KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 29

Belirsizlik, Döviz Kuru ve Gelirin Hizmet Ticareti Üzerindeki Uzun Dönem Etkileri: G7 Ülkelerinden Kanıtlar

Long-Run Effects of Uncertainty, Exchange Rates, and Income on Services Trade: Evidence from the G7 Countries

Barış Ülker(DİCLE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-6860-8210
Sayfa
919–936
Yayın Tarihi
2026-10-14
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Bulgular, REER’deki değerlenmenin toplam hizmet ticaretini istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve negatif yönde (-0,70/-0,80) etkilediğini, buna karşılık GSYİH artışlarının toplam hizmet ticaretini artırdığını (0,83/1,09) ve böylece hizmet ticaretinin uzun dönemde fiyat rekabetçiliği ve ekonomik ölçek kanallarıyla şekillendiğini göstermektedir.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Bu çalışma, G7 ülkelerinde toplam hizmet ticaretinin uzun dönem belirleyicilerini, 1997-2024 dönemi için ampirik olarak incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Araştırmada Dünya Bankası ve Ekonomi Politikası Belirsizliği (Economic Policy Uncertainty, EPU) veri tabanlarından elde edilen yıllık panel veriler kullanılarak EPU endeksi, reel efektif döviz kuru (Real Effective Exchange Rate, REER) ve ülkelerin kendi gayrisafi yurt içi hasıla (GSYİH) düzeyi temel açıklayıcı değişkenler olarak modele dahil edilmiştir.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Bulgular, REER’deki değerlenmenin toplam hizmet ticaretini istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve negatif yönde (-0,70/-0,80) etkilediğini, buna karşılık GSYİH artışlarının toplam hizmet ticaretini artırdığını (0,83/1,09) ve böylece hizmet ticaretinin uzun dönemde fiyat rekabetçiliği ve ekonomik ölçek kanallarıyla şekillendiğini göstermektedir.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:2024 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Hizmet ticareti · ekonomi politikası belirsizliği · reel efektif döviz kuru

Özet

Bu çalışma, G7 ülkelerinde toplam hizmet ticaretinin uzun dönem belirleyicilerini, 1997-2024 dönemi için ampirik olarak incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmada Dünya Bankası ve Ekonomi Politikası Belirsizliği (Economic Policy Uncertainty, EPU) veri tabanlarından elde edilen yıllık panel veriler kullanılarak EPU endeksi, reel efektif döviz kuru (Real Effective Exchange Rate, REER) ve ülkelerin kendi gayrisafi yurt içi hasıla (GSYİH) düzeyi temel açıklayıcı değişkenler olarak modele dahil edilmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki eşbütünleşme ilişkisi Westerlund testiyle sınanmış, uzun dönem katsayıları ise yatay kesit bağımlılığını ve gözlenemeyen ortak faktörleri dikkate alan AMG ve CCEMG panel tahmincileri ile tahmin edilmiştir. Bulgular, REER’deki değerlenmenin toplam hizmet ticaretini istatistiksel olarak anlamlı ve negatif yönde (-0,70/-0,80) etkilediğini, buna karşılık GSYİH artışlarının toplam hizmet ticaretini artırdığını (0,83/1,09) ve böylece hizmet ticaretinin uzun dönemde fiyat rekabetçiliği ve ekonomik ölçek kanallarıyla şekillendiğini göstermektedir. EPU katsayısı ise her iki modelde de istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulunamamıştır. Bu durum, politika belirsizliğinin hizmet ticareti üzerinde anlamlı uzun dönem etkisinin tespit edilememesinin G7 ekonomilerinin yapısal dayanıklılığı ile ilişkili olabileceğini düşündürmektedir. Bu sonuçlar, G7 ülkelerinde hizmet ticaretini desteklemeye yönelik politikalarda fiyat rekabetçiliğinin korunmasının önem taşıdığını göstermektedir.

Abstract

This study empirically examines the long-run determinants of total services trade in the G7 countries over the 1997-2024 period. Using annual panel data from the World Bank and the Economic Policy Uncertainty (EPU) database, the study includes EPU index, the real effective exchange rate (REER) and gross domestic product (GDP) as the main explanatory variables. Cointegration is tested using the Westerlund test, while long-run coefficients are estimated using AMG and CCEMG estimators, which account for cross-sectional dependence and unobserved common factors. The findings show that REER appreciation has a statistically significant negative effect on total services trade (−0.70 to −0.80), whereas increases in GDP significantly raise it (0.83 to 1.09), indicating the importance of price competitiveness and economic scale in the long run. However, the EPU coefficient is not statistically significant with either estimator. The absence of a significant long-run effect of policy uncertainty may be related to the structural resilience of G7 economies. Accordingly, preserving price competitiveness appears to be important for policies supporting services trade in the G7 countries.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Ülker, B. (2026). Belirsizlik, Döviz Kuru ve Gelirin Hizmet Ticareti Üzerindeki Uzun Dönem Etkileri: G7 Ülkelerinden Kanıtlar. İktisadi İdari ve Siyasal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Sayı: 29, 919–936. https://doi.org/10.25204/iktisad.1900170

