SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 19

2001-2008 yıllarında Türkiye'de uygulanan alternatif tarım politikalarının gelir çarpan analizi ve politika önerileri

Celal TAŞDOĞAN
Ahmet ŞAHİNÖZ
Selim ÇAĞATAY
Pages
161–182
Publication Date
2022-10-11
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)

Premium payments result in a relative improvement in rural income when compared to deficiency payments.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study analyzes impacts of agricultural support, over the period of 2001-2008 in Turkey, given mostly in the form of direct income support (DIS) and premium payments on incomes of rural households, besides compares the outcomes of hypothetical scenarios related to DIS, premium and deficiency payments.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Main methodology of the study involves use of income multipliers which are calculated basing on the database obtained by disaggregation of social accounting matrix in Turkey and on the solution algorithms of Leontief input-output model.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Premium payments result in a relative improvement in rural income when compared to deficiency payments.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2001-2008 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study analyzes impacts of agricultural support, over the period of 2001-2008 in Turkey, given mostly in the form of direct income support (DIS) and premium payments on incomes of rural households, besides compares the outcomes of hypothetical scenarios related to DIS, premium and deficiency payments. Main methodology of the study involves use of income multipliers which are calculated basing on the database obtained by disaggregation of social accounting matrix in Turkey and on the solution algorithms of Leontief input-output model. According to empirical findings, finalizing DIS payments creates a deterioration not only in rural but also in urban income. Premium payments result in a relative improvement in rural income when compared to deficiency payments.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Türkiye’de 2001-2008 yıllarında ağırlıklı olarak doğrudan gelir desteği (DGD) ve prim ödemeleri ile yapılan tarımsal desteklerin kırsal kesim hanehalkı gelirleri üzerindeki etkilerini incelemekle birlikte DGD, prim ödemeleri ve fark ödemeleriyle ilgili hipotetik senaryoları mukayese etmektedir. Çalışmada kullanılan temel yöntem, Türkiye için Sosyal Hesaplar Matrisi çerçevesinde yapılan ayrıştırmalar ile elde edilen veriler ve Leontief girdi-çıktı modelinin çözüm yöntemlerinin kullanılmasıyla gerçekleştirilen gelir çarpan analizidir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre DGD ödemelerinin sona erdirilmesi kırsal kesim hanehalkı yanı sıra kentsel hanehalkının gelirini de olumsuz etkilemektedir. Prim ve fark ödemesi politikaları karşılaştırıldığında ise prim ödemelerinin görece kırsal kesim gelirlerini daha olumlu etkilediği tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

TAŞDOĞAN, C., ŞAHİNÖZ, A., ÇAĞATAY, S. (2022). 2001-2008 yıllarında Türkiye'de uygulanan alternatif tarım politikalarının gelir çarpan analizi ve politika önerileri. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 19, 161–182. https://ajindex.com/articles/433163

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. BECKER U. (2001), « EU-Enlargements and Limits to Amendments of the E.C. Treaty », Jean Monnet Working Paper, n° 15, 2001, 18 p. BOULOUIS J. (1992), « Le droit des Communauté européennes dans ses rapports avec le droit international général », R.C.A.D.I., 1992, vol. IV, tome 235, pp. 9-80. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 22 novembre 1978, Mattheus c. Doego, aff. 93/78, Rec. 1978, p. 2203. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 29 mars 1979, Commission c. Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d’Irlande du Nord (Pommes de terre), aff. 231/78, Rec. 1979, p. 1447. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 13 juillet 1983, Forcheri c. État belge, aff. 152/82, Rec. 1983, p. 2323. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 3 juin 1986, Kempf c. Secrétaire d’État à la Justice, aff. 139/85, Rec. 1986, p. 1781. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 30 avril 1996,
  2. CIA Security c. Signalson, Rec. 1996, p. I-2201. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 14 janvier 1997, Centro-Com, aff. C-124/95, Rec. 1997, p. I-81. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 28 avril 1988, LAISA c. Conseil, affaires jointes 31 et 35/86, Rec. 1988, p. 2285. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 15 décembre 1995, Bosman c. UEFA, aff. C-415/93, Rec. 1995, p. I-4921. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 12 mai 1998, Commission c. Conseil, aff. C-170/96, Rec. 1998, p. I-2763. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 26 septembre 2000,
  3. Unilever Italia v. Central Food, C-443/98, Rec. 2000, p. I-7535. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 20 septembre 2001, Grzelczyk, aff. C-184/99, Rec. 2001, p. I-6193. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 17 septembre 2002, Baumbast, aff. C-413/99, Rec. 2002, p. I-7091. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 2 juin 2005, Commission c. Luxembourg, aff. C-266/03, Rec. 2005, p. I-4805. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 16 juin 2005, Pupino, aff. C-105/03, Rec. 2005, p. I-5285. C.J.C.E., arrêt du 13 septembre 2005, Commission c. Conseil, aff. C-176/03, Rec. 2005, p. I-7879. CHRISTOPHE TCHAKALOFF M.-F. (2000), « Les conditions de l’adhésion à l’Union européenne », in J. Rideau (dir.), De la Communauté de droit à l’Union de droit, Paris: L.G.D.J., 2000, pp. 287-298 COMMISSION EUROPEENNE, 2005, Document de stratégie pour l’élargissement – 2005,
  4. COM (2005) 561 final, du 9 novembre 2005, p. 3. COMMISSION EUROPEENNE, 2006, Document de stratégie d’élargissement et principaux défis 2006 - 2007. Y compris rapport spécial joint en annexe sur la capacité de l’UE à intégrer de nouveaux membres, COM (2006) 649 final, du 8 novembre 2006. COMMISSION EUROPEENNE, 2007, Document de stratégie pour l’élargissement et principaux défis pour 2007-2008,
  5. COM (2007) 663 final, du 6 novembre 2007.
  6. CONSEIL EUROPEEN, Conclusions de la Présidence du Conseil europé