Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=z_cDCnGYuYueCDNIAj9iyei7p9N9VtIg0-GwUO3b--4&_path=id%3D705047%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Den%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Determination of the Factors Affecting Turkish Olive Producer’s Adoption of Good Agricultural Practices in Marmara Region of Turkey

Year 2021, Volume: 24 Issue: 3, 515 - 521, 30.06.2021

Cenap Pilak Salih Ülger

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.705047
Cited By: 2

Abstract

This study was carried out with 63 farmers using good agricultural practices (GAP) in olive production in five districts of Balıkesir, Bursa and Tekirdag provinces located in the Marmara Region of Turkey by conducting a questionnaire survey. The farmers with GAP certificate produce either Gemlik (71.4%) or (28.6%) Ayvalık varieties. Survey forms were handed out to contract-based producers in November 2017 during olive harvest period. The data were evaluated using SPSS statistical program. The results showed that average size of farms producing olive oil with GAP are generally 60-65 decares (da) in size. The average age of olive producers is 58.7, who have been producing olives for an average of 39 years with an average GAP experience of 2.4 years. A positive relationship was evident between lower level of education and late adoption of GAP. The most important problem faced by growers was Verticillium wilting, followed by olive fly in recent years. The study revealed that the absence of a significant difference in the prices of olives and olive oils grown with or without GAP reduced the attractiveness of GAP production. Moreover, because of the lack of price policy in olives grown with GAP, olives are marketed along with conventionally produced ones in an equal conditions in the domestic market.

Keywords

GAP Olive Olea europaea

References

  • Aktürk D, Savran F, Can Niyaz Ö 2014. Tarımda Konvansiyonel Üretim ile İyi Tarım Uygulamalarının Karşılaştırılması: Çanakkale İlinde Şeftali ve Kiraz Örneği. XI. Ulusal Tarım Ekonomisi Kongresi 3-5 Eylül 2014 Samsun, 2: 748-755.
  • Anonymous 2010. İyi Tarım Uygulamaları Hakkında Yönetmelik. 7.12.2010 Anonymous 2017. T.C. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı İstatistikleri.
  • Anonymous 2018. www.tuik.gov.tr. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu İnternet Sitesi ve 27778 sayılı resmi gazete.
  • Annor BP, Mensah-Bonsu A, Jatoe JBD 2016. Compliance with GLOBALGAP standards among smallholder pineapple farmers in Akuapem-South, Ghana. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 6(1): 21-38. Doi:10.1108/JADEE-05-2013-0017
  • Bal T, Çerçinli F 2013. The analysis of cherry production and trade in Turkey: The case of Uluborlu district. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science 19(3): 398-415.
  • Colen L, Maertens M, Swinnen J 2012. Private standards, trade and poverty: GlobalGAP and horticultural employment in Senegal. World Economy, 35(8): 1073-1088. Doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2012.01463.x
  • Dannenberg P 2011. Overcoming exclusion-informal dealing with the standard GlobalGAP in the Kenyan horticulture industry. Geographische Zeitschrift, 99(4): 237-255.
  • FAO 2003. https://www.globalgap.org. (verified January 13, 2020).
  • Gutiérrez-Guzmán N, Serra JA, Dussan-Sarria S 2012. Priorización de factores críticos para implantar buenas prácticas agrícolas en pequeños productores. Cuadernos de Desarrollo Rural, 9(69): 221-237.
  • Henson S, Masakure O, Cranfield J 2011. Do fresh produce exporters in Sub-Saharan Africa benefit from GlobalGAP certification?. World Development, 39(3): 375-386. Doi:10.1016/j. worlddev.2010.06.012
  • Hinojosa-Rodríguez A, Parra-López C, Carmona-Torres C, Sayadi S, Gallardo-Cobos R 2013. Certified quality systems and farming practices in olive growing: The case of integrated production in Andalusia. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 29(4): 291-309. Doi:10.1017/ S174217051300015X
  • Holzapfel S, Wollni M 2014. Is GlobalGAP certification of small-scale farmers sustainable? Evidence from Thailand. Journal of Development Studies, 50(5): 731-747. Doi:10.1080/00220388. 2013.874558
  • Köksal, Ö. 2009. Organik zeytin yetiştiriciliğine kararverme davranışı üzerine etkili olan faktörlerin analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Tarım Ekonomisi Anabilim Dalı, Doktora Tezi.
  • Lang T, David B, Caraher M 2002. Food, social policy and the environment: Towards a new model. Social Policy & Administration, 35(5): 538-558. Doi:10.1111/1467-9515.t01-1-00252
  • Lemeilleur S 2013. Smallholder compliance with private standard certification: The case of GlobalGAP adoption by mango producers in Peru. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, 16(4):1-22.
  • Parra NSR, Figueredo CA, Villamil NSS 2015. Impact of the application of the GlobalGAP norm, in the Latin American Agro-food sector. Revista Colombiana de Investigaciones Agroindustriales, 2: 84-97. Doi:10.23850/24220582.173
  • Stock JH, Watson MW 2007. Introduction to Econometrics, Pearson Addison Wesley, Boston.
  • Subervie J, Vagneron I 2013. A drop of water in the Indian Ocean? The impact of GlobalGAP certification on lychee farmers in Madagascar. World Development, 50: 57-73. Doi:10.1016/ j.worlddev.2013.05.002
  • Tallontire A, Opondo M, Nelson V. 2014. Contingent spaces for smallholder participation in GlobalGAP: insights from Kenyan horticulture value chains. The Geographical Journal, 180(4): 353-364. Doi:10.1111/geoj.12047
  • Tey YS, Rajendran N, Brindal M, Sidique SFA, Shamsudin MN, Radam A, Hadi AHIA 2016. A review of an international sustainability standard (GlobalGAP) and its local replica (MyGAP). Outlook on Agriculture, 45(1): 67-72. Doi:10.5367/oa.2016.0230
  • Walley K, Custance P, Parsons S 2000. UK consumer attitudes concerning environmental issues impacting the agrifood industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 9: 355-366.

