Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Analysis of Turkey's bilateral trade dynamics: The structural gravity model approach

Year 2023, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 20 - 36, 27.02.2023

Emrah Eray Akça

https://doi.org/10.30855/gjeb.2023.9.1.002

Abstract

Since the early 2000s, developments in Türkiye's trade performance have made it necessary to analyze this process and enrich it with policies to maximize the contribution of trade performance to the Turkish economy. Starting from this motivation, this study analyzes the dynamics of Türkiye's bilateral trade flows in the framework of the structural gravity model using the panel data for the 2003-2020 period. In this context, export and import models are estimated separately by the Poisson pseudo maximum likelihood (PPML) method. The general results of the study reveal that Türkiye's bilateral trade flows are mostly determined by both its own and its partners’ economic sizes. Additionally, some geographical factors such as physical distance, common border, and landlocked location as well as demographic indicators like cultural similarity are among the important factors affecting trade flows. While trade agreements are not found statistically significant for Türkiye's trade dynamics, partner countries' membership in World Trade Organization is found to have negative impacts on Türkiye's trade developments. The findings of the study contain notable implications for Türkiye in terms of policies to be implemented to reach the targeted trade volume.

Keywords

Bilateral trade flows structural gravity model PPML Turkey

References

  • Adam, C. and Cobham, D. (2007). Modelling multilateral trade resistance in a gravity model with exchange rate regimes. In Centre for Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis Conference Papers, CDMC07/02, 1-49.
  • Adam, A. and Moutos, T. (2008). The trade effects of the EU–Turkey Customs Union. World Economy, 31(5), 685-700.
  • Akça, E. E. (2021). Determinants of export flows from Turkey to BRICS countries: The findings from the augmented-gravity model approach. Ekonomik Yaklasim, 32(118), 27-46.
  • Akyüz, K. C., Yildirim, I., Balaban, Y., Gedik, T. and Korkut, S. (2010). Examination of forest products trade between Turkey and European Union countries with gravity model approach. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(16), 2375-2380.
  • Anderson, J. E. (1979). A theoretical foundation for the gravity equation. The American Economic Review, 69(1), 106-116.
  • Anderson, J. E. and van Wincoop, E. (2003). Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border puzzle. American Economic Review, 93(1), 170–192.
  • Antonucci, D. and Manzocchi, S. (2006). Does Turkey have a special trade relation with the EU? A gravity model approach. Economic Systems, 30(2), 157-169.
  • Ata, S. (2013). Turkey’s trade with neighbor countries: A gravity model approach. International Conference on Eurasian Economies, Almaata-Kazakistan, 500-509.
  • Atıcı, C. and Güloğlu, B. (2006). Gravity model of Turkey's fresh and processed fruit and vegetable export to the EU: A panel data analysis. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 18(3-4), 7-21.
  • Aysun, A., Öksüzler, O. ve Yılgör, M. (2012). Gümrük Birliği’nin Türkiye’nin dış ticareti üzerine etkisi: Panel çekim modeli uygulaması. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(2), 15-26.
  • Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2006). Bonus vetus OLS: A simple approach for addressing the “border puzzle” and other gravity-equation issues, University of Notre Dame manuscript, Working Paper, 1-56.
  • Baldwin, R. and Taglioni, D. (2006). Gravity for dummies and dummies for gravity equations. NBER Working Paper, No: 12516, 1-29.
