Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

MEASURING THE AGRICULTURAL TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY OF PROVINCES IN TURKEY USING MALMQUIST INDEX

Year 2024, Issue: 67, 191 - 196, 30.04.2024

Habibe Yaman , Onur Sungur , Murat Ali Dulupçu

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1345345

Abstract

This study aims to reveal the total factor productivity levels in the agricultural sector in 81 provinces of Turkey by using the Malmquist index method over the period 2009-2019. The results extracted from the Malmquist index findings show that index value changed between 1.186 and 0.952, agricultural productivity increased in 75 provinces and decreased in 6 provinces. In addition, our findings confirm technological change affects the change in agricultural productivity levels in all provinces in Turkey, and that technology is a determining factor in agricultural productivity in all provinces. From a policy perspective, the results suggest that authorities in Turkey should develop and implement technologies that will make the sector productive, to encourage and support infrastructure, research and publication studies on technology. In addition, this research claims that the regional incentive system can be revised and, it can build an incentive system based on performance and efficiency in which provinces or businesses operating in this field are classified according to their productivity.

Keywords

Total Factor Productivity (TFP) Agricultural Sector Malmquist TFP Index Turkey.

Supporting Institution

-

Project Number

-

Thanks

This study is derived from the first author's doctoral thesis titled “A Review on the Development of Innovation and Productivity in the Agricultural Sector at the Provincial Level in Turkey”.

