Kent Tarımına İlişkin Paydaş Görüşleri: Iğdır Örneği

Year 2023, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 530 - 540, 16.12.2023

Enes Akdeniz , M. Bihter Bingül Bulut , İbrahim Hosaflıoğlu , Öner Demirel

https://doi.org/10.30785/mbud.1318068

Abstract

Kentsel tarım, kentsel alanların içinde ve çeperinde gerçekleşen tüm tarımsal faaliyetleri kapsamaktadır. Çevresel, sosyal ve ekonomik bağlamlardaki karmaşık etkileşimleri nedeniyle, kentsel tarım çeşitli zorluklarla karşı karşıyadır. Bu nedenle, kentsel tarımın geliştirilmesi sürecinde çeşitli paydaşlar yer almaktadır. Bu çalışma, kentsel tarımın Iğdır ili ve çevresinde paydaşların görüşlerini belirlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu da kentsel tarım kapsamında bölgede neler yapılabileceğinin anlaşılmasını sağlayacaktır. Araştırmada yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formları kullanılmıştır. Paydaşlara beş soru sorulmuş ve verilerin analizinde nitel veri analiz yöntemlerinden biri olan betimsel analiz kullanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre, Iğdır ilinin kentsel tarımsal faaliyetler açısından önemli bir potansiyele sahip olduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. Paydaş görüşlerinden yola çıkılarak Iğdır ilinde kentsel tarım olanakları tartışılmıştır.

Keywords

Tarımsal faaliyetler, yerel yönetim, paydaşlar, kent, kentsel tarım

Stakeholder Opinions on Urban Agriculture: The Case of Iğdır

Abstract

Urban agriculture encompasses all agricultural activities within or near urban areas. Due to its complex interactions within environmental, social, and economic contexts, urban agriculture faces various challenges. Therefore, various stakeholders are involved in the process of developing urban agriculture. This study aims to determine the place and importance of urban agriculture in the eyes of stakeholders in Iğdır City and its surrounding areas. This will provide an understanding of what can be done in the region within the scope of urban agriculture. Semi-structured interview forms were used in the study. Five questions were asked to the stakeholders, and descriptive analysis, one of the qualitative data analysis methods, was used to analyze the data. According to the findings, it was concluded that Iğdır city holds significant potential in terms of urban agricultural activities. Based on the stakeholder opinions, opportunities for urban agriculture in Iğdır City were discussed.

Keywords

Agricultural activities, local authorities, stakeholders, urban, urban agriculture

Thanks

This article is based on the master’s thesis titled "Investigation of Urban Agriculture and Agrotourism Potential in Iğdır City and its Surroundings" completed in the Department of Agricultural Sciences, Institute of Science, Iğdır University. The article adheres to national and international research and publication ethics. Ethical committee approval for the study was obtained through the decision numbered 2022/5, dated 24/03/2022, from the Ethics Committee of Iğdır University.

