Bölgesel Kapsamlı Ekonomik Ortaklık (RCEP): Üye Ülkeler Arasındaki Ticari İlişkilerin Sosyal Ağ Analizi Yöntemi İle Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Bölgesel Kapsamlı Ekonomik Ortaklık (RCEP) anlaşması, Çin’in de aralarında bulunduğu 15 ülkenin taraf olduğu dev bir serbest ticaret anlaşması olarak 2020 yılında imzalanmıştır. Bu bağlamda, RCEP anlaşması GSYİH ve ticaret hacmi açısından dünyanın en büyük serbest ticaret anlaşmasıdır. Bu çalışmada, 2012 (RCEP anlaşmasının müzakerelerinin başladığı yıl) ile 2021 yılları arasındaki RCEP ülkeleri arasındaki ticari ilişkiler sosyal ağ analizi kullanılarak incelenmiştir. Analizlerde, RCEP ülkelerinin birbirlerine yaptıkları ihracat değerleri kullanılmış ve veriler Trade Map'ten elde edilmiştir. Çalışmada, 2012, 2015, 2018 and 2021 yıllarına ilişkin sosyal ağ analizleri Ucinet programı kullanılarak analiz edilirken, Gephi programıyla ticaret ağları görselleştirilmiştir. Sosyal ağ analizleri için temel ego ağ göstergeleri, derece merkeziliği değerleri, odak ve otorite merkeziliği değerleri ve özvektör değerleri hesaplanmıştır. Analizler sonucunda RCEP ülkeleri arasında yapılan ticarette odak ve otorite konumunda olan ülkenin dört yıl (2012, 2015, 2018 and 2021) için de Çin olduğu görülmektedir. Öte yandan Çin’in en önemli ticaret ortaklarının Japonya ve Güney Kore olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, Vietnam’ın bu dönemde ticaret düzeyindeki gelişme dikkat çekicidir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• RCEP
• Sosyal Ağ Analizi
• Uluslararası Ticaret

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP): Evaluation of Trade Relations Between Member Countries Using the Social Network Analysis Method

Abstract

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement was signed in 2020 as a giant free trade agreement signed by 15 countries, including China. In this context, the RCEP agreement is the world's largest free trade agreement in terms of GDP and trade volume. In this study, commercial relations between RCEP countries between 2012 (the year when negotiations of the RCEP agreement began) and 2021 were examined using social network analysis. In the analyses, export values of RCEP countries to each other were used and the data were obtained from Trade Map. In the study, social network analyzes for the years 2012, 2015, 2018 and 2021 were analyzed using the Ucinet program, while trade networks were visualized with the Gephi program. For social network analyses, basic ego network indicators, degree centrality values, hub and authority centrality values and eigenvector values were calculated. As a result of the analysis, it is seen that the hub and authority country in trade between RCEP countries is China for all four years (2012, 2015, 2018 and 2021). On the other hand, it has been determined that China's most important trade partners are Japan and South Korea. Additionally, the development in Vietnam's trade level during this period is remarkable.

Keywords

• RCEP
• Social Network Analysis
• International Trade

Kaynakça

1. Anastasiei, B., Dospinescu, N., & Dospinescu, O. (2023). Word-of-mouth engagement in online social networks: influence of network centrality and density. Electronics, 12(13), 2857.
2. Asean (2016). Regional comprehensive economic partnership (RCEP), https://asean.org/regional-comprehensive-economic-partnership-rcep/ Accessed on: 08.08.2023.
3. Asean (2020). ASEAN hits historic milestone with signing of RCEP, https://asean.org/asean-hits-historic-milestone-with-signing-of-rcep/ Accessed on: 09.08.2023.
4. Barnes, J.A. (1954). Class and committees in a Norwegian Island Parish. Human Relations, 7, 39-58. Benedictis, L. D., & Tajoli L. (2011). The world trade network. The World Economy, 34(8), 1-43.
5. Bonacich, P. (2007). Some unique properties of eigenvector centrality. Social Networks, 29(4), 555-564.
6. Borgatti, S. P., & Cross, R. (2003). A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432-445.
7. Can, U., & Alatas, B. (2019). A new direction in social network analysis: Online social network analysis problems and applications. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 535, 122372.
8. Che, S., Kamphuis, P., Zhang, S., & Kim, J. H. (2022, January). RECP from the perspective of Chinese Mainlanders and Taiwanese Netizens: a comparative semantic network analysis. In 2022 16th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication (IMCOM) (pp. 1-4). IEEE.

