اثر نهادها بر صادرات پسته ایران به بلوک‌های آسیایی (رویکرد اقتصادسنجی فضایی)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری علوم اقتصادی دانشگاه سمنان

2 مدیر گروه اقتصاد دانشگاه سمنان

3 عضو هیات علمی دانشگاه سمنان

چکیده

مقدمه و هدف:ایران به عنوان یکی از بزرگ­ترین تولیدکنندگان و صادرکنندگان پسته در بازارهای جهانی محسوب می­شود. با توجه به آن که صادرات این کالا یکی از منابع مهم درآمدهای ارزی است و نقش مهمی در کاهش وابستگی بودجه عمومی دولت به درآمدهای نفتی دارد، شناسایی عوامل تأثیرگذار بر صادرات پسته به بازارهای جهانی ضروری است و می­تواند به ارتقاء جایگاه کشور در بازار جهانی پسته منجر شود. شرایط نهادی یکی از عوامل مؤثر بر صادرات کالاها از جمله پسته از ایران به بازارهای جهانی است.
مواد و روش­ها: این مقاله به بررسی تجربی اثر نهادها بر صادرات پسته ایران به بلوک­های آسیایی با استفاده از روش اقتصادسنجی فضایی و مدل مختلط رگرسیون- خود رگرسیونی فضایی می­پردازد. الگوی پژوهش یک مدل رگرسیونی با داده­های پانل طی دوره زمانی 2000-2015 از تجارت ایران با بلوک­های آسیایی است.
یافته­ها: نتایج حاصل از تخمین مدل نشان می­دهد متغیر شاخص راهنمای ریسک بین­المللی کشورها به عنوان شاخص نمایانگر نهادها دارای اثر مثبت و معنی دار بر صادرات پسته ایران به بلوک­های آسیایی است.
بحث و نتیجه­گیری: شاخص راهنمای ریسک بین­المللی کشورها سه نوع ریسک سیاسی، مالی و اقتصادی کشورها در بر می­گیرد که طبق یافته­های مقاله به عنوان یکی از مهم­ترین موانع گسترش سرمایه­گذاری و تجارت پسته در ایران به شمار می­آید. کاهش این ریسک، ثبات سیاسی، مالی و اقتصادی را در پی دارد و موجب رشد صادرات پسته ایران می­شود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Effect of Institutions on Iranian Pistachio Exports to Asian Blocs (Spatial Econometric Approach)

نویسندگان [English]

