Buğday Üreticilerinin Sertifikalı Tohum Kullanımına Etki Eden Sosyo-Ekonomik Özelliklerin İncelenmesi: Ankara İli Örneği

Year 2020, Volume: 30 Issue: 1, 115 - 123, 31.03.2020

Celal Cevher Bülent Altunkaynak

https://doi.org/10.29133/yyutbd.651446

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, sertifikalı tohum kullanımına etki eden sosyo-ekonomik faktörlerin belirlenmesidir. Bu faktörlerin belirlenmesi ile çiftçilerin gelir düzeyinin ve dolaysıyla refahının yükseltilmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Ayrıca, sertifikalı tohum kullanımın arttırılmasıyla kaliteli buğday üretiminin elde edilmesi ve hububat sanayinin gelişmesine katkı sağlaması istenmektedir. Çalışmada, üreticilerin sertifikalı tohum kullanımına ilişkin görüşleri sosyo-ekonomik değişkenler bakımından incelenmiştir. Araştırma alanı olarak, sertifikalı tohum kullanımın yaygın olduğu (yaklaşık %20) Ankara ili seçilmiştir. Örnekleme hacminin belirlenmesinde arazi genişliği dikkate alınmıştır. Çalışmanın birincil verileri 318 üreticiden anket yöntemi ile toplanmıştır. İkincil veriler tarımsal kuruluşlardan sağlanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, sertifikalı buğday tohumunun benimsenme oranı %58.7 olarak belirlenmiştir. Üreticilerin %90.6’sı verilen tohum desteğinin yeterli olmadığını, %88.7’sinin ise tohum fiyatlarının yüksek olduğunu belirtmişlerdir. Araştırma alanında uygun alternatif tohum çeşitlerinin olduğunu belirten üreticilerin oranı %83.6’dır. Üreticilerin eğitim düzeyinin, desteklerin yeterliliği ve tohum fiyatlarına ilişkin görüşleri üzerinde önemli etkiye sahip (p<0.05) olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Üreticinin ikamet yeri ve gelir düzeyi, alternatif tohum seçimi üzerinde önemli (p<0.05) bir etkiye sahip bulunmuştur. Sonuç olarak, Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı tarafından verilen sertifikalı tohum desteğinin, kaliteli tohum kullanımına, gayrisafi üretim değerindeki artışa ve üretim masraflarındaki azalmaya etki yaptığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

Keywords

Ankara, socio-economic factors, productivity, wheat production, Verimlilik, Sosyo-ekonomik faktörler, Buğday üretimi

Investigation of Socio-Economic Characteristics of Wheat Producers on Certified Seed Use: The Case of Ankara ProvinceInvestigation of Socio-Economic Characteristics of Wheat Producers on Certified Seed Use: The Case of Ankara Province

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the socio-economic factors affecting the use of certified seeds. By determining these factors, it is aimed to increase the income level and thus the welfare of farmers. In addition, by increasing the use of certified seeds, it is desired to obtain quality wheat production and contribute to the development of the grain industry. In the study, producers' opinions on certified seed use were examined in terms of socio-economic variables. As a research area, Ankara province, where certified seed use is common (approximately 20%), was chosen. Land size was taken into account in determining the sampling volume. The primary data of the study were collected by questionnaire method from 318 manufacturers. Secondary data was obtained from agricultural organizations. According to the results of the research, the rate of adoption of certified wheat seed was determined as 58.7%. 90.6% of the producers stated that the seed support given was not sufficient and 88.7% of the seed prices were high. The rate of producers stating that there are suitable alternative seed varieties in the research area is 83.6%. It has been determined that the training level of the producers has a significant impact (p <0.05) on the adequacy of the supports and their opinions on seed prices. The producer's residence and income levels have had a significant (p <0.05) effect on alternative seed selection. As a result, it has been concluded that certified seed support provided by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry affects quality seed use, increase in gross production value and decrease in production costs.

