Yapısal Kırılmalar Altında Teknoloji Yoğun Sektörlerde Verimlilik ve Rekabet Gücü İlişkisi

Öz

Ekonomik büyümenin temel kaynaklarından biri, üretim faktörü stoklarındaki ve niteliklerindeki artış diğeri de teknolojik gelişmedir. İş gücü ve sermaye gibi üretim faktörleri artmakta ve bununla birlikte teknoloji de hızla ilerlemektedir. Bu kapsamda yüksek teknoloji ürünlerine yapılacak yatırımlar hem iç hem de dış piyasada önemli bir rekabet gücünün elde edilmesini sağlayacaktır. Ayrıca bu sektörde belirli bir rekabet gücünün elde edilmesi ile verimlilik, büyüme ve yenilik gibi alanlarda artış meydana gelecektir. Çalışmada, Türkiye için verimlilik ve rekabet gücü arasındaki ilişki 1995-2017 yıllarını kapsayan iki aşamalı analiz ile incelenmiştir. Birinci analizde, RCA endeksi kullanılarak, yüksek teknoloji içeren sektörlerin rekabet gücü hesaplanmıştır. İkinci analizde ise, öncelikle yapısal kırılmaların dahil edildiği LM Birim Kök analizi uygulanmıştır. Sonrasında rekabet gücü ve verimlilik arasındaki uzun dönemli ilişkinin varlığı Maki Eşbütünleşme Analizi kullanılarak tahmin edilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonucuna göre Türkiye’nin yüksek teknoloji içeren sektörlerdeki rekabet gücü yetersiz olmakla birlikte rekabet gücünün artması verimlilik üzerinde pozitif yönde bir etki yapmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yüksek Teknoloji, Verimlilik, Yapısal Kırılma, Maki Eşbütünleşme Analizi, Türkiye

The Relationship Between Productivity and Competition Power in High Technology Industry Under Structural Breaks

Öz

One of the main sources of economic growth is the increase in stocks of production factor, as well as technological development. Technology is rapidly advancing with production factors such as labor force and capital. Investments in high technology products will ensure that a significant competitive power both in domestic and foreign markets. Thanks to the achievement of competitive power in this sector, productivity, growth and innovation will increase. In this study, the relationship between productivity and competitiveness for Turkey, covering the years 1995-2017 has been analyzed by two-step analysis. Firstly, the competitiveness of high-tech sectors has been analyzed by RCA index. Secondly, LM Unit Root analysis including structural breaks has been applied and the long-term relationship between competitiveness and productivity was estimated by Maki Cointegration Analysis. According to the results, the competition power in high-tech sectors in Turkey is insufficient but the increasing in the competition power affect productivity positively

Anahtar Kelimeler

• High technology, Productivity, Structural breaks, Maki Cointegration Test, Turkey

Kaynakça

1. Abdoh, H.A. (2019). Product Market Competition and Productivity Shocks. Applied Economics, 51:(37), 4104-4115
2. Aghion, P. ve Howitt, P., (1992). A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction. Econometrica 60, 323–357.
3. Aghion, P., Harris, C., Howitt, P. ve Vickers, J., (2001). Competition, imitation and growth with step-by-step innovation. Rev. Econ. Stud. 68 (3), 467–492
4. Badinger, H. (2008). Intra- and Inter-Industry Productivity Spillovers in OECD Manufacturing: A Spatial Econometric Perspective. Cesifo Working Paper No. 2181
5. Balassa, B. (1965) “Trade Liberalisation and Revealed Comparative Advantage”, The Manchester School of Economics and Social Science, 33: 99-123.
6. Beltran, A. (2019). Informal Sector Competition and Firm Productivity. Applied Economics Letters,
7. Carvalho, P. (2018). Competition and Firm Productivity: Evidence from Portugal. GEE Papers
8. Castellacci, F. (2010). How does competition affect the relationship between innovation and productivity? Estimation of a CDM model for Norway. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 20(7), 637-658

