The magnitude of the economic crisis and the influence on the developments of industrial branches was different.Although European economies are strongly interconnected both internally and externally, the way in which an economic branch has crossed and is trying to overcome the economic crisis has some peculiarities arising from its specificity on the one hand, and on the other hand, from the policies applied in the field. Based on these considerations,the paper examines how Romanian metallurgical industry passes through the economic crisis as compared with other industries. Also based on quantitative analyses performed and taking into account the specific phenomenon of seasonality are presented models of evolution of this industry with horizon in February 2015

A. Bălăcescu

A. G. Babucea

C. I. Răbonţu

M. Zaharia

English

Directory of Open Access Journals

445 METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA, A. G. BABUCEA, A. BĂLĂCESCU, C. I. RĂBONŢUMETALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISISReceived – Prispjelo: 2014-07-08Accepted – Prihvaćeno: 2014-10-20Professional Paper – Strukovni radISSN 0543-5846METABK 54(2) 445-448 (2015)UDC – UDK 669.011:003.01:338.976.498=111M. Zaharia, Petroleum-Gas University of Ploiesti, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Romania A.G. Babucea, A. Bălăcescu,  C.I. Răbonţu, “Constantin Brancusi” University of Targu Jiu, Faculty of Economics and Business Adminis-tration, Targu Jiu, RomaniaThe magnitude of the economic crisis and the influence on the developments of industrial branches was different. Although European economies are strongly interconnected both internally and externally, the way in which an economic branch has crossed and is trying to overcome the economic crisis has some peculiarities arising from its specificity on the one hand, and on the other hand, from the policies applied in the field. Based on these considera-tions, the paper examines how Romanian metallurgical industry passes through the economic crisis as compared with other industries. Also based on quantitative analyses performed and taking into account the specific phenom-enon of seasonality are presented models of evolution of this industry with horizon in February 2015.Key words: metallurgy, economic crisis, turnover, forecast models, RomaniaINTRODUCTIONMetallurgical industry occupied an extremely im-portant place in the Romanian economy, especially be-fore 1990. As in other former communist countries, like for example in Poland [1], privatization and restruc-turing processes have influenced the evolution of this industry adapting and integrating as well as other bran-ches, in the competitions of market economy. Certainly, the economic crisis has left its mark on the metallurgical activities which have declined ever since the period before the crisis. From the second half of 2008 it was noted a significant decrease of the inde-xes of turnover value in metallurgy by 63.4 percentage points, thus reaching a value below the level of 2005. But September 2009 marks the beginning of a process of recovery (increase) when metallurgy industry pro-vided 6,8 % of the industrial output of the country and 8,9 % of the value of manufacturing output [2], the pro-cess continuing, so that in March 2013 in Romania there were 20 large metallurgy companies.An important way of highlighting the economic ef-ficiency of metallurgical industry is the analysis of turn-over and the index of turnover. From this point of view a quantitative analysis based on econometric models [3-5] in the period 2000-2012 was remade in our paper „An analysis of the turnover index evolution in me-tallurgy during 2000-2012. The case of Romania” [6]. This paper represents a continuation of it [6] and other concerns of the authors in this area [7,8] and refers to how metallurgy crossed over economic crisis and its prospects of evolution with horizon in February 2015, through the prism of turnover index in comparison to other manufacturing industries.The data used in this paper were provided by Roma-nian state institutions, including: National Statistics In-stitute [9], and the Ministry of Economy [10].EVOLUTION OF TURNOVER INDEX OF METALLURGY COMPARED TO THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY IN THE PERIOD BEFORE THE ECONOMIC CRISISEvolutions of the turnover index in metallurgy (de-noted by ITOM) as comparated to the total manufac-turing industry (denoted by ITOT) in period January 2000 - January 2014 is illustrated in Figure 1. In the period January 2000 - October 2008, both the turnover of the manufacturing industry and the me-tallurgy have evolved quite similarly on an upward trend increasing about 5 times. But in 2004, metallurgi-cal industry recorded a different evolution from that of the manufacturing industry in terms of growth rate. As can be seen in Figure 1, the onset of economic crisis has had a much stronger impact on