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (56)

  1. Adler, G., Meleshchuk, S., & Buitron, C. O. (2023). Global value chains and external adjustment: Do exchange rates still matter?. Economic Modelling, 118, Makale 106073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2022.106073
  2. Ahmad, S., Limão, N., Oliver, S., & Shikher, S. (2023). Brexit uncertainty and its (dis)service effects. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 15(4), 459-485. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20200808
  3. Al-Thaqeb, S. A., & Algharabali, B. G. (2019). Economic policy uncertainty: A literature review. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 20, Makale e00133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeca.2019.e00133
  4. Anderson, J. E., & van Wincoop, E. (2003). Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border puzzle. American Economic Review, 93(1), 170–192. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455214
  5. Ando, M., & Hayakawa, K. (2022). Impact of COVID-19 on trade in services. Japan and the World Economy, 62, Makale 101131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2022.101131
  6. Ariu, A. (2016). Crisis-proof services: Why trade in services did not suffer during the 2008–2009 collapse. Journal of International Economics, 98, 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2015.09.002
  7. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., & Baek, J. (2025). Is there a J-curve effect in the Korean service trade?. The International Trade Journal, 39(4), 314-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853908.2024.2379350
  8. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Halicioglu, F., & Uz Akdogan, I. (2025). An asymmetric study of J-curve effect in the Turkish service trade. Applied Economics, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2025.2601908
  9. Baker, S. R., Bloom, N., & Davis, S. J. (2016). Measuring economic policy uncertainty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(4), 1593-1636. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw024
  10. Benz, S., Jaax, A., & Yotov, Y. V. (2022). Shedding light on the drivers of services tradability over two decades. OECD Trade Policy Papers, No. 264. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/d5f3c149-en
  11. Bond, S., & Eberhardt, M. (2013). Accounting for unobserved heterogeneity in panel time series models [Yayımlanmamış çalışma]. University of Oxford.
  12. Borchert, I., & Mattoo, A. (2010). The crisis-resilience of services trade. The Service Industries Journal, 30(13), 2115-2136. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060903289944
  13. Bose, D. (2014). Real exchange rates and international competitiveness–concepts, measures and trends in New Zealand [Bildiri sunumu]. New Zealand Association of Economists Annual Conference, New Zealand. https://tinyurl.com/68de4evy
  14. Boulatoff, C., İşcan, T. B., & Kotlyarova, Y. (2022). Does distance matter for trade in services? The case of interprovincial trade in Canada. Open Economies Review, 33(1), 157-185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-021-09629-3
  15. Cheng, K. M. (2020). Currency devaluation and trade balance: Evidence from the US services trade. Journal of Policy Modeling, 42(1), 20-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2019.09.005
  16. Churi, D. K., & Kamat, S. B. (2021). Determinants of trade in services: A panel data analysis of emerging economies. Indian Journal of Economics and Business, 20(2), 29-41. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5407536
  17. Das, S. P., & Sant’Anna, V. P. (2023). Determinants of bilateral trade in manufacturing and services: A unified approach. Economic Modelling, 123, Makale 106246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2023.106246
  18. Devereux, M. B., & Engel, C. (2007). Expenditure switching versus real exchange rate stabilization: Competing objectives for exchange rate policy. Journal of Monetary Economics, 54(8), 2346-2374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2006.12.013
  19. Dixit, A. K., & Pindyck, R. S. (1994). Investment under uncertainty. Princeton University Press. Du, J., & Shepotylo, O. (2026). Brexit and the services trade—a longitudinal analysis. Journal of Service Research, 29(1), 115-131. https://doi.org/10.1177/10946705241271384
  20. Eberhardt, M., & Bond, S. (2009). Cross-section dependence in nonstationary panel models: A novel estimator (MPRA Paper No. 17870). Munich Personal RePEc Archive. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/17870/
  21. Economic Policy Uncertainty. (t.y.). Economic policy uncertainty index [Veri seti]. Erişim tarihi: 15 Ocak 2026. https://www.policyuncertainty.com/
  22. Egger, P., Francois, J. F., Garcés, I., & Manchin, M. (2025). Market access uncertainty and trade in services. (CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP20538). Centre for Economic Policy Research. https://cepr.org/publications/dp20538
  23. Ertürk, E. (2016). Uluslararası iktisat: Teori, politika ve uygulama (2. basım). Ekin Yayınevi. European Commission. (2024). The cost of uncertainty – new estimates. https://tinyurl.com/234nueap
  24. Frees, E. W. (1995). Assessing cross-sectional correlation in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 69(2), 393–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01658-M
  25. Goldstein, M., & Khan, M. S. (1985). Income and price effects in foreign trade. R. W. Jones & P. B. Kenen (Ed.), Handbook of International Economics (Vol. 2) içinde (ss. 1041–1105). Elsevier.
  26. Goswami, A. G., Mattoo, A., & Sáez, S. (Ed.). (2012). Exporting services: A developing country perspective. The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-8816-7