9. Chakrabarti A.K. (1991). Competition in High Technology: Analysis of Patents of U.S., Japan, U.K., France, West Germany, and Canada, IEEE Transactions On Engineering Management, 38(1), February
10. Chuang, Y.C. (1998). Learning By Doing, The Technology Gap and Growth. International Economic Review, 39(3), 697-721.
11. Chuang, Y.C. (2002), The Trade-Induced Learning Effect on Growth: Cross-Country Evidence. Journal of Development Studies, 39(2), 137-154.
12. Correa, J. A. ve Ornaghi, C. (2014) “Competition & innovation: Evidence from US patent and productivity data.” The Journal of Industrial Economics 62(2), 258–285.
13. Cuneo, P. ve Mairesse, J., (1984). Productivity and R&D At The Firm Level In French Manufacturing. In: Griliches, Z. (Ed.), R&D, Patents and Productivity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 339–374.
14. Engle, R.R.ve Granger, C.W.J., (1987). Cointegration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation and Testing. Journal of Econometrica 55, 251–276.
15. Francis, J. ve Collins-Dodd, C. (2004), Impact Of Export Promotion Programs On Firm Competencies, Strategies And Performance The case of Canadian High-Technology SMEs, International Marketing Review, 21 ( 4/5), 474-495
16. Gani A. (2009) Technological Achievement, High Technology Exports and Growth. Journal of Comparative International Management, 12(2), 31-47.
17. Gregory, A.W. ve Hansen, B.E., (1996). Residual-Based Tests For Cointegration In Models With Regime Shifts. Journal of Econometrics, 70,99–126.
18. Grossman, G.M. ve Helpman, E., (1991). Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
19. Harhoff, D., (1998). R&D and Productivity In German Manufacturing Firms. Journal of Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 6(1), 29–49.
20. Hatemi-J, A., (2008). Tests for Cointegration with Two Unknown Regime Shifts with an Application to Financial Market Integration. Journal of Empirical Economics, 35, 497–505.
21. Ho, Y. (2007). Contribution of High-Technology Industry to Regional Economic Growth at Different Positions in the Distribution of a Region’s Size, International Review of Public Administration, 12 (1), 41-50.
22. Holmes, T.J. ve Schmitz, J.A. (2010). Competition and Productivity: A Review of Evidence. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Research Department Staff Report 439
23. Johansen, S., (1988). Statistical Analysis of Cointegration Vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 12:231–254.
24. Johansen, S., (1991). Estimation and Hypothesis Testing Of Cointegration Vectors in Gaussian Vector Autoregressive Models. Journal of Econometrica 59:1551–1580.
25. Jones, C.I., (1995). R & D-based models of economic growth. J. Polit. Economy 103, 759–784.
26. Kafourous, M., (2005). R&D and Productivity Growth: Evidence From The UK. Journal of Economics of Innovation and New Technology 14 (6), 479–497.
27. Kask, C., ve Sieber, E., (2002), Productivity Growth in ‘High-tech' Manufacturing Industries, Monthly Labor Review, 16-31
28. Kato, A. (2009). Product Market Competition and Productivity in the Indian Manufacturing Industry. The Journal of Development Studies, 45(10), 1579-1593
29. Kılavuz E. ve Topcu B.A. (2012). Export and Economic Growth in the Case of the Manufacturing Industry: Panel Data Analysis of Developing Countries. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues 2(2), 201-215
30. Konings J. ve Vandenbussche H. (2008). Heterogeneous responses of firms to trade protection. J. Int. Econ. 76(2), 371—83
31. Köksel, B. ve Destek, M.A(2015). Türkiye Ekonomisinde Fisher Hipotezinin Test Edilmesi: 2002-2014 Dönemi Üzerine Bir Ampirik Analiz. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(41), 1247-1253
32. Lee, J. ve Strazicich, M. (2003), Minimum Lagrange Multiplier Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks, Review Of Economics And Statistics 85, 1082–1089.
33. Lee, J. ve Strazicich, M. (2004), Minimum LM Unit Root Tests With Two Structural Breaks, Economics Bulletin,33(4), 2483-2492
34. Lenger, A. (2018). Ey Yüksek Teknoloji Geldiysen, Masaya İki Kere Vur . İktisat ve Toplum Dergisi, 8(88), 25-30
