KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Adam Akademi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1

Aydın Yöresinde Kırsal Kalkınma Yatırımları Destekleme Programının Etkisinin Değerlendirilmesi Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Research to Evaluate the Impact of the Rural Development Investment Support Program in the Aydın Region

Fatih Karaman, Ferit Çobanoğlu

Sayfa
33–50
Yayın Tarihi
2026-05-14
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Aydın İlinde Kırsal Kalkınma Yatırımlarının Destekleme Programının (KKYDP) tarım sektörüne katkısı ve Çiftçiler üzerindeki etkisinin değerlendirilmesidir. Destekleme programının uygulandığı Çine, Karpuzlu, Germencik ve Sultanhisar İlçelerinden seçilen üreticilerle yüz yüze görüşme şeklinde gerçekleştirilen anket uygulama formlarından elde edilen veriler araştırmanın ana materyalini oluşturmaktadır. Anket çalışmasında, 2022 ve 2023 yıllarında KKYDP kapsamında alet makine desteğinden faydalanan 46 üretici ile çalışma yapılmış, üreticilere destekleme programı ile ilgili değişik ana başlıklarda sorular yöneltilmiştir. Üreticilere destekleme öncesi ve sonrası işçi istihdamı, ürün verimlilik ve işletme karlılığı, destekleme programının alet makine alımına etkisinin belirlenmesine yönelik olmak üzere sorular sorulmuş ayrıca KKYDP’nin uygulanmasında ve daha çok başarılı olmasının sağlanması için nelerin yapılması gerektiği, söz konusu programın avantajlı ve dezavantajlı yönleri sorulmuş ve alınan cevaplar çalışma kapsamında irdelenmiştir.

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the contribution of the Rural Development Investment Support Program (RDISP) to the agricultural sector and its impact on farmers in Aydın province. The main material of the research is the data obtained from the questionnaire application forms, which were conducted as personal interviews with the selected producers from the districts of Çine, Karpuzlu, Germencik, and Sultanhisar, where the support program is implemented. In the survey study, 46 producers who benefited from the support for tools and machinery under the RDISP in 2022 and 2023 were interviewed. Questions were asked to the producers under different main headings related to the support program. The producers were asked questions about the employment of workers before and after the support, the productivity of products and the profitability of the business, the impact of the support program on the purchase of tools and machinery, what should be done to ensure that the RDISP is implemented and becomes more successful, the advantages and disadvantages of the program in question, and the answers received were examined in the context of the study.

Anahtar kelimeler
🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Karaman, F., Çobanoğlu, F. (2026). Aydın Yöresinde Kırsal Kalkınma Yatırımları Destekleme Programının Etkisinin Değerlendirilmesi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Adam Akademi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 1, 33–50. https://doi.org/10.31679/adamakademi.1553438

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

Kaynakça (36)

