Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Satisfaction Levels of Cooperative Partners in The New World Order: Case of Çukobirlik

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2, 388 - 400, 30.04.2021

Murat İsmet Haseki , Selim Gündüz , Celile Özçiçek Dölekoğlu

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.774043
Cited By: 1

Öz

The continuity of the organizations is directly proportional to the satisfaction of the service recipients. The presence of many partners, beneficiaries and employees in cooperatives requires high cooperation. Therefore, it is important to reveal the service quality of the cooperatives and to determine the expectations of the partners. This study was carried out in Çukobirlik, which ranks third in Turkey cooperatives and first among the agricultural cooperatives in terms of number of partners, with the aim of determining the partners’ service satisfaction, their perception related to cooperative activities and their intentions for diversification of these activities. 831 surveys were applied. 94.8% of the participants in the study are men and the agricultural production experience of 76.4% of them is over 21 years. It was seen that the satisfaction level of the partners from Çukobirlik’s services is high in all dimensions, and the dimensions of assurance, competency and enthusiasm came to the fore compared to other dimensions. With the global pandemic of Covid-19, it has once again manifested itself that agricultural production is an activity that is the first and most affected by all extraordinary situations and affects all humanity with its results. The collective production model is a guarantee of sustainability.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Agricultural Sales Cooperatives Partner Satisfaction Çukobirlik

