Journals / Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 18 Sayı: 34

Exchange Rate Pass-Through, Pricing Behavior, and Export Volume: An Analysis of Turkey’s Hazelnut Exports

Döviz Kuru Geçişkenliği, Fiyatlama Davranışı ve İhracat Miktarı İlişkisi: Türkiye Fındık İhracatı Üzerine Bir Analiz

Halit Levent Orman(GİRESUN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-9225-1223
Pages
325–344
Publication Date
2026-06-25
🏛️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)

The empirical findings indicate that there is no statistically significant long-run relationship between the exchange rate and export volume, whereas world prices and external demand exert a decisive influence on export performance.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the effects of exchange rate movements on Turkey’s hazelnut exports through price, quantity, and behavioral adjustment channels.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The widely accepted view in the literature suggests that a depreciation of the domestic currency increases export volumes.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The empirical findings indicate that there is no statistically significant long-run relationship between the exchange rate and export volume, whereas world prices and external demand exert a decisive influence on export performance.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Döviz Kuru Geçişkenliği · Fındık İhracatı · Fiyatlama Davranışı

Abstract

This study examines the effects of exchange rate movements on Turkey’s hazelnut exports through price, quantity, and behavioral adjustment channels. The widely accepted view in the literature suggests that a depreciation of the domestic currency increases export volumes. However, this mechanism may weaken in agricultural products characterized by perennial production and extremely limited short-run supply elasticity. In this context, the study analyzes whether exchange rate pass-through in Turkey’s hazelnut exports operates primarily through pricing behavior and the timing of sales rather than through increases in export volume. Using annual data for the period 1990–2024, the ARDL bounds testing approach is employed. The empirical findings indicate that there is no statistically significant long-run relationship between the exchange rate and export volume, whereas world prices and external demand exert a decisive influence on export performance. The results suggest that increases in the exchange rate do not generate a mechanism that raises export volumes; instead, exporters adjust through pricing power and stockholding behavior. These findings imply that exchange rate pass-through in perennial agricultural products cannot be fully explained by the classical price–quantity channel and highlight the importance of behavioral and institutional factors. The study draws attention to the limited effectiveness of exchange-rate-oriented policy approaches in agricultural exports and thereby offers a new perspective to the literature

Özet

Bu çalışma, döviz kuru hareketlerinin Türkiye’nin fındık ihracatı üzerindeki etkilerini fiyat, miktar ve davranışsal uyum kanalları üzerinden incelemektedir. Literatürde yaygın olarak kabul gören yaklaşım, yerel para biriminin değer kaybının ihracat miktarını artıracağı yönündedir. Ancak çok yıllık ve kısa dönemde arz esnekliği son derece sınırlı olan tarım ürünlerinde bu mekanizmanın zayıflayabileceği göz ardı edilmektedir. Bu çerçevede çalışma, Türkiye’nin fındık ihracatında döviz kuru geçişkenliğinin miktar artışı yerine fiyatlama davranışı ve satış zamanlaması üzerinden işleyip işlemediğini analiz etmektedir. 1990–2024 dönemine ait yıllık veriler kullanılarak ARDL sınır testi yaklaşımı uygulanmıştır. Ampirik bulgular, döviz kuru ile ihracat miktarı arasında uzun dönemde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişkinin bulunmadığını, buna karşılık dünya fiyatları ve dış talep değişkenlerinin ihracat performansını belirleyici ölçüde etkilediğini göstermektedir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, döviz kuru artışlarının ihracat miktarını artıran bir mekanizma yaratmaktan ziyade, ihracatçıların fiyatlama gücü ve stoklama davranışı yoluyla uyum sağlamasına neden olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu bulgular, çok yıllık tarım ürünlerinde döviz kuru geçişkenliğinin klasik fiyat-miktar kanalıyla açıklanamayabileceğine işaret etmekte ve davranışsal ile kurumsal unsurların önemini vurgulamaktadır. Çalışma, tarım ihracatına yönelik politika tasarımında kur odaklı yaklaşımların sınırlı etkisine dikkat çekerek literatüre yeni bir perspektif sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Orman, H. L. (2026). Exchange Rate Pass-Through, Pricing Behavior, and Export Volume: An Analysis of Turkey’s Hazelnut Exports. Karadeniz Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 34, 325–344. https://doi.org/10.38155/ksbd.1857881

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (29)

