Türkiye’de Organik Tarımın Yoğunlaşma Katsayısının Belirlenmesi

Öz

Çalışmanın temel amacı, Türkiye'de organik tarımın hangi illerde kümelendiğini belirlemektir. Konum katsayısı, bölgesel yoğunlaşma ölçümlerinde en yaygın kullanılan endekslerden biridir ve belirli bir üretim faaliyetinin bir ülke/bölge/sektör içindeki uzmanlaşma derecesini veya belirli bir üretim faaliyetinin belirli bir bölgedeki göreli yoğunlaşmasını ifade eder. Bu doğrultuda çalışma kapsamında Türkiye genelinde rekabet avantajı sağlayan organik tarımın konum katsayısının belirlenmesi amaçlanmış ve bu doğrultuda konum katsayısının belirlenmesi öngörülmüştür. Konum katsayısının belirlenmesinde ekonomik performansın en iyi göstergelerinden biri olan üretim miktarı kullanılmıştır. Nitekim üretim miktarı hangi üretim faaliyetinin daha baskın olduğunu gösteren en önemli göstergedir ve hesaplanacak konum katsayısı 0 ile sonsuz (∞) arasında bir değer alır. İlgili üretim faaliyetinin 1'den büyük bir skora sahip olması, ilgili faaliyetin bölgede yoğunlaşmış/uzmanlaşmış ana üretim faaliyeti olduğunu gösterir. Ancak puanın 1'den küçük olması, faaliyetin bölgede yeterince yoğunlaşmamış/uzmanlaşmamış yerel bir faaliyet olduğunu gösterir. Analiz sonucunda, Doğu Anadolu ve Orta Anadolu organik tarım üretiminin en yoğun olduğu bölgelerdir. Organik tarım üretiminin en yoğun olduğu ilk 10 il sırasıyla Van (7), Ağrı (6), Ankara (6), Bayburt (6), Erzurum (6), Çanakkale (5), Kars (5), Muş (5), Niğde ve Sivas'tır. En yaygın olarak üretilen ürünler yonca (18), buğday (16), domates (15), elma (14), mısır (12), arpa (12), fındık (9), korunga (9), zeytin (9), yulaf (9) ve fiğdir (9). Yerelleştirilmiş ve yoğunlaştırılmış organik tarım sistemlerinin birim arazi başına yüksek gelir elde etmede, tarımsal arazi kullanımını optimize etmede ve sürdürülebilirliği sağlamada etkili olduğu kanıtlanmıştır. Ayrıca uzmanlaşmış işgücü, sektöre özgü girdiler ve ileri teknolojilerin kullanımını da sağlamaktadırlar. Bu nedenle, oluşumların verimliliği artırarak ve organik tarımın büyümesini teşvik ederek bölgenin ekonomik, sosyal ve çevresel sürdürülebilirliğini geliştireceğine inanılmaktadır. Bu da bölgenin kalkınması için önemli faydalar sağlayacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Organik tarım
• Bölgesel ekonomik faaliyet
• Yoğunlaşma katsayısı

Determination of Location Quotient of Organic Agriculture in Türkiye

Öz

The main objective of the study is to determine in which provinces organic agriculture is clustered in Türkiye. Location quotient is one of the most widely used indices in regional concentration measurements and expresses the degree of specialization of a certain production activity within a country/region/sector or the relative concentration of a certain production activity in a certain region. In this direction, within the scope of the study, it is aimed to determine the location quotient of organic agriculture, which provides competitive advantage throughout Türkiye, and it is envisaged to determine the location quotient in this direction. In determining the location quotient, the amount of production, which is one of the best indicators of economic performance, was used. As a matter of fact, the amount of production is the most important indicator showing which production activity is more dominant and the location quotient to be calculated takes a value between 0 and infinity (∞). If the relevant production activity has a score greater than 1, it indicates that the activity is the main production activity that is concentrated/specialised in the region. However, if the score is less than 1, it indicates that the activity is a local one that is not sufficiently concentrated/specialised in the region. Following the analysis, Eastern Anatolia and Central Anatolia are the regions with the highest concentration of organic agriculture production. The top 10 provinces with the most concentrated organic agriculture production are Van (7), Ağrı (6), Ankara (6), Bayburt (6), Erzurum (6), Çanakkale (5), Kars (5), Muş (5), Niğde and Sivas. The most widely produced crops are alfalfa (18), wheat (16), tomato (15), apple (14), maize (12), barley (12), hazelnut (9), sainfoin (9), olive (9), oat (9) and vetch (9). Localized and intensified organic farming systems have proven effective in generating high income per unit of land, optimizing agricultural land utilization, and ensuring sustainability. They also provide specialized labour forces, sector-specific inputs, and the use of advanced technologies. Therefore, it is believed that the formations will enhance the economic, social, and environmental sustainability of the region by increasing productivity and promoting the growth of organic agriculture. This will lead to significant benefits for the region's development.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Regional economic activity
• Organic agriculture
• Location quotient

