SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 41 Sayı: Tarım Özel Sayısı Özel Sayı

THE IMPACT OF UNIONIZATION IN THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR: FARMER PERCEPTIONS AND BEHAVIOR

Tarım Sektöründe Sendikalaşmanın Etkisi: Çiftçi Algıları ve Davranışı

Nazife Merve Hamzaoğlu(İSTANBUL KÜLTÜR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-6240-7613
Pages
51–60
Publication Date
2023-07-31
🏛️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)

Income targeting policies are essential to support agri-business owners.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:For centuries, agriculture has been one of the vital sectors in economic development; its role in developing economies and rural development is still inevitable.
📊
Key Findings & Data:World Values Survey Data (Wave 7) was applied to reveal the factors affecting farmers' perception of the economic and social factors from different countries by segmenting union members and non-members using binomial logistic regression models.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Income targeting policies are essential to support agri-business owners.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:sendikalaşma · çiftçi davranışı · tarım

Abstract

For centuries, agriculture has been one of the vital sectors in economic development; its role in developing economies and rural development is still inevitable. Rising food and energy prices and the negative effects of climate change can be more problematic for middle-smallholder farmers or family enterprises and low-qualified farmworkers. To overcome them, unionization and cooperatives in agriculture may present a viable option. Unionization in agriculture can be a solution for vulnerable parts of agriculture, such as workers who are exploited by working cheap and long hours and small and family businesses in a market where cooperatives are disrupted. This study focuses on the impact of unionization in the agricultural market by exploring farmer behavior. World Values Survey Data (Wave 7) was applied to reveal the factors affecting farmers' perception of the economic and social factors from different countries by segmenting union members and non-members using binomial logistic regression models. The findings show that unionized farmers have different motivations than non-members. Income targeting policies are essential to support agri-business owners.

Özet

For centuries, agriculture has been one of the vital sectors in economic development; its role in developing economies and rural development is still inevitable. Rising food and energy prices and the negative effects of climate change can be more problematic for middle-smallholder farmers or family enterprises and low-qualified farmworkers. To overcome them, unionization and cooperatives in agriculture may present a viable option. Unionization in agriculture can be a solution for vulnerable parts of agriculture, such as workers who are exploited by working cheap and long hours and small and family businesses in a market where cooperatives are disrupted. This study focuses on the impact of unionization in the agricultural market by exploring farmer behavior. World Values Survey Data (Wave 7) was applied to reveal the factors affecting farmers' perception of the economic and social factors from different countries by segmenting union members and non-members using binomial logistic regression models. The findings show that unionized farmers have different motivations than non-members. Income targeting policies are essential to support agri-business owners.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hamzaoğlu, N. M. (2023). THE IMPACT OF UNIONIZATION IN THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR: FARMER PERCEPTIONS AND BEHAVIOR. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 41 Sayı: Tarım Özel Sayısı Özel Sayı, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.17065/huniibf.1243771

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (22)

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  2. Benjamin, D., Cooper, K., Heffetz, O., & Kimball, M. (2020). Self-reported well-being indicators are a valuable complement to traditional economic indicators but are not yet ready to compete with them. Behavioural Public Policy, 4(2), 198-209. doi:10.1017/bpp.2019.43
  3. Cole, L. W., & Foster, S. R. (2001). From the ground up: Environmental racism and the rise of the environmental justice movement. NYU Press.
  4. Córdoba, D., Selfa, T., Abrams, J. B., & Sombra, D. (2018). Family farming, agribusiness and the state: Building consent around oil palm expansion in post-neoliberal Brazil. Journal of Rural Studies, 57, 147-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2017.12.013
  5. Czarzasty J. (2004). Trade unions in agriculture were examined. Eurofound. https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/it/publications/article/2004/trade-unions-in-agriculture-examined Retrieved 2 October 2022.
  6. Fritz, M., & Berger, P. D. (2015). Improving the user experience through practical data analytics: Gain meaningful insight and increase your bottom line. Morgan Kaufmann.
  7. Gallin, D. (2001). Propositions on trade unions and informal employment in times of globalization. Antipode, 33(3), 531-549. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00197
  8. Haerpfer, C., Inglehart, R., Moreno, A., Welzel, C., Kizilova, K., Diez-Medrano J., M. Lagos, P. Norris, E. Ponarin & B. Puranen et al. (eds.). (2020). World Values Survey: Round Seven – Country-Pooled Datafile. Madrid, Spain & Vienna, Austria: JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat. http://doi.org/10.14281/18241.1 Retrieved 20 July 2022.
  9. Holmes, S. (2013). Fresh fruit, broken bodies: Migrant farmworkers in the United States. University of California Press.
  10. Hurd, R. W. (1973). Strategies for Union Growth In Food Manufacturing and Agriculture. ILR, 267-274. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1813/74907 22 May 2023
  11. International Labour Office, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, & International Union of Food and Allied Workers' Associations. (2007). Agricultural workers and their contribution to sustainable agriculture and rural development. ILO. Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_dialogue/@actrav/documents/publication/wcms_113732.pdf 7 October 2022
  12. Jamieson, S. M. (1946). Labor unionism in American agriculture.
  13. Khıtakhunov, A. (2020). Agriculture in the Eurasian economic union: Analysıs of trends and challenges. Eurasian research journal, 2(2), 37-53. 3 October 2022
  14. Majka, L. C., & Majka, T. J. (1982). Farm workers, agribusiness, and the state. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
  15. Martin, P. L. (2015). Immigration and farm labor: Challenges and opportunities.
  16. Martin, P. L. (2016). Migrant workers in commercial agriculture. International Labour Office, Sectoral Policies Department, Conditions of Work and Equality Department. Retrieved from https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---migrant/documents/publication/wcms_538710.pdf 5 October 2022
  17. Otieno, O. G., Wandeda, D. O., & Mwamadzingo, M. (2021). Trade union membership dynamics amidst COVID-19: Does social dialogue matter? International Journal of Labour Research, 10(1-2).
  18. Schwartz, H. (1941). Organizational problems of agricultural labor unions. Journal of Farm Economics, 23(2), 456. https://doi.org/10.2307/1231643
  19. Sims, S. (2021). American agriculture’s dependence on immigrant workers. Retrieved from https://ualr.edu/socialchange/2021/03/28/american-agricultures-dependence-on-immigrant-workers/, 15 May 2023.
  20. Uppal, S. (2011). Unionization 2011 (75-001-X). Statistics Canada.
  21. Wellman, D. (1997). The union makes us strong: Radical unionism on the San Francisco Waterfront. Cambridge University Press.
  22. Khıtakhunov, A. (2020). Agriculture in the Eurasian economic union: Analysıs of trends and challenges. Eurasian research journal, 2(2), 37-53. 3 October 2022