AÇIKLANMIŞ KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ÜSTÜNLÜKLER İNDEKSİ ÇERÇEVESİNDE AB ADAY ÜLKELERİ ENERJİ SEKTÖRÜ REKABET GÜCÜ ANALİZİ (2006-2016)

Yıl 2018, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1, 362 - 376, 31.08.2018

Nurdan Kuşat

https://doi.org/10.21733/ibad.415206

Cited By: 1

Öz

Küresel
yapının ivmelediği hızlı ekonomik büyüme, nüfus artışı ve şehirleşme; hem
ulusal hem uluslararası arenanın en önemli gündem konusudur. Bu çalışma
gelişmiş ekonomileri temsil eden AB 28 ülkelerinin dünya ticaretindeki enerji
sektörü rekabet gücü analizinin yanı sıra, AB aday ülkelerinin de bu sektördeki
rekabet güçlerini test etmektedir. Çalışma da Balassa’nın Açıklanmış
Karşılaştırmalı Üstünlükler (Revealed Comparative Advantages – RCA) indeksi
kullanılmak suretiyle AB 28 ülkeleri ve AB aday ülkelerinin enerji sektörü rekabet
gücü ölçümlemesi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Hesaplamalarda SITC Rev 3 çerçevesinde
3. basamakta yer alan verilerden yararlanılmıştır.

Elde
edilen bulgular incelenen ülkelerden sadece Karadağ ve Arnavutluk’un enerji
sektöründeki rekabet avantajını göstermektedir (2016 yılı için). Bu genel
değerlendirmeye karşılık Karadağ’ın 3.32 “Taş, Kok ve Briket Kömürü”
ticaretinde çok yüksek bir rekabet avantajı ortaya koyduğu, Arnavutluk’un 3.33
“Petrol ve Petrolden Elde Edilen Ürünler” de çok yüksek olmasa da belirgin bir
rekabet üstünlüğü sergilediği gözlenmektedir. Türkiye’nin ise 3.35 “Elektrik
Enerjisi” alt basamağında sahip olduğu rekabet avantajını yıllar itibariyle
kaybederek, üstünlüğü Karadağ, Bosna-Hersek, Sırbistan ve Arnavutluk’a
kaptırdığı dikkat çekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Rekabet Gücü, Açıklanmış Karşılaştırmalı Üstünlükler, Enerji Sektörü, AB, AB Aday Ülkeleri

EU CANDIDATE COUNTRIES’ ENERGY SECTOR COMPETITIVENES ANALYSIS IN THE FRAMEWORK OF REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE INDEX (2006-2016)

Öz

Rapid
economic growth, population art and urbanization accelerated by global
structure; they are the most important agendas of both national and
international arena. In addition to analyzing the competitiveness of the energy
sector in the world trade of the EU 28 countries which represent developed
economies, EU candidate countries’ competitiveness in this sector are also
tested. In the study, energy sector competitiveness measurement of EU 28
countries and EU candidate countries was carried out using Balassa's Revealed
Comparative Advantages (RCA) index. In the calculations, in the third step of
the SITC Rev 3 framework are used.

Result
of this study shows that only Montenegro and Albania have a global competitive
advantage in energy sector (for the year 2016). In response to this general
assessment, Montenegro's 3.32 "Coal, Coke And Briquettes" trade showed a very high
competitive advantage, and also it is observed that Albania's 3.33 "Petroleum, Petroleum Products And Related
Materials" show a significant competitive advantage, though not
very high. Turkey has lost its competitive advantage under the 3:35 "Electric Current" stage year
to year against  Montenegro, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Serbia and Albania.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Competitivenes, Revealed Comparative Advantages, Energy Sector, EU, EU Candidate Countries