  1. Abid, M., Schneider, U. A., & Scheffran, J. (2016). Adaptation to climate change and its impacts on food productivity and crop income: Perspectives of farmers in rural Pakistan. Journal of Rural. Studies, 47, Part A, 254–266. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.08.005.
  2. Adebayo, O., Bolarin, O., Oyewale, A., & Kehinde, O. (2018). Impact of irrigation technology use on crop yield, crop income and household food security in Nigeria: A treatment effect approach. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 3(2), 154–171. DOI: 10.3934/agrfood.2018.2.154.
  3. Adu-Baffour, F., Daum, T., & Birner, R. (2019). Can small farms benefit from big companies’ initiatives to promote mechanization in Africa? A case study from Zambia. Food Policy 84, 133–145. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2019.03.007.
  4. Akdoğan, İ. & Gülçubuk, B. (2022). The impact of rural development investments support programme on local development in Konya province. The Journal of Agricultural Economics Researches, 8(1): 57-66.
  5. Ali, A., Rahut, D. B., & Behera, B. (2016). Factors influencing farmers' adoption of energy-based water pumps and impacts on crop productivity and household income in Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 54, 48–57. DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.073.
  6. Azis, M., Saputra, Y.H., & Setiyanto, A. (2021). Factors affecting sustainability of agricultural machinery assistance program. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 892, 012018, 1-18. DOI: :10.1088/1755-1315/892/1/012018.
  7. Benin, S. (2015). Impact of Ghana's agricultural mechanization services center program. Agricultural Economics, 46, 103–117. DOI: 10.1111/agec.12201.
  8. Biggs, S. & Justice, S. (2015). Rural and agricultural mechanization: A history of the spread of small engines in selected Asian countries. http://csisa.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/2/2014/06/BiggsJusticeIFPRI_DP_01443.pdf [08.04.2024].
  9. Cunguara, B. & Darnhofer, I. (2011). Assessing the impact of improved agricultural technologies on household income in rural Mozambique. Food Policy 36(3), 378–390. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.03.002.
  10. Çobanoğlu, F., Yılmaz, H.İ., Tunalıoğlu, R., Bozkıran, S., Nalbantoğlu, A., & Yıldız, H. (2017). Assessment of impact of rural development investments support programme: Problems and possible solution suggestions. Institute of Agricultural Economics and Policy Development, TEPGE, No: 275, 1-323. https://arastirma.tarimorman.gov.tr/tepge/Menu/53/Yayin-Arsivi [10.10.2024].
  11. De Janvry, A., Macours, K., & Sadoulet, E. (2016). Introduction. Learning for adopting: Technology adoption in developing country agriculture (1–9). Policy briefs from the workshop organized by Ferdi, Cerdi and SPIA on June 1 and 2, 2016, in Clermont-Ferrand. De Janvry, A., Macours, K., & Sadoulet, E. (eds.). https://are.berkeley.edu/esadoulet/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/learning_for_adopting.pdf [10.02.2024].
  12. Foster, A.D., & Rosenzweig, M.R. (2010). Microeconomics of technology adoption. Annual Review of Economics, 2, 395–424. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.economics.102308.124433.
  13. Gollin, D., Morris, M., & Byerlee, D. (2005). Technology adoption in intensive post-green revolution systems. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(5), 1310–1316. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8276.2005.00824.x.
  14. Hatibu, N. (2013). Investing in agricultural mechanization for development in East Africa in mechanization for rural development: A review of patterns and progress from around the world. eds. J. Kienzle, J., Ashburner, j., & Sims, B.G. (eds.), 20 (Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 1–13.
  15. Hayami, Y., & Ruttan, V.W. (1971). Agricultural development: An international perspective. Baltimore, Md/London: The Johns Hopkins Press.
  16. Hayami, Y., Ruttan, V.W. (1985). Agricultural development: An international perspective. Revised and Expanded version. Baltimore, Md/London: The Johns Hopkins Press.
  17. Jack, B. Kelsey (2013) Market inefficiencies and the adoption of agricultural technologies in developing countries. White Paper. Agricultural Technology Adoption Initiative, JPAL (MIT) and CEGA (UC Berkeley). https://escholarship.org/content/qt6m25r19c/qt6m25r19c.pdf?t=oa7jim [05.09.2023].
  18. Jaleta, M., Kassie, M., & Erenstein, O. (2015). Determinants of maize stover utilization as feed, fuel and soil amendment in mixed crop-livestock systems, Ethiopia. Agricultural Systems 134, 17–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2014.08.010.
