Amaç: Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, Türkiye'nin sektörel ihracat potansiyelini Yapısal Çekim Modeli ile analiz etmektir. Bir değişkenin (GSYİH, reel döviz kuru, ticaret anlaşmaları gibi) Türkiye'nin sektörel ihracatı üzerindeki ortalama etkilerini bulmak amaçlanmıştır. Türkiye'nin hangi ülke ve sektörlerde potansiyelin altında veya üzerinde ihracat yaptığı araştırılmıştır.
Yöntem: Bu çalışmada, Türkiye'nin sektörel ihracat potansiyelini analiz etmek için çekim modeli kullanılmıştır.
Bulgular: Toplu sonuçlar, Türkiye'nin potansiyelinin altında ihracat yaptığını göstermektedir. 2010-2019 döneminde tarım sektörünün potansiyel açığı 21-36 milyar dolar arasındadır. Bu, Türkiye'nin tarım sektöründeki kullanılmayan potansiyel hacminin neredeyse iki katına tekabül etmektedir. Öte yandan, genel olarak sanayi sektörünün potansiyel açığı 5-31 milyar dolardır. Bahse konu değerler Türkiye’nin tarihsel süreç içerisinde potansiyel açığın kapatılması açısından sanayi sektöründe tarım sektörüne göre belli başarılar elde edilsede son dönemler itibarı ile iki sektörde de potansiyelin altında ihracat gerçekleştirdiği ve potansiyel düzeye yaklaşılabilecek politikalara ihtiyaç duyulduğu şeklinde yorumlanabilir.
Özgünlük: Türkiye'nin sektörel ihracat potansiyeli Yapısal Çekim Modeli ile analiz edilmiş olup, ilk olarak Çekim Modeli 179 ülke ve 2010-2019 dönemi için inşa edilmiştir. Ardından sektörel düzeyde ülke çifti için ihracat potansiyelleri tahmin edilmiştir. İkinci olarak, bir değişkenin (GSYİH, reel döviz kuru, ticaret anlaşmaları gibi) Türkiye'nin sektörel ihracatı üzerindeki ortalama etkileri incelenmiştir. Sektörel ayrım yapılması ve ülke sayısının geniş tutulması açısından çalışma özgün bir niteliğe sahiptir.
Abbas, S. and Waheed, A. (2019). Pakistan’s Global Trade Potential: A Gravity Model Approach, Global Business Review, 20 (6), 1361-1371, doi: 10.1177/0972150919848936
Antoine, G. (2019). Indirect measures of trade costs: Limitations and caveats, Economics Letters, 176(C), 96-102, doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2018.12.027
Anderson, J. (1979). A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Model, American Economic Review, 69(1), 106-116, Retrieved From: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1802501
Anderson, J., Larch M. and Yotov Y. (2015). Estimating General Equilibrium Trade Policy Effects: GE PPML, CESI Working Paper, No. 5592, Retrieved From: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp5592.pdf
Anderson, J. E. and van Wincoop, E. (2003). Gravity with gravitas: a solution to the border puzzle, American Economic Review, 93 (1), 170–92, doi: 10.1257/000282803321455214
Anderson, J. E. and van Wincoop, E. (2004). Trade costs, Journal of Economic Literature, 42 (3), 691–751, doi: 10.1257/0022051042177649
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2004). Economic determinants of free trade agreements, Journal of International Economics, 64(1), 29–63, doi:10.1016/S0022-1996(03)00079-5
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2006). Estimating the effects of free trade agreements on trade flows using matching econometrics, Journal of International Economics (2009) 77(1), 63–76, doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2008.09.006
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2007). Do free trade agreements actually increase members international trade?, Journal of International Economics, 71(1), 72–95, doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2006.02.005
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2009). Bonus vetus OLS: a simple method for approximating international trade-cost effects using the gravity equation, Journal of International Economics 77(1), 77–85, doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2008.10.004
Baldwin, R. and Taglioni, D., (2006). Gravity for dummies and dummies for gravity equations, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 12516, Retrieved From: https://www.nber.org/papers/w12516
Bayar, G. (2015). Determinants of Turkish Exports to European Union Countries: A Sectoral Panel data Analysis, Emerging markets Finance and Trade, 51(6), 1-19, doi:10.1080/1540496X.2015.1011506
Bayar, G., Ünal, M. and Tokpunar, S. (2015). Determinants of Turkish Exports to European Union Countries: A Sectoral Panel Data Analysis, Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, doi:51. 1-19, doi:10.1080/1540496X.2015.1011506
Shepherd, B. (2016). The Gravity Model of International Trade: A User Guide, ARTNeT, Retrieved From: https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/knowledge-products/GravityUserGuide-REVISED-02.pdf
Dahi, O. and Demir F. (2013). Prefential trade aggrements and manufactured goods exports: does it matter whom you PTA with?, Applied Economics, 45(34), 4754-4772, doi:10.1080/00036846.2013.804169
Fally, T. (2015). Structural Gravity and Fixed Effects, Journal of International Economics, 97(1), 76-85, doi: 10.3386/w21212
Odularu, G. (2020). Fostering Trade in Africa, Springer, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-36632-2_1
Morland,C., Schier, F. and Weimar H. (2020). The Structural Gravity Model and Its Implications on Global Forest Product Trade, 11(2), 178, doi:10.3390/f11020178
Mulabdic, A. and Yasar, P. (2021). Gravity Model–Based Export Potential An Application to Turkey, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, doi:10.1596/1813-9450-9557
Papazoglou, C. (2007). Greece’s Potential Trade Flows: A Gravity Model Approach, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, 13(4), 403-414, doi:10.1007/s11294-007-9107-x
World Trade Organisation. (2012). A Practical Guide to Trade Policy Analysis, Retrieved From: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/wto_unctad12_e.pdf
World Trade Organisation. (2016). An Advanced Guide to Trade Policy Analysis, Retrieved From: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/advancedwtounctad2016_e.pdf
AN ANALYSIS OF SECTORAL EXPORT POTENTIAL OF TURKEY BY USING STRUCTURAL GRAVITY MODEL
Year 2022,
Volume: 21 Issue: 45, 1096 - 1112, 30.12.2022
Purpose: The main purpose of this study is to analyze the sectoral export potential of Turkey with the Structural Gravity Model. It is aimed to find the average effects of a variable (such as GDP, real exchange rate, trade agreements) on Turkey's sectoral exports. It has been researched in which countries and sectors that Turkey exports below or above the potential.