Keywords

Ankara, Productivity, Socio-economic factors, Wheat production

References

• Abah, R. C., & Petja, B. M. (2015). The Socio-economic factors affecting agricultural development in the lower river benue basin. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, 5, 84-94.
• Adalıoğlu, H. A., Akkuş, İ. C., Abay, C., & Örmeci Kart, M. Ç. (2017). Factors affecting farmers‟preferences in choice of cotton seed in Söke district of Aydın province. Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 32, 189-196.
• Adanacıoğlı, H., & Engindeniz, S. (2011). Analytical approach of factors affecting agricultural production: An example of wheat. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Turkish Agriculture Magazine, 200, 20-28.
• Aksoy, A., Demir, N., Kaymak, H. Ç., & Sarı, M. M. (2017). Seed sector of turkey in terms of sustainable agriculture. Atatürk Universty Journal of the Agricultural Faculty, 48, 133-138. Anonymous, (2001). Plant production specialized commission report of seed sub-commission. DPT, Eighth Five-Year Development Plan, Ankara.
• Anonymous. (2017). Cereal Report. Turkish Grain Board. http://www.tmo.gov.tr/HububatRaporu/ Erişim tarihi: 13.11.2018.
• Awotide, B. A., Awoyemi, T. T., Diagne, A., & Ojehomon V. T. (2011). Impact of access to subsidized certified improved rice seed on income: Evidence from Rice Farming Households in Nigeria. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, 2, 43-60.
• Balabanlı, C., Cirit, Y., Kayacan, S., Bıçakçı, E., & Yüksel, O. (2016). Determination of forage crops producer behaviour in agriculture; example of Isparta province. Journal of Central Research Institute for Field Crops, 25 (Special Issue-2), 259-264.
• Balbay, D. (2014). Research on terms and conditions of developing greenhouse agriculture at Marmara Region. (MSc), Namık Kemal University Institute of Science and Technology Tekirdağ, Turkey.
• Banerjee, S., Ban, H. D., & Martin, S. W. (2007). Effects of seed and farm characteristics on cottonseed choice: a choice-based conjoint experiment in the Mississippi Delta. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 39, 657–669.
• Başaran, C., & Engindeniz, S. (2015). Analysis of input use efficiency in green pepper production: A case study for Izmir Province. Turkish Journal of Agricultural Economics, 21, 7784.
• Bishaw, Z., Niane, A. A., & Gan, Y. (2007). Quality seed production. Springer, lentil: An Ancient Crop for Modern Times, 349-383.
• Boyacı, M., & Yıldız, Ö. (2014). Organizational culture in agricultural extension organizations. Ege Journal of Agricultural Research, 51, 125-132.
• Cevher, C. (2015, Eylül). Quality problems and solutions in wheat varieties: The case of Central Anatolia Paper presented at the 11. Field Crops Congress, Çanakkale.
• Cevher, C., & Altunkaynak, B. (2019, Haziran). Investigation of socio-economic characteristics of wheat producers on certified seed use: The Case of Ankara Province Paper presented at the International Conference on Agronomy and Food Science and Technology, İstanbul.
• Comer, S., Ekanem, E., Muhammad, S., Sing, S. P., &Tegegne, F. (1999). Sustainable and conventional farmers: a comparison of socio-economic characteristics, attitude and beliefs. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 15, 29-45.
• Daldal, N. (2016). Producers' approach to agrıcultural supports the example of Tekirdağ. (MSc), Namık Kemal University Institute of Science and Technology Tekirdağ, Turkey.
• Demir, N. (2009). A Regional comparative analysis of farmers’ approaches to livestock support policies. (PhD), Atatürk University Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences Erzurum, Turkey.
• Erdem, B. (2012). The analysis of production and marketing problems of wheat, sunflower and rice in thrace region. (PhD), Namık Kemal University Gradute School of Natural and Applied Sciences Tekirdağ, Turkey.
• Erdem, E., & Yücel, A. G. (2015). The relationship between seed use and productivity: The Case of Turkish Agricultural Sector. Journal of Knowlede Economy and Knowledge Management, 9, 90-106.
• Engin, A. 2015. Seed development of the future of forage crops. Turkey Seed Industry Association, 14, 3.
• Gül, H., Gül, M., Acun, S., Türk Aslan, S., Öztürk, A., Kara, B., & Akman, Z. (2015). Usage level of wheat varieties and problems in agricultural farms: A case study for Burdur and Isparta Province. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology 3, 732-741.
• Jaffee, S., & Srivastava, J. (1994). The Roles Of The Prıvate And Publıc Sectors In Enhancıng The Performance Of Seed Systems. The World Bank Research Observer 9:97–117.
• Hailu, B. K., Abrha, B. K., & Weldegiorgi, K. A. (2014). Adoption and impact of agricultural technologies on farm income: Evidence from southern tigray, Northern Ethiopia. International Journal of Foodand Agricultural Economics, 2, 91-106.
• Hennessy, T., & O'Brien, M. (2008). Is off-farm income driving on-farm investment? Journal of Farm Management 13, 235-246.
