Akdeniz Bölgesi’ndeki küçük ölçekli üretim sistemlerinde defne (Laurus nobilis L.) üretiminin gelire bağımlılığının sosyoekonomik belirleyicileri

Öz

Giriş ve Hedefler Odun dışı orman ürünleri Akdeniz kırsal geçim sistemlerinde hayati bileşenlerdir; ancak hanehalkı düzeyindeki gelir bağımlılığını açıklayan kanıtlar sınırlı kalmaktadır. Bu çalışma, defne (Laurus nobilis L.) gelirinin toplam hanehalkı geliri içindeki payını analiz etmeyi ve bu bağımlılığı şekillendiren sosyoekonomik faktörleri belirlemeyi amaçlamıştır. Yöntem Çalışmada 377 küçük ölçekli üretici haneden elde edilen kesitsel anket verileri kullanılmıştır. Hanehalkı gelir düzeyi, işgücü yapısı ve üretim ölçeğinin defne gelirinin göreceli önemi üzerindeki etkisini değerlendirmek amacıyla ekonometrik bir regresyon modeli uygulanmıştır. Bulgular Hanehalkının defne gelirine olan bağımlılığında önemli bir heterojenlik olduğunu göstermiştir. Düşük gelirli hanelerin bu kaynağa daha fazla bağımlı olduğu saptanırken, çeşitlendirilmiş gelir portföyüne sahip hanelerin daha düşük bağımlılık sergilediği görülmüştür. Ayrıca, üretim ölçeği gelir payını anlamlı derecede artırmış; satış miktarındaki %10’luk bir artışın, defne gelir payını yaklaşık 0,77 yüzde puanlık artırdığı belirlenmiştir. Sonuçlar Odun dışı orman ürünlerinin kırsal ekonomilerdeki heterojen rolünü vurgulamış ve küçük ölçekli üretim sistemlerinde gelir bağımlılığını anlamak için hanehalkı düzeyindeki analizlerin gerekliliğini ortaya koymuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Odun dışı orman ürünleri
• kırsal ekonomi
• hanehalkı geliri
• Akdeniz ormancılığı

Destekleyen Kurum

Yazarlar, bu makaleyi hazırlamak için hibe dahil olmak üzere hiçbir mali kaynak veya başka bir destek almadıklarını beyan ederler.

Etik Beyan

Tüm yazarlar, Yazarlar İçin Yönergeler bölümünde yer alan “Yazarların Etik Sorumlulukları” başlıklı beyanı okumuş, anlamış ve uygun olduğu ölçüde bu beyanın hükümlerine uymuşlardır.

Teşekkür

Bu çalışma, Muhammet Ali Keleş’in (danışman: Gökhan Şen) yüksek lisans tezi kapsamında toplanan anket verilerine dayanmaktadır. İlgili bulguların bir ön versiyonu, 6. International Conference on Frontiers in Academic Research (ICFAR 2025)' de sunulmuştur.

Socioeconomic determinants of bay laurel (Laurus nobilis L.) income dependence in Mediterranean small-scale production systems

Öz

Background and Aims Non-wood forest products constitute a critical component of rural livelihoods in Mediterranean regions; however, empirical evidence elucidating household-level income dependency remains limited. This study aims to examine the contribution of bay laurel (Laurus nobilis L.) income to total household income and to identify the socio-economic determinants influencing this dependence. Method The study utilizes cross-sectional survey data obtained from 377 small-scale producer households. An econometric regression model was employed to assess the effects of household income level, labour structure, and production scale on the relative importance of bay laurel income. Results The findings reveal significant heterogeneity in household dependency on bay laurel income. While low-income households were found to rely more heavily on this resource, households with more diversified income portfolios exhibited lower levels of dependency. In addition, production scale was found to significantly increase the income share; specifically, a 10% increase in sales volume was associated with an approximate 0.77 percentage point rise in the share of bay laurel income. Conclusion These results highlight the heterogeneous role of non-wood forest products in rural economies and underscore the necessity of household-level analyses to better understand income dependency within small-scale production systems.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Non-wood forest products
• rural economy
• household income
• Mediterranean forestry

Destekleyen Kurum

The authors declare that no financial resources or other support, including grants, have been received to prepare this manuscript.

Etik Beyan

All authors have read, understood, and complied, as applicable, with the statement on “Ethical responsibilities of Authors” as described in the Instructions for Authors.

Teşekkür

This study builds on survey data collected within the MSc thesis of Muhammet Ali Keleş (supervised by Gökhan Şen). A preliminary version of related findings was presented at 6th International Conference on Frontiers in Academic Research (ICFAR 2025).

