- E-ISSN2288-2766
- KCI
E-ISSN : 2288-2766
A Study on Competitiveness in the Aircraft Industry
Abstract
Purpose – This study shows that which country has more competitiveness in aerospace industry. The reason why author choose aerospace industry for research is aerospace industry is one of major business in every countries in the world instead of infant industry. Research design, data, methodology – In order to research this topic, there are 3 tools to analyze competitiveness in aerospace industry. To achieve analysis of competitiveness between USA and England, UN comtrade program which provides huge database including time serial data. the major tool to research this paper are through revealed comparative advantage index(RCA), trade specialization index(TSI) including market share. Results – Final research results provide absolute expressive data that USA aerospace industry has overwhelmingly comparative advantage as well as competitiveness. all of TSI are over zero(0) which means that from 2000 to 2018, USA aerospace industry is export specialization as USA aerospace industry has comparative advantage against England aerospace industry. All of TSI in USA are approaching to figure +1 as export specialization except 2010. Conclusion – All of TSI in USA are approaching to figure +1 as export specialization except 2010. when we review above RCA value, we can have absolutely strong confidence that USA aerospace industry has overwhelmingly comparative advantage against that of the British aerospace industry. Even though RCA value in 2000 is 6.313, however, when time goes by and they are 8.997 in 2005, 8.007 in 2010 and 8.389 in 2015 respectively and RCA value is slightly goes down as figure 7 in 2018. we review above market share analysis data, USA has overpoweringly superior competitive power against British aerospace industry.
- keywords
- revealed comparative advantage, trade specialization index, market share
Reference
Arminen, I., Koskela, I., & Palukka, H. (2014). Multimodal production of second pair parts in air traffic control training. Journal of Pragmatics, 6(5), 46-62.
Bazeley, P. (2006). The contribution of computer software to integrating qualitative and quantitative data and analyses. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 64-74.
Balassa B. (1965). Trade liberalization and revealed comparative advantage. Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, 33(1), 99-123.
Finlay, W. M. L., Walton, C., & Antaki, C. (2011). Giving feedback to care staff about offering choices to people with intellectual disabilities. In C. Antaki, Applied conversation analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk, 1(3), 161-183
Hindmarsh, J., & Llewellyn, N. (2010). Finding organisation in detail: Methodological orientations. In N. Llewellyn & J. Hindmarsh, Organisation, interaction and practice: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, 2(3), 24-46
Hutchins, E., & Klausen, T. (1996). Distributed cognition in an airline cockpit. In Y. Engeström & D. Middleton, Cognition and communication at work, (3)1, 15-34
Kitzinger, C. (2011). Working with childbirth helplines: The contributions and limitations of conversation analysis. In C. Antaki, Applied conversation analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk, 2(3), 98-118
Koschmann, T. (2013). Conversation analysis and collaborative learning. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. Chinn, C. Chan, & A. O'Donnell, International handbook of collaborative learning, 4(3) 149-167
Koskela, I., Arminen, I., & Palukka, H. (2013). Centres of coordination as a nexus of aviation. In P. Haddington, L. Mondada, & M. Nevile, Interaction and mobility: Language and the body in motion, 15(3), 245-276
Margutti, P. (2010). On designedly incomplete utterances: What counts as learning for teachers and students in primary classroom interaction? Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(4), 315-345.
Melander, H., & Sahlström, F. (2009). Learning to fly—The progressive development of situation awareness. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 53(2), 151-166.
Nevile, M. (2007). Talking without overlap in the airline cockpit: Precision timing at work. Text & Talk – An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies, 27(2), 225-249.
Nevile, M. (2010). Looking for action: Talk and gaze home position in the airline cockpit. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 33(1), 1-21.
Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(3), 235-276.
Stokoe, E. (2011). Simulated interaction and communication skills training: The ‘Conversation analytic role-play method’. In C. Antaki, Applied conversation analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk 3(2), 119-139.
Stokoe, E. (2014b). The conversation analytic role-play method (CARM): A method for training communication skills as an alternative to simulated role-play. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 47(3), 255-265.
Tuccio, W. A. (2011). Heuristics to improve human factors performance in aviation. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 20(3), 39-53.
Tuccio, W. A., & Nevile, M. (2017). Using Conversation Analysis in Data-Driven Aviation Training with Large-Scale Qualitative Datasets. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 26(1). 25-37
Tuccio, W. A., Esser, D. A., Driscoll, G., McAndrew, I., & Smith, M. O. (2016). Interventionist applied conversation analysis: Collaborative transcription and repair based learning (CTRBL) in aviation. Pragmatics and Society, 7(1), 30-56.
Uncomtrade (2017). Annual Statistics Reports. Retrieved November 21, 2016, from http://comtrade.un.org/
- Downloaded
- Viewed
- 0KCI Citations
- 0WOS Citations