Etik Beyan

There is no need to obtain permission from the ethics committee for this study.

Kaynakça

1. Aktaş, H., Özberk, F., Erol, O., Baloch, F. S., Doğan, S., Kahraman, M. and Çığ, F. (2018). Potential and sustainable conservation of wheat genetic resources in Southeastern Anatolia Region of Turkey. Bahri Dağdaş Journal of Crop Research, 7(2): 47-54. (In Turkish).
2. Aliyu, A.A., Dukiya, M. D. J. J. and Umaru E.T. (2023). Classification of Settlements by economic potentials in the southern region of Niger State: A location quotient approach. Structure and Environment. 15(3): 125-132. (In Turkish).
3. Alkan, A. and Bilim, Z.O. (2021). Regional concentration in Turkish cement industry with Location Quotient approach. Bitlis Eren University Journal of Social Sciences, 10(1): 101-113. (In Turkish).
4. Altuğ, F. (2017). Innovative specialisation trends in innovation activities in Turkey: Manufacturing industry patent indicators of Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir regions. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 15(2): 157-166. (In Turkish).
5. Anwar, C., Mappatoba, M., Syamsuddin, H. and Taqwa, E. (2021). Determining selected prime agriculture commodities through three methods. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, 12(3): 677-683. Ayla, D. (2011). Organic agriculture in Turkey. (MSc Thesis). Karadeniz Technical University, Institute of Science and Technology, Trabzon, Türkiye. (In Turkish).
6. Ayuya, O. I., Gido, E. O., Bett, H. K., Lagat, J. K., Kahi, A. K. and Bauer, S. (2015). Effect of certified organic production systems on poverty among smallholder farmers: Empirical evidence from Kenya. World Development, 67: 27-37.
7. Basuki, M. and Mujiraharjo, F. N. (2017). Analisis sektor unggulan Kabupaten Sleman dengan metode shift share dan location quotient. Jurnal Sains, Teknologi dan Industri, 15(1): 52-60.
8. Bayraktutan, Y. (1994). Regional Imbalance and regional development. Atatürk University Journal of Economics and Business Administration. 10(3-4): 183-214. (In Turkish).

