Comparative Analysis of Competitiveness of Shangai Cooperation Organization Members and Turkey

Öz

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a regional integration that emerged in the Central Asian region about 20 years ago and has been on the agenda of Turkey for the last few years. In particular, disputes between Turkey-and EU in recent years have led the various segments to express the SCO as a possible alternative to the EU in the future. In this study, the export specialization and competition levels of the SCO region countries and Turkey are analysed in terms of products and Lall (2000) based technological categories. The comparative advantages of the SCO countries and Turkey are calculated using the Balassa index for the 1993-2016 interval. Analysis revealed that Turkey has a comparative advantage in especially low and medium technology and resource based products. It is evident that while the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan have comparative advantage in primary and resource-based products, China has over-unity RCA in low and medium technology products, India in primary, resource-based and low-tech products, and Pakistan in low technology and primary products. In other words Turkey and SCO countries possess a similar comparative advantage pattern with respect to the technological classification. Besides, the ratio of advanced technology products with RCA over-unity is almost zero for all the countries in consideration. Additionally, in the case of products in which Turkey has a strong comparative advantage, it is shown that the closest competitors are China, India and Pakistan.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Revealed Comparative Advantage,Competitiveness,Balassa Index,Shanghai Cooperation Organization

Comparative Analysis of Competitiveness of Shangai Cooperation Organization Members and Turkey

Öz

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a regional integration that emerged in the Central Asian region about 20 years ago and has been on the agenda of Turkey for the last few years. In particular, disputes between Turkey-and EU in recent years have led the various segments to express the SCO as a possible alternative to the EU in the future. In this study, the export specialization and competition levels of the SCO region countries and Turkey are analysed in terms of products and Lall (2000) based technological categories. The comparative advantages of the SCO countries and Turkey are calculated using the Balassa index for the 1993-2016 interval. Analysis revealed that Turkey has a comparative advantage in especially low and medium technology and resource based products. It is evident that while the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan have comparative advantage in primary and resource-based products, China has over-unity RCA in low and medium technology products, India in primary, resource-based and low-tech products, and Pakistan in low technology and primary products. In other words Turkey and SCO countries possess a similar comparative advantage pattern with respect to the technological classification. Besides, the ratio of advanced technology products with RCA over-unity is almost zero for all the countries in consideration. Additionally, in the case of products in which Turkey has a strong comparative advantage, it is shown that the closest competitors are China, India and Pakistan.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Competitiveness,Revealed Comparative Advantage,Balassa Index,Shanghai Cooperation Organization,Turkey

Kaynakça

1. Balassa, B. (1965). Trade liberalisation and “revealed” comparative advantage. The Manchester School, 33(2), 99-123.
2. Çiçek, R., & Bashimov, G. (2016). Orta Asya’nın pamuk ticaretindeki karşılaştırmalı üstünlüğünün belirlenmesi. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 12(28), 1-14.
3. Doanh, N. K. (2011). The dynamic patterns of Korea’s export specialization. Vietnam: Thai Nguyen University of Economics and Business Administration, 177-198.
4. Eğilmez, M. (2016). Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü ve Türkiye, http://www.mahfiegilmez.com/2016/11/sangay-isbirligi-orgutu-ve-turkiye.html, 25.08.2017
5. Erkan, B. (2012). BRIC ülkeleri ve Türkiye’nin ihracat uzmanlaşma ve rekabet düzeylerinin karşılaştırmalı analizi. AİBÜ-İİBF Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Bahar 2012, 8(1), 101-131.
6. Grace, A. (2016), Quantifying China's influence on the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Cornell International Affairs Review,Vol.10, No.1, 1-3
7. Hinloopen, J., & Van Marrewijk, C. (2001). On the empirical distribution of the Balassa index. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 137(1), 1-35.
8. IMF (2017). World Economic Outlook April 2017, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/weoselgr.aspx, 15.07.2017.

9. Kaya, A. A. (2006). İmalat sanayi ihracatında uzmanlaşma: Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği analizi (1991–2003). Ege Academic Review, Vol.6, Issue 2, 73-82.
10. Khatibi, A. (2008). Kazakhstan’s revealed comparative advantage vis-à-vis the EU-27. ECIPE Working Paper No. 03/2008.
11. Kösekahyaoğlu, L. ve Özdamar, G. (2011). Türkiye, Çin ve Hindistan’ın sektörel rekabet gücü üzerine karşılaştırmalı bir inceleme, Uludağ Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(2), 29-49.
12. Lall, S. (2000). The technological structure and performance of developing country manufactured exports, 1985-98. Oxford development studies, 28(3), 337-369.
13. Liesner, H. H. (1958). The European common market and British industry. The Economic Journal, 68(270), 302-316.
14. Lord, M. (2015). Regional economic integration in Central Asia and South Asia, MPRA Paper No. 66436.
15. Raghuramapatruni, R. (2015), Revealed comparative advantage and competitiveness: A study on BRICS, Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(5), 1-7.
16. Shoufeng, C., Feng, L., & Zhang, J. (2011). Export competitiveness of agri-products between China and central Asian countries: A comparative analysis. Canadian Social Science, 7(5), 129-134.
17. Şahin, D. (2016). Açıklanmış karşılaştırmalı üstünlükler yöntemi ile Türkiye ve Çin'in sektörel rekabet gücünün karşılaştırmalı analizi. Kırıkkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 6(1), 275-289.
18. Şimşek, N., & Sadat, S. A. (2009). ECO pazarında Türkiye: 1997-2005 dönemi rekabet gücü analizi. Sosyoekonomi, 10(10), 135-157.
19. Şimşek, N., Seymen, D. ve Utkulu, U. (2010). Turkey’s competitiveness in the EU market: A comparison of different trade measures, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12( 2), 107-139.
20. Şimşek, N., Şimşek, H. A., & Nurbayev, D. (2017). Kazakhstan’s competitiveness in the Eurasian Economic Union market. Sosyoekonomi, Vol. 25(33), 81-102.
21. Tabata, S. (2006). Observations on changes in Russia's comparative advantage, 1994-2005. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 47(6), 747-759.
22. Taneja, K., & Wani, N. U. H. (2014). Economic performance of Indo-China merchandise trade: An analysis of RCA and RID approaches. Journal of International Economics, 5(1), 88.
23. The World Bank (2017). http://data.worldbank.org/indicator, 29.07.2017.
24. Turkish Statistical Institute (2017), Main statistics, http://www.tuik.gov.tr/UstMenu.do?metod=temelist, 29.07.2017
25. Van Belle, G., Fisher, L. D., Heagerty, P. J., & Lumley, T. (2004). Biostatistics: A methodology for the health sciences (Vol. 519): John Wiley & Sons.
26. Veeramani, C. (2008). India and China changing patterns of comparative advantage? In R. Radhakrishna (Ed.), India Development Report 2008, (pp. 145-156). New Delhi, India: Oxford University Press.
27. Yıldırım, B. (2007). Şanghay İşbirliği Örgütü ve Türkiye, http://www.tasam.org/tr-TR/Icerik/283/sangay_isbirligi_orgutu_ve_turkiye, 21.08.2017