715
24.236.149
29.959.566
-54.193.712
93.978.003
46.668.457
-194.840.172
359.762.926
58530498,97
27.294.182
93.978.003
179.960.243
950.499
46.668.457
430.511.477
67.389.903
34.536.004
32.853.899
-67.387.899
113.261.757
56.244.560
-236.894.215
430.511.477
72828598,91
30.168.984
113.261.757
214.252.137
804.357
56.244.560
487.202.362
81.107.816
45.738.612
35.369.204
-81.105.811
128.176.363
63.650.992
-272.933.166
487.202.362
82418860,65
34.141.716
128.176.363
242.465.423
910.277
63.650.992
2000
Source: SPO, SIS data and own calculations
57
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 1996, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
22.427.648
Activities
10.533.245
Total
Receipts
3.182.305
25.609.954
Commodities
11.782.790
Formal Labor
3.534.765
3.534.765
Informal Labor
1.755.326
1.755.326
Capital
7.789.931
7.789.931
2.997.598
Households
1.755.326
7.204.156
804.063
7.789.931
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
1.477.841
ROW
944.947
932.886
4.110.584
3.534.765
282.006
8.315.345
1.755.326
7.789.931
14.654.063
804.063
1.500.635
Public Invest.
27.483.180
14.654.062
3.736.164
3.187.931
25.609.954
287.555
1.111.190
8.315.345
804.063
722.322
5.410.888
2.893.335
2.893.335
-220.950
1.016.919
795.969
224.779
138.825
4.474.188
3.736.164
5.410.888
Private Invest.
Total Expenditures
1.361.809
266.896
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
27.483.180
795.969
243.409
537.167
747.142
243.555
2.893.335
2.893.335
795.969
4.474.188
58
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 1997, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
42.667.845
Activities
20.061.580
Total
Receipts
7.088.355
49.756.201
Commodities
22.897.335
Formal Labor
7.440.184
7.440.184
Informal Labor
3.694.715
3.694.715
Capital
14.087.636
14.087.636
6.216.662
Households
3.694.715
12.958.018
1.894.772
14.087.636
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
3.167.000
ROW
1.977.017
2.020.021
8.762.823
7.440.184
657.245
15.122.842
3.694.715
14.087.636
27.950.626
1.894.772
2.221.928
Public Investment
53.407.685
27.950.627
7.798.192
5.869.026
49.756.201
635.545
2.164.823
15.122.842
1.894.772
1.117.089
9.208.042
5.358.034
5.358.034
295.656
1.628.080
1.923.737
391.366
344.046
9.498.235
7.798.193
9.208.042
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
1.877.882
671.250
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
53.407.685
1.923.737
377.960
1.223.522
1.636.331
673.034
5.358.034
5.358.034
1.923.737
9.498.235
59
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 1998, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
76.702.200
Activities
35.986.031
Total
Receipts
12.713.300
89.415.501
Commodities
40.589.483
Formal Labor
13.297.031
13.297.031
Informal Labor
6.603.161
6.603.161
Capital
26.199.178
26.199.178
10.930.055
Households
6.603.161
24.313.443
3.620.648
26.199.178
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
5.922.674
ROW
3.398.927
4.605.594
14.573.224
13.297.031
1.227.236
28.298.798
6.603.161
26.199.178
53.175.588
3.620.648
6.064.745
Public Investment
94.674.352
53.175.588
14.716.524
12.583.962
89.415.501
1.392.772
3.985.355
28.298.798
3.620.648
566.538
19.215.245
8.537.831
8.537.831
-974.337
4.612.670
3.638.333
698.627
627.996
15.899.846
14.716.523
19.215.245
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
5.436.749
1.253.672
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
94.674.352
3.638.333
872.384
2.366.976
2.726.648
878.760
8.537.831
8.537.831
3.638.333
15.899.846
60
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 1999, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
114.509.276
Activities
53.643.445
Total
Receipts
17.972.068
132.481.344
Commodities
60.221.595
Formal Labor
23.749.549
23.749.549
Informal Labor
11.793.769
11.793.769
Capital
32.005.847
32.005.847
19.610.093
Households
11.793.769
28.577.951
6.509.574
32.005.847
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
10.438.349
ROW
5.155.523
6.668.105
1.403.675
35.005.735
20.801.155
11.793.769
32.005.847
79.736.229
6.509.574
10.836.982
Public Investment
23.749.549
79.736.229
22.961.996
19.424.679
132.481.344 140.465.954
1.902.751
6.427.784
35.005.735
6.509.574
1.961.392
32.223.053
10.962.062
10.962.062
-5.223.506
10.424.010
5.200.504
1.178.353
1.260.378
23.239.887
22.961.996
32.223.053
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
9.576.603
2.370.118
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
140.465.954
5.200.504
1.596.212
4.139.456
4.710.585
1.765.488
10.962.062
10.962.062
5.200.504
23.239.887
61
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 2000, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
184.868.575
Activities
89.037.224
Total
Receipts
29.959.128
214.827.702
Commodities
100.495.708
Formal Labor
36.368.142
36.368.142
Informal Labor
18.060.025
18.060.025
Capital
52.099.355
52.099.355
29.186.317
Households
18.060.025
48.054.083
9.592.947
52.099.355
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
15.481.452