  19. Jena, P.R. (2019). Can minimum tillage enhance productivity? Evidence from smallholder farmers in Kenya. Journal of Cleaner Production, 218, 465–475. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.278.
  20. Jena, P.R. & Tanti, P.C. (2023). Effect of farm machinery adoption on household income and food security: evidence from a nationwide household survey in India. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7:922038. DOI: 10.3389/fsufs.2023.922038.
  21. Kalton, G. (2023). Probability vs. nonprobability sampling: From the birth of survey sampling to the present day. Statistics in Transition new series, June 2023, 24(3), 1-22. DOI: 10.59170/stattrans-2023-029.
  22. Kassie, M., Shiferaw, B., & Muricho, G. (2011). Agricultural technology, crop income, and poverty alleviation in Uganda. World Development 39 (10), 1784–1795. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.04.023
  23. Liu, Z., Ying, H., Chen, M., Bai, J., Xue, Y., Yin, Y., & et al. (2021). Optimization of China’s maize and soy production can ensure feed sufficiency at lower nitrogen and carbon footprints. Nature Food, 2, 426–433. DOI: 10.1038/s43016-021-00300-1.
  24. Mahmud, S., Nessa, Q., Hossain, M., & Amir Hossain, M.M. (2014). Impact Evaluation of Enhancement of Agricultural Production and Rural Employment through Extension of Agricultural Engineering Technologies (2nd revised). Evaluation Sector Implementation Monitoring and Evaluation Division (IMED), Ministry of Planning, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, June 2014.
  25. Ma, W., Zhu, Z., & Zhou, X. (2022). Agricultural mechanization and cropland abandonment in rural China. Applied Economics Letters, 29(6), 526–533. DOI: 10.1080/13504851.2021.1875113. UKKS (2014). Ulusal Kırsal Kalkınma Stratejisi 2014-2020. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2015/02/20150221-12-1.pdf [04.02.2024].
  26. Olmstead, A.L. & Rhode, P. (1993). Induced innovation in American Agriculture: A reconsideration. Journal of Political Economy, 101(1), 100–118. DOI: 10.1086/261867.
  27. Paudel, G.P., Dilli Bahadur, K.C., Rahut, D.B., Khanal, N.P., Justice, S.E., & McDonald, A.J. (2019a). Smallholder farmers' willingness to pay for scale-appropriate farm mechanization: Evidence from the mid-hills of Nepal. Technology in Society, 59, 101196. DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101196.
  28. Paudel, G.P., Dilli Bahadur, K.C, Rahut, D.B., Justice, S.E., & McDonald, A.J. (2019b). Scale-appropriate mechanization impacts on productivity among smallholders: Evidence from rice systems in the mid-hills of Nepal. Land Use Policy 85, 104–113. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.030.
  29. Pingali, P. (2007). Agricultural mechanization: adoption patterns and economic impact. Handbook of Agricultural Economics 3, 2779–2805. DOI: 10.1016/S1574-0072(06)03054-4.
  30. Rahman, M. S., Miah, M.M., & Hossain, S. (2011). Impact of farm mechanization on labour use for wheat cultivation in northern Bangladesh. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 21(3), 589–594.
  31. Sims, B. & Kienzle, J. (2017). Sustainable agricultural mechanization for smallholders: What is it and how can we implement it? Agriculture 7(6), 50. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture7060050.
  32. Tan, S., Özen, A., & Everest, B. (2016). The evaluation of agriculturally based investment grant projects within the scope of rural development supports: The case of Aydın province. COMU Journal of Agriculture Faculty, 4(2): 29-36.
  33. The jamovi project (2024). jamovi (Version 2.5) [Computer Software]. https://www.jamovi.org [05.05.2024]. Topcu, Y. (2008). Effective factors’ analysis on willingness to utilize from farmers’ agricultural support policies: The case study of Erzurum province. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences, 21(2), 205-212.
  34. Vortia, P., Nasrin, M., Bipasha, S.K., & Islam, M.M. (2021). Extent of farm mechanization and technical efficiency of rice production in some selected areas of Bangladesh. GeoJournal 86, 729–742. DOI: 10.1007/s10708-019-10095-1.
  35. Yan, L., Yin-He, S., Qian, Y., Zhi-Yu, S., Chun-Zi, W., & Zi-Yun, L. (2021). Method of reaching consensus on probability of food safety based on the integration of finite credible data on block chain. IEEE Access, 9, 123764–123776. DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3108178.
  36. Zhou, X. & Ma, W. (2022). Agricultural mechanization and land productivity in China. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 29(6), 530–542. DOI: 10.1080/13504509.2022.2051638.