DO SHOCKS HAVE PERMANENT OR TRANSITORY EFFECTS ON CONTAINER TRAFFIC IN TURKISH PORTS? / Şokların Türk Limanlarındaki Konteyner Trafiği Üzerindeki Etkisi Kalıcı Mıdır Geçici Midir?

Yıl 2021, , 31 - 45, 30.04.2021

Abdullah Açık

https://doi.org/10.29216/ueip.877117

Cited By: 1

Öz

Container ports are one of the most important parts of the supply chain. Due to high investment and operating costs, the structure and predictability of current and future demands are very important. To investigate this structure, this study aims to determine whether the shocks to the export and import container quantities handled in Turkish ports are temporary or permanent. Both standard unit root tests and unit root tests with structural breaks were applied to export and import container amounts. According to the results, when the structural breaks are considered, it has been determined that both export and import container quantities are stationary. This situation shows that the effects of the shocks to the container traffic are temporary, the applied policies lose their effect in a short time and the future container traffic can be predicted using historical data.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Unit Root Test, Structural Break, Container Traffic, Policy Effectiveness

DO SHOCKS HAVE PERMANENT OR TRANSITORY EFFECTS ON CONTAINER TRAFFIC IN TURKISH PORTS? / Şokların Türk Limanlarındaki Konteyner Trafiği Üzerindeki Etkisi Kalıcı Mıdır Geçici Midir?

Öz

Konteyner limanları, tedarik zincirinin en önemli parçalarından biridir. Yüksek yatırım ve işletme maliyetleri nedeniyle, mevcut ve gelecekteki taleplerin yapısı ve öngörülebilirliği çok önemlidir. Bu yapıyı incelemek için bu çalışma, Türkiye limanlarında elleçlenen ihracat ve ithal konteyner miktarlarına yönelik şokların geçici mi yoksa kalıcı mı olduğunu belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. İthal ve ihraç konteyner miktarlarına hem standart birim kök testleri hem de yapısal kırılmalı birim kök testleri uygulanmıştır. Sonuçlara göre yapısal kırılmalar göz önüne alındığında hem ihraç hem de ithal konteyner miktarlarının durağan oldukları tespit edilmiştir. Bu durum, şokların konteyner trafiğine olan etkilerinin geçici olduğunu, uygulanan politikaların kısa sürede etkisini yitirdiğini ve geçmiş veriler kullanılarak gelecekteki konteyner trafiğinin tahmin edilebileceğini göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Birim Kök Testi, Yapısal Kırılma, Konteyner Trafiği, Politika Etkinliği

