Impact of Foreign Trade Openness on Regional Unemployment: The Case of Turkey

Yıl 2019, , 153 - 170, 15.01.2019

Onur Ercan Esin Kılıç

https://doi.org/10.17541/optimum.494052

Cited By: 2

Öz

Regional unemployment rates are the main indicator of regional
development related to the labor market. Therefore, policies to combat
unemployment should be ensured to spread the investments to the regions.
Besides, since foreign trade will enable production for larger markets, the
level of employment may be increased by directing enterprises to foreign trade.
Consequently, it is important to investigate the relationship between foreign
trade openness and unemployment at the regional level. In this study, the
relationship between regional foreign trade openness and unemployment in Turkey
were investigated using dynamic linear panel data analysis methods for period
2004-2014. Analysis results indicated a negative
relationship between the regional foreign trade openness and the unemployment
rate. In addition, the results of Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel causality test showed
that the relationship between these two variables is bidirectional. According
to these results, with the policies to increase regional trade openness, regional
unemployment rate could be reduced in Turkey.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Foreign Trade Openness, Regional Unemployment, Panel Data Analysis

Ticari Dışa Açıklığın Bölgesel İşsizlik Üzerindeki Etkisi: Türkiye Örneği

Öz

Bölgesel işsizlik oranları,
bölgesel gelişmişliğin emek piyasasına ilişkin temel göstergesi olarak ele
alınmaktadır. Dolayısıyla, işsizlikle mücadele politikaları yatırımların
bölgelere yayılmasını da sağlamalıdır. Ayrıca, dış ticaret daha geniş piyasalar
için üretimi beraberinde getireceğinden; istihdam düzeyi, işletmelerin dış
ticarete yönlendirilmesiyle de arttırılabilir. Bu nedenle, bölgesel düzeyde
ticari dışa açıklık ile işsizlik arasındaki ilişkinin araştırılması önemlidir. Bu
çalışmada Türkiye’de bölgesel ticari dışa açıklık ile işsizlik arasındaki ilişki,
2004-2014 dönemi için dinamik doğrusal panel veri analizi yöntemleri
kullanılarak araştırılmıştır. Analiz sonuçları bölgesel ticari dışa açıklık
endeksleri ile işsizlik oranı arasında negatif bir ilişki olduğunu işaret
etmiştir. Ayrıca, Dumitrescu-Hurlin panel nedensellik testi sonuçları, bu iki
değişken arasındaki ilişkinin çift yönlü olduğunu göstermiştir. Elde edilen
sonuçlar, Türkiye’de bölgesel ticari dışa açıklığın arttırılmasına yönelik
uygulanacak politikaların bölgesel işsizlik oranlarını azaltabileceği şeklinde
yorumlanabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ticari Dışa Açıklık, Bölgesel İşsizlik, Panel Veri Analizi