metallurgical industry. From the second half of 2008, ITO evolutions of me-tallurgy decreased significantly. Over this trend over-laps a seasonal evolution characteristic to this industry.THREE INDUSTRIES PASSING THROUGH THE ECONOMIC CRISISIn order to highlight how the metallurgical industry from Romania went through the period of economic cri-sis it presents a brief comparison of the evolution of turnover index in metallurgy (ITOM) with turnover in-446   METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA et al.: METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISISdex in the food industry (ITOFI) and Manufacture of Fabricated Metal Products (except machinery and equipment), (ITOFMP).The analysis is based on the series of data corres-ponding to the values of ITO for the three industries during the period July 2008 to April 2014 [6], having as a basis the average indexes of turnover since 2010 for each of the three industries.Figure 2 shows the evolution of indexes of turnover in metallurgy and in manufacture of fabricated metal products. As can be seen, the impact of the economic crisis was significantly higher on the manufacture of fa-bricated metal products, which in the first quarter of 2009 recorded an average index of turnover that was 38,6 % lower than in the last quarter of the year 2008. At the same time, the average of ITO in metallurgy was 16,8 % lower than in the last quarter of the year 2008. Note that it decreased significantly in the fourth quarter as compared to the third quarter of 2008.The low levels of the two industries is maintained throughout 2009, recording at a quarterly level, very small increases between 6 % and 9 % compared to the first semester in which they recorded the lowest values in the whole period under review. Note, that the level of the index of turnover in metallurgy in 2009 reached about the same level recorded in 2008, while the ITO in manufacture of fabricated metal products was 30 % lower in 2009 compared to 2008.It is find a relatively similar situation in the early part of the economic crisis in the case of the index of turnover in the food industry (Figure 3). The decline is significant, the average index of turover in the first quarter of 2009 was 27 % lower than in the fourth quarter of 2008. But unlike metallurgy and manufacture of fabricated metal products in food industry, the decline continued in the second semester of 2009 by 13 % so that, compared with the last quarter of 2008 the decrease was of 36,8 %.2010 is the year that prepares economic recovery in all three industries. For metallurgy and manufacture of fabricated metal products until the end of the analysed period (April 2014) evolutions of indexes of turnover are situated on the upward trends which overlap the sea-sonal fluctuations caused by the specificity of these two industries (Figure 2). Thus, in the year 2013, the aver-age index of turnover in metallurgy was 32,52 % higher than in 2010 and 6,8 percentage points higher than the level of index of turnover in manufacturing industry.In contrast with these (Figure 3) after a significant upward evolution in the period 2010 - 2012, in 2013 are notice a significant decline, so that the index of turnover of food industry decreases to 99 % of the level recorded in 2010.TWO MODELS OF MEDIUM-TERM FORECAST OF THE INDEX OF TURNOVER IN METALLURGY Since the series of data used in the study of the evo-lution of metallurgy during the economic crisis, contain a number of 64 observations there were developed and tested, using Excel, SPSS and EViews [4-6], multiple regression models describing the evolution in time of the index of turnover in metallury during January 2009 through April 2014.In a first phase, taking into account the obvious sea-sonality of data series was made the seasonal adjust-020406080100120140160180200220Jan-01Jan-02Jan-03Jan-04Jan-05Jan-06Jan-07Jan-08Jan-09Jan-10Jan-11Jan-12Jan-13Jan-14ITO / % Metallurgy Manufacturing industryJan-00406080100120140160MetallurgyManufacture of fabricated metal productsJan-09Jul-09Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11Jul-11Jan-12Jul-12Jan-13Jul-13Jan-14ITO / %Jul-08406080100120140160Metallurgy Food Industry     Jan-09Jul-09Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11Jul-11Jan-12Jul-12Jan-13Jul-13ITO / %Jan-14Figure 1   The evolution of ITO of metallurgy and manufacturing industryFigure 2   Evolution of ITO of metallurgy and manufacture of fabricated metal productsFigura 3 Evolution of ITO of metallurgy and food industry447 METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA et al.: METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISISIn models (1) and (2), s(t) is the term for seasonality, and represents the influence of residual factors. As can be seen from Figure 4, their trajectories practically overlap.In Figure 4 are also represented variants of the prog-nosis of the index of turnover trends in metallurgy