Agricultural Support Implementations in Türkiye: Oily Sunflower Production-Çanakkale Province Sample

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15053938

Keywords:

Agricultural Support, Oily Sunflower, Deficiency Support, Diesel Fuel Support, Fertilizer Support, Çanakkale

Abstract

The agricultural sector around the world is protected and supported due to some of its essential features. In the report prepared by the OECD considering 54 countries, it is stated that the amount of resources allocated to the agricultural sector on an annual basis in the 2020-2022 period is 851 billion USD and the amount of direct transfers to producers is 333 billion USD. Agricultural support payments in Türkiye are paid in accordance with the Agricultural Law No. 5488 passed in 2006. According to article 21 of the Agricultural Law, it is stipulated that the amount of support given to agricultural production cannot be less than 1% of the country's gross national income. However, while the share of agricultural support payments in the country's gross domestic product in Türkiye was 0,60% in 2006, this rate decreased to 0,27% in 2022. The present study revealed that only 26,92% of the agricultural support amount which is necessary to be paid to producers in Türkiye in 2022 could be provided. In this study, using the data obtained from 75 agricultural enterprises determined by the Stratified Sampling Method in Çanakkale province, the perspectives of the producers on the agricultural supports applied in oilseed sunflower have been examined. In the study, it has been determined that the rate of benefiting from difference support, diesel and fertilizer support of the producers is over 95%. The research conducted has also showed that 94,67% of the producers did not find the difference support unit price sufficient. According to the findings of the research, 92% of the producers declared that the unit price of diesel support and 86,67% of the fertilizer support unit price were not sufficient. According to the results of the study, 37,33% of the producers reported that the supports applied in oilseed sunflower caused a decrease in product cost, while 8% reported that they caused an increase in product income. Considering the average sunflower yield amount of 236,93 kg/da in the enterprises examined, the research revealed that while the product income excluding supports was 515,32 TL/da, this value reached 639,09 TL/da including supports. In other words, the agricultural supports applied to oilseed sunflower increased the product income by 24,02%. However, when this amount and the rate of increase are compared with other research findings, it is seen that the contribution of agricultural supports to oilseed sunflower product income decreases both at real level and proportionally every year in Türkiye compared to the previous year. In this context, in order to make oilseed sunflower production more attractive throughout the country; the effect of the differential support unit price on the level of producer income increase, and the unit prices of diesel, fertilizer and seed support should be determined on a real basis, taking into account the shares of the specified inputs in the product cost. In order to increase the production of oilseed sunflower throughout the country, the current study reveals that it is of great importance to make production in irrigated areas, to give more space to this product in marginal areas, and to use seeds with higher oil content.

References

Abay, C., Türkekul, B., Ören, M.N., Gürer, B., Özalp, B., 2017. Türkiye'de üreticilerin tarımsal desteklerden faydalanma durumu üzerine inceleme. Balkan and Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1): 130-136.

Adams, G., Westhoff, P., Willott, B., Young II, R.E., 2001. Do ‘decoupled’ payments affect U.S. crop area? Preliminary evidence from 1997-2000. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83(5): 1190-1195.

Ahmad, I., Muhstaq, M.S., Ilyas, M., Anjum, M.A., Hammad, A., Safdar, M.H., 2022. Impact of inputs price subsidy on sunflower production in Punjab, Pakistan: A mode of productivity enhancement. Journal of Arable Crops and Marketing, 04(01): 61-70.

Aktas, E., Altiok, M., Songur, M., 2015. Effects on agricultural production in different countries comparative analysis of agricultural support policies. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 15(4): 55-74.

Anton, J., Mouel, L.C., 2004. Do counter-cyclical payments in the 2002 US Farm Act create incentives to produce? Agricultural Economics, 31(2): 277–284.

Becker, D.A., Judge, P.R., 2014. Evidence of distortionary effects of decoupled payments in US indica rice production. Atlantic Economic Journal, 42(3): 265-275.

Bulut, E., 2020. Türkiye’de uygulanan tarımsal destekleme politikalarının üretim etkisi. Doktora Tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.