Kaynakça

• Alcalá, F., & Ciccone, A. (2004). Trade and productivity. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(2), 613–646. DOI: 10.1162/0033553041382139
• Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277-297. DOI: 10.2307/2297968
• Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 9-51. DOI: 10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D
• Ayaş, N. ve Çeştepe, H. (2010). Dış ticaretin istihdam üzerindeki etkileri: Türk imalat sanayi örneği. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 15(2), 259-281. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/sduiibfd/issue/20827/223030
• Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143.
• Brecher, R. A. (1974). Minimum wage rates and the pure theory of international trade. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 88(1), 98-116. DOI: 10.2307/1881796
• Davidson, C., Martin, L., & Matusz, S. (1999). Trade and search generated unemployment. Journal of International Economics, 48(2), 271-299. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-1996(98)00040-3
• Davis, D. R. (1998). Does European unemployment prop up American wages? National labor markets and global trade. The American Economic Review, 88(3), 478-494. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/116845
• De Pinto, M. (2013). International trade and unemployment: On the redistribution of trade gains when firms matter. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
• Dumitrescu, E. I., & Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460. DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
• Dutt, P., Mitra, D., & Ranjan, P. (2008). International trade and unemployment: Theory and cross-national evidence. Economics Faculty Scholarship, 68, ss. 1-36. Retrieved from https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1093&context=ecn
• Elhorst, J. P. (2003). The mystery of regional unemployment differentials: Theoretical and empirical explanations. Journal of Economic Surveys, 17(5), 709-748. DOI: 10.1046/j.1467-6419.2003.00211.x
• Erlat, G. (2000). Measuring the impact of trade flows on employment in the Turkish manufacturing industry. Applied Economics, 32(9), 1169-1180. DOI: 10.1080/000368400404317
• Felbermayr, G., Prat, J., & Schmerer, H. J. (2008). Globalization and labor market outcomes: Wage bargaining, search frictions and firm heterogeneity. IZA Discussion Paper Series, 3363, 1-51.
• Felbermayr, G., Prat, J., & Schmerer, H. J. (2009). Trade and unemployment: What do the data say? IZA Discussion Paper Series, 4184, 1-47. Retrieved from http://ftp.iza.org/dp3363.pdf
• Fu, X., & Balasubramanyam, V. N. (2005). Exports, foreign direct investment and employment: The case of China. The World Economy, 28(4), 607-625. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00694.x
• Fugazza, M., Carrère, C., Olarreaga, M., & Robert-Nicoud, F. (2014). Policy issues in international trade and commodities research study series: No. 64. Trade in employment. New York and Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Retrieved from https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/itcdtab64_en.pdf
• Gozgor, G. (2014). The impact of trade openness on the unemployment rate in G7 countries. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 23(7), 1018-1037. DOI: 10.1080/09638199.2013.827233
• Gozgor, G. ve Piskin, A. (2011). İşsizlik ve dış ticaret: Türkiye’deki bölgeler için genelleştirilmiş momentler yöntemi-dinamik panel veri yaklaşımı. Business and Economics Research Journal, 2(3), 121-138. Retrieved from https://www.berjournal.com/tr/issizlik-ve-dis-ticaret-turkiye’deki-bolgeler-icin-genellestirilmis-momentler-yontemi-dinamik-panel-veri-yaklasimi
• Gül, E. ve Kamacı, A. (2012). Dış ticaretin istihdam üzerindeki etkileri: Bir panel veri analizi. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 12(4), 23-32. Retrieved from https://earsiv.anadolu.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/11421/131
• Helpman, E., Itskhoki, O., & Redding, S. (2011). Trade and labor market outcomes. NBER Working Paper Series, 16662, 1-47. Retrieved from https://www.nber.org/papers/w16662.pdf
• Kamei, K. (2014). International trade, unemployment, and firm owners in a general equilibrium with oligopoly. Munich Personal RePEc Archive, 59388, 1-15. Retrieved from https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/59388/1/MPRA_paper_59388.pdf
• Kılıç, E. ve Kutlu, E. (2017). Trade openness and unemployment in transition economies: A dynamic heterogeneous panel data analysis. In F. Yenilmez & E. Kılıç (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Unemployment and Labor Market Sustainability in the Era Of Globalization (pp. 371-387). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-2008-5.ch020
• Maddala, G. S., & Wu, S. (1999). A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and statistics, 61(S1), 631-652. DOI: 10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1631
• Melitz, M. J. (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, 71(6), 1695-1725. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/1555536
• Moore, M. P., & Ranjan, P. (2005). Globalisation vs. skill-biased technological change: Implications for unemployment and wage inequality. The Economic Journal, 115(503), 391-422. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2005.00994.x
• Neary, J. P. (2009, February) International trade in general oligopolistic equilibrium. Paper presented at the meeting of CESifo Area Conference on Global Economy, Munich. Retrieved from https://www.cesifo-group.de/dms/ifodoc/docs/Akad_Conf/CFP_CONF/CFP_CONF_2009/Conf-ge09-Whalley/Conf-ge09-papers/ge09_neary__9107667_en.pdf
• Nicita, A. (2006). Export led growth, pro-poor or not? Evidence from Madagascar’s textile and apparel industry. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 3841, 1-25. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/438991468055157604/pdf/wps3841.pdf
• Özel, H. A., Topkaya, Ö. ve Kurt, S. (2012). Ticari açıklık ve işsizlik ilişkisi: Türkiye örneği. Kamu-İş, İş Hukuku ve İktisat Dergisi, 12(4), 29-54. Retrieved from http://www.kamu-is.org.tr/pdf/1242.pdf
• Papageorgiou, D., Choksi, A. M., & Michaely, M. (1990). Liberalizing foreign trade in developing countries: The lessons of experience. Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/824261468765268505/pdf/multi-page.pdf
• Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. IZA Discussion Paper, 1240, 1-42. Retrieved from http://ftp.iza.org/dp1240.pdf
• Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312. DOI: 10.1002/jae.951
• Polat, Ö. ve Uslu, E. E. (2010). Türkiye imalat sanayinde dış ticaretin istihdam üzerindeki etkisi. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 9(3), 489-504. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/223444
• Polat, O., Uslu, E. E. ve Aydemir, C. (2011). İmalat sanayinde dış ticaret ve istihdamın panel veri analizi. Business and Economics Research Journal, 2(3), 161-171. Retrieved from http://www.berjournal.com/wp-content/plugins/downloads-manager/upload/BERJ%202(3)11%20Article%2010%20pp.161-171.pdf
• Rama, M. (2003). Globalization and workers in developing countries. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 2958, 1-38. Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/846921467988877048/pdf/multi0page.pdf
• Sandalcılar, A. R. ve Yalman, İ. N. (2012). Türkiye’de dış ticaretteki serbestleşmenin işgücü piyasaları üzerindeki etkileri. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 7(2), 49-65. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/65451
• Seyidoğlu, H. (2009). Uluslararası iktisat: Teori politika ve uygulama. İstanbul: Güzem Can Yayınları.
• Shapiro, C., & Stiglitz, J. (1984). Equilibrium unemployment as a worker discipline device. American Economic Review, 74(2), 433–444. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/1804018
• T.C. Kalkınma Bakanlığı, (2013). İllerin ve bölgelerin sosyo-ekonomik gelişmişlik sıralaması araştırması SEGE 2011. Ankara: Bölgesel Gelişme ve Yapısal Uyum Genel Müdürlüğü Yayını. Retrieved from http://www3.kalkinma.gov.tr/DocObjects/View/15310/SEGE-2011.pdf
• Yılmaz, A. ve Altay, H. (2016, July). The cointegration relationship between trade openness and unemployment rate: A panel data analysis for G-8 countries. In EUREFE’16 bildiri kitabı (Vol. 2, pp. 823-844), Retrieved March 18, 2017, from http://eurefe.org/eurefecilt-2.pdf