Yüksek Teknolojili Ürün İhracatları mı Refah Düzeyini Artırıyor yoksa Refah Düzeyi Yüksek Ülkeler mi İnovasyonda Daha İyi? Bir Nedensellik Analizi

Yıl 2021, , 1373 - 1396, 30.06.2021

Ebru Gül Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.15869/itobiad.853931

Öz

İkinci Dünya Savaşı’ndan, özellikle de 1980’lerden sonra, dünyanın önde gelen ülkeleri tarafından desteklenen küreselleşme olgusu, gittikçe önem ve hız kazanmıştır. 1980 yılında dünya ticareti içerisindeki payı % 18,8 olan ihracat, 2019 yılına gelindiğinde % 30,6’ya ulaşmıştır. Balassa, Chow ve Heller’in çalışmalarında da görüldüğü gibi ülkelerin Kabul edilebilir büyüme düzeylerine ulaşabilmeleri adına ihracat önem kazanmıştır. Bununla birlikte ülkelerin bazıları ihracat stratejilerini, yüksek katma değer yaratan yüksek teknolojili ürünlerin ihracatına ağırlık vermek yönünde farklılaştırdılar. Bu noktada, çalışmada Yüksek Teknolojili Ürün İhracatları mı Refah Düzeyini Artırıyor yoksa Refah Düzeyi Yüksek Ülkeler mi İnovasyonda Daha İyi? sorusuna Dimutriscue and Hurlin nedensellik testi kullanılarak ve dünyadaki en yüksek ve en düşük 10 yüksek teknolojili ürün ihracatçısı ülke grupları karşılaştırılmak suretiyle cevap aranmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre en düşük yüksek teknolojili ürün ihracatçısı ülke grubu için refah ve yüksek teknolojili ürün ihracatı arasında çift yönlü bir ilişki olduğu, en yüksek, yüksek teknolojili ürün ihracatçısı ülke grubu için ise refahtan yüksek teknolojili ürün yönlü bir nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilmiştir. Çalışma, refah ve yüksek teknolojili ürün ihracat düzeyleri arasındaki ilişkiyi en yüksek ve en düşük yüksek teknolojili ürün ihracatçılarını karşılaştırmak yoluyla inceleyen literatürdeki ilk çalışmadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Yüksek Teknolojili Ürün İhracatı, Refah, Dimutriscue and Hurlin Nedensellik Testi, İnovasyon, Kişi Başına Milli Gelir

Does High Technology Product Exports Increase Welfare or Countries with High Welfare Levels Innovate Better? A Causality Analysis

Öz

After the Second World War, globalization has been promoted and supported by the leading countries, especially after the 1980s, globalization has accelerated. 18.8% percent of exports within total world trade as of 1980 has become 30.6% by 2019. Export became important, especially for reaching acceptable growth rates for countries, as manifested in the studies of Balassa, Chow and Heller. However, some countries changed their strategies toward exporting the products that create higher values to their trade level, which means exporting the more profitable high-technology products. By this new government strategy, it is aimed to find the answer to the question ‘Does High Technology Product Exports Increase Welfare or Countries with High Welfare Levels Innovate Better?’ using the causality test of Dimutriscue and Hurlin for 20 countries of the top10 and bottom 10 high-tech exporters of the world with the time span of 2007-2018. It is concluded that for bottom high-technology exporters, there is two-way causality between welfare and high technology exports, but for top ten high technology exporters, there is one-way causality from welfare to high technology exports. This may be the sign of after a certain saturation level of welfare; high-tech product exports do not create any value on welfare. To our knowledge, this research paper is the first study that makes a comparison between top high-tech exporters and bottom high-tech exports in terms of analysing the effects of high-tech exports on welfare. Moreover, this is the first paper on two-way impact analysis; the impacts of welfare on high-tech export and the impacts of high-tech export on welfare. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

High-Technology Product Exports, Welfare, Dumitrescu and Hurlin Causality Test, Causality, Innovation, GDP Per Capita

Kaynakça

• Braunerhjelm, P.& Thulin, P. (2008). Can countries create comparative advantages? R&D expenditures, high-tech exports and country size in 19 OECD countries, 1981–1999. International Economic Journal, 22(1), 95–111.
• Dumitrescu, E. I. ve Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460.
• Dodaro, S. (1993). Exports and growth: a reconsideration of causality. Journal of Developing Areas 27, 227-244.
• Ekananda, M., & Parlinggoman, D. J. (2017). The role of high-tech exports and of foreign direct investments (FDI) on economic growth. European Research Studies Journal, 20(4A), 194-212.
• Fagerberg, J. (1994). Technology and international differences in growth rates. Journal of Economic Literature, 32: 1147–75
• Fagerberg J. & Verspagen B. (2007). Innovation, growth and economic development: have the conditions for catch-up changed?. Working Papers Archives 2007001, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
• Falk, M. (2009). High-tech exports and economic growth in industrialized countries. Applied Economics Letters, 16(10–12), 1025–1028.
• Gani, A. (2009). Technological achievement, high technology exports and growth. Journal of Comparative International Management 12(2): 31-47.
• IMF, (2020). Measuring economic welfare? What and how?. IMF Policy Papers. Washington. http://www.imf.org/external/pp/ppindex.aspx
• Lee J., (2011). Export specialization and economic growth around the world. Economic Systems, Elsevier, 35(1), 45-63.
• Pesaran H., Smith R. And Im K.S., (1995). Dynamic linear models for heteregenous panels. Working Papers in Economics 9503, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
• Peseran, H. M. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. Discussion Paper, No. 1240 August, p. 5. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.5113
• Pesaran, Hashem M. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22 (2), 265-312.
• Erdi̇l Sahi̇n, B. (2019). Impact of high technology export on economic growth: an analysis on turkey. Journal of Business Economics and Finance, 8 (3), 165-172. DOI: 10.17261/Pressacademia.2019.1123
• Satrovic E. (2018). Economic output and high-technology export: panel causality analysis. International Journal of Economic Studies, 4(3),55-63.
• Seung-Hoo Yoo (2008). High-technology exports and economic output: an empirical investigation. Applied Economics Letters, 15:7, 523-525, DOI: 10.1080/13504850600721882
• Stockhammer, E., Hochreiter, H., Obermayr, B., & Steinerb, K. (1997). The index of sustainable economic welfare (ISEW) as an alternative to GDP in measuring economic welfare. The results of the Austrian (revised) ISEW calculation 1955–1992. Ecological Economics 21(1): 19-24.
• Tatoğlu, F. Y. (2018). Panel zaman serileri analizi. İstanbul: Beta Yayıncılık
• Tebaldi, E. (2011). The determinants of high-technology exports: a panel data analysis. Atlantic Economic Journal, 343-353.
• Usman, M. (2017). Impact of high-tech exports on economic growth: empirical evidence from pakistan. Journal on Innovation and Sustainability, Vol. 8 (1), pp. 91-105.
• Yunus G. and Turen U (2013). The determinants of high technology exports volume: a panel data analysis of eu-15 countries. International Journal of Management, Economics and Social Sciences, 2(3), 217 –232, Available at SSRN:https://ssrn.com/abstract=2326360
• https://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/about_us/169.htm
• World Bank (2002). World Development Indicators on CD-ROM, Washington, DC
• https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.EXP.GNFS.ZS
• https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/TX.VAL.TECH.MF.ZS