Organic Farming on the Urban Fringe and the Factors Affecting Its Continuity: The Case of Bursa

Öz

In recent years, the rapid expansion of urban areas and the concomitant reduction in agricultural land have raised concerns about food security. Access to healthy food has emerged as a significant concern, particularly in metropolitan areas where locally produced food is limited. The sustainability of agricultural land in the urban fringe and the search for solutions to improve local food systems are prominent issues on the agendas of many countries. In this context, the objective of the article is to gain insight into the development of organic farming activities in the periphery of metropolitan cities, in the case of Bursa. The study's objective was to ascertain the spatial characteristics of organic production in Bursa. Furthermore, a survey was conducted with organic producers to ascertain the micro-scaled factors influencing the continuity of organic agriculture, employing the decision tree model. Consequently, the organic production in Bursa is dispersed, characterized by small-scale enterprises, and concentrated in rural settlements around Uludağ. The analysis indicates that the primary factor influencing the continuation of organic production in the province is the age of the producers. An examination of the structure of organic production reveals that peasant farmers conduct organic production with a traditional agricultural background at the request of the buyer company. While this relationship model appears beneficial for small producers in maintaining organic agriculture, it does not result in a change in income or skills for small producers. Instead, it creates a dependency on the buyer, and farmers cannot fulfill the requirements of organic agriculture without external support. As a result, these producers may revert to conventional production from organic production. In Bursa, a limited number of large-scale organic producers control the entire production process. These producers demonstrate greater resilience in the sector and a stronger inclination to continue organic farming than their contracted counterparts. Consequently, it is evident that human and social capital must be reinforced and that agricultural subsidies are invaluable in mitigating the vulnerability resulting from the scarcity of social and financial resources in the region where small-scale enterprises are concentrated. Furthermore, it is essential to transform organic agriculture into a social practice involving young producers.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Organic farming
• Local food systems
• Bursa
• Turkey

Destekleyen Kurum

TÜBİTAK

Proje Numarası

122K020

Etik Beyan

Ethics Committee for Social and Human Sciences Research at Yıldız Technical University, dated 31/08/2021

Metropol Çeperinde Organik Tarım ve Devamlılığını Etkileyen Faktörler: Bursa Örneği

Öz

Son yıllarda kent nüfusunun artması, tarım alanlarının yapılaşmaya açılması, kırsal alanlarda yaşayanların kente göç etmesi gıda güvenliğiyle ilgili endişeleri beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu noktada tarım topraklarının sürdürülebilirliği ve yerel gıda sistemleri kentsel politikaların gündeminde yer almaya başlamıştır. Özellikle üretimin kısıtlı olduğu büyük şehirlerde, sağlıklı gıdaya erişim başat konulardan biri haline gelmiş, yerel yönetimler bu konularda çözüm arayışlarına girmiştir. Bu bağlamda, makalede büyük şehirlerin çeperinde organik tarım faaliyetlerinin gelişimi, kentsel nüfusun yoğun olduğu Bursa Metropolü üzerinden ele alınmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında Bursa’da organik üretimin mekânsal özellikleri tespit edilmiş, üreticilerle anket çalışması yapılarak organik tarımın devamlılığını etkileyen üretici ve üretime dair mikro ölçekli yapısal faktörler karar ağacı modeliyle belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak, Bursa’da organik üretimin dağınık, küçük ölçekli olduğu ve Uludağ yakın çevresinde bulunan kırsal yerleşmelerde yoğunlaştığı görülmektedir. İlde organik üretime devam etme eğilimini en çok etkileyen faktörün yaş olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Organik üretim yapısına bakıldığında, geleneksel tarım geçmişine sahip deneyimli köylü çiftçilerin alıcı firmanın talebiyle faaliyeti gerçekleştirdiği izlenmektedir. Bu ilişki modeli küçük üreticilerin organik tarımı sürdürmelerinde olumlu gibi görünmekle beraber, gelirlerinde ve becerilerinde büyük bir değişiklik yaratmamaktadır. Diğer taraftan alıcı bağımlı bir ilişki ortaya çıkmakta, çiftçi tek başına kaldığında organik tarımın gereklerini yerine getirememektedir. Sonuçta bu üreticiler organik üretimden konvansiyonel üretime geri dönebilmektedir. Bursa’da tarladan tüketiciye kadar olan sürecin kontrolünü elinde bulunduran az sayıda organik üretici bulunmaktadır. Bunların sektördeki dayanıklılığı ve organik tarıma devam etme eğilimleri sözleşmeli üreticilere göre daha yüksektir. Dolayısıyla küçük ölçekli işletmelerin yoğunlaştığı bölgede kısıtlı sosyal ve finansal kaynakların yarattığı kırılganlığı gidermek ve organik tarımı genç üreticilerin dahil olduğu toplumsal bir pratik haline dönüştürmek için beşeri ve sosyal sermayenin güçlendirilmesi gerektiği, tarımsal desteklerin değerli olduğu anlaşılmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Organik tarım
• Bursa
• Türkiye
• Yerel gıda sistemi

