تحلیل عوامل مؤثر بر تجارت محصولات پتروشیمی در گروه D8

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسنده

• امیر رضا سوری

موسسه مطالعات و پژوهش های بازرگانی

https://doi.org/10.22067/erd.v24i14.58851

چکیده

برای توضیح تجارت محصولات پتروشیمی بین کشورهای طرف تجاری در گروه D8، از مدل جاذبه برای فرموله کردن جریان‌های تجاری استفاده شده است. داده‌های تلفیقی مورد استفاده برای دوره 2006 تا 2015 برای هر یک از گروه‌های کالاییHS28(محصولات شیمیایی غیرآلی)،HS29 (محصولات شیمیایی آلی) وHS38 (محصولات گوناگون صنایع شیمیایی)، با یک پایگاه داده بزرگ و به روش‌های حداقل مربعات معمولی، اثرات ثابت و اثرات تصادفی برآورد شده است. نتایج مطالعه نشان داد که قدرت توضیح‌دهندگی مدل برای هر سه گروه از محصولات بالا بوده و حجم تجارت گروه کالای HS28 با توجه به تولید ناخالص داخلی صادرکنندگان و تولید ناخالص داخلی واردکنندگان به ترتیب با و با کشش، حجم تجارت گروه کالایی HS29 با توجه به تولید ناخالص داخلی صادرکنندگان و تولید ناخالص داخلی واردکنندگان به ترتیب با و با کشش و حجم تجارت گروه کالایی HS38 با توجه به تولید ناخالص داخلی صادرکنندگان بی‌کشش و با توجه به تولید ناخالص داخلی واردکنندگان با کشش بوده است. ضمن اینکه اندازه و ابعاد اقتصادی و درآمد سرانه اثرات معنی‌دار مستقیم و عدم توازن تجاری و مسافت اثر معنی‌دار اما معکوس بر جریان تجاری کشورهای مورد بررسی داشته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• تجارت بین الملل
• محصولات پتروشیمی
• مدل جاذبه
• گروهD8

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Analysis of Factors Affecting the Trade of Petrochemicals in Group D8

نویسنده [English]

• amirreza souri

Institute for trade studies and research (ITSR)

چکیده [English]

Since the end of the Second World War, international trade has grown faster than the world production in nearly a year. In this period, trade among the developed nations has increased much faster than trade in general accounting for an increasing proportion of total trade. Balassa (1966) and Grubel (1967, 1970) demonstrated the importance of simultaneous increase by all countries regarding their exports of most industries. The pioneering studies of the gravity model were realized by Tinbergen (1962) and Pöyhönen (1963). The gravity model is analogous to Newton's law of gravity, where the state gravity between two objects is directly related to each other and inversely related to distance. Anderson's (1979) and Deardorff (1998) have considered that the gravitational equation helps explain the pattern of international trade.
In the 1980’s, Romer (1986, 1990), and Lucas (1988) studied the endogenous growth models. Endogenous growth theories identify a number of channels that affects growth, such as productivity, human capital, and openness. Most of the studies show that trade and economic growth are positively correlated.
When economic geography was born in 1990’s some authors as in Krugman (1993) explained the relationship between North and South considering the mobility between the countries. This process involves trade flows, migration, and direct foreign investment.
In last years, a number of gravity models have been applied to explain the bilateral trade flows (Egger 2002; Serlenga & Shin 2007; Faustino & Leitão, 2008).
The objective of this paper is to examine the pattern of Iran trade by adopting an argument gravity model. The manuscript uses a panel data approach. This study analyses the link between gravity model and Iran trade. The manuscript considers the determinants of Iran and and D8 countries within the years of 2006 to 2015. This study uses country-specific characteristics (per capita income, market size, geographical distance, and factor endowments).The structure of the paper is a follows.
This model is analogous to Newton’s law of gravity, which states that the gravity between two objects is directly related to their masses and inversely related to their distance.

Where Fij denotes the flow from country i to country j. Yi and Yj are the economic sizes of the two countries, usually measured as the gross domestic product (GDP), or per-capita GDP. Dij is the distance between the countries. G is a gravitational constant.
In order to facilitate the econometric estimations, we apply logs the gravity equation (1), hence, we obtain a linear relationship as follows:

