Journals / Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 59 - Sayı: 1

Investigation of agricultural supports on forage crop production: a perspective of the effects of supports on the basis of regions

Yem bitkileri üretimine yönelik tarımsal desteklerin araştırılması: Desteklerin bölgeler temelinde etkilerine bir bakış

Pages
1–15
Publication Date
2022-03-30
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)

Conclusion: Giving forage crops supports considering the crops production pattern and geographical conditions of the regions will contribute more to the increase in forage crops production.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Although the farmers producing forage crops have been supported since 2000, the targeted level of forage crop production has not been reached.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Hence a study was conducted and the objective of this t was to determine the factors affecting the increase in forage crop production at the regional level.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Giving forage crops supports considering the crops production pattern and geographical conditions of the regions will contribute more to the increase in forage crops production.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:regresyon analizi · Tarımsal destekler · yem bitkisi üretimi

Abstract

Objective: Although the farmers producing forage crops have been supported since 2000, the targeted level of forage crop production has not been reached. Hence a study was conducted and the objective of this t was to determine the factors affecting the increase in forage crop production at the regional level. Material and Methods: The Central Anatolia and Eastern Anatolia Regions, where forage crop production is common in Turkey, were selected. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews with randomly selected 980 forage crop producers. Linear regression analysis was used to analyze the data. Results: It has been determined that the most important variables affecting the increase in forage crop production in both regions are the presence of land and the number of animals. An increase of 1 hectare in the irrigated land led to an increase in the production of 2.77 hectares of vetch crop (Vicia sativa L.) in the Central Anatolia Region. In the Eastern Anatolia Region, it was determined that this situation caused an increase in the production of 4.69 hectares of alfalfa crops (Medicago sativa L.). After the subsidies, the forage crop production of the non-animal farmers was approximately 2.14 times higher than the livestock farmers. Conclusion: Giving forage crops supports considering the crops production pattern and geographical conditions of the regions will contribute more to the increase in forage crops production.

Özet

Amaç: 2000 yılından itibaren yem bitkisi üreten çiftçilerin desteklenmesine rağmen, yem bitkisi üretimi hedeflenen seviye ulaşılamamıştır. Bu çalışmada, bölgeler düzeyinde yem bitkisi üretim artışına etki eden faktörlerin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Materyal ve Yöntem: Türkiye’de yem bitkisi üretiminin yaygın olarak yapıldığı Orta Anadolu ve Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi seçilmiştir. Rastgele seçilen 980 yem bitkisi üreticisiyle yüz yüze görüşülerek anket yoluyla veriler toplanmıştır. Verileri analiz etmek için doğrusal regresyon analizi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma Bulguları: Her iki bölgede de yem bitkisi üretim artışına etki eden en önemli değişkenlerin arazi varlığı ve hayvan sayısı olduğu saptanmıştır. Sulu arazideki 1 hektarlık artış, İç Anadolu Bölgesi’nde 2,77 hektar fiğ bitkisi (Vicia sativa L.) üretiminde artışa neden olmuştur. Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi’nde ise bu durumun 4,69 hektar yonca bitkisinin (Medicago sativa L.) üretim artışına neden olduğu saptanmıştır. Desteklerden sonra, hayvancılık yapmayan çiftçilerin hayvancılık yapanlara kıyasla yem bitkisi üretimi yaklaşık olarak 2,14 kat daha fazla olmuştur. Sonuç: Yem bitkisi desteklerinin bölgelerin bitkisel üretim deseni ve coğrafik şartları dikkate alınarak verilmesi, yem bitkisi üretim artışına daha fazla katkı sağlayacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

CEVHER, C., ALTUNKAYNAK, B., ATASEVEN, Y., KÖKSAL, Ö., BAYRAMOĞLU, Z., YAVUZ, G. G. (2022). Investigation of agricultural supports on forage crop production: a perspective of the effects of supports on the basis of regions. Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 59 - Sayı: 1, 1–15. https://ajindex.com/articles/386068

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Abah, R.C. & B.M. Petja, 2015. The socio-economic factors affecting agricultural development in the Lower River Benue Basin. Journal of Biology, Agriculture and Healthcare, 5 (24): 84-94.
  2. Acar, Z., M. Tan, I. Ayan, O.O. Asci, H. Mut, U. Basaran, E. Gulumser, M. Can & G. Kaymak, 2020. Türkiye’de yem bitkileri tarımının durumu ve geliştirme olanakları. Turkey Agricultural Engineering IX. Technical Congress (January 13-17, 2020,
  3. Ankara, Turkey). Adam, M.K., A.W. Scott & G.B. Colin, 2012. An exploration of livestock-development policies in western China. Food Policy, 37(1): 12-20.
  4. Ahn, B. & S. Han, 2016. Analysis on the effects of government's support for forage production. The Korean Journal of Agricultural Economics, 57(3): 55-78.
  5. Agirbas N.C., K. Sapmaz & A. Koc. 2017, The effects of agricultural supports on forage crops of cultivation area and amount of production in Eskişehir Province. Atatürk University, Journal of the Agricultural Faculty, 48(1): 65-72.
  6. Agostinho, F., M.W. Oliveira, F.M. Pulselli, C. Almeida & B.F. Giannetti, 2019. Emergy accounting as a support for a strategic planning towards a regional sustainable milk production. Agricultural Systems, 176: 102647. Aksu, N. & I. Dellal, 2016. An evaluation for Afyonkarahisar Province on relationship of feed crops subsidy with bovine livestock activities. Yuzuncu Yil University Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 26 (1): 52-60.
  7. Alene, A.D. & V.M. Manyong, 2007. The effects of education on agricultural productivity under traditional and improved technology in Northern Nigeria: An endogenous switching regression analysis. Empirical Economics, 32(1): 141-159.
  8. Altındeger, M. & B. Hekimoglu, 2017. TR831 Samsun ili hayvancılık sektörü üretim, sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Working Paper, Samsun Gıda Tarım ve Hayvancılık İl Müdürlüğü. Asfaw, A. & A. Admassie, 2004. The role of education on the adoption of chemical fertiliser under different socioeconomic environments in Ethiopia. Elsevier, Agricultural Economics, 30(3): 215-228. Aslan M. & I. Boz. 2005, Factors ınfluencing the agricultural use of direct income support. Turkish Journal of Agricultural Economics, 11(2): 61-70.
  9. Ata, N. & H. Yılmaz, 2015. Reflections of implementations of livestock production support polices on dairy farms in Turkey: The Case of Burdur Province. SDU Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, 10(1): 44-54.
  10. Avazov, S. 2013. Socio-economic features of the agro-pastoralists in the Zarafshan Valley, NW Tajikistan. Young Researchers’ Forum of