BibTex RIS Cite

Türkiye İmalat Sanayiinde İthalatın Piyasayı Disipline Etme Hipotezinin Testi: Panel Veri Yaklaşımı

Year 2007, Issue: 29, - , 01.06.2007

Prof. Dr. Mustafa Saatçi Arş. Gör. Alper Aslan

Abstract

Dışa açılma ve rekabet arasındaki ilişki “ithalatın piyasayı disipline etme“ hipotezi olarak bilinir ve ampirik literatürün yoğun ilgisini çekmektedir. Oligopolistik yapıya sahip yerel endüstriler, uluslar arası rekabete maruz kalarak daha rekabetçi davranmaya zorlanır. Bu durum, fiyatmaliyet marjlarının düşmesine ve çıktı seviyesinin artmasına neden olarak, yerel firmaların piyasa gücünü azaltacaktır. Bu makalede, iki haneli Türkiye imalat sanayi verileri ile panel veri ekonometrik teknikleri kullanılarak disipline edici ithalat hipotezi test edilmiş ve ithalat penetrasyonunun Türkiye imalat sanayi iki haneli alt sektörlerinde 1966-2001 döneminde, piyasayı disipline etmede önemli bir rolü olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır

Keywords

İmalat Sanayi Fiyat-Maliyet Marjları Dışa Açılma Rekabet

References

  • BALTAGI, Badi; (2001), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, Chichester, Eng.: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 292s.
  • BRANDER, James ve Paul KRUGMAN; (1983), “A 'Reciprocal Dumping' Model of International Trade”, NBER Working Paper, No. 1194.
  • VENABLES, Anthony; (1985), “ Trade and Trade Policy with Imperfect Competition: The Case of Identical Product and Free Entry”, Journal of International Economics, 29: ss. 23-42.
  • CAVES, Richard; (1985), “International Trade and Industrial Organization: Problem Solved and Unsolved”, European Economic Review, 28, ss. 377-395.
  • CURRIE, Janet ve Ann HARRISON; (1997), “Sharing the Costs: The Impact of Trade Reform on Capital and Labor in Morocco”, Journal of Labor Economics, 15(3, part 2) ss. 44-71.
  • EPIFANI, Paolo; (2003), “Trade Liberalization, Firm Performance, and Labor Market Outcomes in the Developing World: What Can We Learn from Micro- Level Data?” World Bank, Labor & Employment Policy Research Working Papers no. 3063. ss. 1-68.
  • ENGİN, Nazım; Erol KATIRCIOĞLU ve Cevdet AKCAY; (1995), “The Impact of Trade Liberalization on the Turkish Manufacturing Industry: An Empirical Assessment.” In Policies for Competition and Competitiveness, ed. R. Erzan,. Vienna, Austria: United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), ss. 86–122.
  • DIEBOLD, Francis ve Marc NERLOVE; (1990), “Unit roots in economic time series: a selected survey”. In: Fomby, T.; Rhodes, E. (eds.), Advances in econometrics: co-integration, spurious regressions and unit roots. Greenwich: JAI Press, 379s.
  • FOROUTAN, Faezeh; (1996), “Turkey 1976-85: Foreign Trade, Industrial Productivity and Competition,” in Industrial Evolution in Developing Countries, Eds. M. J. Roberts and J. R. Tybout, A World Bank Book, Washington, ss.1-64.
  • GRANGER, Clieve ve Paul NEWBOLD; (1974), “Spurious regressions in econometrics”, Journal of Econometrics, 2 (2), ss. 111-120
  • HALL, Robert; (1988), “The Relation Between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry”, Journal of Political Economy, 96(5), ss. 921-47.
  • HAUSMAN, Jerry; (1979), “Specification Tests in Econometrics.” Econometrica, 46, no. 6, ss. 1251–1271.
  • HAUSMAN, Jerry ve William TAYLOR; (1981), “Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects” Econometrica, 49, no. 6, ss. 1377– 1397.
  • HOEKMAN, Bernard, Hiau Looi KEE ve Marcelo OLARREAGA; (2001), “Markups, Entry Regulation and Trade: Does Country Size Matter?” Policy Research Working Paper no. 2662, World Bank, ss.1-37.
  • IM, Kyung So; Hashem PESARAN ve Yongcheol SHIN; (2003), “Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 115, ss. 53-74,
  • KATIRCIOĞLU, Erol; (1989), Türkiye İmalat Sanayiinde Yoğunlaşma ve Yo- ğunlaşmayı Belirleyen Faktörler 1975-1985, Tüses Araştırma Vakfı Yayını, ss. 1-37.
