KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Uluslararası tarım araştırmalarında yenilikçi yaklaşımlar dergisi (Online) / 2020 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2

Ipard Supported Beekeeping Businesses’ Socio-economical Structure and Problems: A Case Study of Van

Coşar TOSUN
Cennet OĞUZ
Sayfa
189–209
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)

Government supported businesses percentage is 19, while 89% is not supported by the government.When the educational level is examined 69% of the businesses had had some education about beekeeping, while 31% had nothad any

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In this study, IPARD (Instrument for Precession on Agricultural and Rural Development) promoted businesses are examined in Vanprovince based on investments on agricultural businesses to restructure and upgrade to community standards.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The study was conducte don full count method of 94 businesses through filled questionnaires based on 2016’s production data.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Government supported businesses percentage is 19, while 89% is not supported by the government.When the educational level is examined 69% of the businesses had had some education about beekeeping, while 31% had nothad any
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:2016 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

In this study, IPARD (Instrument for Precession on Agricultural and Rural Development) promoted businesses are examined in Vanprovince based on investments on agricultural businesses to restructure and upgrade to community standards. The aim of thisstudy is to determine not only whether IPARD programme has led the businesses modernization or improved the number of theenterprises but also defining the problems by examining the business managers’ socioeconomically statuses and thereforesuggesting solutions, in Van Province, holds an important place in honey production throughout Turkey. The study was conducte don full count method of 94 businesses through filled questionnaires based on 2016’s production data. The mean age of the businessmanagers is 36,4 and men/women percentage is 79% to 21 % respectively. 43% of the managers are found to live on by justbeekeeping, while 57% has off-farm income. Examined businesses owners’ questionnaires showed 71% are pleased to dobeekeeping and the rest not. Government supported businesses percentage is 19, while 89% is not supported by the government.When the educational level is examined 69% of the businesses had had some education about beekeeping, while 31% had nothad any

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

TOSUN, C., OĞUZ, C. (2020). Ipard Supported Beekeeping Businesses’ Socio-economical Structure and Problems: A Case Study of Van. Uluslararası tarım araştırmalarında yenilikçi yaklaşımlar dergisi (Online), Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2, 189–209. https://ajindex.com/articles/339770

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (11)

  1. Akyol, E., A. Korkmaz, Yeninar and I. Çakmak (2008). An observation study on the effects of queen age on some characteristics of honeybee colonies. It. J. Anim. Sci.,7(1), 19-25.
  2. Akyol, E. And O. Kaftanoğlu (2001). Colony characteristics and the performance of Caucasian (Apis mellifera caucasica) and Mugla (Apis mellifera anatoliaca) bees and their reciprocal crosses. J. Apic. Res., 40(3-4), 11-15.
  3. Akyol, E., D. Özkök and M. A. Kaya (1999). A Study on the determination of the best genotypes for the region by comparison of colony development and honey characteristics of Mugla, ındigenous and Caucasian Honeybee (Apis mellifera L.) genotypes in Hadim Region. TKV technical Bee Journal, 64, 10-15.
  4. Anonymous (2008). Instrument for pre-accession assistance rural development (IPARD) Program (2007- 2013). Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Ankara.
  5. Anonymous (2015). Instrument for pre-accession assistance rural development (IPARD) Program (2014- 2020).
  6. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Ankara.
  7. Arısoy, H. and C. Oğuz (2005). Level of utilization of newly developed wheat varieties by agricultural research ınstitutes in agricultural enterprises and comparative economic analysis with traditional varieties -Konya province example- Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Development, Publication no: 130, Ankara.
  8. Barlovic, N., J. Kezic, O. N. Benedic and Z. Grgic (2009). Economic efficiency of beekeeping in Croatia. Agric. Conspec. Sci.,, 74(1), 51-54.
  9. Bayramoğlu, Z. (2003). Economic analysis of dairy cattle project (100 X 2) in Konya, Graduate Thesis, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences. Selcuk University, Konya. Ćejvanović, Z., Z. Grgić, A. Maksimović and D. Bićani (2011). Assumptions of economic model for sustainable productions of beekeeping in the Bosnia and Hercegovina. J. Agric. Sci. Tech., 5 (4), 481- 485. Çakmak, İ., L. Aydın, S. Seven and M. Korkut (2003). Beekeeping survey results in the Southern Marmara Region. Uludağ Bee Journal, February 2003,
  10. Bursa. Çiçek, A. And A.A.Yücer (1993). A research on the place, economic significance and problems of beekeeping in Tokat. J. Gaziosmanpaşa University. Faculty of Agriculture, 10 (1), 150-160.
  11. Doğaroğlu, M. (1981). Highlights of the grown in Turkey bee race and type comparison of the performance conditions in the Çukurova region. (Doctoral Thesis), Ç.Ü. Faculty of Agriculture, Adana, 82 s. Erkan, C. and Y. Aşkın (2001). Apiculture and Beekeeping Activities in Van Province. Bahçesaray Dist