Kaynakça

  • Acar, İ., Yıldırım, İ. (2000): Economic analysis of farms operating as a member of Dönerdere agricultural development co-operative which runs a dairy. – Yüzüncü Yıl University, Faculty of Agriculture, Journal of Agricultural Sciences 10 (1): 61-70.
  • Aktoprak, S. (2019): Economic structure of irrigation cooperatives in Edirne province and analysis of cooperative member relations. – Tekirdağ Namık Kemal University Institute of Science, Ph.D. Thesis, pp. 147.
  • Alagöz, S. B., Karabıyık, H. Ç., and Yılmaz, A. (2018): Kooperatif işletmeleri reklam filmlerinin tüketici algısı üzerindeki etkisi ve farklılaşması: Konya ilinde bir araştırma. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University Journal of Social and Economic Research 20 (35): 50-58.
  • Alçiçek, G., and Karlı, B. (2016): Burdur ilinde tarımsal kooperatiflerde kooperatif-ortak ilişkilerinin değerlendirilmesi. – Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Mustafa Kemal University 21(1): 83-91.
  • Altınkaya Z. (2010): Türkiye’deki kooperatiflerin yapısı değişmeli mi? – Journal of Anadolu Bil Vocational School of Higher Education 17: 59-70.
  • Baş, M. and Göral, S. (2018): Tüketicilerin perakende markalarına bakışı: kooperatif marka örneği. – Third Sector Social Economic Review 53(3): 852-864. DOI: 10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.18.09.783.
  • Başaran, H., Birinci, S., Şener, H. B., Özçağlar, A. and Zeyrek, A. E. (2015): Yerel dayanışmadan büyük işletmelere (Yüzyıllık geçmişiyle tarım satış kooperatifleri). – 21st International Turkish Cooperative Congress, Karabük.
  • Bilgin, N., Ergün, E., and Aytekin, M. (2007): Kooperatif ortaklarının güven duygusu ile ortakların performans-tatmin arasındaki ilişki: tariş’te bir uygulama. – Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences Journal 22 (1): 67-82.
  • Bilgin, N. and Kuzey, C. (2013): Tarımsal kooperatif yöneticilerin karizmatik liderlik davranışları ile ortakların işbirliği ve performans-tatminleri arasındaki ilişkiye yönelik bir araştırma. – Third Sector Social Economic Review 48 (1): 49-72.
  • Ceylan, O. (2019): Neoliberal ekonomi ve Türkiye tarım politikaları arasında küçük köylülüğün dönüşümü: Edirne ili örneği (1980-2015). – Anatolian Journalof Economics andBusiness 3(2): 134-152.
  • Çayabatmaz, Y. (2014): Kooperatiflerin finansman sorunları ve çözüme yönelik alternatifler. – Marmara University, Institute of Social Sciences Department of Business Cooperative Science, Master’s Thesis.
  • Cooperatives Europe, (2016): The power of cooperation (https://coopseurope.coop/sites/default/files/The%20power%20of%20Cooperation%20-%20Cooperatives%20Europe%20key%20statistics%202015.pdf). Accessed date: 30.03.2020.
  • Cooperatives in Japan, (2019): https://icaap.coop/ICANew/President/assets/Cooperatives%20in%20Japan-Country%20Brochure.pdf. Accessed date: 16.05.2020.
  • COPAC COOP, (2020): Committee for the promotion and advancement and cooperatives. Data Explorer. http://www.copac.coop/data-explorer/. Accessed date: 27.06.2020.
  • Çıkın, A. and Karacan A.R. (1994): Genel kooperatifçilik. – Ege University Faculty of Agriculture Publications No. 511, Izmir.
  • Çukobirlik, (2019): S. S. Çukurova Cotton, Peanut and Oil Seeds Agricultural Sales Cooperatives Union 2019-2023 Strategic Plan, October-2019, Adana.
  • Dedeoğlu, M., and Yıldırım, İ. (2006): Economic Analysis of Farms Associated with Emek Agricultural Development Cooperative. – Yüzüncü Yıl University, Faculty of Agriculture, Journal of Agricultural Sciences 16(1): 39-48.
  • Duguid, F., Durutaş, G., and Wodzicki, M. (2015): Türkiye’de kadın kooperatifleri’nin mevcut durumu, The World Bank. Engin, M. (2018): Tarım kredi kooperatiflerinde çok amaçlılık politikalarının, kooperatif ortakları açısından değerlendirilmesi. – Namık Kemal University, Master’s Thesis.
  • EPRS, (2019): European Parliamentary Research Service, Cooperatives: Characteristics, Activities, status, challenges, 1-12.
  • Ercan, Ş., Öztep, R., Güler, D., and Saner, G. (2019). Tarım 4.0 ve Türkiye'de Uygulanabilirliğinin Değerlendirilmesi. Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, 25(2), 259-265.
  • Erdem, H. (2018): Çumra Bölgesi sulama kooperatiflerinin bilançolarının analizi. – Selçuk University Institute of Science, Ph.D. Thesis.
  • Ertan, A. and Kaya, M. S. (2012): Analysis of cooperative-member relations in Çünür irrigation cooperative. – Journal of Süleyman Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences 2(16): 117-129.
  • Ertan, A. and Turan A. (2001): Gülbirlik ortaklarının kooperatif ortak ilişkisi yönünden analizi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, C. 6, S. 2: 29-43.
  • Esim, S. and Katajamaki, W. (2017): Rediscovering worker cooperatives in a changing world of work. – IUSLabor (1): 1-8.
  • European Commission, (2020): Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship, and SMEs. Cooperatives. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/social-economy/cooperatives_en. Accessed date: 27.03.2020.
  • Everest, B., and Yercan, M. (2016): A Research on members' perception of cooperative principles: a case of agricultural credit cooperatives. – Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University 53 (1): 67-73.
  • Everest, B., Niyaz, Ö. C., Sibel, T., and Yercan, M. (2018): Examination of the preference of cooperative branded products by consumers: the case of Çanakkale. – Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences 5 (4): 516-522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.471330
  • Fındıkoğlu, Z. F. (1967): Kooperasyon sosyolojisi. – Istanbul University Publications No. 1206, Istanbul.
  • Haseki, M. İ. (2007): Kooperatifçilik ve Pazarlama Anlayışı: Tarım Satış Kooperatiflerinin Pazarlama Faaliyetlerine Yönelik Tüketici Görüşlerinin Belirlenmesi Üzerine Bir Çalışma. – Çukurova University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Business Administration, Ph.D. thesis.
