IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/erg/wpaper/1318.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Anatomy of Firm-Level Productivity in Turkey in the AKP Era

Author

Listed:
  • Nergiz Dincer

    (Department of Economics, TED University)

  • Ayça Tekin-Koru

    (Department of Economics, TED University)

Abstract

The main aim of the current paper is to investigate the productivity dynamics of Turkey during the Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi (AKP) era to contribute to the ongoing discussions of long-term economic growth of the country, using a unique data set and firm-level granular productivity analysis. Furthermore, the deindustrialization of Turkey is scrutinized as a complement to the productivity analysis. Among a plethora of results, the following three are the most important ones in terms of their policy implications: (i) The aggregate productivity figures underestimated the productivity improvements in the manufacturing sector and overestimated the productivity losses in the services sector. (ii) The productivity growth of manufacturing sector in Turkey has been positive yet evolving towards medium-low tech manufacturing which displays the lowest productivity growth among all manufacturing sectors. (iii) While the surviving firms in the Turkish manufacturing sector have increased their own productivity in the AKP era, in the services sector surviving firms have a negative contribution to aggregate productivity growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Nergiz Dincer & Ayça Tekin-Koru, 2019. "An Anatomy of Firm-Level Productivity in Turkey in the AKP Era," Working Papers 1318, Economic Research Forum, revised 21 Aug 2019.
    • Handle: RePEc:erg:wpaper:1318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://erf.org.eg/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/1318.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://bit.ly/31YFTa2
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marc J. Melitz & Sašo Polanec, 2015. "Dynamic Olley-Pakes productivity decomposition with entry and exit," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(2), pages 362-375, June.
    2. Ricardo J. Caballero & Takeo Hoshi & Anil K. Kashyap, 2008. "Zombie Lending and Depressed Restructuring in Japan," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1943-1977, December.
    3. Andrew B. Bernard & Stephen J. Redding & Peter K. Schott, 2007. "Comparative Advantage and Heterogeneous Firms," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 74(1), pages 31-66.
    4. Lucia Foster & John C. Haltiwanger & C. J. Krizan, 2001. "Aggregate Productivity Growth: Lessons from Microeconomic Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: New Developments in Productivity Analysis, pages 303-372, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Daron Acemoglu & Murat Ucer, 2015. "The Ups and Downs of Turkish Growth, 2002-2015: Political Dynamics, the European Union and the Institutional Slide," NBER Working Papers 21608, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Daniel A. Ackerberg & Kevin Caves & Garth Frazer, 2015. "Identification Properties of Recent Production Function Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 2411-2451, November.
    7. James Levinsohn & Amil Petrin, 2003. "Estimating Production Functions Using Inputs to Control for Unobservables," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(2), pages 317-341.
    8. Griliches, Zvi & Regev, Haim, 1995. "Firm productivity in Israeli industry 1979-1988," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 175-203, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Dincer, Nergiz & Tekin-Koru, Ayca, 2019. "An Anatomy of Productivity in Turkey in the AKP Era through a Political Economy Lens," MPRA Paper 96844, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Enrico De Monte, 2020. "Entry, Exit and Productivity: Evidence from French Manufacturing Firms," Working Papers of BETA 2020-07, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    3. Enrico De Monte & Anne-Laure Levet, 2019. "Productivity Dynamics in French Woodworking Industries," Working Papers of BETA 2019-45, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    4. Jose Asturias & Sewon Hur & Timothy J. Kehoe & Kim J. Ruhl, 2023. "Firm Entry and Exit and Aggregate Growth," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 48-105, January.
    5. Daniel A. Dias & Carlos Robalo Marques, 2021. "From micro to macro: a note on the analysis of aggregate productivity dynamics using firm-level data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-14, August.
    6. Ulf Lewrick & Lukas Mohler & Rolf Weder, 2014. "When firms and industries matter: understanding the sources of productivity growth," BIS Working Papers 469, Bank for International Settlements.
    7. Daan Freeman & Leon Bettendorf & Harro van Heuvelen & Gerdien Meijerink, 2021. "The contribution of business dynamics to productivity growth in the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 427, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    8. Pei Liu & Wei-Chiao Huang & Hao Chen, 2020. "Can the National Green Industrial Policy Improve Production Efficiency of Enterprises?—Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-17, August.
    9. Florin Maican & Matilda Orth, 2017. "Productivity Dynamics and the Role of ‘Big-Box’ Entrants in Retailing," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(2), pages 397-438, June.
    10. Wen Yue, 2021. "Government subsidy and aggregate productivity dynamics: Evidence from China," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 263-282, May.
    11. Audinga Baltrunaite & Mario Cannella & Sauro Mocetti & Giacomo Roma, "undated". "Board composition and performance of state-owned enterprises: Quasi-experimental evidence," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1328, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    12. Qilin Mao & Jiayun Xu, 2024. "Zombie firms, misallocation and manufacturing capacity utilization rate: Evidence from China," Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(2), pages 641-682, April.
    13. Matthew Backus, 2020. "Why Is Productivity Correlated With Competition?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(6), pages 2415-2444, November.
    14. Doan Thi Thanh Ha & Kozo Kiyota, 2014. "Firm-Level Evidence on Productivity Differentials and Turnover in Vietnamese Manufacturing," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 65(2), pages 193-217, June.
    15. Rebecca Riley & Chiara Rosazza Bondibene & Garry Young, 2013. "Productivity Dynamics in the Great Stagnation: Evidence from British businesses," Discussion Papers 1407, Centre for Macroeconomics (CFM), revised Apr 2014.
    16. Ryan A. Decker & John C. Haltiwanger & Ron S. Jarmin & Javier Miranda, 2018. "Changing Business Dynamism and Productivity: Shocks vs. Responsiveness," NBER Working Papers 24236, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Riley, Rebecca & Rosazza-Bondibene, Chiara & Young, Garry, 2015. "The UK productivity puzzle 2008-13: evidence from British businesses," Bank of England working papers 531, Bank of England.
    18. Linarello, Andrea, 2018. "Direct and indirect effects of trade liberalization: Evidence from Chile," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 160-175.
    19. Kazunobu Hayakawa & Toshiyuki Matsuura, 2017. "Trade Liberalization, Market Share Reallocation, and Aggregate Productivity: The Case of the Indonesian Manufacturing Industry," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 55(3), pages 230-249, September.
    20. Redha Fares, 2022. "Bankruptcy, Performance and Market Selection: Evidence from Firms in France," Erudite Ph.D Dissertations, Erudite, number ph22-01 edited by Claude Mathieu.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:erg:wpaper:1318. 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: Sherine Ghoneim (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erfaceg.html .

    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.