Organization of Turkic States: Where to Initiate the Integration Process and What to Do?

Year 2022, , 73 - 107, 31.08.2022

Bilgehan Emeklier , Taner Taş , Kubilay Çağrı Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.17752/guvenlikstrtj.1112874

Cited By: 3

Abstract

This article aims to bring the argument that the integration process of the Organization of Turkic States should progress with the strategy of priority sector for cooperation and institutionalization up for discussion in the context of neo-functionalism. Considering that sector-priority cooperation steps will pave the way for institutionalization and integration, the problem of the study is which sectors can be primarily a catalyst and how much. In this context, the potential contributions of the integration process to be followed with a focus on agriculture, defence and energy as today’s strategic sectors is tried to be revealed within the scope of cointegration econometric analysis by assessing with panel data method the relationship between the annual data of the member and observer countries covering the period of 1995-2019 in the relevant sectors and the growth data. As a result of this econometric modelling, it has been seen that the cooperation and integration steps to be followed in the field of agricultural incomes, defence expenditures and energy respectively in terms of the magnitude of the effects will contribute to both the development levels of the countries and the institutionalization and deepening of the Organization of Turkish States.

Keywords

Organization of Turkic States, Neo-functional Integration, Agriculture, Defence, Energy

Türk Devletleri Teşkilatı: Bütünleşme Sürecine Nereden Başlamalı ve Ne Yapmalı?

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, neofonksiyonalizm bağlamında Türk Devletleri Teşkilatı’nın bütünleşme süreci için öncelikli sektör stratejisiyle ilerlemesi gerektiği argümanını tartışmaya açmaktır. Sektör öncelikli iş birliği adımlarının bütünleşme ve kurumsallaşmanın yolunu açacağı düşüncesinden hareketle çalışmanın problematiği hangi sektörlerin öncelikli olarak ne denli katalizör olabileceğidir. Bu kapsamda, günümüzün stratejik sektörleri tarım, savunma ve enerji odaklı izlenecek bütünleşme sürecinin potansiyel katkıları, üye ve gözlemci ülkelerin ilgili sektörlerdeki 1995-2019 dönemlerini kapsayan yıllık verileri ile büyüme verileri arasındaki ilişki panel veri yöntemiyle araştırılıp, eşbütünleşme ekonometrik analizi çerçevesinde ortaya konmaya çalışılmıştır. Uygulanan ekonometrik modelleme sonucu, etkilerin büyüklüğü açısından sırasıyla tarımsal gelirler, savunma harcamaları ve enerji alanında izlenecek iş birliği ve bütünleşme adımlarının hem ülkelerin kalkınma seviyelerine hem de Türk Devletleri Teşkilatı’nın kurumsallaşması ve derinleşmesine katkı sağlayacağı görülmüştür.

