SavedAdd your journal

Journals / MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

Comparative Analysis of Competitiveness of Shangai Cooperation Organization Members and Turkey

Hamza ÇEŞTEPE
Selcen ZORLU
Pages
2559–2578
Publication Date
2019-07-16
DOI
—
🏛️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)

Additionally, in the case of products in which Turkey has a strong comparative advantage, it is shown that the closest competitors are China, India and Pakistan.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a regional integration that emerged in the Central Asian region about 20 years ago and has been on the agenda of Turkey for the last few years.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study, the export specialization and competition levels of the SCO region countries and Turkey are analysed in terms of products and Lall (2000) based technological categories.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Additionally, in the case of products in which Turkey has a strong comparative advantage, it is shown that the closest competitors are China, India and Pakistan.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Revealed Comparative Advantage · Competitiveness · Balassa Index

Abstract

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a regional integration that emerged in the Central Asian region about 20 years ago and has been on the agenda of Turkey for the last few years. In particular, disputes between Turkey-and EU in recent years have led the various segments to express the SCO as a possible alternative to the EU in the future. In this study, the export specialization and competition levels of the SCO region countries and Turkey are analysed in terms of products and Lall (2000) based technological categories. The comparative advantages of the SCO countries and Turkey are calculated using the Balassa index for the 1993-2016 interval. Analysis revealed that Turkey has a comparative advantage in especially low and medium technology and resource based products. It is evident that while the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan have comparative advantage in primary and resource-based products, China has over-unity RCA in low and medium technology products, India in primary, resource-based and low-tech products, and Pakistan in low technology and primary products. In other words Turkey and SCO countries possess a similar comparative advantage pattern with respect to the technological classification. Besides, the ratio of advanced technology products with RCA over-unity is almost zero for all the countries in consideration. Additionally, in the case of products in which Turkey has a strong comparative advantage, it is shown that the closest competitors are China, India and Pakistan.

Özet

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) is a regional integration that emerged in the Central Asian region about 20 years ago and has been on the agenda of Turkey for the last few years. In particular, disputes between Turkey-and EU in recent years have led the various segments to express the SCO as a possible alternative to the EU in the future. In this study, the export specialization and competition levels of the SCO region countries and Turkey are analysed in terms of products and Lall (2000) based technological categories. The comparative advantages of the SCO countries and Turkey are calculated using the Balassa index for the 1993-2016 interval. Analysis revealed that Turkey has a comparative advantage in especially low and medium technology and resource based products. It is evident that while the Russian Federation, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan have comparative advantage in primary and resource-based products, China has over-unity RCA in low and medium technology products, India in primary, resource-based and low-tech products, and Pakistan in low technology and primary products. In other words Turkey and SCO countries possess a similar comparative advantage pattern with respect to the technological classification. Besides, the ratio of advanced technology products with RCA over-unity is almost zero for all the countries in consideration. Additionally, in the case of products in which Turkey has a strong comparative advantage, it is shown that the closest competitors are China, India and Pakistan.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇEŞTEPE, H., ZORLU, S. (2019). Comparative Analysis of Competitiveness of Shangai Cooperation Organization Members and Turkey. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 2559–2578. https://ajindex.com/articles/2795

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Balassa, B. (1965). Trade liberalisation and “revealed” comparative advantage. The Manchester School, 33(2), 99-123.
  2. Çiçek, R., & Bashimov, G. (2016). Orta Asya’nın pamuk ticaretindeki karşılaştırmalı üstünlüğünün belirlenmesi. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 12(28), 1-14.
  3. Doanh, N. K. (2011). The dynamic patterns of Korea’s export specialization. Vietnam: Thai Nguyen University of Economics and Business Administration, 177-198.
  4. Eğilmez, M. (2016). Şangay İşbirliği Örgütü ve Türkiye, http://www.mahfiegilmez.com/2016/11/sangay-isbirligi-orgutu-ve-turkiye.html, 25.08.2017
  5. Erkan, B. (2012). BRIC ülkeleri ve Türkiye’nin ihracat uzmanlaşma ve rekabet düzeylerinin karşılaştırmalı analizi. AİBÜ-İİBF Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Bahar 2012, 8(1), 101-131.
  6. Grace, A. (2016), Quantifying China's influence on the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Cornell International Affairs Review,Vol.10, No.1, 1-3
  7. Hinloopen, J., & Van Marrewijk, C. (2001). On the empirical distribution of the Balassa index. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 137(1), 1-35.
  8. IMF (2017). World Economic Outlook April 2017, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2017/01/weodata/weoselgr.aspx, 15.07.2017.
  9. Kaya, A. A. (2006). İmalat sanayi ihracatında uzmanlaşma: Türkiye-Avrupa Birliği analizi (1991–2003).
  10. Ege Academic Review, Vol.6, Issue 2, 73-82.
  11. Khatibi, A. (2008). Kazakhstan’s revealed comparative advantage vis-à-vis the EU-27. ECIPE Working Paper No. 03/2008.
  12. Kösekahyaoğlu, L. ve Özdamar, G. (2011).
  13. Türkiye, Çin ve Hindistan’ın sektörel rekabet gücü üzerine karşılaştırmalı bir inceleme, Uludağ Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(2), 29-49.
  14. Lall, S. (2000). The technological structure and performance of developing country manufactured exports, 1985-98. Oxford development studies, 28(3), 337-369.
  15. Liesner, H. H. (1958). The European common market and British industry. The Economic Journal, 68(270), 302-316.
  16. Lord, M. (2015). Regional economic integration in Central Asia and South Asia, MPRA Paper No. 66436. Raghuramapatruni, R. (2015), Revealed comparative advantage and competitiveness: A study on BRICS, Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(5), 1-7.
  17. Shoufeng, C., Feng, L., & Zhang, J. (2011). Export competitiveness of agri-products between China and central Asian countries: A comparative analysis. Canadian Social Science, 7(5), 129-134.
  18. Şahin, D. (2016). Açıklanmış karşılaştırmalı üstünlükler yöntemi ile Türkiye ve Çin'in sektörel rekabet