Türkiye'de Kırmızı Et Fiyatı Oynaklığı ve Kırmızı Et Fiyatlarının Ham Petrol ve Döviz Kurları ile İlişkisi, GARCH (p, q) Modeli Yaklaşımı

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 31 Sayı: 4, 915 - 927, 31.12.2021

Melek Akay

https://doi.org/10.29133/yyutbd.984277

Cited By: 3

Öz

Türkiye’nin tarımsal ürün fiyatlarında genel olarak bir yükselme ile birlikte zaman içerisinde oynaklıklar görülmektedir. Fiyatlarda görülen bu oynaklıklar önemli çalışma konularından biridir. Özellikle, sıkça değişen enerji fiyatları ile tarımsal ürünlerin fiyatları arasındaki ilişki bilimsel olarak incelenmiştir. Türkiye'de kırmızı et fiyatlarının nasıl giderek dalgalandığı konusu ise önem arz etmektedir. Ayrıca, ham petrol fiyatlarındaki ve döviz kurlarındaki iniş çıkışların kırmızı et fiyatlarına bağlı olduğunun yanı sıra ham petrol ve döviz kurlarındaki oynaklığın kırmızı et fiyatlarına yansıdığını varsayabiliriz. Genel olarak, normal doğrusal regresyon analizi ile GARCH (p, q) model kullanılarak dana ve kuzu karkas, ham petrol ve döviz kuru fiyatları arasındaki ilişki ve kırmızı et fiyatı volatilitesi son on yıllık veriler dikkate alınarak incelenmiştir (veriler haftalık veriler olup Mayıs 2006 ve Şubat 2017 periyodunu kapsamaktadır). Analiz sonuçlarına bakıldığında, dana ve kuzu karkas fiyatlarının son on yıllık süreçte oynaklık gösterdiği, özellikle 2009- 2012 yılları (ithalatın yüksek oranda yapıldığı dönem) arasında yüksek oynaklık tespit edilmiştir. Aynı zamanda, petrol fiyatları ile çok önemli bir ilişkiye sahip olduğu belirlenmiş ve t-2, t-4 zamandaki döviz kuru fiyatı kuzu karkas fiyatını etkilerken dana karkas ile önemli bir ilişkisi bulunmamıştır. Sonuç olarak, kırmızı et fiyat yükselişi ve oynaklıkları Türkiye için önemli bir problem haline gelmekte ve bu alanda yapılan politikaların değerlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kırmızı Et Fiyatıları, Volatilite, Ham Petrol, Döviz Kuru, GARCH (p,q) Modeli, Türkiye

Red Meat Price Volatility and Its Relationship with Crude Oil and Exchange Rates in Turkey with the Approach of GARCH (p, q) Model

Öz

Turkey's agricultural commodity prices are volatile while they have steadily increased over time. A substantial amount of research has been done on the variations in these prices by looking at other commodities like energy. As a result, the connections between agricultural and energy markets have been widely explored. There is a great concern about how red meat prices in Turkey are getting increasingly fluctuating. On the other hand, we may assume that ups and downs movement in the prices of crude oil and exchange rates are connected to veal and lamb carcass prices and that volatility is transmitted to those meat prices. This study uses the generalize all period unconstraint volatility model, which generalizes the GARCH (p, q) model, to examine the veal and lamb prices volatilities in Turkey and their relationship with crude oil as well as exchange rates (data are weekly covering from May 2006 to February 2017). According to findings, red meat prices have been volatile over the previous decade, notably between 2009 and 2012. Furthermore, crude oil prices have an important impact on the prices of veal and lamb and their prior times statistically. Also exchange rates at t-2 and t-4 time have an impact on lamb prices but none at all on veal prices. Subsequently, red meat price rise and volatility are becoming an important problem for Turkey, and the policies made in this area need to be evaluated.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Red Meat Prices, Volatility, Crude Oil, Exchange Rates, GARCH (p, q) model, Turkey

