Zeynep ÇİRKİN BÜYÜKDENİZ, Türkmen GÖKSEL

DIŞ TİCARET LİBERALİZASYONUNUN İŞSİZLİK ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİLERİ

İşsizlik pek çok ekonominin ortak problemi olsa da geleneksel ticaret teorisi tam istihdam, esnekücretler ve sektörler arası faktör mobilitesinin tam esnek olması gibi basitleştirici varsayımlara dayandığı içinekonomistler genellikle dış ticaretin işsizlik üzerindeki etkisini ihmâl eden modeller üzerinde çalışmışlardır.Küreselleşme sürecinin de etkisiyle artan dış ticaretin istihdam yaratıcı ve/veya yok edici etkisi gelenekselticaret teorilerinin dayandığı bu varsayımlar nedeniyle irdelenememektedir. Bu çalışmada Krugman Modeli(1980) eksik istihdam ve etkin ücreti varsayımları ile yeniden modellenerek işsizlik içsel olarak hesaplanmıştır.Modelde işçinin verimliliği firmanın seçtiği ücret düzeyine, denge ücret düzeyine, gelir vergisi düzeyine, dışticaretin yarattığı rekabet faktörünün olumsuz etkisine ve yine dış ticaretin ortaya çıkardığı pazargenişlemesinin yarattığı olumlu etkiye bağlıdır. Fakat liberalleşmenin işsizlik seviyesi üzerindeki net etkisibelirsizdir. Bu etkinin yönü rekabetin yarattığı olumsuz etkiden ve pazar genişlemesinin yarattığı olumluetkiden hangisinin baskın olduğuna göre değişiklik gösterecektir.

The Effects of International Trade Liberalization on Unemployment

As a well-known fact, unemployment is a common problem for many economies. Classical international trade theory is based on simple assumptions such as full employment, flexible wages and perfect elastic factor mobility across sectors. Due to these assumptions, economists have mostly studied on models which are ignoring the effect of foreign trade on unemployment. The creative or destructive impact of international trade on employment cannot be scrutinized because of related assumptions and the effect of the globalization process. This study is built on Krugman (1980) by adding two important dimensions: efficiency wages and unemployment. Labor productivity is determined by the wage level of the company, the equilibrium wage rate that cleans the market and income tax level. On the other hand, unemployment in the local market is affected by two channels: A larger market and higher competition. However, the net effect of liberalization on unemployment is ambiguous. The direction of this impact depends on the negative impacts of competition and the positive effects of market expansion. If the first (latter) effect dominates the latter (first) one, the international trade causes an increase (decrease) in the unemployment rate in the domestic market.

PDF

___

Balassa, Bela (1966), “American Direct Investments in the Common Market,” Banco Nazionale de Lavoro Quarterly Review, No. 74, 121-46.
Balassa, Bela (1979), “Intra-Industry Trade and the Integration of Developing Countries in the World Economy”, World Bank Reprint Series (113), 245-270.
Balassa, Bela (1986), “The Determınants Of Intra-Industry Specıalızatıon In Unıted States Trade” Oxford Economic Papers (38), 220-233.
Bayraktutan, Yusuf (2003), “Bilgi Ve Uluslararası Ticaret Teorileri”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 4(2):175-186.
Belenkiy, Maksim ve Riker, David (2015), “Theory and Evidence Linking International Trade to Unemployment Rates” U.S. Internatıonal Trade Commıssıon Offıce Of Economıcs Workıng Paper, No.2015-01B.
Brecher, Richard (1974), “Minimum Wage Rates and the Pure Theory of International Trade”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 88(1): 98-116.
Davidson, Carl, Lawrence Martin, Steven Matusz (1999), “Trade and search generated unemployment” Journal of International Economics, 48:271–299.
Davis, Donald ve Harrigan, James (2011), “Good jobs, bad jobs, and trade liberalization” Journal of International Economics, 84:26–36.
Dutt, Pushan., Mitra, Devashish ve Ranjan, Priya (2009), “International trade and unemployment: Theory and cross-national evidence” Journal of International Economics,78:32-44.
Gözgör, Giray ve Pişkin, Ali (2011), “İşsizlik ve Dış Ticaret: Türkiye’deki Bölgeler İçin Genelleştirilmiş Momentler Yöntemi-Dinamik Panel Veri Yaklaşımı” Business and Economics Research Journal, 2(3):121-138
Helpman, Elhanan ve Itskhoki, Oleg (2010), “Labor Market Rigidities, Trade and Unemployment” Review of Economic Studies, 77(3): 1100-1137.
Janiak, Alexandre (2007), “Does Trade Liberalization Lead to Unemployment? Theory and Some Evidence” Research Gate Publication. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/ 228678904
Krugman, Paul (1979), “Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Competition and International Trade” Journal of International Economics, 9:469-479.
Krugman, Paul (1980), “Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade” The American Economic Review,70(5):950-959.
Krugman, Paul (1993), “What Do Undergrads Need to Know About Trade?”, The American Economic Review, 83(2):23:26.
Leonitief, Wassily (1951) “Input-Output Economics”, Scientific American,185(4):15-21.
Lancaster, Kevin (1980), “Intra-Industry Trade Under Perfect Monopolıstıc Competıtıon”, Journal of International Economics, 10:151-175.
Melitz, Marc (2003), "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity" Econometrica, 71(6): 1695-1725.
Seyidoğlu, Halil (2013), Uluslararası İktisat (İstanbul: Güzem Can Yayınları).
Sharma, Kishor (1999), “Pattern And Determınants Of Intra-Industry Trade In Australıan Manufacturıng” Yale Unıversıty Economıc Growth Center, Center Dıscussıon Paper No. 813.
Soo, Kwok Tong (2012), “Intra-industry trade: A Krugman-Ricardo model and data”, Lancaster University Economics Working Paper Series. http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/ Ianwpaper/33867578.htm
Yellen, Janet (1984), “Efficiency Wage Models of Unemployment” The American Economic Review, 74(2):200-205.
Yüksel, Esra ve Sarıdoğan, Ercan (2011), “Uluslararası Ticaret Teorileri Ve Paul R.Krugman’ın Katkıları” Öneri,C.9,S.37:199-206.