Kaynakça

• ALTAY, N. O., GACANER, A. (2003). TURKEY’S DYNAMICS OF COMPETITION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF COMPETITIVENESS OF THE TEXTILE AND CLOTHING INDUSTRY. Paper Presented at the VII.ERC/METU International Economy Congress, Ankara.
• AMIGHINI, A., LEONE, M., RABELLOTTI, R. (2011). PERSISTENCE VERSUS CHANGE IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPECIALIZATION PATTERN OF ITALY: HOW MUCH DOES THE ‘DISTRICT EFFECT’ MATTER?. Regional Studies. 45(3): 381–401.
• BALASSA, B. (1965). TRADE LIBERALISATION AND ‘REVEALED’ COMPERATIVE ADVANTAGE. The Manchaster School of Economic and Social Studies. 33 (2):99-123.
• BILAS, V., BOŠNJAK, M. (2015). REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND MERCHANDISE EXPORTS: THE CASE OF MERCHANDISE TRADE BETWEEN CROATIA AND THE REST OF THE EUROPEAN UNION MEMBER COUNTRIES. Ekon. Misao Praksa Dbk. God. XXIV, Br. 1:29-47.
• CUADROS, A., ORTS, V., ALGUACIL, M. T. (2004). OPENNESSAND GROWTH: RE-EXAMINING FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT, TRADE AND OUTPUT LINKAGES IN LATIN AMERICA. J. Dev. Stud. 40: 167-192.
• COXHEAD, I. (2007). A NEW RESOURCE CURSE? IMPACTS OF CHINA’S BOOM ON COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND RESOURCE DEPENDENCE IN SOUTHEAST ASIA. World Development. 35(7):1099-1119.
• ÇOBAN, S., TOPÇU, M. (2013). THE NEXUS BETWEEN FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN THE EU: A PANEL DATA ANALYSIS. Energy Economics. 39: 81-88.
• ÇOBAN, O., KÖK, R. (2005). TÜRKİYE TEKSTİL ENDÜSTRİSİ VE REKABET GÜCÜ: AB ÜLKELERİYLE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI BİR ANALİZ ÖRNEĞİ (1989–2001). İktisat, İşletme ve Finans Dergisi. 20(228): 68-81.
• DE BENEDİCTİS, L., TAMBERİ, M. (2002). A NOTE ON THE BALASSA INDEX OF REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE. Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali, Working Papers 158.
• ERLAT, G., ERLAT, H. (2004). TÜRKİYE'NİN ORTA DOĞU ÜLKELERİ İLE OLAN TİCARETİ, 1990-2002. (Edt) Ercan Uygur ve İrfan Civcir. GAP Bölgesinde Dış Ticaret ve Tarım. TEK Yayını.
• FERTO, I., HUBBARD, L. (2002). REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND COMPETITIVENESS IN HUNGARIAN AGRI-FOOD SECTORS TECHNOLOGY FORESIGHT IN HUNGARY.. Institute of Economics Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Discussion Papers. 2002/8.
• GILES, J. A., WILLIAMS, C. L. (2000). EXPORT-LED GROWTH: A SURVEY OF THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE AND SOME NON-CAUSAILITY RESULTS. J. Int. Trade Econ. Dev. 9: 261-337.
• HATIRLI, S. A., DEMİRCAN, V., ÖZKAN, B. (2003). TEKSTİL VE KONFEKSİYON İHRACATINDA TÜRKİYE’NİN REKABET DURUMU. Türkiye VI. Pamuk, Tekstil ve Konfeksiyon Sempozyumu Bildirileri. Tarımsal Ekonomi Araştırma Enstitüsü. Yayın No:106:115-122.
• HOTUNLUOĞLU, H., KARAKAYA, E. (2011). FORECASTING TURKEY’S ENERGY DEMAND USING ARTIFICAL NEURAL NETWORKS: THREE SCENARIO APPLICATİONS. Ege Akademik Bakış. Cilt 11, Özel Sayı, 87-94.
• JAYAWICKRAMA, A., THANGAVELU, S. M. (2010). TRADE LINKAGES BETWEEN CHINA, INDIA AND SINGAPORE: CHANGING COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE OF INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS. Journal of Economic Studies. 37(3):248-266.
• KAITILA, V., WIGREN, M. (1999). REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE IN TRADE BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE BALTIC COUNTRIES. The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy Discussion Papers, No. 697.
• KARA, O., ERKAN, B. (2011). TÜRKİYE’NİN EMEK YOĞUN MAL İHRACATINDAKİ KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ÜSTÜNLÜKLERİN MAKROEKONOMİK BÜYÜKLÜKLERLE İLİŞKİSİ”. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Bahar 2011, 7,7(1):67-93.