References

  • Allafi, K. A. M. (2014). The Impact of Changing Agricultural Policies on Libyan Agricultural Performance. Sheffield Hallam University, Doctoral Dissertation, Sheffield.
  • Armagan, G. and Ozden, A. (2007). Determinations of Total Factor Productivity with Cobb-Douglas Production Function in Agriculture: The Case of Aydin-Turkey. Journal of Applied Sciences, 7: 499-502.
  • Arnade, C. (1998). Using a Programming Approach to Measure International Agricultural Efficiency and Productivity. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49: 67-84.
  • Avcı, M. A. and Kaya, A. A. (2008). Geçiş Ekonomileri ve Türk Tarım Sektöründe Etkinlik ve Toplam Faktör Verimliliği Analizi (1992-2004) (The Analysis of Efficiency and Total Factor Productivity in Agriculture Sectors of Turkey and Transition Economies (1992-2004)). Ege Academic Review, 8: 843-860.
  • Ball, V. E., Butault, J-P. and Nehring, R. F. (2002). US Agriculture, 1960-96: A Multilateral Comparison of Total Factor Productivity, In Agricultural Productivity, 11-35, Springer, Boston, MA.
  • Bilişik, M. T. (2015). Gelişmekte Olan ve Hızlı Büyüyen Ülkelerin Tarım Sektörünün Malmquist Toplam Faktör Verimliliği ile Analizi (Analyzing Agriculture Sector of Developing and Growth-Leading Countries Using Malmquist Total Factor Productivity). Trakya University Journal of Social Science, 17, 77-97.
  • Çelik, N. (2000). Tarımda Girdi Kullanımı ve Verimliliğe Etkileri (Input Use in Agriculture and Its Effects on Productivity). Economic Sectors and Coordination General Directorate, Department of Agriculture, Specialization Thesis, Ankara.
  • Coelli, T. J. (1996). Measurement of Total Factor Productivity Growth and Biases in Technological Change in Western Australian Agriculture. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11: 77-91.
  • Coelli, T. J. and Rao, D. S. P. (2005). Total Factor Productivity Growth in Agriculture: A Malmquist Index Analysis of 93 Countries, 1980-2000. Agricultural Economics, 32: 115-134.
  • Dharmasiri, L. M. (2012). Measuring Agricultural Productivity Using the Average Productivity Index (API). Sri Lanka Journal of Advanced Social Studies, 1: 25-44.
  • Eastern Anatolia Development Agency (2019). Şehir Şehir Türkiye (City by City Turkey). Ankara: Ozyurt Printing.
  • FAO (2010). Agricultural Investment Funds for Developing Countries. http://www.ea-stagri.org/docs/group/264/investment_funds.pdf (A.D. 16.04.2021).
  • FAO (2017). Productivity and Efficiency Measurement in Agriculture: Literature Review and Gaps Analysis, (Publication Prepared in the Framework of the Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics). Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
  • FAOSTAT (2022). https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (A.D. 27.02.2022).
  • Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M. and Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity Growth, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Change in Industrialized Countries. The American Economic Review, 84: 66- 83.
  • Giang, M. H., Xuan T. D., Trung, B. H. and Que, M. T. (2019). Total Factor Productivity of Agricultural Firms in Vietnam and its Relevant Determinants. Economies, 7: 4.
  • Guvercin, D. (2018). Scale and Elasticity Properties of Turkish Agricultural Production: Political Economy Approach. Sosyoekonomi, 26: 103-116.
  • Hayami, Y. and Ruttan, V. W. (1970). Agricultural Productivity Differences among Countries. The American Economic Review, 60: 895- 911.
  • Karaman, S. (2008). Türkiye Ekonomisinin Gelişmesinde Tarımın Rolü: Eşbütünleşme Analizi (Role of Agriculture in Economic Development of Turkey: Cointegration Analysis). Doctoral dissertation, Bursa Uludag University, Bursa.
  • Karaman, S. and Özalp, A. (2017). Türkiye Tarım Sektörü Bölgesel Toplam Faktör Verimliliğinin Malmquist Endeks ile Belirlenmesi (Regional Agriculture Sector in Turkey: Total Factor Productivity Determination by Malmquist Index). Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpaşa University (JAFAG), 34: 209-217.
  • Kaya, P. and Aktan, H. E. (2011). Türk Tarım Sektörü Verimliliğinin Parametrik Olmayan Bir Yöntemle Analizi (A Non-Parametric Analysis of Turkish Agricultural Productivity). Journal of Alanya Faculty of Business, 3.
  • Koç, A. A., Bayaner, A., Uysal, P. and Subaşı, S. (2016). Türkiye Tarım Sektöründe Faktör Talebi ve Toplam Faktör Verimliliği (Factor Demand and Total Factor Productivity in Turkish Agriculture). In XII. National Agricultural Economics Congress, p. 859-868, Isparta, 25-27 May 2016.
  • Latruffe, L. (2010). Competitiveness, Productivity and Efficiency in The Agricultural and Agri-Food Sectors. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 30, Paris: OECD Publishing.
  • Lee, D. (2017). Economics of Technological Change and Induced Innovation. Washington State University, Doctoral Dissertation, Washington.
  • Link, A. N. and Siegel, D. S. (2003). Technological Change and Economic Performance. In Cantwell, J., Mowery, D. (Eds.), Studies in Global Competition, London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
  • Lipsey, R. G. and Carlaw, K. I. (2004). Total Factor Productivity and The Measurement of Technological Change. The Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d'Economique, 37: 1118-1150.
  • Lissitsa A. and Odening M. (2005). Efficiency and Total Factor Productivity in Ukrainian Agriculture in Transition. Agricultural Economics 32: 311-325.
  • Liu, Y. (2007). Risk, Induced Innovation, and Productivity Convergence in US Agriculture. Washington State University, PhD Thesis, Washington.
  • Mollavelioğlu, M. S., Kanberoğlu, Z. and Oğuz, A. (2017). Afro-Avrasya Ülkelerinde Tarımsal Toplam Faktör Verimliliği ve Ekonomik Büyüme (Agricultural Aggregate Factor Productivity and Economic Growth in The Afro-Eurasian Countries). Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 1.
  • Özkan, M. (2018). Tarım İşletmelerinde Sürdürülebilirliğin Ölçülmesi: Aydın İli Örneği (Measurement of Sustainable Agriculture: The Case of Aydin Province). Aydin Adnan Menderes University, Master's Thesis, Aydin.
  • Özok, U. (2006). Veri Zarflama Analizi ve Malmquist Toplam Faktör Verimliliği Endeksi ile Türkiye’deki İllerin Tarım Etkinliklerinin İncelenmesi (Using of Data Envelopment Analysis and Malmquist Total Factor Productivity Index in Investigating the Efficiency of Agriculture in Provinces of Turkey). Gazi University, Master's Thesis, Ankara.
  • Presidency of the Republic of Turkey Presidency of Strategy and Budget (2022). Presidential Annual Program for 2022, Ankara.
  • Ritchie H., Rosado, P. and Roser M. (2019). Meat and Dairy Production, 2017. https://ourworldin-data.org/meat-production (A.D. 06.07.2022).
  • Rosegrant, M. W. and Evenson, R. E. (1992). Agricultural Productivity and Sources of Growth in South Asia. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74: 757-761.
  • Şahin, M. Y. and Kaplan, H. (2021). Dönüşüm Sürecinde Yatırım Teşviklerinin Dünü ve Bugünü (The Past and Present of Investment Incentives in the Transformation Process). Ankara: The Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Türkiye (TOBB) publications.
  • SEGE (2017). Socio-Economic Development Index 2017. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Industry and Technology, Publication of the General Directorate of Development Agencies, No. 3, Ankara.
  • Takım, A. and Ersungur Ş. M. (2018). Türkiye’de Teşvik Sisteminin Yapısı, Sorunları ve Etkinliği Üzerine Bir Politika Önerisi: Tek Bir Uygulamacı Kuruluş Sorunları Çözer Mi? (A Policy Proposal on the Problems, Effectiveness and Structure of Incentive System in Turkey: Can Single Institution Solve Problems?). Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 32: 725-744.
  • Tipi, T. and Rehber, E. (2006). Measuring Technical Efficiency and Total Factor Productivity in Agriculture: The Case of the South Marmara Region of Turkey. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 49: 137-145.
  • TUIK (2021a). Regional Statistics. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bolgeselistatistik/sorgu-Sayfa.do?target=degisken# (A.D. 09.10.2021).
  • TUIK (2021b). https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=144&locale=tr (A.D. 09.01.2021).
  • TUIK (2021c). https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Tarim-111 (A.D. 15.10.2021).
  • Tzounis, A., Katsoulas, N., Bartzanas, T. and Kittas, C. (2017). Internet of Things in Agriculture, Recent Advances and Future Challenges. Biosystems Engineering, 164: 31-48.
  • Umetsu, C., Lekprichakul, T. and Chakravorty, U. (2003). Efficiency and Technical Change in the Philippine Rice Sector: A Malmquist Total Factor Productivity Analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85 (4): 943-963.
  • WORLD BANK (2022). https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators# (A.D. 24.03.2022).
  • Yolsal, H. (2010). Küresel Finansal Krizin Türk Bankacılık Sektörünün Verimliliği Üzerine Etkileri (The Effects of Global Financial Crisis on The Productivity of Turkish Banking Sector). World of Accounting Science 12.