References

• Aksoy, Y., Savaş, D. & Dursun, S. (2012). Iğdır İlinin Mekânsal Analiz Raporu. Iğdır Çevre ve Şehircilik İl Müdürlüğü. Access Address (23.05.2023): https://webdosya.csb.gov.tr/db/kentges/editordosya/kiu_igdir_mekansal_analiz.pdf/
• Altunışık, R., Coşkun, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S. & Yıldırım, E. (2012). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri SPSS Uygulamalı. Adapazarı/Sakarya: Sakarya Yayıncılık.
• Clinton, N., Stuhlmacher, M., Miles, A., Uludere Aragon, N., Wagner, M., Georgescu, M., Herwig, C. & Gong, P. (2018). A global geospatial ecosystem services estimate of urban agriculture. Earth’s Future, 6(1), 40-60. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017EF000536.
• Cohen, N. & Reynolds, K. (2014). Urban agriculture policy making in New York’s “New Political Spaces” Strategizing for a Participatory and Representative System. J Plan Educ Res. 34(2), 221–234. doi:10.1177/0739456X14526453.
• Cook, J., Oviatt, K., Main, D. S., Kaur, H. & Brett, J. (2015). Reconceptualizing urban agriculture: an exploration of farming along the banks of the Yamuna River in Delhi, India. Agric Human Values, 32(2), 265–279. doi:10.1007/s10460-014-9545-z.
• Delgado,. C. (2018). Contrasting practices and perceptions of urban agriculture in Portugal. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development. 10(2), 170–185. doi:10.1080/19463138.2018.1481069.
• Diehl, J. A. (2020). Growing for Sydney: exploring the urban food system through farmers’ social networks. Sustainability. 12(8), 3346. doi:10.3390/su12083346.
• Gianluca, F., Kathrin, S. & Cesare, Z. (2021). Assessing motivations and perceptions of stakeholders in urban agriculture: a review and analytical framework. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 13(2), 351-367, DOI: 10.1080/19463138.2021.1904247.
• Gül, A. (2022). Urban Agroforestry Systems in Urban Agriculture. In H. B. Türker, & A. Gül. (Eds.) Architectural Sciences and Urban Agriculture (26-68). ISBN:978-625-8213-84-3. Ankara: Iksad Publications. https://iksadyayinevi.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Architectural-Sciences-and-Urban-Agriculture.pdf
• Hara, Y., Murakami, A., Tsuchiya, K., Palijon, A. M. & Yokohari, M. (2013). A quantitative assessment of vegetable farming on vacant lots in an urban fringe area in Metro Manila: can it sustain long-term local vegetable demand? Appl Geogr. (41), 195–206. doi:10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.04.003.
• Hodgson, K., Campbell, M. C. & Bailkey, M. (2011). Urban agriculture: Growing Healthy, Sustainable Places. APA Planning Advisory Service Reports. 1-145.
• Lohrberg, F., Licka, L., Scazzosi, L. & Timpe, A. (2015). Urban Agriculture Europe. Pub. Jovis, Editor: Frank Lohrberg, Lilli Licka, Lionella Scazzosi, Axel Timpe ISBN: 978-3-86859-371-6.
• Merriam, S. B. (2018). Nitel Araştırma Desen ve Uygulama İçin Bir Rehber (3. Basımdan Çeviri). (S. Turan, Çeviren) Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
• Metin, A. E. & Türker, H. B. (2023). Exploring the Synergy between Urban Agriculture and Ecotherapy. In Türker, H. B. & Bolat, F. (Eds.). Architectural Sciencesand Ecological Approaches. 2023, Chapter: 3, 78-88. ISBN: 978-625- 367-073-3. Iksad Publications. (PDF) Exploring the Synergy between Urban Agriculture and Ecotherapy. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/370985736_Exploring_the_Synergy_between_Urban_Agriculture_ and_Ecotherapy [accessed Jul 30 2023].
• Nadal Fuentes, A. (2015). Urban agriculture in the framework of sustainable Urbanism. Temes De Disseny, (31)1, 92-103. Access Address (18.04.2023): https://raco.cat/index.php/Temes/article/view/299595/
• Nadal, A., Cerón-Palma, I., García-Gómez, C., Pérez-Sánchez, M., Rodríguez-Labajos, B., Cuerva, E. & Rieradevall, J. (2018). Social perception of urban agriculture in Latin-America. A case study in Mexican social housing. Land Use Policy, (76), 719–734. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.055.
• Orsini, F., Kahane, R., Nono-Womdim, R. & Gianquinto, G. (2013). Urban agriculture in the developing world: A review. Agronomy Sustainable, 4(3), 695–720.
• Paddeu F. (2017). Legalising urban agriculture in Detroit: a contested way of planning for decline. Town Planning Review. 88(1), 109–129. doi:10.3828/tpr.2017.9.
• Philips, A. (2013). Designing Urban Agriculture, A Complete Guide to The Planning, Design, Construction, Maintenance, and Management of Edible Landscapes. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey, Canada, 163.
• Prové, C., Kemper, D., Loudiyi, S., Mumenthaler, C. & Nikolaidou, S. (2016). Governance of urban agriculture initiatives: insights drawn from European case studies. In: Lohrberg F, Scazzosi L, Licka L, Timpe A, editors. Urban agriculture Europe. Berlin: Jovis; p. 64–69.
