Authors : Bela Salsabila; Suyanti Kasimin; Indra

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 4 - April

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4azwa8rw

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/bezbre76

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25apr2402

Google Scholar

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 15 to 20 days to display the article.

Abstract : This study examines the export competitiveness of Indonesian fruit horticulture products—specifically HS codes 080450 (mangosteen), 080390 (banana), 080430 (pineapple), and 081060 (durian)—in key international markets: Malaysia, Singapore, China, Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Using Revealed Comparative Advantage (RCA), Export Product Dynamics (EPD), and the Gravity Model, it reveals varying levels of competitiveness, with most products showing limited strength. Mangosteen and bananas exhibit a comparative advantage (RCA > 1) but are classified as Falling Stars due to declining market shares. This suggests underutilized potential is constrained by quality, logistics, and market adaptation. In contrast, pineapples in China and the UAE show export growth despite a low RCA, indicating Rising Star status and potential to enhance competitiveness through better quality, certification, and promotion. Gravity Model estimates suggest that exports are significantly influenced by destination countries’ GDP, population, export prices, and exchange rates. GDP and population positively affect high-value commodities like durian and pineapple, while economic distance negatively impacts trade due to logistical challenges. The results underscore the need for targeted strategies to enhance product quality, logistics, and market access, particularly in countries with large populations and high purchasing power, to strengthen Indonesia’s global horticultural export position.

Keywords : Export Competitiveness; Revealed Comparative Advantage; Export Product Dynamic; Gravity Model; International Markets.

References :

1. Central Bureau of Statistics. (2023). Indonesia Gross Domestic Product by Business Field. https://www.bps.go.id
2. Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Indonesia. (2022). National Horticulture Statistics 2022.
3. Kanaya, S. & Firdaus, M. (2014). Competitiveness and Export Dynamics of Indonesian Horticultural Products. Bogor Agricultural University.
4. OEC World. (2024). Tropical Fruits in Indonesia Export. Retrieved from: https://oec.world
5. TrendEconomy. (2023). Indonesia - Export of Edible Fruit and Nuts. https://trendeconomy.com
6. Balassa, B. (1989). NolandM (1989) Revealed comparative advantage in Japan and the United States. Journal of International Economic Integration, autumn.
7. Sarath Chandran, B. P. (2010). Trade Compatibility Between India And Asean Countries.
8. Muhammad, F. And Kanaya, I.A., 2014. Competitiveness and Export Demand of Indonesian Biopharmaca Products in Major Destination Countries for the Period 2003-2012 Irgandhini Agra Kanaya *)1 And Muhammad Firdaus *). Journal of Management & Agribusiness, 11(3), Pp.183-198.
9. Feenstra, R., J.A. Markusen and A.K Rose (1999): "Using the Gravity Equation To Differentiate Among Alternative Theories Of Trade", downloaded 1.2.2008, http://haas.berkeley.edu/~aroseS, pp. 1 - 28.
10. Juanda, B., 2009. Econometrics Modeling and Estimation. Bogor: IPB press.
11. Anderson, J.E. and van Wincoop, E., 2003. Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border
12. Wulandari, P., & Budiasih, L. (2009). The Effect of Real GDP on Indonesian Horticultural Exports. Journal of Agroeconomics, 27(2), 145-160.
    https://ejournal.bappenas.go.id/index.php/JAE
13. Krugman, P. R., & Obstfeld, M. (2009). International Economics: Theory and Policy (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
14. Arize, A. C., Malindretos, J., & Igwe, E. U. (2017). Do Exchange Rate Changes Improve the Trade Balance? Evidence from Selected ASEAN Countries. International Review of Economics & Finance, 50, 251-262.
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2017.04.004
15. Anderson, J.E. and van Wincoop, E., 2003. Gravity with gravitas: A solution to the border
16. CEPII. (2022). Distance and Trade Costs Database. Center d'Études Prospectives et d'Informations Internationales.
    https://www.cepii.fr/CEPII/en/bdd_modele/presentation.asp?id=6
17. Helpman, E., Melitz, M., & Rubinstein, Y. (2008). Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(2), 441-487.
    https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2008.123.2.441
18. World Bank. (2023). World Development Indicators - Population, GDP, Exchange Rate.
    https://data.worldbank.org