TÜRKİYE'DE İLLERİN TARIMSAL TOPLAM FAKTÖR VERİMLİLİĞİNİN MALMQUIST ENDEKSİ İLE ÖLÇÜMÜ

Year 2024, Issue: 67, 191 - 196, 30.04.2024

Habibe Yaman , Onur Sungur , Murat Ali Dulupçu

https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1345345

Abstract

Bu çalışma, 2009-2019 dönemi için Türkiye'nin 81 ilinde tarım sektöründeki toplam faktör verimlilik düzeylerini Malmquist indeks yöntemi kullanılarak ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Malmquist indeks bulgularından elde edilen sonuçlar, endeks değerinin 1.186 ile 0.952 arasında değiştiğini, tarımsal verimliliğin 75 ilde arttığını, 6 ilde azaldığını göstermektedir. Ayrıca bulgularımız, teknolojik değişimin Türkiye'deki tüm illerde tarımsal verimlilik düzeylerindeki değişimi etkilediğini ve teknolojinin tüm illerde tarımsal verimlilikte belirleyici bir faktör olduğunu doğrulamaktadır. Politika açısından, sonuçlar Türkiye'deki yetkililerin sektörü verimli kılacak teknolojiler geliştirmesi ve uygulaması, teknolojiye ilişkin altyapı, araştırma ve yayın çalışmalarını teşvik etmesi ve desteklemesi gerektiğini göstermektedir. Ek olarak, bu araştırma, bölgesel teşvik sisteminin revize edilebileceğini ve bu alanda faaliyet gösteren illerin veya işletmelerin verimliliklerine göre sınıflandırıldığı, performans ve verimliliğe dayalı bir teşvik sistemi kurulabileceğini iddia etmektedir.

Keywords

Toplam Faktör Verimliliği (TFV) Tarım Sektörü Malmquist TFV Endeksi Türkiye.

