Investigation of Foreign Trade between Turkey and Member Countries of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) with Gravity Model

Year 2019, Volume: 14 Issue: 54, 141 - 151, 30.04.2019

Hatice Erkekoğlu Burcu Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.19168/jyasar.525789

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Member
countries of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) constitute an important
part of World foreign trade flows. Because of the share’s size that APEC takes
from foreign trade and its potential of increasing the share it has in the
upcoming years, it seems that Turkey’s trade with member countries of APEC will
gain more importance in the future. The aim of this study is to analyze the
factors that influence Turkey’s trade with 21 member countries of APEC between
the years of 1997-2016 using panel data analysis method and basing upon gravity
model and to explain and interpret the changes occur in the foreign trade of
these countries within this period. Thus the factors influencing the
international trade between APEC countries and Turkey have been determined and
evaluated. In this study, total foreign trade volume of Turkey and member
countries of APEC is used as dependent variable; the ratio of foreign trade
volume to GDP, export, import, gross domestic product (GDP) difference, GDP per
capita difference, population, Linder effect, relative factor endowment,
distance and acreage are used as independent variable; G20 membership, G8 membership,
OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) membership, free
trade agreements, crisis and visa variables are used as dummy variable. In the
consequence of analyses made with 7 model set up in this study, it has been
concluded that variables of foreign trade volume / GDP, export, import, Linder
effect, relative factor endowment and G20 membership influence the foreign
trade volume between Turkey – APEC countries positively and variables of GDP
difference, OECD membership and visa variables influence foreign trade volume negatively.
It has been determined that there is no significant relationship between
variables of GDP per capita difference, distance, population, acreage,
G8membership, crisis, free trade agreements and variable of foreign trade
volume between Turkey-APEC countries.

Keywords

APEC, Turkey, International Trade, Import, Export, Gravity Model, Panel Data Analysis

Türkiye ile Asya ve Pasifik Ekonomik İşbirliği (APEC) Ülkeleri Arasındaki Dış Ticaretin Çekim Modeli ile İncelenmesi

Abstract

Asya ve Pasifik Ekonomik İşbirliği’ne (APEC) üye
olan ülkeler dünya dış ticaret akımlarının önemli bir bölümünü oluşturmaktadır.
APEC'in günümüzde dış ticaretten aldığı payın büyüklüğü ve ilerleyen yıllarda
da uluslararası ticarette sahip olduğu payı arttırma potansiyelinin olması
nedeniyle, Türkiye'nin bu ekonomik gruba üye olan ülkeler ile yaptığı
ticaretin, gelecekte daha da önem kazanacağı görülmektedir.
Bu çalışmanın amacı; Türkiye'nin APEC üyesi 21 ülke ile 1997-2016 yılları
arasındaki dış ticaretini hangi faktörlerin etkilediğini, panel veri analizi
yöntemi kullanarak ve çekim modelini temel alarak incelemek ve bu süreçte
ülkelerin dış ticaretinde meydana gelen değişiklikleri açıklamak ve
yorumlamaktır. Bu sayede; Türkiye ve APEC ülkeleri arasındaki uluslararası
ticareti etkileyen faktörler belirlenmiş ve değerlendirilmiştir.
Çalışmada,  Türkiye ve APEC üyesi ülkelerin
toplam dış ticaret hacmi bağımlı değişken olarak;  dış ticaret hacminin GSYİH'ye oranı, ihracat,
ithalat, gayri safi yurtiçi hasıla (GSYİH) farkı, kişi başına düşen gayrı safi
yurtiçi hasıla (KBGSYİH) farkı, nüfus, Linder etkisi, göreceli faktör donanımı,
uzaklık ve yüz ölçümü bağımsız değişken olarak; G-20 üyeliği, G-8 üyeliği, OECD
(İktisadi İşbirliği ve Kalkınma Örgütü) üyeliği, serbest ticaret anlaşmaları ve
vize değişkenleri kukla değişken olarak kullanılmıştır.
Kurulan 7 model ile yapılan analizler sonucunda; dış ticaret hacmi / GSYİH, ihracat,
ithalat,  Linder etkisi, göreceli faktör
donanımı ve G-20 üyeliği değişkenlerinin Türkiye – APEC ülkeleri arasındaki dış
ticaret hacmini olumlu yönde etkilediği; GSYİH farkı ve OECD üyeliği ve vize
değişkenlerinin ise dış ticaret hacmini olumsuz yönde etkilediği sonucuna
ulaşılmıştır. Ayrıca; KBGSYİH farkı, uzaklık, nüfus, yüz ölçümü, G-8 üyeliği,
kriz, serbest ticaret anlaşmaları değişkenleri ile Türkiye ve APEC ülkeleri
arasındaki dış ticaret hacmi değişkeni arasında anlamlı bir ilişkinin bulunmadığı
belirlenmiştir.

