The Impact of Supplier Performance on Intra-Industry Trade in Automotive Industry

Öz

The aim of this study is to empirically examine the effects of supplier performance on intra-industry trade in the automotive sector. Unlike the existing intra-industry trade literature, which predominantly focuses on macroeconomic determinants, this study incorporates supply chain and supplier performance dimensions into the analytical framework, thereby providing a more comprehensive perspective. Using data from the Turkish automotive sector, the level of intra-industry trade is measured through the Grubel–Lloyd index, while supplier performance is represented by multidimensional indicators such as quality performance, cost efficiency, product development capability, and logistics performance. The results of the econometric analysis reveal that supplier performance has statistically significant effects on intra-industry trade. Quality performance and product development capability are found to have a positive impact on intra-industry trade, whereas increases in logistics costs exert a negative effect. The findings indicate that competitiveness in the automotive sector depends not only on the performance of lead manufacturers but also on the overall efficiency and capability of the supplier network. By highlighting supplier performance as a strategic determinant of intra-industry trade, this study offers important implications for both industry stakeholders and policymakers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Intra-Industry Trade
• competitiveness
• automotive industry
• supply chain management
• supplier performance.

Otomotiv Sektöründe Tedarikçi Performansının Endüstri İçi Ticarete Etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, otomotiv sektöründe tedarikçi performansının endüstri içi ticaret üzerindeki etkilerini ampirik olarak incelemektir. Endüstri içi ticaret literatüründe ağırlıklı olarak makroekonomik değişkenlere odaklanan yaklaşımların aksine, bu çalışma tedarik zinciri ve tedarikçi performansı boyutlarını analiz çerçevesine dâhil ederek literatüre bütüncül bir katkı sunmayı hedeflemektedir. Çalışmada, Türkiye otomotiv sektörüne ait veriler kullanılarak endüstri içi ticaret düzeyi Grubel–Lloyd endeksi aracılığıyla ölçülmüş; tedarikçi performansı kalite, maliyet etkinliği, ürün geliştirme kapasitesi ve lojistik performans gibi çok boyutlu göstergelerle temsil edilmiştir. Uygulanan ekonometrik analiz sonuçları, tedarikçi performansının endüstri içi ticaret üzerinde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı etkiler yarattığını ortaya koymaktadır. Özellikle kalite ve ürün geliştirme kapasitesinin endüstri içi ticareti artırıcı yönde etkilediği, buna karşılık lojistik maliyetlerdeki artışın endüstri içi ticareti olumsuz etkilediği tespit edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, otomotiv sektöründe rekabet gücünün yalnızca ana üreticilerin performansına değil, tedarik zincirinin bütününe bağlı olduğunu göstermektedir. Çalışma, tedarikçi performansının endüstri içi ticaretin şekillenmesinde stratejik bir unsur olduğunu vurgulayarak, sektör ve politika yapıcılar için önemli çıkarımlar sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Endüstri içi ticaret
• rekabet gücü
• otomotiv sektörü
• tedarik zinciri yönetimi
• tedarikçi performansı.

Kaynakça

1. Aggarwal, S. (2023). The empirical measurement and determinants of intra-industry trade for a developing country. Journal of Applied Economic Sciences, 18(3), pp.182–220.
2. Agnihotri, A., & Bhattacharya, S. (2023). General Motors creating shareholder value through diversification in electric vehicles: Can a legacy company win? SAGE Business Cases Originals. SAGE Publications.
3. Aydın, A. (2008). Endüstri içi ticaret: Türkiye üzerine bir inceleme [Doktora tezi]. Marmara Üniversitesi.
4. Baccini, L., Dür, A., & Elsig, M. (2018). Intra-industry trade, global value chains, and preferential tariff liberalization. International Studies Quarterly, 62(2), pp. 329–340.
5. Bagchi, S., & Bhattacharyya, S. (2019). Country-specific determinants of intra-industry trade in India. Foreign Trade Review, 54(3),pp. 129–158.
6. Bai, C., & Sarkis, J. (2014). Determining and applying sustainable supplier key performance indicators. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19(3), pp. 275–291.
7. Cabral, R., & Mollick, A. V. (2011). Intra-industry trade effects on Mexican manufacturing productivity before and after NAFTA. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 20(1), pp.87–112.
8. Corden, W. M. (2014). The theory of international trade. In Economic analysis and multinational enterprise (pp. 184–210). Routledge.

