Turkey’s Export Performance: Examining the Main Determinants of Export Volume(1995-2012)

Year 2014, Volume: 14 Issue: 3, 451 - 462, 01.08.2014

Mehmet Balcılar Harun Bal Neşe Algan Mehmet Demiral

Abstract

In this study the short and the long run relationships between export performance and real effective exchange rate changes in Turkey are investigated using the quarterly data sets covering the period of 1995-2012. The other factors that are expected to affect export performance such as wage, foreign income, productivity, trend GDP and exchange rate volatility are also added to the model. The ARDL bounds testing approach is performed in the estimation process and the causalities among these variables in the model are determined based on the estimated ARDL models. The empirical results reveal that the variables of interest are cointegrated. Real effective exchange rate coefficient is significantly positive in the short run whereas negative in the long run and exchange rate volatility has no significant effect on export performance in contrast with theoretical expectations. Other evidences indicate that Turkey’s export boom in the period examined can be explained by wages, productivity and world demand, rather than exchange rate changes. Consequently, these findings highlight that the policies depressing wages, stimulating high productivity and facilitating foreign market access can help export sectors increase their performance and competitiveness in Turkey

Keywords

Export volume, export performance, ARDL bounds testing approach, Turkey

Türkiye’nin İhracat Performansı: İhracat Hacminin Temel Belirleyicilerinin İncelenmesi (1995-2012)

Abstract

Bu çalışmada Türkiye’de ihracat performansı ile reel efektif döviz kuru değişmeleri arasındaki kısa ve uzun dönemli ilişkiler, 1995-2012 dönemi üçer aylık veriler kullanılarak incelenmiştir. İhracat performansını etkilemesi beklenen ücret, yurtdışı gelir, verimlilik, GSYH trendi ve döviz kuru oynaklığı gibi başka faktörler de modele eklenmiştir. Çalışmanın analiz kısmında ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı izlenmiş ve tahmin edilen ARDL modellerine göre değişkenler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkileri araştırılmıştır. Ulaşılan sonuçlar, incelenen değişkenlerin eşbütünleşik olduğunu göstermektedir. İhracat performansına ilişkin olarak, teorik beklentilerin aksine, reel efektif döviz kuru katsayılarının anlamlı bir biçimde kısa dönemde pozitif uzun dönemde ise negatif olduğu ve döviz kuru oynaklığının anlamlı bir etkisinin olmadığı belirlenmiştir. Diğer bulgular, Türkiye’de ele alınan dönemde yaşanan ihracat artışlarının döviz kuru değişmelerinden çok ücret, verimlilik ve yurtdışı talep ile açıklanabileceğini göstermektedir. Buna göre sonuç olarak, Türkiye’de ücretleri baskı altında tutan, verimlilik artışını teşvik eden ve yurtdışı piyasalara girmeyi kolaylaştıran politikaların, ihracat sektörlerinde performans ve rekabet artışları sağlayabileceği görülmektedir

Keywords

İhracat hacmi, ihracat performansı, ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı, Türkiye

