Research Article

Turkey and Japan Agricultural and Mechanization Status Comparison

December 31, 2020
Doğan Güneş *, Hideo Hasegawa , Harun Yalçın
TR EN

Turkey and Japan Agricultural and Mechanization Status Comparison

Abstract

Objective: This study is a pilot study in terms of new connections and technology transfers that can be created between Japan and Turkey, aimed to provide recommendations by comparing Japanese and Turkish agriculture.
Material and Methods: Agriculture and agricultural data were collected, calculated, and analyzed from statistical and written sources. Comparable data were taken and compared.
Results: Japan's total agricultural area is approximately 12% of Turkey. Mechanical power supply tractors, one of the main power sources used in agriculture, are found in almost the same number in both countries. However, the soil structure, the product produced and the size of the land in the country affect the choice of tractor. Therefore, while in Japan the average tractor power is between 18 to 30 kW, 44 to 52 kW in Turkey. In both countries, each agricultural business has at least 1 tractor. The number of tractors used in the cultivation of 1000 hectares gives us information to make a comparison about the small scale of the agricultural land used. 1000 hectares of land in Japan when processing 310 tractors, this situation is 55 tractors in Turkey. While the average age of farmers in Japan 67, the average is 55 in Turkey.
Conclusion: The population dealing with agriculture should be rejuvenated and the machines used should be made more technological. More effective production can be made with sustainable agriculture and renewable energy. In this way, both the reduction of input costs and the labor force, and the sustainability of agriculture with projects can be aimed at young people are ensured.

Keywords

Agriculture , Japan , Turkey , Agricultural Mechanization

References

  1. Akdemir, B. 2013. Agricultural Mechanization in Turkey. 2013 International Conference on Agricultural and Natural Resources Engineering. IERI Procedia5 (2013) pp. 41-44.
  2. Ulusoy, E. Türkay, B. Has, M. Dönder, Ö. İleri, S. Canoğlu, S. Önel, Ş. Bilgen, H. Demir, V. ve Yazgı, A. 2020. Tarım Makinaları Sanayinde Mevcut Durum ve Gelecek. Türkiye Ziraat Mühendisliği IX. Teknik Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı-1 233-256.
  3. Khan, A.A. and Ramesh, P.R. 2013. Anticipated Role of Japan Concerning Agricultural Mechanization Issues in Developing World. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and Latin America, 44(4): 7-9. Korucu, T. Aybey, A. ve Sivrikaya, F. 2015. Türkiye’nin Tarım Bölgeleri Bazında Mekanizasyon Düzeyinin Yersel Değişim Haritalarının Oluşturulması ve Değerlendirilmesi. KSÜ Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 18(4): 77-90.
  4. Savran, F. Köksal,Ö. Aktürk, D. Gün, S. 2018, A Research on Reasons for Participation of Producers to Agricultural Fairs. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 55(1): 19-25
  5. Shimizu, T. 2017, Present State of Japanese Agriculture and Future Prospects for Agricultural Structure: Detailed Picture Seen in 2015 Agricultural Census. Norinchukin Research Institute Co. Ltd.
  6. Torii, T. 2000. Research in autonomous agriculture vehicles in Japan. Elsevier, Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 25 (2000): 133-153.
  7. Özgüven, M.M. Türker, U. ve Beyaz, A. 2010. Türkiye’nin Tarımsal Yapısı ve Mekanizasyon Durumu. GOÜ, Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 27(2): 89-100.
  8. Yılmaz, S. ve Sümer, S.K. 2018. Türkiye’de Traktör Parkı Yenileme Oranları ve Mekanizasyon Düzeyinin Berlirlenmesi. Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, 14(2): 79-87.
  9. İleri, S. “Türkiye Tarım Makinaları Sektörü Sektör Raporu 20 Mayıs 2019”. TARMAKBİR, http://www.tarmakbir.org/tr/raporlar.html . Erişim: Haziran 2019.
  10. Japan Agricultural Machinery Manufacturers Association (JAMMA). http://www.jfmma.or.jp/statistics.html . Erişim: Haziran 2019.
APA
Güneş, D., Hasegawa, H., & Yalçın, H. (2020). Turkey and Japan Agricultural and Mechanization Status Comparison. Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University, 161-168. https://doi.org/10.20289/zfdergi.835918

Cited By