Project Number

-

References

  • Allafi, K. A. M. (2014). The Impact of Changing Agricultural Policies on Libyan Agricultural Performance. Sheffield Hallam University, Doctoral Dissertation, Sheffield.
  • Armagan, G. and Ozden, A. (2007). Determinations of Total Factor Productivity with Cobb-Douglas Production Function in Agriculture: The Case of Aydin-Turkey. Journal of Applied Sciences, 7: 499-502.
  • Arnade, C. (1998). Using a Programming Approach to Measure International Agricultural Efficiency and Productivity. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49: 67-84.
  • Avcı, M. A. and Kaya, A. A. (2008). Geçiş Ekonomileri ve Türk Tarım Sektöründe Etkinlik ve Toplam Faktör Verimliliği Analizi (1992-2004) (The Analysis of Efficiency and Total Factor Productivity in Agriculture Sectors of Turkey and Transition Economies (1992-2004)). Ege Academic Review, 8: 843-860.
  • Ball, V. E., Butault, J-P. and Nehring, R. F. (2002). US Agriculture, 1960-96: A Multilateral Comparison of Total Factor Productivity, In Agricultural Productivity, 11-35, Springer, Boston, MA.
  • Bilişik, M. T. (2015). Gelişmekte Olan ve Hızlı Büyüyen Ülkelerin Tarım Sektörünün Malmquist Toplam Faktör Verimliliği ile Analizi (Analyzing Agriculture Sector of Developing and Growth-Leading Countries Using Malmquist Total Factor Productivity). Trakya University Journal of Social Science, 17, 77-97.
  • Çelik, N. (2000). Tarımda Girdi Kullanımı ve Verimliliğe Etkileri (Input Use in Agriculture and Its Effects on Productivity). Economic Sectors and Coordination General Directorate, Department of Agriculture, Specialization Thesis, Ankara.
  • Coelli, T. J. (1996). Measurement of Total Factor Productivity Growth and Biases in Technological Change in Western Australian Agriculture. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11: 77-91.
  • Coelli, T. J. and Rao, D. S. P. (2005). Total Factor Productivity Growth in Agriculture: A Malmquist Index Analysis of 93 Countries, 1980-2000. Agricultural Economics, 32: 115-134.
  • Dharmasiri, L. M. (2012). Measuring Agricultural Productivity Using the Average Productivity Index (API). Sri Lanka Journal of Advanced Social Studies, 1: 25-44.
  • Eastern Anatolia Development Agency (2019). Şehir Şehir Türkiye (City by City Turkey). Ankara: Ozyurt Printing.
  • FAO (2010). Agricultural Investment Funds for Developing Countries. http://www.ea-stagri.org/docs/group/264/investment_funds.pdf (A.D. 16.04.2021).
  • FAO (2017). Productivity and Efficiency Measurement in Agriculture: Literature Review and Gaps Analysis, (Publication Prepared in the Framework of the Global Strategy to Improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics). Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
  • FAOSTAT (2022). https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (A.D. 27.02.2022).
  • Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Norris, M. and Zhang, Z. (1994). Productivity Growth, Technical Progress, and Efficiency Change in Industrialized Countries. The American Economic Review, 84: 66- 83.
  • Giang, M. H., Xuan T. D., Trung, B. H. and Que, M. T. (2019). Total Factor Productivity of Agricultural Firms in Vietnam and its Relevant Determinants. Economies, 7: 4.
  • Guvercin, D. (2018). Scale and Elasticity Properties of Turkish Agricultural Production: Political Economy Approach. Sosyoekonomi, 26: 103-116.
  • Hayami, Y. and Ruttan, V. W. (1970). Agricultural Productivity Differences among Countries. The American Economic Review, 60: 895- 911.
  • Karaman, S. (2008). Türkiye Ekonomisinin Gelişmesinde Tarımın Rolü: Eşbütünleşme Analizi (Role of Agriculture in Economic Development of Turkey: Cointegration Analysis). Doctoral dissertation, Bursa Uludag University, Bursa.
  • Karaman, S. and Özalp, A. (2017). Türkiye Tarım Sektörü Bölgesel Toplam Faktör Verimliliğinin Malmquist Endeks ile Belirlenmesi (Regional Agriculture Sector in Turkey: Total Factor Productivity Determination by Malmquist Index). Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpaşa University (JAFAG), 34: 209-217.
  • Kaya, P. and Aktan, H. E. (2011). Türk Tarım Sektörü Verimliliğinin Parametrik Olmayan Bir Yöntemle Analizi (A Non-Parametric Analysis of Turkish Agricultural Productivity). Journal of Alanya Faculty of Business, 3.
  • Koç, A. A., Bayaner, A., Uysal, P. and Subaşı, S. (2016). Türkiye Tarım Sektöründe Faktör Talebi ve Toplam Faktör Verimliliği (Factor Demand and Total Factor Productivity in Turkish Agriculture). In XII. National Agricultural Economics Congress, p. 859-868, Isparta, 25-27 May 2016.