  • Baytar, R. (2012). Türkiye ve BRIC ülkeleri arasındaki ticaret hacminin belirleyicileri: Panel çekim modeli analizi. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(21), 403-424.
  • Baxter, M. and Kouparitsas, M. A. (2005). What determines bilateral trade flows?, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, WP2005-11, 1-54.
  • Bergstrand, J. H. (1985). The Gravity equation in international trade: Some microeconomic foundations and empirical evidence. The review of Economics and Statistics, 67(3), 474-481.
  • Bilgili, F., Ulucak, R., Soykan, M. E. and Erdoğan, S. (2019). Can exchange rate volatility ınfluence the export positively? Evidence from Turkey under the regime shifts. Global Business Review, 1-24.
  • Bilgin, M. H., Gozgor, G. and Demir, E. (2018). The determinants of Turkey's exports to Islamic countries: The impact of political risks. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 27(5), 486-503.
  • Burger, M., Van Oort, F. and Linders, G. J. (2009). On the specification of the gravity model of trade: Zeros, excess zeros and zero-inflated estimation. Spatial Economic Analysis, 4(2), 167-190.
  • Çekyay, B., Palut, P. T., Kabak, Ö., Ülengin, F., Özaydın, Ö. and Ülengin, B. (2017). Analysis of the impact of bilateral and transit quotas on Turkey's international trade by road transport: An integrated maximum flow and gravity model approach. Research in Transportation Economics, 66, 70-77.
  • Değirmen, S. (2012). The Impact of the convergence of ınstitutional frameworks on the Euromed process. In B. Lucke (Ed.) Convergence beyond the economic sphere: Effects and feedbacks of Euro-Med integration (pp. 46-89). Femise Research Programme 2010-2011.
  • Dinçer, G. (2014). Turkey’s rising imports from BRICS: A Gravity model approach. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA), No. 61979, 1-13.
  • Düzgün, R. ve Taşçı, H. M. (2014). Türk işletmelerinin ihracat performansını belirleyen faktörler: İSO-500 üzerine bir uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 9(3), 7-24.
  • Ekanayake, E. M., Mukherjee, A. and Veeramacheneni, B. (2010). Trade blocks and the Gravity model: A study of economic integration among Asian developing countries. Journal of Economic Integration, 25(4), 627-643.
  • Feenstra, R. C., Markusen, J. R. and Rose, A. K. (2001). Using the gravity equation to differentiate among alternative theories of trade. Canadian Journal of Economics, 34(2), 430-447.
  • Frede, J. and Yetkiner, H. (2017). The regional trade dynamics of Turkey: A panel data gravity model. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 26(6), 633-648.
  • Filiztekin, A. (2006). Türkiye’de açıklanmış karşılaştırmalı üstünlüklerin evrimi. Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Dış Ticaret Politikası, 1(1), 101-116.
  • Gómez-Herrera, E. (2013). Comparing alternative methods to estimate gravity models of bilateral trade. Empirical Economics, 44(3), 1087-1111.
  • Günçavdi, Ö. and Küçükçifçi, S. (2001). Foreign trade and factor intensity in an open developing country: An input-output analysis for Turkey. Russian & East European Finance and Trade, 37(1), 75-88.
  • Gündüz, F. F., Akay, Ö., Gündüz, S. and Dölekoğlu, C. Ö. (2020). Determination of the factors affecting cotton export of Turkey: A panel gravity model approach. The Academic Elegance, 7(13), 547-564.
  • Helpman, E., Melitz, M. and Rubinstein, Y. (2008). Estimating trade flows: Trading partners and trading volumes. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 23(2), 441–487.
  • Işık, N. (2016). Türkiye ile Şanghay İşbirliği Örgütü arasındaki ticaret akımlarının panel çekim modeli ile tahmini. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 17, 151-174.
