TY  - JOUR
T1  - Producing Geographical Indication Products from the Farmers' Perspective: Kelkit Dry Beans
TT  - Producing Geographical Indication Products from the Farmers' Perspective: Kelkit Dry Beans
AU  - Dogan, Nilgun
AU  - Adanacıoğlu, Hakan
PY  - 2025
DA  - September
Y2  - 2025
DO  - 10.47115/bsagriculture.1748512
JF  - Black Sea Journal of Agriculture
JO  - BSJ Agri
PB  - Karyay Karadeniz Yayımcılık Ve Organizasyon Ticaret Limited Şirketi
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 2618-6578
SP  - 736
EP  - 742
VL  - 8
IS  - 5
LA  - en
AB  - A locally sourced, high-quality food supply is seen as both viable and desirable. Geographical indications (GIs) help consumers identify products linked to specific regions, creating intellectual property rights that strengthen rural economies and support sustainable agriculture. Despite this potential, adoption among smallholders remains limited, and its effectiveness depends heavily on farmers’ experiences, perceptions, and motivations. This study examines the production and marketing of GI products from the perspective of farmers, focusing on Kelkit Dry Beans, a geographically indicated product in Türkiye. Primary data were collected in 2021 through face-to-face interviews with 100 dry bean farmers in the Kelkit, Şiran, and Köse districts of Gümüşhane province—50 using GI-registered seeds and 50 not. Findings indicate that farmers adopting GI production expected higher prices based on quality improvements but were unable to achieve these outcomes. Access to alternative markets did not improve, and buyer-related problems persisted. Compared to non-GI farmers, those producing GI beans attached greater importance to factors such as easier marketing, higher expected prices, financial support from unions, and the assurance of long-term demand from contract buyers. Nevertheless, their largely negative experiences - particularly unmet price expectations and limited market access—undermine confidence in GI production and discourage wider adoption. In conclusion, while GIs offer opportunities for rural development, competitiveness, and sustainability, their broader adoption requires addressing farmers’ concerns regarding profitability, reliable markets, and institutional support. Without such improvements, the potential benefits of GIs are unlikely to be fully realized.
KW  - GIS
KW  - Farmers’ perspective
KW  - Kelkit dry beans
KW  - Türkiye
N2  - A locally sourced, high-quality food supply is seen as both viable and desirable. Geographical indications (GIs) help consumers identify products linked to specific regions, creating intellectual property rights that strengthen rural economies and support sustainable agriculture. Despite this potential, adoption among smallholders remains limited, and its effectiveness depends heavily on farmers’ experiences, perceptions, and motivations. This study examines the production and marketing of GI products from the perspective of farmers, focusing on Kelkit Dry Beans, a geographically indicated product in Türkiye. Primary data were collected in 2021 through face-to-face interviews with 100 dry bean farmers in the Kelkit, Şiran, and Köse districts of Gümüşhane province—50 using GI-registered seeds and 50 not. Findings indicate that farmers adopting GI production expected higher prices based on quality improvements but were unable to achieve these outcomes. Access to alternative markets did not improve, and buyer-related problems persisted. Compared to non-GI farmers, those producing GI beans attached greater importance to factors such as easier marketing, higher expected prices, financial support from unions, and the assurance of long-term demand from contract buyers. Nevertheless, their largely negative experiences - particularly unmet price expectations and limited market access—undermine confidence in GI production and discourage wider adoption. In conclusion, while GIs offer opportunities for rural development, competitiveness, and sustainability, their broader adoption requires addressing farmers’ concerns regarding profitability, reliable markets, and institutional support. Without such improvements, the potential benefits of GIs are unlikely to be fully realized.
CR  - AgMRC. 2025. Agricultural Marketing Resource Centre. www.agmrc.org (accessed date: May 1, 2025).
CR  - Aydoğdu MH, Yenigün K, Aydoğdu M. 2015. Factors affecting farmers' satisfaction from water users association in the Harran plain-GAP region. J Agric Sci Technol, 17(Suppl): 1669-1684.
CR  - Chicco D, Sichenze A, Jurman G. 2025. A simple guide to the use of Student’s t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, Chi-squared test, and Kruskal-Wallis test in biostatistics. BioData Min, 18: 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13040-025-00465-6
CR  - Çiftçi F, Oğuz C, Çiftçi İ. 2023. Determination of factors affecting the dry bean production decision of farmers in Konya: The case of Cumra district. Turk J Agric Food Sci Tech (TURJAF), 11: 925-932.