  • KIVILCIM Metin; Ebru VOYVODA ve Erinç YELDAN; (2002), “The Impact of the Liberalization Program on the Price–Cost Margin and Investment of Turkey’s Manufacturing Sector After 1980 Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, vol. 38, no. 5, September–October, ss. 72–103.
  • KÖSE, A. Haşim; Erinç YELDAN; (1998), “Dışa Açılma Sürecinin Dinamikle- ri” Toplum ve Bilim, ss. 45-69.
  • KRISHNA, Panagariya ve Devashish MITRA; (1998), “Trade Liberalization, Market Discipline and Productivity Growth: New Evidence from India”, Journal of Development Economics, 56(2): 447-462.
  • LEVIN, Andrew ve Chien LIN; (1992), ”Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties”, University of California, San Diego Working Paper, ss. 23-92.
  • LEVIN, Andrew; Chien Lin; (1993), “Unit root tests in panel data: new results”, University of California, San Diego Working Paper, ss. 56-93.
  • LEVINSOHN, James; (1993), “Testing the imports -as- market- discipline hypothesis”, Journal of International Economics, 35, ss. 1-22.
  • MADDALA, G. S. ve Shaoven WU (1999), “A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Special Issue, ss. 631-52.
  • MIHÇI, Sevinç ve Arzu WIGLEY; (2003), “Avrupa Birliği İle Gümrük Birli- ği’nin Türk İmalat Sanayii Alt Sektörleri Üzerinde Kârlılık Etkileri”, Gazi Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F Dergisi, Cilt 5, Sayı 3, ss. 77-91.
  • MIHÇI, Sevinç ve Arzu WIGLEY; (2004), “Effects of Customs Union with European Union on the Market Structure and Pricing Behaviour of Turkish Manufacturing Industry”, European Study Group ETSG Conferances, Nottingham, ss. 1-19.
  • NEYAPTI, Bilin; Fatma TASKIN ve M. ÜNGÖR; (2003), "Has European Customs Union Agreement Really Affected Turkey's Trade?", Bilkent Economic Papers, ss. 1-14.
  • RESENDE, Marcelo ; (2006), “Profit Persistence in Brazil,: A Panel Data Study” Paulo Jan./Mar, ss. 1-12. (São Paulo) vol.36 no.1 São
  • ROBETRS, Mark ve James R. TYBOUT (eds.); (1996), Industrial Evolution in Developing Countries, New York: Oxford University Press, ss. 946- 948.
  • SEKİ, İsmail; (2005), "Gümrük Birliği’nin Türkiye'nin net ihracatı üzerine etki- leri", Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir, manuscript, ss. 1-24.
  • TAYLOR, Scott; (1994), “Once-off and continuing gains from trade”, Review of Economic Studies, 61, ss. 589-601.
  • TYBOUT, James; (2001), “Plant- and Firm-level Evidence on ‘New’ Trade Theories”, NBER Working Paper no. 8418, ss. 1-54.
  • VERGİL, Hasan ve Ertuğrul YILDIRIM; (2006),”AB-Türkiye Gümrük Birli- ği’nin Türkiye’nin Rekabet Ortamı Üzerine Etkisi, İktisat, İşletme ve Finans Dergisi, Haziran.
  • YALÇIN, Cihan; (2000), “Price-Cost Margins and Trade Liberalization in Turkish Manufacturing Industry: A Panel Data Analysis.” Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey, Research Department Working Paper, Ankara, ss. 1-23.
  • YALÇIN, Cihan ve Ali ÇULHA; (2005), “The Determinants of The Price Cost Margins of Manufacturing Firms in Turkey, Research and Monetary Policy Department Working Paper, No: 05/15, ss. 1-31.
  • WOOLDRIDGE, Jeffrey; (2002), Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, Cambridge: The MIT Pres. 752s. NOTLAR
  • Ulaşılabilen en geniş zaman aralığı olması sebebiyle bu dönem tercih edilmiştir.
  • Levinsohn (1993) ve Foroutan (1991); (1983-1986) ve (1976-1985) dönemini kapsa
  • yan çalışmalarında ithalatın disipline edici etkisi doğrulanırken; Yalçın (2000) de
  • (1983-1994) dönemi için disipline edici etki reddedilmiştir.
  • Ayrıntılı bilgi için bknz. Örnek, İ. ve M. Kaplan. (2004), “Dış Ticaret ve Kalkınma”,
  • içinde S. Taban ve M. Kar (editörler), Kalkınma Ekonomisi: Seçme Konular, Bursa: Ekin Kitabevi.
  • Literatürde sermaye değişkeni oluşturmada tercihe göre %5, %10 ve %15 yıpranma
  • payı düşülmektedir. Çalışmaların genelinde %5 yıpranma düşüldüğü için çalışmada
  • %5 yıpranmaya yer verilmiştir.

