İnovasyonun Doğrudan ve Dolaylı İhracat Eğilimi Üzerindeki Etkisi

Year 2021, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 238 - 261, 10.01.2021

Seda Ekmen Özçelik

https://doi.org/10.25295/fsecon.835784

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Bu makale farklı gelir gruplarından ülkelerde faaliyet gösteren firmaların dığrudan ve dolaylı ihracat eğiliminin belirleyicilerini inovasyonun rolüne odaklanarak analiz etmektedir. Bu amaçla, Dünya Bankası İşletme Anketi’nde yayınlanan firma düzeyinde veriler kullanılmaktadır. Çalışmanın bulguları firmaların ihracat eğilimi ile inovasyon faaliyetleri arasındaki ilişkide inovasyonun içselliğine işaret etmektedir. Bu içsellik kontrol edildiğinde, firmaların ürün ve süreç yeniliği yapmaları doğrudan ve dolaylı ihracat yapma olasılıklarını arttırmaktadır. Bu etki, doğrudan ihracat üzerinde daha yüksektir. Ayrıca ürün yeniliği yapmak süreç yeniliği yapmaya kıyasla ihracat eğilimini daha fazla arttırmaktadır. Bu sonuçlar, ihracat kararı alan firmaların inovasyon faaliyetleri üzerinde odaklanmaları çağrısında bulunmaktadır. Diğer yandan, çalışmanın sonuçları daha büyük ve yabancı mülkiyetli firmaların ihracat yapma olasılığının daha yüksek olduğunu, ar-ge harcamalarının ihracat yapma eğilimimden ziyade inovasyon yapma olasılığını arttırdığını, firma yaşının ihracat eğilimine etki etmediğini ancak ürün yeniliği üzerinde olumlu, süreç yeniliği üzerinde ise olumsuz etkisi olduğunu, üst düzey yönetici deneyiminin ise firmanın doğrudan ihracat yapma olasılığını arttırıken dolaylı ihracat yapma olasılığını etkilemediğini göstermektedir.

Keywords

doğrudan ihracat, dolaylı ihracat, süreç yeniliği, ürün yeniliği

Impact of Innovation on Direct and Indirect Export Propensity

Abstract

This article analyzes the determinants of the direct and indirect export propensity of firms operating in countries from different income groups, focusing on the role of innovation. For this purpose, firm-level data from the World Bank Enterprise Survey are utilized. In the literature, there are several papers examining the link between innovation activities and export performance of the firms. Some of them also consider endogeneity of innovation in this link. The findings of the study indicate the endogeneity of innovation in the relationship between export propensity and innovation activities. When this endogeneity is controlled, product and process innovation activities of the firms increase their probability of exporting directly and indirectly. This impact is higher on direct exports. In addition, product innovation increases the export propensity more compared to process innovation. These results call for firms that decide to export to focus on their innovation activities. On the other hand, the results of the study show that larger and foreign-owned firms are more likely to export, R&D expenditures increase the probability of innovation rather than export propensity. Moreover, firm age does not affect the export propensity but has a positive effect on product innovation and a negative effect on process innovation. Finally, the experience of top manager increases the probability of the firm to export directly, but does not affect the indirect export propensity.