Bulut, E., Bayraktar, Y., 2023. Do agricultural supports affect production? A panel ARDL analysis of Turkey. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 29(1): 249-261.

Canbay, Ş., 2021. Does agricultural support policy affect crop production in Turkey? Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, 12(23): 130-140.

Doğan, H.G., Kan, M., Kan, A., 2018. Evaluation of the effect of deficiency payment supports on the producer’s decisions of the some cereal crops in Turkey. Journal of Social Sciences of Mus Alparslan University, 6(6): 945-951.

Düğmeci, H., Çelik, Y., 2020. Konya ili çumra ilçesinde yağlık ayçiçeği üretim maliyetinin tespiti üzerine bir araştırma. Türk Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(3): 682-690.

Erdal, G., Erdal, H., Gürkan, M., 2013. Türkiye’de uygulanan tarımsal desteklerin üretici açısından değerlendirilmesi (Kahramanmaraş ili örneği). International Journal of Social and Economic Sciences, 3(2): 92-98.

Erdal, G., Erdal, H., Çiçek, A., 2020. An analysis of the effects of livestock support policies on breeders: An example of TR83 Region in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology, 8(11): 2378-2387.

Erdal, H., Erdal, G., Ayyildiz, B., 2021. Are support policies for sustainable livestock ımportant? Causality between animal existence and support policies: VECM analysis for Turkey. The Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences, 31(1): 254-264.

FAO, 2024. Faostat. Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations. Production-Trade (Crops and livestock products) (https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/TCL), (Erişim Tarihi: 05.01.2025).

Frandsen, E.S., Gersfelt, B., Jensen, G.H., 2003. The impacts of redesigning european agricultural support. Review of Urban and Regional Development Studies, 15(2): 106-131.

Gence, F., 2019. Kahramanmaraş ilinde çerezlik ayçiçeği üretim faaliyetinin ekonomik analizi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kahramanmaraş.

Göçmez, U., 2014. Türkiye’de son 10 yılda uygulanan tarım politikaları ve yaşanan ekonomik gelişmeler çerçevesinde yağlık ayçiçeği üretici gelirlerindeki değişimler. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Trakya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Edirne.

Karakaya, M.C., 2023. OECD Ülkelerinde tarımsal destekleme politikalarının tarımsal verimlilik üzerindeki etkisi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Denizli.

Keleş, G., Yılmaz, S., 2019. The share of subsidies in income of cereals farmers in Türkiye. Türk Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4): 814-821.

Konyalı, S., 2017. Sunflower production and agricultural policies in Turkey. Sosyal Bilimler Araştırma Dergisi, 6(4): 11-19.

Levine, R., Renelt, D., 1992. A sensitivity analysis of cross-country growth regressions. The American Economic Review, 82(4): 942-963.

Lukomets, A.V., 2024. Impact of government support on oilseeds production. In: Sergi, B.S., Popkova, E.G., Ostrovskaya, A.A., Chursin, A.A., Ragulina, Y.V. (eds) Ecological Footprint of the Modern Economy and the Ways to Reduce It. Advances in Science, Technology & Innovation. Springer, Cham.

Munćan, P., Božić, D., 2013. The effects of input subsidies on field crop production in Serbia. Economics of Agriculture, 60(3): 585-594.

OECD, 2023. Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2023: Adapting Agriculture to Climate Change. OECD Publishing, Paris, France.

Önder, K., Şahin, M., 2023. Destekleme primlerinin ayçiçeği arzı üzerindeki etkisi: ARDL modeli. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(1): 313-333.

Paula, S., Constant, T.V., Elena, S., Mihai, M.M., Elena, S., Ciprian, M.D., 2023. Subsidies’ impacts on technical–economic indicators in large crop farms. Agriculture, 2023(13): 1712.

Resmi Gazete, 2006. “Tarım Kanunu”. Kabul Tarihi: 18.04.206, Kanun No: 5488, Resmî Gazete Yayım Tarihi: 25.04.2006, Sayı: 26149.