until February 2015. These are presented in detail in table 4. The values represent the means of the confidence inter-vals for a probability of 95 %.Table 4  Forecast values of the index of turnover in metallurgy during the period July 2014-February 2015Year Month Linear (Model 1) Expon. (Model 2)2014 Joule 138,5 139,5August 141,9 143,0September 147,1 148,4Octomber 150,3 151,7November 147,8 149,4December 142,7 144,52015 January 119,5 121,5February 128,9 130,9CONCLUSIONSThe impact of the outbreak of the economic crisis in late 2008 is felt differently across industrial branches and its influence on their long-term developments is dif-ferent. In order to highlight this fact was realized a com-parative analysis of metallurgical industry with the evo-lutions of the food industry and industry of manufactur-ing road transport vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers.Based on the analysis of index values of turnover in metallurgy from January 2009 to April 2014 was made a prediction of this industry with the horizon in Febru-ary 2015 based on linear and exponential models.REFERENCES[1]  Gajdzik, B. Development of market strategies of metallur-gical enterprises after restructuring of steel industry. Meta-lurgija, 53 (2014) 1, 131-134.ment methods using additive seasonal movings average method, seasonality factors obtained being presented in Table 1.Table 1   Seasonal adjustment factors for index of turnover in metallurgySample 2009:01 2014:04 Included observations: 64Diff  erence from Moving AverageMonth ScalingFactorsMonth ScalingFactorsMonth ScalingFactorsJan. -22,318 May 1,634 Sep. 8,092Feb. -12,893 Jun. 1,011 Oct. 10,548Mar. 2,308 Jul. 0,845 Nov. 7,352Apr -1,743 Aug. 3,548 Dec. 1,612Taking into account these, for a level of significance  = 0,05 (p = 95 %), five models were tested: linear, logarithmic quadratic, power and exponential.Table 2   Resume of results of the regression statistics and the variance analysisLiniar Log. Quadratic Power Exp.R 0,797 0,718 0,798 0,725 0,787R Sqr. 0,635 0,516 0,637 0,526 0,621F1 0 8 , 2 6 6 , 1 3 5 3 , 5 6 6 9 , 0 2 1 0 1 , 4Sig. F 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000As can be seen (Table 2) all models are statistically valid because all Sig. F values are much lower than 0,05.Next were tested the statistical significances of the coefficients of obtained models. Values of the coeffi-cients and the results of test t (Student), under the same conditions ( = 0,05) are shown in Table 3.Table 3   Testing statistical significance of coefficients of regression models BT S i g . T B T S i g . TLiniar LogaritmicTime 0,69 10,4 0,000 12,93 8,13 0,00C 1,58 36,5 0,000 72,78 13,74 0,00Power ExponentialTime 0,116 0,000 0,0006 0,00C 77,94 0,000 2,1065 0,00QuadraticTime 0,571 0,041Time**20 , 0 0 1 9 0 , 6 3 5C 92,97 0,000Analyzing the results presented in Table 2 shows that the Quadratic model cannot be used since Sig. T = 0,635 >  = 0,05. As a result only the other four models can be used. Of these, taking into account the values of R and R Sqr. the linear model was chosen, for which R2 = 0,6977: ITOM(t) = 0,6977 ·t + 91,585 + s(t) +    (1)and respectively, the exponential model, for which R2 = 0,6208: ITOM(t) = 92,687 · e0,0062·t + s(t) +    (2)-40-20020406080100120140160ITO-ITO(-1) Extrapol. ITOLinear ExponentJan-09Jul-09Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11Jul-11Jan-12Jul-12Jan-13Jul-13ITO of Metallurgy / %Jan-14Jul-14Jan-15Figure 4   Trend and values of the first  difference of the ITO of metallurgy  in the analyzed period448   METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA et al.: METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISIS[2]  Beldescu et al., Sector Analysis - Romania Metallurgical, Romanian Center for promotion of Trade and Foreign In-vestments, Bucharest, 2011, pp.4-5.[3]  Bierens H.J., Introduction to the Mathematical and Stati-stical Foundations of Econometrics, Cambridge University Press, 2004, New York.[4]  Oprescu Gh. Dinamica economica stochastica. Mecanisme de filtrare si predictie, Editura ASE, 2007, Bucuresti.[5]  Zaharia M., Gogonea R.M. Econometrie. Elemente funda-mentale, Editura Universitară, 2008, Bucureşti.[6]  Babucea A.G., Zaharia M., Bălăcescu A., An analysis of the turnover index evolution in metallurgy during 2000 – 2012, The case of Romania. Metalurgija, 53 (2014) 1, 109-112.[7]  Oprescu Gh. Stochastic economic dynamics. Filtering and prediction mechanisms, ASE Publishing House, 2007, Bu-charest.[8]  Zaharia M., Gogonea R.M., Busuioc M.F., Oprea C. The Place of Metallurgical High Education in Higher Technical and Industrial Education in Romania, in Metalurgia Inter-national, 15(2014), Special Issue 8, 187-192.[9] www.insse.ro[10] www.minind.roNote:   The responsible translator for English language is the lector Simion Otilia from Faculty of Economics and Business Adminis-tration, “Constantin Brancusi” University of Targu Jiu, Romania