Keywords

Türk Devletleri Teşkilatı, Neofonksiyonalist Bütünleşme, Tarım, Savunma, Enerji

References

• BATTISTELLA Dario, Theories des Relations Internationales, Presses de Sciences Po, Paris, 2003.
• BOMBERG Elizabeth, STUBB Alexander, The European Union: How Does It Work?, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003.
• DEDEOĞLU Beril, Uluslararası Güvenlik ve Strateji, Derin Yayınları, İstanbul, 2003.
• DOWNING Thomas E., (ed.), Climate Change and World Food Security, Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Research Workshop “Climate Change and World Food Security”, Oxford, U.K., July 11-15, 1993, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 1996.
• HAAS Ernst B., MITRANY David vd., Limits and Problems of European Integration, Springer-Science+Business Media, Netherlands, 1963.
• MITRANY David, A Working Peace System, London; Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1943.
• ÖZER Ayşe İ. A., The Rise of Turkish Defemse Industry, SETA Publications, Ankara, 2019.
• PALABIYIK M. Serdar, YILDIZ Ali, Avrupa Birliği, ODTÜ Yayıncılık, Ankara, Tarihsiz.
• AÇIKMEŞE, Sinem Akgül “Uluslararası İlişkiler Işığında Avrupa Bütünleşmesi”, Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 2004, Sayı 1(1), 1-32.
• ARIBOĞAN D. Ülke, BİLGİN Mert, “New Energy Order Politics Neopolitics: From Geopolitics to Energeopolitics”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, 2009 Kış, Sayı 5(20), 109-132.
• BREUSCH Trevor S., PAGAN Adrian R., “The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics”, Review of Economic Studies, 1980, Sayı 47(1), 239-253.
• DUMITRESCU Elona Ivona, HURLIN Christophe, “Testing for Granger Non-Causality in Heterogeneous Panels”, Economic Modelling, 2012, Sayı 29(4), 1450-1460.
• EBERHARD Markus, BOND Steven, “Cross-Section Dependence in Nonstationary Panels: A Novel Estimator”. MPRA Paper, 2009, Sayı 17870, 1-26.
• HOOGHE Liesbet, MARKS Gary, “Grand theories of European integration in the twenty-first century”, Journal of European Public Policy, 2019, Sayı 26(8), 1113-1133.
• IM Kyung So, PESARAN M. Hashem, SHIN Yongcheol, “Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 2003, Sayı 115(1), 53-74.
• KAO Chihwa, “Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data”, Journal of Econometrics, 1999, Sayı 90(1), 1-44.
• LEVIN Andrew, LIN Chien-Fu, CHU Chia-Shang James, “Unit Roots Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite Sample Properties”, Journal of Econometrics, 2002, Sayı 108, 1-24.
• LINDBERG N. Leon, “Decision Making and Integration in the European Community”, International Organization, 1965, Sayı 19(1), 56-80.
• LINDBERG N. Leon, “Political Integration as a Multidimensional Phenomenon Requiring Multivariate Measurement”, International Organization, 1970, Sayı 24(4), 649-731.
• LINDBERG N. Leon, “Political Integration, Definition and Hypotheses”, Brent F. Nelsen, Alexander C-G. Strubb, (ed.), The European Union: Readings on the Theory and Practice of European Integration, Lynne Rienner Publishers, Colorado, 1994, 99-111.
• MAXWELL Simon, “Food security: a post-modern perspective”, Food Policy, 1996, Sayı 21(2), 155-170.
• PEDRONI Peter, “Critical Values For Cointegration Tests In Heterogeneous Panels With Multiple Regressors”, Oxford Bulletin of Economic and Statistics, Special Issue 1999, Sayı 61(1), 305-319.
• PEDRONI Peter, “Fully-Modified OLS for Heterogeneous Cointegrated Panels”, Advances in Econometrics, 2000, Sayı 15, 93-130.
• PESARAN H. M., “A simple panel unit root rest in the presence of cross-section dependence”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 2007, Sayı 22, 265-312.
• PESARAN H. M., General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0435, 2004.
• PESARAN H. M., ULLAH Aman, YAMAGATA Takashi, “A Bias-Adjusted LM test of Error Crosssection Independence”, The Econometrics Journal, 2008, Sayı 11(1), 105-127.
• PESARAN H. M., YAMAGATA T., “Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels”, Journal of Econometrics, 2008, Sayı 142, 50-93.
• SEZGİN Selami, “Savunma Ekonomisi”, Ferhat Pirinççi ve Murat Yeşiltaş, (ed.), Savunma Politikalarına Giriş, SETA Kitapları 73, İstanbul, 2021, 72-99.
• VİLPİŠAUSKAS Ramūnas, “Eurozone Crisis and European Integration: Functional Spillover, Political Spillback?”, Journal of European Integration, 2013, Sayı 35(3), 361-373.
• WESTERLUND Joakim, “A Panel CUSUM Test of the Null of Cointegration”. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 2005, Sayı 67(2), 231-262.
• WESTERLUND Joakim, EDGERTON David L., “A panel bootstrap cointegration test”, Economics Letters, 2007, Sayı 97(3), 185-190.
• BAYAR Zeynep, “Savaş enerjide taşları yerinden oynatacak”, 04.03.2022, https://www.bloomberght.com/savas-enerjide-taslari-yerinden-oynatacak-2300661
• CHO Sungjoon, Toward an Identity Theory of International Organizations, 101 Am. Soc'y of Int'l L. Proc. 157 (2007), 1-22, https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1183&context=fac_schol
• ELVER Hilal, “Ukrayna Savaşı milyonlarca insanı nasıl açlığa sürekliyor?”, 13 Nisan 2022, https://fikirturu.com/jeo-strateji/ukrayna-savasi-milyonlarca-insani-nasil-acliga-surukluyor/
• KANAPIYANOVA Zhuldyz, “Türkmen Gazını Avrupa Pazarına Ulaştırmak: Trans-Hazar Doğalgaz Boru Hattı”, Akhmet Yassawi University Eurasian Research Institute weekly e-bulletin (04.10.2021-10.10.2021), No. 323, https://www.eurasian-research.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Haftalik-e-bulten-04.10.2021-10.10.2021-No-323.pdf
• SHEAHAN Maria, MARSH Sarah, “Germany to increase defence spending in response to 'Putin's war' – Scholz”, Reuters, 27.02.2022, https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/germany-hike-defense-spending-scholz-says-further-policy-shift-2022-02-27/
• SILVA Diego Lopes Da, TIAN Nan, vd., Trends in World Military Expenditure 2021, SIPRI Fact Sheet April 2022, https://www.sipri.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/fs_2204_milex_2021_0.pdf
• TAPIA Felipe Sánchez, “The Turkish defence industry. First-class strategic asset”, IEEE Analysis Paper 06/2021, 1-24, https://www.ieee.es/Galerias/fichero/docs_analisis/2021/DIEEEA06_2021_FELSAN_IndustriaTurca_ENG.pdf
• “Information Note: The importance of Ukraine and the Russian Federation for global agricultural markets and the risks associated with the current conflict”, Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations, Rome, 2022, https://www.fao.org/3/cb9013en/cb9013en.pdf, 1-41.
• “Live blog: Russia’s Gazprom halts gas deliveries to Poland, Bulgaria”, 26.04.2022 https://www.trtworld.com/europe/live-blog-russia-s-gazprom-halts-gas-deliveries-to-poland-bulgaria-56653
• “The State of Food and Agriculture 2021: Making agrifood systems more resilient to shocks and stresses” Rome, FAO, 2021, 1-182, https://www.fao.org/3/cb4476en/cb4476en.pdf
• Climate change and food security: risks and responses, FAO, 2015, https://www.fao.org/3/i5188e/I5188E.pdf
• The Future of Food and Agriculture: Trends and Challenges, FAO, Rome, 2017, https://www.fao.org/3/i6583e/i6583e.pdf
• https://enerji.gov.tr/bilgi-merkezi-transit-boru-hatlari; https://enerji.gov.tr/bilgi-merkezi-dogal-gaz-boru-hatlari
• https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2021-full-report.pdf