Land Resources and Agricultural Exports Nexus

• Autorzy: Harun Uçak , Saliha Çelik , Hakan Kurt
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Research background: As part of the process of structural transformation that countries go through in their development journey, the relative significance of agriculture as a sector typically shrinks over time. Nonetheless, the agricultural sector maintains its significance in terms of its trade potential and global employment prospects to this day. The extant literature largely neglects the impact of countries' land resources on agricultural trade by emphasizing agricultural farm size and land productivity nexus. This justifies the exploration of the causal nexus between countries' agricultural land resources and their agricultural exports. Purpose: The study herein aims at investigating the nexus between countries' total agricultural land resources and agricultural exports for 174 selected countries over the period 1991-2019. Research methodology: Dumitrescu and Hurlin's (2012) test for Granger non-causality for heterogeneous panels is harnessed. Results: Estimation results evidence the presence of bi-directional causality (feedback) between countries' agricultural land resources and agricultural exports not only in the whole panel (1991-2019) but also in subpanels too (1991-2000, 2001-2010, and 2011-2019). Overall, the results stress the strategic importance of agricultural land as a significant determinant of agricultural exports. Novelty: Our study takes a unique approach and investigates if there is a cause-and-effect relationship between a country's agricultural land resources and its agricultural exports by relying on the implications of the factor endowment theory of trade. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Agricultural exports; Production factors; Data analysis; Panel data

PL

Eksport produktów rolnych; Czynniki produkcji; Analiza danych; Dane panelowe

• Czasopismo: Folia Oeconomica Stetinensia
• Rocznik: 2023
• Numer: vol. 23, iss. 1
• Strony: 284--300