Keywords

dirext exports, indirect exports, product innovation, process innovation

References

• Ahn, J., Khandelwal, A. K. Ve Wei, S. J. (2011), “The role of intermediaries in facilitating trade”, Journal of International Economics, 84(1), 73-85.
• Alarcon, S. ve Sanchez, M. (2016), “Is there a virtuous circle relationship between innovation activities and exports? A comparison of food and agricultural firms”, Food policy, 61, 70-79.
• Alvarez, R. ve Lopez, R. A. (2005), “Exporting and Performance: Evidence from Chilean Plants”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 38 (4), 1384–1400.
• Amadu, A. W. ve Danquah, M. (2019), “R&D, human capital and export behavior of manufacturing and service firms in Ghana”, Journal of African Business, 20(3), 283-304.
• Antras, P. ve Costinot, A. (2010), “Intermediation and Economic Integration”, American Economic Review, 2, 424–428.
• Aw, B.Y., Roberts, M. ve Xu, D. Y. (2011), “R&D Investment, Exporting, and Productivity Dynamics”, American Economic Review, 101 (4), 1312–1344.
• Athukorala, P., Jayasuriya, S. ve Oczkowski, E. (1995), “Multinational firms and export performance in developing countries: Some analytical issues and new empirical evidence”, Journal of Development Economics, 46(1), 109-122.
• Ayllon, S. ve Radicic, D. (2019), “Product innovation, process innovation and export propensity: persistence, complementarities and feedback effects in Spanish firms”, Applied Economics, 51(33), 3650-3664.
• Baldwin, J. R. ve Rafiquzzaman, M. (1998), “The effect of technology and trade on wage differentials between nonproduction and production workers in Canadian manufacturing”, Statistics Canada Working Paper, 98.
• Barrios, S., Görg, H. ve Strobl, E. (2003), “Explaining firms’ export behaviour: R&D, spillovers and the destination market”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 65(4), 475-496.
• Basile R (2001), “Export behaviour of Italian manufacturing firms over the nineties: The role of innovation”, Research Policy 308, 1185–1201.
• Becker, S. O. ve Egger, P. H. (2013), “Endogenous product versus process innovation and a firm’s propensity to export”, Empirical Economics, 44(1), 329-354.
• Benlagha, N. ve Karaa, I. (2017), “Evidence of adverse selection in automobile insurance market: A seemingly unrelated probit modelling”, Cogent Economics & Finance, 5(1), 1330303.
• Bernard, A.B. ve Jensen, J.B. (1999), ”Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both?”, Journal of International Economics, 47 (1), 1-25
• Blum, B. S., Claro, S. ve Horstmann, I. (2010), “Facts and figures on intermediated trade”, American Economic Review, 100(2), 419-23.
• Bravo-Ortega, C., Benavente, J. M. ve Gonzalez, A. (2014), “Innovation, exports, and productivity: Learning and self-selection in Chile”, Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 50(sup1), 68-95.
• Caldera, A. (2010), “Innovation and exporting: evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms”, Review of World Economics, 146(4), 657-689.
• Chakrabarti, A. B. ve Mondal, A. (2017), “Effect of Business Group Affiliation on Firm Internationalization: The Case of India Under Reforms”, Journal of East-West Business, 23(1), 41-70.
• Cieslik, A.ve Michałek, J. J. (2018), “Firm-level determinants of direct and indirect exports: empirical evidence for CEE and MENA countries”, Economic Research-Ekonomska istraživanja, 31(1), 982-992.
• Cassiman, B., Golovko, E. ve Martínez-Ros, E. (2010), “Innovation, Exports and Productivity”, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 28 (4), 372–376.
• Cassiman, B. ve Martinez-Ros, E. (2007), “Product innovation and exports. Evidence from Spanish manufacturing”, IESE Business School Working Paper, Barcelona.
• Clerides, S. K., Lach, S. ve Tybout, J. R. (1998), “Is learning by exporting important? Micro-dynamic evidence from Colombia, Mexico, and Morocco”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113 (3), 903-947.
• Çavusgil S. T. ve Zou S. (1994), “Marketing strategy-performance relationship: An investigation of the empirical link in export market ventures”, Journal of Marketing, 58, 1–21.
• Damijan, J. P., Kostevc, C., and Polanec, S. (2010), “From innovation to exporting or vice versa?”, World Economy, 33(3), 374-398.
• Das M. (1994), “Successful and unsuccessful exporters from developing countries: Some preliminary findings”. European Journal of Marketing, 28(12), 19–33.
• De Loecker, J. (2013), “Detecting learning by exporting”, American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 5(3), 1-21.
• Falk, M. ve de Lemos, F. F. (2019), “Complementarity of R&D and productivity in SME export behavior”, Journal of Business Research, 96, 157-168.
• Felbermayr, G. ve Jung, B. (2011), “Trade Intermediation and the Organization of Exporters” , Review of International Economics, 19 (4), 634–648.
• Filatotchev, I., Liu, X., Buck, T. ve Wright, M. (2009), “The export orientation and export performance of high-technology SMEs in emerging markets: The effects of knowledge transfer by returnee entrepreneurs”, Journal of International Business Studies, 40(6), 1005-1021.
• Filippini, M., Greene, W. H., Kumar, N. ve Martinez-Cruz, A. L. (2018), “A note on the different interpretation of the correlation parameters in the Bivariate Probit and the Recursive Bivariate Probit”, Economics Letters, 167, 104-107.
• Ganotakis, P. ve Love, J. H. (2011), “R&D, product innovation, and exporting: evidence from UK new technology based firms”, Oxford Economic Papers, 63 (2), 279-306.
• Girma, S., Gorg, H. Ve Hanley A. (2008), “R&D and exporting: A comparison of British and Irish firms”, Review of World Economics, 144(4), 750–753.
