11 measurably over-trading by around one-third. Turkey’s 2003 realization ratio of 1.31 indicates that the actual ratio of trade to GDP (25 percent) was 31 percent over its ratio predicted by the model. It compares very favorably with the level of openness of new Central European members of the EU (EU-8), which had the average realization ratio of 1.35. Turkey’s realization ratio was roughly similar as Slovenia’s (1.33) but higher than that for Bulgaria (0.94) and Poland (0.92), both traded below their respective potential, Romania (1.02), Latvia (1.04), Lithuania (1.09) as well as above the average for other Balkan countries (0.65). Each country of the latter as a group traded well below its current potential as reflected by the estimated model.

Turkey’s trade integration into global markets for goods has significantly expanded over the last two decades. This was mainly the result of expanding exports in the second half of the 1980s and in the 2000s. Turkey’s share in world imports remained relatively unchanged in 19902003 at around 0.8 percent, although it displayed an upward trend in 2000-2004. Its share in world exports, however, rose rather dramatically by 50 percent in 2000-2003. This was in marked contrast to the developments in the 1990s when Turkey exports growth simply kept with the pace of the growth of world exports. Turkey’s share of 0.4 percent was relatively stable throughout the 1990s (Table 5).

**Table 5:** _Turkey in world trade in regional perspective in 1993, 1996 and 2004_

||||||||||Ch|ange in|percent (|%)|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||199|3<br>|199|6<br>|20|00|200|4<br>|1993-|2004|2000-|2004|
||Exports<br>|Imports<br>V|Exports<br>alue in b|Imports <br>illion of U|Exports <br>S dollar|Imports <br>|Exports|Imports|Exports|Imports|Exports|Imports|
|Turkey|15.3|29.4|23.1|42.5|27.8|54.5|62.9|97.3|310|232|127|79|
|EU-8|49.2|62.2|83.6|115.4|118.8|154.1|254.5|297.9|417|379|114|93|
|Bulgaria|2.3|4.5|4.8|4.9|4.8|6.4|9.4|14.2|304|216|97|123|
|Romania|4.9|6.5|7.6|10.0|10.4|13.1|23.5|32.6|380|399|126|150|
||<br>|S<br>|hare in w<br>|orld (in<br>|%)<br>||||||||
|Turkey|0.41|0.77|0.44|0.79|0.43|0.83|0.69|1.03|68|33|59|24|
|EU-8|1.32|1.64|1.58|2.14|1.86|2.34|2.80|3.15|111|92|50|35|
|Bulgaria|0.06|0.12|0.09|0.09|0.07|0.10|0.10|0.15|65|27|38|55|
|Romania|0.13|0.17|0.14|0.18|0.16|0.20|0.26|0.34|96|100|59|74|

_Notes_ : EU-8 countries are the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovak Republic and Slovenia.

_Source_ : IMF DOT Statistics.

Turkey’s export performance has been in line with that of EU-8 and Romania and well above Bulgaria’s performance. The latter’s share in world exports in 2003 was slightly below in 1993, whereas that of Turkey was 52 percent higher. The difference between Turkey and EU-8 and Romania is relatively small considering that dynamics of geographic reorientation of trade away from the former Soviet Union drove their trade in 1992-96 following the collapse of central planning. While between 1990 and 1993, exports from Turkey were growing at roughly the same pace as those from the EU-8, the situation subsequently changed. The ratio of EU-8 share in world exports to that of Turkey increased from 3.2 in 1990 and 1993 to 4.3 in 2000 and then fell to 4 in 2004 indicating Turkey’s stronger export growth performance (based on IMF DOT statistics).

Indeed, Turkey’s share in world exports rose 59 percent from 0.4 percent in 2000 to 0.7 percent in 2004 while that of the EU-8 as a group rose 50 percent. Only Romania the top export performer among Central European countries during that period—matched Turkey’s record.

On the other hand, Turkey had the weakest performance among these countries in terms of imports. Its share in world imports, like that in exports, did not budge in the 1990s. It increased