Impact of Young Farmer Support Program for Livestock Enterprises

Year 2024, Volume: 38 Issue: 2, 243 - 264, 22.08.2024

Duygu Çıtak Birol , Ferit Çobanoğlu , Halit Ahmet Akdemir , Halil İbrahim Yılmaz

Abstract

It is indispensable for young farmers to remain in agriculture and/or to sustain farm holding operations. In this study, the impact of the Young Farmer Support Program (YFSP) implemented in Turkey is tried to be define by the counterfactual impact assessment methodology in holdings with livestock such as cattle, sheep/goat. The study was conducted throughout Turkey, the questionnaire with the farmers was completed at the end of 2018. The data obtained intended for the YFSP, which was used in 2016, was taken as basis for the impact assessment. Considering the distribution and number of project subjects from each region, the provinces that would represent the region in terms of its differences were purposefully selected and sample selection was made. The focus is on two important outputs, machine equipment purchased value per livestock unit (LSU) and average income value of cattle and sheep/goat sold per LSU in the last three years which are important in the study. As explanatory variables, age, gender, marriage, educational status, number of family members, non-agricultural income, etc. are employed in the models. According to the two important indicators, Average Treatment Effect (ATE) and Average Treatment Effect on the Treated (ATET), it is revealed that YFSP has positive effects on the dependent variables examined in cattle and sheep / goat farms. This knowledge and accumulation of experience can be transferred to other main components of rural development programs.

Keywords

treatment effects, impact evaluation, young farmer, sustainability, counterfactual framework