  • Latruffe, L. (2010). Competitiveness, Productivity and Efficiency in The Agricultural and Agri-Food Sectors. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 30, Paris: OECD Publishing.
  • Lee, D. (2017). Economics of Technological Change and Induced Innovation. Washington State University, Doctoral Dissertation, Washington.
  • Link, A. N. and Siegel, D. S. (2003). Technological Change and Economic Performance. In Cantwell, J., Mowery, D. (Eds.), Studies in Global Competition, London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
  • Lipsey, R. G. and Carlaw, K. I. (2004). Total Factor Productivity and The Measurement of Technological Change. The Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d'Economique, 37: 1118-1150.
  • Lissitsa A. and Odening M. (2005). Efficiency and Total Factor Productivity in Ukrainian Agriculture in Transition. Agricultural Economics 32: 311-325.
  • Liu, Y. (2007). Risk, Induced Innovation, and Productivity Convergence in US Agriculture. Washington State University, PhD Thesis, Washington.
  • Mollavelioğlu, M. S., Kanberoğlu, Z. and Oğuz, A. (2017). Afro-Avrasya Ülkelerinde Tarımsal Toplam Faktör Verimliliği ve Ekonomik Büyüme (Agricultural Aggregate Factor Productivity and Economic Growth in The Afro-Eurasian Countries). Van Yüzüncü Yıl University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 1.
  • Özkan, M. (2018). Tarım İşletmelerinde Sürdürülebilirliğin Ölçülmesi: Aydın İli Örneği (Measurement of Sustainable Agriculture: The Case of Aydin Province). Aydin Adnan Menderes University, Master's Thesis, Aydin.
  • Özok, U. (2006). Veri Zarflama Analizi ve Malmquist Toplam Faktör Verimliliği Endeksi ile Türkiye’deki İllerin Tarım Etkinliklerinin İncelenmesi (Using of Data Envelopment Analysis and Malmquist Total Factor Productivity Index in Investigating the Efficiency of Agriculture in Provinces of Turkey). Gazi University, Master's Thesis, Ankara.
  • Presidency of the Republic of Turkey Presidency of Strategy and Budget (2022). Presidential Annual Program for 2022, Ankara.
  • Ritchie H., Rosado, P. and Roser M. (2019). Meat and Dairy Production, 2017. https://ourworldin-data.org/meat-production (A.D. 06.07.2022).
  • Rosegrant, M. W. and Evenson, R. E. (1992). Agricultural Productivity and Sources of Growth in South Asia. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74: 757-761.
  • Şahin, M. Y. and Kaplan, H. (2021). Dönüşüm Sürecinde Yatırım Teşviklerinin Dünü ve Bugünü (The Past and Present of Investment Incentives in the Transformation Process). Ankara: The Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Türkiye (TOBB) publications.
  • SEGE (2017). Socio-Economic Development Index 2017. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Industry and Technology, Publication of the General Directorate of Development Agencies, No. 3, Ankara.
  • Takım, A. and Ersungur Ş. M. (2018). Türkiye’de Teşvik Sisteminin Yapısı, Sorunları ve Etkinliği Üzerine Bir Politika Önerisi: Tek Bir Uygulamacı Kuruluş Sorunları Çözer Mi? (A Policy Proposal on the Problems, Effectiveness and Structure of Incentive System in Turkey: Can Single Institution Solve Problems?). Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 32: 725-744.
  • Tipi, T. and Rehber, E. (2006). Measuring Technical Efficiency and Total Factor Productivity in Agriculture: The Case of the South Marmara Region of Turkey. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 49: 137-145.
  • TUIK (2021a). Regional Statistics. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bolgeselistatistik/sorgu-Sayfa.do?target=degisken# (A.D. 09.10.2021).
  • TUIK (2021b). https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=144&locale=tr (A.D. 09.01.2021).
  • TUIK (2021c). https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Tarim-111 (A.D. 15.10.2021).
  • Tzounis, A., Katsoulas, N., Bartzanas, T. and Kittas, C. (2017). Internet of Things in Agriculture, Recent Advances and Future Challenges. Biosystems Engineering, 164: 31-48.
  • Umetsu, C., Lekprichakul, T. and Chakravorty, U. (2003). Efficiency and Technical Change in the Philippine Rice Sector: A Malmquist Total Factor Productivity Analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85 (4): 943-963.
  • WORLD BANK (2022). https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators# (A.D. 24.03.2022).
  • Yolsal, H. (2010). Küresel Finansal Krizin Türk Bankacılık Sektörünün Verimliliği Üzerine Etkileri (The Effects of Global Financial Crisis on The Productivity of Turkish Banking Sector). World of Accounting Science 12.
There are 45 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Regional Economy
Journal Section Makaleler
Authors