Kaynakça

• Açık, A. (2019). Volatility Spillover from Global Container Freight Indices to Port Throughputs in Turkey. Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Yenilik Dergisi, 5 (1), 101-113.
• Açık, A. (2020). The Impact of Uncertainty on International Trade: An Evidence from Container Traffic in Turkish Ports. Journal of Politics Economy and Management, 3 (2), 1-10
• Açık, A., Sağlam, B.B. and Kayıran, B. (2019b). Industrial Production as A Leading Indicator for Container Port Throughput in Turkey. Dokuz Eylül University Maritime Faculty Journal, 11 (1), 37 – 56.
• Açık, A., Sağlam, B.B. and Tepe, R. (2019a). Time-varying causality between exchange rate and container handling volume in Turkish ports. Transport & Logistics: The International Journal, 19 (46), 1-11.
• Akar, O. and Esmer, S. (2015). Cargo Demand Analysis of Container Terminals in Turkey. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 3 (2), 117-122.
• Aly, H. Y. and Strazicich, M. C. (2011). Global Financial Crisis and Africa: Is the Impact Permanent or Transitory? Time Series Evidence from North Africa. American Economic Review, 101 (3), 577-81.
• Ateş, A. and Esmer, S. (2014). Farklı Yöntemler ile Türk Konteyner Limanlarının Verimliliği. Verimlilik Dergisi, 1, 61–76.
• Ateş, A., Esmer, S., Çakir, E. and Balci, K. (2013). Karadeniz Konteyner Terminallerinin Göreceli Etkinlik Analizi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Denizcilik Fakültesi Dergisi, 5 (1), 1-22.
• Baig S. and Hussain, H. (2020) Do Shocks Have Permanent or Transitory Effects on Tourist Inflow? An Application of Stationarity Test with Structural Breaks: Evidence Reexamined for Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25 (2), 120-130,
• Bucak, U., Başaran, İ. M. and Esmer, S. (2020). Dimensions of the Port Performance: A Review of Literature. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 8 (4), 214-240.
• Carrion-i-Silvestre, J. L. and Sansó, A. (2007). The KPSS Test with Two Structural Breaks. Spanish Economic Review, 9 (2), 105-127.
• Chi, J. and Cheng, S.K. (2016). Do Exchange Rate Volatility and Income Affect Australia’s Maritime Export Flows to Asia?. Transport Policy, 47, 13-21.
• Chou, C.C., Chu, C.W. and Liang, G.S. (2008). A Modified Regression Model for Forecasting the Volumes of Taiwan’s Import Containers. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 47 (9-10), 797-807.
• Davis, S. (2008). Fiscal Federalism, Risk Sharing and the Persistence of Shocks. Neck, R., Richter, C. and Mooslechner, P. (eds). In Quantitative Economic Policy: Essays in Honour of Andrew Hughes Hallett (pp. 137-155). Austria: Springer.
• Dickey, D. A. and Fuller, W. A. (1979). Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with A Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427–431.
• Erginer, K.E., Açık, A. and Başer, S.Ö. (2019). İthal Ara Mal Kullaniminin Limanlara Yansimasi. Çaylan, D. Ö. (eds), In Türkiye İçin Denizcilik Stratejileri (pp.165-177). Ankara: Nobel Kitapevi.
• Gosasang, V., Yip, T.L. and Chandraprakaikul, W. (2018). Long-Term Container Throughput Forecast and Equipment Planning: The Case of Bangkok Port. Maritime Business Review, 3 (1), 53-69.
• Gozgor, G. (2016). Are Shocks to Renewable Energy Consumption Permanent or Transitory? An Empirical Investigation for Brazil, China, and India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 66, 913-919.
• Guloglu, B. and İvrendi, M. (2010). Output Fluctuations: Transitory or Permanent? The Case of Latin America. Applied Economics Letters, 17 (4), 381-386.
• Güner, S. (2015a). Investigating Infrastructure, Superstructure, Operating and Financial Efficiency in The Management of Turkish Seaports Using Data Envelopment Analysis. Transport Policy, 40, 36-48.
• Güner, S. (2015b). Proposal of a Two-Stage Model for Measuring the Port Efficiency and An Implication on Turkish Ports. Alphanumeric Journal, 3(2), 99-106.
• Hsu, W. K., Huang, S. H. S., Tseng, W. J. and Li, D. F. (2020). An Assessment of The Policy Gap in Port Selection of Liner Shipping Companies. Transportation Letters, 1-9.
• Khraief, N., Shahbaz, M., Heshmati, A. and Azam, M. (2020). Are Unemployment Rates in OECD countries Stationary? Evidence from Univariate and Panel Unit Root Tests. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 51, 100838.
• Kim, C.B. (2016). Impact of Exchange Rate Movements, Global Economic Activity, And the BDI Volatility on Loaded Port Cargo Throughput in South Korea. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 32 (4), 243-248.
• Kim, C.B. (2017). Does Exchange Rate Volatility Affect Korea's Seaborne Import Volume?. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 33 (1), 43-50.
• Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P.C.B., Schmidt, P. and Shin, Y. (1992). Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity Against the Alternative of a Unit Root. Journal of Econometrics, 54, 159-178.
• Lättilä, L. and Hilmola, O.P. (2012). Forecasting Long-Term Demand of Largest Finnish Sea Ports. International Journal of Applied Management Science, 4 (1), 52-79.