Destekleyen Kurum

TÜBİTAK

Proje Numarası

122K020

Etik Beyan

31.08.2021 tarihli Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Araştırmaları Etik Kurulu.

Kaynakça

1. Aghasafari H., Alireza Karbasi, A., Mohammadi H. and Calisti R. (2020). Determination of the best strategies for development of organic farming: A SWOT – Fuzzy Analytic Network Process approach. Journal of Cleaner Production, 277: 124039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124039
2. Atasever, M. ve Adıgüzel, G. (2006). Organik Besinlerin Kalitesi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 37(1): 117-122.
3. Avrupa Komisyonu (2023). Avrupa Komisyonu Resmi Web Sayfası. https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/farming/organic-farming/organic-production-and-products_en (Erişim Tarihi:10.03.2023).
4. Azima, S. and Mundler, P. (2022). Does direct farm marketing fulfill its promises? Analyzing job satisfaction among direct-market farmers in Canada. Agriculture and Human Values, 39: 791–807.
5. Bhatta, G. D. and Doppler, W. (2011). Smallholder peri-urban organic farming in Nepal: A comparative analysis of farming systems. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems and Community Development, 1(3): 163–180.
6. Brodziak, A. and Król, J. (2017). Organic Food—Healthy Food in the 21st Century? Przemysł Spożywczy, 71: 35–38.
7. Burton, R. J. F. (2004). Seeing Through the ‘Good farmer's’ eyes: Towards developing an understanding of the social symbolic value of ‘productivist’ behaviour. Sociologia Ruralis, 44: 195-215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2004.00270.x
8. Cakirli Akyüz, N. and Theuvsen, L. (2020). The impact of behavioral drivers on adoption of sustainable agricultural practices: The case of organic farming in Turkey. Sustainability, 12(17): 6875. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12176875

