Analyzing Iran's Export Market Potential, Gravity Model: Evidence from Date Market

Authors
1 Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran.
2 Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Tehran, Karaj, Islamic Republic of Iran.
Abstract
This study aims at annual analysis of Iranian date export, using the gravity model and cross-section data for each year from 1994 to 2013. The estimated results of gravity equation show negative effects of geographical distance, landlocked location and positive effects of re-export, political, social and commercial ties on Iran’s date export. The date export relative prices and per capita GDP of partners show that most of Iran’s date export has been concentrated at low prices and to low per capita income countries. Moreover, the calculated date export potential indicates that, on average, Iran’s export has been close to its export potential in Central Asia, Africa and the Middle East, while it has exploited 76 percent of its export potential to European countries. More than half of the export potential to Germany, Italy, Denmark and Sweden has remained unexploited. The lifting of trade sanctions, adherence to international hygienic standards and investment in packaging industries are the most important suggestions to increase the share of Iran’s date in the world market.

Keywords

Subjects


1. Armstrong, S. P. 2012. The Politics of Japan-China Trade and the Role of the World Trade System. Wld. Econ., 35(9): 1102-1120.
2. Bahmani – Oskoee, M. and Goswawi, G. G. 2004. Exchange Rate Sensitivity of Japans Bilaterd Flows. JPN. Wld. Econ., 16(1): 1-15.
3. Bergstrand, J. H. 1985. The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence, Rev. Econ. Statistics, 67(3): 474-81.
4. Bergstrand, J. H. 1989. The Generalized Gravity Equation. Monopolistic Competition, and the Factor Proportions Theory in International Trade. Rev. Econ. Stat., 71: 143-153.
5. CEPII. 2014, French Research Center in International Economics. http://www.cepii.fr
6. Eita, J. H. and Jordaan, A. C. 2007. South Africa’s Wood Export Potential Using a Gravity Model Approach. Department of Economics Working Paper Series, University of Pretoria, PP. 1-24.
7. Farazmand, H., Shamsadini, S. and Makvandi, R. 2013. A Study on the Trade Potential of Agricultural Products between Iran and Selected Latin American Countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay and Mexico. The 7th National and 1st International Conference of Electronic Commerce and Electronic Economy, Iranian E-Commerce Scientific Association (IECA), Tehran.
8. Ghane, S. 2011. Brief Study of European Date Market. State Agrarian University of Armenia. UDC, 39(3): 140-145.
9. Gholami Jafarabadi, S. and Fotros, M. H. 2016. Investigating the Effect of Foreign Exchange Policies on Iran's Macroeconomic Variables. Econ. J., 16(9&10): 23-51.
10. Hanson, G. 2005. Market Potential, Increasing Returns and Geographic Concentration. J. Int. Econ., 67(1): 1–24.
11. Head, K. and Mayer, Th. 2004. The Empirics of Agglomeration and Trade. North-Holland Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Elsevier, pp: 2609-2669.,
12. Head, K. and Mayer, TH. 2011. Gravity, Market Potential and Economic Development. J. Econ. Geogr. 15(5): 281-294.
13. Head, K. and Mayer, Th. 2013. Gravity Equations: In: “Workhorse, Toolkit, and Cookbook”. CEPII, WP, No 2013 – 27.
14. Karagoz, K. and Saray, M. O. 2010. Trade Potential of Turkey with Asia-Pacific Countries: Evidence from Panel Gravity Model. Int. Econ. Stud., 36(1):19-26.
15. Kaur, S. and Nanda, P. 2010. India’s Export Potential to Other SAARC Countries: A Gravity Model Analysis. J. Glob. Econ., 6(3): 167- 184.
16. Khaksar Astaneh,H., Yaghoubi, M. and Kalateharab, V. 2014. Determining Revealed Comparative Advantage and Target Markets for Iran's Stone Fruits. J. Agr. Sci. Tech., 16(2): 253-264
17. Krugman, P. 1991. Increasing returns and economic geography. J. Polit. Econ., 99(3): 483–499.
18. Krugman, P. 1996. Development, Geography, and Economic Theory. Camb. J. Econ. Behav. Organ., 31(3): 450–454.
19. Linnemann, H. 1966. An Econometric Study of International Trade Flows. Netherlands School of Economics, Amsterdam, North-Holland.
20. Mbaga, M. D., Al‐Shabibi, M. S., Boughanmi, H. and Zekri, S. 2012. A Comparative Study of Dates Export Supply Chain Performance: The Case of Oman and Tunisia. Benchmarking Int. J., 18(3): 386-408.
21. Mortazavi, S. A., Javadi, R. and Akilpoor, M. H. 2014 The Determinants and Trade Potentials of Export of the Iran’s Shrimp in European :union:: Using a Gravity Model. J. Manag. Sys., 6(23): 21-41. ‎
22. Orindi, M. N. 2008. Determinants of Kenyan Exports: A Gravity Model Approach. Master of Arts Degree in Economics. School of Economics, University of Nairobi.
23. Poyhonen, P. 1963. A Tentative Model for the Volume of Trade between Countries. Rev. Wld. Econ. (Weltwirtschaftliches Archive), 90(1): 93-100.
24. Nasiri, N. and Haji Hasani, S. 2013. Evaluation of Iran's World's Trade Potential (Gravity Model). 2nd International Management Conference, Entrepreneurship and Economic Development, Payame Noor University, Qom.
25. Rahman, M. M. 2010. Australia’s Global Trade Potential: Evidence from the Gravity Model Analysis. Int. J. Bus. Resch. (IJBR), 10(2): 1-41
26. Redding, S. and Venables, A. 2004. Economic Geography and International Inequality. J. Int. Econ., 62(1): 53–82.
27. Thanh Binh, D., Duong, N. and Cung, H. 2013. Applying Gravity Model to Analyze Trade Activities of Vietnam. Forum for Researc in Empirical International Trade, WP, 639 PP..
28. Tho, N. H. 2013. Determinants of Vietnam’s Exports: A Gravity Model Approach. School of Management and Economics, Assumption University, Bangkok, Thailand.
29. Tinbergen, J. 1962. Shaping the World Economy: Suggestions for an International Economic Policy. Twentieth Century Fund, New York.