Provincial Development in Türkiye: A Composite Index Analysis of Çanakkale
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37241/jatss.2026.151Keywords:
provincial development, composite development index, principal component analysis, structural transformation, Çanakkale ProvinceAbstract
Introduction: This study examines provincial development disparities in Türkiye through a structured assessment of Çanakkale’s relative position within the national distribution. Motivated by persistent regional inequalities, the paper develops a clearer empirical hierarchy in which a PCA-based composite development index serves as the primary analytical tool, while clustering and comparative benchmarking are used for interpretation.
Method: Using cross-sectional data for 81 provinces in 2022, the study constructs a composite index from six indicators: per-capita production, start-ups per capita, investment per capita, agricultural production per capita, industrial share, and services share. Variables are standardised and aggregated through principal component analysis, and robustness is assessed through diagnostic tests and comparison with an equal-weight alternative. Provinces are then grouped into high-, medium-, and low-development typologies through k-means clustering, and Çanakkale is evaluated against national averages and a population-based peer group.
Results or Findings: The results show substantial interprovincial heterogeneity. Çanakkale ranks above the national mean and falls within the medium-development group. Its profile combines strong entrepreneurship and high investment per capita with moderate industrialisation and a relatively large agricultural base. This mixed structure helps explain why the province performs better than many peers but does not reach the high-development cluster.
Discussion or Conclusion: The findings suggest that Çanakkale represents a transitional development pattern and that stronger links between investment, entrepreneurship, and higher value-added industry are essential for upward movement.
Downloads
References
Albayrak, A. S. (2005). Türkiye’de illerin sosyoekonomik gelişmişlik düzeylerinin çok değişkenli istatistik yöntemlerle incelenmesi. International Journal of Management Economics and Business, 1(1), 153–177. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ijmeb/article/750872
Bartlett, M. S. (1951). The effect of standardization on a χ² approximation in factor analysis. Biometrika, 38(3–4), 337–344. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/38.3-4.337
Bulut, H., & Öner, Y. (2017). The evaluation of socio-economic development of development agency regions in Turkey using classical and robust principal component analyses. Journal of Applied Statistics, 44(16), 2936–2948. https://doi.org/10.1080/02664763.2016.1267115
Çınar, İ. T. (2023). Regional development trap and economic complexity in Turkey: Evidence from provincial data. Regional Science Policy & Practice, 15(9), 2224–2253. https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12719
Dinçer, B., Özaslan, M., & Kavasoğlu, T. (2003, May). İllerin ve bölgelerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişlik sıralaması araştırması (2003) (DPT Yayın No. 2671). Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı, Bölgesel Gelişme ve Yapısal Uyum Genel Müdürlüğü. https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Illerin_Sosyo-Ekonomik_Gelismislik_Siralamasi_Arastirmasi_2003.pdf
Ekinci, E. (2025). Toward fair and sustainable regional development: A multidimensional framework for allocating public investments in Türkiye. Sustainability, 17(24), Article 11288. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172411288
Everitt, B. S., & Howell, D. C. (Eds.). (2005). Encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science. John Wiley & Sons.
