IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/woraff/v186y2023i1p135-168.html

Same Ride, Different Riders

Author

Listed:
  • Sahand E. P. Faez
  • Wing‐Keung Wong

Abstract

Mainstream international relations definitions commonly assume that states are identical units in a constant state of competition for survival to increase their power. Yet, such a one‐sided approach fails to fully consider that the internal structures and contexts of states at different times and under different leaders exert considerable effects on how states act in the international arena and on the foreign policies that shape their identities, priorities, and thus relations with other states. We begin by questioning such theoretical assumptions and then apply a more appropriate reformulation to the case of Turkey's changing trade policy with the European Union (EU). Examining Gül's administration (2007–2014) and Erdoğan's (2014–2020), we look at whether a change in Turkish leadership resulted in a significant change in trade policy and led to a change in the dynamics of its foreign relations approach. Turkey's relations with the members of the EU are assessed (via panel data estimations) as the volume of trade between Turkey and EU members. The data consists of 25 European states’ GDP, Exchange Rate, and Inflation Rate for 2000–2020. We find a significant difference in Turkey's behavior in terms of trade with the EU members between the two administrations under study. This suggests the need to rethink some central theoretical assumptions in certain mainstream international relations perspectives. Según las definiciones de las relaciones internacionales convencionales, los estados son unidades idénticas que se encuentran en un estado constante de competencia por la supervivencia, cuyo papel clave es aumentar su poder. Este enfoque unilateral no tiene en cuenta varios aspectos clave del sistema global actual. El propósito de este estudio es examinar si existe alguna diferencia significativa en la relación de Turquía con los miembros de la Unión Europea (UE) entre dos administraciones recientes. Su relación con los miembros de la UE se evalúa como el volumen de comercio entre Turquía y los miembros de la UE. Se han realizado varias estimaciones de datos de panel. La variable dependiente para evaluar las relaciones internacionales en este estudio es el comercio de Turquía con los miembros de la UE. Los datos consisten en el PIB, el tipo de cambio y la tasa de inflación de 25 estados europeos para 2000–2020. Las dos administraciones se añaden como variables ficticias. Según los hallazgos, existe una diferencia significativa en el comportamiento de Turquía en términos de comercio con los miembros de la UE entre las dos administraciones bajo estudio. 根据主流国际关系(IR)的定义,各个国家都是一样的单元,其为生存而处于不断竞争的状态,而生存的关键在于增强实力。这种片面的衡量方法没有考虑当前全球体系的几个关键方面。本研究旨在分析土耳其最近两届政府在与欧盟(EU)成员国关系方面是否存在显著差异。土耳其政府与欧盟成员国的关系通过二者之间的贸易量加以评估。进行了几轮面板数据估计。本研究中,用于评估国际关系的因变量是土耳其与欧盟成员国的贸易。数据包括2000年至2020年25个欧洲国家的GDP、汇率和通胀率。两届政府被添加为虚拟变量。调查结果显示,土耳其两届政府在与欧盟成员国的贸易行为方面存在显著差异。