CR  - Eren F, Sezgin A. 2021. Coğrafi işaretli yöresel ürünlerin destinasyonlar açısından önemi: Kapodokya örneği. J Tourism Res Inst, 2: 61-78.
CR  - FAO. 2023. Food and Agriculture crop production statistics. http://faostat.fao.org (accessed date: April 10, 2024).
CR  - Kahraman A, Erturk E, Kiraz F. 2023. Evaluation of dry bean farming in Konya region and its importance for sustainable agriculture. Selcuk J Agric Food Sci, 37: 274-284.
CR  - Karagül E. 2017. Türkiye yemeklik tane baklagil genetik kaynakları. Anadolu J AARI, 27: 56-70.
CR  - Katungi E, Kikulwe E, Emongor R. 2015. Analysis of farmers' valuation of common bean attributes and preference heterogeneity under environmental stresses of Kenya. Afr J Agric Res, 10: 2889-2901.
CR  - Maina FW, Mburu J, Ackello-Ogutu C, Egelyng H. 2019. Producers' valuation of geographical indications-related attributes of agri-food products from semi-arid lands in Kenya. Heliyon, 5: e01718.
CR  - Marion H, Luisa M, Sebastian R. 2023. Adoption of geographical indications and origin-related food labels by SMEs – A systematic literature review. Clean Circ Bioecon, 4: 1-11.
CR  - Mangole G, Ithuteng M, Radikgomo M, Molosiwa OO. 2022. Challenges and opportunities in common bean production and marketing in Botswana: Prospects and farmer's perspectives. Afr J Food Agric Nutr Dev (AJFAND), 22: 20461-20479.
CR  - Mesic Z, Juracak J. 2022. Frauds in food supply chains: The case of Croatian market. In: Soucie S, Pestek A (eds), Emerald Publishing, pp: 50-72.
CR  - Muroyiwa B, Rameno FD. 2024. Factors influencing choice of maize and beans marketing channels for smallholder farmers in Lesotho. Int J Bus Ecosyst Strategy, 6: 232-238.
CR  - Mutari B, Sibiya J, Bogweh Nchanji E, Simango K, Gasura E. 2021. Farmers' perceptions of navy bean production constraints, preferred traits and farming systems in Zimbabwe. J Ethnobiol Ethnomed, 17: 1-19.
CR  - Nasar S, Shaheen H, Murtaza G, Tinghong T, Arfan M, Idrees M. 2023. Socioeconomic evaluation of common bean cultivation in providing sustainable livelihood to the mountain populations of Kashmir Himalayas. Plants, 12: 1-12.
CR  - Siddiq M, Uebersax MA, Siddiq F. 2021. Global production, trade, processing and nutritional profile of dry beans and other pulses. In: Siddiq M, Uebersax MA (eds), Overview, Production and Postharvest Technologies. John Wiley & Sons, England, 1st ed., pp: 1-28.
CR  - Soydaş V, Aydın M, Elkoca E, İlhan E. 2021. A preliminary study on the characterization of common bean landraces in Gumushane. Anadolu J, 31: 143-160.
CR  - TEPGE. 2024. Fasulye Ürün Raporu. https://arastirma.tarimorman.gov.tr/tepge (accessed date: April 10, 2025).
CR  - TurkStat. 2024. Crop Production Markets. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=tarim-111&dil=1 (accessed October 30, 2024).
CR  - TPO. 2024. Geographical Indication. https://ci.turkpatent.gov.tr/sayfa/co%C4%9Frafi-i%C5%9Faret-nedir (accessed date: May 29, 2024).
CR  - Uçar R. 2023. Dry beans: An overview. In: Akgül Taş (ed), Adv Plant Res Agric. Iksad Publication, Ankara,Türkiye, pp: 39-50. ISBN: 978-625-367-112-9.
CR  - Venance S, Mshenga P, Birachi EA. 2016. Factors influencing on-farm common bean profitability: The case of smallholder bean farmers in Babati district, Tanzania. J Econ Sustain Dev, 7: 196-201.
UR  - https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1748512
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/5080650
ER  -