Metallurgical industry in Romania in the context of the economic crisis

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia

445METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA, A. G. BABUCEA, A. BĂLĂCESCU, C. I. RĂBONŢUMETALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISISReceived – Prispjelo: 2014-07-08Accepted – Prihvaćeno: 2014-10-20Professional Paper – Strukovni radISSN 0543-5846METABK 54(2) 445-448 (2015)UDC – UDK 669.011:003.01:338.976.498=111M. Zaharia, Petroleum-Gas University of Ploiesti, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Romania A.G. Babucea, A. Bălăcescu,  C.I. Răbonţu, “Constantin Brancusi” University of Targu Jiu, Faculty of Economics and Business Adminis-tration, Targu Jiu, RomaniaThe magnitude of the economic crisis and the influence on the developments of industrial branches was different. Although European economies are strongly interconnected both internally and externally, the way in which an economic branch has crossed and is trying to overcome the economic crisis has some peculiarities arising from its specificity on the one hand, and on the other hand, from the policies applied in the field. Based on these considera-tions, the paper examines how Romanian metallurgical industry passes through the economic crisis as compared with other industries. Also based on quantitative analyses performed and taking into account the specific phenom-enon of seasonality are presented models of evolution of this industry with horizon in February 2015.Key words: metallurgy, economic crisis, turnover, forecast models, RomaniaINTRODUCTIONMetallurgical industry occupied an extremely im-portant place in the Romanian economy, especially be-fore 1990. As in other former communist countries, like for example in Poland [1], privatization and restruc-turing processes have influenced the evolution of this industry adapting and integrating as well as other bran-ches, in the competitions of market economy. Certainly, the economic crisis has left its mark on the metallurgical activities which have declined ever since the period before the crisis. From the second half of 2008 it was noted a significant decrease of the inde-xes of turnover value in metallurgy by 63.4 percentage points, thus reaching a value below the level of 2005. But September 2009 marks the beginning of a process of recovery (increase) when metallurgy industry pro-vided 6,8 % of the industrial output of the country and 8,9 % of the value of manufacturing output [2], the pro-cess continuing, so that in March 2013 in Romania there were 20 large metallurgy companies.An important way of highlighting the economic ef-ficiency of metallurgical industry is the analysis of turn-over and the index of turnover. From this point of view a quantitative analysis based on econometric models [3-5] in the period 2000-2012 was remade in our paper „An analysis of the turnover index evolution in me-tallurgy during 2000-2012. The case of Romania” [6]. This paper represents a continuation of it [6] and other concerns of the authors in this area [7,8] and refers to how metallurgy crossed over economic crisis and its prospects of evolution with horizon in February 2015, through the prism of turnover index in comparison to other manufacturing industries.The data used in this paper were provided by Roma-nian state institutions, including: National Statistics In-stitute [9], and the Ministry of Economy [10].EVOLUTION OF TURNOVER INDEX OF METALLURGY COMPARED TO THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY IN THE PERIOD BEFORE THE ECONOMIC CRISISEvolutions of the turnover index in metallurgy (de-noted by ITOM) as comparated to the total manufac-turing industry (denoted by ITOT) in period January 2000 - January 2014 is illustrated in Figure 1. In the period January 2000 - October 2008, both the turnover of the manufacturing industry and the me-tallurgy have evolved quite similarly on an upward trend increasing about 5 times. But in 2004, metallurgi-cal industry recorded a different evolution from that of the manufacturing industry in terms of growth rate. As can be seen in Figure 1, the onset of economic crisis has had a much stronger impact on metallurgical industry. From the second half of 2008, ITO evolutions of me-tallurgy decreased significantly. Over this trend over-laps a seasonal evolution characteristic to this industry.THREE INDUSTRIES PASSING THROUGH THE ECONOMIC CRISISIn order to highlight how the metallurgical industry from Romania went through the period of economic cri-sis it presents a brief comparison of the evolution of turnover index in metallurgy (ITOM) with turnover in-446  METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA et al.: METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISISdex in the food industry (ITOFI) and Manufacture of Fabricated Metal Products (except machinery and equipment), (ITOFMP).The analysis is based on the series of data corres-ponding to the values of ITO for the three industries during the period July 2008 to April 2014 [6], having as a basis the average indexes of turnover since 2010 for each of the three industries.Figure 2 shows the evolution of indexes of turnover in metallurgy and in manufacture of fabricated metal products. As can be seen, the impact of the economic crisis was significantly higher on the manufacture of fa-bricated metal products, which in the first quarter of 2009 recorded an average index of turnover that was 38,6 % lower than in the last quarter of the year 2008. At the same time, the average of ITO in metallurgy was 16,8 % lower than in the last quarter of the year 2008. Note that it decreased significantly in the fourth quarter as compared to the third quarter of 2008.The low levels of the two industries is maintained throughout 2009, recording at a quarterly level, very small increases between 6 % and 9 % compared to the first semester in which they recorded the lowest values in the whole period under review. Note, that the level of the index of turnover in metallurgy in 2009 reached about the same level recorded in 2008, while the ITO in manufacture of fabricated metal products was 30 % lower in 2009 compared to 2008.It is find a relatively similar situation in the early part of the economic crisis in the case of the index of turnover in the food industry (Figure 3). The decline is significant, the average index of turover in the first quarter of 2009 was 27 % lower than in the fourth quarter of 2008. But unlike metallurgy and manufacture of fabricated metal products in food industry, the decline continued in the second semester of 2009 by 13 % so that, compared with the last quarter of 2008 the decrease was of 36,8 %.2010 is the year that prepares economic recovery in all three industries. For metallurgy and manufacture of fabricated metal products until the end of the analysed period (April 2014) evolutions of indexes of turnover are situated on the upward trends which overlap the sea-sonal fluctuations caused by the specificity of these two industries (Figure 2). Thus, in the year 2013, the aver-age index of turnover in metallurgy was 32,52 % higher than in 2010 and 6,8 percentage points higher than the level of index of turnover in manufacturing industry.In contrast with these (Figure 3) after a significant upward evolution in the period 2010 - 2012, in 2013 are notice a significant decline, so that the index of turnover of food industry decreases to 99 % of the level recorded in 2010.TWO MODELS OF MEDIUM-TERM FORECAST OF THE INDEX OF TURNOVER IN METALLURGY Since the series of data used in the study of the evo-lution of metallurgy during the economic crisis, contain a number of 64 observations there were developed and tested, using Excel, SPSS and EViews [4-6], multiple regression models describing the evolution in time of the index of turnover in metallury during January 2009 through April 2014.In a first phase, taking into account the obvious sea-sonality of data series was made the seasonal adjust-020406080100120140160180200220Jan-01Jan-02Jan-03Jan-04Jan-05Jan-06Jan-07Jan-08Jan-09Jan-10Jan-11Jan-12Jan-13Jan-14ITO / % Metallurgy Manufacturing industryJan-00406080100120140160MetallurgyManufacture of fabricated metal productsJan-09Jul-09Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11Jul-11Jan-12Jul-12Jan-13Jul-13Jan-14ITO / %Jul-08406080100120140160Metallurgy Food Industry     Jan-09Jul-09Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11Jul-11Jan-12Jul-12Jan-13Jul-13ITO / %Jan-14Figure 1  The evolution of ITO of metallurgy and manufacturing industryFigure 2  Evolution of ITO of metallurgy and manufacture of fabricated metal productsFigura 3 Evolution of ITO of metallurgy and food industry447METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA et al.: METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISISIn models (1) and (2), s(t) is the term for seasonality, and represents the influence of residual factors. As can be seen from Figure 4, their trajectories practically overlap.In Figure 4 are also represented variants of the prog-nosis of the index of turnover trends in metallurgy until February 2015. These are presented in detail in table 4. The values represent the means of the confidence inter-vals for a probability of 95 %.Table 4  Forecast values of the index of turnover in metallurgy during the period July 2014-February 2015Year Month Linear (Model 1) Expon. (Model 2)2014 Joule 138,5 139,5August 141,9 143,0September 147,1 