Twórcy

autor

Harun Uçak

• Alanya Alaadin Keykubat University, Antalya, Turkey

autor

Saliha Çelik

• Alanya Alaadin Keykubat University, Antalya, Turkey

autor

Hakan Kurt

• Alanya Alaadin Keykubat University, Antalya, Turkey

Bibliografia

• Akther, T., Voumik, L.C., Rahman, M.H. (2022), The pattern of international trade between Bangladesh and USA: Heckscher-Ohlin and Rybczynski analysis. Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications, 4(3), 162-176. DOI: 10.1108/MSCRA-03-2022-0011.
• Bai, J., Ng, S. (2004). A panic attack on unit roots and cointegration. Econometrica, 72 (4), 1127-1177. Retreved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3598781.
• Bai, J., Ng, S. (2010). Panel unit root tests with cross-section dependence: A further investigation. Econometric Theory, 26(4), 1088-1114. Retreved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40800875.
• Balogh, J.M., Jámbor, A. (2020). The environmental impacts of agricultural trade: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 12(3), 1152. DOIO: 10.3390/su12031152.
• Bersvendsen, T., Ditzen, J. (2021). Testing for slope heterogeneity in Stata. The Stata Journal, 21(1), 51-80. DOI: 10.1177/1536867X211000004.
• Binswanger, H.P., Deininger, K., Feder, G. (1995). Power, distortions, revolt and reform in agricultural land relations. Handbook of development economics, 3, 2659-2772. DOI: 10.1016/S1573-4471(95)30019-8.
• Bojnec, Š. (2013). Land endowments and land market policies in Croatia, FYR of Macedonia, and Turkey. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science, 19(3), 387-397.
• Bojnec, Š., Latruffe, L. (2013). Farm size, agricultural subsidies and farm performance in Slovenia. Land Use Policy, 32, 207-217. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.09.016.
• Burdisso, T., Sangiácomo, M. (2016). Panel time series: Review of the methodological evolution. The Stata Journal, 16(2), 424-44. DOI: 10.1177/1536867X1601600210.
• Carrara, A.F., Pesquero, T.L. (2022). The Export of Commodities and the Validity of the Export-Led Growth (ELG) Hypothesis for the Brazilian Economy: An Analysis of the Commodity Boom Period. Journal of Time Series Econometrics, 14(1), 87-106. DOI: 10.1515/ jtse-2020-0034.
• Carter, M.R. (1984). Identification of the Inverse Relationship between Farm Size and Productivity: An Empirical Analysis of Peasant Agricultural Production. Oxford Economic Papers, 36, 131-145. Retreved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2662637.
• Chand, R., Prasanna, P.L., Singh, A. (2011). Farm size and productivity: Understanding the strengths of smallholders and improving their livelihoods. Economic and Political Weekly, 5-11. Retreved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/23018813.
• Choi, S.M., Kim, H., Ma, X. (2021). Trade, structural transformation and growth. The World Economy, 44(6), 1770-1794. DOI: 10.1111/twec.13043.
• De Hoyos, R.E., Sarafidis, V. (2006). Testing for cross-sectional dependence in panel-data models. The Stata Journal, 6(4), 482-496. DOI: 10.1177/1536867X0600600.
• De Maria, M. (2019). Understanding land in the context of large-scale land acquisitions: A brief history of land in economics. Land, 8(1), 15. DOI: 10.3390/land8010015.
• Devadoss, S., Ugwuanyi, B., Ridley, W. (2022). Determinants of international trade in agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 47(3), 598-615. DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.313317.
• Dorward, A. (1999). Farm size and productivity in Malawian smallholder agriculture. The Journal of Development Studies, 35(5), 141-161. DOI: 10.1080/00220389908422595.
• Dumitrescu, E.I., Hurlin, C. (2012). Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1450-1460. DOI: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014.
• Eastwood, R., Lipton, M., Newell, A. (2010). Farm size. Handbook of agricultural economics, 4, 3323-3397. DOI: 10.1016/S1574-0072(09)04065-1.
• Fan, S., Chan-Kang, C. (2005). Is small beautiful? Farm size, productivity, and poverty in Asian agriculture. Agricultural Economics, 32, 135-146. DOI: 10.1111/j.0169-5150.2004.00019.x.
• FAO (2020). World food and agriculture - statistical yearbook 2020. World Food and Agriculture-Statistical Yearbook.
• Frees, E.W. (1995). Assessing cross-sectional correlation in panel data. Journal of Econometrics, 69(2), 393-414. DOI: 10.1016/0304-4076(94)01658-M.
• Friedman, M. (1937). The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 32(200).
• Granger, C.W.J. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica, 37(3), 424-438. DOI: 10.2307/1912791.
• Grzelak, A., Guth, M., Matuszczak, A., Czyżewski, B., Brelik, A. (2019). Approaching the environmental sustainable value in agriculture: How factor endowments foster the eco-efficiency. Journal of Cleaner Production, 241, 118304. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118304.
• Hamulczuk, M., Makarchuk, O., Sica, E. (2019). Searching for market integration: Evidence from Ukrainian and European Union rapeseed markets. Land Use Policy, 87, 104078. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104078.
• Hill, C.R., Griffiths, W.E., Lim, G.C. (2011). Principles of econometrics. Wiley.
• Hoechle, D. (2007). Robust standard errors for panel regressions with cross-sectional dependence. The Stata Journal, 7(3), 281-312. DOI: 10.1177/1536867X0700700301.
• Huo, D. (2014). Impact of country-level factors on export competitiveness of agriculture industry from emerging markets. Competitiveness Review. DOI: 10.1108/CR-01-2012-0002.
• Hurlin, C., Mignon, V. (2007). Second generation panel unit root tests.
• Kennedy, P. (2008). A guide to econometrics. John Wiley & Sons.