  1. Abbott, P. C., & Paarlberg, P. L. (1998). Tariff rate quotas: Structural and stability impacts in growing markets. Agricultural Economics, 19(3), 257–267
  2. Akal, M. (2009). Estimation of hazelnut export of Turkey and forecast accuracies. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 5(10), 77–96.
  3. Akkoç, U., & Yücel, M. E. (2017). Türkiye’de döviz kuru geçişkenliğinin asimetrik davranışı. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 13(13), 903–911.
  4. Anderson, K., & Nelgen, S. (2012). Trade barrier volatility and agricultural price stabilization. World Development, 40(1), 36–48.
  5. Aslan, F. (2024). Döviz kuru tarımsal ihracat ilişkisi: Türkiye örneği. Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.25308/aduziraat.1436653
  6. Baffes, J., & Gardner, B. (2003). The transmission of world commodity prices to domestic markets. World Bank Economic Review, 17(1), 159–180.
  7. Brown, R. L., Durbin, J., & Evans, J. M. (1975). Techniques for testing the constancy of regression relationships over time. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 37(2), 149–192.
  8. Campa, J. M., & Goldberg, L. S. (2005). Exchange rate pass-through into import prices. Review of Economics and Statistics, 87(4), 679–690. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465305775098189
  9. Çatuk, C. (2025). The impact of exchange rate and inflation rate fluctuations on Türkiye’s agricultural exports: A statistical analysis. Turkish Journal of Agriculture–Food Science and Technology, 13(2), 339–345.
  10. Deaton, A., & Laroque, G. (1992). On the behaviour of commodity prices. Review of Economic Studies, 59(1), 1–23.
  11. Dickey, D. A., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1979.10482531
  12. Dornbusch, R. (1987). Exchange rates and prices. American Economic Review, 77(1), 93–106. Enders, W. (2015). Applied econometric time series (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  13. Erdal, G., Erdal, H., & Esengün, K. (2012). The effects of exchange rate volatility on trade: Evidence from Turkish agricultural trade. Applied Economics Letters, 19(3), 297–303.
  14. Erdem, E., Nazlioglu, S., & Erdem, C. (2010). Exchange rate uncertainty and agricultural trade: Panel cointegration analysis for Turkey. Agricultural Economics, 41(6), 537–543.
  15. Gardner, B. L. (1987). The economics of agricultural policies. Macmillan.
  16. Gilbert, C. L. (1989). The impact of exchange rates and developing country debt on commodity prices. Economic Journal, 99(397), 773–784.
  17. Goldberg, P. K., & Knetter, M. M. (1997). Goods prices and exchange rates: What have we learned? Journal of Economic Literature, 35(3), 1243–1272.
  18. Gopinath, G., Itskhoki, O., & Rigobon, R. (2010). Currency choice and exchange rate pass-through. American Economic Review, 100(1), 304–336. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.1.304
  19. Kripfganz, S., & Schneider, D. C. (2020). Response surface regressions for critical value bounds. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 82(4), 905–929.
  20. Krugman, P., Obstfeld, M., & Melitz, M. (2018). International economics: Theory and policy (11th ed.). Pearson.
  21. Melitz, M. J., & Ottaviano, G. I. P. (2008). Market size, trade, and productivity. Review of Economic Studies, 75(1), 295–316.
  22. Orman, T., & Dellal, İ. (2021). Cointegration analysis of exchange rate volatility and agricultural exports in Turkey: An ARDL approach. Turkish Journal of Agriculture Food Science and Technology, 9(6), 1180–1185. https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v9i6.1180-1185.4456
  23. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y., & Smith, R. J. (2001). Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 16(3), 289–326.
  24. Phillips, P. C. B., & Perron, P. (1988). Testing for a unit root in time series regression. Biometrika, 75(2), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/75.2.335
  25. Schuh, G. E. (1974). The exchange rate and U.S. agriculture. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 56(1), 1–13.
  26. Wright, B. D., & Williams, J. C. (1989). A theory of negative prices for storage. Journal of Futures Markets, 9(1), 1–13.
  27. Yanikkaya, H., Kaya, H., & Koçtürk, O. M. (2013). The effect of real exchange rates and their volatilities on the selected agricultural commodity exports: A case study on Turkey, 1971–2010. Agricultural Economics, 59(5), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.17221/122/2012-AGRICECON
  28. Yıldırım, A. E., & Saraç, T. B. (2022). Exchange rate volatility and Turkey Germany bilateral trade: An asymmetry analysis. Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 31(5), 783–797. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2021.2022742
  29. Zivot, E., & Andrews, D. W. K. (2002). Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil-Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 20(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1198/073500102753410372