Journals / Tekstil ve Konfeksiyon / 2015 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 4

TÜRKİYE’NİN PAMUK İTHALATININ ARMINGTON ESNEKLİĞİ

ARMINGTON ELASTICITY OF TURKEY’S IMPORT DEMAND FOR COTTON

Pages
289–292
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)

According to the results and based on 2014/15 season figures, a subsidy which decreases theratio of domestic prices to import prices of cottons by 1 per cent would cost an additional 240 thousand US dollars for the budget andlead some 24 million US dollars decline in the value of imported cotton.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study estimates Armington elasticity of Turkey’s import demand for cotton by using Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL)method.
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the results and based on 2014/15 season figures, a subsidy which decreases theratio of domestic prices to import prices of cottons by 1 per cent would cost an additional 240 thousand US dollars for the budget andlead some 24 million US dollars decline in the value of imported cotton.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:On the other hand, an import tax which increases import pricesat the same level would have the same effect on imports, while raising an amount of 12 million US dollars tariff revenue.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study estimates Armington elasticity of Turkey’s import demand for cotton by using Autoregressive Distributed Lag (ARDL)method. The estimated long-run elasticity of demand shows that policies on cotton prices might have important economic impacts ondomestic production and trade in Turkey. According to the results and based on 2014/15 season figures, a subsidy which decreases theratio of domestic prices to import prices of cottons by 1 per cent would cost an additional 240 thousand US dollars for the budget andlead some 24 million US dollars decline in the value of imported cotton. On the other hand, an import tax which increases import pricesat the same level would have the same effect on imports, while raising an amount of 12 million US dollars tariff revenue.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, Türkiye'nin pamuk ithalatı talebinin Armington esnekliği Sınır Testi Yaklaşımı (ARDL) kullanılarak tahmin edilmiştir. Uzun dönem talep esnekliği pamuk fiyatlarına yönelik politikaların Türkiye'nin üretim ve ticareti üzerinde önemli ekonomik etkileri olacağını göstermektedir. Çalışma bulguları, yerli/ithal fiyat oranını yüzde 1 oranında düşüren bir destek politikasının bütçeye yaklaşık 240 bin ABD dolarlık ek bir maliyete neden olurken, aynı zamanda Türkiye'nin pamuk ithalatını neredeyse 24 milyon ABD doları azaltacağını göstermektedir. Bununla beraber, yerli/ithal pamuk fiyat oranında aynı seviyede düşüşe sebep olacak bir gümrük vergisinin ithalatı aynı miktarda azaltacağı, diğer yandan 12 milyon ABD dolarlık vergi geliri sağlayacağı beklenmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERTUĞRUL, H. M., GENÇOSMANOĞLU, Ö. T. (2022). TÜRKİYE’NİN PAMUK İTHALATININ ARMINGTON ESNEKLİĞİ. Tekstil ve Konfeksiyon, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 4, 289–292. https://ajindex.com/articles/596757

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. The Official Gazette, 2012, “Girdi Tedarik Stratejisi (GİTES) ve Eylem Planı 2013-2015”, September 3, 2015,
  2. Pesaran, M. H., Shin, Y. and Smith, R. J., 2001, “Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol.16 (3), pp. 289-326
  3. Armington, P. S. (1969, March). “A theory of demand for products distinguished by place of production”, Staff Papers, Vol.16 (1), pp. 159-178
  4. Babula, R, 1987, “An Armington Model of U.S. Cotton Exports”, Journal of Agricultural Economics Research, Vol.39 (4), pp. 12-22
  5. Piermartini, R. and Teh, R., 2005, “Demystifying Modelling Methods for Trade Policy”, WTO Discussion Papers, No.10
  6. McDaniel, C. A. and Balistreri, E. J., 2003, “A Review of Armington Trade Substitution Elasticities”, Integration and Trade Journal, Vol.7 (18), pp. 161-173
  7. Kreinin, M. E. and Plummer, M. G., 2012, “Theory and Economic Modeling of Preferential Trading Arrangements”, M. E. Kreinin and M. G. Plummer (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of International Commercial Policy, Oxford University Press, pp. 123-156
  8. Amjadi, A., 2011, WITS-World Integrated Trade Solution: User's Manual, World Bank and UNCTAD
  9. Gallaway, M. P., McDaniel, C. A. and Rivera, S. A., 2003, “Short-run and long-run industry-level estimates of U.S. Armington elasticities”, North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Vol.14, pp. 49-68
  10. Ertugrul, H. M. and Mangir, F., 2015, “The tourism-led growth hypothesis: empirical evidence from Turkey”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol.18 (7), pp. 633-646
  11. Dickey, D. and Fuller, W., 1979, “Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol.74 (366), pp. 427-431
  12. Phillips, P. C. and Perron, P., 1988, “Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression”, Biometrika, Vol.75 (2), pp. 335-346
  13. Ng, S. and Perron, P., 2001, “LAG Length Selection and the Construction of Unit”, Econometrica, Vol.69 (6), pp. 1519-1554.