References

• Abuşoğlu, Ö. (1990) Döviz Kuru ve İhracat Üzerine Etkisi: 1980-1988 Dönemi, Ankara, Türkiye Odalar ve Borsalar Birliği Yayınları (TOBB) Yayınları, Yayın No: 154.
• Arndt, S.W. ve Huemer, A. (2004) “Trade, Production Networks and The Exchange Rate” http://ssrn.com/ abstract=900416, (19.07.2013).
• Arslan, I. ve Van Wijnbergen, S. (1993) “Export Incentives, Exchange Rate Policy and Export Growth in Turkey” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 75 (1): 128-133.
• Aysan, A.F. ve Hacıhasanoğlu, Y.S. (2007) “Investigation into The Determinants of Turkish Export- Boom in The 2000s” Journal of International Trade and Diplomacy, 1(2):159-202.
• Bahmani-Oskooee, M. ve Ratha, A. (2004) “The J Curve: A Literature Review” Applied Economics, 36(13):1377-1398.
• Barlow, R. ve Şenses, F. (1995) “The Turkish Export Boom: Just Reward or Just Lucky?” Journal of Development Economies, 48(1):111-133.
• Banerjee, A., Galbraith, J. ve Hendry, D. (1993) Cointegration, Error Correction and Econometric Analysis of Non-stationary Data, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
• Banerjee, A., Dolado, J. ve Mestre, R. (1998) “Error- correction Mechanism Tests for Cointegration in a Single Equation Framework” Journal of Times Series Analysis, 19(3): 267-283.
• Bollerslev, T. (1986) “Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity” Journal of Econometrics, 31(3): 307-327.
• Bushe, D.M., Kravis I.B. ve Lipsey, R.E. (1986) “Prices, Activity and Machinery Exports: An Analysis Based on New Price Data” Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(2):248-255.
• Cushman, D.O. (1983) “The Effects of Real Exchange Rate Risk on International Trade” Journal of International Economics, 15(1):45-63.
• Çelik, S. ve Kaya, H. (2010) “Real exchange Rates and Bilateral Trade Dynamics of Turkey: Panel Cointegration Approach” Applied Economics Letters, 17:791-795.
• Doğanlar, M. (2002) “Estimating The Impact of Exchange Rate Volatility on Exports: Evidence from Asian Countries” Applied Economics Letters, 9: 859-863.
• Edwards, L. ve Wilcox, O. (2003) “Exchange Rate Depreciation and The Trade Balance in South Africa” http://www.commerce.uct.ac.za/Economics/staff/ ledwards/2008/,(05.07.2013).
• Engle, R.F. (1982) “Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity with Estimates of the Variance of United Kingdom Inflation” Econometrica, 50(4):987-1007.
• Engle, R.F. ve Granger, C.W. J. (1987) “Cointegration and Error Correction Representation: Estimation and Testing” Econometrica, 55(2):251-276.
• Freund, C., Hong, C. ve Wei, S.J. (2012) “China’s Trade Response to Exchange Rate”. http://www. aeaweb.org/aea/2012conference/program/retrieve. php?pdfid=556, (21.07.2013).
• Froyen, R.T. (1999) Macroeconomics Theories and Policies, 5th Edition, New Jersey, Prentice Hall International Editions.
• Goldstein, M. ve Khan, M.S. (1985) “Income and Price Effects In Foreign Trade” Jones et al.(eds.) Handbook of International Economics, Amsterdam, North Holland.
• Hall, S., Hondroyiannis, G., Swamy , P.A.V.B., Tavlas, G. ve Ulan, M. (2010) “Exchange-Rate Volatility and Export Performance: Do Emerging Market Economies Resemble Industrial Countries or Other Developing Countries?” Economic Modelling, 27:1514-1521.
• Hummels, D., Rapoport, D. ve Yi, K. (1998) “Vertical Specialization and the Changing Nature of World Trade” FRBNY Economic Policy Review, 79-99.
• Hummels, D., Ishii, J. ve Yi, K. (2001) “The Nature and Growth of Vertical Specialization in World Trade” Journal of International Economics, (54):75-96.
• Karagöz, M. ve Doğan, Ç. (2005) “Döviz Kuru Diş Ticaret İlişkisi: Türkiye Örneği” Fırat Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 15(2):219-228.
• Keyder, N., Sağlam, Y. ve Öztürk, M.K. (2004) “International Competitiveness and the Unit Labor Cost Based Competitiveness Index” METU Studies in Development, 31:43-70.
• Lall, S. (2000) “Turkish Performance in Exporting Manufactures: A Comparative Structural Analysis” QEH Working Paper Series, No:47.
• Nowak-Lehmann, D., Herzer, D., Martinez-Zarzoso, I. ve Vollmer, S. (2007) “The Impact of a Customs Union between Turkey and the EU on Turkey’s Exports to the EU” Journal of Common Market Studies, 45(3):719-743.
• OECD (2013) Vertical Specialisation and Global Value Chains, OECD Statistics Directorate, STD/SES/ WPTGS(2009)16, Paris, OECD.
• Özçelik, E. ve Taymaz, E. (2002) “Does Innovativeness Matter for International Competitiveness in Developing Countries? The Case of Turkish Manufacturing Research Forum (ERF) Working Paper Series, No. 7. Industries” Research Policy, 33(3):409-424.
• Özler, Ş., Taymaz, E. ve Yılmaz, K. (2007) “History Matters for the Export Decision: Plant Level Evidence from Turkish Manufacturing Industry” TUSIAD-Koç University Economic Research Forum Working Paper Series, No:0706.
• Pesaran, M.H. ve Shin, Y. (1999) “An Autoregressive Distributed Lag Modeling Approach to Cointegration Analysis” Strom, S. (ed.) Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
• Pesaran, M.H., Shin, Y. ve Smith, R. (2001) “Bounds Testing Approaches to the Analysis of Level Relationships” Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3):289-326.
• Rey, S. (2006) “Effective Exchange Rate Volatility and MENA Countries’ Exports to the EU” Journal of Economic Development, 31(2):23-54.
• Sivri, U. ve Usta, C. (2001) “Reel Döviz Kuru, İhracat ve İthalat Arasındaki İlişki” Uludağ Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(4):1-9.
• Şahinbeyoğlu, G. ve Ulaşan, B. (1999) “An Empirical Examination of the Structural Stability of Export Function: The Case of Turkey” The CBRT Research Department Discussion Paper No. 9907.
• Tarı, R. ve Yıldırım, D.Ç. (2009) ”Döviz Kuru Belirsizliğinin İhracata Etkisi: Türkiye İçin Bir Uygulama” C.B.Ü. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, 16(2):95-105.
• Uygur, E. (1997) “Export Policies and Export Performance: The Case of Turkey” The Economic
• Yaşar, M. ve Nelson, C.H. (2004) “The Relationship between Exports and Productivity at the Plant level in the Turkish Apparel and Motor Vehicle Parts Industries” North American Summer Meetings from Econometric Society, No 138.
• Yükseler, Z. ve Türkan, E. (2006) “Türkiye’nin Üretim ve Dış Ticaret Yapısında Dönüşüm: Küresel Yönelimler ve Yansımalar” Ekonomik Araştırma Forumu Çalışma Raporları Serisi.
• Zengin, A. (2001) “Reel Döviz Kuru Hareketleri ve Dış Ticaret Fiyatları: Türkiye Ekonomisi Üzerine Ampirik Bulgular” Cumhuriyet Üniv. İktisadi ve İdari Birimler Dergisi, 2(2):27-41.
• TÜİK (2013) Ulusal Hesaplar-Dış Ticaret İstatistikleri-Girdi-Çıktı Tabloları. http://www.tuik.gov. tr/, (10.06.2013).
• United Nations (2013) Commodity Trade Statistics (UN-COMTRADE) Database. http://comtrade.un.org/, (10.06.2013).