Suggested Citation

  • Sahand E. P. Faez & Wing‐Keung Wong, 2023. "Same Ride, Different Riders," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 186(1), pages 135-168, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:woraff:v:186:y:2023:i:1:p:135-168
    DOI: 10.1177/00438200221111793
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/00438200221111793
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00438200221111793?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wendt, Alexander E., 1987. "The agent-structure problem in international relations theory," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 335-370, July.
    2. Olugbenga Onafowora, 2003. "Exchange rate and trade balance in east asia: is there a J-curve?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 5(18), pages 1-13.
    3. T. S. Breusch & A. R. Pagan, 1980. "The Lagrange Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 47(1), pages 239-253.
    4. Wendt, Alexander, 1992. "Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 391-425, April.
    5. Kohli, Ulrich, 2004. "Real GDP, real domestic income, and terms-of-trade changes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 83-106, January.
    6. Jerry Hausman, 2015. "Specification tests in econometrics," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 38(2), pages 112-134.
    7. Khim-sen Liew & Kian-Ping Lim & Huzaimi Hussain, 2003. "Exchange Rate and Trade Balance Relationship: The Experience of ASEAN Countries," International Trade 0307003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lawrence Dumisani Nyathi & Japhet Mutale, 2025. "Leveraging Smart Technologies for Sustainable Economic Development: Evidence from Urban and Rural Communities in Bulawayo Province, Zimbabwe," African Journal of Commercial Studies, African Journal of Commercial Studies, vol. 6(6).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michel Krah & Michael Kouadio & Fabrice Anzara, 2026. "Public debt and economic growth in WAEMU countries: evidence on the moderating effect of governance," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Meghamrita Chakraborty, 2023. "Linking Migration, Diversity and Regional Development in India," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 8(1), pages 55-72, January.
    3. Hany Eldemerdash & Hugh Metcalf & Sara Maioli, 2014. "Twin deficits: new evidence from a developing (oil vs. non-oil) countries’ perspective," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 825-851, November.
    4. Huy Quang Doan, 2019. "Trade, Institutional Quality and Income: Empirical Evidence for Sub-Saharan Africa," Economies, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, May.
    5. Skoufias, Emmanuel, 1998. "Determinants of child health during the economic transition in Romania," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(11), pages 2045-2056, November.
    6. González, Maximiliano & Guzmán, Alexander & Pombo, Carlos & Trujillo, María Andréa, 2012. "Family involvement and dividend policy in listed and non-listed firms," Galeras. Working Papers Series 034, Universidad de Los Andes. Facultad de Administración. School of Management.
    7. McGovern, Mark E. & Rokicki, Slawa & Reichman, Nancy E., 2022. "Maternal depression and economic well-being: A quasi-experimental approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    8. A. Mahabbati & A. Izady & M. Mousavi Baygi & K. Davary & S. M. Hasheminia, 2017. "Daily soil temperature modeling using ‘panel-data’ concept," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(8), pages 1385-1401, June.
    9. Vassilis Tselios, 2008. "Income and educational inequalities in the regions of the European Union: Geographical spillovers under welfare state restrictions," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 87(3), pages 403-430, August.
    10. Michele FRATIANNI & Chang HOON HO, 2007. "On the Relationship Between RTA Expansion and Openness," Working Papers 288, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    11. Mendieta-Aragón, Adrián & Rodríguez-Fernández, Laura & Navío-Marco, Julio, 2025. "Tourism usage of digital collaborative economy platforms in Europe: Situation, behaviours, and implications for the digital policies," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    12. Wilman-Santiago Ochoa-Moreno & Byron Alejandro Quito & Carlos Andrés Moreno-Hurtado, 2021. "Foreign Direct Investment and Environmental Quality: Revisiting the EKC in Latin American Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    13. Pardo Martínez, Clara Inés & Silveira, Semida, 2012. "Analysis of energy use and CO2 emission in service industries: Evidence from Sweden," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(7), pages 5285-5294.
    14. Aladejare, Samson Adeniyi, 2022. "Natural resource rents, globalisation and environmental degradation: New insight from 5 richest African economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    15. Skare, Marinko & Soriano, Domingo Riberio, 2021. "Technological and knowledge diffusion link: An international perspective 1870–2019," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    16. Furkan Demirtaş & Emine Kaya & Festus Victor Bekun & Mücahit Çitil & Mustafa Torusdağ & Abdulkadir Barut, 2025. "Do institutional quality and military expenditure of G20 countries affect green investments?," Energy & Environment, , vol. 36(6), pages 2639-2664, September.
    17. Khanindra Ch. Das, 2013. "Home Country Determinants of Outward FDI from Developing Countries," Margin: The Journal of Applied Economic Research, National Council of Applied Economic Research, vol. 7(1), pages 93-116, February.
    18. Waliullah & Mehmood Khan Kakar & Rehmatullah Kakar & Wakeel Khan, 2010. "The Determinants of Pakistan’s Trade Balance: An ARDL Cointegration Approach," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 15(1), pages 1-26, Jan-Jun.
    19. Yilmaz Bayar, 2016. "Institutional Determinants of Stock Market Development in European Union Transition Economies," Romanian Economic Journal, Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, vol. 19(61), pages 211-226, September.
    20. Umut Uzar, 2022. "The connection between freedom of the press and environmental quality: An investigation on emerging market countries," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 46(1), pages 21-38, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:woraff:v:186:y:2023:i:1:p:135-168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.