A REVIEW OF ONE VILLAGE ONE PRODUCT (OVOP): POTENTIALITIES AND FRAGILITIES IN BRAZIL AND TURKEY

Abstract

Various studies on rural development are now the starting point of healthy living, healthy food, ecological sustainability objectives. Increasing interest in this area has led to the development of interdisciplinary research. "One Village One Product" (OVOP) movement, which emerged at the end of the 1970s as Japan's regional development approach, began to become widespread in the Far East, Asia and Africa, then the other continents. In the 2000s in Turkey, these approaches have begun with the projects of the District Agriculture Directorates, but it is not very well known yet. At different periods in Turkey in agricultural policies, there are different approaches such as village institutes, rural credit cooperatives, regional development plans, and some local approaches. From 1950 to 1975 the sense of rural development of Brazil was also felt by the poorer rural population and lacking technological resources. The process of increasing productive change, especially after 1970, led to the adoption of new technological standards. The aim of this study was to explore the structure of OVOP projects and make a discussion for the possible effects on the processes of Turkey and Brazil's rural development. This study examined the characteristics that were different in the rural development of the two countries and included recommendations for the development of OVOP projects. Methodological approach was based on published information in official reports and scientific literature. 

Keywords

• Rural development,rural stakeholders’ participation

References

1. Albayrak, A.N., and Eryılmaz, Y. (2018). From Rural to Urban: Transformation of Villages at the Border of Metropolitan Cities, CAUMME 2018: Conference of Architecture and Urbanism in the Mediterranean and the Middle East Proceedings. Ed., Girginkaya Akdağ, S.; Soygeniş, S.; Vatan, M., Bahçeşehir University, İstanbul.
2. Bostancı, S.H. (2017). Sustainable Urban Model Approaches of Local Governments in Turkey. Management & Education/Upravlenie i Obrazovanie, 13.
3. Carmargo, F.A.O., Silva, L.S., Merten, G.H., Carlos, F.S., Baveye, P.C., and Triplett, E.W. (2017). Brazilian Agriculture in Perspective: Great Expectations vc Reality. Advances in Agronomy, 141, 53-114.
4. Can, M. F., and Sakarya, E. (2012). Dünya ve Türkiye’de Tarım ve Hayvancılık Kooperatiflerinin Tarihsel Gelişimi, İktisadi Önemi ve Mevcut Durumu. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi, 83(1), 27-36.
5. Denpaiboon, C., and Amatasawatdee, C. (2012). Similarity and Difference of One Village One Product (OVOP) for Rural Development Strategy in Japan and Thailand. Japanese Studies Journal Special Issue: Regional Cooperation for Sustainable Future in Asia (Thammasat, 2012).FAO – Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2018). Brazil profile. Available at: http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles/index/en/?iso3=bra , Access in 07.12.2018.
6. Geray, C. (1981). Kırsal Türkiye'de Toplum Kalkınması ve Kooperatifçilik: Örnek Olaylar. Tuna Yayıncılık ve Dağıtım.
7. Gürlük, S. (2001). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Kırsal Kalkınma Politikaları ve Sürdürülebilir Kalkınma. Uludağ Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(4), 1-12.
8. IBGE - Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, 2018. Statistics of Agriculture, Livestock and other. Available at: https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas-novoportal/economicas/agricultura-e-pecuaria.html , Access in 11.12.2018.

9. JICA, Japonya Uluslararası İşbirliği Ajansı, (2000). Doğu Karadeniz Bölgesel Gelişme Planı Nihai Raporu, TC Başbakanlık Devlet Planlama Teşkilatı Yayını, Ankara.
10. Keskin, H., and Sungur, O. (2010). Transformation in Regional Policy: Changes in Regional Policies in Development Plans in Turkey. SDÜ Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı: 21.
11. Natsuda, K., Igusa, K., Wiboonpongse, A., and Thoburn, J. (2012). One Village One Product–Rural Development Strategy in Asia: The Case of OTOP in Thailand.
12. Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue Canadienne d'études du Développement, 33(3), 369-385.
13. Ngugi, J., and Bwisa, H. (2013). Factors Influencing Growth of Group Owned Small and Medium Enterprises: A Case of One Village One Product Enterprises. International Journal of Education and Research, 1(8), 2201-6740.
14. Mukai, K., and Fujikura, R. (2015). One Village One Product: Evaluations and Lessons Learnt from OVOP Aid Projects. Development in Practice, 25(3), 389-400.
15. Saleh, D.A., Amr, S., Jillson, I.A., Wang, J.H.Y., Khairy, W.A., and Loffredo, C.A. (2014). Knowledge and Perceptions of Hepatics C Infection and Pesticides Use in two
16. Rural Villages in Egypt. BMC Public Health, 14, paper 501.
17. Sunderlin, W.D., Sassi, C., Sills, E. O., Duchelle, A. E., Larson, A.M., Resosudarmo, I.A.P., Awono, A., Kewka, D.L., and Huynh, T.B. (2018). Creating an Appropriate
18. Tenure Foundation for REED Plus: The Record to Date and Prospects for the Future. World Develpment, 106, 376-392.
19. Unver, I.O. (1997). Southeastern Anatolia Project (GAP). International Journal of Water Resources Development, 13(4), 453-484.
20. Yamazaki, J. (2010). A Comparative Analysis of One Village One Product (OVOP) and its Replicability in International Development. Erasmus University.
21. Yücer, A.A. (2016). Kırsal Kalkınma için Bir Köy Bir Ürün Projeleri ve Başarı Koşulları, XII. Ulusal Tarım Ekonomisi Kongresihttps://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Agriculture