148,4Octomber 150,3 151,7November 147,8 149,4December 142,7 144,52015 January 119,5 121,5February 128,9 130,9CONCLUSIONSThe impact of the outbreak of the economic crisis in late 2008 is felt differently across industrial branches and its influence on their long-term developments is dif-ferent. In order to highlight this fact was realized a com-parative analysis of metallurgical industry with the evo-lutions of the food industry and industry of manufactur-ing road transport vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers.Based on the analysis of index values of turnover in metallurgy from January 2009 to April 2014 was made a prediction of this industry with the horizon in Febru-ary 2015 based on linear and exponential models.REFERENCES[1] Gajdzik, B. Development of market strategies of metallur-gical enterprises after restructuring of steel industry. Meta-lurgija, 53 (2014) 1, 131-134.ment methods using additive seasonal movings average method, seasonality factors obtained being presented in Table 1.Table 1  Seasonal adjustment factors for index of turnover in metallurgySample 2009:01 2014:04 Included observations: 64Diff erence from Moving AverageMonth ScalingFactorsMonth ScalingFactorsMonth ScalingFactorsJan. -22,318 May 1,634 Sep. 8,092Feb. -12,893 Jun. 1,011 Oct. 10,548Mar. 2,308 Jul. 0,845 Nov. 7,352Apr -1,743 Aug. 3,548 Dec. 1,612Taking into account these, for a level of significance  = 0,05 (p = 95 %), five models were tested: linear, logarithmic quadratic, power and exponential.Table 2  Resume of results of the regression statistics and the variance analysisLiniar Log. Quadratic Power Exp.R 0,797 0,718 0,798 0,725 0,787R Sqr. 0,635 0,516 0,637 0,526 0,621F 108,2 66,13 53,56 69,02 101,4Sig. F 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000 0,000As can be seen (Table 2) all models are statistically valid because all Sig. F values are much lower than 0,05.Next were tested the statistical significances of the coefficients of obtained models. Values of the coeffi-cients and the results of test t (Student), under the same conditions ( = 0,05) are shown in Table 3.Table 3  Testing statistical significance of coefficients of regression models B T Sig.T B T Sig.TLiniar LogaritmicTime 0,69 10,4 0,000 12,93 8,13 0,00C 1,58 36,5 0,000 72,78 13,74 0,00Power ExponentialTime 0,116 0,000 0,0006 0,00C 77,94 0,000 2,1065 0,00QuadraticTime 0,571 0,041Time**2 0,0019 0,635C 92,97 0,000Analyzing the results presented in Table 2 shows that the Quadratic model cannot be used since Sig. T = 0,635 >  = 0,05. As a result only the other four models can be used. Of these, taking into account the values of R and R Sqr. the linear model was chosen, for which R2 = 0,6977: ITOM(t) = 0,6977 ·t + 91,585 + s(t) +   (1)and respectively, the exponential model, for which R2 = 0,6208: ITOM(t) = 92,687 · e0,0062·t + s(t) +   (2)-40-20020406080100120140160ITO-ITO(-1) Extrapol. ITOLinear ExponentJan-09Jul-09Jan-10Jul-10Jan-11Jul-11Jan-12Jul-12Jan-13Jul-13ITO of Metallurgy / %Jan-14Jul-14Jan-15Figure 4  Trend and values of the first  difference of the ITO of metallurgy  in the analyzed period448  METALURGIJA 54 (2015) 2, 445-448M. ZAHARIA et al.: METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY IN ROMANIA IN THE CONTEXT OF THE ECONOMIC CRISIS[2] Beldescu et al., Sector Analysis - Romania Metallurgical, Romanian Center for promotion of Trade and Foreign In-vestments, Bucharest, 2011, pp.4-5.[3] Bierens H.J., Introduction to the Mathematical and Stati-stical Foundations of Econometrics, Cambridge University Press, 2004, New York.[4] Oprescu Gh. Dinamica economica stochastica. Mecanisme de filtrare si predictie, Editura ASE, 2007, Bucuresti.[5] Zaharia M., Gogonea R.M. Econometrie. Elemente funda-mentale, Editura Universitară, 2008, Bucureşti.[6] Babucea A.G., Zaharia M., Bălăcescu A., An analysis of the turnover index evolution in metallurgy during 2000 – 2012, The case of Romania. Metalurgija, 53 (2014) 1, 109-112.[7] Oprescu Gh. Stochastic economic dynamics. Filtering and prediction mechanisms, ASE Publishing House, 2007, Bu-charest.[8] Zaharia M., Gogonea R.M., Busuioc M.F., Oprea C. The Place of Metallurgical High Education in Higher Technical and Industrial Education in Romania, in Metalurgia Inter-national, 15(2014), Special Issue 8, 187-192.[9] www.insse.ro[10] www.minind.roNote:  The responsible translator for English language is the lector Simion Otilia from Faculty of Economics and Business Adminis-tration, “Constantin Brancusi” University of Targu Jiu, Romania

Metallurgical industry in Romania in the context of the economic crisis

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Directory of Open Access Journals

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia