Global Competition in Wheat and Meslin, Maize and Rice Products: Türkiye's Competitiveness

Year 2025, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 270 - 285

Zeynep Aktaş Çimen

https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1630840

Abstract

Global trade in agricultural products is critical for food security. As the volume of trade has increased and become more complex, it has become important to assess global competition in the trade of agricultural products. The objective of the study is to assess Türkiye's position and level of specialization in relation to the competitiveness of the top 20 countries in the global export market for three key agricultural products wheat and meslin, maize and rice over the period 2004-2023. These three products were chosen due to their significant role in the global economy. For the analysis, data were selected using the Harmonized System (HS) 4-digit product codes from Trade Map database. Specifically, wheat and meslin are coded as “1001”, maize as “1005”, and rice as “1006”. 20 years of data on the exports and imports of countries were used and analyzed with the Indices of Revealed Comparative Advantage, Net Exports and Export-Import Ratio. According to the results of the RCA analysis, Ukraine has the highest competitive advantage in the global wheat and meslin export market, while Türkiye is the most competitively disadvantaged country. In the maize export market, Argentina holds the highest competitive advantage, whereas Türkiye is the most disadvantaged. In the rice export market, Guyana has the highest competitive advantage, with Türkiye being the most disadvantaged country after Austria.

Keywords

Exports, Revealed comparative advantage, Competitiveness, Türkiye

Ethical Statement

Ethics committee approval was not required for this study because of there was no study on animals or humans.

References

• Aktaş Çimen Z, Sarıçoban K. 2024. Türkiye’nin süs bitkileri ihracatındaki rekabet gücü. Uluslararası İktisadi İdari İnc Derg, 44: 151-168.
• Amighini A. 2004. China in the International fragmentation of production: Evidence from the ICT İndustry. Università commerciale Luigi Bocconi, Milano, Italy, pp: 147.
• Asciuto A, Carapezza R, Galati A, Schimmenti E. 2008. The competitiveness of the Italian flower andornamental plant sector. New Medit, 7(1): 26-37.
• Aysu A. 2018. Buğday: beslenme kültürü ve politikalar. Meltem İzmir Akdeniz Akad Derg, 4: 82-90.
• Balassa B, Noland M. 1989. Revealed comparative advantage in Japan and the United States. J Int Econ Integrat, 4(2): 8-22.
• Balassa B. 1965. Trade liberalisation and “revealed” comparative advantage. Manchester School, 33(2): 99-123.
• Balassa B. 1977. Revealed comparative advantage revisited: An analysis of relative export shares of the industrial countries, 1953–1971. Manchester School, 45(4): 327-344.
• Banterle A, Carraresi L. 2007. Competitive performance analysis and European Union trade: The case of the prepared swine meat sector. Acta Agri Scand Section C, 4(3): 159-172.
• Bashimov G. 2018. Kazakistan’ın bakır sektöründeki rekabet gücünün ölçülmesi. Ekon Sos Araş Derg, Özel Sayı, 55-68.
• Bashimov G. 2022. Kazakistan’ın hububat ürünleri ihracatında karşılaştırmalı üstünlüğünün ölçülmesi. Asya Araş Uluslar Sos Bil Derg, 6 (2): 87-198.
• Bin Rahman AR, Zhang J. 2023. Trends in rice research: 2030 and beyond. Food Ener Secur, 12(2): e390.
• Can MB. 2023. Mısır ve buğday glüteninin ruminant beslemede kullanımı. Hayvansal Üretim, 64(2): 93-102.
• Cornejo R, Singh S, Harris J. 2023. Do revisions to the harmonized system lead to distortions in rules of origin? A case study of India’s selected free trade agreements. Legal Issues Econ Integrat, 50(2): 185-210.
• Erbaş Köse ÖD, Mut Z. 2018. Tahıl ve tahıl ürünlerinin insan beslenmesi ve sağlık açısından önemi, Yozgat’ta tahılların durumu. 3rd International Bozok Symposium, May 03-05, Yozgat, Türkiye, pp: 1121-1130.
• FAO. 2016. The agriculture sectors in the intended nationally determined contributions: Analysis, by Strohmaier R, Rioux J, Seggel A, Meybeck A, Bernoux M, Salvatore M, Miranda J and Agostini A. Environment and Natural Resources Management, Working Paper No. 62, Rome, Italy, pp: 92.
• FAO. 2022. The state of agricultural commodity markets 2022. Food and Agriculture Organization. URL: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/5b1d7bed-225a-444b-a041-c0844060a73c/content (accessed date: January 20, 2025).
• French S. 2017. Revealed comparative advantage: What is it good for? J Int Econ, 106: 83-103.
• Fukagawa NK, Ziska LH. 2019. Rice: Importance for global nutrition. J Nutrit Sci Vitaminol, 65(Supplement): S2-S3.
• Geetha RS, Srivastava SK. 2018. Export of maize from India: Performance and determinants. Asian J Agri Extens Econ Sociol, 29(1): 1-11.
• Govindasamy R, Bayramoğlu Z, Aziz S, Soysal U. 2023. Investigating the competitiveness of Pakistan agricultural products. Eurasian J Agri Econ, 3(2): 39-57.
• Granabetter D. 2016. Revealed comparative advantage index: an analysis of export trade in the Austrian district of Burgenland. Rev Innov Competitiv, 2(2): 97-114.
• Gutiérrez-Moya E, Adenso-Díaz B, Lozano S. 2021. Analysis and vulnerability of the international wheat trade network. Food Secur, 13: 113-128.
• Hasan MR, Das D. 2024. What makes the second-largest apparel-exporting nation? An in-depth analysis of competitiveness and comparative advantage in Bangladesh’s apparel industry. Competitiveness Review: An Int Busin J. https://doi.org/10.1108/CR-01-2024-0011
• Hinloopen J, Van Marrewijk C. 2001. On the empirical distribution of the Balassa Index. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 137(1): 1-35.
• Jagadeesh MS, Jahnavi AP, Vinay HT, Abhishek GJ, Abhishek SS, Chikkalaki AS. 2024. Export competitiveness of Indian coffee: analysing trade potential in the global market. J Scient Res Rep, 30(9): 51-61.
• Jambor A, Babu S. 2017. Competitiveness of global agriculture: Policy lessons for food security. International Food Policy Research Institute. URL: https://cgspace.cgiar.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/f6ef1522-be64-464f-8879-8391b815bcab/content (accessed date: January 18, 2025).
• Ji G, Zhong H, Nzudie HLF, Wang P, Tian P. 2024. The structure, dynamics, and vulnerability of the global food trade network. J Cleaner Product, 434: 140439.