• Provincial Directorate of Agriculture and Forestry. (2019). Access Address (02.06.2023): https://webdosya.csb.gov.tr/db/ced/icerikler/igd-r_-cdr2018-20190930172121.pdf/
• Ramaloo, P., Liong, C. Y., Siwar, C. & Isahak, A. (2018). Perception of community residents on supporting urban agriculture in Malaysian City: case study at Bukit Mertajam. Journal Pengurusan (UKM Journal of Management). Vol. 53.
• Rasouli, S. (2012). Sürdürülebilir Kentsel Tasarımda Kentsel Tarımın Rolü, “İstanbul Örneği”. Master's Thesis, Istanbul Technical University, Institute of Science, İstanbul. 15.
• Rogerson, C. M. (2011). Urban agriculture and public administration: institutional context and local response in Gauteng. In: Zarina Patel, Bradley Rink, editors. Urban Forum. 22(2), 183–198.
• Sanyé-Mengual, E., Anguelovski, I., Oliver-Solà, J., Montero, J. I. & Rieradevall, J. (2016). Resolving differing stakeholder perceptions of urban rooftop farming in Mediterranean cities: promoting food production as a driver for innovative forms of urban agriculture. Agric Human Values. 33(1), 101–120. doi:10.1007/s10460-015- 9594-y.
• Sanyé-Mengual, E., Specht, K., Krikser, T., Vanni, C., Pennisi, G., Orsini, F. & Gianquinto, G. P. (2018). Social acceptance and perceived ecosystem services of urban agriculture in Southern Europe: the case of Bologna, Italy. PLOS One. 13(9), 1–21. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200993.
• Şimşek, O. (2018). Iğdır İlinin nüfus özellikleri. Akademik Tarih ve Düşünce Dergisi, 5(14), 180-210. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/atdd/issue/37307/431120/
• Specht, K. & Sanyé-Mengual, E. (2017). Risks in urban rooftop agriculture: assessing stakeholders’ perceptions to ensure efficient policymaking. Environ Sci Policy. (69), 13–21. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2016.12.001.
• Specht, K., Siebert, R. & Thomaier, S. (2016). Perception and acceptance of agricultural production in and on urban buildings (ZFarming): a qualitative study from Berlin, Germany. Agric Human Values, 33(4), 753–769. doi:10.1007/s10460-015-9658-z.
• TÜİK. (2022). Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. Nüfus Sayım Verileri Access Address (16.05.2023): https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Nufus-ve-Demografi-109/
• Türker, H. B. & Anaç, İ. (2022). Analyze of academic researches on urban agriculture in Turkey. Journal of Architectural Sciences and Applications, 7(1), 383-404.
• Türker, H. B. & Akten, M. (2020). A Productive Land Use: Urban Agriculture. Journal of Strategic Research in Social Science, 6 (1), 11-24.
• Türker, H. B. & Akten, M. (2021). Uşak Kent Halkının Kentsel Tarıma Yönelik Kullanım Düzeyi ve Bakış Açısı. Mimarlık Planlama ve Tasarım Alanında Araştırma ve Değerlendirmeler-II, 1-30.
• Türker, H. B. (2021). Protection and Sustainability of Urban Agriculture Areas. Atila Gül and Mert Çakır (Eds.). Architectural Sciences and Protection & Conservation & Preservation. 2021, Volume:1, 595-622. ISBN: 978-625- 8061-45-1. Iksad Publications. https://iksadyayinevi.com/home/architectural-sciences-and-protection- conservation-preservation/
• Türker, B., Gül, A., Anaç, İ. & Gül, H. E. (2021). The role of urban agriculture in adapting to climate change for sustainable cities. 2nd International City and Ecology Congress Within The Framework of Sustainable Urban Development. (CEDESU 2021). Proceedings Book. p. 247-252. December 2-3, 2021, Trabzon, Turkey. https://kongre.akademikiletisim.com//files/cedesu2021/cedesu_tam_metin.pdf
• Türker H. B. & Akten, M. (2022). A Comprehensive Review on Urban Agriculture. In H. B. Türker, & A. Gül (Eds.) Architectural Sciencesand Urban Agriculture (01-25). ISBN:978-625-8213-84-3. Ankara: Iksad Publications. https://iksadyayinevi.com/home/architectural-sciences-and-urban-agriculture/
• Türker, H. B. & Akten, M. (2023). Harvesting the hidden value of vacant lands: a GIS-based approach to urban agriculture. Journal of Architectural Sciences and Applications, 8 (1), 422-437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30785/mbud.1292693
• Türkoğlu, M. (2018). Iğdır’ın Ilk Biyoçeşitliliği ve Doğadaki Besin Zinciri. T.C. Orman ve Su İşleri Bakanlığı Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü.
• Türkoğlu, M. & Şekercioğlu. H. Ş. (2017). Iğdır’ın Kuşları. T.C. Orman ve Su İşleri Bakanlığı Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü, ISBN: 978-605-9550-01-7.
• UNDP. (1996). Human Development Report 1996, United Nations Development Programme. Access Address (16.04.2023): https://hdr.undp.org/system/files/documents/hdr1996encompletenostatspdf.pdf/
• Vásquez, R., Cofie, O., Drechsel, P. & Mensa-Bonsu, I. F. (2002). Linking urban agriculture with urban management: a challenge for policy makers and planners. WIT Trans Ecol Environ. 54. 925-934.