Supporting Institution

General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies,

Project Number

TAGEM/TEPAD/G/18/A8/P3/001

References

• Aggelopoulos S, Arabatzis G (2020). European union young farmers program: A Greek case study. New Medit, A Mediterranean Journal of Economics, Agricultural and Environment 9:50-55.
• Altıntaş G, Altıntaş A, Bektaş H, Çakmak E, Oruç E, Kızılaslan H, Birol D (2019). Effects of young farmer project support on the tendency of young farmers to stay in agriculture: Case of TR83 region, Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology 7: 1682-1693.
• Ambler K, de Brauw A, Godlonton S (2016). Cash transfers and crop production in Senegal. Working paper, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA.
• Ambler K, de Brauw A, Godlonton S (2020). Cash transfers and management advice for agriculture: Evidence from Senegal. The World Bank Economic Review 34: 597-617.
• Appleton S, Balihuta A (1996). Education and agricultural productivity: evidence from Uganda. Journal of International Development 8: 415–444.
• Arslan A, Higgins D, Egger EM, Zucchini E (2020). Strengthening local development in the highlands and high rainforest areas project (PSSA), Peru. Impact Assessment Report, Investing in Rural People. IFAD, Rome, Italy, pp. 1-58.
• Bednaríková Z, Bavorová M, Ponkina EV (2016). Migration motivation of agriculturally educated rural youth: the case of Russian Siberia. Journal of Rural Studies 45:99–111.
• Bika Z (2007). The territorial impact of the farmers’ early retirement scheme. Sociologia Ruralis 47: 246-272.
• Birol D, Yilmaz HI, Akdemir HA, Cobanoglu F (2020). Determination of parameters that can be criteria to young farmers supports in Turkey: Choice Experiment Method. Turkish Journal of Agricultural Economics 26: 131-146.
• Boone R, Covarrubias K, Davis B, Winters P (2013). Cash transfer programs and agricultural production: The case of Malawi. Agricultural Economics 44: 365-378.
• Cattaneo MD, Drukker DM, Holland AD (2013). Estimation of multivalued treatment effects under conditional independence. The Stata Journal 13: 407–450.
• Cavatassi R, Mallia P (2018). Impact assessment report: Livestock and Pasture Development Project (LPDP), Tajikistan. IFAD, Rome, Italy.
• Chen R, Ye C, Cai Y, Xing X, Chen Q (2014). The impact of rural out-migration on land use transition in China: past present and trend. Land Use Policy 40: 101–110.
• Covarrubias K, Davis B, Winters P (2012). From protection to production: productive impacts of the Malawi Social Cash Transfer scheme. Journal of Development Effectiveness 4: 50-77.
• CRO (2019). Turkey Agricultural Outlook Field Study 2019. Credit Registration Office, pp. 1-36.
• Çağlayan ZC, Göktaş İ, Örmeci Kart MÇ, Gümüş S (2020). Evaluation of the young farmer program in terms of animal breeders: Case of Izmir. Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University Special Issue: 107-117.
• Davis J, Caskie P, Wallace M (2013). Promoting structural adjustment in agriculture-the economics of New entrant schemes for farmers. Food Policy 40: 90–96.
• Dodson CB, Koenig SR (2007). Facilitating beginning farmers purchase of farmland. Journal of the ASFMRA 72–84.
• Doğan HG, Kan A, Kan M, Tosun F, Uçum I, Solmaz C, Birol D (2018). Evaluation of the factors affecting the benefiting level from the young farmers project support in TR 71 Region of Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology 6: 1599-1606.
• Duesberga S, Bogue P, Renwick A (2017). Retirement farming or sustainable growth-land transfer choices for farmers without a successor. Land Use Policy 61: 526–535.
• EC (European Commission) (2013). Overview of CAP Reform 2014-2020. Agricultural Policy Perspectives Brief No 5, December 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-perspectives/policy-briefs/05_en.pdf. (access date: 10.01.2024).
• Eroglu NA, Bozoglu M, Bilgic A (2020). The impact of livestock supports on production and income of the beef cattle farms: A case of Samsun province, Turkey. Journal of Agricultural Science 26: 117-129.
• EUROSTAT (2020). Glossary: Livestock unit (LSU). EUROSTAT Statistics Explained. (access date: 10.01.2024). Garbero A, Diatta D, Olapade M (2018). Impact assessment report: Agricultural Value Chains Support Project, Senegal. IFAD, Rome, Italy.
• Gedik DS (2019). Rural Development Young Farmer Project: Sample of Tekirdağ Province. MSc. Thesis. Tekirdağ Namık Kemal University, Turkey.
• Faysse N, Phiboon K, Filloux T (2019). Public policy to support young farmers in Thailand. Outlook on Agriculture 48: 292-299.
• Hamilton W, Bosworth G, Ruto E (2015). Entrepreneurial younger farmers and the “young farmer problem” in England. Agriculture and Foresty 61: 61–69.
• Handouyahia A, Haddad, T., Eaton, F (2013). Kernel matching versus inverse probability: A comparative study. International Journal of Mathematical and Computational Sciences, 7: 1218-1233.
• Heckman JJ, Ichimura H, Todd P (1998). Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator. Review of Economic Studies, 65: 261-294.
• Hennessy T (2014). Common Agricultural Policy, (2014–2020) Tools to Enhance Family Farming: Opportunities and Limits: In-Depth Analysis. Brussels: European Parliament.
• Horvitz D, Thompson D (1952). A generalization of sampling without replacement from a finite population. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47: 663-685.
• Huang FM & Luh YH (2009). "The Economic Value of Education in Agricultural Production: A Switching Regression Analysis of Selected East Asian Countries," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 50928, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
• Huber M., Lechner, M., Wunsch, C (2010). “How to Control for Many Covariates? Reliable Estimators Based on the Propensity Score”, Institute for the Study of Labor, Discussion Paper IZA DP No. 5268, Bonn, Germany.
• INDECON (2019). Final Report. Indecon Mid-Term Evaluation of the Rural Development Programme Ireland. Prepared by Indecon International Research Economists in association with the Countryside and Community Research Institute, University of Gloucestershire submitted to Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. August 2019.
• Jiang M, Paudel KP, Mi Y (2017). Rural land transfer and financial impact: Evidence from China. Southern Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting,4-7 February 2017; Alabama,USA.
• Kan A, Kan M, Doğan HG, Tosun F, Uçum İ, Solmaz C (2018). Evaluation of young farmers project support program in terms of agri-entrepreneurship in Turkey. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 55: 1021-1031.
