The Relationship Between Logistics Performance and Innovation: An Empirical Study of Turkish Firms

Abstract

The aim of the study is to explore whether logistics performance affects firms’ innovation decisions. Using Turkey Regional Enterprise Survey conducted between August 2015 and June 2016, we measure logistics performance by transportation costs. We consider several aspects of innovation including process innovation, product innovation, organizational innovation and investments in Research & Development. We also analyze whether the impact of transportation costs on innovation activities varies across industries or regions. Our findings indicate that the impact of transportation costs on R&D activities is highest for firms in the construction sector, whereas for innovation outputs, the impact is greatest for the wholesale & retail sector. Moreover, our results also reveal three regions where transportation costs matter the most for innovation are Ankara, Bursa-Bilecik-Eskisehir and finally Diyarbakir-Sanliurfa.

Keywords

• Innovation,Logistics,Turkey

References

1. Ankara Chamber of Commerce (2016), “Statistics”. Accessed from http://www.aso.org.tr/wp- content/uploads/2017/09/istatislikler-1.pdf, on 25 February 2019.
2. Arvis, J. F., Saslavsky, D., Ojala, L., Shepherd, B., Busch, C., & Raj, A. (2014). Connecting to Compete 2014: Trade Logistics in the Global Economy- The Logistics Performance Index and Its Indicators. World Bank. Accessed from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/20399 on 1 March, 2019.
3. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). Innovative clusters and the industry life cycle. Review of Industrial Organization, 11(2), 253-273.
4. Chow, G., Heaver, T. D., & Henriksson, L. E. (1994). Logistics performance: definition and measurement. International journal of physical distribution & logistics management, 24(1), 17-28.
5. Christopher, M. (1998). Logistics and Supply Chain Management: Strategies for reducing cost and improving service, (2nd Ed.). New York: Prentice Hall.
6. Daugherty, P. J., Ellinger, A. E., & Gustin, C. M. (1996). Integrated logistics: achieving logistics performance improvements. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 1(3), 25-33.
7. Droge, C., Jayaram, J., & Vickery, S. K. (2004). The effects of internal versus external integration practices on time-based performance and overall firm performance. Journal of operations management, 22(6), 557-573.
8. Erkan, B. (2014). Türkiye’de lojistik sektörü ve rekabet gücü. ASSAM Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi, 1(1), 44-65.

9. Gao, D., Xu, Z., Ruan, Y. Z., & Lu, H. (2017). From a systematic literature review to integrated definition for sustainable supply chain innovation (SSCI). Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 1518-1538.
10. Global Innovation Index (2018). Accessed from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/Home on March 1, 2019.
11. Greene, W. H. (2008). Econometric analysis (6th ed). International edition, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
12. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1993). Innovation and growth in the global economy. MIT press.
13. Gunasekera, K., Anderson, W., & Lakshmanan, T. R. (2008). Highway-induced development: evidence from Sri Lanka. World Development, 36(11), 2371-2389.
14. Hertz, S., Johansson, J. K., & de Jager, F. (2001). Customer-oriented cost cutting: process management at Volvo. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 6(3), 128-142.
15. Hong, J. (2007). Transport and the location of foreign logistics firms: The Chinese experience. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41(6), 597-609.
16. Krugman, P. (1991). Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of political economy, 99(3), 483-499.
17. Lean, H. H., Huang, W., & Hong, J. (2014). Logistics and economic development: Experience from China. Transport Policy, 32, 96-104.
18. Lindberg, A., & Götberg, A. (2016). Radical Supply Chain Innovation-Developing a Generic and Actionable Framework. M.Sc. Thesis, Department of Industrial Management and Logistics, Lund University.
19. O'Cass, A., Song, M., & Yuan, L. (2013). Anatomy of service innovation: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1060-1062.
20. OECD OSLO Manual (2005). Proposed guidelines for collecting and interpreting technological innovation data. OCDE: Statistical Office of the European Communities.
21. OECD (2019). Gross domestic spending on R&D (indicator). doi: 10.1787/d8b068b4-en. Accessed from https://data.oecd.org/rd/gross-domestic-spending-on-r-d.htm on 1 March 2019.
22. Sarıdoğan, A. A. (2013). Lojistik Sektörüne Rekabet Gücü Odaklı Stratejik Maliyet Yönetimi. Trakya Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi E-Dergi, 2(2), 69-95.
23. Tebaldi, L., Bigliardi, B., & Bottani, E. (2018). Sustainable Supply Chain and Innovation: A Review of the Recent Literature. Sustainability, 10(11), 3946.
24. TOBB (2015) Industrial Capacity Report Statistics. Accessed from https://www.tobb.org.tr/BilgiErisimMudurlugu/Sayfalar/Eng/sanayi-kapasite-raporu-istatistikleri.php, on 20 February, 2019.
25. Torre, A. (2008). On the role played by temporary geographical proximity in knowledge transmission. Regional Studies, 42(6), 869-889.
26. Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2005). One size fits all?: Towards a differentiated regional innovation policy approach. Research policy, 34(8), 1203-1219.
27. Transportation and Logistics Industry Report (2018). Accessed from https://www.ulk.sakarya.edu.tr/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Ula%C5%9Ft%C4%B1rma-ve-Lojistik-Sekt%C3%B6r-Raporu-2018.pdf on 20 February, 2019.
28. Yorulmaz, M., & Birgün, S. (2016). Deniz Ulaştırma Lojistiği Hizmet Yetenekleri İle Firma Performansı Arasındaki İlişkilerin İncelenmesi: Türkiye’de Faaliyet Gösteren Deniz Ulaştırma İşletmelerinde Bir Uygulama. Journal of Transportation and Logistics, 1(1), 59-82.