  • Kaplan, F. (2016). Türkiye’nin meyve ve sebze ihracatı: Bir çekim modeli uygulaması. Journal of Yaşar University, 11(42), 77-83.
  • Karagöz, K. ve Karagöz, M. (2009). Türkiye’nin küresel ticaret potansiyeli: Çekim Modeli yaklaşımı. CÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 127-144.
  • Karagoz, K. and Saray, M. O. (2010). Trade potential of Turkey with Asia-Pacific countries: Evidence from panel gravity model. International Economics Studies, 36(1), 19-26.
  • Konak, A. ve Demir, M. A. (2019). Türkiye'nin BRICS ülkeleri İle ticaretinin analizi: Çekim modeli uygulaması. Uluslararası Bankacılık Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 43-70.
  • Mayer, T. and Zignago, S. (2011). Notes on CEPII’s distances measures: The GeoDist database. CEPII Working Paper, No: 2011–25.
  • Nowak‐Lehmann, F., Herzer, D., Martinez‐Zarzoso, I. and Vollmer, S. (2007). The Impact of a Customs Union between Turkey and the EU on Turkey's exports to the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies, 45(3), 719-743.
  • Özer, O. O. and Köksal, O. (2016). Determinants of Turkey’s citrus exports: A gravity model approach. New Medit: Mediterranean Journal of Economics, Agriculture and Environment, 15(3), 37-42.
  • Özkaya, H. (2011). İkili ve çok taraflı anlaşmaların Türkiye’nin ihracatı üzerindeki etkisi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 12(2), 279-288.
  • Piermartini, R. and Teh, R. (2005). Demystifying modelling methods for trade policy. WTO Discussion Paper, No: 10, 1-71.
  • Pöyhönen, P. (1963). A tentative model for the volume of trade between countries. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 90(1), 93-100.
  • Rose, A. K. (2004). Do we really know that the WTO increases trade?. American Economic Review, 94(1), 98-114.
  • Sandalcılar, A. R. (2012). Türkiye’nin BRIC ülkeleriyle ticari potansiyeli: Panel Çekim modeli yaklaşımı. Journal of Yasar University, 25(7), 4164-4175.
  • Santos Silva, J. and Tenreyro, S. (2006). The log of gravity. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 641-658.
  • Saygılı, F. ve Manavgat, G. (2014). Linder Hipotezi: "Türkiye'nin dış ticareti için ampirik bir analiz". Ege Akademik Bakış, 14(2), 261-270.
  • Shepherd, B. (2016). The gravity model of international trade: A user guide (An updated version). ARTNeT United Nations Publications, 1-58.
  • Subramanian, A. and Wei, S. J. (2007). The WTO promotes trade, strongly but unevenly. Journal of International Economics, 72(1), 151-175.
  • Tinbergen, J. (1962). Naar een Nieuwe Wereldeconomie: voorstellen voor een internationaal economisch beleid [Shaping the world economy: Suggestions for an international economic policy], New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.
  • Ülengin, F., Çekyay, B., Palut, P. T., Ülengin, B., Kabak, Ö., Özaydın, Ö. and Ekici, Ş. Ö. (2015). Effects of quotas on Turkish foreign trade: A gravity model. Transport Policy, 38, 1-7.
  • Westerlund, J. and Wilhelmsson, F. (2011). Estimating the gravity model without gravity using panel data. Applied Economics, 43(6), 641-649.
  • Yılmaz, Ş. E. (2016). Dış ticaret kuramlarının evrimi (4. Baskı). Ankara: Elif Yayınevi.
  • Yotov, Y. V., Piermartini, R., Monteiro, J. A. and Larch, M. (2016). An advanced guide to trade policy analysis: The structural gravity model. Geneva: World Trade Organization.
  • Yücer, A. (2020). Ticari çekim modelinde çoklu direnç faktörü ve Türkiye’nin dış ticaret eğiliminin değerlendirmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(3), 1221-1263.
  • IMF-DOTS (2021). https://data.imf.org/?sk=9D6028D4-F14A-464C-A2F2-59B2CD424B85
  • TCTB (2021). https://www.trade.gov.tr/free-trade-agreements
  • WB-WDI (2021). https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
  • WTO (2021). https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm

Türkiye’nin ikili ticaret dinamiklerinin analizi: Yapısal çekim modeli yaklaşımı

Year 2023, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 20 - 36, 27.02.2023

Emrah Eray Akça

https://doi.org/10.30855/gjeb.2023.9.1.002

Abstract

Türkiye’nin uluslararası ticaretinde 2000’li yılların başından itibaren gözlenen gelişmeler, söz konusu sürecin kapsamlı analizlere tabi tutulması ve Türkiye ekonomisine katkısını azamileştirecek politikalarla zenginleştirilmesi gereksinimini beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu motivasyondan hareketle bu çalışmada 2003-2020 dönemi kapsamında Türkiye’nin ikili ticaret dinamikleri yapısal çekim modeli çerçevesinde analiz edilmektedir. Bu bağlamda kurgulanan ihracat ve ithalat modelleri Poisson pseudo en çok olabilirlik (PPML) yöntemi kullanılarak tahmin edilmektedir. Çalışmanın genel analiz bulguları, Türkiye’nin ikili ticaret akımlarının ağırlıklı olarak kendi ve ticaret ortaklarının ekonomik büyüklükleri tarafından belirlendiğine işaret etmektedir. Ayrıca fiziki mesafe, ortak sınır ve ticaret ortağı ülkenin denize kıyısı olmaması gibi coğrafi faktörlerin ve kültürel benzerlik gibi demografik unsurların Türkiye’nin uluslararası ticaret gelişmeleri bakımından önem taşıdıkları sonucuna varılmıştır. Ticaret anlaşmalarının ikili ticaret akımları üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi bulunmazken, ticaret ortağı ülkelerin Dünya Ticaret Örgütü üyeliklerinin ikili ticaret akımlarını negatif yönde etkilediği bulgusuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışmadan elde edilen bulgular Türkiye’nin hedeflenen ticaret hacmine ulaşması için uygulanacak politikalar konusunda önemli çıkarımları bünyesinde barındırmaktadır.