• Leontief, W. (1953). Domestic production and foreign trade; The American capital position reexamined. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 97(4), 332-349. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3149288.
• Li, X. (2012). Technology, factor endowments, and China's agricultural foreign trade: A neoclassical approach. China Agricultural Economic Review. DOI: 10.1108/17561371211196801.
• Lipton, M. (1993). Land Reform as Commenced Business: The Evidence against Stopping. World Development 21, 4, 641-657. DOI: 10.1016/0305-750X(93)90116-Q.
• Lopez, L., Weber, S. (2017). Testing for Granger causality in panel data. The Stata Journal, 17(4), 972-984.
• Maravall, L. (2020). Factor endowments on the 'frontier': Algerian settler agriculture at the beginning of the 1900s. The Economic History Review, 73(3), 758-784. DOI: 10.1111/ehr.12882.
• Maslak, N., Lei, Z., Xu, L. (2020). Analysis of agricultural trade in China based on the theory of factor endowment. Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific EJournal, 6(1868-2020-929), 50-61. DOI: 10.51599/are.2020.06.01.04.
• McMillan, M., Rodrik, D., Verduzco-Gallo, Í. (2014). Globalization, structural change, and productivity growth, with an update on Africa. World Development, 63, 11-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.10.012.
• Mkuna, E. (2022). Determinants of horticultural export and welfare impact of smallholder farmers: evidence from common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L) farming in Arusha Tanzania. In: Trade and Investment in East Africa: Prospects, Challenges and Pathways to Sustainability (pp. 267-292). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-19-4211-2_12.
• Noack, F., Larsen, A. (2019). The contrasting effects of farm size on farm incomes and food production. Environmental Research Letters, 14(8), 084024. DOI:10.1088/1748-9326/ab2dbf.
• Norbu, N.P., Tateno, Y., Bolesta, A. (2021). Structural transformation and production linkages in Asia-Pacific least developed countries: An input-output analysis. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 59, 510-524. DOI: 10.1016/j.strueco.2021.09.009.
• Paramati, S.R., Apergis, N., Ummalla, M. (2017). Financing clean energy projects through domestic and foreign capital: The role of political cooperation among the EU, the G20 and OECD countries. Energy Economics, 61, 62-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2016.11.001.
• Paramati, S.R., Ummalla, M., Apergis, N. (2016). The effect of foreign direct investment and stock market growth on clean energy use across a panel of emerging market economies. Energy Economics, 56, 29-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2016.02.008.
• Pesaran, M.H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
• Pesaran, M.H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265-312. DOI: 10.1002/jae.951.
• Pesaran, M.H., Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2007.05.010.
• Reese, S., Westerlund, J. (2016). Panicca: Panic on cross-section averages. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 31(6), 961-981. DOI: 10.1002/jae.2487.
• Ricardo, D. [1819] (1951). Principles of political economy and taxation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Salahuddin, M., Alam, K., Ozturk, I. (2016). The effects of internet usage and economic growth on CO2 emissions in OECD countries: A panel investigation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 62, 1226-1235. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.018.
• Savastano, S., Scandizzo, P.L. (2017). Farm size and productivity: A "Direct-Inverse-Direct" relationship. The World Bank.
• Sen, A.K. (1962). An Aspect of Indian Agriculture. Economic Weekly 14(4-6), 243-246.
• Smith, A. [1776] (1937). The wealth of nations. New York: Random House.
• Song, J., Peng, R., Qian, L., Yan, F., Ozturk, I., Fahad, S. (2022). Households production factor mismatches and relative poverty nexus: a novel approach. Pol J Environ Stud, 10. DOI: 10.15244/pjoes/146987.
• Srinivasan, T.N. (1972). Farm size and productivity implications of choice under uncertainty. Sankhyā: The Indian Journal of Statistics, Series B, 409-420. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/25051809.
• Strauss, J., Yigit, T. (2003). Shortfalls of panel unit root testing. Economics Letters, 81(3), 309-313. DOI: 10.1016/S0165-1765(03)00210-6.
• Toyin, M.E. (2016). Causality relationship between agricultural exports and economic growth: Evidence from South Africa. Journal of Social Sciences, 48(1-2), 129-136. DOI: 10.1080/09718923.2016.11893577.
• Vanek, J. (1959). The Natural Resource Content of Foreign Trade, 1870-1955, and the Relative Abundance of Natural Resources in the United States. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 41(2), 146-153. DOI: 10.2307/1927796.
• Verter, N. (2015). The application of international trade theories to agriculture. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(6 S4), 209-219. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n6s4p209.
• Viana, C.M., Freire, D., Abrantes, P., Rocha, J., Pereira, P. (2022). Agricultural land systems importance for supporting food security and sustainable development goals: A systematic review. Science of The Total Environment, 806, 150718. DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150718.
• Ya, Z., Pei, K. (2022). Factors Influencing Agricultural Products Trade between China and Africa. Sustainability, 14(9), 5589. DOI: 10.3390/su14095589.
• Zhang, D., Sun, Z. (2022). Comparative Advantage of Agricultural Trade in Countries along the Belt and Road and China and Its Dynamic Evolution Characteristics. Foods, 11(21), 3401. DOI: 10.3390/foods11213401.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/foli-2023-0015