Türkiye’nin Marmara Bölgesindeki Türk Zeytin Üreticilerinin İyi Tarım Uygulamalarını Benimsemesini Etkileyen Faktörlerin Belirlenmesi

Year 2021, Volume: 24 Issue: 3, 515 - 521, 30.06.2021

Cenap Pilak Salih Ülger

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.705047
Cited By: 2

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Marmara Bölgesi'nde yer alan Balıkesir, Bursa ve Tekirdağ illerinin beş ilçesinde zeytin üretiminde iyi tarım uygulamaları (İTU) kullanan 63 çiftçi ile anket çalışması şeklinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. İTU sertifikalı çiftçiler çoğunlukla Gemlik (% 71.4) veya (% 28.6) Ayvalık çeşidi yetiştirmektedir. Anket formları Kasım 2017'de zeytin hasat döneminde sözleşmeye dayalı üreticilere dağıtılmıştır. Veriler SPSS istatistik programı kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuçlar, İTU ile zeytinyağı üreten zeytin bahçelerinin ortalama büyüklüğünün genellikle 60-65 dekar olduğunu göstermiştir. Zeytin üreticilerinin ortalama yaşı 58.7 yıl, zeytin üreticiliği yaptığı süre 39 yıl ve İTÜ deneyimleri 2,4 yıldır. Daha düşük eğitim seviyesi ile İTU’nın geç benimsenmesi arasında pozitif bir ilişki görülmüştür. Yetiştiricilerin karşılaştığı en önemli sorun Verticillium solgunluğudur ve bunu son yıllarda zeytin sineği takip etmektedir. Çalışma, İTU ile veya İTU olmadan yetiştirilen zeytin ve zeytinyağı fiyatlarında önemli bir fark bulunmamasını İTU üretiminin çekiciliğini azalttığını ortaya koymuştur. Ayrıca, GAP ile yetiştirilen zeytinlerde fiyat politikasının bulunmaması nedeniyle, zeytinler, geleneksel olarak üretilenler ile iç pazarda eşit koşullarda pazarlanmaktadır.

