The Impact of Livestock Supports on Production and Income of the Beef Cattle Farms: A Case of Samsun Province, Turkey

Year 2020, Volume: 26 Issue: 1, 117 - 129, 05.03.2020

Nevra Alhas Eroğlu , Mehmet Bozoğlu , Abdulbaki Bilgiç

https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.487493

Cited By: 2

Abstract

Although the beef cattle sector has been considerably supported during the last two decades, Turkey could not get its self-sufficiency yet. The objective of this case study was to examine the impacts of livestock supports on production and income of beef cattle farms. The survey data was collected from randomly selected 171 cattle farms in Samsun province of Turkey. The Treatment Effect Model was used to measure the impacts of livestock supports on beef meat production and gross profit of the farms. The results indicate that the farmers, who have larger land and herd, higher education level, keeping farm records, are mechanized and specialized in beef cattle breeding were more likely to benefit from livestock supports than their counterparts. The Treatment Effect Model highlights that livestock support has a statistically significant effect on the amount of beef meat produced whereas it has no statistically significant effect on the gross profits of the farms. The research recommended that the livestock supports are necessary for the sustainability of beef cattle farms. The farms should be encouraged to get records via Farm Accountancy Data Network and the record keeping farms should be supported by higher amounts.

Keywords

Beef cattle breeding, Livestock supports, Impact assessment, Treatment effect, Turkey