Method: The gravity model was used in this study to analyze Turkey's sectoral export potential.
Findings: The aggregated results show that Turkey exports below its potential. The potential deficit of the agricultural sector in the 2010-2019 period is between 21-36 billion dollars. This corresponds to almost twice the volume of unused potential in Turkey's agricultural sector. On the other hand, the potential gap of the industrial sector in general is 5-31 billion dollars. The aforementioned values can be interpreted as the fact that Turkey has achieved some success in the industrial sector compared to the agricultural sector in terms of closing the potential gap in the historical process, but as of recent periods, both sectors have exported below the potential and policies that can approach the potential level are needed.
Originality: Turkey's sectoral export potential was analyzed with the Structural Gravity Model, and the Gravity Model was first built for 179 countries and the period 2010-2019. Then, export potentials were estimated for the country pair at the sectoral level. Second, the average effects of a variable (such as GDP, real exchange rate, trade agreements) on Turkey's sectoral exports are examined. The study has a unique quality in terms of making a sectoral distinction and keeping the number of countries wide.
Abbas, S. and Waheed, A. (2019). Pakistan’s Global Trade Potential: A Gravity Model Approach, Global Business Review, 20 (6), 1361-1371, doi: 10.1177/0972150919848936
Antoine, G. (2019). Indirect measures of trade costs: Limitations and caveats, Economics Letters, 176(C), 96-102, doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2018.12.027
Anderson, J. (1979). A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Model, American Economic Review, 69(1), 106-116, Retrieved From: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1802501
Anderson, J., Larch M. and Yotov Y. (2015). Estimating General Equilibrium Trade Policy Effects: GE PPML, CESI Working Paper, No. 5592, Retrieved From: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp5592.pdf
Anderson, J. E. and van Wincoop, E. (2003). Gravity with gravitas: a solution to the border puzzle, American Economic Review, 93 (1), 170–92, doi: 10.1257/000282803321455214
Anderson, J. E. and van Wincoop, E. (2004). Trade costs, Journal of Economic Literature, 42 (3), 691–751, doi: 10.1257/0022051042177649
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2004). Economic determinants of free trade agreements, Journal of International Economics, 64(1), 29–63, doi:10.1016/S0022-1996(03)00079-5
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2006). Estimating the effects of free trade agreements on trade flows using matching econometrics, Journal of International Economics (2009) 77(1), 63–76, doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2008.09.006
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2007). Do free trade agreements actually increase members international trade?, Journal of International Economics, 71(1), 72–95, doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2006.02.005
Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2009). Bonus vetus OLS: a simple method for approximating international trade-cost effects using the gravity equation, Journal of International Economics 77(1), 77–85, doi:10.1016/j.jinteco.2008.10.004
Baldwin, R. and Taglioni, D., (2006). Gravity for dummies and dummies for gravity equations, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 12516, Retrieved From: https://www.nber.org/papers/w12516
Bayar, G. (2015). Determinants of Turkish Exports to European Union Countries: A Sectoral Panel data Analysis, Emerging markets Finance and Trade, 51(6), 1-19, doi:10.1080/1540496X.2015.1011506
Bayar, G., Ünal, M. and Tokpunar, S. (2015). Determinants of Turkish Exports to European Union Countries: A Sectoral Panel Data Analysis, Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, doi:51. 1-19, doi:10.1080/1540496X.2015.1011506
Shepherd, B. (2016). The Gravity Model of International Trade: A User Guide, ARTNeT, Retrieved From: https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/knowledge-products/GravityUserGuide-REVISED-02.pdf
Dahi, O. and Demir F. (2013). Prefential trade aggrements and manufactured goods exports: does it matter whom you PTA with?, Applied Economics, 45(34), 4754-4772, doi:10.1080/00036846.2013.804169
Fally, T. (2015). Structural Gravity and Fixed Effects, Journal of International Economics, 97(1), 76-85, doi: 10.3386/w21212
Odularu, G. (2020). Fostering Trade in Africa, Springer, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-36632-2_1
Morland,C., Schier, F. and Weimar H. (2020). The Structural Gravity Model and Its Implications on Global Forest Product Trade, 11(2), 178, doi:10.3390/f11020178
Mulabdic, A. and Yasar, P. (2021). Gravity Model–Based Export Potential An Application to Turkey, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, doi:10.1596/1813-9450-9557
Papazoglou, C. (2007). Greece’s Potential Trade Flows: A Gravity Model Approach, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, 13(4), 403-414, doi:10.1007/s11294-007-9107-x
World Trade Organisation. (2012). A Practical Guide to Trade Policy Analysis, Retrieved From: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/wto_unctad12_e.pdf
World Trade Organisation. (2016). An Advanced Guide to Trade Policy Analysis, Retrieved From: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/advancedwtounctad2016_e.pdf
Süleyman, S. (2022). AN ANALYSIS OF SECTORAL EXPORT POTENTIAL OF TURKEY BY USING STRUCTURAL GRAVITY MODEL. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 21(45), 1096-1112. https://doi.org/10.46928/iticusbe.1094434