ROW
10.251.463
11.588.590
2.348.901
56.119.593
39.284.673
18.060.025
52.099.355
127.424.081
9.592.947
19.740.899
Public Investment
36.368.142
127.424.081
37.710.035
26.798.268
214.827.702 234.404.711
2.844.090
8.065.510
56.119.593
9.592.947
8.312.875
54.852.042
20.723.037
20.723.037
-5.720.815
14.388.106
8.667.291
2.091.537
2.088.785
43.464.995
37.710.035
54.852.042
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
17.652.114
2.411.122
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
234.404.711
8.667.291
1.671.336
7.181.825
7.804.472
2.034.505
20.723.037
20.723.037
8.667.291
43.464.995
62
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 2001, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
233.965.790
Activities
123.976.535
Total
Receipts
60.150.878
294.116.668
Commodities
130.675.594
Formal Labor
50.562.315
50.562.315
Informal Labor
25.108.698
25.108.698
Capital
76.010.980
76.010.980
39.525.258
Households
25.108.698
67.640.634
15.343.588
76.010.980
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
23.141.351
ROW
14.971.365
17.628.284
3.862.379
82.210.366
55.861.684
25.108.698
76.010.980
188.082.909
15.343.588
38.465.899
Public Investment
50.562.315
188.082.908
58.928.463
46.478.089
294.116.668 304.798.838
3.413.997
14.569.732
82.210.366
15.343.588
-2.360.710
82.583.278
17.169.962
17.169.962
-17.112.021
26.947.417
9.835.396
4.420.854
4.784.008
65.066.545
58.928.463
82.583.278
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
33.681.891
4.306.531
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
304.798.839
9.835.396
2.337.008
11.037.057
11.759.081
3.368.843
17.169.962
17.169.962
9.835.396
65.066.545
63
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 2002, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
385.304.605
Activities
188.032.924
Total
Receipts
81.134.076
466.438.681
Commodities
211.388.799
Formal Labor
72.923.558
72.923.558
Informal Labor
36.213.048
36.213.048
Capital
129.614.770
129.614.770
56.364.039
Households
36.213.048
108.339.267
25.396.422
129.614.770
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
34.686.871
ROW
22.524.175
23.256.105
4.782.103
135.637.351
85.232.383
36.213.048
25.396.422
48.146.368
Public Investment
72.923.558
280.594.332
89.376.870
69.305.303
466.438.681 493.061.163
2.915.305
27.298.084
129.614.770 280.594.332 135.637.351
25.396.422
6.638.126
124.089.797
41.729.761
41.729.761
-16.990.860
34.213.668
17.222.808
5.877.823
4.359.405
95.469.611
89.376.870
124.089.797
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
43.786.963
8.836.903
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
493.061.163
17.222.808
1.240.478
16.559.519
16.298.505
7.579.287
41.729.761
41.729.761
17.222.808
95.469.611
64
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 2003, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
510.185.214
Activities
245.278.238
Total
Receipts
98.496.338
608.681.552
Commodities
278.878.192
Formal Labor
93.978.003
93.978.003
Informal Labor
46.668.457
46.668.457
Capital
164.920.751
164.920.751
70.375.494
Households
46.668.457
142.067.993
37.564.010
164.920.751
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
43.999.678
ROW
29.959.566
27.607.901
6.899.480
172.770.730
110.334.367
46.668.457
37.564.010
54.250.857
Public Investment
93.978.003
359.134.343
112.506.353
86.248.204
608.681.552 650.479.147
1.088.446
30.702.736
164.920.751 359.134.343 172.770.730
37.564.010
14.920.067
155.419.128
65.608.199
65.608.199
-18.845.232
35.560.071
16.714.839
6.732.603
4.337.362
121.404.331
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
49.913.495
13.961.501
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
650.479.146
16.714.839
950.499
23.602.509
24.236.149
11.456.447
65.608.199
112.506.353 155.419.128
65.608.199
16.714.839
121.404.331
65
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 2004, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
615.123.730
Activities
ROW
Total
Receipts
124.348.181 739.471.911
Commodities
341.814.333
292.045.238
Formal Labor
113.261.757
113.261.757
Informal Labor
56.244.560
56.244.560
Capital
193.615.258
193.615.258
83.582.489
Households
56.244.560
167.938.483
46.386.821
193.615.258
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
51.476.631
32.853.899
34.221.509
416.795.461
7.801.123
202.220.737
51.487.108
Public Investment
149.299.109
56.244.560
46.386.821
135.893.665
90.528.715
739.471.911 797.276.738 113.261.757
1.143.562
34.282.254
193.615.258 416.795.461 202.220.737
46.386.821
26.530.062
168.545.885
93.999.488
93.999.488
-5.118.240
23.059.290
17.941.049
6.826.800
3.697.019
159.822.928
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
47.790.090
16.707.554
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
797.276.738
17.941.049
804.357
29.679.267
34.536.004
13.709.456
93.999.488
135.893.665 168.545.885
93.999.488
17.941.049
159.822.928
66
Table: Aggregated Social Accounting Matrix for Turkey, 2005, Billions TL
Factors
Activities
Comm.