• Hazneci, K., & Ceyhan, V. (2017). Assesing the technical efficiency of farms producing wheat seed and its determinants in TR83 region, Turkey. Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 32, 181-188.
• İpekçioğlu, Ş., Bayraktaş, M. S., Büyükhatipoğlu, Ş., & Monis, T. (2014, Eylül). Determination, wheat breeding farmers in Sanliurfa and Mardin Province, in the selection of the type of knowledge level Paper presented at the XI. Ulusal Tarım Ekonomisi Kongresi, Samsun.
• Kaynak, O., & Boz, İ. (2015). Adoption and diffusion of some cotton varieties developed by the east Mediterranean cross region agricultural research ınstitute. Journal of Bahri Dagdas Crop Research, 3, 26-34.
• Kızılaslan, H. (2004). Wheat Production and comparison of applied policies in Turkey and in the World. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpasa University, 21, 23-38.
• Kılıçer, K. (2008). Factors increasing the adoption and diffusion of technologıcal innovations. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 8, 209-222.
• Kronstad, W. E. (1998). Agricultural development and wheat breeding in the 20th Century. Wheat: Prospects for Ciobalimprovement 1-10.
• La Due, E. L., Miller, L. H., & Kwiatkowski, J. H. (1991). Investment behavior and farm business expansion. Review of Agricultural Economics, 13, 73-84.
• Lanteri, S., & Quagliotti, L. (1997). Problems related to seed production in the African region. Euphytica, 96, 173-183.
• Laurance, W. F., Sayer, J., & Cassman, K. G. (2014). Agricultural expansion and its impacts on tropical natüre. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 29, 107-116.
• Mittal, S., & Meher, M. (2016). Socio-economic factors affecting adoption of modern ınformation and communication technology by farmers in ındia: analysis using multivariate probit model. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 22, 199-212.
• Nakano, Y., Tanaka, Y., & Otsuka, K. (2018). Impact of training on the intensification of rice farming: evidence from rainfed areas in Tanzania. The journal of the International Association of Agricultural Economics, 49, 193-202.
• Nazir, A., Li, G., Inayat, S. Iqbal, M. A., Humayoon, A., & Akhtar, S. (2018). Determinants for ıncome diversification by farm households in Pakistan. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 28, 1163-1173.
• Olgun, M., Erdoğan, S., Kutlu, İ., Ayter, N. G., & Başçiftçi, Z. B. (2012). Production potential of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) in Central Anatolia Region. Süleyman Demirel Universty, Journal of The Faculty of Agriculture, 7, 81-92.
• Osteen, C., Gottlieb, J., & Vasavada, U. (2012). Agricultural resources and environmental indicators. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Information Bulletin Number, 98.
• Prokopy, L. S., Floress, K., Klotthor-Weinkauf, D., & Baumgart-Gets, A. (2008). Determinants of agricultural best management practice adoption: Evidence from the literatüre. The Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 63, 300-311.
• Rouabhi, A., Laouar, A., Mekhlouk, A., & Dhehibi, B. (2019). Socioeconomic assessment of no-till in wheat cropping system: A Case Study in Algeria. New Medit, 18, 53-63.
• Rogers, M. E., 2003. Diffusion of innovations (Fifth Ed.). New York, USA.
• Sofijanova, E., Kletnikoski, P., Dimovska, V., & Dimitrovski, Z. (2012). Comparative economic analysis of wheat production using certified and uncertified seed: The case of ovcepole region in republic of Macedonia. Scientific works of uft “Food Science, Engineering and Technologies’’, 510, 922-926.
• Şahin, A., Meral, Y., & Can, M. (2013). Analysis of Seed Sector in Turkey. Journal of Institute of Social Sciences, 4, 073-088.
• Şehrali, S., & Özgen, M. (2013). Plant breeding. Ankara, TURKEY: Ankara University, Faculty of Agriculture Publications: 1582, Anakara University Printing.
• Tester, M., & Langridge, P. (2010). Breeding technologies to increase crop production in a changing world. Science, 327, 818-822.
• Topçu, Y. (2008). Effective factors’ analysis on willingness to utilize from farmers’ agricultural support policies: The Case Study of Erzurum Province. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences, 21, 205-212.
• Tuğay, M. E. (2012). The way of increasing of agricultural production in Turkey. Research Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 5, 01-08.
• Yağdı, K., Yılmaz, K., Sezer N., Aydemir T., & Bağcı, S. A. (2010). General evaluation of the production and use of seeds for field crops seed system in Turkey Paper presented at the Agriculture Engineering VII. Technical Congress, Ankara.
• Yüksel, M. (2009). Köy-KOP’a üye olan ve süt sığırcılığı yapan işletmeler ile üye olmayıp süt sığırcılığı yapan işletmelerin tarımsal yeniliklerin benimsenmesi açısından karşılaştırılması. (MSc), Çukurova Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Adana, Turkey.