Classifying Countries According to Their Export Competitiveness: The Position of Turkey as An Emerging Economy

Yıl 2015, , 71 - 94, 01.09.2015

Taşkın Dirsehan

https://doi.org/10.5824/1309-1581.2015.4.005.x

Öz

Classifying Countries According to Their Export Competitiveness: The Position of Turkey as An Emerging Economy

Öz

Country classification is useful from both firms’ and countries’ side. Firms may use the classification to decide which countries to operate in and countries may use it for their development. As there is evidence that the development of a country relates on export competitiveness, this study tries to reveal specifically sector groups’ relationships with it and how the countries can be classified according to the country export competitiveness. As a result, Turkey’s position is evaluated and the importance of technology advancement is discussed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Export Competitiveness, Macromarketing, Economic Development

Kaynakça

• Alvarez, I., & Marin, R. (2013). FDI and Technology as Levering Factors of Competitiveness in Developing Countries. Journal of International Management, 19, 232-246.
• Balassa, B. (1965). Trade Liberalization and 'Revealed' Comparative Advantage. The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, 33, 99-123.
• Battal, T. (2010). Türkiye'nin Ticaret Ortaklarına Göre Rekabetçi Konumu (Competitive Position of Turkey Among Trade Partners). Ankara: Millî Prodüktivite Merkezi.
• Budeva, D. (2009). Two Models of International Country Segmentation. Boca Raton, FL: PhD Thesis Submitted to Florida Atlantic University.
• Cavusgil, S. (1990). A Market-Oriented Clustering of Countries. In H. Cavusgil, & S. Cavusgil, International Marketing Strategy (pp. 201-211). New York: Pergamon.
• Cavusgil, S., Kiyak, T., & Yeniyurt, S. (2004). Complementary Approaches to Preliminary Foreign Market Opportunity Assessment: Country Clustering and Country Ranking. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 607-617.
• Data, W. B. (tarih yok). 30th May 2015 tarihinde http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ adresinden alındı
• Database, U. N. (tarih yok). 30th May 2015 tarihinde http://comtrade.un.org/db/ adresinden alındı
• Davidson, W., & Harrigan, R. (1977). Key Decisions in International Marketing: Introducing New Products Abroad. Columbia Journal of World Business, 12, 15-23.
• Dinler, Z. (2004). İktisada Giriş (Introduction to Economy) (10th Edition b.). Bursa: Ekin Kitabevi.
• Erdem, E., & Köseoğlu, A. (2014). Teknolojik Değişim ve Rekabet Gücü İlişkisi: Türkiye Üzerine Bir Uygulama (The Relationship Between Technological Change and Competiteveness: An Emprical Analysis on Turkey). Bilgi Ekonomisi ve Yönetimi Dergisi (The Journal of Knowledge Economy & Knowledge Management), 9(1), 51-68.
• Fagerberg, J. (1996). Technology and Competitiveness. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 12, 39-51.
• Gupta, V., Hanges, P., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Cultural Clusters: Methodology and Findings. Journal of World Business, 37, 11-15.
• Hair, J. J., Bush, R., Ortinau, D. (2009). Marketing Research in a Digital Information Environment, 4th Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
• Helsen, K., Jedidi, K., & DeSarbo, W. (1993). A New Approach to Country Segmentation Utilizing Multinational Diffusion Patterns. Journal of Marketing, 57, 60-71.
• Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
• IMF. (2013). World Economic Outlook: Transitions and Tensions. International Monetary Fund, Publication Services.
• Krugman, P. (1994). Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession. Foreign Affairs, 73, 28-44.
• Kurtuluş, K. (2010). Araştırma Yöntemleri, İstanbul: Türkmen Kitabevi.
• Laursen, K. (1998). Revealed Comparative Advantage and the Alternatives as Measures of International Specialisation. Danish Research Unit for Industrial Dynamics (DRUID) Working Paper, 98-30, 1-14.
• Lee, C. (1990). Determinants of National Innovativeness and International Market Segmentation. International Marketing Review, 7(5), 39-49.
• Malhotra, N. (2007). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation. 5th International Edition, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall.
• Peterson, M., & Malhotra, N. (1997). Comparative Marketing Measures of Societal Quality of Life
• Substantive Dimensions in 186 Countries. Journal of Macromarketing, 17(1), 25-38.
• Schumpeter, J. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
• Schwab, K. (. (2014). The Global Competitiveness Report 2014-2015. Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
• Sethi, S. (1971). Comparative Cluster Analysis for World Markets. Journal of Marketing Research, 8(3), 348-354.
• Sheth, J., & Sharma, A. (2005). International E-Marketing: Opportunities and Issues. International Marketing Review, 22(6), 611-622.
• Sriram, V., & Gopalakrishna, P. (1991). Can Advertising Be Standardized Among Similar Countries? A Cluster Based Analysis. International Journal of Advertising, 10(2), 137-149.
• Stump, R., Gong, W., & Li, Z. (2008). Exploring the Digital Divide in Mobile-phone Adoption Levels across Countries: Do Population Socioeconomic Traits Operate in the Same Manner as Their Individual-level Demographic Counterparts? Journal of Macromarketing, 28(4), 397-412.
• Vollrath, T. (1991). A Theoretical Evaluation of Alternative Trade Intensity Measures of Revealed Comparative Advantage. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 127, 265-280.
• Wedel, M., & Kamakura, W. (2002). Introduction to the Special Issue on Market Segmentation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 19, 181-183.
• Yilmaz, B. (2003). Turkey's Competiteveness in the European Union: A Comparison with Five Candidate Countries - Bulgaria, The Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania - and The EU15. Ezoneplus Working Paper, 12, 1-20.