Formal
Labor
Informal
Labor
Capital Account
Capital
Househ.
Enterp.
Social Sec.
Inst.
Govern.
Domestic
Banks
Private
Invest.
Public
Invest.
707.902.158
Activities
ROW
Total
Receipts
133.575.227 841.477.386
Commodities
389.644.228
338.434.212
Formal Labor
128.176.363
128.176.363
Informal Labor
63.650.992
63.650.992
Capital
214.267.191
214.267.191
95.433.908
Households
63.650.992
183.773.416
53.831.469
214.267.191
Enterprises
Social Sec. Inst.
Government
57.802.172
35.369.204
39.781.642
450.889.130
9.196.474
224.373.942
40.264.243
Public Investment
165.567.880
63.650.992
53.831.469
161.489.985
72.673.276
841.477.386 908.839.242 128.176.363
1.141.012
40.600.526
214.267.191 450.889.130 224.373.942
53.831.469
32.793.982
145.731.501
97.009.390
97.009.390
17.491.373
8.457.868
25.949.241
7.012.741
4.126.075
176.706.696
Private Investment
Total Expenditures
36.138.168
21.089.014
Domestic Banks
Rest of the World
908.839.242
25.949.241
910.277
32.742.455
45.738.612
16.920.165
97.009.390
161.489.985 145.731.501
97.009.390
25.949.241
176.706.696
67
REFERENCES
Adelman, I., and S. Robinson. (1988).” Macroeconomic Adjustment and Income
Distribution: Alternative Models Applied to Two Economies.” Journal of Development
Economics 29 (1): 23-44.
Agenor P. R, Jensen H, Verghish M, Yeldan E. (2004). “Disinflation, Fiscal
Sustainability and Labor Market Adjustment in Turkey”. Second draft
Armington, P. S. (1969). “A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by
Place of Production”. IMF Staff Papers 16 (1).
Brown, D. K. (1988). “Trade Preferences for Developing Countries: A Survey
of Results”. Journal of Development Studies 24 (3): 335-363.
Cattaneo A, El-Said M, Robinson S, (1998). “Estimating A SAM Using Cross
Entropy Methods”. IFPRI Discussion Papers.
Decaluwé, B., A. Martens, and M. Monette. (1988). “Macroclosures In Open
Economy CGE Models: A Numerical Reappraisal ”. International
Journal of Development Planning Literature 3( 2).
Devarajan, S., D. S. Go, G. D. Lewis, S. Robinson, and P. Sinko. (1997).”
Simple General Equilibrium Modeling” In “Applied Methods for Trade
Policy Analysis: A Handbook”, eds. Joseph F. Francois and Kenneth A. Reinert.
Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Devarajan, S., G.D. Lewis, and S. Robinson. (1993). “External Shocks,
Purchasing Power Parity, and The Equilibrium Real Exchange Rate”.
World Bank Economic Review 7 (1): 45-63.
Devarajan, S., G. D. Lewis, and S. Robinson. (1994). “Getting the Model
Right: The General Equilibrium Approach to Adjustment Policy”. Draft
Manuscript. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.77
Duchin, F. (1996). “Household Lifesytles: Social Dimension of Structural
Economics”. Manuscript Submitted to the United Nations University.
Elekdag, S. (2003) “Exchange Rates and Monetary Policy in Turkey,”
unpublished, Johns Hopkins University.
GAMS User Guide at www.gams.org.
Harris Lee R, Lofgren Hans, Robinson Sherman, (2002 ). “A Standart
Computable General Equilibrium Model in GAMS”. IFPRI.
Hertel T, Hummels D, Ivanic M, Keeney Roman. (2004) . “How Confident
Can We Be In CGE-Based Assesments of Free Trade Agreements”.
