The Relationship Between Trade Openness and Economic Growth in OECD Countries: A Panel Data Analysis

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 28, 202 - 214, 25.05.2023

Vildan Saba Aktop

https://doi.org/10.20990/kilisiibfakademik.1231205

Cited By: 2

Öz

Purpose: The aim of this research is to analyze the effect of trade openness on economic growth for the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries between 1997-2020.
Design/Methodology: In this study, the Cobb-Douglas production function was expanded by adding the trade openness variable following the relevant literature. In the study using panel data analysis method, Westerlund cointegration test was applied. Afterwards, Dumitrescu Hurlin Panel Causality Test was applied to determine the direction of causality relationship between variables.
Findings: Westerlund cointegration test was applied and a cointegration relationship was found between the series. According to the causality test results, a bidirectional causality relationship was found between trade openness and economic growth. According to the results of the AMG estimator (Augmented Mean Group Estimator), it was concluded that trade openness positively affects economic growth throughout the panel.
Limitations: The analysis started in 1997 in order to obtain the complete data for the variables used in OECD member countries.
Originality/Value: The effect of trade openness on economic growth differs in each country in positive and negative terms. Therefore, it is important to determine how the effects of openness on growth have an impact on countries and country groups. It is expected that continuing to research this subject in the OECD sample will contribute to the field.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Trade Openness, Economic Growth, International Trade, Panel Data Analysis, Dumitrescu Hurlin Panel Causality Test.

OECD Ülkelerinde Ticari Açıklık ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Panel Veri Analizi

Öz

Amaç: Bu araştırmanın amacı 1997-2020 yılları arasında Ekonomik İşbirliği ve Kalkınma Teşkilatı (OECD) ülkeleri için ticari açıklığın ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisini analiz etmektir.
Tasarım/Yöntem: Bu çalışmada ilgili literatürden yararlanılarak Cobb-Douglas üretim fonksiyonu ticari açıklık değişkeni eklenerek genişletilmiştir. Panel veri analiz yöntemi kullanılan çalışmada Westerlund eşbütünleşme testi uygulanmış ve seriler arasında eşbütünleşme ilişkisi bulunmuştur. Sonrasında değişkenler arasında nedensellik ilişkisinin yönünün tespit edilmesi için Dumitrescu Hurlin Panel Nedensellik Testi uygulanmıştır.
Bulgular: Nedensellik testi sonuçlarına göre dışa açıklık ve ekonomik büyüme arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi saptanmıştır. AMG tahmincisi (Augmented Mean Group Estimator) sonuçlarına göre panelin genelinde ticari açıklığın ekonomik büyümeyi olumlu etkilediği sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.
Sınırlılıklar: OECD üyesi ülkelerde kullanılan değişkenlere ait verilerin eksiksiz olarak ele alınması için analiz 1997 yılından başlanmıştır.
Özgünlük/Değer: Ticari açıklığın ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi her ülkede olumlu ve olumsuz anlamda farklılık göstermektedir. Bu nedenle dışa açılmanın büyüme üzerindeki etkilerinin ülke ve ülke gruplarında nasıl bir etkiye sahip olduğunu tespit etmek önemlidir. OECD örnekleminde bu konunun araştırılmaya devam edilmesi alana katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ticari Açıklık, Ekonomik Büyüme, Dış Ticaret, Panel Veri Analizi, Dumitrescu Hurlin Panel Nedensellik Testi