  27. Gozgor, G., & Ongan, S. (2017). Economic policy uncertainty and tourism demand: Empirical evidence from the USA. International Journal of Tourism Research, 19(1), 99-106. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2089
  28. Hailemariam, A., & Ivanovski, K. (2022). The effect of economic policy uncertainty on US tourism net exports. Tourism Economics, 28(8), 2219-2227. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166211025334
  29. Hu, X., & Yu, J. (2022). Research on the impact of economic policy uncertainty on China's ICT service export. BCP Business and Management, 20, 544-552. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v20i.1030
  30. International Monetary Fund. (2025). World Economic Outlook database: Groups and aggregates. IMF. https://tinyurl.com/3tdm5wmp
  31. Joshi, N., & Ghosh, I. (2021). Determinants of trade in services. Journal of Innovative Business and Management, 13(1), 72-78. https://doi.org/10.32015/JIBM/2021.13.1.72-78
  32. Kapetanios, G., Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2011). Panels with non-stationary multifactor error structures. Journal of Econometrics, 160(2), 326-348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2010.10.001
  33. Karam, F., & Zaki, C. (2013). On the determinants of trade in services: Evidence from the MENA region. Applied Economics, 45(33), 4662-4676. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2013.797560
  34. Kutner, M. H., Nachtsheim, C. J., Neter, J., & Li, W. (2005). Applied linear statistical models (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
  35. Li, N., & Meleshchuk, S. (2024). Bilateral trade in services and exchange rates: Evidence of dominant currency pricing (IMF Working Paper No. 2024/242). International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400295928.001
  36. Li, N., Meleshchuk, S., Yin, Q., Zhao, D., & Zymek, R. (2025). Bilateral trade in services: Insights from a new research dataset (IMF Working Paper No. 2025/163). International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798229023030.001
  37. Melas, K. D., Michail, N. A., & Louca, K. G. (2025). Trade uncertainty, economic policy uncertainty and shipping costs. German Economic Review, 26(1), 15-33. https://doi.org/10.1515/ger-2024-0025
  38. Nguyen, C. P., Schinckus, C., & Su, T. D. (2020). Economic policy uncertainty and demand for international tourism: An empirical study. Tourism Economics, 26(8), 1415-1430. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816619900584
  39. Nordås, H. K., & Rouzet, D. (2017). The impact of services trade restrictiveness on trade flows. The World Economy, 40(6), 1155-1183. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12424
  40. Osnago, A., Piermartini, R., & Rocha, N. (2015). Trade policy uncertainty as barrier to trade (No. ERSD-2015-05). WTO Staff Working Paper.
  41. Pattichis, C. (2012). Exchange rate effects on trade in services. Journal of Economic Studies, 39(6), 697-708. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443581211274629
  42. Pesaran, M. H. (2006). Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with a multifactor error structure. Econometrica, 74(4), 967-1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x
  43. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross‐section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951
  44. Pesaran, M. H. (2021). General diagnostic tests for cross-sectional dependence in panels. Empirical Economics, 60(1), 13-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-020-01875-7
  45. Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010
  46. Phillips, P. C. B., & Sul, D. (2003). Dynamic panel estimation and homogeneity testing under cross section dependence. The Econometrics Journal, 6(1), 217-259. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-423X.00108
  47. Qi, Y., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Trade policy uncertainty and services sector exports: A labor cost stickiness perspective. Finance Research Letters, 85(Part E), Makale 108234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2025.108234
  48. Trofimov, I. D. (2024). Is there J-curve effect in the services trade in Canada? A panel data analysis. Bulletin of Applied Economics, 11(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.47260/bae/1114
  49. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2024). Global trade update (UNCTAD/DITC/INF/2024/3). https://shorturl.at/S3CQz
  50. United Nations, European Commission, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, & World Trade Organization. (2010). Manual on statistics of international trade in services 2010. United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/seriesm/seriesm_86rev1e.pdf
  51. United Nations. (2004). International merchandise trade statistics: Compilers manual. United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/unsd/publication/SeriesF/seriesf_87e.pdf
  52. Walsh, K. (2006). Trade in services: Does gravity hold? A gravity model approach to estimating barriers to services trade (IIIS Discussion Paper No. 119). Institute for International Integration Studies. https://www.etsg.org/ETSG2006/papers/walsh.pdf
  53. Westerlund, J. (2007). Testing for error correction in panel data. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 69(6), 709–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2007.00477.x
  54. World Bank. (2026). World Development Indicators [Veri seti]. World Bank DataBank. Erişim tarihi: 10 Ocak 2026, https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
  55. World Trade Organization. (2023). World trade report 2023: Re-globalization for a resilient, inclusive and sustainable future. https://tinyurl.com/3kh55hcr
  56. Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. (2017). Panel zaman serileri analizi: Stata uygulamalı. Beta Basım Yayın.