Where lnG corresponds to the intercept, while , and are elasticity’s.
According to the gravity approach, the trade between the two countries is directly related to their incomes (or per-capita incomes) and inversely related to the distance between them.
Since the pioneering studies of Tinbergen (1962), Pöyhönen (1963), Anderson (1979), Pagoulatos and Sorensen (1975), Caves (1981), Toh (1982), Krugman, (1997), and Badinger and Breuss (2008) the geographic distance has been an important determinant of trade. The distance can be analyzed in terms of geography, culture, language, and adjacency (Border). Rauch (1999) and Eichengree and Irwin (1998) emphasize the importance of border and common language.
Anderson (1979) introduced the product differentiation by country of origin assumption. A few years later Bergstrand (1985), Egger (2002) and Grossman and Helpman (2005) used the income per capita to specify the supply side of economies.
Usually geographic distance measures the cost of transport. According to the literature there is an increase in the flow of trade if the transportation costs decrease. The theoretical predictions show a negative correlation between distance and the trade. Balassa (1966), Balassa and Bauwens (1987), Stone and Lee (1995), Clark and Stanley (2003), and Badinger and Breuss (2008) found a negative sign between geographical distance and trade.
The empirical model uses the dummy variables to the cultural distance, language, and to the border.
The similarities of the countries encourage bilateral trade. Frankel et al. (1998) and Papazolou et al. (2006) demonstrate the importance of these qualitative variables to analyze the regional trading agreements (RTAs).
Balassa (1966) and Balassa and Bauwens (1987) found a positive sign. The empirical studies show that gravity models utilize gravitational factors as in volume of trade, capital follows, and migration (Baltagi et al., 2003; Faustino & Leitão, 2008; Kabir & Salin, 2010; Leitão & Faustino, 2009, 2010; Serlenga & Shin, 2007; Skabic & Orlic, 2007; White, 2009).
Where is bilateral trade (exports plus imports), is a set of explanatory variables.

All variables are in the logarithm form; is the unobserved time-invariant specific effects; captures a common deterministic trend; e is a random disturbance assumed to be normal, and identical distributed (IID) with .
The combined data used within the period of 2006 to 2015 for each of the commodity groups HS28 (inorganic chemical products), HS29 (organic chemical products), and HS38 (various products of the chemical industry) with a large database and in a minimum method ordinary squares, fixed effects, and random effects are estimated. The results of the study showed that the explanatory power of the model was high for all the three groups of products and the volume of trade of the HS28 commodity group with regard to the GDP of the exporters and the GDP of the importers,.Meanwhile, the size, economic dimensions, and the per capita income have significant direct effects. Trade imbalance and distance have a significant but inverse effect on the business flow of the countries under study.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• international trade
• petrochemicals
• Gravity model
• Panel Data
• D8

مراجع

[1] Anderson J E. (1979). “A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation”, theAmericanEconomic 69 (1), 106-116.

[2] Akhavi, A., & Hosini, M. A. (2006). Capacity assessment of iran's exports of agricultural products EU. Journal of Agricultural and Development Economics, 54, 125-157. (In persian)

[3] Azarbaijani, K., & Eizadi, G. (2006). Intra-industry trade iran and china: A New Look. Journal of Economic Studies, 26, 81-99. (In persian)

[4] Afshari. Z., & Solimani movahed, M. (2010). Hkshr theory test - avhlyn - samuelson at intra-industry trade Iran (dynamic panel data approach). Journal of Business Research, 54, 1-23. (In persian)

[5] Badinger, H. and F. Breuss. (2008). “Trade and productivity: an industry perspective,”Empirica, 35, 213-231.

[6] Balassa, B. (1966). “Tariff Reductions and Trade in Manufactures among Industrial Countries”,American Economic Review, 56(3). 466-473.

[7] Balassa, B, and Bauwens L. (1987). “Intra-Industry Specialization in Multi-Country and Multi-Idustry Framework”, the Economic Journal, 923-939.

[8] Baltagi, B.H., Egger, P., and Pfaffermayr, M. (2003). “A Generalized Design for Bilateral TradeFlow Models”, Economics Letters, 80, 391-7.

[9] Bergstrand, H. (1985). “The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some MicroeconomicFoundations and Empirical Evidence”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 67(3). 474-481.

[10] Caves, E. (1981). “Intra-Industry Trade and Market Structure in Industrial Countries”, OxfordEconomic Papers, 203-223.

[11] Clark, D, and Stanley, D. (2003). “Determinants of Intra- Industry Trade Between the UnitedStates and Industrial Nations”, International Economic Journal 17 (3). 1-17.

[12] Deradorff, A. (1998). “Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in NeoclassicalWorld?”, NBER Chapters in The Regionalization of the World Economy, 7-32.

[13] Eichengreen, B, and Irwin D. (1998). “The Role of History in Bilateral Flows“, TheRegionalization of the World Economy in Jeffrey A. Frankel (Ed). University of Chicago,Press.

[14] Egger, P.(2002). “ An Econometric View on the Estimation of Gravity Models and theCalculation of Trade Potentials”, World Economy, 25, 297-312.