9. Bayramoğlu, Z., Ağızan, K., Ağızan, S., Bozdemir, M., Ataiyibiner, A. and Akgöz, B. (2021). Dissemination of Organic Agriculture in Marginal Agricultural Areas and Contribution to Sustainability. Atlas Publishers, Konya, Türkiye. (In Turkish).
10. Blanc, J. and Kledal, P. R. (2012). The Brazilian organic food sector: Prospects and constraints of facilitating the inclusion of smallholders. Journal of Rural Studies, 28(1): 142-154.
11. Brosnan S. (2017). Crime concentration in Ireland in 2012: A Location quotient approach. Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies, 17(1): 76-93.
12. Campaniaris, C., Murray, R., Hayes, S. and Jeffrey, M. (2015). Evidence-based development of a strategy for Canadian apparel SMEs. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 19(3): 299-314.
13. Chiang, S. H. (2009). Location quotient and trade. The Annals of Regional Science, 43(2): 399-414.
14. Çakmakçı, R. and Erdoğan, U. (2005). Organic Agriculture. Atatürk University Ofset Facilities Publishers, Erzurum, Türkiye.
15. Çetin, M., Saygin, S. and Demir, H. (2020). The impact of agricultural sector on environmental pollution: a cointegration and causality analysis for the Turkish economy. Journal of Tekirdağ Faculty of Agriculture, 17(3): 329-345. (In Turkish).
16. Çiftçi, M. (2018). Regional specialisation in academic employment, academic labour market and faculty rotation in Turkey. EKEV Academy Journal, 22(73): 233-262. (In Turkish).
17. Çolakoğlu, C. A. and Tunalıoğlu, R. (2010). Determination of the Relationship between Olive Production and Climate Data in Aydın Province. Journal of Adnan Menderes University Faculty of Agriculture, 7(1): 71-77. (In Turkish).
18. Darmanto, E. B., Pratiwi, Y. S. and Nugroho, H. S. W. (2020). Location quotient analysis of agricultural sector and subsector in East Java 2010-2017 (A reference for law and policy on economics, nutrition and public health). Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, 14(1): 234-238.
19. De Master, K. (2012). Designing dreams or constructing contradictions? European Union multifunctional policies and the Polish organic farm sector. Rural Sociology, 77(1): 89-109.
20. Deliktaş, E. and Çelik, N. (2019). Determination of competitive sectors in TRB2 Region. Journal of Izmir Katip Çelebi University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 2(1): 29-44. (In Turkish).
21. Demir, A. and Gül, U. (2004). Organic Agriculture. Agricultural Economics Research Institute-Bakış, 3(5): 1-4. (In Turkish).
22. Demiryürek, K. (2016). Organic Agriculture and Economics. DOKAP Publishers, Giresun, Türkiye. (In Turkish).
23. Eser, U. and Köse, S. (2005). Turkey Industry in terms of ındustrial localisation and concentration: Analysis of provincial manufacturing ındustries. Ankara University SBF Journal, 60(2): 97-139.
24. Falcioğlu, P. and Akgüngör, S. (2008). Regional specialisation and industrial concentration patterns in the Turkish manufacturing industry: An assessment for the 1980-2000 period. European Planning Studies, 16(2): 303-323. (In Turkish).
25. Hildebrand, G. and Mace, A. (1950). The employment multiplier in an expanding industrial market: Los Angeles County, 1940-47. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 32(3): 241-249.
26. Humaidi, E. and Kertayoga, I. P. A. W. (2022). Preparation of a Map of Leading Food Commodities in the Lampung Province Using the Location Quotient (LQ) Method. 2nd International Conference on Agriculture and Applied Science. 18 November, P. 1-5, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia.
27. Irham, I. and Mulyo, J. H. (2016). Contribution of agricultural sector and sub sectors on Indonesian economy. Ilmu Pertanian (Agricultural Science), 18(3): 150-159.
28. Kartikawati, D. and Sundari, M. (2018). The Role of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery Sector in the Development of Malinau District (Location Quotient and Shift Share Approach). The 1st International Conference on Environmental Sciences (ICES2018), 15–16 November, West Sumatra, Indonesia.
29. Kazancik, B. (2007). Regional Development and Sector-Region Agglomerations. Regional Development and Governance Symposium, 25-26 October, P. 393-414, İzmir, Türkiye. (In Turkish).
30. Kılıç, A., Kuzucu, M. and Gökçen, İ. S. (2023). Investigation of the nutritional status of agricultural soils in Kilis province. Journal of Tekirdağ Agricultural Faculty, 20(3): 631-641. (In Turkish).
