THE IMPACT OF TÜRKİYE'S MARITIME TRANSPORT PERFORMANCE ON EXPORT MARKET PENETRATION

Öz

The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship between Turkiye's maritime logistics performance and export market penetration. Covering the period 1990–2023, the study employs the Autoregressive Distributed Lag model (ARDL) to analyze both short- and long-term relationships. In the model, export market penetration is used as the dependent variable, while container port traffic, shipping fleet size, real exchange rate, and number of export partners are included as independent variables. The long-term estimation results indicate a significant relationship between maritime logistics performance and export market penetration. Specifically, a 1% increase in container traffic at ports and in the shipping fleet size increases export market penetration by 0.16% and 0.40%, respectively. The real exchange rate has a significant impact on export market penetration. The short-term forecast results indicate that export market penetration can be adjusted by the size of the shipping fleet, the real exchange rate, and the number of export partners. The study contributes to the literature by empirically demonstrating the decisive role of maritime transport performance in increasing export market penetration in the case of Turkiye and provides policymakers with guiding recommendations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Maritime Logistics
• Export Market Penetration
• Container Port Traffic
• Shipping Fleet Size
• Turkiye

TÜRKİYE’NİN DENİZ YOLU TAŞIMACILIĞI PERFORMANSININ İHRACAT PAZAR PENETRASYONU ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİ

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Türkiye’nin deniz yolu taşımacılığı performansı ile ihracat pazar penetrasyonu arasındaki ilişkiyi araştırmaktır. 1990-2023 dönemini kapsayan çalışmada Gecikmesi Dağıtılmış Otoregresif modeli (ARDL) tahmin edilerek, kısa ve uzun dönem ilişkisi analiz edilmiştir. Modelde bağımlı değişken olarak ihracat pazar penetrasyonu, bağımsız değişkenler olarak limanlardaki konteyner trafiği, deniz ticaret filosu büyüklüğü, reel döviz kuru ve ihracat partneri sayısı kullanılmıştır. Uzun dönem tahmin sonuçları, deniz yolu taşımacılığı performansı ile ihracat pazar penetrasyonu arasında anlamlı bir ilişkiyi açıklamaktadır. Limanlardaki konteyner trafiği ve deniz ticaret filosundaki %1’lik artış, ihracat pazar penetrasyonunu sırasıyla %0.16 ve %0.40 artırmaktadır. Reel döviz kuru, ihracat pazar penetrasyonu üzerinde anlamlı bir etkiye sahiptir. Kısa dönem tahmin sonuçları, ihracat pazar penetrasyonunun deniz ticaret filosu büyüklüğü, reel döviz kuru ve ihracat partneri sayısı ile düzeltilebileceğine işaret etmektedir. Çalışma, Türkiye örneğinde ihracat pazar penetrasyonunun artışında deniz yolu taşımacılığı performansının belirleyici rolünü ampirik olarak ortaya koyarak literatüre katkı sağlamakta ve politika yapıcılara yönlendirici öneriler sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Deniz Yolu Taşımacılığı
• İhracat Pazar Penetrasyonu
• Limanlardaki Konteyner Trafiği
• Deniz Ticaret Filosu
• Türkiye

Kaynakça

1. Ait Lhassan, I., Ezekari, M., Belamhitou, M., ve El Hachimi, I. (2022). The effect of logistics performance determinants on export performance. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147- 4478), 11(5), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v11i5.1849
2. Alzate, P., Isaza, G. A., Toro, E. M., ve Jaramillo-Garzón, J. A. (2024). Advances and emerging research trends in maritime transport logistics: environment, port competitiveness and foreign trade. International Journal of Production Management and Engineering, 12(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.4995/ijpme.2024.21090
3. Arvis, J.-F., Ojala, L., Wiederer, C., Shepherd, B., Raj, A., Dairabayeva, K., ve Kiiski, T. (2010). Connecting to Compete 2010: Trade Logistics in the Global Economy--The Logistics Performance Index and Its Indicators.
4. Arvis, J.-F., Ojala, L., Wiederer, C., Shepherd, B., Raj, A., Dairabayeva, K., ve Kiiski, T. (2018). Connecting to Compete 2018: Trade Logistics in the Global Economy--The Logistics Performance Index and Its Indicators.
5. Aslan, Ç., Çepni, O., ve Gül, S. (2021). The impact of real exchange rate on international trade: Evidence from panel structural VAR model. Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 30(6), 829–842. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2021.1905695
6. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., ve Gelan, A. (2019). The South Africa-U.S. Trade and the Real Exchange Rate: Asymmetric Evidence from 25 Industries. South African Journal of Economics, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/saje.12242
7. Barakat, M., Haikal, G., Ali, A., ve Eid, A. (2018). Enhancing Exports through Managing Logistics Performance: Evidence from Middle East and African Countries. Journal of Research in Business, Economics and Management, 11(2), 2131–2140.
8. Brenton, P., ve Newfarmer, R. (2007). Watching More Than The Discovery Channel : Export Cycles And Diversification In Development. In Policy Research Working Paper (4302; Issue August). https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-4302