  • IMF, (2020): International Monetary Fund. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2019/01/weodata. Accessed date: 27.03.2020.
  • İnan, H. İ.(2001): Tarım Ekonomisi ve İşletmeciliği, Tekirdağ, Hasad Yayıncılık, 5.
  • International Cooperation Alliance, (2019): World Cooperative Monitor, Exploring The Cooperative Economy.
  • Kara, M., Yücel, R., and Dinçer, P. K. (2016): THE effects of the agricultural cooperatives to the sustainable development and on the expectations of the partners: An application from Bolu and Düzce provinces of Turkey. – Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of Graduate School of Social Sciences 16(4): 47-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11616/basbed.vi.455403.
  • Kendirlioğlu, Ö. (2008): Assessment of the activities of Tariş Olive and Olive Oil agricultural sales cooperatives and determination of producer satisfaction: The case of Aydin province. – Adnan Menderes University, Institute of Science Master’s Thesis (Unpublished).
  • Kılıç, B. (2011): Analysis of member-cooperative relationships in the agricultural development cooperatives in Samsun province of Turkey. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Institute of Science, Department of Agricultural Economics, Master’s Thesis, p. 158.
  • Kinikli, F., and Yercan, M. (2017): Evaluating member satisfaction in agricultural cooperatives: A case of dairy cooperatives in Izmir Province. – Radovi Poljoprivrednog Fakulteta Univerziteta u Sarajevu\ Works of the Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Sarajevo 62(2): 557-567.
  • Ministry of Customs and Trade, (2012): Turkey Cooperative Strategy and Action Plan 2012-2016. Ankara: General Directorate of Cooperatives.
  • Mülayim, Z. G. (1992): Kooperatifçilik. – Turkish Cooperative Organization Publications, Ankara.
  • National Cooperative Union of Turkey (2018): National Cooperative Union of Turkey 2017 Work Report and 2018 Work Program, Ankara.
  • Nejat, E. (1910): Memleketimiz ve kooperatif şirketler. – Ottoman Journal of Agriculture and Trade 16: 252-255.
  • ÖİKR, (2018a): Eleventh Development Plan (2019-2023), Rural Development (http://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/)
  • ÖİKR, (2018b): Eleventh Development Plan (2019-2023), Competitive Production in Agriculture and Food. (http://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/)
  • Oğuz, H., Mete, O. (2017): Branding in cooperatives and relationship between consumer-cooperative products: Torku case. – Third Sector Social Economic Review 52rd special issue: 386-424.
  • Özdemir, G. (2005): Cooperative–shareholder relations in agricultural cooperatives in Turkey. – Journal of Asian Economics 16(2): 315-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2005.01.004.
  • Özdemir, F., Ağır, H. B., Yılmaz H. İ., Boz, İ. (2014): Agricultural credit cooperatives from the view of producer: An example of Dinar district of Afyonkarahisar. – XI. National Agricultural Economics Congress 3-5 September 2014, Samsun 1261-1265.
  • Sayın, B. and Sayın, C. (2004): Agricultural producer organization, adaptation preparation to European Union and Agricultural Farmer Union Law. – Turkey VI. Agricultural Economy Congress 16-18 Eylül 2004, Tokat: 466-470.
  • Serinikli, N. and İnan H. İ. (2007): Economic analysis of Edirne village development cooperatives union. – Journal of Tekirdağ Agricultural Faculty 4 (3): 237-248.
  • S-Ryhma, (2018). Annual report 2018. S Group. Key figures. https://www.s-kanava.fi/web/s-ryhma/en/vuosikatsaus/s-group#Key_figures. Accessed date: 15.05.2020.
  • Şahin A., Cankurt M., Günden C., Miran B., Meral Y. (2013): Agricultural development cooperatives in Turkey; member-cooperative relations. – KSU Journal of Natural Sciences 16(2): 21-33.
  • Topuz, B. K. and Bozoğlu, M. (2015): Analysis of member-cooperative relationships in the agricultural development cooperatives in Samsun province of Turkey. – Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences 30(3): 246-253.
  • Topuz, B. K. and Bozoğlu, M. (2016): Performance measurement in the agricultural producer unions. – Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences 31(3): 360-369. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7161/omuanajas.269989.
  • TÜİK, (2020): http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=33705. Accessed date: 15.05.2020
  • USDA, (1990): Cooperative benefits and limitations, farmer cooperatives in the United States Cooperative Information Report 1 Section 3.
  • Ünal, V. and Yercan, M. (2006): Türkiye’de su ürünleri kooperatifleri ve balıkçılar için önemi. – Ege University Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences, 23(1-2): 221–227.
  • Vural, H. (2014): Organization in the agricultural sector and the importance of co-operatives. – XI. National Agricultural Economics Congress 3-5 September 2014, Samsun: 1240-1244.
  • Yercan, M. (2007): Cooperation pattern of Turkish and European Union Agriculture and agricultural cooperatives. – Turkish Journal of Agricultural Economics 13(1): 19-29.
  • Yercan, M. (1996): İzmir Yöresinde Seçilmiş Bazı Tarımsal Amaçlı Kooperatiflerde Kaynak Kullanımı ve Kooperatif İşletmelerde Etkinliğin Ölçülmesi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. – Ege University Institute of Science, Journal of Agricultural Economics, Izmir.
  • Yücel, Ş., and Acar, G. (2018): Socio-economic status of fishery cooperatives’ directors and their views about the cooperatives’ problems. – Gaziosmanpasa Journal of Scientific Research 7(2): 57-66.
  • http://www.turktarim.gov.tr/Haber/280/kente-gocun-onlenmesi-beklentilerin-karsilanmasiyla-mumkun. Accessed date: 15.05.2020