  • shekoofe nagheli 1
  • Majid Maddah 2
  • esmaiel abounoori 3
1 Semnan university
2 Semnan University
3 Semnan university
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Iran is as one of the largest producers and exporters of pistachio in world markets. Considering that the export of this commodity is one of the main sources of foreign exchange earnings and has an important role in reducing the government's general budget dependence on oil revenues, identifying the factors affecting on pistachio exports to world markets is essential and it can lead to the improvement of the country's position in the global pistachio market. Institutional conditions are the factors affecting on the export of goods, including pistachio from Iran to world markets.
Materials andMethods: This paper examines the effect of institutions on Iranian pistachio exports to Asian blocs using the spatial econometric method and Mixed Regressive-Spatial Autoregressive Model. The research pattern is a regression model with panel data during the time period 2000-2015 from Iranian trade with Asian blocs.
Findings: The results of model estimation are shown International Country Risk Guide (ICRG) variable as an indicator of institutions has a positive and significant effect on Iranian pistachio exports to Asian blocs.
Conclusion: The International Country Risk Guide index has three types of political, financial and economic risk of the country, according to the findings of the article as one of the most important obstacles to the expansion of investment and pistachio trade in Iran. Reducing this risk brings political, financial and economic stability will increase Iranian pistachio exports.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Institutions
  • Pistachio Exports
  • Spatial econometric
  • Economy of Iran
  1. Ahmadzadeh K, Yavari K, Assari Arani A, Sahabi The study of institutional factors and regional integration on services export. Journal of Economic Research. 2014; 48(3): 165-191. [DOI:10.22059/jte.2013.35818].
  2. Akbari N, Moallemi Economic integration in Persian Gulf countries; A spatial econometrics approach. Iranian Journal of Economic Research. 2006; 7(25): 109-126. https://ijer.atu.ac.ir/article-3719-en.html.
  3. Alvarez IC, Barbero J, Rodriguez Pose A, Zofio JL. Does institutional quality matter for trade? Institutional conditions in a sectoral trade framework. World Development. 2018; 103(3): 72-87. [DOI:10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.10.010].
  4. Anderson J, Marcouiller D. Insecurity and the pattern of trade: An empirical investigation. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 2002; 84: 342-352. [DOI:1162/003465302317411587].
  5. Anderson JE, Young L. Trade and contract enforcement. (Boston College, mimeo). 1999. [DOI:1515/1538-0645.1574].
  6. Anselin L. Spatial econometrics. Bruton Center School of Social Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas. 1999. [DOI:10.1.1.111.4233].
  7. Araujo L, Mion G, Ornelas E. Institutions and export dynamics. Journal of International Economics. 2016; 98: 2-20. [DOI: 1016/j.jinteco.2015.08.004].
  8. Azarbayjani K, Samiei N, Shirazi H. The effect of institutions on bilateral trade of selected countries in the Middle East. Iranian Journal of Economic Research. 2011; 15(45): 1-23. https://ijer.atu.ac.ir/article-3340-en.html.
  9. Beverelli C, Keck A, Larch M, Yotov YV. Institutions, trade and development: A quantitative analysis. CESifo Working Paper Series 6920, CESifo Group Munich. 2018. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/176939.
  10. Coase R. The nature of the firm. Economica. 1937; 4(16): 386-405. [DOI:10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x].
  11. Coe DT, Helpman E, Hoffmaister AW. International R&D spillovers and institutions. European Economic Review. 2009; 53(7): 723-741. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014-2921(09)00034-8.
  12. Crabbe K, Beine M. Trade, institutions and export specialization. LICOS Discussion Paper Series. 2009; 234: 1-48. [DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1394224].
  13. De Groot HLF, Linders GJ, Rietveld P, Subramanian U. The institutional determinants of bilateral trade patterns. World Bank. Washington. 2003; 57(1): 103-123. http://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa03/cdrom/papers/421.
  14. De Mendonca TG, Lirio VS, Braga MJ, Da Silva OM. Institutions and bilateral agricultural trade. Procedia Economics and Finance. 2014; 14: 164-172. [DOI:10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00699-6].
  15. Dollar D, Kraay A. Institutions, trade and growth. The World Bank Economic Review. 2002; 29(6): 221-246. [DOI:1016/S0304-3932(02)00206-4].
  16. Egger An econometric view on the estimation of gravity models and the calculation of trade potentials. World Economy. 2002; 25(2): 297-312. [DOI:10.1111/1467-9701.00432].
  17. Elhorst JP. Specification and estimation of spatial panel data models. International Regional Science Review. 2003; 26(3): 244-268. [DOI:10.1177/0160017603253791].
  18. Elhorst JP. Spatial panel models. University of Groningen, Department of Economics, Econometrics and Finance. 2011; 1-21. https://www.york.ac.uk/media/economics/documents/seminars.
