KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1

Tractor Brand Preferences of Farmers: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach*

Murat Cankurt
Bülent Miran
Sayfa
13–17
Yayın Tarihi
2010-02-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Results indicate that when durability (0.35) took first place among of the purchase criteria, fuel economy (0.28), brand value (0.20), low price (0.09) and the dealer’s reliability (0.08) have been following respectively.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Decision making is a process of making a choice among alternatives, in order to achieve the goals and objectives.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Farmers' decision-making tractors brand choices are the process of making a choice among alternatives also.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Results indicate that when durability (0.35) took first place among of the purchase criteria, fuel economy (0.28), brand value (0.20), low price (0.09) and the dealer’s reliability (0.08) have been following respectively.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Tractor marketing · brand preference

Özet

Decision making is a process of making a choice among alternatives, in order to achieve the goals and objectives. Farmers' decision-making tractors brand choices are the process of making a choice among alternatives also. The purpose of this study, farmers in the choosing of the tractor brand to determine what criteria they are given priority. And according to these criteria, to determine which brands they preferred. As criteria; low price, durability, fuel economy, dealer’s reliability, and brand value are taken into account in the model. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is used in the analysis of the data. Results indicate that when durability (0.35) took first place among of the purchase criteria, fuel economy (0.28), brand value (0.20), low price (0.09) and the dealer’s reliability (0.08) have been following respectively.

Abstract

Decision making is a process of making a choice among alternatives, in order to achieve the goals and objectives. Farmers' decision-making tractors brand choices are the process of making a choice among alternatives also. The purpose of this study, farmers in the choosing of the tractor brand to determine what criteria they are given priority. And according to these criteria, to determine which brands they preferred. As criteria; low price, durability, fuel economy, dealer’s reliability, and brand value are taken into account in the model. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is used in the analysis of the data. Results indicate that when durability (0.35) took first place among of the purchase criteria, fuel economy (0.28), brand value (0.20), low price (0.09) and the dealer’s reliability (0.08) have been following respectively.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Cankurt, M., Miran, B. (2010). Tractor Brand Preferences of Farmers: An Analytic Hierarchy Process Approach*. Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 13–17. https://ajindex.com/articles/1277405

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (13)

  1. Anonim (2003), Aydın Tarım İl Müdürlüğü DGD kayıtları. Aydın.
  2. Anonim (2005), Aydın Tarım İl Müdürlüğü İl Tarım Master Planı. Aydın.
  3. Braunschweig, T. and Becker, B., (2004), Choosing research priorities by using the analytic hierarchy process: an application to international agriculture. R&D Management. 34:77-86.
  4. Cankurt, M. (2008). Aydın Yöresinde Çiftçilerin Traktör Talebi, Kullanım Memnuniyeti ve Satın Alma Davranışlarının Belirlenmesi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Dr Tezi, Ege Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Bornova, İzmir.
  5. Cankurt, M., Miran, B., Gülsoylu, E., (2009). Farmers’ Tractor Preferences via Conjoint Analysis. 25. Tarımsal Mekanizasyon Kongresi, Isparta.
  6. DPT, (2007), Dokuzuncu Beş Yıllık kalkınma Planı, Otomotiv Sanayii Özel İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu, Ankara.
  7. Evcim H.Ü., Ulusoy E, Gülsoylu E, Sındır K., İçöz, E., (2005), Türkiye Tarımı Makineleşme Durumu, Türkiye Ziraat Mühendisleri VI. Teknik Kongresi, Ankara.
  8. Forman, E.H. and Selly, M.A., (2000), Decision by Objectives, How to Convince Others That You are Right. World Scientific, Singapore, 402 p.
  9. Miran B., (2003), Temel İstatistik Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi ISBN 975-9308800 Bornova İzmir.
  10. Prakash, T.N., (2003), Land Suitability Analysis for Agricultural Crops: A Fuzzy Multicriteria Decision Making Approach. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation, Enschede, The Netherlands.
  11. Rommelfanger, H.J., (2003), A Fuzzy Logic Approach to Multicriteria Decision Making. Institute of Statistics and Mathematics, J.W. Goethe-University of Frankfurt, Mertonstrasse, Frankfurt, Germany.
  12. Saaty, T.L., (1980), The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, New York.
  13. Saaty, T.L., L.G. Vargas, and Dellmann, K., (2003), The allocation of intangible resources: the analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences. 37:169–184.