SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Öneri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 21 Sayı: 65

EXPORT PROBABILITY, ECONOMIC SHOCKS, AND POLICY SCENARIOS: A MICRODATA-BASED ASSESSMENT OF ISTANBUL'S MANUFACTURING SECTOR

İHRACAT OLASILIĞI, EKONOMİK ŞOKLAR VE POLİTİKA SENARYOLARI: İSTANBUL İMALAT SEKTÖRÜ ÜZERİNE MİKRO VERİ TABANLI BİR DEĞERLENDİRME

Selim Süleyman(İstanbul Ticaret Odası)0000-0002-1548-0874
Pages
19–41
Publication Date
2026-01-29
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results show that firm size, R&D intensity, marketing expenditures, and profitability ratios positively impact export probability, while debt-to-equity ratios have negative effects.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study investigates the firm-level determinants of export probability in Istanbul's manufacturing sector using microeconometric methods.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Utilizing a comprehensive panel dataset of 330,469 firm-year observations from 2009 to 2022, we employ a logit model to identify key factors influencing export behavior.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results show that firm size, R&D intensity, marketing expenditures, and profitability ratios positively impact export probability, while debt-to-equity ratios have negative effects.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:İhracat Olasılığı · Firma Heterojenliği · Yeni Ticaret Teorisi

Abstract

This study investigates the firm-level determinants of export probability in Istanbul's manufacturing sector using microeconometric methods. Utilizing a comprehensive panel dataset of 330,469 firm-year observations from 2009 to 2022, we employ a logit model to identify key factors influencing export behavior. Results show that firm size, R&D intensity, marketing expenditures, and profitability ratios positively impact export probability, while debt-to-equity ratios have negative effects. Specifically, a 10% increase in R&D spending raises export probability by 2.9 percentage points, and a similar increase in net sales boosts it by 3.4 percentage points. The study goes beyond traditional export determinants by analyzing firms' resilience to external shocks, including geopolitical risks, energy crises, and natural disasters, thereby combining conventional export factors with a risk perspective. Scenario analyses identify 4,209 firms with export characteristics that are not currently exporters, estimating their additional export potential at $1.9 to $4.8 billion. The findings suggest that export promotion policies should focus not only on traditional performance indicators but also on structural capacities that enhance firms' resilience to shocks. This multidimensional approach provides practical insights for designing trade-oriented industrial policies under uncertainty in emerging markets.

Özet

Bu çalışma, İstanbul imalat sektöründe faaliyet gösteren firmaların ihracat yapma olasılığını belirleyen faktörleri ekonometrik yöntemlerle analiz etmektedir. 2009-2022 dönemini kapsayan 330.469 firma-yıl gözleminden oluşan geniş panel veri seti kullanılarak logit model tahmini gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular, firma büyüklüğü, AR-GE yoğunluğu, pazarlama harcamaları ve kârlılık oranının ihracat olasılığını pozitif yönde etkilediğini; borç/özsermaye oranının ise negatif etkiye sahip olduğunu göstermektedir. AR-GE harcamalarındaki %10'luk artışın ihracat olasılığını 2,9 puan, net satışlardaki artışın %3,4 oranında artırdığı tespit edilmiştir. Çalışma ayrıca firmaların jeopolitik riskler, enerji krizleri ve doğal afetler gibi dışsal şoklara karşı dayanıklılık profillerini analiz ederek geleneksel ihracat belirleyicilerini risk perspektifiyle bütünleştirmektedir. Senaryo analizleri sonucunda, ihracat karakteristiklerine sahip ancak henüz ihracatçı olmayan 4.209 firma belirlenmiş ve bu firmaların 1,9-4,8 milyar dolar arasında ek ihracat potansiyeli taşıdığı hesaplanmıştır. Sonuçlar, ihracat teşvik politikalarının yalnızca geleneksel performans göstergelerine değil, aynı zamanda firmaların şok direncini artıracak yapısal kapasitelere de odaklanması gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Süleyman, S. (2026). EXPORT PROBABILITY, ECONOMIC SHOCKS, AND POLICY SCENARIOS: A MICRODATA-BASED ASSESSMENT OF ISTANBUL'S MANUFACTURING SECTOR. Öneri Dergisi, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 65, 19–41. https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.1779926

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (29)

