Analyzing The Effects of Livestock Policies on Farm-level Efficiency in Turkey; Thrace Region Case

Year 2022, , 515 - 528, 13.09.2022

Gökçe Koç , Ayşe Uzmay

https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.978947

Cited By: 4

Abstract

The effect of agricultural subsidies on the efficiency of farms is one of the main issues discussed today. Dairy farming benefits from various types of subsidies and take a lion share from the agricultural support budget. In this context, this study has four important aims. Firstly, to analyze the technical efficiency of dairy farms, secondly, to investigate the effects of policy tools on efficiency, thirdly to determine factors affecting efficiencies and finally to bring proposals. This study was carried out in Thrace Region of Turkey and interviewed with 140 dairy farmers. The three-stage method was applied in this study. The technical efficiency and policies effects on efficiency were determined by using Data Envelopment Analysis. Tobit Analysis was used to investigate the relationship between efficiency and farmer or farms-oriented characteristics. The results of Data Envelopment Analysis show that average efficiency scores are 0.700 under constant return to scale, 0.795 under variable return to scale and 0.886 for scale efficiency. The technical efficiency increases by 1.13%-2.43% thanks to subsidies and the scale efficiency is 1.35% higher. It is noteworthy that subsidies affect efficiency positively but provide a small improvement, also the effects vary across the farm-scale groups. According to Tobit Analysis, the education level of farmers, the share of livestock in total income, family size and whether tend to give up farming are significantly affecting efficiency. It is recommended for governments should provide subsidies to increase the scale of small farms that work with increasing return to scale and to improve the technology of larger farms that work with decreasing return to scale.

Keywords

livestock subsidies, agricultural policy, technical efficiency, data envelopment analysis, Tobit model

Supporting Institution

Ege University Scientific Research Projects Coordination Unit

Project Number

2016-ZRF-054

Analyzing The Effects of Livestock Policies on Farm-level Efficiency in Turkey; Thrace Region Case

Abstract

Tarımsal desteklerin işletmelerin etkinlikleri üzerindeki etkileri son dönemlerde tartışılan önemli konulardan biridir. Süt sığırcılığı, hem birçok farklı destekleme çeşidinden yararlanmakta, hem de tarımsal destekleme bütçesinden önemli bir pay almaktadır. Bu kapsamda, araştırmanın dört temel amacı bulunmaktadır; bunlardan ilki süt sığırcılığı işletmelerinde teknik etkinliğin belirlenmesi, ikincisi; destekleme politika araçlarının etkinlik üzerindeki etkisinin ortaya koyulması, üçüncüsü; etkinliğin belirleyicisi olan üretici ve işletmeye ait ayırt edici faktörlerin analiz edilmesi ve son olarak da tarım politikalarına yönelik öneriler getirilmesidir. Araştırma kapsamında Trakya Bölgesi’nin üç ilinde 140 üretici ile yüz yüze anket çalışması gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırmada üç aşamalı metodoloji kullanılmıştır; Veri Zarflama Analizi yardımı ile süt sığırcılığı işletmelerinin teknik etkinliği ve desteklemelerin teknik etkinlik üzerindeki etkisi hesaplanmış, Tobit analizi yardımıyla ise etkinlik ile işletmeye ve üreticiye ait özellikler arasındaki ilişki analiz edilmiştir. Veri Zarflama Analizi sonuçlarına göre, işletmelerin ölçeğe sabit getiri skorları ortalama 0.700, ölçeğe değişken getiri skorları ortalama 0.795, ölçek etkinliği skorları ise ortalama 0.886 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Desteklemeler ile işletmelerin ölçeğe sabit getiri skorları %2.43, değişken getiri skorları %1.13, ölçek etkinlikleri ise %1.35 artmıştır. Tarımsal desteklerin süt sığırcılığı işlemelerinde etkinliği pozitif etkilediği ancak küçük oranda bir iyileşme sağladığı, ayrıca ölçek büyüklüğüne göre desteklerin pozitif etkisinin farklı olduğu dikkati çekmektedir. Tobit analizi sonuçlarına göre ise etkinliğin belirleyicileri; üreticilerin eğitim düzeyi, geliri, aile büyüklüğü, işletmelerin ölçek ve arazi büyüklüğü, üreticilerin üretime devam etme düşüncesi ve işletmenin ortalama süt verimidir. Araştırma sonucunda, hayvancılık desteklerinin ölçeğe artan getiri ile çalışan küçük ölçekli işletmelerde ölçeğin büyütülmesine, ölçeğe azalan getiri ile çalışan büyük ölçekli işletmelerde ise teknolojinin geliştirilmesine yönelik verilmesi önerilmektedir.

