SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1

Socio-economic Determinants of Red Meat Consumption in Turkey: A Case Study

Türkiye’de Kırmızı Et Tüketiminin Sosyo-ekonomik Belirleyicileri: Örnek Bir Çalışma

Meral UZUNÖZ
Güngör KARAKAŞ
Pages
37–52
Publication Date
2014-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the results from binary logistic regression analysis; gender, education, household size and income are significant and associated with red meat consumption.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In the study, it was aimed to determine socio-economic factors affecting red meat consumption habits and consumer preferences of families, living in urban areas of Tokat province.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The survey was completed between June and July in 2009.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results from binary logistic regression analysis; gender, education, household size and income are significant and associated with red meat consumption.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Red meat consumption · Consumer behaviour · Logit model

Abstract

In the study, it was aimed to determine socio-economic factors affecting red meat consumption habits and consumer preferences of families, living in urban areas of Tokat province. The factors affected red meat consumption preferences of consumers were analysed using binary logistic regression model. The basic material of the study consists of the original data from surveys, obtained face to face with consumers living in urban areas in Tokat, Turkey. The survey was completed between June and July in 2009. According to the results from binary logistic regression analysis; gender, education, household size and income are significant and associated with red meat consumption. A negative relationship was determined among red meat consumption, education level and household. It is expected that this results have important implications for the supermarket, butchery shop and other food supplier industries in the research area and policymaker.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, Tokat ili kentsel alanda yaşayan tüketicilerin kırmızı et tüketimi ve tercihlerini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Tüketicilerin kırmızı et tüketimlerini etkileyen faktörler binary lojistik regresyon modeli kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Haziran ve Çalışmada Temmuz 2009 yılında tüketicilerden yüz yüze görüşme tekniği kullanılarak elde edilen orijinal veriler kullanılmıştır. Binary lojistik regresyon analiz sonuçlarına göre, cinsiyet, eğitim, hane halkı büyüklüğü ve gelir faktörleri tüketicilerin kırmızı et tüketimlerini etkileyen faktörler olarak belirlenmiştir. Kırmızı et tüketimi ile hane halkı büyüklüğü ve eğitim düzeyi arasında negatif yönlü bir ilişki mevcuttur. Çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçların gıda üretimi yapan firmalar, süpermarketler, kasaplar ve bu sektöre yönelik politika yapıcılar için yararlı olacağı düşünülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

UZUNÖZ, M., KARAKAŞ, G. (2014). Socio-economic Determinants of Red Meat Consumption in Turkey: A Case Study. Çankırı Karatekin Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 1, 37–52. https://ajindex.com/articles/128250

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Adisen, H. (1999). A case study on red meat consumption. Yuzuncuyil University Thesis, Van. Akbay, C. (2005). Econometric analysis of households’ food consumption demand in Kahramanmaras, KSU Journal of Science and Engineering, 8(1): 114-121.
  2. Alison, J., McAfee, A.J., Mc Sorley, E.M., Cuskelly, G.J., Moss, B.W., Wallace, J.M.W., Bonham, M.P., Fearon, A.M. (2010). Red meat consumption: An overview of the risks and benefits. Meat Science 84(2010): 1–13.
  3. Armagan, G., Akbay, C. (2007). An econometric analysis of urban households' animal products consumption in Turkey. Applied Economics, pp.1-8.
  4. Atay, O.,Gokdal, O., Aygun, T., Ulker, H. (2004).
  5. Red me at consumption habits in Cine, Aydın. 4th National Zoo technics Congress Book, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta 01-03 September 2004, pp. 348- 354. Becker, T. (2000). Consumer perception of fresh meat quality: a frame work for analysis, British Food Journal, 102(3): 158–176.
  6. Bellemare, M.F., Barrett, C.B. (2006). An ordered probit model of market participation: evidence from Kenya and Ethiopia. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 88(2): 324-337.
  7. Bonne, K., Verbeke, W. (2006). Muslim consumer’s motivations towards meat -consumption in Belgium: qualitative exploratory insights from means-end chain analysis. Anthropology of Food, [Online], 5 May 2006, URL: http://aof.revues.org/index90.html.
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste, R. Nice (trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  9. Cankurt, M., Miran, B., Sahin, A. (2010). Determining of the effective factors on cattle meat preferences: thecase of Izmir. Animal Production, 51(2): 16-22.
  10. CBRT (2011).
  11. Statistical Data, Exchanges Rates. Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey,http://www.tcmb.gov.tr/yeni/eng.
  12. Engin deniz, S. and Çukur, F. (2003). A research on technique and economic analysis of peach production of Kemalpasa, İzmir. Journal of Ege University Faculty of Agriculture, 40(2): 65-72.
  13. Erdal, G., Esengün, K. (2008). The analysis of the factors affecting fish consumption in Tokat province by logit model Ege University Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciencesi, 25(3): 203-209.
  14. Gogus, A.K. (1986). Meat technology. Ankara University Faculty of Agriculture Publications: 991, pp. 243, Ankara.
  15. Gokalp, H.Y. (1986). Meat science. Courses paper. Ataturk University Faculty of Agriculture, Erzurum. Gossard, M.H., York, R. (2003). Social structural influences on meat consumption. Human Ecology Review, 10(1): 1-9. Goodwi