Kaynakça

• Adams, S. (2008). Globalization and income inequality: Implications for intellectual property rights. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30(5), 725-735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2007.10.005
• Alam, K.J. ve Sumon, K.K. (2019). Causal relationship between trade openness and economic growth: A panel data analysis of asian countries. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues, 10(1), 118-126. https://ideas.repec.org/a/eco/journ1/2020-01-15.html
• Bahmani-Oskooee, M. ve Niroomand, F. (1999). Openness and economic growth: An empirical investigation. Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, 6(9), 557-561. https://aquila.usm.edu/fac_pubs/4790.
• Bardi, W. ve Hfaiedh, M.A. (2021). International trade and economic growth: evidence from a panel ARDL-PMG approach. International Economics and Economic Policy. 18, 847-868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10368-021-00507-4.
• Bonga-Bonga, L. ve Kinfack, E. (2019). The growth effect of trade openness on African countries: Evidence from using an instrumental variable panel smooth transition model. MPRA Paper No. 92111. https://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/92111/.
• Brander, J. ve Spencer, B. (1983). International R&D rivalry and industrial strategy, Review of Economic Studies, 50, 707-722. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297771
• Brueckner, M. ve Lederman, D. (2015), Trade openness and economic growth: Panel data evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. Economica, 82, 1302-1323. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12160.
• Chang, R., Kaltani, L. ve Loayza, N.V. (2009). Openness can be good for growth: The role of policy complementarities. Journal of Development Economics, 90, 33-49. https://doi.org/10.3386/ w11787.
• Christiansen, L., Schindler, M. ve Tressel, T. (2009). Growth and structural reforms: A new assessment. International Monetary Fund, Research Department, IMF Working Paper WP/09/284, 1-52. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1531517.
• Conteh, S.B., Yijun Y, Sesay B (2021), Economic growth effects of the interaction of trade openness and institutions quality: Empirical evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa. International Journal of Economic and Financial Issues. 11(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.32479/IJEFI.10098.
• Dar, A., & Amirkhalkhali, S. (2003). On the impact of trade openness on growth: Further evidence from OECD countries. Applied Economics, 35(16), 1761-1766. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0003684032000129020.
• Dixit, A. (1987). Strategic aspects of trade policy. T. F. Bewley (Yay. Haz), Advances in economic theory: 5th world congress içinde (s. 329-362). New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521340446.009
• Dollar, D. ve Kraay, A. (2001). Trade, growth, and poverty. https://documents1.worldbank.org/ curated/en/278551468743972606/pdf/multi0page.pdf.
• Dritsaki, C. (2015). Effect of trade openness and foreign direct investment on economic growth: An empirical research of the three Baltic countries. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 133, 191-199.
• Eusufzai, Z. (1996). Openness, economic growth, and development. Economic development and cultural change, 44 (2), 333-338. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1154406
• Frankel, J. ve Romer, D. (1999). Does trade cause growth?. American Economic Review, 89 (3), 379-399. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.89.3.379
• Freund, C. ve Bolaky, B. (2008). Trade, regulations and income. Journal of development economics, 87, 309-321. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JDEVECO.2007.11.003
• Gries, T. ve Redlin, M. (2012). Trade openness and economic growth: A panel causality analysis. Center For International Economics, Working Paper Series, No. 2011-06, June 2012.
• Grossman, G. M., Helpman, E. (1991). Trade, knowledge spillovers and growth. European Economic Review, 35(2), 517-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(91)90153-A.
• ILO-International Labour Organization, (2004). A fair globalization: Creating opportunities for all. Switzerland: ILO Publishing. https://www.ilo.org/public/libdoc/ilo/2004/104B09_19_engl.pdf
• İspiroğlu, F. ve Taş, S. (2022). Yükselen piyasa ekonomilerinde ticari açıklığın ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisi: Ekonometrik bir uygulama. Uluslararası Yönetim İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 18(1), 182- 207. https://doi.org/10.17130/ijmeb.846218
• Karaca, T., Güney, N. ve Hopoğlu, S. (2022). Ticari dışa açıklık-doğrudan yabancı yatırımlar-ekonomik büyüme ilişkisi: BRICS-T ülkeleri örneği. Bingöl Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1), 109-146. https://doi.org/ 10.33399/biibfad.937591.
• Katircioğlu, S. (2010). Trade and growth in a non-recognized small island state: Evidence from the Turkish republic of Northern Cyprus. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 11, 112–130. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.06
• Keho, Y. (2017). The impact of trade openness on economic growth: the case of Cote d’Ivoire. Cogent Economics&Finance. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322039.2017.13328 20.
• Khandare, V.B. (2011). Impact of globalization on international trade (with special reference to India). International Journal of Trade in Services, 3(1), 1-14.
• Kim, D. H. (2011). Trade, growth and income, The Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 20(5), 677-709. https:/doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2011.538966.
• Köse, Ö. (2003). Küreselleşme sürecinde devletin yapısal ve işlevsel dönüşümü. Sayıştay Dergisi, 14(49), 3-46. https://www.jurix.com.tr/article/9365.
• Lee, H.Y., Ricci, L.A. ve Rigobon, R. (2004). Once again, is openness good for growth?, NBER Working Paper 10749. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/ w10749/w10749. Pdf.
• Nourzad, F. ve Powell, J. (2003). Openness, growth, and development: Evidence from a panel of developing countries. Scientific Journal of Administrative Development, 1(1), 72-94. https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1102&context=econ_fac&httpsredir=1&referer=
• Mangir, F., Kabaklarlı, E. ve Ayhan, F. (2017). An analysis for the relationship between trade openness and economic growth: Evidence for ten African countries. Journal of Management and Economics Research, 15, 58-71. https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.373442.
• Muhammad, F., ve Jian, Z. (2016). The relationship between trade openness and economic growth in Muslim countries: An empirical investigation. Economics, 5(2), 15-19. https://doi.org/ 10.11648/j.eco.20160502.11.
• OECD. (2011). OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard 2011. Innovation and growth in knowledge economies. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/20725345. Sachs, J. D. ve Warner, A. M. (1995). Natural resource abundance and economic growth. NBER Working Papers 5398. https://doi.org/10.3386/w5398.
• Silajdzic, S., ve Mehic, E. (2018). Trade openness and economic growth: Empirical evidence from transition economies. Trade and Global Market içinde, 9-23. Publish intechOpen, http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.75812
• Subaşat, T. (2008). What is globalization and what is not?: A political economy perspective, Izmir University of Economics Working Paper No: 08/01. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/ 10419/175895/1/wp0801.pdf. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Dış İşleri Bakanlığı, https://www.mfa.gov.tr/iktisadi-isbirligi_ve-gelisme-teskilati-oecd.tr.mfa.
• Vlastou, I. (2010). Forcing Africa to open up to trade: Is it worth it?. The Journal of Developing Areas, 44(1), 25-39. https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.0.0086.
• Wacziarg, R. (2001). Measuring the dynamic gains from trade, World Bank Economic Review, 15(3), 393-429. https://ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_4_No_9_August_2013/32.pdf
• Yanikkaya, H. (2003). Trade openness and economic growth: A cross country empirical investigation, Journal of Development Economics, 72(1), 57–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3878(03)00068-3.
• Yenipazarlı, A., Cambazoğlu ve Begeç, E. (2022). Ticari dışa açıklık ve ekonomik büyüme bağlantısı: BRICS örneği. Pamukkale Journal of Eurasian Socioeconomic Studies, 9(1), 38-61. https://doi.org/10.34232/pjess.1094236
• Zeren, F. ve Ari, A. (2013). Trade openness and economic growth: A panel causality test. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(9), 317-324. https://ijbssnet.com/journals/ Vol_4_No_9_August_2013/32.pdf.