Yeni Dünya Düzeninde Kooperatif Ortaklarının Memnuniyet Düzeyleri: Çukobirlik Örneği

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2, 388 - 400, 30.04.2021

Murat İsmet Haseki , Selim Gündüz , Celile Özçiçek Dölekoğlu

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.774043
Cited By: 1

Öz

Örgütlerin devamlılığı hizmet alanların memnuniyeti ile doğru orantılıdır. Kooperatiflerde çok sayıda ortak, yararlanıcı ve çalışanların varlığı iş birliğinin yüksek olmasını gerektirir. Bu nedenle kooperatiflerin hizmet kalitesinin ortaya konulması ve ortakların beklentilerinin belirlenmesi önemlidir. Bu çalışma, Türkiye’deki kooperatifler içerisinde ortak sayısı bakımından 3. sırada olan, tarımsal kooperatifler arasında da ilk sırada yer alan tarım satış kooperatiflerinde ortakların hizmetlerden memnuniyeti, kooperatif faaliyetleri ile ilgili algıları ve faaliyetlerin çeşitlenmesine yönelik niyetlerini belirlemek amacıyla Çukobirlik özelinde yapılmıştır. Çukobirlik’in faaliyetinin olduğu 11 ilde gönüllülük esasına göre 831 ortakla yüz yüze olarak anket uygulanmıştır. Çalışmaya katılanların %94.8’i erkek olup, %76.4’ünün tarımsal üretim deneyimi 21 yılın üzerindedir. Ortakların Çukobirlik’in hizmetlerinden memnuniyet düzeyleri her boyutta yüksek olduğu görülmüş olup, güvence ve yeterlilik boyutu ile heveslilik boyutu diğer boyutlara nazaran öne çıkmıştır. Tarımsal üretim faaliyetinin tüm olağanüstü durumlardan ilk ve en fazla etkilenen, sonuçları ile tüm insanlığı etkileyen bir faaliyet olduğu, küresel düzeyde yaşanan COVID-19 kaynaklı pandemi ile bir kez daha kendisini göstermiştir. Kolektif üretim modeli sürdürülebilirliğin bir güvencesidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tarımsal satış kooperatifi Çukobirlik Türkiye Ortak memnuniyeti