9. Bugarcic, F., ve Kleinert, J. (2024). Estimating the effects of logistics performance on trade: Evidence from different gravity model approaches (GEP 2024–13; Issue April).
10. Çelebi, D. (2019). The role of logistics performance in promoting trade. Maritime Economics and Logistics, 21(3), 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41278-017-0094-4
11. Chen, Y. C., ve Hasan, M. K. (2023). Impacts of Liner Shipping Connectivity and Global Competitiveness on Logistics Performance: the Mediating Role of the Quality of Port and Infrastructure. Transport, 38(2), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2023.19372
12. Cheung, Y. W., ve Sengupta, R. (2013). Impact of exchange rate movements on exports: An analysis of Indian non-financial sector firms. Journal of International Money and Finance, 39, 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2013.06.026
13. D’Acunto, F., Hoang, D., Paloviita, M., ve Weber, M. (2019). Cognitive abilities and inflation expectations (126; KIT Working Paper Series in Economics).
14. Diakantoni, A., Escaith, H., Roberts, M., ve Verbeet, T. (2017). Accumulating Trade Costs and Competitiveness in Global Value Chains. In WTO Working Paper (ERSD-2017-02; Issue January). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2906866
15. Dickey, D. A., ve Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series With a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(366a), 427–431.
16. Dickey, D. A., ve Fuller, W. A. (1981). Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root. Econometrica, 49(4), 1057–1062.
17. Ding, T., Zhu, W., ve Zhao, M. (2022). Will Cross-Border Logistics Performance Contribute to Export Competitiveness. International Journal of Applied Logistics, 12(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijal.309406
18. Emeka Nkoro, ve Uko, A. K. (2016). Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL) cointegration technique: application and interpretation. Journal of Statistical and Econometric Methods, 5(3), 63–91.
19. Fan, L., Zhang, S., ve Yin, J. (2018). Structural Analysis of Shipping Fleet Capacity. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2018, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3854090
20. Fugazza, M., ve Hoffmann, J. (2017). Liner shipping connectivity as determinant of trade. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 2(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-017-0019-5
21. Gani, A. (2017). The Logistics Performance Effect in International Trade. Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 33(4), 279–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2017.12.012
22. Government UK Shipping Fleet Statistics. (2024). https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/shipping-fleet-statistics-2024/shipping-fleet-statistics-2024-notes-and-definitions. Access Date: 25/09/2025
23. Guillou, S. (2008). Exports and exchange rate : a firm-level investigation. In Documents de travail (’OFCE: 2008-02). http://spire.sciences-po.fr/hdl:/2441/6151
24. Hoang, H. T. (2024). Decomposition approach for examining effects of logistic performance on exports: A case study of Vietnam. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i4.3394
25. Jiang, Z., & Wu, Y. (2017). The Impact of International Logistics to International Trade Research Based on an Empirical Analysis of the Data in 1995-2014 in Shandong Province. MATEC Web of Conferences (ICTTE 2017). https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201712405004
26. Karamollaoğlu, N., ve Yalçin, C. (2020). Exports, Real Exchange Rates and Dollarization: Empirical Evidence from Turkish Manufacturing Firms. Empirical Economics, 59(5), 2527–2557.
27. Koban, E., ve Keser, H. Y. (2010). Dış Ticarette Lojistik (3. Baskı). Ekin Kitabevi. Bursa.
28. Koyuncu, T., Doğaner, B., ve Alola, A. A. (2023). The criticality of transport and export activities in the economic prosperity of high-middle income countries: the role of logistics performance. Urban, Planning and Transport Research, 11(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2023.2182353
29. Lu, X., Zhang, C., ve Geng, L. (2024). Impact of logistics performance on international trade - a test based on meta-analysis. Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2024.2431263