NBER.
Hewings, G. J. D., and M. Madden (eds.).(1995). “Social and Demographic
Accounting”. Cambridge University Press.
www.die.gov.tr
www.dpt.gov.tr
www.hazine.gov.tr
www.muhasebat.gov.tr
www.ssk.gov.tr
www.tcmb.gov.tr
Kazgan Gülten, (1999) .“Tanzimattan Yirmibirinci Yüzyıla Türkiye
Ekonomisi”.
Akdeniz Yay.
68
Kilkeny, M., and A. Faide. (1997). “Fiscal SAMs and Fiscal Federalism”.
Department of Economics, Iowa State University, draft.78
Köse, A., ve E. Yeldan (1996) “Çok Sektörlü Hesaplanabilir Genel Denge
Modellerinin Veri Tabanı Üzerine Notlar: Türkiye 1990 Sosyal
Hesaplar Matrisi” METU Studies in Development, 23(1): 59-83.
Lewis B. D., and Thorbecke E. (1992). “District Level Economic Linkages in
Kenya: Evidence Based on A Small Regional Acconting Matrix”. World
Development, 20 (6).
Panagariya, A., and R. Duttagupta. (2001). “The `Gains` from Preferential
Trade Liberalization in the CGE Models, Where Do They Come
from?”. In Regionalism and Globalization: Theory and Practice, ed.
Sajal Latrivi. New York : Routledge.
Host-Madsen P.,(1979). “Macro Economic Acounts- An Overview”. IMF.
Pyatt G., and Thorbecke E. (1976). “Planning Techniques For A Better
Future”. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labor Force.
Reinert, K. A., and D. W. Roland-Holst. (1997). “Social Accounting Matrices”.
In Applied Methods for Trade Policy Analysis. Cambridge, United
Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, S. (1989).” Multisectoral Models”. In Handbook of Development
Economics, Volume II, eds. Hollis Chenery and T.N. Srinivasan.
Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Roe T., and Yeldan E. (1991) “Political Economy of Rent-Seeking under
Alternative Trade Regimes” International Review of Economics
(Weltwirtschaftliches Archives), 127(3).
Sadoulet, E., and A. de Janvry. (1995). “Input-Output Tables, Social
Accounting Matrices and Multipliers.” In Quantitative development
policy analysis. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.79
Sadoulet, E., and A. de Janvry. (1995). “Multimarket Models”. In Quantitative
development policy analysis. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Sadoulet, E., and A. de Janvry. (1995). “Computable General Equilibrium
Models”. In Quantitative development policy analysis. Baltimore,
Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Sak G., and Yeldan E. (1993) “Reflections on Asset-Backed Securitization in
Turkey: Results of A Financial CGE Model” METU Studies in
Development, 20(3).
Thorbecke, E. (1985). “The Social Accounting Matrix and Consistency Type
Planning Models.” Chapter 10 in G. Pyatt and. J.I. Round. Social
Accounting Matrices, A Base for Planning. Washington, D.C.: World
Bank Symposium.
Thorbecke, E. (1988). “The Impact of Stabilization and Structural Adjustment
Measures and Reforms on Agriculture and Equity”. in E. Berg(ed.),
Policy Reform and Equity: Extending the Benefits of Development.
San Fransisco: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
Thorbecke, E. (1989). “The Social Accounting Matrix Framework to Capture
the Interdepence between Domestic and Foreign Variables”. Paper for
the Conference on Large-scale Social Science Models, National
Center for Super Computing Applications, Univesity of Illionis,
69
September.
Thorbecke, E. (1995). “Intersectoral Linkages and Their Impact on Rural
Poverty Alleviation: A Social Accounting Matrix Approach”. UNIDO.
Voyvoda E., and Yeldan E. (2003). “An OLG Investigation of the IMF’s Fiscal
Programming Model for Turkey.”
Yeldan E. (1989) “Structural Adjustment and trade in Turkey: Investigating
the Alternatives ‘Beyond Export-led Growth’” Journal of Policy
Modeling, 11(2).
Yeldan E. (1996). “Türk Ekonomisinde Krizin Oluşumu: Bir Genel Denge
Analizi” METU Studies in Development
Yeldan, E. (1997) “Financial Liberalization and Fiscal Repression in Turkey:
Policy Analysis in a CGE Model With Financial Markets,” Journal of
Policy Modeling, 19.
Yeldan E. (1998). “The Simple Dynamic CGE Model of a Small Open
Economy”. unpublished chapter.
Yeldan E. (2001) “Küreselleşme Sürecinde Türkiye Ekonomisi: Bölüşüm,
Birikim, Büyüme”. İletişim Yay.
70