Advertisement

Review of Economics of the Household

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 1085–1118 | Cite as

Self-insurance and consumption risk-sharing between birth-year cohorts in Turkey

  • Evren Ceritoğlu
Article
  • 62 Downloads

Abstract

This paper tests the empirical validity of the consumption risk-sharing hypothesis across urban and rural regions in Turkey. For this purpose, I analyze fourteen consecutive waves of the TURKSTAT Household Budget Surveys from 2003 to 2016 and prepare a pseudo-panel data set for birth-year cohorts. The empirical analysis shows that there is imperfect consumption risk-sharing between birth-year cohorts in Turkey. We observe that the growth of cohort consumption is positively and significantly associated with both the growth of cohort income and the growth of aggregate consumption. Finally, we find that cohorts would have sacrificed modest amounts to insure their consumption.

Keywords

Consumption risk-sharing Income and consumption smoothing Cohort Pseudo-panel 

JEL Classification

C23 D11; D12 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Attanasio, O. P., & Weber, G. (2010). Consumption and saving: Models of inter-temporal allocation and their implications for public policy. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(3), 693–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Banks, J., Blundell, R., & Brugiavini, A. (2001). Risk pooling, precautionary saving and consumption growth. Review of Economic Studies, 68(4), 757–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benito, A. (2006). Does job insecurity affect household consumption? Oxford Economic Papers, 58(1), 157–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Browning, M., & Lusardi, A. (1996). Household saving: Micro theories and micro facts. Journal of Economic Literature, 34, 1797–1855.Google Scholar
  5. Cilasun, S. M., & Kırdar, M. G. (2013). Household structure and household income and its components over the life-cycle in Turkey. İktisat İşletme ve Finans, 28, 89–116.Google Scholar
  6. Deaton, A. (1985). Panel data from time series of cross-sections. Journal of Econometrics, 30, 109–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deaton, A. (1989). Saving in developing countries: Theory and review. World Bank Economic Review (Special Issue), 3(Suppl1), 61–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deaton, A. (1997). The Analysis of household surveys: A micro-econometric approach to development policy. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press for the World Bank.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Deaton, A., & Paxson, C. (1994). Intertemporal choice and inequality. Journal of Political Economy, 102, 437–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duygan-Bump, B. (2006). Welfare cost of financial crises when risk-sharing is imperfect: Evidence from Turkey, in EUI Finance and Consumption Program Working Paper.Google Scholar
  11. Fafchamps, M. (2011). Risk sharing between households. In J. Benhabib, A. Bisin & M. O. Jackson (Eds). Handbook of social economics (vol. 1A, Ch. 24, pp. 1255–1280). North-Holland, San Diego and Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  12. Friedman, M, (1957). A Theory of the consumption function. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.Google Scholar
  13. Hara, C., Huang, J., & Kuzmics, C. (2007). Representative consumer’s risk aversion and efficient risk-sharing rules. Journal of Economic Theory, 137, 652–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hayashi, F., Altonji, J., & Kotlikoff, L. (1996). Risk-sharing between and within families. Econometrica, 64(2), 261–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kalemli-Ozcan, S., Bent, E. S., & Yosha, O. (2003). Risk Sharing and industrial specialization: Regional and international evidence. American Economic Review, 93(3), 903–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Krusell, P., & Smith, Jr., A. A. (1999). On the welfare effects of eliminating business cycles. Review of Economic Dynamics, 2(2), 245–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Krusell, P., Mukoyamae, T., Sahin, A., Anthony, Jr., A. S. (2009). Revisiting the welfare effects of eliminating business cycles. Review of Economic Dynamics, 12, 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lai, J. T., Isabel K. M.Y., & Yi, X. (2016). Heterogeneous preferences and risk sharing at household level in China, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Discussion Paper.Google Scholar
  19. Lucas, R. (2003). Macroeconomic priorities. American Economic Review, 93(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McKenzie, D. J. (2004). Asymptotic theory for heterogeneous dynamic pseudo-panels. Journal of Econometrics, 120, 235–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McKenzie, D. J. (2006). Precautionary saving and consumption growth in Taiwan. China Economic Review, 17, 84–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mian, A., Rao, K., & Sufi, A. (2013). Household balance sheets, consumption, and the economic slump. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128, 1687–1726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ministry of Development, The Republic of Turkey, Annual Programme 2011.Google Scholar
  24. Modigliani, F. (1986). Life cycle, individual thrift, and the wealth of nations. American Economic Review, 76(3), 297–313.Google Scholar
  25. Pericoli, F. M., Eleonora, P., & Luigi, V. (2015). The impact of social capital on consumption insurance and income volatility in the UK: Evidence from The British Household Panel Survey. Review of Economics of the Household, 13, 269–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schulhofer-Wohl, S. (2011). Heterogeneity and tests of risk sharing. Journal of Political Economy, 119(5), 925–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Storesletten, K., Christopher, I. T., & Yaron, A. (2004). Consumption and risk sharing over the life cycle. Journal of Monetary Economics, 51, 609–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Townsend, R. M. (1994). Risk and insurance in village India. Econometrica, 62(3), 539–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Townsend, R. M. (1995). Consumption insurance: An evaluation of risk-bearing systems in low-income economies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(3), 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Turkish Statistical Institute (TURKSTAT), Household Budget Surveys (HBS), 2003 – 2016.Google Scholar
  31. Verbeek, M. (2008). Pseudo-panels and repeated cross-sections. In L. Mátyás & P. Sevestre (Eds.), The econometrics of panel data. 3rd edn. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Xu, X. (2008). Consumption risk-sharing in China. Economica, 75, 326–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Economist, Structural Economic Research DepartmentCentral Bank of the Republic of Turkey (CBRT)AnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations