Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2006 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 2

Technology Production Skill, Productivity and Foreign Trade: A Comparative Analysis on Turkey and EU's New Members

Teknoloji Üretme Yeteneği, Verimlilik ve Dış Ticaret: Türkiye ve AB'nin Yeni Üyeleri Üzerine Karşılaştırmalı Bir İnceleme

Pages
17–45
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

Results suggest that Turkey’s relative backwardness in creating new products is well reflected in its low share of high-tech exports and particularly in poor performance of intra-industry trade in research oriented goods.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper compares the new ten members of the European Union (EU) and Turkey in terms of their ability to produce new technologies, productivity levels and trade structure.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results suggest that Turkey’s relative backwardness in creating new products is well reflected in its low share of high-tech exports and particularly in poor performance of intra-industry trade in research oriented goods.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This result confirms the main conclusions derived from the new approaches on trade and growth.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This paper compares the new ten members of the European Union (EU) and Turkey in terms of their ability to produce new technologies, productivity levels and trade structure. Firstly, the link between findings of the ‘new trade theory’ and the ‘endogenous growth theory’ in which the difference between growth level of countries is attributed to the differences in human capital and skills to produce (or imitate) new technologies are examined. Then, the share of intra-industry trade in total trade of Turkey and the new members is analyzed by using Grubel-Lloyd index. Results suggest that Turkey’s relative backwardness in creating new products is well reflected in its low share of high-tech exports and particularly in poor performance of intra-industry trade in research oriented goods. This result confirms the main conclusions derived from the new approaches on trade and growth.

Özet

Bu makalede, Türkiye ve AB’nin yeni üyeleri yeni teknoloji üretme yeteneği, verimlilik düzeyi ve dış ticaret yapısı açısından karşılaştırmalı olarak incelenmiştir. Çalışmada ilk olarak, ‘yeni ticaret teorisi’ ile ülkeler arası büyüme farklarının ülkelerin beşeri sermaye ve yeni teknoloji üretme (taklit etme) yeteneği farklarıyla açıklandığı ‘içsel büyüme teorisi’nin çıkarsamaları arasındaki ilişki değerlendirilmiştir. Daha sonra, Grubel-Lloyd indeksi kullanılarak Türkiye ve yeni AB üyelerinin dış ticaretinde endüstri-içi ticaretin payı incelenmiştir. Çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlara göre, Türkiye’nin yeni ürünler üretmedeki nispi yetersizliği ülkenin toplam ihracatında yüksek teknoloji ürünlerinin düşük bir paya sahip olmasını ve araştırma kökenli mallarda endüstri içi ticaretin düşük seviyelerde kalmasını açıklamada oldukça önemli ipuçları vermektedir. Bu sonuç, yeni ticaret ve büyüme teorilerinden elde edilen çıkarsamaları doğrular niteliktedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KÖSEKAHYAOĞLU, L. (2022). Technology Production Skill, Productivity and Foreign Trade: A Comparative Analysis on Turkey and EU's New Members. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 2, 17–45. https://ajindex.com/articles/533270

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Abramovitz, M. (1956) “Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870”, American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 46, 5-23.
  2. Amendola, G., P. Guerrieri, and P. Padoan (1998) “International Patterns of Technological Accumulation and Trade”, Trade, Growth and Technical Change in D. Archibugi, ve J. Michie (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Andersen, T.M, N. Haldrup, and J.R. Sorensen (2000) “Labour Market Implications of EU Product Market Integration”, Economic Policy, 30, 105–133.
  4. Baier, S.L, P.D. Gerald and J.R. Tamura (2002) “How Important are Capital and Total Factor Productivity for Economic Growth?”, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Working Paper, April. Barro, J. and X. Sala-I-Martin (1995)
  5. Economic Growth, New York: McGraw Hill, Inc. Balassa, B. and L. Bauwens (1988) “The Determinants of Intra-European Trade in Manufactured Goods”, European Economic Review, 32, 1421-1437.
  6. Blomstrom, M., R.E. Lipsey, and M. Zegan (1996) “Is fixed Investment the Key to Economic Growth”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 269-276.
  7. Buckley, P.J, L.J. Clegg, N. Forsans and K.T. Reilly (2000) “The Evolution of FDI in the United States in the Context of Trade Liberalisation and Regionalisation”, Journal of Business Research, 853-857.
  8. Damijan, J.P. and M. Rojec (2004) Foreign Direct Investment and the Catching-up Process in New EU Member States: Is There a Flying Geese Pattern?, Vienna: Institute for International Economic Studies. Denison, E.F. (1985) Trends in American Economic Growth, 1929-1982, Washington: Brookings Institution. Djankov, S. and B. Hoekman (1996) “Intra-Industry Trade, Foreign Direct Investment, and the Reorientation of Eastern European Exports”, Policy Research Working Paper, World Bank, No:1652. Dunning, J.H. (1998) “Globalization and the New Geography of Foreign Direct Investment”, Oxford Development Studies, 26(1), 47–69.
  9. Dosi, G, K. Pavitt and L. Soete (1990)
  10. The Economics of Tecnhical Change, International Trade, Newyork: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Erlat, G. and H. Erlat (2003) "Measuring Intra-Industry Trade and Marginal Intra-Industry Trade: The Case for Turkey", Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 39(6), 5-38.
  11. Erk, N. ve Tekgül, Y. (2001) Ekonomik Entegrasyon ve Endüstri İçi Ticaret: Türkiye-AB Ülkeleri Arasındaki Endüstri İçi Ticaretin Ölçülmesi ve Ticaret Tipinin Belirlenmesi, ERC/ODTÜ Uluslararası Ekonomi Kongresi/IV, Ankara. Eurostat, 2006,
  12. Structural Indicators, Innovation and Research. http://epp.eurostat.cec.eu.in