Turkish Delight for Some, Cold Turkey for Others?: The Effects of the EU-Turkey Customs Union
Following Turkey’s application for EU membership in 1987, a Customs Union (CU) between Turkey and the EU, mainly covering trade in manufacturing goods and processed agricultural products, came into effect in 1995. In addition to a large agricultural sector, Turkey also specializes in the production and exportation of relatively low-price, low-quality varieties of manufactured products. We use a theoretical framework in order to demonstrate that these features of the Turkish economy imply asymmetric changes in the trade volumes of the incumbent countries of the EU as a result of the EU-Turkey CU. By examining disaggregated trade data we find that the technologically sophisticated EU countries (e.g., mainly the Northern European countries) are also least similar to Turkey in terms of their export structure, whereas the degree of export similarity between the less technologically sophisticated EU members and Turkey is high. Our econometric results indicate that, in contrast to the “Northern” group’s exports to other EU15 countries (which have remained intact), the Southern countries’s exports to the other EU15 countries have declined as a result of the EU-Turkey CU. Moreover, the extra penetration of the Turkish market by EU countries has not been more favourable to the Southern group. These findings also imply that technologically sophisticated countries may see no significant further benefits from Turkey’s full accession to the EU (whereas the migration and political influence related costs for these countries may be large).
|Date of creation:||2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page: http://www.cesifo.deEmail:
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Flam, Harry & Helpman, Elhanan, 1987. "Vertical Product Differentiation and North-South Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 810-22, December.
- Arjan M. Lejour & Ruud A. de Mooij, 2004.
"Turkish Delight – Does Turkey’s accession to the EU bring economic benefits?,"
CESifo Working Paper Series
1183, CESifo Group Munich.
- Arjan M. Lejour & Ruud A. Mooij, 2005. "Turkish Delight: Does Turkey's Accession to the EU Bring Economic Benefits?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 87-120, 02.
- Hartler, Christina & Laird, Sam, 1999. "The EU model and Turkey: A case for thanksgiving?," WTO Staff Working Papers TPRD-99-01, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
- Flam, Harry, 2003.
"Turkey and the EU: Politics and Economics of Accession,"
718, Stockholm University, Institute for International Economic Studies.
- Harry Flam, 2003. "Turkey and the EU: Politics and Economics of Accession," CESifo Working Paper Series 893, CESifo Group Munich.
- Mercenier, Jean & Yeldan, Erinc, 1997.
"On Turkey's trade policy: Is a customs union with Europe enough?,"
European Economic Review,
Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 871-880, April.
- J. Mercenier & Erinç Yeldan, 1996. "On Turkey's Trade Policy : Is A Customs Union with Europe Enough?," Departmental Working Papers 964, Bilkent University, Department of Economics.
- Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutherford, Thomas F. & Tarr, David G., 1996.
"Economic implications for Turkey of a customs union with the European Union,"
Policy Research Working Paper Series
1599, The World Bank.
- Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutherford, Thomas F. & Tarr, David G., 1997. "Economic implications for Turkey of a Customs Union with the European Union," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 861-870, April.
- Finger, J M & Kreinin, M E, 1979. "A Measure of 'Export Similarity' and Its Possible Uses," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 89(356), pages 905-12, December.
- Alan V. Deardorff, 1995.
"Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?,"
NBER Working Papers
5377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Alan Deardorff, 1998. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," NBER Chapters, in: The Regionalization of the World Economy, pages 7-32 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Deardorff, A.V., 1995. "Determinants of Bilateral Trade : Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassical World?," Papers 95-05, Michigan - Center for Research on Economic & Social Theory.
- Antonis Adam & Thomas Moutos, 2002. "The Political Economy of EU Enlargement: Or, Why Japan is not a Candidate Country?," CESifo Working Paper Series 704, CESifo Group Munich.
- Arvind Panagariya, 2000. "Preferential Trade Liberalization: The Traditional Theory and New Developments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 287-331, June.
- Baltagi, Badi H. & Egger, Peter & Pfaffermayr, Michael, 2003. "A generalized design for bilateral trade flow models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 391-397, September.
- Laszlo Matyas, 1997. "Proper Econometric Specification of the Gravity Model," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 363-368, 05.
- Antonis Adam & James McHugh & Theodora Kosma, 2003. "Trade Liberalization Strategies; What Could South Eastern Europe Learn From Cefta and Bfta?," IMF Working Papers 03/239, International Monetary Fund.
- Togan, Sübidey, 1997. "Opening up the Turkish Economy in the Context of the Customs Union with EU," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 12, pages 157-179.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_1550. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Julio Saavedra)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.