Kaynakça

  • Acar, İ., Yıldırım, İ. (2000): Economic analysis of farms operating as a member of Dönerdere agricultural development co-operative which runs a dairy. – Yüzüncü Yıl University, Faculty of Agriculture, Journal of Agricultural Sciences 10 (1): 61-70.
  • Aktoprak, S. (2019): Economic structure of irrigation cooperatives in Edirne province and analysis of cooperative member relations. – Tekirdağ Namık Kemal University Institute of Science, Ph.D. Thesis, pp. 147.
  • Alagöz, S. B., Karabıyık, H. Ç., and Yılmaz, A. (2018): Kooperatif işletmeleri reklam filmlerinin tüketici algısı üzerindeki etkisi ve farklılaşması: Konya ilinde bir araştırma. Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University Journal of Social and Economic Research 20 (35): 50-58.
  • Alçiçek, G., and Karlı, B. (2016): Burdur ilinde tarımsal kooperatiflerde kooperatif-ortak ilişkilerinin değerlendirilmesi. – Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Mustafa Kemal University 21(1): 83-91.
  • Altınkaya Z. (2010): Türkiye’deki kooperatiflerin yapısı değişmeli mi? – Journal of Anadolu Bil Vocational School of Higher Education 17: 59-70.
  • Baş, M. and Göral, S. (2018): Tüketicilerin perakende markalarına bakışı: kooperatif marka örneği. – Third Sector Social Economic Review 53(3): 852-864. DOI: 10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.18.09.783.
  • Başaran, H., Birinci, S., Şener, H. B., Özçağlar, A. and Zeyrek, A. E. (2015): Yerel dayanışmadan büyük işletmelere (Yüzyıllık geçmişiyle tarım satış kooperatifleri). – 21st International Turkish Cooperative Congress, Karabük.
  • Bilgin, N., Ergün, E., and Aytekin, M. (2007): Kooperatif ortaklarının güven duygusu ile ortakların performans-tatmin arasındaki ilişki: tariş’te bir uygulama. – Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences Journal 22 (1): 67-82.
  • Bilgin, N. and Kuzey, C. (2013): Tarımsal kooperatif yöneticilerin karizmatik liderlik davranışları ile ortakların işbirliği ve performans-tatminleri arasındaki ilişkiye yönelik bir araştırma. – Third Sector Social Economic Review 48 (1): 49-72.
  • Ceylan, O. (2019): Neoliberal ekonomi ve Türkiye tarım politikaları arasında küçük köylülüğün dönüşümü: Edirne ili örneği (1980-2015). – Anatolian Journalof Economics andBusiness 3(2): 134-152.
  • Çayabatmaz, Y. (2014): Kooperatiflerin finansman sorunları ve çözüme yönelik alternatifler. – Marmara University, Institute of Social Sciences Department of Business Cooperative Science, Master’s Thesis.
  • Cooperatives Europe, (2016): The power of cooperation (https://coopseurope.coop/sites/default/files/The%20power%20of%20Cooperation%20-%20Cooperatives%20Europe%20key%20statistics%202015.pdf). Accessed date: 30.03.2020.
  • Cooperatives in Japan, (2019): https://icaap.coop/ICANew/President/assets/Cooperatives%20in%20Japan-Country%20Brochure.pdf. Accessed date: 16.05.2020.
  • COPAC COOP, (2020): Committee for the promotion and advancement and cooperatives. Data Explorer. http://www.copac.coop/data-explorer/. Accessed date: 27.06.2020.
  • Çıkın, A. and Karacan A.R. (1994): Genel kooperatifçilik. – Ege University Faculty of Agriculture Publications No. 511, Izmir.
  • Çukobirlik, (2019): S. S. Çukurova Cotton, Peanut and Oil Seeds Agricultural Sales Cooperatives Union 2019-2023 Strategic Plan, October-2019, Adana.
  • Dedeoğlu, M., and Yıldırım, İ. (2006): Economic Analysis of Farms Associated with Emek Agricultural Development Cooperative. – Yüzüncü Yıl University, Faculty of Agriculture, Journal of Agricultural Sciences 16(1): 39-48.
  • Duguid, F., Durutaş, G., and Wodzicki, M. (2015): Türkiye’de kadın kooperatifleri’nin mevcut durumu, The World Bank. Engin, M. (2018): Tarım kredi kooperatiflerinde çok amaçlılık politikalarının, kooperatif ortakları açısından değerlendirilmesi. – Namık Kemal University, Master’s Thesis.
  • EPRS, (2019): European Parliamentary Research Service, Cooperatives: Characteristics, Activities, status, challenges, 1-12.
  • Ercan, Ş., Öztep, R., Güler, D., and Saner, G. (2019). Tarım 4.0 ve Türkiye'de Uygulanabilirliğinin Değerlendirilmesi. Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, 25(2), 259-265.
  • Erdem, H. (2018): Çumra Bölgesi sulama kooperatiflerinin bilançolarının analizi. – Selçuk University Institute of Science, Ph.D. Thesis.