  19. Gani A, Prasad BC. Institutional quality and trade in pacific Island countries, Asia pacific research and training network on trade. Working Paper Series. 2006; No.20. https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/178378.
  20. Grossman G, Helpman E. A protectionist bias in majoritarian politics. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2005; 120(4): 1239-1282. [DOI:1162/003355305775097498].
  21. Kabir M, Salim R. Can gravity model explain BIMSTEC’S trade?. Journal of Economic Integration. 2010; 25(1): 144-166. [DOI:11130/jei.2010.25.1.144].
  22. Karbasi AR, Aminizadeh M. Investigating the effective factors on Iran’s pistachio export with emphasis on the role of trade sanctions. Journal of Agricultural Economics Research. 2019; 11(3): 1-22. http://jae.miau.ac.ir/article-3520-en.html.
  23. Kimiaei F, Arbab Afzali M. The impacts of governance and knowledge bases factors on emerging economies exports. Journal of Fiscal and Economic Policies. 2016; 4(13): 95-114. http://qjfep.ir/article-1-406-fa.html.
  24. Knack S, Keefer P. Institutions and economic performance: Cross country tests using alternative institutional measures. Economics and Politics. 1995; 7(3): 207-227. [DOI:1111/j.1468-0343.1995.tb00111.x].
  25. Lavallee E. Governance, corruption and trade: A north-south approach. EURIsCO, University Paris Dauphine. 2005. [DOI:10.1.1.621.5598].
  26. Leitao NC, Faustino H. Portuguese foreign direct investment inflows: An empirical investigation. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics. 2010; 38: 190-197. https://www.sid.ir/en/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=318337.
  27. LeSage JP. Spatial econometrics. Department of Economics, University of Toledo. 1999. [DOI:1016/B0-12-369398-5/00343-1].
  28. Mahmoodzadeh M, Zibaei M. Investigating the factors affecting iranian pistachio exports: A cohesive analysis. Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development. 2004; 12(46): 137-158. https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=6606.
  29. Memarnejad A, Ajayeby S. (2010). The impact of trade liberalization on net exports (Case study of selected countries). Iranian Journal of Applied Economics. 2010; 1(2): 135-159. https://jae.srbiau.ac.ir/article-3875-en.html.
  30. Nadiri M. The impact of institutions on economic growth: Inter-country approach. Ph.D. Thesis of Economics, University of Allameh Tabatabai, Tehran. 2013. https://penco.ir/referral-2-20063-en.html.
  31. Nagheli S, Maddah The effect of political institutions on Iranian export to major trading partners in different commodities groups. Applied Theories of Economics. 2017; 4(3): 59-90. https://ecoj.tabrizu.ac.ir/article-6742-en.html.
  32. Najafi Alamdarloo H, Mortazavi SA, Shemshadi Yazdi K. Application of spatial econometrics in agricultural exports in ECO members: Panel data approach. Journal of the Economic Research. 2013; 13(3): 49-62. http://ecor.modares.ac.ir/article-18-3585-en.html.
  33. Nazemi Investigating the effect of macroeconomic variables on non-oil exports. Industrial Management Journal. 2009; 4(10): 105-117. http://ensani.ir/article-55697-fa.html.
  34. North Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Second Edition, Translated by Mohammad Reza Moeini, Publications of the Management and Planning Organization: Tehran. 2007. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511808678.009].
  35. Piraee K, Tasan M, Daneshnia The effect of foreign direct investment, real exchange rate and economic liberalization on non–oil exporting in I.R.Iran (Using toda yamamoto causality test). Journal of Economic Research. 2015; 50(1): 75-98. [DOI:10.22059/jte.2015.54097].
  36. Prabir D. Does governance matter for enhancing trade? Empirical evidence from Asia. Research and Information System for Developing Countries, Core IVB, Fourth Floor, India Habitat Centre Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110 003, India. 2010. https://ideas.repec.org/p/eab/govern/22792.html.
  37. Rodrik D. Trade strategy, investment and exports: Another look at East Asia. Pacific Economic Review. 1997; 2(1): 1-24. [DOI:1111/1468-0106.t01-1-00020].
  38. Shahabadi A, Dehghani H, Mirzababazadeh The effect of institutional factors on non-oil export in D8 countries. Journal of New Economy and Trade. 2009; 5(17): 97-118. http://ensani.ir/article-302734-fa.html.
  39. Sharifi-Renani H, Mollaesmaeili-Dehshiri Analyzing the impact of institutions on the non-oil export of selected oil exporting countries. Journal of New Economy and Trade. 2014; 8(31): 193-215. http://ensani.ir/article-334704-fa.html.
  40. Skabic I, Orlic E. Determinants of FDI in CEE and Western Balkman countries (Is accession to the EU important for attracting FDI?). Economic and Business Review. 2007; 9(4): 333-350. https://www.researchgate.net/publication-325115770.
  41. Spencer BJ. What should trade policy target?. Edited by: Paul Krugman, Strategic Trade Policy and the New International Economics, Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT press. 1986. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238374514.