• MAHAJAN, V., NAURIYALAND, D.K., SINGH, S.P. (2015). TRADE PERFORMANCE AND REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE OF INDIAN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY IN NEW IPR REGIME. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Marketing. 9(1):56-73.
• NARAYAN, P. K., SMYTH, R. (2009). MULTIVARIATE GRANGER CAUSALITY BETWEEN ELECTRYCITY CONSUMPTION, EXPORTS AND GDP: EVIDENCE FROM A PANEL OF MIDDLE EASTERN COUNTRIES. Energy Policy. 37, 229-236.
• ÖZTÜRK, İ. (2010). A LITERATURE SURVEY ON ENERGY-GROWTH NEXUS. Energy Policy. 38, 340-349.
• RİAZ, K., JANSEN, H. G. P. (2012). SPATIAL PATTERNS OF REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE OF PAKISTAN'S AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS. Pakistan Economic and Social Review, 50(2) (Winter 2012), 97.
• SADORSKY, P. (2010). THE IMPACT OF FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN EMERGING ECONOMIES. Energy Policy, 38: 2528-2535.
• SADORSKY, P. (2011a). FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEAN FRONTIER ECONOMIES. Energy Policy. 39: 999-1066.
• SADORSKY, P. (2011b). TRADE AND ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN MIDDLE EAST. Energy Econ. 33: 739-749.
• SERİN, V., CİVAN, A. (2008). REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND COMPETITIVENESS: A CASE STUDY FOR TURKEY TOWARDS THE EU. Journal of Economic and Social Research. 10(2): 25-41.
• SEYOUM, B. (2007). REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND COMPETITIVENESS IN SERVICES: A STUDY WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON DEVELOPING COUNTRIES. Journal of Economic Studies. 34(5): 376 – 388.
• SHAHBAZ, M., KHAN, S., TAHİR, M. I. (2013a). THE DYNAMIC LINKS BETWEEN ENERGY CONSUMPTION, ECONOMIC GROWTH, FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRADE IN CHINA: FRESH EVIDENCE FROM MULTIVARIATE FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS. Energy Economics. 40: 8-21.
• SHAHBAZ, M,. LEAN, H. H., FAROOQ, A. (2013b). NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN PAKISTAN. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 18: 87-94.
• SILVAST, A. (2017). ENERGY, ECONOMICS AND PERFORMATIVITY: REVIEWING THEORETICAL ADVANCES IN SOCIAL STUDIES OF MARKETS AND ENERGY. Energy Research ve Social Science. 34: 4-12.
• SORRELL, S. (2009). JEVONS’ PARADOX REVISITED: THE EVIDENCE FOR BACKFIRE FROM IMPROVED ENERGY EFFICIENCY. Energy Policy. 37: 1456-1469.
• UTKULU, U., SEYMEN, D. (2004). REVEALED COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE AND COMPETITIVENESS: EVIDENCE FOR TURKEY VISÀ-VIS THE EU/15. Paper presented on the European Trade Study Group 6th Annual Conference ETSG, Nottingham.
• YILDIRIM, E., ŞÜKRÜOĞLU, D., ASLAN, A. (2014). ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE NEXT 11 COUNTRIES: THE BOOTSTRAPPED AUTOREGRESSIVE METRIC CAUSALITY APPROACH Energy Economics. 44: 14-21.
• YÜCEL, Y. (2010). ULUSLARARASI TİCARETİN SERBESTLEŞTİRİLMESİ SÜRECİNDE TÜRK TEKSTİL VE HAZIR GİYİM SEKTÖRÜNÜN REKABET GÜCÜ VE ÇİN TEHDİDİ. Marmara Üniversitesi İ.İ.B.F. Dergisi. 29(2):227-250.
• İnternet Kaynakları
• https://comtrade.un.org/data. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• https://www.wto.org. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• http://www.ikv.org.tr/ikv.asp?id=282. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• http://www.ab.gov.tr/index.php?p=45465&l=1. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• http://www.ab.gov.tr/index.php?p=49043&l=1. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• http://www.ab.gov.tr/index.php?p=49992&l=1. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• http://www.ab.gov.tr/index.php?p=45469&l=1. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• http://www.ab.gov.tr/index.php?p=267&l=1. Erişim: 05.02.2018.
• http://www.mfa.gov.tr/no_-230_-20-eylul-2016_-bosna-hersek_in-ab-adaylik-basvurusunun-kabuledilmesi-hk_.tr.mfa. Erişim: 05.02.2018.