Keywords

İkili ticaret akımları yapısal çekim modeli PPML Türkiye

References

  • Adam, C. and Cobham, D. (2007). Modelling multilateral trade resistance in a gravity model with exchange rate regimes. In Centre for Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis Conference Papers, CDMC07/02, 1-49.
  • Adam, A. and Moutos, T. (2008). The trade effects of the EU–Turkey Customs Union. World Economy, 31(5), 685-700.
  • Akça, E. E. (2021). Determinants of export flows from Turkey to BRICS countries: The findings from the augmented-gravity model approach. Ekonomik Yaklasim, 32(118), 27-46.
  • Akyüz, K. C., Yildirim, I., Balaban, Y., Gedik, T. and Korkut, S. (2010). Examination of forest products trade between Turkey and European Union countries with gravity model approach. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(16), 2375-2380.
  • Anderson, J. E. (1979). A theoretical foundation for the gravity equation. The American Economic Review, 69(1), 106-116.
  • Anderson, J. E. and van Wincoop, E. (2003). Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border puzzle. American Economic Review, 93(1), 170–192.
  • Antonucci, D. and Manzocchi, S. (2006). Does Turkey have a special trade relation with the EU? A gravity model approach. Economic Systems, 30(2), 157-169.
  • Ata, S. (2013). Turkey’s trade with neighbor countries: A gravity model approach. International Conference on Eurasian Economies, Almaata-Kazakistan, 500-509.
  • Atıcı, C. and Güloğlu, B. (2006). Gravity model of Turkey's fresh and processed fruit and vegetable export to the EU: A panel data analysis. Journal of International Food & Agribusiness Marketing, 18(3-4), 7-21.
  • Aysun, A., Öksüzler, O. ve Yılgör, M. (2012). Gümrük Birliği’nin Türkiye’nin dış ticareti üzerine etkisi: Panel çekim modeli uygulaması. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(2), 15-26.
  • Baier, S. L. and Bergstrand, J. H. (2006). Bonus vetus OLS: A simple approach for addressing the “border puzzle” and other gravity-equation issues, University of Notre Dame manuscript, Working Paper, 1-56.
  • Baldwin, R. and Taglioni, D. (2006). Gravity for dummies and dummies for gravity equations. NBER Working Paper, No: 12516, 1-29.
  • Baytar, R. (2012). Türkiye ve BRIC ülkeleri arasındaki ticaret hacminin belirleyicileri: Panel çekim modeli analizi. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 11(21), 403-424.
  • Baxter, M. and Kouparitsas, M. A. (2005). What determines bilateral trade flows?, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, WP2005-11, 1-54.
  • Bergstrand, J. H. (1985). The Gravity equation in international trade: Some microeconomic foundations and empirical evidence. The review of Economics and Statistics, 67(3), 474-481.
  • Bilgili, F., Ulucak, R., Soykan, M. E. and Erdoğan, S. (2019). Can exchange rate volatility ınfluence the export positively? Evidence from Turkey under the regime shifts. Global Business Review, 1-24.
  • Bilgin, M. H., Gozgor, G. and Demir, E. (2018). The determinants of Turkey's exports to Islamic countries: The impact of political risks. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 27(5), 486-503.
  • Burger, M., Van Oort, F. and Linders, G. J. (2009). On the specification of the gravity model of trade: Zeros, excess zeros and zero-inflated estimation. Spatial Economic Analysis, 4(2), 167-190.
  • Çekyay, B., Palut, P. T., Kabak, Ö., Ülengin, F., Özaydın, Ö. and Ülengin, B. (2017). Analysis of the impact of bilateral and transit quotas on Turkey's international trade by road transport: An integrated maximum flow and gravity model approach. Research in Transportation Economics, 66, 70-77.
  • Değirmen, S. (2012). The Impact of the convergence of ınstitutional frameworks on the Euromed process. In B. Lucke (Ed.) Convergence beyond the economic sphere: Effects and feedbacks of Euro-Med integration (pp. 46-89). Femise Research Programme 2010-2011.
  • Dinçer, G. (2014). Turkey’s rising imports from BRICS: A Gravity model approach. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA), No. 61979, 1-13.
  • Düzgün, R. ve Taşçı, H. M. (2014). Türk işletmelerinin ihracat performansını belirleyen faktörler: İSO-500 üzerine bir uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 9(3), 7-24.
  • Ekanayake, E. M., Mukherjee, A. and Veeramacheneni, B. (2010). Trade blocks and the Gravity model: A study of economic integration among Asian developing countries. Journal of Economic Integration, 25(4), 627-643.
  • Feenstra, R. C., Markusen, J. R. and Rose, A. K. (2001). Using the gravity equation to differentiate among alternative theories of trade. Canadian Journal of Economics, 34(2), 430-447.
  • Frede, J. and Yetkiner, H. (2017). The regional trade dynamics of Turkey: A panel data gravity model. The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, 26(6), 633-648.
  • Filiztekin, A. (2006). Türkiye’de açıklanmış karşılaştırmalı üstünlüklerin evrimi. Uluslararası Ekonomi ve Dış Ticaret Politikası, 1(1), 101-116.
  • Gómez-Herrera, E. (2013). Comparing alternative methods to estimate gravity models of bilateral trade. Empirical Economics, 44(3), 1087-1111.