• Golovko, E. ve Valentini, G. (2011), “Exploring the complementarity between innovation and export for SMEs’ growth”, Journal of international business Studies, 42(3), 362-380.
• Greene, W. H. (1998). Gender economics courses in liberal arts colleges: Further results. The Journal of Economic Education, 29(4), 291-300.
• Greenaway, D., Guariglia, A. ve Kneller, R. (2007), “Financial Factors and Exporting Decisions”, Journal of International Economics, 73 (2), 377–395.
• Halilem, N., Amara, N. ve Landry, R. (2014), “Exploring the relationships between innovation and internationalization of small and medium‐sized enterprises: A nonrecursive structural equation model”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 31(1), 18-34.
• Hambrick, D. C. (2007), “Upper echelons theory: An update”, Academy of Management Review, 32 (2), 334-343.
• Harris R. ve Li Q.C. (2009), “Exporting R&D and absorptive capacity in UK establishments”, Oxford Economic Papers, 61(1), 74–103.
• Higon, D. A. ve Driffield, N. (2011), “Exporting and innovation performance: Analysis of the annual Small Business Survey in the UK”, International Small Business Journal, 29(1), 4-24.
• Hussen, M. S. ve Çokgezen, M. (2020), “Analysis of Factors Affecting Firm Innovation: An Empirical Investigation for Ethiopian Firms”, Journal of African Business, 21(2), 169-192.
• Ito, K. ve Pucik, V. (1993), “R&D spending, domestic competition, and export performance of Japanese manufacturing firms”, Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 61-75.
• Ito, K. ve Lechevalier, S. (2010), “Why some firms persistently out-perform others: Investigating the interactions between innovation and exporting strategies”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(6), 1997-2039.
• Kiss, A. N., Fernhaber, S. ve McDougall–Covin, P. P. (2018), “Slack, innovation, and export intensity: Implications for small–and medium–sized enterprises”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(5), 671-697.
• Lachenmaier, S. ve Wöbmann, L. (2006), “Does innovation cause exports? Evidence from exogenous innovation impulses and obstacles using German micro data”, Oxford Economic Papers, 58(2), 317-350.
• Lee, R. P. ve Chen, Q. (2009), “The immediate impact of new product introductions on stock price: the role of firm resources and size”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 26(1), 97-107.
• Lefebvre, E., Lefebvre, L.A. ve Bourgault, M. (1998), “R&D-related capabilities as determinants of export performance”, Small Business Economics, 10(4), 365-377.
• Lejpras, A. (2019), “Determinants of export performance: differences between service and manufacturing SMEs”, Service Business, 13(1), 171-198.
• Lejpras, A. (2015), “Knowledge, location, and internationalization: empirical evidence for manufacturing SMEs”, Economics of Innovation and new Technology, 24(8), 734-754.
• Lewbel, A., Dong, Y. ve Yang, T. T. (2012), “Comparing features of convenient estimators for binary choice models with endogenous regressors”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 45(3), 809-829.
• Maddala, G. S. (1986), Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics, 3, Cambridge university press.
• Mulliqi, A., Adnett, N. ve Hisarciklilar, M. (2019), “Human capital and exports: A micro-level analysis of transition countries”, The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 28(7), 775-800.
• OECD (2015), Oslo Manual: Guidelines for collecting, and interpreting innovation data, Paris: OECD.
• Ottaviano, G. ve Martincus, C. V. (2011), “SMEs in Argentina: Who are the Exporters?”, Small Business Economics ,37 (3), 341–361.
• Palangkaraya, A. (2012), “The link between innovation and export: Evidence from Australia’s small and medium enterprises”, ERIA Discussion Paper, 8.
• Penrose, E. T. (1959), The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, New York: John Wiley.
• Özçelik, E. ve Taymaz, E. (2004), “Does innovativeness matter for international competitiveness in developing countries?: The case of Turkish manufacturing industries”, Research Policy, 33(3), 409-424.
• Pla-Barber, J. ve Alegre, J. (2007), “Analysing the Link Between Export Intensity, Innovation and Firm Size in a Science-Based Industry”, International of Business Reviews, (16), 275–293.
• Roberts M. ve Tybout J.R. (1997), “The decision to export in Colombia: An empirical model of entry with sunk costs”, American Economic Review, 87, 545–564.
• Rodriguez, J. L. ve Rodriguez, R. M. G. (2005), “Technology and export behaviour: A resource-based view approach”, International business review, 14(5), 539-557.
• Romer, P. (1990), “Endogenous Technological Change”, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 71-102.
• Roper, S. ve Love, J. H. (2002), “Innovation and export performance: Evidence from UK and German manufacturing plants”, Research Policy, 31 (7), 1087–1102.
• Salomon, R. ve Shaver, J. M. (2005), “Learning by Exporting: New Insights from Examining Firm Innovation”, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 14 (2), 431–460.
• Schumpeter, Joseph .A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
• Sterlacchini, A. (1999), “Do Innovative Activities Matter to Small Firms in Non-R&D-Intensive Industries? An Application to Export Performance”, Research Policy, 28 (8), 819–832.
• Van Beveren, I. ve Vandenbussche, H. (2010), “Product and Process Innovation and Firms’ Decision to Export”, Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 13 (1), 3–24.
• Wagner, J. (1995), “Exports, firm size, and firm dynamics”, Small Business Economics, 7(1), 29-39.
• Wu, L., Wei, Y. ve Wang, C. (2020), “Disentangling the effects of business groups in the innovation-export relationship”, Research Policy, 50 (2021), 104093, 1-26.