[15] Evans, E., and Harrigan, J. (2005). “Distance Time, and Specialization: Learn Retailing inGeneral Equilibrium”, American Economic Review 95 (1): 292-313.

[16] Fidrmuc, J. (2004). “The Endogeneity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria, Intra-IndustryTrade, and EMU Enlargement”, Contemporary Economic Policy, 22(1). 1-12.

[17] Frankel, J. and Rose, A. (1998). “The Endogeneity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria”,The Economic Journal 108, 1009-1025.

[18] Grubel, H (1967).” Intra – Industry Specialisation and the Pattern of Trade “, Canadian Journalof Economics and Political Science, 33 (3). 374-388.

[19] Grubel, H (1970). “The Theory of Optimum Currency Areas”, the Canadian Journal ofEconomics”, 3(2). 318-324.

[20] Grossman, G, and Helpman, E. (2005). “A Protectionist Bias in Majoritarian Politics”,Quarterly Journal of Economy 120, 139-1282.

[21] Helpman, E, and Krugman, P. (1985). “Market Structure and Foreign Trade”, Brighton, UK:Harvester Wheatsheaf.

[22] Helpman, E. (1987). “Imperfect Competition and International Trade: Evidence from fourteenIndustrial Countries”, Journal of Japononese International and International Economics, 1(1).62-81.

[23] Hummels, D. and Levinshon, J. (1995). “Monopolisitc Competition and International Trade:Reconsidering the Evidence”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110 (3).736-799.

[24] Lucas, R. Jr. (1988). “On the Mechanics of Economic Development”, Journal of MonetaryEconomics, 22 (1). 3-42.

[25] Leitão, N.C., and Faustino, H. (2010). “Portuguese Foreign Direct Investment Inflows: AnEmpirical Investigation”, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 38, 190-197.

[26] Leitão, N.C., Faustino, H., and Yoshida, Y. (2010). “Fragmentation Vertical Intra-IndustryTrade , and Automobile Components”, Economics Bulletin 30 (2). 1006-1015.

[27] Linder, S. B. (1961). “An Essay on Trade and Transformation”, John Wiley, New York.

[28] Kabir, M., and Salim, R. (2010). “Can Gravity Model Explain BIMSTEC’S Trade?”, Journal ofEconomic Integration , 25(1). 144-166.

[29] Krugman, P. (1993). “Geography and Trade”, First MIT Press paperback edition.

[30] Pagoulatos, E., and Sorense, R. (1975). “Two-Way International Trade: Na EconometricAnalysis”, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv (3). 454-465.

[31] Papazolou, C., Pentencost, J., and Marques, H. (2006). “Model Forecast of the Potential TradeEffects of EU Enlargement: Lessons from 2004 and Path- Dependency in Integration,” WorldEconomy, 29, 1071-1089.

[32] Pöyhönen, P. (1963). “A Tentative Model for the Volume of Trade between Countries”,Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 90 (1): 93-99.

[33] Rauch, J. (1999). “Networks versus Markets in International Trade”, Journal of International Economics, 48 (1). 7-35.

[34] Romer, D. (1986). “A Simple General Equilibrium Version of the Bamol- Tobin Model”, TheQuarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, 101 (4). 663-685.

[35] Skabic, I. and Orlic, E. (2007). “Determinants of FDI in CEE and Western Balkman Countries(Is Accession to the EU important for Attracting FDI?)”,Economic and Business Review, 9 (4).333-350.

[36] Serlenga, L., Shin, Y. (2007). “Gravity Models of Intra-EU Trade: Application of the CCEP-HTEstimation in Heterogeneous Panels with Unobserved Common Time- Specific Factors”,Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22, 361-381.

[37] Stone, J. and Lee, H. (1995). “Determinants of Intra-Industry Trade: An Longitudinal Cross-Country Analysis”, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 67-85.

[38] Tinbergen, J. (1962). “Shaping the World Economy”. New York: The Twentieth Century FundInc.

[39] Souri ,Amir Reza (2014). “Factors Affecting Intra-industry Trade Between Iran and Regional Blocs” , Journal of Economy and Regional Development, 21 (8).153-179. (In persian)

[40] Toh, K. (1982). “A Cross- Section Analysis of Intra- Industry Trade in U.S ManufacturingIndustries”, Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv (118). 281-301.

[41] Yavari, K., & Aahraf Zade,H.R. (2007). Economic Integration in Developing Countries; Application of Gravity Model to Integrated Data in a Method GMM, Iranaian Journal of Trade Studies, 36, 95-110. (In persian)

[42] Zieaie bigdeli, M .T. & Hasanpoor, Y. (2004). Intra-industry trade of the member countries of the islamic conference (OIC) . Journal of Business Research, 31, 91-125. (In persian)