References

• Acs S, Hanley N, Dallimer M, Gaston K J, Robertson P, Wilson P & Armsworth P R (2010). The effect of decoupling on marginal agricultural systems: Implications for farm incomes, land use and upland ecology. Land Use Policy 27(2): 550-563. https://doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.07.009.
• Aksoy A, Terin M & Keskin A (2012). Türkiye süt sığırcılığında ıslah ve destekleme politikalarının bölgesel etkileri üzerine bir araştırma. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 43(1): 59-64.
• Alhas Eroğlu N (2017). Samsun ilinde hayvancılık desteklerinin besi işletmelerinin üretim ve gelirlerine etkileri. PhD Thesis, Ondokuz Mayis University, Samsun, Turkey.
• Angrist J D (2001). Estimation of limited dependent variable models with dummy endogenous regressors: Simple strategies for empirical practice. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 19(1): 2-28.
• Anonymous (2015). Kırmızı Et Stratejisi. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, General Directorate of Livestock, Ankara, Turkey.
• Anonymous (2016). http://www.tuketbir.org.tr/basin_detay.asp?gidenID=MzI=.
• Anonymous (2018). Kalkınma Bakanlığı, 11. Kalkınma Planı, Tarım ve Gıdada Rekabetçi Üretim, Özel İhtisas Komisyonu Raporu, Ankara, Turkey.
• Aydın E, Can M F, Aral Y, Cevger Y & Sakarya E (2010). Türkiye’de canlı hayvan ve kırmızı et ithalatı kararlarının sığır besicileri üzerine etkileri. Veteriner Hekimler Derneği Dergisi 81(2): 51-57.
• Bartolini F & Viaggi D (2013). The common agricultural policy and the determinants of changes in EU farm size. Land Use Policy 31: 126-135. http://doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.10.007.
• Breen J P, Hennessy T C & Thorne FS (2005).The effect of decupling on the decision to produce: An Irish case study. Food Policy 30(2): 129-144. http://doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2005.03.001.
• Çelik C & Sarıözkan S (2017). Kırşehir ili merkez ilçede sığır besiciliği yapan işletmelerin ekonomik analizi. Harran Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi 6(1): 38-45.
• Chau N H & De Gorter H (2000). Disentangling the production and export consequences of direct farm income payments. In: American Agricultural Economics Association Meetings, July 30-August 2, No: 21854, Tampa, Florida.
• Demir N (2009). Destekleme politikalarının hayvancılık sektörü üzerine etkilerinin bölgesel karşılaştırmalı analizi. PhD Thesis, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkey.
• Demir N & Yavuz F (2010). Hayvancılık destekleme politikalarına çiftçilerin yaklaşımlarının bölgelerarası karşılaştırmalı analizi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 41(2): 113-121.
• Douarin E, Bailey A, Davidova S, Gorton M & Latruffe L (2007). Structural, location and human capital determinants of farmers’ response to decoupled payments. EU FP6 Project IDEMA (Impact of Decoupling and Modulation in the Enlarged EU: a sectorial and farm level assessment), Deliverable 14.
• El Benni N, Finger R & Mann S (2012). Effects of agricultural policy reforms and farm characteristics on income risk in Swiss agriculture. Agricultural Finance Review 72(3): 301-324. http://doi:10.1108/00021461211277204.
• FAO (2018). Databases. Retrieved in September 10, 2018 from http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QV.
• Genius M, Karagiannis G & Tzouvelakas V (2008). Assessing European farmers’ intentions in the light of the 2003 CAP reform. In: Paper Presented at the 109th European Association of Agricultural Economics (EAAE) Seminar “The CAP After the Fischler Reform: National Implementations, Impact Assessment and the Agenda for Future Reforms’, 20-21 November, Viterbo, Italy.
• Giannoccaro G & Berbel J (2013). Farmers’ stated preference analysis towards resources use under alternative policy scenarios. Land Use Policy 31: 145-155. http://doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.12.013.
• Goodwin B K & Mishra AK (2005). Another look at decoupling: Additional evidence on the production effects of direct payments. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(5): 1200-1210. http://doi:10.1111/j.14678276.2005. 00808.x.
• Goodwin B K & Mishra AK (2006). Are "decoupled" farm payments really decoupled? An empirical evaluation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88(1): 73–89. http://doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2006.00839.x.
• Gorton M, Douarin E, Davidova S & Latruffe L (2008). Attitudes to agricultural policy and farming futures in the context of the 2003 CAP reform: A comparison of farmers in selected established and new Member States. Journal of Rural Studies 24: 322-336. http://doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.10.001.
• Heckman J J & Robb R (1985). Alternative methods for evaluating the impact of interventions. Journal of Econometrics 30: 239-267.
• Hennessy D (1998). The production effects of agricultural income support policies under uncertainty. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80(1): 46-57. http://doi:10.2307/3180267.
• Hsieh Y (2009). Lecture Note on Treatment Effects Analysis. New York University.
• Kazukauskas A, Newman C & Sauer J (2014). The impact of decoupled subsidies on productivity in agriculture: across-country analysis using micro data. Agricultural Economics 45: 327-336. http://doi:10.1111/agec.1206.
• Keskin A, Dağdemir V & Yavuz F (2010). Türkiye et sığırcılığında ıslah ve destekleme politikalarının bölgesel etkileri üzerine bir çalışma. In: Türkiye 9. Ulusal Tarım Ekonomisi Kongresi, 22-24 Eylül, Şanlıurfa, Türkiye.
• Latruffe L, Dupuy A & Desjeux Y (2013). What would farmers’ strategies be in a no-CAP situation? An illustration from two regions in France. Journal of Rural Studies 32: (10-25). http://doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.04.003.
• Lobley M & Butler A (2010). The impact of CAP reform on farmers’ plans for the future: some evidence from South West England. Food Policy 35(44): 341–348. http://doi:j.foodpol.2010.04.001.
• Majewski E, Sulewski P, Raggi M & Viaggi D (2011). Differences in possible reactions of EU farmers from selected European regions to CAP Change. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Oeconomia 10(1): 45-56.
• Morgan-Davies C, Waterhouse T & Wilson R (2012). Characterization of farmers’ responses to policy reforms in Scottish hill farming areas. Small Ruminant Research, 102(2-3): 96-107. http://doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2011.07.013.
• Moss J, McErlean S, Kostov P & Patton M (2002). Analysis of impact of decoupling on agriculture in the UK. Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute, University of Missouri.
• O'Donoghue E J & Whitaker J B (2010). Do direct payments distort producers' decisions? An examination of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 32(1): 170-193.
• Özkan U & Erkuş A (2003). Bayburt İlinde Sığır Besiciliğine Yer Veren Tarım İşletmelerinin Ekonomik Analizi. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 9(4): 467-472.
• Özüdoğru T & Tatlıdil F F (2012). Amasya Damızlık Sığır Yetiştiricileri Birliğine üye olan ve olmayan işletmelerin ekonomik analizi ve süt sığırcılığına yönelik desteklerin gelire etkisi. Selçuk Tarım ve Gıda Bilimleri Dergisi 26(3): 42-29.
• Revell B & Oglethorpe D (2003). Decoupling and UK agriculture: a whole farm approach. Study Commissioned by DEFRA, London.
• Rubin D B (1974). Estimating casual effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. Journal of Educational Psychology 66(5): 688-701.
• Sckokai P & Moro D (2006). Modeling the reforms of the common agricultural policy for arable crops under uncertainty. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88(1): 43–56. http://doi:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2006.00857.x.
• Severini S & Tantari A (2013). The effect of the EU farm payments policy and its recent reform on farm income inequality. Journal of Policy Modeling 35: 212-227. http://doi:10.1016/j.jpolmod.2012.12.002.
• Shrestha S, Hennessy T & Hynes S (2007). The effect of decoupling on farming in Ireland: A regional analysis. Irish Journal of Agricultural and Food Research 46: 1-13.
• Terza J V (1998). Estimating count data models with endogenous switching: sample selection and endogenous treatment effects. Journal of Econometrics 84(1): 129-154. http://doi:10.1016/S0304-4076(97)00082-1.
• Topçu Y (2008). Çiftçilerin tarımsal destekleme politikalarından faydalanma istekliliğinde etkili faktörlerin analizi: Erzurum ili örneği. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 21(2): 205-212.
• Topçu Y, Uzundumlu A S & Kızıloğlu S (2008). Sığır besiciliği işletmelerinin başarısızlığında etkili faktörlerin analizi: Erzurum ili örneği. Alınteri 15(B): 19-25.
• TURKSTAT (2018a). Retrieved in Agricultural Prices and Economic Accounts and Livestock Statistics. http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1004.
• TURKSTAT (2018b). Retrieved in Crop Production Statistics https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bitkiselapp/bitkisel.zul.
• TURKSTAT (2018c). Retrieved in Statistical Indicators, Regional Statistics. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bolgeselistatistik/tabloOlustur.do# .
• Viaggi D (2011). Approaches to research in support to agricultural policy: The experience of the CAP-IRE Project. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Oeconomia 10(2): 83-94.
• Weber J G & 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. http://doi:10.1093/ajae/aar134.
• Yamane T (2001). Elementary Sampling Theory. Prentice Hall Inc., Englewoods, New Jersey.
• Yılmaz H, Demircan V & Dernek Z (2008). Türkiye tarımında doğrudan gelir desteği uygulamaları (Isparta ili üreticileri açısından bir değerlendirme). Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi 9(2): 248-265.