• Leal, E., Notteboom, T. and Sanchez, R. (2011). The Spatial Distribution of Port Activity: Theoretical and Methodological Notes for Modelling and Research. Notteboom, T. (eds.). In Current Issues in Shipping, Ports and Logistics (pp. 521-542). Antwerp: UPA University Press.
• Lean, H. H. and Smyth, R. (2009). Asian Financial Crisis, Avian Flu And Terrorist Threats: Are Shocks To Malaysian Tourist Arrivals Permanent Or Transitory?. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 14 (3), 301-321.
• Lean, H. H. and Smyth, R. (2014). Are Shocks to Disaggregated Energy Consumption in Malaysia Permanent or Temporary? Evidence from LM Unit Root Tests with Structural Breaks. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 31, 319-328.
• Lee, C. C. and Chang, C. P. (2008). Trend Stationary of Inflation Rates: Evidence from LM Unit Root Testing with A Long Span of Historical Data. Applied Economics, 40 (19), 2523-2536.
• Lee, S. Y., Chang, Y. T. and Lee, P. T. W. (2010). Container Port Selection Factors: Heterogeneity Among Major Market Players. Journal of International Logistics and Trade, 8 (2), 73-90.
• Malhotra, A. and Maloo, M. (2014). Bitcoin–Is It A Bubble? Evidence from Unit Root Tests. Evidence from Unit Root Tests (March 1, 2014). URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2476378.
• MTI (2021). Container Statistics, URL: https://atlantis.udhb.gov.tr/istatistik/istatistik_konteyner.aspx. Narayan P.K. and Popp P. (2010). A New Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks in Level and Slope at Unknown Time. Journal of Applied Statistics, 37 (9), 1425-1438.
• Narayan, P. K. (2005) The Structure of Tourist Expenditure in Fiji: Evidence from Unit Root Structural Break Tests. Applied Economics, 37 (10), 1157-1161.
• Narayan, P. K. (2008). Do Shocks to G7 Stock Prices Have A Permanent Effect? Evidence from Panel Unit Root Tests With Structural Change. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 77 (4), 369-373.
• Narayan, P. K. and Prasad, B. C. (2008). Are Shocks to Real Effective Exchange Rates Permanent or Transitory? Evidence from Pacific Island Countries. Applied economics, 40 (8), 1053-1060.
• Narayan, P. K., Narayan, S. and Smyth, R. (2008). Are Oil Shocks Permanent or Temporary? Panel Data Evidence from Crude Oil and NGL Production In 60 Countries. Energy Economics, 30 (3), 919-936.
• Ng, A. S. F., Sun, D. and Bhattacharjya, J. (2013). Port Choice of Shipping Lines and Shippers in Australia. Asian Geographer, 30(2), 143-168.
• Njegovan, N. (2006). Are Shocks to Air Passenger Traffic Permanent or Transitory? Implications for Long-Term Air Passenger Forecasts for the UK. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy (JTEP), 40 (2), 315-328.
• Öztürk, I. and Aslan, A. (2015). Are Fluctuations in Electricity Consumption Permanent or Transitory? Evidence from A Nonlinear Unit Root Test in High-Income OECD Countries. Energy Sources, Part B: Economics, Planning, and Policy, 10 (3), 257-262.
• Sağlam, B.B. and Karataş Çetin, Ç. (2018). A Qualitative Examination of Relational and Contractual Governance Mechanisms in Aliaga Port Cluster. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 6 (4), 365-378.
• Sağlam, B.B., Açık, A. and Ertürk, E. (2018). Evaluation of Investment Impact on Port Efficiency: Berthing Time Difference as A Performance Indicator. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 6 (1), 37-46.
• Shahbaz, M., Khraief, N., Mahalik, M. K. and Zaman, K. U. (2014). Are Fluctuations in Natural Gas Consumption Per Capita Transitory? Evidence from Time Series and Panel Unit Root Tests. Energy, 78, 183-195.
• Suresh, K. G. (2016). Are Shocks to Real Output Permanent or Transitory? Evidence from a Panel of Indian States and Union Territories. Journal Transition Studies Review, 23 (1), 107-113.
• Sys, C. and Vanelslander, T. (2020). Future Maritime Supply Networks: Key Issues and Solutions. In Vanelslander, T. and Sys, C. (eds). Maritime Supply Chains. Netherlands: Elsevier.
• Tran, N. K. (2011). Studying Port Selection on Liner Routes: An Approach from Logistics Perspective. Research in Transportation Economics, 32 (1), 39-53.
• Tsai, F.M. and Huang, L.J. (2017). Using Artificial Neural Networks to Predict Container Flows Between the Major Ports of Asia. International Journal of Production Research, 55 (17), 5001-5010.
• TSI (2021). Export/Import Coverage Ratio. URL: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/DownloadIstatistikselTablo?p=We3AuKO20pNLAVG1ycuAiBdTzlZSzOttRNdXvvcXq869YnzSfMe07SvuH/M2oy8w. Ulucak, R. and Lin, D. (2017). Persistence of Policy Shocks to Ecological Footprint of the USA. Ecological Indicators, 80, 337-343.
• Yilanci, V. and Tunali, Ç. B. (2014). Are Fluctuations in Energy Consumption Transitory or Permanent? Evidence from a Fourier LM Unit Root Test. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 36, 20-25.
• Yucel, A. G. (2020). Are Shocks to Tourist Arrivals Permanent or Transitory? A Comprehensive Analysis on The Top 20 Most-Visited Countries. Current Issues in Tourism, 1-18.
• Zivot, E. and Andrews, D. W. K. (1992). Further Evidence on The Great Crash, The Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 10 (3), 251-270.