9. Candemir, A., Duvaleix, S. and Latruffe, L. (2021). Agricultural cooperatives and farm sustainability – a literature review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35: 1118-1144. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12417
10. Çetin, M., Saygın, S. ve Demir, H. (2020). Tarım sektörünün çevre kirliliği üzerindeki etkisi: türkiye ekonomisi için bir eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik analizi. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3): 329-345. https://doi.org/10.33462/jotaf.678764
11. Darnhofer, I. (2005). Organic Farming and rural development: Some evidence from Austria. Sociologia Ruralis, 45: 308-323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9523.2005.00307.x
12. Darnhofer, I., d’Amico, S.; andFouilleux, E. (2019). A relational perspective on the dynamics of the organic sector in Austria, Italy, and France. Journal of Rural Studies, 68: 200–212.
13. Duram, L. A. (2000). Agents' perceptions of structure: How Illinois organic farmers view political, economic, social, and ecological factors. Agriculture and Human Values, 17: 35-48.
14. Enthoven, L. and Van den Broeck, G. (2021). Local food systems: reviewing two decades of research. Agricultural Sytstems, 193: 103226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103226
15. Eriksen, S. N. (2013). Defining local food: constructing a new taxonomy – three domains of proximity. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B — Soil & Plant Science, 63: 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064710.2013.789123
16. FAO (2022a). The World of Organic Agriculture 2021. https://www.fao.org/family-farming/detail/en/c/1378841/ (Erişim tarihi: 15.03.2023).
17. FAO (2022b). World Food and Agriculture Statistical Yearbook 2022, https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/0c372c04-8b29-4093-bba6-8674b1d237c7/content, (Erişim tarihi: 24.04.2025).
18. FAO (2023). https://www.fao.org/newsroom/detail/oecd-fao-agricultural-outlook-2023-32-maps-key-output--consumption-and-trade-trends/en (Erişim tarihi: 13.09.2023)
19. FAO, Rikolto and RUAF (2022). Urban and peri-urban agriculture sourcebook – From production to food systems, Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb9722en (Erişim tarihi:15.03.2023).
20. Firdauzi, A., Ekowati, T., Prasetyo, A. S. and Mariyono, J. (2024). Factor determining the smallholder farmer’s perception on organic farming in Indonesia. Journal of Tekirdag Agricultural Faculty, 21(3): 722-731.
21. Flaten, O., Lien, G., Koesling, M. and Løes, A.-K. (2010). Norwegian farmers ceasing certified organic production: Characteristics and reasons. Journal of Environmental Management, 91: 2717–2726.
22. Harris, F., Robinson, G. M. and Griffiths, I. (2008). A study of the motivations and influences on farmers’ decisions to leave the organic farming sector in the United Kingdom. In: G.M. Robinson (ed.). Sustainable Rural Systems. Ashgate, Aldershot, Hampshire, 99–111.
23. Huttunen, S. and Oosterveer, P. (2017), Transition to sustainable fertilisation in agriculture, a practices approach. Sociologia Ruralis, 57: 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12118
24. IBM (2024). https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/spss-modeler/saas?topic=trees-decision-tree-models (Erişim tarihi:10.08.2024).
25. IFOAM (2008). Principles of Organic Agriculture. IFOAM General assembly, Vignola, Italy.
26. Kaltoft, P. and Risgaard, M.-L. (2006). Has organic fa.rming modernized itself out of business? Reverting to conventional methods in Denmark. In: G.C. Holt (ed.). Sociological Perspectives of Organic Agriculture. CABI, Wallingford,. 126–141.
27. Kenanoğlu Bektaş, Z. and Miran, B. (2006). Manisa ve İzmir illerinde geleneksel ve organik çekirdeksiz kuru üzümün karşılaştırmalı ekonomik analizi. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(3): 285-295.
28. KKB (2020). Kredi Kayıt Bürosu Türkiye Tarımsal Görünüm Saha Araştırması, https://www.kkb.com.tr/Resources/ContentFile/Tarimsal-gorunum-saha-arastirma-raporu2023.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 21.04.2025).
29. Kneafsey M., Venn, L., Schmutz, U., Balazs, B., Trenchard, L., Eyden-Wood, T., Bos, E., Sutton, G. and Blackett, M. (2013). Short Food Supply Chains and Local Food Systems in the EU: A State of Play of their Socio Economic Characteristics., JCR Scientific and Policy Reports European Commission.
30. Kumar, A., Saroj, S., Joshi, P. and Takeshima, H. (2018). Does cooperative membership improve household welfare? Evidence from a panel data analysis of smallholder dairy farmers in Bihar, India. Food Policy, 75: 24–36.
31. Läpple, D. (2010). Adoption and abandonment of organic farming: An empirical investigation of the Irish drystock sector. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61: 697–714.
32. Läpple, D. and Rensburg, T. V. (2011). Adoption of organic farming: Are there differences between early and late adoption? Ecological Economics, 70: 1406-1414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.03.002
33. Liebert, J., Benner, R., Bezner Kerr, R. et al. (2022). Farm size affects the use of agroecological practices on organic farms in the United States. Nature Plants, 8: 897–905. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-022-01191-1