Fisher, A. G. B. (1939). Production, primary, secondary and tertiary. Economic Record, 15(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4932.1939.tb01015.x
Gaberli, Ü. (2023). Structural change: Do services substitute or complete the industry? International Journal of Social Inquiry, 16(1), 29–46. https://doi.org/10.37093/ijsi.1280111
Gömleksiz, M., Şahbaz, A., & Mercan, B. (2017). Regional economic convergence in Turkey: Does the government really matter for? Economies, 5(3), Article 27. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies5030027
Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2019). On the methodological framework of composite indices: A review of the issues of weighting, aggregation, and robustness. Social Indicators Research, 141(1), 61–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9
Hamilton, C., & de Vries, G. J. (2023, December). The structural transformation of transition economies (GGDC Research Memorandum No. 196). Groningen Growth and Development Centre, University of Groningen. https://iariw.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/gd196-3.pdf
Hartigan, J. A., & Wong, M. A. (1979). A k-means clustering algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 28(1), 100–108. https://doi.org/10.2307/2346830
Hauser, C., Siller, M., Schatzer, T., Walde, J., & Tappeiner, G. (2018). Measuring regional innovation: A critical inspection of the ability of single indicators to shape technological change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 129, 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.019
Jolliffe, I. T., & Cadima, J. (2016). Principal component analysis: A review and recent developments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 374(2065), Article 20150202. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2015.0202
Kaiser, H. F., & Rice, J. (1974). Little Jiffy, Mark IV. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(1), 111–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447403400115
Kaya, A. İ., & Çiçekçi, C. (2023, June). Structural transformation and sources of growth in Turkey (WIDER Working Paper 2023/71). United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER). https://www.wider.unu.edu/sites/default/files/Publications/Working-paper/PDF/wp2023-71-structural-transformation-sources-growth-Turkey.pdf
Kılıç, İ., Saraçlı, S., & Kolukısaoğlu, S. (2011). Sosyo-ekonomik göstergeler bakımından illerin bölgesel bazda benzerliklerinin çok değişkenli analizler ile incelenmesi. Journal of Statisticians: Statistics and Actuarial Sciences, 4(2), 57–68. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/jssa/article/123884
Michener, G. (2015). Policy evaluation via composite indexes: Qualitative lessons from international transparency policy indexes. World Development, 74, 184–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.04.016
Ministry of Industry and Technology. (2025). Investment statistics. Retrieved September 18, 2025, from https://www.sanayi.gov.tr/istatistikler/yatirim-istatistikleri
Moeller, J. (2025). Why and when you should avoid using z-scores in graphs displaying profile or group differences. Journal of Personality-Oriented Research, 11(2), 58–78. https://doi.org/10.17505/jpor.2025.28091
Munda, G., & Nardo, M. (2009). Noncompensatory/nonlinear composite indicators for ranking countries: A defensible setting. Applied Economics, 41(12), 1513–1523. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840601019364
Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffmann, A., & Giovannini, E. (2005, August 9). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide, OECD Statistics (Working Paper No. 2005/03). OECD. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/533411815016
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2023, September 29). Regions in industrial transition 2023: New approaches to persistent problems (OECD Regional Development Studies). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5604c2ab-en
Pede, V. O., Sparks, A. H., & McKinley, J. D. (2012, February). Regional income inequality and economic growth: A spatial econometrics analysis for provinces in the Philippines. Paper presented at the 56th Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Fremantle, Australia. Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society. Retrieved September 18, 2025, from https://www.aares.org.au/conference
Schreiber, J. B. (2021). Issues and recommendations for exploratory factor analysis and principal component analysis. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 17(5), 1004–1011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2020.07.027
Seunga Ryu, I., Gorelova, A., Flood, M., & Donoso Salas, J. I. (2024, December 11). A granular approach to measuring regional attractiveness (OECD Regional Development Papers No. 100). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/4f0866f1-en
Tanwar, N., Kumar, S., Sisodia, B. V. S., & Hooda, B. K. (2016). Dynamics of socio-economic development of districts of Eastern Uttar Pradesh. Journal of Applied and Natural Science, 8(1), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v8i1.736
Templ, M., Filzmoser, P., & Reimann, C. (2008). Cluster analysis applied to regional geochemical data: Problems and possibilities. Applied Geochemistry, 23(8), 2198–2213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2008.03.004
Temurlenk, M. S., & Abar, H. (2019). Türkiye’deki illerin sosyoekonomik gelişmişlik seviyeleri: 2008 – 2016 dönemi. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 33(4), 1115–1135. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/840398
Turkish Statistical Institute. (2025). Geographic Statistics Portal. Retrieved September 18, 2025, from Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. https://cip.tuik.gov.tr/
Urfalıoğlu, F., & Seyfullahoğulları, A. (2004). İllerin bazı sosyo-ekonomik kriterler altında gelişmişlik sınıflaması. Marmara University Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 19(1), 209–232. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/muiibd/article/4112
Van Neuss, L. (2019). The drivers of structural change. Journal of Economic Surveys, 33(2), 309–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12266
World Bank. (2009). World development report 2009: Reshaping economic geography. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-7607-2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