Keywords

hayvancılık destekleri, tarım politikası, teknik etkinlik, veri zarflama analizi, Tobit model

Project Number

2016-ZRF-054

References

• Allendorf, J. J., Wettemann, P. J. C. (2015). Does animal welfare influence dairy farm efficiency? A two-stage approach. Journal of Dairy Science, 98: 7730-7740.
• Álvarez, A., del Corral, J., Solís, D., Pérez, J. A. (2008). Does intensification improve the economic efficiency of dairy farms?. Journal of Dairy Science, 91 (9): 3693-3698.
• Aras, A. (1988). Tarım Muhasebesi, Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları, No:486, Bornova, İzmir.
• Bajrami, E., J Wailes, E., L Dixon, B., Musliu, A., & Durand-Morat, A. (2017). Factors affecting the technical efficiency of dairy farms in Kosovo. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 18 (4): 823-840.
• Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30 (9): 1078-1092.
• Cabrera, V.E., Solís, D., del Corral, J. (2010). Determinants of technical efficiency among dairy farms in Wisconsin. Journal of Dairy Science, 93(1): 387-393.
• Ceyhan, V., Hazneci, K. (2010). Economic efficiency of cattle-fattening farms in Amasya province, Turkey. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 9: 60-69.
• Chang, H. H., Mishra, A. K. (2011). Does the Milk Income Loss Contract program improve the technical efficiency of US dairy farms?. Journal of Dairy Science, 94 (6): 2945-2951.
• Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2 (6): 429-444.
• Chidmi, B., Solis, D., Funtanilla, M., Cabrera, V. E. (2010). Analyzing the determinants of technical efficiency among traditional dairy farms in Wisconsin: a quantile regression approach, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association 2010 Annual Meeting, Jully 25-27, Denver, USA.
• Coelli, T. J., Rao, D. S. P., O'Donnell, C. J., Battese, G. E. (2005). An introduction to efficiency and productivity analysis. Springer, New York, the USA, p.331.
• Curtis, J., Jackson S., Kennedy, V. D. (2016). An evaluation of technical efficiency among heterogeneous dairy farms. African Journal of Dairy Farming and Milk Production, 3 (2): 135-140.
• Dagistan, E., Koc, B., Gul, M., Parlakay, O., Akpinar, M. G. (2009). Identifying technical efficiency of dairy cattle management in rural areas through a non-parametric method: a case study for the East Mediterranean in Turkey. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 8 (5): 863-867.
• DairyNZ. (2018). New Zealand Dairy Statistics (2017), Hamilton, New Zealand, p.52.
• Erdal, G., Erdal, H., Yavuz, H., Çallı, A. (2016). The present and future statues of animal presence in Turkey; the declination of TR83 area. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology, 4 (8): 668-675.
• European Union (EU). (2018a). EU Dairy Farms Report. Brussels, Belgium, p.185.
• European Union (EU). (2018b). Turkey Report (2018). Strasbourg, p.111.
• FAO. (2019). Food and agriculture data, http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (Accessed date: 12.04.2019).
• Farrell, M.J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 120: 253-290.
• Ferjani, A. (2008). The relationship between direct payments and efficiency on Swiss farms. Agricultural Economics Review, 9(1): 93-102.
• Galanopoulos, K., Abas, Z., Laga, V., Hatziminaoglou, I., & Boyazoglu, J. (2011). The technical efficiency of transhumance sheep and goat farms and the effect of EU subsidies: Do small farms benefit more than large farms?. Small Ruminant Research, 100(1): 1-7.
• Galluzzo, N. (2018a). A non-parametric analysis of technical efficiency in Bulgarian farms using the FADN dataset. European Countryside, 10 (1): 58-73.
• Galluzzo, N. (2018b). Analysis of economic efficiency in some Irish farms using the DEA approach. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology, 6 (2): 156-162.
• Gaspar, P., Mesías, F. J., Escribano, M., Pulido, F. (2009). Assessing the technical efficiency of extensive livestock farming systems in Extremadura, Spain. Livestock Science, 121 (1): 7-14.