Kaynakça

1. Amadu, F.O., Miller, D.C., 2024. The impact of forest product collection and processing on household income in rural Liberia. Forest Policy and Economics, 158, 103098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103098.
2. Angelsen, A., Jagger, P., Babigumira, R., Belcher, B., Hogarth, N.J., Bauch, S., Börner, J., Smith-Hall, C., Wunder, S., 2014. Environmental income and rural livelihoods: a global-comparative analysis. World Development, 64(S1), S12–S28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.03.006.
3. Ayhan, E., Erkan, N., 2023. Investigation of potential contribution of laurel (Laurus nobilis L.) production to rural economy and profile, problems and expectations of laurel producer (Case of Bursa province). Turkish Journal of Forestry, 24(3), 262–271. https://doi.org/10.18182/tjf.1302497.
4. Babulo, B., Muys, B., Nega, F., Tollens, E., Nyssen, J., Deckers, J., Mathijs, E., 2009. The economic contribution of forest resource use to rural livelihoods in Tigray, northern Ethiopia. Forest Policy and Economics, 11(2), 109–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2008.10.007.
5. Belcher, B., Schreckenberg, K., 2007. Commercialisation of non-timber forest products: a reality check. Development Policy Review, 25, 355–377. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2007.00374.x.
6. Cavendish, W., 2002. Quantitative Methods for Estimating the Economic Value of Resource Use to Rural Households, in: Campbell, B.M., Luckert, M.K. (Eds.), Uncovering the Hidden Harvest: Valuation Methods for Woodland and Forest Resources. Earthscan, London, pp. 17–65.
7. Cheng, J., Sun, J., Yao, K., Xu, M., Cao, Y., 2022. A variable selection method based on mutual information and variance inflation factor. Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy, 268, 120652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2021.120652.
8. Davis, P.H., 1982. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 948 pages.

9. Ellis, F., 2000. Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 273 pages.
10. Ersen, N., Akyüz, İ., Akyüz, K.C., 2020. Forecasting with regression analysis method in time series: Bay laurel and thyme exports in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Forest Science, 4(2), 217–228. https://doi.org/10.32328/turkjforsci.702961.
11. FAO, 1995. Non-Wood Forest Products for Rural Income and Sustainable Forestry. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. https://www.fao.org/4/v9480e/v9480e.pdf.
12. FAO, 2023. FAOSTAT Forestry Production and Trade Database. https://www.fao.org/faostat.
13. Güngör, E., Çoban, M., 2024. Analysis of laurel harvesting as a rural development tool. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.24011/barofd.1396287.
14. Güngör, E., Şen, G., 2024. Sustainable afforestation strategies: Hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model in post-mining rehabilitation. Forests, 15(5), 783. https://doi.org/10.3390/f15050783.
15. Hayes, A.F., Cai, L., 2007. Using heteroskedasticity-consistent standard error estimators in OLS regression: an introduction and software implementation. Behavior Research Methods, 39(4), 709–722. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192961.
16. ITC Trade Map, 2024. International trade statistics for bay leaves (HS 0910). https://www.trademap.org.
17. Jochmans, K., 2022. Heteroscedasticity-robust inference in linear regression models with many covariates. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 117(538), 887–896. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2020.1831924.
18. Kamanga, P., Vedeld, P., Sjaastad, E., 2009. Forest incomes and rural livelihoods in Chiradzulu District, Malawi. Ecological Economics, 68(3), 613–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.08.018.
19. Long, J.S., Ervin, L.H., 2000. Using heteroscedasticity consistent standard errors in the linear regression model. The American Statistician, 54(3), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2000.10474549.
20. MacKinnon, J.G., White, H., 1985. Some heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimators with improved finite sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 29(3), 305–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(85)90158-7.
21. Mazhar, B., Zeb, A., Ullah, A., Kaechele, H., 2021. Why do households depend on the forest for income? Analysis of factors influencing households’ decision-making behaviors. Sustainability, 13, 9419. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169419.
22. Newton, P., Miller, D.C., Byenkya, M.A.A., Agrawal, A., 2016. Who are forest-dependent people? A taxonomy to aid livelihood and land use decision-making in forested regions. Land Use Policy, 57, 388–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.05.032.
23. Orhunbilge, N., 1997. Sampling Methods and Hypothesis Tests. İstanbul University Press, İstanbul, 356 pages. Serper, Ö., 2000. Applied Statistics II. Ezgi Kitabevi, Bursa, 483 pages. Shackleton, C.M., Pandey, A.K., 2022. Positioning non-timber forest products on the development agenda. Forest Policy and Economics, 135, 102647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.07.004.
24. Siltanu, G.T., Smith-Hall, C., Walelign, S.Z., 2024. What matters? A global meta-analysis of environmental income and reliance determinants. Frontiers in Environmental Economics, 3, 1408794. https://doi.org/10.3389/frevc.2024.1408794.
25. Sorrenti, S., 2013. Non-Wood Forest Products in International Statistical Systems. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8b983106-b05a-43cd-b5f7-131e81302ab6/content.
26. Toksoy, D., Şen, G., Özden, S., Ayaz, H., 2008. The forestry organization and its relationship with local people in the Eastern Black Sea Region of Turkey. New Mediterr, 4, 47-53. https://newmedit.ciheam.org/share/img_new_medit_articoli/239_47toksoy.pdf.
27. TÜİK, 2000. Population Statistics. https://www.tuik.gov.tr.
28. Tutin, T.G. et al., 1993. Flora Europaea. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 571 pages.
29. Vedeld P, Angelsen A, Bojö J, Sjaastad E, Berg GK (2007) Forest environmental incomes and the rural poor. Forest Policy and Economics 9:869–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2006.05.008.
30. Wooldridge, J.M., 2020. Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach. Cengage Learning, Boston, 784 pages.
31. Wunder, S., 2001. Poverty alleviation and tropical forests—What scope for synergies? World Development, 29(11), 1817–1833. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00070-5.
32. Wunder, S., Angelsen, A., Belcher, B., 2014. Forests, livelihoods, and conservation: Broadening the empirical base. World Development, 64(S1), S1–S11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.03.007.