35. Lucas, R.E. (1988), On The Mechanics of Economic Development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3-42.
36. Maki, D. (2012). Tests for Cointegration Allowing for an Unknown Number of Breaks Journal of Economic Modelling, 29(5), 2011–2015.
37. Manyika J., Sinclair J., Strobe G., Rassey L., Mischke, Rernes J., Roxburgh C., George K., O’Halleran. D.ve Ramaswamy S. (2012). Manufacturing The Future: The Next Era of Global Growth And Innovation. Mc Kinsey Global Institute Mc Kinsey Operations Practice.
38. Martin, S., (1993). Endogenous firm efficiency in a Cournot principal-agent model. J. Econ. Theory 59, 445–450.
39. Nickell, S. J. (1996) “Competition and corporate performance.” Journal of Political Economy, 104(4) ,724–746.
40. Okada, Y. (2005). Competition and productivity in Japanese manufacturing industries. J. Japanese Int. Economies, 19, 586-616
41. Pridotkiene, J., Venckuviene, V. ve Laskiene, D. (2015). Estimation of Newly Emerging Economies’ Low-Tech Export Impact On Lithuanian Low-Tech Export Growth. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 213, 236 – 240
42. Sanayi ve Teknoloji Stratejisi 2023, (2019). Sanayi ve Teknoloji Bakanlığı, https://www.sanayi.gov.tr/strateji2023/sts-ktp.pdf
43. Schmidt, P. ve Phillips, P.C.B.(1992) LM Tests for a Unit Root in the Presence of Deterministic Trends.Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 54, 257-287
44. Sekkat, K. (2009). Does competition improve productivity in developing countries? Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 12(2), 145 – 162.
45. Souare, M.(2013).Canada–US Productivity Gap: The Role Of Competition Intensity Differential. International Review of Applied Economics, 27(3), 404-428
46. Srholec M. (2007) High-Tech Exports from Developing Countries: A Symptom of Technology Spurts or Statistical Illusion? Review of World Economics, 143(2), 227- 255.
47. Syverson, C. (2004). “Market structure and productivity: A concrete example.” Journal of Political Economy, 11 (6), 1181–1222.
48. Tebaldi, E. (2011). The Determinants of High-Technology Exports: A Panel Data Analysis, Atlantic Economic Journal, 39,(4), 343–353.
49. Telatar, O. M., Değer, M. K. ve Doğanay, M. A.( 2016). Teknoloji Yoğunluklu Ürün İhracatının Ekonomik Büyümeye Etkisi: Türkiye Örneği (1996:Q1-2015:Q3) Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 30 (4), 921-934.
50. Tsai, K.-H. ve Wang, J.C., (2004). R&D Productivity and The Spillover Effects Of High-Tech Industry On The Traditional Manufacturing Sector: The Case Of Taiwan. Journal of The World Economy 27 (4), 1555–1570.
51. TİM, (2018). İhracat 2019 Raporu. Erişim Adresi, https://www.tim.org.tr/files/downloads/sunumlar/Y%C3%B6nlendirme%20Sunumla r%C4%B1/Karisik/Yeni%20Vizyon%20Yeni%20Yol%20Haritas%C4%B1%20%C4 %B0hracat%202019%20Raporu.pdf
52. TÜİK, (2018). İstatistiki Göstergeler. Erişim Adresi http://www.tuik.gov.tr/Start.do
53. TOBB, (2014). Ekonomik Rapor 2014. Erişim Adresi, http://www.tobb.org.tr/Documents/yayinlar/2015/71GK/ekonomikrapor-2014.pdf
54. TOBB, (2005). Ekonomik Rapor 2014. Erişim Adresi https://www.tobb.org.tr/Documents/yayinlar/Ekonomik%20Rapor%202005.pdf
55. TÜSİAD, 2000. Temel Ekonomik Göstergeler ve Genel Değerlendirme. https://tusiad.org/tr/yayinlar/raporlar/item/1811-2000-yilina-girerken-turk-ekonomisi
56. Usman, M. (2017). Impact of High-Tech Exports on Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from Pakistan, Journal on Innovation and Sustainability, 8 (1), 91-105.
57. Ustabaş A. ve Ersin Ö. Ö. (2016). The Effects of R&D and High Technology Exports on Economic Growth: A Comparative Cointegration Analysis for Turkey and South Korea. International Conference on Eurasian Economies.
58. Verspagen, B., (1995). R&D and Productivity: A Broad Cross-Section Cross-Country Look. Journal of Productivity Analysis 6 (2), 117–135.
59. Wang, D. Hui-Kuang Yu, T. ve Liu,H. (2013). Heterogeneous Effect Of High-Tech Industrial R&D Spending On Economic Growth. Journal of Business Research 66, 1990–1993.
60. Young, A. (1991), Learning by Doing the Dynamic Effects of International Trade. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), 369-405.