• Gelan, A., Muriithi, B. W. (2012). Measuring and explaining technical efficiency of dairy farms: a case study of smallholder farms in Africa. Agrekon, 51 (2): 53-74.
• Gonçalves, R. M. L., Vieira, W. D. C., Lima, J. E. D., Gomes, S. T. (2008). Analysis of technical efficiency of milk-producing farms in Minas Gerais. Economia Aplicada, 12 (2): 321-335.
• Guesmi, B., Serra, T. (2015). Can we improve farm performance? The determinants of farm technical and environmental efficiency. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 37 (4): 692-717.
• Gül, M., Yilmaz, H., Parlakay, O., Akkoyun, S., Bilgili, M. E., Vurarak, Y., Hizli, H., Kilicalp, N. (2018). Technical efficiency of dairy cattle farms in East Mediterranean Region of Turkey. Scientific Papers Series Management, Economic Engineering in Agriculture and Rural Development, 18 (2): 213-226.
• Hadley, D. (2006). Patterns in technical efficiency and technical change at the farm‐level in England and Wales, 1982–2002. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 57 (1): 81-100.
• Hazneci, E., Ceyhan, V. (2015). Measuring the productive efficiency and identifying the inefficiency determinants of dairy farms in Amasya Province, Turkey. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, 4 (1): 100-107.
• Jiang, N., Sharp, B. (2015). Technical efficiency and technological gap of New Zealand dairy farms: a stochastic meta-frontier model. Journal of Productivity Analysis, 44 (1): 39-49.
• Karakuş, K. (2011). An overview to live animal and red meat imports of Turkey. Igdir University Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 1(1): 75-79.
• Kleinhanß, W., Murillo, C., San Juan, C., Sperlich, S. (2007). Efficiency, subsidies, and environmental adaptation animal farming under CAP. Agricultural Economics, 36(1): 49-65.
• Kumbar, N. (2015). An Efficiency Analysis of Breeding Farm Enterprises in Trakya Region. (PhD Thesis) Namık Kemal University, Department of Agricultural Economics, Tekirdag, 96p.
• Kumbhakar, S. C., Lien, G. (2010). Impact of subsidies on farm productivity and efficiency. In: The Economic Impact of Public Support to Agriculture. Springer, New York, pp 109-124.
• Latruffe, L., Bakucs, L. Z., Bojnec, S., Ferto, I, .... Toma, C. (2008). Impact of public subsidies on farms’ technical efficiency in New Member States before and after EU accession. European Association of Agricultural Economists 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, Ghent, Belgium, 5p.
• Latruffe, L., Desjeux, Y. (2016). Common Agricultural Policy support, technical efficiency and productivity change in French agriculture. Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, 97 (1): 15-28.
• Latruffe, L., Guyomard, H., & Le Mouël, C. (2009). The role of public subsidies on farms' managerial efficiency: an application of a five-stage approach to France. Working Papers Smart–Lereco, No: 09-05, Rennes, France, 25p.
• Madau, F. A., Furesi, R., Pulina, P. (2017). Technical efficiency and total factor productivity changes in European dairy farm sectors. Agricultural and Food Economics, 5 (17): 14p.
• Mareth, T., Scavarda, L. F., Thomé, A. M. T., Cyrino Oliveira, F. L., Alves, T. W. (2019). Analysing the determinants of technical efficiency of dairy farms in Brazil. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 68 (2): 464-481.
• Mareth, T., Thomé, A. M. T., Scavarda, L. F., Cyrino Oliveira, F. L. (2017). Technical efficiency in dairy farms: research framework, literature classification and research agenda. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 66 (3): 380-404.
• McDonald, J. (2009). Using least squares and Tobit in second stage DEA efficiency analyses. European Journal of Operational Research, 197: 792-798.
• McDonald, J. F., Moffitt, R. A. (1980). The uses of Tobit analysis. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 62 (2): 318-321.
• Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF). (2021). Animal Production Statistics.
• National Dairy Council. (2019). Milk Sector Statistics in the World and Turkey, p.49.
• Newbold, P. (1995). Statistics for Business and Economics. Prentice-Hall International, New Jersey, p.867.
• Özden A. (2016). Analysis of countries agricultural production efficiency by income groups: meta frontier approach, Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 13 (3): 121-128.
• Özüdoğru, T. (2010). Analysis of economic impacts of Amasya cattle breeders association on the local farmers. (PhD Thesis) Ankara University, Department of Agricultural Economics, Ankara, 250p.
• Parlakay, O., Semerci, A., Çelik, A. D. (2015). Estimating technical efficiency of dairy farms in Turkey: a case study of Hatay Province. Custos e Agronegócio Online, 11(3): 106-115.
• Pfeiffer, L., López‐Feldman, A., Taylor, J. E. (2009). Is off‐farm income reforming the farm? Evidence from Mexico. Agricultural Economics, 40 (2): 125-138.
• Semerci, A., Celik, A. D. (2017). Reflections of animal husbandry subsidies on dairy cattle enterprises: A case study of Hatay Province-Turkey. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 14 (2): 92-100.
• Siafakas, S., Tsiplakou, E., Kotsarinis, M., Tsiboukas, K., Zervas, G. (2019). Identification of efficient dairy farms in Greece based on home grown feedstuffs, using the Data Envelopment Analysis method. Livestock Science, 222: 14-20.
• Silva, E., Almeida, B., Marta-Costa, A. A. (2018). Efficiency of the dairy farms: A study from Azores (Portugal). European Countryside, 10 (4): 725-734.
• Silva, E., Arzubi, A., Berbel, J. (2013). An application of data envelopment analysis (DEA) in Azores dairy farms. In: Efficiency measures in the agricultural sector, Springer, pp 73-81.
• Silva, E., Marote, E. (2013). The importance of subsidies in Azorean dairy farms’ efficiency. Efficiency measures in the agricultural sector, Springer, pp 157-166.
• Skevas, I., Emvalomatis, G., Brümmer, B. (2018). Heterogeneity of long‐run technical efficiency German dairy farms: A Bayesian Approach. Journal Agricultural Economics, 69 (1): 58-75.
• Špička, J., Smutka, L. (2014). The technical efficiency of specialised milk farms: a regional view. The Scientific World Journal, Article ID: 985149, p.13.
• Terin, M., Kulekci, M., Yildirim, I. (2017). Measuring technical, allocative and economic efficiencies of dairy farms in western Turkey. Indian Journal Animal Research, 51: 165-169.
• Thrace Development Agency (TDA). (2013). Trakya Bölgesi Mevcut Durum Analizi, Tekirdag, 433p.
• Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat). (2019). Data Request.
• Turkish Statistical Institute (TurkStat) (2020). Regional Statistics. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bolgeselistatistik/ (Accessed date: 10.05.2021).
• Uzmay, A. (2017). Determination of farmers opinions about the affects of livestock policies on dairy cattle farms: sample of Izmir province. Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University, 54 (2): 167-175.
• Uzmay, A., Çınar, G. (2016). The hierarchy of preferences of dairy cattle breeders to supporting policies in Izmir: Fuzzy Pairwise Comparison. Turkish Journal Agricultural Economics, 22 (2): 59-67.
• Uzmay, A., Koyubenbe, N., Armagan, G. (2009). Measurement of efficiency using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and social factors affecting the technical efficiency in dairy cattle farms within the province of Izmir, Turkey. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 8 (6): 1110-1115.
• Uzmay, A., Ozden, F. (2016). A study on the factors affecting the dairy policy opinions of the (2013) Turkey National Dairy Summit Participants. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 18 (5): 1163-1172.
• Zhu, X., Milán Demeter, R., Lansink A.O. (2012). Technical efficiency and productivity differentials of dairy farms in three EU countries: the role of CAP subsidies. Agricultural Economics Review, 1 (1): 66-92.