Year 2007, Issue: 29, - , 01.06.2007

Prof. Dr. Mustafa Saatçi Arş. Gör. Alper Aslan

Abstract

References

  • BALTAGI, Badi; (2001), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, Chichester, Eng.: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 292s.
  • BRANDER, James ve Paul KRUGMAN; (1983), “A 'Reciprocal Dumping' Model of International Trade”, NBER Working Paper, No. 1194.
  • VENABLES, Anthony; (1985), “ Trade and Trade Policy with Imperfect Competition: The Case of Identical Product and Free Entry”, Journal of International Economics, 29: ss. 23-42.
  • CAVES, Richard; (1985), “International Trade and Industrial Organization: Problem Solved and Unsolved”, European Economic Review, 28, ss. 377-395.
  • CURRIE, Janet ve Ann HARRISON; (1997), “Sharing the Costs: The Impact of Trade Reform on Capital and Labor in Morocco”, Journal of Labor Economics, 15(3, part 2) ss. 44-71.
  • EPIFANI, Paolo; (2003), “Trade Liberalization, Firm Performance, and Labor Market Outcomes in the Developing World: What Can We Learn from Micro- Level Data?” World Bank, Labor & Employment Policy Research Working Papers no. 3063. ss. 1-68.
  • ENGİN, Nazım; Erol KATIRCIOĞLU ve Cevdet AKCAY; (1995), “The Impact of Trade Liberalization on the Turkish Manufacturing Industry: An Empirical Assessment.” In Policies for Competition and Competitiveness, ed. R. Erzan,. Vienna, Austria: United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), ss. 86–122.
  • DIEBOLD, Francis ve Marc NERLOVE; (1990), “Unit roots in economic time series: a selected survey”. In: Fomby, T.; Rhodes, E. (eds.), Advances in econometrics: co-integration, spurious regressions and unit roots. Greenwich: JAI Press, 379s.
  • FOROUTAN, Faezeh; (1996), “Turkey 1976-85: Foreign Trade, Industrial Productivity and Competition,” in Industrial Evolution in Developing Countries, Eds. M. J. Roberts and J. R. Tybout, A World Bank Book, Washington, ss.1-64.
  • GRANGER, Clieve ve Paul NEWBOLD; (1974), “Spurious regressions in econometrics”, Journal of Econometrics, 2 (2), ss. 111-120
  • HALL, Robert; (1988), “The Relation Between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry”, Journal of Political Economy, 96(5), ss. 921-47.
  • HAUSMAN, Jerry; (1979), “Specification Tests in Econometrics.” Econometrica, 46, no. 6, ss. 1251–1271.
  • HAUSMAN, Jerry ve William TAYLOR; (1981), “Panel Data and Unobservable Individual Effects” Econometrica, 49, no. 6, ss. 1377– 1397.
  • HOEKMAN, Bernard, Hiau Looi KEE ve Marcelo OLARREAGA; (2001), “Markups, Entry Regulation and Trade: Does Country Size Matter?” Policy Research Working Paper no. 2662, World Bank, ss.1-37.
  • IM, Kyung So; Hashem PESARAN ve Yongcheol SHIN; (2003), “Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 115, ss. 53-74,
  • KATIRCIOĞLU, Erol; (1989), Türkiye İmalat Sanayiinde Yoğunlaşma ve Yo- ğunlaşmayı Belirleyen Faktörler 1975-1985, Tüses Araştırma Vakfı Yayını, ss. 1-37.
  • KIVILCIM Metin; Ebru VOYVODA ve Erinç YELDAN; (2002), “The Impact of the Liberalization Program on the Price–Cost Margin and Investment of Turkey’s Manufacturing Sector After 1980 Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, vol. 38, no. 5, September–October, ss. 72–103.
  • KÖSE, A. Haşim; Erinç YELDAN; (1998), “Dışa Açılma Sürecinin Dinamikle- ri” Toplum ve Bilim, ss. 45-69.
  • KRISHNA, Panagariya ve Devashish MITRA; (1998), “Trade Liberalization, Market Discipline and Productivity Growth: New Evidence from India”, Journal of Development Economics, 56(2): 447-462.
  • LEVIN, Andrew ve Chien LIN; (1992), ”Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties”, University of California, San Diego Working Paper, ss. 23-92.