Keywords

İTU Zeytin Olea europaea

References

  • Aktürk D, Savran F, Can Niyaz Ö 2014. Tarımda Konvansiyonel Üretim ile İyi Tarım Uygulamalarının Karşılaştırılması: Çanakkale İlinde Şeftali ve Kiraz Örneği. XI. Ulusal Tarım Ekonomisi Kongresi 3-5 Eylül 2014 Samsun, 2: 748-755.
  • Anonymous 2010. İyi Tarım Uygulamaları Hakkında Yönetmelik. 7.12.2010 Anonymous 2017. T.C. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı İstatistikleri.
  • Anonymous 2018. www.tuik.gov.tr. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu İnternet Sitesi ve 27778 sayılı resmi gazete.
  • Annor BP, Mensah-Bonsu A, Jatoe JBD 2016. Compliance with GLOBALGAP standards among smallholder pineapple farmers in Akuapem-South, Ghana. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 6(1): 21-38. Doi:10.1108/JADEE-05-2013-0017
  • Bal T, Çerçinli F 2013. The analysis of cherry production and trade in Turkey: The case of Uluborlu district. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science 19(3): 398-415.
  • Colen L, Maertens M, Swinnen J 2012. Private standards, trade and poverty: GlobalGAP and horticultural employment in Senegal. World Economy, 35(8): 1073-1088. Doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2012.01463.x
  • Dannenberg P 2011. Overcoming exclusion-informal dealing with the standard GlobalGAP in the Kenyan horticulture industry. Geographische Zeitschrift, 99(4): 237-255.
  • FAO 2003. https://www.globalgap.org. (verified January 13, 2020).
  • Gutiérrez-Guzmán N, Serra JA, Dussan-Sarria S 2012. Priorización de factores críticos para implantar buenas prácticas agrícolas en pequeños productores. Cuadernos de Desarrollo Rural, 9(69): 221-237.
  • Henson S, Masakure O, Cranfield J 2011. Do fresh produce exporters in Sub-Saharan Africa benefit from GlobalGAP certification?. World Development, 39(3): 375-386. Doi:10.1016/j. worlddev.2010.06.012
  • Hinojosa-Rodríguez A, Parra-López C, Carmona-Torres C, Sayadi S, Gallardo-Cobos R 2013. Certified quality systems and farming practices in olive growing: The case of integrated production in Andalusia. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 29(4): 291-309. Doi:10.1017/ S174217051300015X
  • Holzapfel S, Wollni M 2014. Is GlobalGAP certification of small-scale farmers sustainable? Evidence from Thailand. Journal of Development Studies, 50(5): 731-747. Doi:10.1080/00220388. 2013.874558
  • Köksal, Ö. 2009. Organik zeytin yetiştiriciliğine kararverme davranışı üzerine etkili olan faktörlerin analizi. Ankara Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Tarım Ekonomisi Anabilim Dalı, Doktora Tezi.
  • Lang T, David B, Caraher M 2002. Food, social policy and the environment: Towards a new model. Social Policy & Administration, 35(5): 538-558. Doi:10.1111/1467-9515.t01-1-00252
  • Lemeilleur S 2013. Smallholder compliance with private standard certification: The case of GlobalGAP adoption by mango producers in Peru. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, 16(4):1-22.
  • Parra NSR, Figueredo CA, Villamil NSS 2015. Impact of the application of the GlobalGAP norm, in the Latin American Agro-food sector. Revista Colombiana de Investigaciones Agroindustriales, 2: 84-97. Doi:10.23850/24220582.173
  • Stock JH, Watson MW 2007. Introduction to Econometrics, Pearson Addison Wesley, Boston.
  • Subervie J, Vagneron I 2013. A drop of water in the Indian Ocean? The impact of GlobalGAP certification on lychee farmers in Madagascar. World Development, 50: 57-73. Doi:10.1016/ j.worlddev.2013.05.002
  • Tallontire A, Opondo M, Nelson V. 2014. Contingent spaces for smallholder participation in GlobalGAP: insights from Kenyan horticulture value chains. The Geographical Journal, 180(4): 353-364. Doi:10.1111/geoj.12047
  • Tey YS, Rajendran N, Brindal M, Sidique SFA, Shamsudin MN, Radam A, Hadi AHIA 2016. A review of an international sustainability standard (GlobalGAP) and its local replica (MyGAP). Outlook on Agriculture, 45(1): 67-72. Doi:10.5367/oa.2016.0230
  • Walley K, Custance P, Parsons S 2000. UK consumer attitudes concerning environmental issues impacting the agrifood industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 9: 355-366.
There are 21 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Agricultural, Veterinary and Food Sciences
Journal Section RESEARCH ARTICLE
Authors

Cenap Pilak 0000-0002-0413-4220

Salih Ülger 0000-0002-3314-2369

Publication Date June 30, 2021
Submission Date March 17, 2020
Acceptance Date October 21, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2021 Volume: 24 Issue: 3

Cite

APA Pilak, C., & Ülger, S. (2021). Determination of the Factors Affecting Turkish Olive Producer’s Adoption of Good Agricultural Practices in Marmara Region of Turkey. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım Ve Doğa Dergisi, 24(3), 515-521. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.705047

Cited By

Efficiency Factors in the Olive Oil Sector in Turkey
Agriculture
https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14030493
Türkiye, Çanakkale İli Zeytin Bahçelerindeki Bitki Paraziti Nematod Faunasının Belirlenmesi ve Toprak Kalitesinin Değerlendirilmesi
Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.1614984
 Download Cover Image


International Peer Reviewed Journal
Free submission and publication
Published 6 times a year



88x31.png


KSU Journal of Agriculture and Nature

e-ISSN: 2619-9149