Turkish Economy

Theories on the relationship between money and inflation had largely been shaped around the positive relationship and money causality for inflation before the Post-Keynesians. Since the 1980s, this idea emerged that there might be no correlation between money growth and inflation. In the case of existence, the causality is reversed, so money is endogenous somehow. However, practically there is a suspicion that the causality between money growth and inflation is not fixed and linear. According to the experience of Turkey in the last seven decades, which has experienced fluctuated inflation rates, it is supposed that the causal relationship between Broad Money Growth (BMG) and inflation is not constant. This paper examines this idea over 1961–2019 using a Markov Switching Vector Autoregressive model (MS-VAR), which allows for regime shifts. Findings show that the causal relationship between BMG and inflation has not been constant, and different regimes have generated different causality orientations. There was a one-way causality from inflation to BMG during 1971–2001 that inflation rates were high. Whereas, during 1961–70 and 2002–19, when the Turkish economy experienced milder inflation rates, there was a one-way causal relationship from BMG to inflation.

This article examines the relationship between inflation and inflation uncertainty in the Turkish economy in this period 2004:01-2014:12. This relationship is explored in two ways: a) with the effect of structural breaks; b) without the effect of structural breaks. In fact, with regard to the main structural break have occurred over this period, we examine whether structural break has affected the causal relationship between these two variables or not. Conditional Heteroscedasticity Models are used to obtain inflation uncertainty. The EGARCH model has been identified as the most appropriate model for inflation uncertainty. Lee-Strazicich test is applied for checking any structural break in inflation and inflation uncertainty series. Then, the relation between inflation and its uncertainty is tested using Granger causality Test. This study shows that the structural break has no effect on the Friedman-Ball hypothesis. This hypothesis is supported whether with the structural break or without the structural break. But Cukierman-Meltzer’s view is affected by the structural break. Since this hypothesis imply that inflation uncertainty causes inflation, so politicians need to implement policies that pay more attention to inflation uncertainty.