  • Günçavdi, Ö. and Küçükçifçi, S. (2001). Foreign trade and factor intensity in an open developing country: An input-output analysis for Turkey. Russian & East European Finance and Trade, 37(1), 75-88.
  • Gündüz, F. F., Akay, Ö., Gündüz, S. and Dölekoğlu, C. Ö. (2020). Determination of the factors affecting cotton export of Turkey: A panel gravity model approach. The Academic Elegance, 7(13), 547-564.
  • Helpman, E., Melitz, M. and Rubinstein, Y. (2008). Estimating trade flows: Trading partners and trading volumes. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 23(2), 441–487.
  • Işık, N. (2016). Türkiye ile Şanghay İşbirliği Örgütü arasındaki ticaret akımlarının panel çekim modeli ile tahmini. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, 17, 151-174.
  • Kaplan, F. (2016). Türkiye’nin meyve ve sebze ihracatı: Bir çekim modeli uygulaması. Journal of Yaşar University, 11(42), 77-83.
  • Karagöz, K. ve Karagöz, M. (2009). Türkiye’nin küresel ticaret potansiyeli: Çekim Modeli yaklaşımı. CÜ İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 10(2), 127-144.
  • Karagoz, K. and Saray, M. O. (2010). Trade potential of Turkey with Asia-Pacific countries: Evidence from panel gravity model. International Economics Studies, 36(1), 19-26.
  • Konak, A. ve Demir, M. A. (2019). Türkiye'nin BRICS ülkeleri İle ticaretinin analizi: Çekim modeli uygulaması. Uluslararası Bankacılık Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 43-70.
  • Mayer, T. and Zignago, S. (2011). Notes on CEPII’s distances measures: The GeoDist database. CEPII Working Paper, No: 2011–25.
  • Nowak‐Lehmann, F., Herzer, D., Martinez‐Zarzoso, I. and Vollmer, S. (2007). The Impact of a Customs Union between Turkey and the EU on Turkey's exports to the EU. Journal of Common Market Studies, 45(3), 719-743.
  • Özer, O. O. and Köksal, O. (2016). Determinants of Turkey’s citrus exports: A gravity model approach. New Medit: Mediterranean Journal of Economics, Agriculture and Environment, 15(3), 37-42.
  • Özkaya, H. (2011). İkili ve çok taraflı anlaşmaların Türkiye’nin ihracatı üzerindeki etkisi. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 12(2), 279-288.
  • Piermartini, R. and Teh, R. (2005). Demystifying modelling methods for trade policy. WTO Discussion Paper, No: 10, 1-71.
  • Pöyhönen, P. (1963). A tentative model for the volume of trade between countries. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 90(1), 93-100.
  • Rose, A. K. (2004). Do we really know that the WTO increases trade?. American Economic Review, 94(1), 98-114.
  • Sandalcılar, A. R. (2012). Türkiye’nin BRIC ülkeleriyle ticari potansiyeli: Panel Çekim modeli yaklaşımı. Journal of Yasar University, 25(7), 4164-4175.
  • Santos Silva, J. and Tenreyro, S. (2006). The log of gravity. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88(4), 641-658.
  • Saygılı, F. ve Manavgat, G. (2014). Linder Hipotezi: "Türkiye'nin dış ticareti için ampirik bir analiz". Ege Akademik Bakış, 14(2), 261-270.
  • Shepherd, B. (2016). The gravity model of international trade: A user guide (An updated version). ARTNeT United Nations Publications, 1-58.
  • Subramanian, A. and Wei, S. J. (2007). The WTO promotes trade, strongly but unevenly. Journal of International Economics, 72(1), 151-175.
  • Tinbergen, J. (1962). Naar een Nieuwe Wereldeconomie: voorstellen voor een internationaal economisch beleid [Shaping the world economy: Suggestions for an international economic policy], New York: The Twentieth Century Fund.
  • Ülengin, F., Çekyay, B., Palut, P. T., Ülengin, B., Kabak, Ö., Özaydın, Ö. and Ekici, Ş. Ö. (2015). Effects of quotas on Turkish foreign trade: A gravity model. Transport Policy, 38, 1-7.
  • Westerlund, J. and Wilhelmsson, F. (2011). Estimating the gravity model without gravity using panel data. Applied Economics, 43(6), 641-649.
  • Yılmaz, Ş. E. (2016). Dış ticaret kuramlarının evrimi (4. Baskı). Ankara: Elif Yayınevi.
  • Yotov, Y. V., Piermartini, R., Monteiro, J. A. and Larch, M. (2016). An advanced guide to trade policy analysis: The structural gravity model. Geneva: World Trade Organization.
  • Yücer, A. (2020). Ticari çekim modelinde çoklu direnç faktörü ve Türkiye’nin dış ticaret eğiliminin değerlendirmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22(3), 1221-1263.
  • IMF-DOTS (2021). https://data.imf.org/?sk=9D6028D4-F14A-464C-A2F2-59B2CD424B85
  • TCTB (2021). https://www.trade.gov.tr/free-trade-agreements
  • WB-WDI (2021). https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators
  • WTO (2021). https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm
There are 57 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Economics
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Emrah Eray Akça 0000-0003-4190-5503

Publication Date February 27, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2023 Volume: 9 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Akça, E. E. (2023). Türkiye’nin ikili ticaret dinamiklerinin analizi: Yapısal çekim modeli yaklaşımı. Gazi İktisat Ve İşletme Dergisi, 9(1), 20-36. https://doi.org/10.30855/gjeb.2023.9.1.002
 Download Cover Image
22273
Gazi İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi Creative Commons Atıf-GayriTicari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.