Global shocks, green policy, and the welfare logic of Türkiye’s steel trade
Abstract
Keywords
Global trade, steel industry, protectionism, climate policy, welfare, competitiveness, Türkiye
References
- References ANDERSON, J. E., and VAN WINCOOP, E. (2003), “Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border puzzle,” American Economic Review, 93(1), 170–192.
- ANDERSON, J. E., and YOTOV, Y. V. (2010), “The changing incidence of geography,” American Economic Review, 100(5), 2157–2186.
- BAŞ, E. (2023), Türkiye çelik sektörünün karbonsuzlaşması: Mevcut durum, riskler ve politika seçenekleri, Istanbul Policy Center, Sabancı University.
- BAŞ, E. (2025), Türkiye çelik sektöründe yeşil dönüşüm: Teknolojik yollar ve politika gereksinimleri, Istanbul Policy Center, Sabancı University.
- BOHRINGER, C., FISCHER, C., ROSENDAHL, K. E., and RUTHERFORD, T. (2022), “Potential impacts and challenges of border carbon adjustments,” Nature Climate Change, 12, 22–29.
- COSTINOT, A., and RODRIGUEZ-CLARE, A. (2014), “Trade theory with numbers: Quantifying the consequences of globalization”. In G. Gopinath, E. Helpman, & K. Rogoff (Eds.), Handbook of International Economics (Vol. 4, pp. 197–261). Elsevier.
- DAI, M. (2021), “Timing the impact of sanctions on trade,” In Research Handbook on Economic Sanctions. Edward Elgar.
- DOORNICH, J. B., and RASPOTNIK, A. (2020), Economic sanctions' disruption on international trade patterns and global trade dynamics: Analyzing the effects of the European Union's sanctions on Russia. (Research report).
- ERLAT, G. (1978), İktisadi birleşmelerin dış ticaret etkileri: ticaret yaratma ve ticareti saptırmanın ex ante ölçülmesi üzerine bir deneme, Ankara Üniversitesi.
- EUROPEAN COMMISSION. (2024), EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) data and CBAM implementation reports. Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union (DG TAXUD).