Journals / Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1

The Impact of Livestock Supports on Production and Income of the Beef Cattle Farms: A Case of Samsun Province, Turkey

Pages
117–129
Publication Date
2022-10-17
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)

The results indicatethat the farmers, who have larger land and herd, highereducation level, keeping farm records, are mechanized andspecialized in beef cattle breeding were more likely to benefitfrom livestock supports than their counterparts.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:ABSTRACTAlthough the beef cattle sector has been considerablysupported during the last two decades, Turkey could not getits self-sufficiency yet.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The survey data wascollected from randomly selected 171 cattle farms in Samsunprovince of Turkey.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results indicatethat the farmers, who have larger land and herd, highereducation level, keeping farm records, are mechanized andspecialized in beef cattle breeding were more likely to benefitfrom livestock supports than their counterparts.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

ABSTRACTAlthough the beef cattle sector has been considerablysupported during the last two decades, Turkey could not getits self-sufficiency yet. The objective of this case study wasto examine the impacts of livestock supports on productionand income of beef cattle farms. The survey data wascollected from randomly selected 171 cattle farms in Samsunprovince of Turkey. The Treatment Effect Model was usedto measure the impacts of livestock supports on beef meatproduction and gross profit of the farms. The results indicatethat the farmers, who have larger land and herd, highereducation level, keeping farm records, are mechanized andspecialized in beef cattle breeding were more likely to benefitfrom livestock supports than their counterparts. TheTreatment Effect Model highlights that livestock support hasa statistically significant effect on the amount of beef meatproduced whereas it has no statistically significant effect onthe gross profits of the farms. The research recommendedthat the livestock supports are necessary for the sustainabilityof beef cattle farms. The farms should be encouraged to getrecords via Farm Accountancy Data Network and the recordkeeping farms should be supported by higher amounts.

🔖

Cite This Article

BOZOĞLU, M., EROĞLU, N. A., BİLGİÇ, A. (2022). The Impact of Livestock Supports on Production and Income of the Beef Cattle Farms: A Case of Samsun Province, Turkey. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1, 117–129. https://ajindex.com/articles/594770

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Acs S, Hanley N, Dallimer M, Gaston K J, Robertson P, Wilson P & Armsworth P R (2010). The effect of decoupling on marginal agricultural systems: Implications for farm incomes, land use and upland ecology. Land Use Policy 27(2): 550-563
  2. Aksoy A, Terin M & Keskin A (2012). Türkiye süt sığırcılığında ıslah ve destekleme politikalarının bölgesel etkileri üzerine bir araştırma. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 43(1): 59-64
  3. Alhas Eroğlu N (2017). Samsun ilinde hayvancılık desteklerinin besi işletmelerinin üretim ve gelirlerine etkileri. PhD Thesis, Ondokuz Mayis University (Published), Samsun, Turkey Angrist J D (2001). Estimation of limited dependent variable models with dummy endogenous regressors: Simple strategies for empirical practice. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 19(1): 2-28
  4. Anonymous (2015). Kırmızı Et Stratejisi. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, General Directorate of Livestock, Ankara,
  5. Turkey Anonymous (2016). http://www.tuketbir.org.tr/basin_detay.asp?gidenID=MzI=
  6. Anonymous (2018). Kalkınma Bakanlığı, 11. Kalkınma Planı, Tarım ve Gıdada Rekabetçi Üretim, Özel İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu, Ankara,
  7. Turkey Aydın E, Can M F, Aral Y, Cevger Y & Sakarya E (2010). Türkiye’de canlı hayvan ve kırmızı et ithalatı kararlarının sığır besicileri üzerine etkileri. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi 81(2): 51-57 Bartolini F & Viaggi D (2013). The common agricultural policy and the determinants of changes in EU farm size. Land Use Policy 31: 126-135
  8. Breen J P, Hennessy T C & Thorne FS (2005).The effect of decupling on the decision to produce: An Irish case study. Food Policy 30(2): 129-144 Chau N H & De Gorter H (2000). Disentangling the production and export consequences of direct farm income payments. In: American Agricultural Economics Association Meetings, July 30-August 2, No: 21854, Tampa, Florida Çelik C & Sarıözkan S (2017). Kırşehir ili merkez ilçede sığır besiciliği yapan işletmelerin ekonomik analizi. Harran Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 6(1): 38-45
  9. Demir N (2009). Destekleme politikalarının hayvancılık sektörü üzerine etkilerinin bölgesel karşılaştırmalı analizi. PhD Thesis, Atatürk University (Published), Erzurum, Turkey Demir N & Yavuz F (2010). Hayvancılık destekleme politikalarına çiftçilerin yaklaşımlarının bölgelerarası karşılaştırmalı analizi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 41(2): 113-121
  10. Douarin E, Bailey A, Davidova S, Gorton M & Latruffe L (2007). Structural, location an