  • LEVIN, Andrew; Chien Lin; (1993), “Unit root tests in panel data: new results”, University of California, San Diego Working Paper, ss. 56-93.
  • LEVINSOHN, James; (1993), “Testing the imports -as- market- discipline hypothesis”, Journal of International Economics, 35, ss. 1-22.
  • MADDALA, G. S. ve Shaoven WU (1999), “A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Special Issue, ss. 631-52.
  • MIHÇI, Sevinç ve Arzu WIGLEY; (2003), “Avrupa Birliği İle Gümrük Birli- ği’nin Türk İmalat Sanayii Alt Sektörleri Üzerinde Kârlılık Etkileri”, Gazi Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F Dergisi, Cilt 5, Sayı 3, ss. 77-91.
  • MIHÇI, Sevinç ve Arzu WIGLEY; (2004), “Effects of Customs Union with European Union on the Market Structure and Pricing Behaviour of Turkish Manufacturing Industry”, European Study Group ETSG Conferances, Nottingham, ss. 1-19.
  • NEYAPTI, Bilin; Fatma TASKIN ve M. ÜNGÖR; (2003), "Has European Customs Union Agreement Really Affected Turkey's Trade?", Bilkent Economic Papers, ss. 1-14.
  • RESENDE, Marcelo ; (2006), “Profit Persistence in Brazil,: A Panel Data Study” Paulo Jan./Mar, ss. 1-12. (São Paulo) vol.36 no.1 São
  • ROBETRS, Mark ve James R. TYBOUT (eds.); (1996), Industrial Evolution in Developing Countries, New York: Oxford University Press, ss. 946- 948.
  • SEKİ, İsmail; (2005), "Gümrük Birliği’nin Türkiye'nin net ihracatı üzerine etki- leri", Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir, manuscript, ss. 1-24.
  • TAYLOR, Scott; (1994), “Once-off and continuing gains from trade”, Review of Economic Studies, 61, ss. 589-601.
  • TYBOUT, James; (2001), “Plant- and Firm-level Evidence on ‘New’ Trade Theories”, NBER Working Paper no. 8418, ss. 1-54.
  • VERGİL, Hasan ve Ertuğrul YILDIRIM; (2006),”AB-Türkiye Gümrük Birli- ği’nin Türkiye’nin Rekabet Ortamı Üzerine Etkisi, İktisat, İşletme ve Finans Dergisi, Haziran.
  • YALÇIN, Cihan; (2000), “Price-Cost Margins and Trade Liberalization in Turkish Manufacturing Industry: A Panel Data Analysis.” Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey, Research Department Working Paper, Ankara, ss. 1-23.
  • YALÇIN, Cihan ve Ali ÇULHA; (2005), “The Determinants of The Price Cost Margins of Manufacturing Firms in Turkey, Research and Monetary Policy Department Working Paper, No: 05/15, ss. 1-31.
  • WOOLDRIDGE, Jeffrey; (2002), Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, Cambridge: The MIT Pres. 752s. NOTLAR
  • Ulaşılabilen en geniş zaman aralığı olması sebebiyle bu dönem tercih edilmiştir.
  • Levinsohn (1993) ve Foroutan (1991); (1983-1986) ve (1976-1985) dönemini kapsa
  • yan çalışmalarında ithalatın disipline edici etkisi doğrulanırken; Yalçın (2000) de
  • (1983-1994) dönemi için disipline edici etki reddedilmiştir.
  • Ayrıntılı bilgi için bknz. Örnek, İ. ve M. Kaplan. (2004), “Dış Ticaret ve Kalkınma”,
  • içinde S. Taban ve M. Kar (editörler), Kalkınma Ekonomisi: Seçme Konular, Bursa: Ekin Kitabevi.
  • Literatürde sermaye değişkeni oluşturmada tercihe göre %5, %10 ve %15 yıpranma
  • payı düşülmektedir. Çalışmaların genelinde %5 yıpranma düşüldüğü için çalışmada
  • %5 yıpranmaya yer verilmiştir.
There are 44 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Prof. Dr. Mustafa Saatçi This is me

Arş. Gör. Alper Aslan This is me

Publication Date June 1, 2007
Published in Issue Year 2007 Issue: 29

Cite

APA Saatçi, P. D. M., & Aslan, A. G. A. (2007). Türkiye İmalat Sanayiinde İthalatın Piyasayı Disipline Etme Hipotezinin Testi: Panel Veri Yaklaşımı. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(29).

33329Erciyes University Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences 33312

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-CreationDerivatives 4.0 International license.   35160