31. Kim, S., Suh, K., Kim, Y., Kim, C. and Jung, C. (2019). Quantitative evaluation on geographical ındication of agricultural specialty products using location quotient (LQ) index. Journal of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers, 61(2): 75-83.
32. Kirazlar, N. (2001). Ecological (Organic) Agriculture Legislation. Turkey 2nd Ecological Agriculture Symposium, 14-16 November, P. 11-19, Antalya, Türkiye (In Turkish).
33. Lee, J. (2020). Analysis of the status of agricultural communities and location quotient (LQ) using regional survey data in 2015 census of agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning, 26(2): 83-93.
34. Leigh, R. (1970). The use of location quotients in urban economic base studies. Land Economics, 46(2): 202-205.
35. Lobley, M., Butler, A. and Reed, M. (2009). The contribution of organic farming to rural development: An exploration of the socio-economic linkages of organic and non-organic farms in England. Land Use Policy, 26(3): 723-735.
36. McGreevy, S.R. (2012). Lost in translation: incomer organic farmers, local knowledge, and the revitalisation of upland Japanese hamlets. Agriculture and Human Values, 29(3): 393-412.
37. Merdan, K. and Kaya, V. (2013). Economic analysis of organic agriculture in Turkey. Journal of Atatürk University Institute of Social Sciences, 17(3): 239-252. (In Turkish).
38. Miller, M. M., Gibson, L. J. and Wright, N. G. (1991). Location quotient: A basic tool for economic development analysis. Economic Development Review, 9(2): 65-68.
39. Öz, Ö. (2004). Spatial distribution and competitive structure of economic activities in Turkey. METU Studies in Development, 31(2): 211-241.
40. Öztürk, S. (2018). Evaluation of women entrepreneurship in Turkey within the framework of economic and cultural norms. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Development, 13(1): 1-11. (In Turkish).
41. Restiatun, R. (2009). Identifikasi Sektor Unggulan Dan Ketimpangan Antarkabupaten/Kota Di Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Jurnal Ekonomi & Studi Pembangunan, 10(1): 77-98.
42. Rozaki, Z., Wijaya, O. and Wardana, C. (2021). Agriculture Development Based on Regional Potency in Kulonprogro Regency. International Geography Seminar. 31 August, P. 1-6, Lor in Hotel Solo, Indonesia.
43. Sausan, A., Cahyani, A., Ashidieq, F., Risqa, M., Bahri, M., Wahyudi, R., Gitanto, V. and Putri, R. (2022). Location Quotient Analysis of the Agricultural Sector in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. 2nd International Conference on Smart and Innovative Agriculture (ICoSIA 2021), 10 March, P. 5-9, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
44. Smith, E. and Marsden, T. (2004). Exploring the ‘limits to growth’ in UK organics: Beyond the statistical image. Journal of Rural Studies, 20(3): 345-357.
45. Süzer S. (2020). Organic (Ecological) Agriculture. https://arastirma.tarimorman.gov.tr/ttae/Sayfalar/Detay.aspx?SayfaId=66 (Accessed Date: 18.05.2021) (In Turkish).
46. TOB (2022). Organic Agriculture Statistics. https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/Konular/Bitkisel-Uretim/Organik-Tarim/Istatistikler (Accessed Date: 18.04.2022) (In Turkish).
47. Turhan, Ş. (2005). Sustainability in agriculture and organic agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 11(1 and 2): 13-24. (In Turkish).
48. Urhan, F. B. and Sandal, E. K. (2019). Spatial pattern of Turkey textile ındustry: Comparative localisation coefficient analysis for 2009-2015. International Journal of Geography and Geography Education, 40: 172-189. (In Turkish).
49. Weterings, A. and Marsili, O. (2015). Spatial concentration of industries and new firm exits: Does this relationship differ between exits by closure and by M&A? Regional Studies, 49(1): 44-58.
50. Wicaksono, I. A. (2011). the analysis of location quotient on sector and subsector of agriculture among the sub districts in Purworejo Regency. Mediagro, 7(2): 11-18.
51. Yardımcı, A. (2014). Clustering trends of Ankara Industry according to capacity reports. Ekonomik Yaklasim, 25(92): 55-67. (In Turkish).
52. Yavan, N. and Şahin, M. (2014). Analysis of Regional Concentration and Diversification in Turkish Industry with Different Indices. TÜCAUM VIII. Geography Symposium. 06-08 February, P. 23-24, Geoagiu-Bai, Romania. (In Turkish).
53. Yolcu, N. (2013). Organic agriculture and employment creation potential of organic agriculture in Turkey. (MSc. Thesis) Karadeniz Technical University. (In Turkish).