9. Das, K., Samanta, S., & Pal, M. (2018). Study on centrality measures in social networks: a survey. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 8, 1-11.
10. Deguchi, T., Takahashi, K., Takayasu, H., & Takayasu, M. (2014). Hubs and authorities in the world trade network using a weighted HITS algorithm. Plos One, 9(7), e100338.
11. Drysdale, P. and Armstrong, S. (2021). RCEP: a strategic opportunity for multilateralism. China Economic Journal, 14(2), 128-143.
12. Esteve-Pérez, J., & del Río-González, M. (2022). Assessment of the centrality of the cruise ship navigation networks in Southern Europe through the application of social network analysis. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10(8), 1072.
13. Ergün, E., & Koçak Usluel, Y. (2016). An analysis of density and degree-centrality according to the social networking structure formed in an online learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(4), 34-46.
14. Faust, K. (2006). Comparing social networks: size, density, and local structure. Advances in Methodology and Statistics, 3(2), 185-216.
15. Friedkin, N. E. (1981). The development of structure in random networks: an analysis of the effects of increasing network density on five measures of structure. Social Networks, 3(1), 41-52.
16. Fruchterman T.M., & Reingold EM (1991) Graph drawing by forcedirected placement. Software-Practice and Experience, 21(11), 1129–1164.
17. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (2015). Globalization and growth. American Economic Review, 105(5), 100-104.
18. Harary, F. (2018). Graph theory (on Demand Printing of 02787). CRC Press.
19. Hanson, G. H. (2012). The Rise of middle kingdoms: Emerging economies in global trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(2), 41-64.
20. Howell, A. (2013). Is Geography ‘dead’ or ‘destiny’ in a globalizing world? A network analysis and latent space modeling approach of the world trade network. Journal of Globalization Studies, 4(2), 3-20.
21. Iacobucci, D., McBride, R., & Popovich, D. L. (2017). Eigenvector centrality: Illustrations supporting the utility of extracting more than one eigenvector to obtain additional insights into networks and interdependent structures. Journal of Social Structure, 18(1), 1-23.
22. Ishikawa, K. (2021). The ASEAN economic community and ASEAN economic integration. Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, 10(1), 24-41.
23. Jalel, R., Elaoud, A., Ben Salah, N., Chehaibi, S., & Ben Hassen, H. (2021). Modeling of soil tillage techniques using Fruchterman–Reingold Algorithm. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 18, 2987–2996.
24. Jeon, J. W., Duru, O., & Yeo, G. T. (2019). Cruise port centrality and spatial patterns of cruise shipping in the Asian market. Maritime Policy & Management, 46(3), 257-276.
25. Jiang, H., & Yu, M. (2021). Understanding RCEP and CPTPP: from the perspective China’s dual circulation economic strategy. China Economic Journal, 14(2), 144-161.
26. Karim, M. F., Rahutomo, R., Manuaba, I. B. K., Purwandari, K., Mursitama, T. N., & Pardamean, B. (2023). Free trade as domestic, economic, and strategic issues: a big data analytics approach. Journal of big Data, 10(1), 44.
27. Kleinberg J.M. (1999). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 46(5): 604-632.
28. Kimura, F., & Chen, L. (2016). Implications of mega free trade agreements for Asian Regional Integration and RCEP Negotiation. Policy Brief, 3, 1-4.
29. Laporta, L., Afonso, J., & Mesquita, I. (2018). Interaction network analysis of the six game complexes in high-level volleyball through the use of Eigenvector Centrality. Plos One, 13(9), e0203348.
30. Li, J., Zhao, H., & Xu, B. (2022). Optimization of container shipping network reconfiguration under RCEP. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10(7), 873.
31. Liu, D. (2022). Spatial correlation network and driving factors of trade between China and RECP countries: Empirical investigation based on the social network analysis method. Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2022, 2135836.
32. Morselli, C., Masias, V.H., Crespo, F., & Laengle, S. (2013). Predicting sentencing outcomes with centrality measures. Security Informatics, 2(1), 1-9.
33. Newman, M. E. J. (2010). Networks an introduction (First Press). Oxford University Press.
34. O’Malley, A. J., Arbesman, S., Steiger, D. M., Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2012). Egocentric social network structure, health, and pro-social behaviors in a national panel study of Americans. Plos One, 7(5), e36250.
35. Otte, E., & Rousseau, R. (2002). Social network analysis: a powerful strategy, also for the information sciences. Journal of Information Science, 28(6), 441-453.
36. Park, C. K., Lee, C., & Jeon, J. Q. (2020). Centrality and corporate governance decisions of Korean chaebols: A social network approach. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 62, 101390.
37. Permatasari, Y. (2020). Building Indonesia through ASEAN economic community. Journal of ASEAN Studies, 8(1), 81-93.
38. Qiu, Y., & Gong, Y. (2021). Industrial linkage effects of RCEP economies’ imports of producer services on manufacturing advantages. PLOS ONE, 16(7), e0253823.
39. Scott, J. (2012). What is social network analysis?. Bloomsbury Academic.
40. Serrat, O. (2017). Social Knowledge Solutions, Springer Singapore.
41. Shimizu, K. (2021). The ASEAN economic community and the RCEP in the world economy. Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, 10(1), 1-23.
42. Tan, W., & Soong, J. J. (2022). The political economy of China’s rising role in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP): Strategies and instruments of Chinese Way. The Chinese Economy, 55(4), 268-281.
43. Trade Map, https://www.trademap.org/Index.aspx Accessed on: 08.08.2022.
44. Wu, C. H. (2020). ASEAN at the Crossroads: Trap and Track between CPTPP and RCEP. Journal of International Economic Law, 23(1), 97-117.
45. Zhang, W., Cao, S., Zhang, X., & Qu, X. (2023). COVID-19 and stock market performance: Evidence from the RCEP countries. International Review of Economics & Finance, 83, 717-735.
46. Zhao, J., Glueck, M., Chevalier, F., Wu, Y., & Khan, A. (2016, May). Egocentric analysis of dynamic networks with egolines. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 5003-5014). Association for Computing Machinery.
47. Zhao, C., Qi, X., Gong, Y., Feng, X., Cao, X., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Is there reciprocity between India and RCEP member countries' goods trade?. Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 1-22.
48. Zhou, Y., Hong, Y., Cheng, B., & Xiong, L. (2021). The spatial correlation and driving mechanism of wood-based products trade network in RCEP countries. Sustainability, 13(18), 10063.
49. Zhu, N., & Huang, S. (2023). Impact of the tariff concessions of the RCEP agreement on the structure and evolution mechanism of manufacturing trade networks. Social Networks, 74, 78-101.