Keywords

APEC, Türkiye, Uluslararası Ticaret, İthalat, İhracat, Çekim Modeli, Panel Veri Analizi

References

• Albayrak, Ali Sait. 2008. “Weighted Regression Analysis Alternative to the Least Squares Technique in the Presence of None Constant Variance and an Application”. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences 10(2): 111-134.
• Arnon, A. and Weinblatt, J. 1998. “Linder's Hypothesis Revisited: Income Similarity Effects for Low Income Countries”. Applied Economics Letters 5(10): 607-611.
• Berke, Burcu. 2009. “Avrupa Parasal Birliğinde Kamu Borç Stoku ve Enflasyon İlişkisi: Panel Veri Analizi”. İstanbul University Econometrics and Statistics E-Journal 9: 30-55.
• Bhattacharya, S. K. and Bhattacharyay, B. N. 2007. “Gains and Losses of India-China Trade Cooperation - A Gravity Model Impact Analysis”. http://ssrn.com/abstract=985274, (date accessed : 31.07.2017).
• Bilgili, Emine. 2007. “The Panel Gravity Model and Predicting Turkey’s Export Flows”. Proceedings of The Third International Conference on Business, Management and Economics (ICMBE). volume 3, İzmir, Turkey, 13-17 June 2007. 107-123.
• Cheng, I-Hui and Wall, Howard J. 1999. Controlling for Heterogeneity in Gravity Models of Trade. Montana/United Sates: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
• Coğrafya Dünyası. (2018). Devletler. http://www.cografya.gen.tr/siyasi/devletler/ (date accessed: 23.01.2018).
• Colak, Nurdan. 2012. The Effect of Intellectual Capital on Firm Value and Econometric Analysis. Bülent Ecevit University Institute for Social Sciences, Zonguldak. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
• Deardoff, Alan V. 1998. “Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World? ”. in: The Regionalization of the World Economy, (Ed.) Jeffrey. A. Frankel, 7-32. Chicago/United States: University of Chicago Press.
• Egger, Peter. 2002. “An Econometric View on the Estimation of Gravity Models and the Calculation of Trade Potentials”. The World Economy 25(2): 297-312.
• Erkekoglu, Hatice. 2007. “Intra-Industry Trade Between Turkey and European Union”. Proceedings of The Third International Conference on Business, Management and Economics (ICMBE). volume 3, İzmir, Turkey, 13-17 June 2007. 73-91.
• Hacıimamoğlu, Tunahan. 2016. Institutional Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment: OECD Case, Kocaeli University Institute for Social Sciences, Kocaeli. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis).
• Helpman, E. and Krugman, P. 1985. Market Structure and Foreign Trade: Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition and the International Economy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Kien, Nguyen Trung. 2009. “Gravity Model by Panel Data Approach: An Empirical Application with Implications for the ASEAN Free Trade Area”. ASEAN Economic Bulletin 26(3): 266-277.
• Korkmaz, T., Yıldız, B. and Gökbulut, R. İ. 2010. “Testing the Validity of CAPM in ISE National 100 Index with Panel Data Analysis”. İstanbul University Journal of School of Business Administration 39(1): 95-105.
• Martinez-Zarzoso, I. and Lehmann, F. N. 2003. “Augmented Gravity Model: An Empirical Application to MERCOSUR-European Union Trade Flows”. Journal of Applied Economics 6(2): 291-316.
• Pöyhönen, Pentti. 1963. “A Tentative Model for the Volume of Trade between Countries”. Welwirtschaftliches Archive 90: 93-100.
• Rahman, M., Shadat, W. B. and Das, N. C. 2006. Trade Potential in SAFTA: An Application of Augmented Gravity Model. Center of Policy Dialogue Occasional Paper Series, paper 61.
• Rasoulinezhad, Ehsan. 2016. “Investigation of Sanctions and Oil Price Shocks on the Iran-Russia Trade by using the Gravity Model”. Vestnik St. Petersburg University 5(2): 68–84.
• Ravenstein, Ernst Georg. 1885. “The Laws of Migration”. Journal of the Statistical Society of London 48(2):167-235.
• Sahin, Levent. 2017. “Analysis of the Republic of Azerbaijan’s Export to CIS with Panel Gravity Model: Testing the Similarity in Preference Theory”, Yuzuncu Yil University The Journal of Social Sciences Institute 1(special issue-1): 137-142.
• Tansey, M. M. and Hanson, T. S. 2011. “The Gravity Model of Trade Applied to Developing Countries”. The Southern Business and Economic Journal 34(3/4):51-74.
• Time and Date. (2017). Distance Calculator. https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/distance.html (date accessed: 27.12.2017).
• Tinbergen, Jan. 1962. Shaping The World Economy: Suggestions for An International Economic Policy, New York/United States: Twentieth Century Fund.
• Turkish Statistical Institute. 2018. Foreign Trade Statistics, https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/disticaretapp/disticaret. zul?param1=4&param2=0&sitcrev=0&isicrev=0&sayac=5808, (date accessed: 28.01.2018).
• Van Bergeijk, P. A. G. and Brakman, S. 2010. The Gravity Model in International Trade - Advances and Applications, New York:Cambridge University Press.
• World Bank. (2018). http://databank.worldbank.org/data/reports.aspx?source=2&country=TUR, (date accessed: 29.01.2018).
• Yamak, R. ve Köseoğlu, M. 2006. Uygulamalı İstatistik ve Ekonometri (3. Baskı), Trabzon:Celepler Matbaacılık.
• Yamarik, S. and Ghosh, S. 2005. “A Sensitivity Analysis of The Gravity Model”. The International Trade Journal 19(1): 83-126.
• Zhang, Z. and Li, C. 2006. “Country-Specific Factors and the Pattern of Intra-Industry Trade in China's Manufacturing”. Journal of International Development 18(8): 1137-1149.