Notes on the Current Development Problems and Growth Prospects of the Turkish Economy

Abstract

It is the aim of these notes to make a balance sheet of the development problems which Turkey is currently facing and to assess medium-term growth prospects for the Turkish economy. Such a balance sheet necessitates a retrospective look into the recent past, in which a distinction should be made between the pre- and post-1980 periods since it was early in 1980 that a major reorientation of economic policies into an orthodox “structural adjustment” line took place. Hence we investigate roughly two seven year periods covering 1973-79 and 1980—86 (with more emphasis on the second period), being fully aware that with respect to certain variables the year 1980 may not always serve as a dividing line.

Social work education in Turkey at the crossroads: An analysis of educational trends and socio-political context in a historical perspective

“…Boratav (2006: 174) emphasizes the fundamental impact of the IMF and World Bank on social policy in Turkey in the early 2000s where the fight against poverty was prioritized as a precaution against prevailing social inequalities. That is to say, social policy was regarded as being limited to transfer payments to those who would otherwise be unable to participate in the market economy, reflecting an adaptation of the 200-year-old ‘Poor Laws’ of England to the contemporary conditions in Turkey in the 2000s (Boratav, 2006: 174–175). In addition to the impact of social assistance in reducing social inequality, the political outlook of Justice and Development Party also considered the associated impact on the voting behaviour of the poor community.…”

“…Boratav (2006: 148–149) points out that social services had been removed from the policy agenda in the post-1983 period in Turkey within the context of neoliberal policies enacted by the structural adjustment programme launched in 1980. That is to say, the neoliberal economic order had a direct impact on the social policy domain in Turkey between 1980 and 1988.…”

“…This process could be regarded as a transformation under a neoliberal conservative government towards minimizing the state through weakening the role of state institutions (Doganay, 2007). Boratav (2006: 174) emphasizes the fundamental impact of the IMF and World Bank on social policy in Turkey in the early 2000s where the fight against poverty was prioritized as a precaution against prevailing social inequalities. That is to say, social policy was regarded as being limited to transfer payments to those who would otherwise be unable to participate in the market economy, reflecting an adaptation of the 200-year-old ‘Poor Laws’ of England to the contemporary conditions in Turkey in the 2000s (Boratav, 2006: 174–175).…”

Türkiye’de Uluslararası Politik Ekonomi: Alt-disiplinin Gelişimi ve Mevcut Durumu

“…IPE was introduced to Turkish academia mainly by Marxists economists, who examined world affairs through the "Core-Periphery" dichotomy during the Cold War. These scholars largely dealt with a series of IPE issues such as the international division of labor, redistributional policies, 14 economic development, 15 and liberalization in the age of neoliberalism. 16 In these years, prominent Marxist-oriented economists, who taught at the Middle East Technical University (METU) and Mülkiye (Faculty of Political Science at Ankara University), were the pioneers of publishing and teaching in the subfield of IPE.…”

For the People, of the People and by the Military: The Regime Structure of Modern Turkey

“…When, as part of the prospective loan's implementation plan, a devaluation of the lira and other structural adjustments to the economy were announced the same year, a marked deterioration in civil order saw the number of politically motivated murders rise from seven or eight a day to an average of 20 and industrial output decline by 5.4 percent (Pevsner, 1984, pp. 78–80; Boratav and Turel, 1988, p. 38). 6 On this basis, Chief-of-Staff Evren removed the civilian government in 1980, having dispatched General Sahinkaya to Washington to gain American support, hosted four visits from the NATO Commander General Rogers and received loan guarantees of $182 million from the World Bank (Paul, 1981, p. 4; Birand, 1987, p. 187).…”