• Kutkowska B, Szuk T. 2020. Competitiveness on the global cereal market. Ann Polish Assoc Agri Agribusin Econ, 22(2): 142-152.
• Maqbool MS, Mahmood T, Hussain S, Ashraf M. 2020. Analysis of trade competitiveness of Pakistan cereal products in global perspective. Rev Econ Devel Stud, 6(1): 97-106.
• Marković M, Krstić B, Rađenović Ž. 2019. Export competitiveness of the Serbian agri-food sector on the EU market. Економика пољопривреде, 66(4): 941-953.
• Marković M. 2019. Analysis of comparative advantages of Serbian exports at the sectoral level. Ekonomika, 65(3): 55-64.
• Mikic M. 2005. Commonly used trade indicators: a note. ARTNeT capacity building workshop on trade research. URL: https://repository.unescap.org/handle/20.500.12870/4195 (accessed date: January 10, 2025).
• Nithyashree ML, Ganapati M, Balasubramanian M, Gadag RN. 2020. Export performance and prospectus of maize (Zea mays L.) in India. Maize J, 9(2): 125-130.
• Oktan G. 2024. Türkiye’nin hububat ürünlerindeki rekabet gücünün G7 ülkeleri ile karşılaştırılması. Yüksek lisans Tezi, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü, Rize, Türkiye, pp: 84.
• Pascucci F. 2018. The export competitiveness of Italian coffee roasting industry. British Food J, 120(7): 1529-1546.
• Ranum P, Peña‐Rosas, JP, Garcia‐Casal MN. 2014. Global maize production, utilization, and consumption. Ann New York Acad Sci, 1312(1): 105-112.
• Reed T. 2024. Export-led industrial policy for developing countries: Is there a way to pick winners? J Econ Perspect, 38(4): 3-26.
• Rodríguez ML, Guaita PI, Marques PI. 2024. Competitiveness in theagricultural sector: a literature review. Clío América, 18(35): 52-69.
• Saboniene A. 2009. Lithuanian export competitiveness: Comparison with other Baltic States. Eng Econ, 62(2): 49-57.
• Şahin D. 2016. Tarımsal gıda ürünlerinde karşılaştırmalı üstünlüğün ölçümü: Türkiye örneği. Uluslar Sos Araş Derg, 9(43): 2177-2184.
• Sarıçoban K, Kösekahyaoğlu L, Erkan B. 2017. Türkiye’nin tekstil ihracatındaki rekabet gücü düzeyinin belirlenmesi: 1996-2015 dönemi için bir analiz. Kesit Akad Derg, 8: 186-203.
• Sarıçoban K, Kösekahyaoğlu L. 2016. Türkiye’nin tarimsal ürünlerdeki ihracat rekabet gücünün ölçülmesi: 1996-2015 dönemi üzerine bir analiz. ASSAM Uluslar Hakemli Der, 4(7): 78-96.
• Sarıçoban K, Kösekahyaoğlu L. 2017. Ticaret sonrası verilerle rekabet gücünün ölçülmesinde kullanılan indeksler üzerine bir literatür taraması. Akad Sos Araş Derg, 47(47): 424-444.
• Sing V. 2022. Three crops rule the world: Over-dependence on wheat, maizeand rice threatens the future of wildlife survival and global food security. State of India’s Environment – 2022: A Down to Earth Annual. Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi, India, pp: 241-241.
• Sovcovici V, Lopotenco V, Staver, L. 2024. Competitiveness of Moldovan agri-food exports at the regional level in the context of current crises. Scient Papers Ser Manag Econ Eng Agri Rural Devel, 24(2): 865-874.
• Statistics How To. 2025. Trimmed Mean / Truncated Mean: Definition, Examples. URL: https://www.statisticshowto.com/trimmed-mean/ (accessed date: January 28, 2025).
• Thomé KM, Paiva VAL, Gois TCD. 2023. Wine international market structure and competitiveness. Int J Wine Busin Res, 35(4): 561-579.
• Thomé KM, Paiva VAL. 2020. Sparkling wine international market structure and competitiveness. Wine Econ Policy, 9(2): 37-47.
• Trade Map. 2023. Trade statistics for international business development. URL: https://www.trademap.org/Product_SelCountry_TS.aspx?nvpm=1%7c792%7c%7c%7c%7c10%7c%7c%7c4%7c1%7c1%7c2%7c2%7c1%7c1%7c1%7c1%7c1 (accessed date: January 16, 2025).
• Umair Riaz U, Samreen T, Ijaz F, Rashid S, Hussain S, Ahmed Z, Malik HA, Zulqernain M, Mehdi SM. 2020. Rice production: Knowledge and practices for ensuring food security. Austin Publishing Group, Punjab, Pakistan, pp: 128.
• United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. 2025. Data Hub: Empowering development through data and statistics. URL: https://unctadstat.unctad.org/datacentre/reportInfo/US.RCA accessed date: January 19, 2025).
• Vollrath TL. 1991. A theoretical evaluation of alternative trade intensity measures of revealed comparative advantage. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 127(2): 265-280.
• World Bank. 2024. Indicators. URL: https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators# (accessed date: January 17, 2025).