Evaluation of Agricultural Mechanization as an Indicator of Agricultural Development: A Comparative Study for Türkiye and Egypt

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 3, 257 - 265, 15.05.2024

Hüseyin Duran , Nashwa A. Ghaly , Gürkan A. K. Gürdil

https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1429314

Cited By: 1

Öz

Nowadays, one of the main goals of agriculture is to meet the needs of human communities in all countries through more efficient and high-quality production in agricultural areas. The incorporation of technological advancements, particularly agricultural mechanization, has become imperative for enhancing agricultural production. In recent years, the growing need and inclination to minimize reliance on human labor have heightened the significance of agricultural mechanization, its continual development, and its integration into agricultural operations. The progress of agriculture is intricately tied to the adoption of production technologies within the agricultural sector. The heightened integration of new and contemporary technologies in agriculture can elevate agricultural productivity and income while concurrently lowering production costs. The degree of a country's agricultural development is inherently linked to the utilization of production technologies within its agricultural practices. This research aims to study the existing state of agricultural mechanization in Türkiye and Egypt by identifying and measuring important indicators of the mechanization level of farming, focusing on conducting a comparative analysis between the two countries. Türkiye has a total cultivated area of approximately 23 million hectares, whereas Egypt's cultivated area is around 3 million hectares. Tractors equipped with mechanical power supplies, constituting a fundamental energy source in agriculture, in this study are estimated to be approximately 1.354.912 and 135.100 in Türkiye and Egypt, respectively. The results showed that the levels of mechanization in Türkiye and Egypt were represented by engine power per hectare (1.28 kW/hectare and 0.93 kW/hectare), the number of tractors per 1000 hectares (58.91 tractor /1.000 hectare, and 45 tractor /1.000 hectare) and the cultivated area per tractor (16.97 ha/tractor and 22.21 ha/tractor), respectively. Additionally, the average tractor power in Egypt and Türkiye reached 33-41 kW and 44-52 kW, respectively.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Agriculture, Mechanization level, Tractors, Agricultural machinery