• Kang HS (2010). Understanding Farm Entry and Farm Exit in Korea. PhD Thesis, University of Birmingham, England.
• Katchova AL, Ahearn MC (2016). Dynamics of farmland ownership and leasing: implications for young and beginning farmers. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 38: 334–350.
• Kauffman N (2013). Financing young and beginning farmers. Main Street Economist 2: 1–7.
• Kontogeorgos A, Sergaki P, Chatzitheodoridis F (2017). An assessment of new farmers’ perceptions about agricultural cooperatives. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship 22: 1–13.
• Kostov P, Davidova S, Bailey A (2018). Effect of family labour on output of farms in selected EU member states: A non-parametric quantile regression approach. European Review of Agricultural Economics 45: 367-395.
• Leonard B, Kinsella A, O’Donoghue C, Farrell M, Mahon M (2017). Policy drivers of farm succession and inheritance. Land Use Policy 61: 147–159.
• Lopez CA, Salazar L, de Salvo CP (2017). Agricultural input subsidies and productivity: The case of Paraguayan farmers. Inter-American Development Bank, Working Paper Series: IDB-WP-802, p.32.
• Ma SJ (2014). How to encourage young generation to engage in farming: Korea’s case. In: Proceedings of the International Seminar on Enhanced Entry of Young Generation into Farming, Food and Fertilizer Technology Center, Jeonju. South Korea, pp. 20–24.
• MAF (2018). Annual Report. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Ankara, Turkey.
• May D, Arancibia S, Behrendt K, Adams J (2019). Preventing young farmers from leaving the farm: Investigating the effectiveness of the young farmer payment using a behavioural approach. Land Use Policy 82: 317-327.
• Mazorra AP (2000). Analysis of the evolution of farmers’ early retirement policy in Spain. The case of Castille and Leon. Land Use Policy 17: 113–120.
• Mihi-Ramirez A, Kumpikaite V (2014). Economics reason of migration from point of view of students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 109: 522–526.
• Mills-Novoa M (2011). Sustaining Family Farming Through Mentoring: A Toolkit for National Family Farm Coalition Members. National Family Farm Coalition, USA.
• Morais M, Binotto E, Borges JAR (2017). Identifying beliefs underlying successors’ intention to take over the farm. Land Use Policy 68:48–58.
• Mwambi MM, Oduol J, Mshenga P, Saidi M (2016). Does contract farming improve smallholder income? The case of avocado farmers in Kenya. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies 6: 2-20.
• Nagatani T, Sakamoto K (2017). Succession of farming to entrant farmers through establishing agricultural corporations involving their predecessors. The Natural Resource Economics Review Special Issue: 53–66.
• OGRT (2016). Communication on Support of Young Farmer Projects under Rural Development Support. Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkey. 2016/16, No. 29675, 5 April 2016.
• OGRT (2017). Communication on Support of Young Farmer Projects under Rural Development Support. Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkey. 2017/10, No. 30024, 31 March 2017.
• OGRT (2018). Communication on Support of Young Farmer Projects under Rural Development Support. Official Gazette of the Republic of Turkey. 2018/12, No. 30370, 24 March 2018.
• Onyeneke RU, Nwajiuba CU, Mmagu CJ, Aligbe JO, Uwadoka CO, Igberi CO, Amadi MU (2018). Impact of adoption of improved cook-stove on different components of household welfare in rural communities in Nigeria: The case of save80 cook-stove in Kaduna. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 37: 1327-1338.
• Paltasingh KR, Goyari P (2018). Impact of farmer education on farm productivity under varying technologies: Case of paddy growers in India. Agricultural and Food Economics 6: 1-19.
• Paolantonio A, Cavatassi R, McCollum K (2018). Impact Assessment Report. Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Plan VIDA-PEEP to Eradicate Extreme Poverty-Phase I, Investing in Rural People, IFAD, Rome, Italy.
• Pavic L, Turk J, Grgic I, Prisenk J (2020). Impact analysis of the young farmers’ support program on Slovenian dairy sector development using econometric modeling approach. Agronomy 10: 1-9.
• Rahman S (2014). Impact of rural infrastructure on farm and non-farm enterprise choice and income in Bangladesh. The Journal of Developing Areas 48: 275-290.
• Ravenscroft N (2014). Securing land for farmers. The Land 15: 39–42.
• Robins JM, Mark SD, Newey WK (1992). Estimating exposure effects by modelling the expectation of exposure conditional on confounders. Biometrics 48: 479-495.
• Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70: 41-55.
• Rubin DB (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 66: 688-701.
• Sagbo NSM (2019). Effects of agricultural loans in developing countries – Benin case. Theses and Dissertations, Agricultural Economics p.131.
• Salvioni C and Sciulli D (2011). Farm level impact of rural development policy: a conditional difference in difference matching approach. 122nd Seminar, February 17-18, 2011, Ancona, Italy 99421, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
• Schultz TW (1964). Transforming Traditional Agriculture. Yale University Press, New Haven, p.212 Sencebe Y (2012). La SAFER. Terrains & Travaux 1: 105–120.
• StataCorp (2015). Stata Statistical Software 14; StataCorp LP: College Station, TX, USA. TCA (2019). Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, 2018 TCA Audit Report. T.R. Turkish Court of Accounts, September 2019, pp. 1-209.
• Uchiyama T (2014). Recent trends in young people’s entry into farming in Japan: An international perspective. In: Proceedings of the International Seminar on Enhanced Entry of Young Generation into Farming, Food and Fertilizer Technology Center, Jeonju. South Korea, pp. 1–16.
• Uchiyama T, Whitehead I (2012). Intergenerational farm business succession in Japan. In: Baker, J.R., Lobley, M. and Whitehead, I. (eds) Keeping it in the Family: International Perspectives on Succession and Retirement on Family Farms, London. Ebgland, pp. 55–73.
• Unakıtan G, Başaran B (2018). A Suggestion for the success of the young farmer project: Young Farmer Cooperatives. Balkan and Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences 04: 149-157.
• Weir S (1999). The effects of education on farmer productivity in rural Ethiopia. Centre for the Study of African Economies Working Paper no. WPS/99–7, Oxford University, Oxford.
• Wikipedia (2021). Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkish_lira (access date: 11.01.2024).
• Zagata L, Sutherland LA (2015). Deconstructing the ‘young farmer problem in Europe’: Towards a research agenda. Journal of Rural Studies 38: 39-51.