  1. Akman, M. S., & Kazan, E. (2023). Trade policy uncertainty and firm investment: Evidence from Turkey. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 59(2), 273–290.
  2. Alfaro, L., Antràs, P., Chor, D., & Conconi, P. (2020). Internalizing global value chains: A firm-level analysis. IMF Economic Review, 68(3), 669–706. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41308.020.00105-5
  3. Antràs, P., & Chor, D. (2018). On the measurement of upstreamness and downstreamness in global value chains. Review of Economics and Statistics, 100(2), 278–294.
  4. Atabek Demirhan, A. (2015). To be exporter or not to be exporter? Entry–exit dynamics of Turkish manufacturing firms. Empirical Economics, 51(1), 181-200.
  5. Aysan, A. F., Disli, M., & Ng, A. (2017). SME access to finance in emerging markets: The Turkish case. Journal of Banking Regulation, 18(1), 45–58.
  6. Baldwin, R. (1989). NBER Working Paper Series, No. 2911. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w2911/w2911.pdf
  7. Baldwin, R., & Krugman, P. (1989). Persistent trade effects of large exchange rate shocks. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 104(4), 635–654.
  8. Berman, N., Martin, P., & Mayer, T. (2020). How do different exporters react to exchange rate changes? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(1), 437–507.
  9. Bernard, A. B., & Jensen, J. B. (1995). Exporters, jobs, and wages in U.S. manufacturing: 1976–1987. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics, 1995(1), 67–119.
  10. Bernard, A. B., & Jensen, J. B. (1999). Exceptional exporter performance: Cause, effect, or both? Journal of International Economics, 47(1), 1–25.
  11. Bernard, A. B., Jensen, J. B., Redding, S. J., & Schott, P. K. (2007). Firms in international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 105–130.
  12. Briguglio, L., Cordina, G., Farrugia, N., & Vella, S. (2009). Economic vulnerability and resilience: Concepts and measurements. Oxford Development Studies, 37(3), 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/136.008.10903089893
  13. Clerides, S., Lach, S., & Tybout, J. R. (1998). Is learning by exporting important? Micro-dynamic evidence from Colombia, Mexico, and Morocco. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113(3), 903–947.
  14. Di Giovanni, J., Levchenko, A., & Mejean, I. (2022). Firms, destinations, and aggregate fluctuations. Econometrica, 90(1), 119–162.
  15. Dixit, A. (1989a). Hysteresis, import penetration, and exchange rate pass-through. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 104(2), 205–228.
  16. Dixit, A. (1989b). Entry and exit decisions under uncertainty. Journal of Political Economy, 97(3), 620–638.
  17. Gereffi, G., & Lee, J. (2016). Economic and social upgrading in global value chains and industrial clusters: Why governance matters. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551.014.2373-7
  18. Gopinath, G., Helpman, E., & Rogoff, K. (Eds.). (2022). Handbook of International Economics (Vol. 6). North Holland: Elsevier.
  19. Helpman, E., Melitz, M. J., & Yeaple, S. R. (2004). Export versus FDI with heterogeneous firms. American Economic Review, 94(1), 300–316.
  20. Krugman, P. R. (1980). Scale economies, product differentiation, and the pattern of trade. American Economic Review, 70(5), 950–959.
  21. Manova, K. (2013). Credit constraints, heterogeneous firms, and international trade. Review of Economic Studies, 80(2), 711–744.
  22. Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2015). On the notion of regional economic resilience: Conceptualization and explanation. Journal of Economic Geography, 15(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbu015
  23. Melitz, M. J. (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, 71(6), 1695–1725.
  24. Melitz, M. J., & Redding, S. J. (2015). Heterogeneous firms and trade. In G. Gopinath, E. Helpman, & K. Rogoff (Eds.), Handbook of International Economics (Vol. 4, pp. 1–54). New Holland: Elsevier.
  25. Miroudot, S., & Cadestin, C. (2017). OECD Trade Policy Papers, No. 197. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2017/03/services-in-global-value-chains_08350b98/465f0d8b-en.pdf
  26. Roberts, M. J., & Tybout, J. R. (1997). The decision to export in Colombia: An empirical model of entry with sunk costs. American Economic Review, 87(4), 545–564.
  27. Rose, A. (2007). Economic resilience to natural and man-made disasters: Multidisciplinary origins and contextual dimensions. Environmental Hazards, 7(4), 383–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.10.001
  28. Wagner, J. (2007). Exports and productivity: A survey of the evidence from firm-level data. World Economy, 30(1), 60–82.
  29. Wagner, J. (2012). International trade and firm performance: A survey of empirical studies since 2006. Review of World Economics, 148(2), 235–267.