Kaynakça

• Akdemir B. 2013. Agricultural mechanization in Turkey. IERI Procedia, 5: 41-44.
• Altuntas E, Demirtola H. 2004. The evaluation of the agricultural mechanization level of Turkey according to the geographical regions. J Agri Fac Gaziosmanpasa Univ, 21(2): 63-70.
• Anonymous. 2023a. Tarım makinaları sektör raporu. Batı Akdeniz kalkınma ajansı. URL: https://www.tbb.org.tr/Content/Upload/Dokuman/8960 (accessed date: November 20, 2023).
• Anonymous. 2023b. Tarım alet ve makine sektörü. URL: https://www.karacabeytso.org.tr/blogfiles (accessed date: November 20, 2023).
• Anonymous. 2023c. Ministry of agriculture and forestry (Türkiye). URL: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Tarim-111 (accessed date: November 14, 2023).
• Baran F, Gökdoğan O, Kaya İ, Oğuz İ. 2019. Projection of technology equipment usage in agriculture in Turkey. Türk Tarım Doğa Bilim Derg, 6(1): 1-9.
• Baudron F, Sims B, Justice S, Kahan G, Rose R, Mkomwa S, Gérard B. 2015. Re-examining appropriate mechanization in Eastern and Southern Africa: two-wheel tractors, conservation agriculture, and private sector involvement. Food Sec, 7: 889-904.
• CAPMAS. 2020. Bulletin of mechanical farm machinery. central agency for public mobilization and statistics, Egypt. URL: https://www.Capmas.Gov.Eg/Pages/Publications.Aspx?Page_id=5109&YearID=23555 (accessed date: December 12, 2023).
• Chandran R. 2017. Impact of mechanization on cost of cultivation and production of paddy in Thrissur. IJAR, 3(10): 79-81.
• Çiçek G, Sümer K. 2017. Agriculture structure and mechanization level of the Çanakkale province. 12th International Congress on Mechanization and Energy in Agriculture, 3-6 September, Cappadocia, Türkiye, pp: 1034.
• Daum T, Birner R. 2017. The neglected governance challenges of agricultural mechanization in Africa insights from Ghana. Food Sec, 9: 959-979.
• Daum T, Kirui O. 2021. Mechanization along the value chain. In: From Potentials to Reality: Transforming Africa’s Food Production. Peter Lang, Bern, Switzerland, pp: 334.
• Evcim Ü, Ertuğrul Ö. 2017. Türkiye tarımında traktör kullanımı. Tarım Mak Bilim Derg, 13 (1): 21-31.
• FAO. 2016. Agricultural mechanization, a key for Sub-Saharan African smallholders; Integrated Crop Management. URL: https://www.fao.org/sustainable-agricultural-mechanization/resources/publications/details/en/c/449937 (accessed date: December 14, 2023).
• FAO. 2017. In FAO Statistical Yearbook 2017. URL: www.fao.org/docrep/015/i2490e/i2490e00.html (accessed date: December 15, 2023).
• FAO. 2023. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Statistics Division. URL: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/RL (accessed date: November 18, 2023).
• FAO. AUC. 2018. Sustainable agricultural mechanization: a framework for Africa. Food and Agriculture Organisation, Rome, and African Union Commission, Addis Adaba. URL: http:// www. fao. org/3/CA113 6EN/ ca113 6en. pdf. (accessed date: October 14, 2023).
• Kadah T, Mohammed R, Ibrahim K, Radwan H. 2018. Current situation of agricultural tractors and equipment in Egypt. Agri Mechanizat Asia, Africa, Latin America, 49(2): 34.
• Koçtürk, D, Avcıoğlu A. 2007. Türkiye’de bölgelere ve illere göre tarımsal mekanizasyon düzeyinin belirlenmesi. Tarım Mak Bilim Derg, 3(1): 17-24.
• MALR. 2019. Ministry of agriculture and land reclamation (Egypt). URL: http://www.agr-egypt.gov.eg/. (accessed date: November 20, 2023).
• McNulty B, Grace M. 2009. Agricultural mechanization and automation. Report from Agricultural and Food Engineering Department, National University of Dublin, Ireland, pp.13-17.
• Peter N, Sewilam H. 2016. Investigating fertilizer drawn forward osmosis process for groundwater desalination for irrigation in Egypt. Desalination Water Treat, 56: 26932–26942.
• Pishbin S. 2013. Measurement of indexes agricultural mechanization in agriculture and horticulture crops in Fars Province. Inter J Biosci, 3(12): 81-89.
• Saygılı S, Çakmak B. 2021. Niğde ı̇li ve ilçelerindeki tarımsal yapı, üretim özellikleri ve mekanizasyon durumunun incelenmesi. Tarım Makinaları Bilim Derg, 17(3): 101-117.
• Schmitz A, Moss B. 2015. Mechanized agriculture: Machine adoption, farm size, and labor displacement. AgBioForum, 18(3): 278-296.
• Sims B. Kienzle J. 2017. Sustainable agricultural mechanization for smallholders: What is it and how can we implement it? Agri, 7(6): 50.
• Sümer M, Has A, Sabancı. 2004. Produced in Turkey technical specifications of agricultural tractors. Çukurova Univ Fac Agri J, 19: 17-26.
• Tarmakbir. 2018. Tarım makinaları sektör raporu. URL:http://www.tarmakbir.org/haberler/tarmakbirsekrap.pdf. (accessed date: April 23, 2023).
• Tarmakbir. 2022. Tarım makinaları sektör raporu. URL: https://tarmakbir.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/tarmekstatozet.pdf. (accessed date: Feb 2, 2024).
• Trade Map. 2023. URL: https://www.trademap.org/Country_SelProduct_TS.aspx?nvpm=. (accessed date: November 23, 2023).
• TÜİK 2017a. Agricultural land of Turkey. Turkish Statistical Institute. URL: http://: www.tutkstat.gov.tr (accessed date: April 25, 2023).
• TÜİK 2017b. Area and production of cereals and other crop products (For selected products). Turkish Statistical Institute. URL: http://: www.tutkstat.gov.tr. (accessed date: April 30, 2023).
• World B. 2019. World development indicators employment in Agriculture. URL:https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.AGR.EMPL.ZS?end=2019&locations=EG& name_desc=false&start=1991&view=chart (accessed June 20, 2022).