Resmi Gazete, 2023. “2023 Yılında Yapılacak Tarımsal Desteklemeler ve 2024 yılında Uygulanacak Sertifikalı Tohum Kullanım Desteklerine İlişkin Cumhurbaşkanı Kararı”. 15 Eylül 2023, Sayı: 32310.

Resmi Gazete, 2024. 2025-2027 Yıllarında Yapılacak Bitkisel Üretime Yönelik Desteklemeler ile Diğer Bazı Tarımsal Desteklemelere İlişkin Karar. (https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2024/08/20240829.pdf), (Erişim Tarihi: 05.01.2025).

Sağdıç, E., Çakmak, E., 2021. Tarımsal destek ödemeleri ile tarımsal üretim düzeyi arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi: Türkiye örneği. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(2): 1858-1880.

Semerci, A., 2013. The effects of agricultural subsidies on sunflower cultivation and farmers’ income: evidence from Turkey, Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 50(1): 139-145.

Semerci, A., 2016. Effects of agricultural supports on farmer’s revenue and product costs: The case of Turkey. Custos e @Gronegócio On Line, 12(3): 71-96.

Semerci, A., 2019a. Yağlık ayçiçeği üretiminin ekonomik analizi: Kırklareli ili örneği. Türk Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(4): 616–623.

Semerci, A., 2019b. Cost analysis of oily sunflower production: the case of Tekirdağ Province, Turkey. Custos e @gronegócio on line, 15(2): 167-191.

Semerci, A., 2021. Tarımsal destekleme uygulamalarının ürün geliri, üretim maliyeti ve brüt kar değeri üzerine etkileri. EJONS International Journal, 5(18): 169-185.

Semerci, A., Durmuş, E., 2021. Analysis of oily sunflower production in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology, 9(1): 56-62.

TCCSBB, 2024a. Tarım Destekleri ve Piyasa Düzenlemeleri. 2024 Yılı Cumhurbaşkanlığı Yıllık Programı. (https://www.sbb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2024-Yili-Cumhurbaskanligi-Yillik-Programi.pdf), (Erişim Tarihi: 05.01.2025).

TCCSBB, 2024b. TC Cumhurbaşkanlığı Strateji ve Bütçe Başkanlığı, 2024. (https://www.sbb.gov.tr/tarim-ve-gida-gostergeleri/#prettyPhoto[rel-16770-263876684]/0), (Erişim Tarihi: 05.01.2025).

TOB, 2020. Çanakkale Tarım İl Müdürlüğü. 2020 Çanakkale Brifing Raporu. (https://canakkale.tarimorman.gov.tr/Menu/17/Brifing.), (Erişim Tarihi: 05.01.2025)

TOB, 2023. Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı 2022 Yılı İdare Faaliyet Raporu. Şubat, 2023. Ankara (https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/SGB/Belgeler/Bakanl%C4%B1k_Faaliyet_Raporlar%C4%B1/TOB%202022%20YILI%20I%CC%87DARE%20FAALI%CC%87YET%20RAPORU.pdf), (Erişim Tarihi: 20.03.2024).

TÜİK, 2024. “Üretim Yöntemi ile Cari Fiyatlarla Yıllık GSYH”, (https://data.tuik.gov.tr), (Erişim Tarihi: 05.01.2025).

Weber, G.J., Key, N., 2012. How much do decoupled payments affect production? An instrumental variable approach with panel data. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 94(1): 52-66.

Yamane, T., 1967. Elementary Sampling Theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, Inc., 405 pp. USA.

Yüksek, E., 2019. Adana ilinde yağlık ayçiçeği üretim faaliyetinin ekonomik analizi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Kahramanmaraş Üniversitesi Lisansüstü Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Kahramanmaraş.

Published

2025-03-20

How to Cite

SEMERCİ, A., & YURT, İnan . (2025). Agricultural Support Implementations in Türkiye: Oily Sunflower Production-Çanakkale Province Sample. Ejons International Journal on Mathematic, Engineering and Natural Sciences, 9(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15053938

Issue

Section

Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)