Journals / International Scientific and Vocational Studies Journal / 2023 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1

Determination of Current Status of The Criteria and Indicators Used in Rural Development Studies: The Case of Isparta Villages

Pages
27–37
Publication Date
2023-06-30
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)

According to the results of the research, it was determined that 4 social criteria and 38 indicators, 7 economic criteria and 32 indicators, 4 political criteria and 16 indicators, 4 environmental criteria and 15 indicators were used in rural development studies in the past.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Rural development is the work aimed at improving rural local conditions that bring negative effects to human life.
📊
Key Findings & Data:According to the results of the research, it was determined that 4 social criteria and 38 indicators, 7 economic criteria and 32 indicators, 4 political criteria and 16 indicators, 4 environmental criteria and 15 indicators were used in rural development studies in the past.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:For today's rural development studies, 8 social criteria and 36 indicators, 6 economic criteria and 35 indicators, 6 political criteria and 21 indicators, 6 environmental criteria and 28 indicators have been determined.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Development · Rural development · Criteria and indicators

Abstract

Rural development is the work aimed at improving rural local conditions that bring negative effects to human life. In rural development studies, the problems of rural communities are identified and defined, and suitable solutions are developed according to these problems. The problems encountered in rural development are determined within the framework of rural development indicators and the criteria that these indicators reflect. In this study, criteria and indicators that were used in the past in rural development practices and that should be added today have been determined. The study was carried out based on the villages of Isparta Province. According to the results of the research, it was determined that 4 social criteria and 38 indicators, 7 economic criteria and 32 indicators, 4 political criteria and 16 indicators, 4 environmental criteria and 15 indicators were used in rural development studies in the past. For today's rural development studies, 8 social criteria and 36 indicators, 6 economic criteria and 35 indicators, 6 political criteria and 21 indicators, 6 environmental criteria and 28 indicators have been determined.

Özet

Rural development is the work aimed at improving rural local conditions that bring negative effects to human life. In rural development studies, the problems of rural communities are identified and defined, and suitable solutions are developed according to these problems. The problems encountered in rural development are determined within the framework of rural development indicators and the criteria that these indicators reflect. In this study, criteria and indicators that were used in the past in rural development practices and that should be added today have been determined. The study was carried out based on the villages of Isparta Province. According to the results of the research, it was determined that 4 social criteria and 38 indicators, 7 economic criteria and 32 indicators, 4 political criteria and 16 indicators, 4 environmental criteria and 15 indicators were used in rural development studies in the past. For today's rural development studies, 8 social criteria and 36 indicators, 6 economic criteria and 35 indicators, 6 political criteria and 21 indicators, 6 environmental criteria and 28 indicators have been determined.

🔖

Cite This Article

TOLUNAY, A., EKEMEN, O. F. (2023). Determination of Current Status of The Criteria and Indicators Used in Rural Development Studies: The Case of Isparta Villages. International Scientific and Vocational Studies Journal, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 1, 27–37. https://ajindex.com/articles/952380

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. F.V. Savaş, Kalkınma Ekonomisi (İkinci Baskı), İ. İ. T. İ. A. Nihat Sayar Yardım Vakfı Yayınları, No:315/547, İstanbul, 1979
  2. U. Geray, Ekonomi, İ.Ü. Orman Fakültesi Yayınları, İ.Ü. Yayın No: 3633, Or. Fak. Yayın No:408, İstanbul, 1991
  3. P. Oakley ve C. Garforth, Guide to extension training, FAO Training Series, No: 11, FAO, Rome, 1985
  4. A. Akyol, A. Tolunay, “Türkiye’de Sürdürülebilir Orman Kaynakları Yönetimi İlkeleri, Göstergeleri ve Uygulamaları” Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 10 (2), 221–234, 2006
  5. A. Tolunay, “Sosyal Ormancılık ve Türkiye Açısından Önemi”, Doktora Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul, 1998
  6. A. Tolunay, A. Akyol, Kalkınma ve Kırsal Kalkınma, SDÜ Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(2): 116-127, 2006
  7. Isparta İli Haritası. Kaynak: https://s.milimaj.com/others/image/harita/isparta-ili-haritasi.png Erişim Tarihi: 10 Ocak 2023 [8] Isparta İli Nüfusu ve Yüzölçümü. Kaynak: https://www.nufusu.com/il/isparta-nufusu Erişim Tarihi: 12 Ocak 2023
  8. Isparta İli, Kaynak: http://www.isparta.gov.tr/isparta Erişim Tarihi: 15 Ocak 2023
  9. G. Ergil, Türk Köyünde Modernleşme Eğilimleri Araştırması (Rapor II), DPT Yayınları, Yayın No: 999, İstanbul, 1971. [11]Y. Anıl, Yukarı Çulhalı Orman Köyü ' nün Sosyoekonomik Dokusu, Ormancılık Araştırma Enstitüsü Yayınları, Teknik Bülten Serisi No: 57, Ankara, 1973
  10. Y. Anıl, Orman Köylerinin Oluşumuna Tarihsel Açıdan Bakış, Ormancılık Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi, Yıl: 1974, Cilt: 20, Sayı: 2, Ankara, 1974. [13]E. Geray, U. ve E. Acun, Orman Köylülerinin Kentlileşmesi ve Orman Köy İlişkileri (Safranbolu Örneği), İ.Ü. Orman Fakültesi Yayınları, İ.Ü. Yayın No:2640, O.F. Yayın No:279, İstanbul, 1980
  11. U. Geray, Konya'daki Proje Köylerinin (Bağrıkurt, Beykavağı, Küçükmuhsine) Sosyoekonomik Koşulları, İstanbul. 1993
  12. T. Porsuk, “Sürdürülebilir Ormancılık İçin Kriterler, Göstergeler ve Türkiye’deki Durum” Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 2000
  13. A. Akyol, “Türkiye’de Sürdürülebilir Orman Kaynakları Yönetimi İlkeleri, Göstergeleri ve Uygulamalar” Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 2004
  14. G. Üçok, “Türkiye’de Orman İşletmeleri Düzeyinde Sürdürülebilir Orman Yönetimi Sosyoekonomik Göstergelerine Ait Standartların Belirlenmesi: İzmir Orman Bölge Müdürlüğü Örneği” Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Isparta, 2013. [18]