9. Drelich-Skulska, B., & Bobowski, S. (2021). Intra-industry trade and implications of the European Union–Japan Economic Partnership Agreement from the perspective of the automotive industry. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 9(2), pp.183–206.
10. Dutta, S. (2023). Endogenous horizontal and vertical differentiation: Measuring value added in intra-industry trade (SSRN Working Paper No. 4518980).
11. Emadi, M. (2016). Measurement of intra-industry trade (ITT) of Iran with ten selective major trading partners using Grubel–Lloyd index. Marketing and Branding Research, 3, pp.144–152.
12. Faber, B. (2014). Trade integration, market size, and industrialization: Evidence from China’s National Trunk Highway System. Review of Economic Studies, 81(3), pp.1046–1070.
13. Fukao, K., Ishido, H., & Ito, K. (2003). Vertical intra-industry trade and foreign direct investment in East Asia. Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 17(4), pp.468–506.
14. Gandolfo, G., & Trionfetti, F. (2014). International trade theory and policy. Springer.
15. Govindan, K., Khodaverdi, R., & Jafarian, A. (2013). A fuzzy multi-criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 47, pp.345–354.
16. Ho, W., Xu, X., & Dey, P. K. (2010). Multi-criteria decision-making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. European Journal of Operational Research, 202(1), pp.16–24.
17. Holweg, M. (2008). The evolution of competition in the automotive industry. In Build to order: The road to the 5-day car (pp. 13–34). Springer London.
18. Huang, S. H., & Keskar, H. (2007). Comprehensive and configurable metrics for supplier selection. International Journal of Production Economics, 105(2), pp.510–523.
19. Huang, Y., Han, W., & Macbeth, D. K. (2020). The complexity of collaboration in supply chain networks. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 25(3), pp.393–410.
20. Kang, Y. D. (2010). Intra-industry trade in an enlarged Europe: Trend of intra-industry trade in the European Union and its determinants (KIEP Research Paper No. 10-02).
21. Kannan, V. R., & Tan, K. C. (2002). Supplier selection and assessment: Their impact on business performance. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 38(3), pp.11–21.
22. Kara, O., Altınay, A., & Erkan, B. (2020). Etkinlik, rantabilite ve ihracat rekabet gücü arasındaki ilişki: Türk otomotiv sektörü üzerine bir uygulama. Gaziantep University Journal of Social Sciences.
23. Llopis-Albert, C., Rubio, F., & Valero, F. (2021). Impact of digital transformation on the automotive industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, 120343.
24. Madeira, M. A. (2014). The new politics of the new trade: The political economy of intra-industry trade. In Handbook of the International Political Economy of Trade, pp. 113–134, Edward Elgar Publishing.
25. Mahdavian, A., Shojaei, A., McCormick, S., Papandreou, T., Eluru, N., & Oloufa, A. A. (2021). Drivers and barriers to implementation of connected, automated, shared, and electric vehicles: An agenda for future research. IEEE Access, 9, 22195–22213.
26. Manger, M. S. (2014). The economic logic of Asian preferential trade agreements: The role of intra-industry trade. Journal of East Asian Studies, 14(2), pp.151–184.
27. Mrdalj, V. (2017). Structure and determinants of intra-industry trade in agro-food sector of Bosnia and Herzegovina. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 8(1), 154.
28. Pandit, D., Joshi, M. P., Sahay, A., & Gupta, R. K. (2018). Disruptive innovation and dynamic capabilities in emerging economies: Evidence from the Indian automotive sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 129, pp. 323–329.
29. Parenti, M., Ushchev, P., & Thisse, J.-F. (2017). Toward a theory of monopolistic competition. Journal of Economic Theory, 167, pp. 86–115.
30. Pavlínek, P. (2018). Global production networks, foreign direct investment, and supplier linkages in the integrated peripheries of the automotive industry. Economic Geography, 94(2), pp.141–165.
31. Pavlínek, P. (2020). Restructuring and internationalization of the European automotive industry. Journal of Economic Geography, 20(2), pp.509–541.
32. Ustabaş, A., & Simav, O. (2018). Otomotiv endüstrisindeki dönüşüm ve Türkiye. Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(2), 211–231.
33. Ülengin, F., Önsel, Ş., Aktaş, E., Kabak, Ö., & Özaydın, Ö. (2014). A decision support methodology to enhance the competitiveness of the Turkish automotive industry. European Journal of Operational Research, 234(3), pp. 789–801.
34. Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., & Roos, D. (2007). The machine that changed the world: The story of lean production—Toyota’s secret weapon in the global car wars that is now revolutionizing world industry. Simon & Schuster.