Habibe Yaman 0000-0002-9212-3264

Onur Sungur 0000-0001-6778-4370

Murat Ali Dulupçu 0000-0001-9269-5978

Project Number -
Early Pub Date April 28, 2024
Publication Date April 30, 2024
Acceptance Date January 16, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Issue: 67

Cite

APA Yaman, H., Sungur, O., & Dulupçu, M. A. (2024). MEASURING THE AGRICULTURAL TOTAL FACTOR PRODUCTIVITY OF PROVINCES IN TURKEY USING MALMQUIST INDEX. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi(67), 191-196. https://doi.org/10.18070/erciyesiibd.1345345
 Download Cover Image

Ethical Principles and Ethical Guidelines

The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences places great emphasis on publication ethics, which serve as a foundation for the impartial and reputable advancement of scientific knowledge. In this context, the journal adopts a publishing approach aligned with the ethical standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is committed to preventing potential malpractice. The following ethical responsibilities, established based on COPE’s principles, are expected to be upheld by all stakeholders involved in the publication process (authors, readers and researchers, publishers, reviewers, and editors).

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors
Make decisions on submissions based on the quality and originality of the work, its alignment with the journal's aims and scope, and the reviewers’ evaluations, regardless of the authors' religion, language, race, ethnicity, political views, or gender.
Respond to information requests from readers, authors, and reviewers regarding the publication and evaluation processes.
Conduct all processes without compromising ethical standards and intellectual property rights.
Support freedom of thought and protect human and animal rights.
Ensure the peer review process adheres to the principle of double-blind peer review.
Take full responsibility for accepting, rejecting, or requesting changes to a manuscript and ensure that conflicts of interest among stakeholders do not influence these decisions.
Ethical Responsibilities of Authors
Submitted works must be original. When utilizing other works, proper and complete citations and/or references must be provided.
A manuscript must not be under review by another journal simultaneously.
Individuals who have not contributed to the experimental design, implementation, data analysis, or interpretation should not be listed as authors.
If requested during the review process, datasets used in the manuscript must be provided to the editorial board.
If a significant error or mistake is discovered in the manuscript, the journal’s editorial office must be notified.
For studies requiring ethical committee approval, the relevant document must be submitted to the journal. Details regarding the ethical approval (name of the ethics committee, approval document number, and date) must be included in the manuscript.
Changes to authorship (e.g., adding or removing authors, altering the order of authors) cannot be proposed after the review process has commenced.
Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers
Accept review assignments only in areas where they have sufficient expertise.
Agree to review manuscripts in a timely and unbiased manner.
Ensure confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript and not disclose any information about it, during or after the review process, beyond what is already published.
Refrain from using information obtained during the review process for personal or third-party benefit.
Notify the journal editor if plagiarism or other ethical violations are suspected in the manuscript.
Conduct reviews objectively and avoid conflicts of interest. If a conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the review.
Use polite and constructive language during the review process and avoid personal comments.
Publication Policy
The Journal of Erciyes University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences is a free, open-access, peer-reviewed academic journal that has been in publication since 1981. The journal welcomes submissions in Turkish and English within the fields of economics, business administration, public finance, political science, public administration, and international relations.

No submission or publication fees are charged by the journal.
Every submitted manuscript undergoes a double-blind peer review process and similarity/plagiarism checks via iThenticate.
Submissions must be original and not previously published, accepted for publication, or under review elsewhere.
Articles published in the journal can be cited under the Open Access Policy and Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is given.
The journal is published three times a year, in April, August, and December. It includes original, high-quality, and scientifically supported research articles and reviews in its listed fields. Academic studies unrelated to these disciplines or their theoretical and empirical foundations are not accepted. The journal's languages are Turkish and English.

Submissions are first subject to a preliminary review for format and content. Manuscripts not meeting the journal's standards are rejected by the editorial board. Manuscripts deemed suitable proceed to the peer review stage.

Each submission is sent to at least two expert reviewers. If both reviews are favorable, the article is approved for publication. In cases where one review is positive and the other negative, the editorial board decides based on the reviews or may send the manuscript to a third reviewer.

Articles published in the journal are open access and can be cited under the Creative Commons license, provided proper attribution is made.