Environmental Impact of Customs Union Agreement with EU on Turkey’s Trade in Manufacturing Industry
In this study, we analyze Turkey’s manufacturing industry trade by estimating sectoral import and export demand equations for 1980-2000. The study aims to understand whether the trade in the manufacturing industry complies with pollution haven hypothesis, and whether the free trade environment provided by the customs union (CU) agreement altered the trade pattern of the clean and dirty industries. Results of our econometric models have shown that while CU positively affects the import demand, it does not have any significant impact on the export demand of Turkish manufacturing industry. In terms of the environmental impact, distinction between clean and dirty industries turns out to be significant for both import and export demand. In general, our findings suggest that both clean and dirty industries’ import demand increase during the study period. In terms of export demand, clean industries’ export demand declines whereas dirty industries’ export demand increases compared to the total demand.
|Date of creation:||Mar 2006|
|Date of revision:||Mar 2006|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Ankara 06531|
Phone: +90 (312) 210 2003
Fax: (312) 210 1244
Web page: http://www.erc.metu.edu.tr
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.:
- Eskeland, Gunnar S. & Harrison, Ann E., 2003.
"Moving to greener pastures? Multinationals and the pollution haven hypothesis,"
Journal of Development Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 1-23, February.
- Eskeland, Gunnar S. & Harrison, Ann E., 1997. "Moving to greener pastures : multinationals and the pollution-haven hypothesis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1744, The World Bank.
- Gunnar A. Eskeland & Ann E. Harrison, 2002. "Moving to Greener Pastures? Multinationals and the Pollution Haven Hypothesis," NBER Working Papers 8888, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005.
"Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality,"
The Review of Economics and Statistics,
MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.
- Frankel, Jeffrey & Rose, Andrew K., 2003. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," Working Paper Series rwp03-038, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2002. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," NBER Working Papers 9201, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Goldstein, Morris & Khan, Mohsin S., 1985. "Income and price effects in foreign trade," Handbook of International Economics, in: R. W. Jones & P. B. Kenen (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 20, pages 1041-1105 Elsevier.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:met:wpaper:0603. 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: (Erol Taymaz)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.