34. Łuczka, W. (2017). Strengths and weaknesses of organic food processing. Annals of the Polish Association of Agricultural and Agribusiness Economists, 18: 143–148.
35. Łuczka, W., Kalinowski, S. and Shmygol, N. (2021). Organic farming support policy in a sustainable development context: A Polish case study. Energies, 14: 4208. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14144208
36. Ma, W., Abdulai, A. and Goetz, R. (2018). Agricultural cooperatives and investment in organic soil amendments and chemical fertilizer in China. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 100: 502–520.
37. Macombe, C. (2007). Work: A necessary sacrifice or a suffered chore? Labor and farm continuity in alternative agriculture in France. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 22: 282 - 289.
38. Marsden, T., Murdoch, J. and Morgan, K. (1999). Sustainable agriculture, food supply chains and regional development: editorial introduction, International Planning Studies, 4(3): 295–301.
39. Matysiak, I. (2021). Between passion and rejection—Attitudes to farming among young university graduates in rural areas of Poland. Wieś i Rolnictwo, 1: 75–95.
40. Mougeot, L. J. A. (2000). Urban Agriculture: Definition, Presence and Potentials and Risks, and Policy Challenges. International Workshop on Growing Cities, Growing Foods: Urban Agriculture on the Policy Agenda, 11-15 October 1999, La Habana, Cuba. https://idl-bnc-idrc.dspacedirect.org/bitstream/handle/10625/26429/117785.pdf
41. Murdoch, J. and Miele, M. (1999). Back to nature: Changing worlds of production in the food sector. Sociologia Ruralis, 39: 465-483.
42. Pérez-Neira,D. and Anibal Grollmus-Venegas, A. (2018). Life-cycle energy assessment and carbon footprint of peri-urban horticulture. A comparative case study of local food systems in Spain. Landscape and Urban Planning, 172: 60-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.01.001
43. Ploomi, A., Luik, A. and Kurg, A. (2006). Why do organic farmers quit in Estonia? Proceedings European Joint Organic Congress "Organic Farming and European Rules Development", 30-31 May, Odense, Denmark.
44. Renting, H., Marsden, M. K. and Banks, J. (2003). Understanding alternative food networks: exploring the role of short food supply chains in rural development. Environment and Planning A, 35: 391–411.
45. Rigby, D., Young, T. and Burton, M. (2001). The development of and prospects for organic farming in the UK. Food Policy, 26: 599–613.
46. Sahm, H., Sanders, J., Nieberg, H., Behrens, G., Kuhnert, H., Strohm, R. and Hamm, U. (2013). Reversion from organic to conventional agriculture: A review. Renewable Agriculture and Food System, 28: 263–275.
47. T. C. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı (2023). Organik Tarım İstatistikleri. https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/Konular/Bitkisel-Uretim/Organik-Tarim/Istatistikler (Erişim tarihi:14.08.2024).
48. TAGEM (2021). Tarımsal Araştırmalar ve Politikalar Genel Müdürlüğü Organik Tarım Sektör Politika Belgesi 2021-2025. https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/TAGEM/Belgeler/yayin/ORGAN%C4%B0K%20TARIM%20SPB_2021-2025.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 20.12.2023).
49. TUİK (2016). Tarımsal İşletme Yapı Araştırması, https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Tarimsal--Isletme-Yapi-Arastirmasi-2016-24869, (Erişim Tarihi:1.06.2023).
50. UNDP (2023). Organic Farming Is Not Just a Trend, It’s Future of Agriculture. https://www.undp.org/kazakhstan/stories/organic-farming-not-just-trend-its-future-agriculture (Erişim tarihi:21.07.2024).
51. Vittersø, G., Torjusen, H., Laitala, K., Tocco, B., Biasini, B., Csillag, P., de Labarre, M. D., Lecoeur, J.-L., Maj, A. and Majewski, E. (2019). Short food supply chains and their contributions to sustainability: Participants’ views and perceptions from 12 European cases. Sustainability, 11: 4800.
52. Yacamán Ochoa, C., Matarán Ruiz, A., Mata Olmo, R., Macías Figueroa, Á. and Torres Rodríguez, A. (2020). Peri-Urban organic agriculture and short food supply chains as drivers for strengthening city/region food systems—Two case studies in Andalucía, Spain. Land, 9(6): 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9060177
53. Yadava, A. (2024). Macroeconomic determinants of organic farming efficiency: Double bootstrap DEA estimates from the Indian states. Regional Science Policy & Practice, 16(6): 100036
54. Yolcu, H. ve Tan, M. (2008). Organik yem bitkileri yetiştiriciliği. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 39: 145-150.
55. Yu, L., Chen, C., Niu, Z., Gao, Y., Yang, H. and Xue, Z. (2021). Risk aversion, cooperative membership and the adoption of green control techniques: evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 279: 123-288.
56. Zasada, I., Schumutz, U., Wascher, D., Kneafsey, M., Corsi, S. et al. (2017) Food beyond the city. Analyzing foodsheds and self-sufficiency for different food system scenarios in European metropolitan regions. City, Culture and Society, 16: 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2017.06.002
57. Zuba-Ciszewska, M., Kowalska, A., Brodziak, A. and Manning, L. (2023). organic milk production sector in poland: driving the potential to meet future market, societal and environmental challenges. Sustainability, 15(13):1-21.