  • Ertan, A. and Kaya, M. S. (2012): Analysis of cooperative-member relations in Çünür irrigation cooperative. – Journal of Süleyman Demirel University Institute of Social Sciences 2(16): 117-129.
  • Ertan, A. and Turan A. (2001): Gülbirlik ortaklarının kooperatif ortak ilişkisi yönünden analizi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, C. 6, S. 2: 29-43.
  • Esim, S. and Katajamaki, W. (2017): Rediscovering worker cooperatives in a changing world of work. – IUSLabor (1): 1-8.
  • European Commission, (2020): Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship, and SMEs. Cooperatives. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/social-economy/cooperatives_en. Accessed date: 27.03.2020.
  • Everest, B., and Yercan, M. (2016): A Research on members' perception of cooperative principles: a case of agricultural credit cooperatives. – Journal of Agriculture Faculty of Ege University 53 (1): 67-73.
  • Everest, B., Niyaz, Ö. C., Sibel, T., and Yercan, M. (2018): Examination of the preference of cooperative branded products by consumers: the case of Çanakkale. – Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences 5 (4): 516-522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.471330
  • Fındıkoğlu, Z. F. (1967): Kooperasyon sosyolojisi. – Istanbul University Publications No. 1206, Istanbul.
  • Haseki, M. İ. (2007): Kooperatifçilik ve Pazarlama Anlayışı: Tarım Satış Kooperatiflerinin Pazarlama Faaliyetlerine Yönelik Tüketici Görüşlerinin Belirlenmesi Üzerine Bir Çalışma. – Çukurova University Institute of Social Sciences, Department of Business Administration, Ph.D. thesis.
  • IMF, (2020): International Monetary Fund. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2019/01/weodata. Accessed date: 27.03.2020.
  • İnan, H. İ.(2001): Tarım Ekonomisi ve İşletmeciliği, Tekirdağ, Hasad Yayıncılık, 5.
  • International Cooperation Alliance, (2019): World Cooperative Monitor, Exploring The Cooperative Economy.
  • Kara, M., Yücel, R., and Dinçer, P. K. (2016): THE effects of the agricultural cooperatives to the sustainable development and on the expectations of the partners: An application from Bolu and Düzce provinces of Turkey. – Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of Graduate School of Social Sciences 16(4): 47-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11616/basbed.vi.455403.
  • Kendirlioğlu, Ö. (2008): Assessment of the activities of Tariş Olive and Olive Oil agricultural sales cooperatives and determination of producer satisfaction: The case of Aydin province. – Adnan Menderes University, Institute of Science Master’s Thesis (Unpublished).
  • Kılıç, B. (2011): Analysis of member-cooperative relationships in the agricultural development cooperatives in Samsun province of Turkey. Ondokuz Mayıs University, Institute of Science, Department of Agricultural Economics, Master’s Thesis, p. 158.
  • Kinikli, F., and Yercan, M. (2017): Evaluating member satisfaction in agricultural cooperatives: A case of dairy cooperatives in Izmir Province. – Radovi Poljoprivrednog Fakulteta Univerziteta u Sarajevu\ Works of the Faculty of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Sarajevo 62(2): 557-567.
  • Ministry of Customs and Trade, (2012): Turkey Cooperative Strategy and Action Plan 2012-2016. Ankara: General Directorate of Cooperatives.
  • Mülayim, Z. G. (1992): Kooperatifçilik. – Turkish Cooperative Organization Publications, Ankara.
  • National Cooperative Union of Turkey (2018): National Cooperative Union of Turkey 2017 Work Report and 2018 Work Program, Ankara.
  • Nejat, E. (1910): Memleketimiz ve kooperatif şirketler. – Ottoman Journal of Agriculture and Trade 16: 252-255.
  • ÖİKR, (2018a): Eleventh Development Plan (2019-2023), Rural Development (http://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/)
  • ÖİKR, (2018b): Eleventh Development Plan (2019-2023), Competitive Production in Agriculture and Food. (http://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/)
  • Oğuz, H., Mete, O. (2017): Branding in cooperatives and relationship between consumer-cooperative products: Torku case. – Third Sector Social Economic Review 52rd special issue: 386-424.
  • Özdemir, G. (2005): Cooperative–shareholder relations in agricultural cooperatives in Turkey. – Journal of Asian Economics 16(2): 315-325. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2005.01.004.
