Dış Ticaretin Serbestleşmesi ve İşsizlik Arasındaki İlişkinin Heterojen Firma Modeli Çerçevesinde Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2022, Volume: 30 Issue: 51, 319 - 352, 31.01.2022

Zeynep Çirkin Büyükdeniz , Türkmen Göksel

https://doi.org/10.17233/sosyoekonomi.2022.01.16

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, uluslararası ticaretin büyük bir kısmını oluşturan benzer teknoloji, tercih ve maliyet yapılarına sahip ülkeler arasındaki ticareti ifade eden endüstri içi ticaret modellerinden olan Melitz (2003) modelini, işsizlik varsayımı altında ele alarak dış ticaret liberalizasyonun işsizliği nasıl etkilediğini araştırmaktır. Bu çalışmada analiz edilen model etkin ücreti varsayımı ile yeniden modellenmiş ve işsizlik içsel olarak hesaplanmıştır. Model nümerik yöntemle çözülmüştür. Modelde piyasa genişlemesinin ve piyasadaki rekabetin eş anlı olarak ortaya çıktığı varsayılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre piyasa genişlemesinin rekabeti domine etmesi durumunda işsizlik azalırken, rekabetin piyasa genişlemesini domine etmesi halinde işsizlik artmaktadır. Ayrıca yapılan analiz sonucunda piyasa genişlemesinin baskın olması durumunda toplam üretim miktarında, verimlilikte ve işsizlik sigortasında da artış olduğu gözlemlenmiştir. Piyasadaki rekabetin baskın olması durumunda ise toplam üretim miktarında, verimlilik seviyesinde ve işsizlik sigortasında azalma meydana geldiği görülmüştür.

Keywords

Genel Denge Modeli, Etkin Ücret Teorisi, Heterojen Firma Modeli, İşsizlik

Evaluation of the Relationship Between Foreign Trade Liberalization and Unemployment within the Framework of the Heterogeneous Firm Model

Abstract

This study investigates how foreign trade liberalization affects unemployment by using the Melitz model (2003), which is one of the intra-industry trade models expressing trade between countries with similar technologies, preferences, and cost structures that make up a large part of international trade. The Melitz model (2003) is remodelled by efficiency wage theory to endogenize unemployment. The model is solved by numerical method. It is assumed that market expansion and competition in the market occur simultaneously. The effect of liberalization on unemployment varies depending on which of two factors, market expansion or competition, dominates the other. According to the results, unemployment decreases when market expansion dominates the competition, while unemployment increases if competition dominates market expansion. In addition, it has been observed that there is an increase in the total amount of production, productivity, and unemployment insurance when market expansion is dominant. Also, it has been observed that there is a decrease in the total amount of production, productivity level, and unemployment insurance when competition in the market is dominant.

Keywords

General Equilibrium Model, Efficiency Wage Theory, Heterogeneous Firms Model, Unemployment

References

• Amand, M. & F. Pelgrin (2016), “Pareto Distributions in International Trade: Hard to Identify, Easy to Estimate”, Toulouse School of Economics Macroeconomics Seminar Working Paper.
• Aw, B.Y. et al. (2000), “Productivity and Turnover in the Export Market: Micro-level Evidence from the Republic of Korea and Taiwan (China)”, World Bank Economic Review, 14, 65-90.
• Axtell, R.L. (2001), “Zipf Distribution of U.S. Firm Sizes”, Science, 293, 1818-1820.
• Baldwin R. & P. Krugman (1989), “Persistent Trade Effects of Large Exchange Rate Shocks”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 104(4),635-654.
• Baldwin, R. & W. Gu (2003), “Export-Market Participation and Productivity Performance in Canadian Manufacturing”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 36(3),634-657.
• Baldwin, R. (1990), “Hysteresis in Trade”, Empirical Economics, 15(2), 127-142.
• Bentivogli, C. & P. Pagano (1999), “Trade, Job Destruction and Job Creation in European Manufacturing”, Open Economies Review, 10, 165-184.
• Bernard, A. et al. (2007), “Firms in International Trade”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), 105-130.
• Bernard, A.B. & J.B. Jensen (1999), “Exceptional Exporter Performance: Cause, Effect, or Both?”, Journal of International Economics, 47, 1-25.
• Bernard, A.B. et al. (2003), “Plants and Productivity in International Trade”, American Economic Review, 93(4), 1268-1290.
• Brecher, R.A. (1974), “Minimum Wage Rates and the Pure Theory of International Trade”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 88(1),98-116.
• Caliendo, L. et al. (2019), “Trade And Labor Market Dynamics: General Equilibrium Analysis of The China Trade Shock”, Econometrica, 87(3), 741-835.
• Clerides, S.K. et al. (1998), “Is Learning by Exporting Important? Micro-dynamic Evidence fromColombia, Mexico, and Morocco”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 903-947.
• Cote, S.L. (2007), “Tariff reduction and employment in Canadian manufacturing”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 40(3), 843-860.
• Dutt, P. et al. (2009), “International trade and unemployment: Theory and Cross-National Evidence”, Journal of International Economics, 78, 32-44.
• Egger, H. & U. Kreickemeier (2009), “Firm Heterogeneity and the Labor Market Effects of Trade Liberalization”, International Economic Review, 50(1), 87-216.
• Fugazza, M. & A.C. Molina (2009), “The Determinants of Trade Survival”, HEID Working Paper, No:05/2009, 1-37.
• Helpman, E. & O. Itshoki (2010), “Labor Market Rigidities, Trade and Unemployment”, Review of Economic Studies, 77(3), 1100-1137.
• Helpman, E. et al. (2004), “Export versus FDI with Heterogeneous Firms”, American Economic Review, 94(1), 300-16.
• Hung, L.W. & S.K. Peng (2019), “Unemployment With Trade And Firm Heterogeneity”, International Journal of Economic Theory, 16(1), 62-81.
• Janiak, A. (2007), “Does Trade Liberalization Lead to Unemployment? Theory and Some Evidence”, Mimeo, Universite Libre de Bruxelles Thesis, 1-50.
• Krugman, P. (1980), “Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade”, The American Economic Review, 70(5), 950-959.
• Lee, K.Y. (2018), “A Quantitative Trade Model with Unemployment”, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy Working Papper, No:18-04.
• Mas-Colell, A. et al. (1995), Microeconomic Theory, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Matusz, S.J. (1986), “Implicit Contracts, Unemployment and International Trade”, The Economic Journal, 96(382), 307-322.
• Melitz, M.J. & S.J. Redding (2012), “Heterogeneous Firms and Trade”, Center for Economic Performans Discussion Paper, No.1183, 1-66.
• Melitz, M.J. (2003), “The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity”, Econometrica, 71, 1695-1725.
• Melitz, M.J. (2008), “International Trade and Heterogeneous Firms”, içinde: S.N. Durlauf (ed.), New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Second Edition, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Pişkin, E. (2017), “Türkiye İhracatının Ölüm-Kalım Meselesi”, Munich Personal RePEc Archive, No. 81459.
• Saez, E. (2001), “Using Elasticities to Derive Optimal Income Tax Rates”, Review of Economic Studies, 68, 205-229.