SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3

THE MEASUREMENT OF UNEQUAL EXCHANGE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE: THE CASE OF TURKEY

ULUSLARARASI TİCARETTE EŞİTSİZ MÜBADELENİN ÖLÇÜLMESİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Nihat DAĞISTAN
Pages
39–66
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

According to the findings in this study, the loss incurred by Turkey due to unequal exchange was estimated total PPP $477,8 billion regarding the period between 1980-2010

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:When core countries are compared to peripheral countries, including Turkey, in the world capitalist system, it is cleary seen that peripheral countries have relatively undervalued currencies, lower comparative price levels and wages.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In order to measure those effects, a method based on deviation of the market exchange rate from PPP exchange rate, which was first proposed by Kohler, is used.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the findings in this study, the loss incurred by Turkey due to unequal exchange was estimated total PPP $477,8 billion regarding the period between 1980-2010
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

When core countries are compared to peripheral countries, including Turkey, in the world capitalist system, it is cleary seen that peripheral countries have relatively undervalued currencies, lower comparative price levels and wages. This situation usually leads to unequal exchange for peripheral countries in international trade with core countries. This study aims to reveal the effects of unequal exchange that Turkey, as one of the peripheral countries, has experienced while doing trades with those core countries. In order to measure those effects, a method based on deviation of the market exchange rate from PPP exchange rate, which was first proposed by Kohler, is used. According to the findings in this study, the loss incurred by Turkey due to unequal exchange was estimated total PPP $477,8 billion regarding the period between 1980-2010

Özet

Dünya kapitalist sisteminde merkez ülkeleri ile aralarında Türkiye'nin de bulunduğu çevre ülkeleri karşılaştırıldığında, çevre ülkelerinin görece daha düşük değerli para birimlerine, daha düşük karşılaştırmalı fiyat ve ücret düzeylerine sahip oldukları görülmektedir. Bu durum çevre ülkeleri açısından merkez ülkeleri ile yaptıkları uluslararası ticarette eşitsiz mübadeleye zemin hazırlamaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, bir çevre ülkesi olarak Türkiye'nin merkez ülkeleri ile yaptığı ticarette maruz kaldığı eşitsiz mübadele etkisinin ölçülerek ortaya konulmasıdır. Bu çerçevede ilk kez Köhler tarafından geliştirilen ve piyasa döviz kurunun SGP döviz kurundan sapmasını temel alan hesaplama yönteminden yararlanılmıştır. Çalışmada elde edilen bulgulara göre, Türkiye'nin eşitsiz mübadeleye bağlı olarak maruz kaldığı kayıp 1980-2010 dönemi itibariyle toplam 477,8 milyar SGP $ olarak tahmin edilmiştir

🔖

Cite This Article

DAĞISTAN, N. (2022). THE MEASUREMENT OF UNEQUAL EXCHANGE IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE: THE CASE OF TURKEY. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 3, 39–66. https://ajindex.com/articles/426904

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Alba, J.D. ve Park, D. (2005). "Non-linear Mean Reversion of Real Exchange Rates and Purchasing Power Parity: Some Evidence from Turkey". Applied Economic Letters, 12, 701-704.
  2. Alba, J.D. ve Papell, D. H. (2007). "Purchasing Power Parity and Country Characteristics: Evidence from Panel Data Tests". Journal of Development Economics, 83, 240-251.
  3. Amin, S. (1976). Unequal Development. New York: Monthly Review Press.
  4. Bahmani-Oskooeea, M., Kutanb, A. M. ve Zhou, S. (2008). "Do Real Exchange Rates Follow a Non-Linear Mean Reverting Process in Developing Countries?". Southern Economic Journal, 74, 1049-1062.
  5. Bhagwati J. N. (1958), "Immiserizing Growth: A Geometrical Note", Review of Economic Studies, No. 3, pp. 201-5.
  6. Boratav, K. (2009). Bir Krizin Hikayesi. Ankara:
  7. Arkadaş Yayınevi.
  8. Brewer, A. (1990). Marxist Theories of Imperialism: A Critical Survey. (Second Edition), London and New York: Routledge. Cheung, Y. ve Lai, K. (2000). "On Cross-Country Differences in The Persistence of Real Exchange Rates". Journal of International Economics, 50, 375-397.
  9. Drine, Imed ve Rault, C. (2008). "Purchasing Power Parity for Developing and Developed Countries: What Can We Learn from Non-Stationary Panel Data Models?". CESIFO Working Paper No.2255. Dollar, D. ve Kraay, A. (2004). "Trade, Growth, and Poverty". The Economic Journal, 114 (February), F22. Emmanuel, A. (1972). Unequal Exchange: A Study Of The Imperialism Of Trade. New York: Monthly Review Press.
  10. Freeman, A. (2009). "The Poverty of Statistics and The Statistics of Poverty". Thirld World Quarterly, 30:8, pp.1427-1448.
  11. Freeman, A. ve Kagarlitsky, B. (2008). Küreselleşmenin Krizi (1.baskı). İstanbul:
  12. Yordam Kitap. Froot, K.A. ve Rogoff, K. (1995). "Perspectives on PPP and Long-Run Real Exchange Rates". In: Rogoff, K., Grossman, G. (Eds.), Handbook of International Economics. North Holland, Amsterdam. Gibson, B. (1980). "Unequal Exchange: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Findings". The Review of Radical Political Economics, 12:3 (Feb.). Köhler, Gernot (1998). "The Structure of Global Money and World Tables of Unequal Exchange". Journal of World-Systems Research 4:145-168.
  13. Köhler, G. (2003). "Time Series of Unequal Exchange". G. Köhler ve E.J. Chaves (eds.), Globalization: Critical Perspectives (ss. 373-386)
  14. İçinde, New York: Nova Science Publishers,
  15. Inc. Kravis, I.B. ve Lipsey, R.E. (1983). "Toward An Explanation of National Price Levels". NBER Working Paper No: 1034. MacDonalds, R. (2007). Exchange Rate Economics: The