The Pattern of Intra Industry Trade and Competitiveness of Agricultural Product Trade Between Indonesia and Türkiye

Year 2025, Volume: 22 Issue: 2, 386 - 395, 26.05.2025

Dahlia Nauly , Amzul Rifin , Lola Rahmadona Nur Khoirotun Novila

https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.1453895

Abstract

International trade cooperation is one of the main issues faced by several countries in response to the global economic uncertainty. Indonesia is one of the countries that is active in trade cooperation both on a bilateral and regional. One of Indonesia’s bilateral collaborations was the trade agreement with Türkiye in the Indonesia- Türkiye Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (IT CEPA). The IT CEPA aims to improve economic relations between Indonesia and Türkiye by increasing trade. This research aims to analyze the pattern of intra-industry trade between Indonesia and Turkiye and the competitiveness of agricultural product trade. The agricultural sector has a high proportion of international trade between Türkiye and Indonesia; therefore, this study focuses on agricultural products. The method utilized is Intra-industry trade (IIT) analysis and Constant Market Share (CMS) analysis. Data on the export and import trade flows of Indonesian and Turkish commodities were obtained from the International Trade Center (ITC) database. The results showed that after the signing of the IT CEPA (2018-2022 period), exports of agricultural products increased by 45.6 percent. Indonesia has the opportunity to increase its exports to Türkiye for commodities that are declining in competitiveness. The intra-industry trade analysis showed that out of 20 two-digit HS code, only one two-digit code has strong intra-industry trade, which is HS 03 fish and crustaceans. This implied that in this HS code, both countries trade relatively in similar value. Meanwhile in other two-digit HS code, is mostly a one-way trade. The Constant Market Share (CMS) analysis revealed that the competitivenes of Indonesia’s agricultural product export to Türkiye increase after the implementation of IT CEPA showing that Indonesia benefits with the implementation of this trade agreement. In the future, both countries must optimalize the IT CEPA in increasing trade between two countries especially products in HS code currently only exist oneway trade.

Keywords

Agriculture, Constant market share analysis, Intra-industry, IT-CEPA, Trade

Ethical Statement

This study was prepared under the permission numbered 80/R-UMJ/VII/2023 dated 10/07/23, from the Ethics Committee of Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta.

Supporting Institution

This research was supported by the Faculty of Agriculture and The Institute of Research and Community Empowerment Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta, Indonesia.

References

• Adzimatur, F. (2016). Competitiveness analysis and factors affecting trade of main commodities between Indonesia and Türkiye (Thesis). Institut Pertanian Bogor, Indonesia. (In Indonesian)
• Azabagaoglu, M. O., Abdikoglu, D. I. and Unakitan, G. (2016). Consumer’s fish behavior in Tekirdag. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 13(4): 145-151.
• Darmawan, A., Husaini, M., Rakhmadi, R. and Atiqasani, G. (2022). Investigating the impact of Indonesia-Türkiye CEPA and factors influencing Indonesian export performance. Jurnal Ekonomi Pembangunan, 20(1): 77–88.
• Dityo, L. (2020). Indonesia Turki comprehensive economic partnership agreement (CEPA). Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: ALETHEA, 3(2): 155–172. (In Indonesian)
• Ertemli, G. and Demirbas, N. (2015). Competitiveness of the Turkish dried fruit sector. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 12(3): 40-46.
• Eyüboğlu, S. and Akmermer, B. (2023). The relationship between economic growth and fisheries production in Turkey. Aquaculture Studies, 24(2). http://doi.org/10.4194/AQUAST1017
• Greenaway, D., Hine, R. and Milner, C. (1994). Country-specific factors and the pattern of horizontal and vertical intra industry trade in the UK. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 130: 1–100.
• Grubel, H.G. and Lloyd, P. J. (1971). Empirical measurement of intra-industrial trade. Economic Registration, 47(4): 494-517.
• Kale, S. (2020). Trend analysis and future forecasting of marine capture fisheries production of Turkey. Research in Marine Sciences, 5(4): 773–794.
• Kamal, M. A, Qayyum, U., Khan, S. and Adeleye, B. N. (2021). Who is trading well with China? A gravity and constant market share analysis of exports of Pakistan and ASEAN in the Chinese Market. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 57(6): 1089-1108.
• Karataş, E. and Karatas, A. (2017). The importance of fishery production as an income source in Turkey. Survey in Fisheries Sciences, 4(1): 38–53.
• Kasim, K. (2023). Türkiye-Indonesia relations in the framework of Türkiye’s Southeast Asia policy. Journal of Administrative Sciences, 21(49): 608–626.
• Kilavuz, E., Erkekoğlu, H. and Topcu, B. A. (2013). Globalizing production structure and intra-industry trade: The case of Turkey. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 3(4): 799–812.
• Koc, A., Aksoy, S. and Dolekoglu, T. (2005). The oilseed market I Turkey: Measuring the impact of plocies on consumption and trade pattern. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 17(2): 39–63.
• Lutfi, A. (2021). Economic diplomacy between Indonesia and Turkey: Strategy of penetration of Indonesian palm oil exports to the Turkish market. (MSc Thesis) Istanbul Sabahattin Zaim University, Türkiye. (In Turkish).
• Nainggolan, S. (2020). Analysis of competitiveness and factors affecting Indonesia's selected commodity exports to developing eight countries. (MSc Thesis). Institut Pertanian Bogor, Indonesia. (In Indonesian)
• Oktaviani, R., Widyastutuk and Novianti, T. (2008). Trade integration and dynamic of Indonesia’s export to Middle East (Case Study: Turkey, Tunisia, and Marocco). Jurnal Agro Ekonomi, 26(2): 167–189. (In Indonesian).
• Richardson, J. D. (1971). Some sensitivity tests for a constant market share analysis of export growth. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 53(3): 300-304.
• Sen, S. (2008). International trade theory and policy: A review of the literature. Levy Economics Institute Working Papers Series No. 635.
• Shah, S. H., Kamal, M. A. and Yu, D. L. (2020). Did China-Pakistan free trade agreement promote trade and development in Pakistan? International Journal of Finance and Economics, 27(3): 3459-3474.
• Stern, R. (2009). Globalization and International Trade Policies (9th ed). World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte.Ltd. Sumiahadi, A., Direk, M. and Acar, R. (2021). Potential Agro-industrial Commodities for The Development of Indonesia-Turkey Economic Partnership. IOP Conference on Earth and Environmental Science. The 7th International Conference on Sustainable Agriculture and Environment, 25-27 August, P.1-9, Surakarta, Indonesia.
• Sunardi, D. (2015). Analysis of competitiveness and determinants export of priority commodities from Indonesia to Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). (MSc Thesis). Institut Pertanian Bogor, Indonesia (In Indonesian).
• TradeMap (2023). Indonesia’s Product Export and Import to Turkiye. International Trade Centre (ITC). https://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx. (Accessed Date: 15.09.23).
• Tyszynski, H. (1951). World trade in manufactured commodities, 1899-1950. The Manchester School, 19(3): 272-304.
• Zaimmudin, M. (2020). Dynamics of Indonesia-Türkiye trade in the IT CEPA Framework. EJournal Ilmu Hubungan Internasional, 8(4): 785–791. (In Indonesian)