30. Mao, R., ve Zhang, B. (2015). Export destination and export market penetration of the People’s Republic of China—past and future. Asian Development Review, 32(1), 142–166. https://doi.org/10.1162/ADEV_a_00044
31. Munim, Z. H., ve Schramm, H.-J. (2018). The impacts of port infrastructure and logistics performance on economic growth: the mediating role of seaborne trade. Journal of Shipping and Trade, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-018-0027-0
32. Nam, H. S., ve Song, D. W. (2011). Defining maritime logistics hub and its implication for container port. Maritime Policy and Management, 38(3), 269–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2011.572705
33. Narayan, P. K., ve Narayan, S. (2005). Estimating income and price elasticities of imports for Fiji in a cointegration framework. Economic Modelling, 22(3), 423–438.
34. Newey, W. K. ve West, K. D. (1987). Economics Department of the University of Pennsylvania Institute of Social and Economic Research -- Osaka University Hypothesis Testing with Efficient Method of Moments Estimation. The International Economic Review, 28(3), 777–787. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2526578
35. Ng, S., ve Perron, P. (2001). LAG Length Selection and the Construction of Unit Root Tests with Good Size and Power. Econometrica, 69(6), 1519–1554. Deniz Ticaret Odası (2025). Deni̇zci̇li̇k Sektör Raporu. İstanbul.
36. Olyanga, A. M., Shinyekwa, I. M. B., Ngoma, M., Nkote, I. N., Esemu, T., ve Kamya, M. (2022). Export logistics infrastructure and export competitiveness in the East African Community. Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications, 4(1), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.1108/mscra-09-2021-0017
37. Pesaran, M. H., ve Shin, Y. (1998). An Autoregressive Distributed-Lag Modelling Approach to Cointegration Analysis. Econometrics and Economic Theory in the 20th Century: The Ragnar Frisch Centennial Symposium, 371–413.
38. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., ve Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds Testing Approaches to the Analysis of Level Relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326.
39. Phillips, P. C. B., ve Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335–346.
40. Schøyen, H., ve Odeck, J. (2013). The technical efficiency of Norwegian container ports: A comparison to some Nordic and UK container ports using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA). Maritime Economics and Logistics, 15(2), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.1057/mel.2013.3
41. Takele, T. B., ve Buvik, A. S. (2019). The role of national trade logistics in the export trade of African countries. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management, 13, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.4102/jtscm.v13i0.464
42. Töngür, Ü., Türkcan, K., ve Ekmen-Özçelik, S. (2020). Logistics performance and export variety: Evidence from Turkey. Central Bank Review, 1–12. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cbrev.2020.04.002
43. Türsoy, T. (2017). Causality between stock prices and exchange rates in Turkey: Empirical evidence from the ARDL bounds test and a combined cointegration approach. International Journal of Financial Studies, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs5010008
44. Wang, T. F., ve Cullinane, K. (2006). The efficiency of European container terminals and implications for supply chain management. Maritime Economics and Logistics, 8(1), 82–99. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.mel.9100151
45. West, K. D. (1997). Another heteroskedasticity- and autocorrelation-consistent covariance matrix estimator. Journal of Econometrics, 76(1–2), 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(95)01788-7
46. World Bank World Development Indicators – Container port traffic (TEU: 20 foot equivalent units). (2023). https://databank.worldbank.org/metadataglossary/world-development-indicators/series/IS.SHP.GOOD.TU. Access Date: 25/09/2025
47. Yücel, M. E. (2025). Lojistik Performansın Türkiye’nin İhracatı Üzerindeki Etkisi. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 80(1), 25–41.
48. Zakia, M., Hanene, B., Samir, A., ve Soumeia, D. (2024). The Impact of Logistics Performance on Export Market Penetration: an Econometric Study Using GMM. Financial Markets, Institutions and Risks, 8(4), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.61093/fmir.8(4).51-63.2024