  • Özdemir, F., Ağır, H. B., Yılmaz H. İ., Boz, İ. (2014): Agricultural credit cooperatives from the view of producer: An example of Dinar district of Afyonkarahisar. – XI. National Agricultural Economics Congress 3-5 September 2014, Samsun 1261-1265.
  • Sayın, B. and Sayın, C. (2004): Agricultural producer organization, adaptation preparation to European Union and Agricultural Farmer Union Law. – Turkey VI. Agricultural Economy Congress 16-18 Eylül 2004, Tokat: 466-470.
  • Serinikli, N. and İnan H. İ. (2007): Economic analysis of Edirne village development cooperatives union. – Journal of Tekirdağ Agricultural Faculty 4 (3): 237-248.
  • S-Ryhma, (2018). Annual report 2018. S Group. Key figures. https://www.s-kanava.fi/web/s-ryhma/en/vuosikatsaus/s-group#Key_figures. Accessed date: 15.05.2020.
  • Şahin A., Cankurt M., Günden C., Miran B., Meral Y. (2013): Agricultural development cooperatives in Turkey; member-cooperative relations. – KSU Journal of Natural Sciences 16(2): 21-33.
  • Topuz, B. K. and Bozoğlu, M. (2015): Analysis of member-cooperative relationships in the agricultural development cooperatives in Samsun province of Turkey. – Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences 30(3): 246-253.
  • Topuz, B. K. and Bozoğlu, M. (2016): Performance measurement in the agricultural producer unions. – Anadolu Journal of Agricultural Sciences 31(3): 360-369. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7161/omuanajas.269989.
  • TÜİK, (2020): http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=33705. Accessed date: 15.05.2020
  • USDA, (1990): Cooperative benefits and limitations, farmer cooperatives in the United States Cooperative Information Report 1 Section 3.
  • Ünal, V. and Yercan, M. (2006): Türkiye’de su ürünleri kooperatifleri ve balıkçılar için önemi. – Ege University Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences, 23(1-2): 221–227.
  • Vural, H. (2014): Organization in the agricultural sector and the importance of co-operatives. – XI. National Agricultural Economics Congress 3-5 September 2014, Samsun: 1240-1244.
  • Yercan, M. (2007): Cooperation pattern of Turkish and European Union Agriculture and agricultural cooperatives. – Turkish Journal of Agricultural Economics 13(1): 19-29.
  • Yercan, M. (1996): İzmir Yöresinde Seçilmiş Bazı Tarımsal Amaçlı Kooperatiflerde Kaynak Kullanımı ve Kooperatif İşletmelerde Etkinliğin Ölçülmesi Üzerine Bir Araştırma. – Ege University Institute of Science, Journal of Agricultural Economics, Izmir.
  • Yücel, Ş., and Acar, G. (2018): Socio-economic status of fishery cooperatives’ directors and their views about the cooperatives’ problems. – Gaziosmanpasa Journal of Scientific Research 7(2): 57-66.
  • http://www.turktarim.gov.tr/Haber/280/kente-gocun-onlenmesi-beklentilerin-karsilanmasiyla-mumkun. Accessed date: 15.05.2020
Toplam 59 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Ziraat, Veterinerlik ve Gıda Bilimleri
Bölüm ARAŞTIRMA MAKALESİ (Research Article)
Yazarlar

Murat İsmet Haseki 0000-0002-1461-7285

Selim Gündüz 0000-0001-5289-6089

Celile Özçiçek Dölekoğlu 0000-0003-4421-2956

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Nisan 2021
Gönderilme Tarihi 26 Temmuz 2020
Kabul Tarihi 15 Ekim 2020
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2021Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Haseki, M. İ., Gündüz, S., & Özçiçek Dölekoğlu, C. (2021). Satisfaction Levels of Cooperative Partners in The New World Order: Case of Çukobirlik. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım Ve Doğa Dergisi, 24(2), 388-400. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.774043

Cited By

Kooperatiflerin Tanınırlığında Web Sitelerinin Yeri: Karşılaştırmalı Bir Değerlendirme
Stratejik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.30692/sisad.1178098
 Kapak Resmi İndir

21082



2022-JIF = 0.500

2022-JCI = 0.170

Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi (International Peer Reviewed Journal)

       Dergimiz, herhangi bir başvuru veya yayımlama ücreti almamaktadır. (Free submission and publication)

      Yılda 6 sayı yayınlanır. (Published 6 times a year)


88x31.png 

Bu web sitesi Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

                 


Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
e-ISSN: 2619-9149