Kaynakça

• An, H., Qiu, F., & Zheng, y. (2016). How do export controls affect price transmission and volatility spillovers in the Ukrainian wheat and flour markets? Science Direct, 142–150.
• Bergmann, D., O’Connor, D., & Thümmel, A. (2016). An analysis of price and volatility transmission in butter, palm oil and crude oil markets, Agricultural and Food Economics, DOI 10.1186/s40100-016-0067-4
• Chadwick, M. G., & Baştan, E. M. (2017). Beef price volatility in Turkey : can import policy affect the price and its uncertainty ? (17/09). Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey, Ankara.
• Çınar, G., & Hushmat, A. (2016). Impact of volatility of world oil prices on Turkey’s Food Prices: Garch Approach, Global Journal of Economics and Business Studies,9(5).1–8.
• Damba, O. T., Bilgic, A., & Aksoy, A. (2017). Estimating price volatility transmission between world crude oil and selected food commodities : A BEKK approach, 48(1), 41–49.
• Dickey A. D., & Fuller W. A. (1979). Distribution of the estimators for autoregressive time series with a unit root. Journal of American Statistical Association , 74 (366), 427–431.
• Engle, R.F., Ng, V.K. & Rothschild, M. (1990). Asset pricing with a factor ARCH covariance structure. NBER Technical Working Paper, (65).
• FAO, (2010). Price volatility in agricultural markets: evidence, impact on food security and policy responses. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/am053e/am053e00.pdf
• FAO, (2017). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Internatinal Crude Oil Prices. Retrieved July 26, 2017, from http://www.fao.org/giews/food-prices/indicators/detail/en/c/235344/
• Gardebroek, C., & Hernandez, M. A. (2013). Do energy prices stimulate food price volatility? Examining volatility transmission between US oil, ethanol and corn markets. Energy Economics, 40, 119–129.
• Harri, A., Nalley, L., & Hudson, D. (2009). The relationship between oil, exchange rates, and commodity prices. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 2(August), 501–510.
• Harris, R., & Sollis, R. (2003). Applied Time series modelling and forecasting. West Sussex, England, John Wiley and Sons, p. 41.
• Hassan, S. A., & Malik, F. (2007). Multivariate GARCH modelling of sector volatility transmission. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 47(3), 470–480.
• Hassouneh, I., Serra, T., & Gil, M. (2010). Price transmission in the Spanish bovine sector : the BSE effect, 41, 33–42.
• Hayenga, M. L., & Dipietre, D. D. (1982). Hedging wholesale meat prices: Analysis of basis risk. Journal of Futures Markets, 2(2), 131–140.
• Kaltalıoglu, M. (2010). Price transmissions between food and oil. M.B.A., in partıal fulfilment of the requırements for the degree of master of business administration in the Department Of Busıness Administration.
• Nazlioglu, & Soytas, U. (2012). Oil price, agricultural commodity prices, and the dollar: A panel cointegration and causality analysis. Energy Economics, vol. 34, issue 4, 1098-110436, 658–665.
• Nazlioglu, S., Erdem, C., & Soytas, U. (2013). Volatility spillover between oil and agricultural commodity markets. Energy Economics, 36, 658–665.
• Republic of Turkey Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2017). Retrieved from 2017, May http://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkeys-energy-strategy.en.mfa
• Serra, T., & Goodwin, B. K. (2003). Price transmission and asymmetric adjustment in the Spanish dairy sector Price transmission and asymmetric adjustment in the Spanish dairy sector, 6846.
• TIM. (2017). Türkiye Ihracatçılar Meclisi (Turkish Exporters Assemply), Agricultural Sector and Policy in Turkey (380-384). İstanbul. Retrieved from http://www.tim.org.tr/files/downloads/Raporlar/Tarim_Raporu_2017.pdf
• TUIK, (2017). Turkish Statistical Institutes, Foreign Trade Statistics Database, Product-Partner Countries in Trade, Retrieved from http://rapory.tuik.gov.tr/22-07-2017-15:20:34-1365891871791902376266888507.html?
• USDA, (2016). Turkey Livestock and Products Report. Retrieved May, 2017, from http://agriexchange.apeda.gov.in/marketreport/Reports/Livestock_and_Products_Annual_Ankara_Turkey_8-31-2016.pdf
• Yavuz, F., Bilgic, A., Terin, M., & Guler, I. O. (2013). Policy implications of trends in Turkey’s meat sector with respect to 2023 vision. Meat Science, 95(4), 798–804.