IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i20p13326-d944325.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Kartepe Village Production Patterns and Farmer Profiles

Author

Listed:
  • Ehlinaz Torun Kayabaşı

    (Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural Economics, Arslanbey Campus, University of Kocaeli, Kartepe 41285, Turkey)

  • Şenol Çelik

    (Department of Animal Sciences, Biometry and Genetics, Faculty of Agriculture, Bingöl University, Bingöl 12000, Turkey)

  • Ahmet Emre Demirtaş

    (Faculty of Social Sciences, Universty of Sakarya, Serdivan 54050, Turkey)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to provide necessary agricultural extension support while carrying out agricultural activities by revealing the production patterns and farmer profiles in the villages of the Kartepe district of the Kocaeli province. The farmers registered in the Farmer Registration System (FRS) were taken into account. A total of 260 farmers participated in a two-month study, answering a questionnaire during face-to-face interviews, and the data obtained were evaluated through performing statistical analyses. The data were interpreted by applying frequency tables and the Kruskal-Wallis test. A total of 89.6% of the farmers are male, 10.4% are female, 40.8% are 56 years old and over, and 34.6% are between 45 and 55 years old. In terms of education levels, 61.9%, the highest proportion, graduated from primary school, followed by 15.8% who graduated from secondary and high schools, those who graduated from university with a Bachelor/Associate Degree, and, finally, those who graduated with a postgraduate degree as well as those who are illiterate. A total of 69.2% of the farmers are retired, and 24.7% are workers. The land of 68.8% of the respondents is their own property, and the land of 11.9% of them is common land. This land ranges as follows: 32.7% consists of 1–10 acres and 11–20 acres, and 17.3% consists of 21–30 acres. More than half of the participants (51.9%) produce 4 tons or more of their product annually. The social security coverage of the respondents is as follows: 42.7% SSK, 21.2% Bagkur, and 16.5% Pension Fund. The analyses show that the differences in terms of occupation, land size, property status, number of workers and worker status, social security, the fight against diseases and pests, and the relationships between them are important.

Suggested Citation

  • Ehlinaz Torun Kayabaşı & Şenol Çelik & Ahmet Emre Demirtaş, 2022. "Evaluation of Kartepe Village Production Patterns and Farmer Profiles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-17, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13326-:d:944325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13326/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13326/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hayley H. Chouinard & Tobias Paterson & Philip R. Wandschneider & Adrienne M. Ohler, 2008. "Will Farmers Trade Profits for Stewardship? Heterogeneous Motivations for Farm Practice Selection," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 66-82.
    2. Chunpeng Fan & Donghui Zhang & Cun-Hui Zhang, 2011. "On Sample Size of the Kruskal–Wallis Test with Application to a Mouse Peritoneal Cavity Study," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 67(1), pages 213-224, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Greiner, Romy & Miller, Owen & Patterson, Louisa, 2008. "The role of grazier motivations and risk attitudes in the adoption of grazing best management practices," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6002, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Manning, Dale & Rad, Mani Rouhi & Ogle, Stephen, 2022. "Inferring the Supply of GHG Abatement from Agricultural Lands," 2024 Annual Meeting, July 28-30, New Orleans, LA 322539, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Huang, Shiyang & Hu, Guiping & Chennault, Carrie & Su, Liu & Brandes, Elke & Heaton, Emily & Schulte, Lisa & Wang, Lizhi & Tyndall, John, 2016. "Agent-based modeling of bioenergy crop adoption and farmer decision-making," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(P1), pages 1188-1201.
    4. Anastasio J. Villanueva & Klaus Glenk & Macario Rodríguez-Entrena, 2017. "Protest Responses and Willingness to Accept: Ecosystem Services Providers’ Preferences towards Incentive-Based Schemes," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(3), pages 801-821, September.
    5. Maria & Irham & Slamet Hartono & Lestari Rahayu Waluyati, 2022. "The effect of environmental awareness on motivation in adopting farming conservation techniques in the various agro-ecological zones: a case study in critical land of Java Island, Indonesia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 1878-1896, February.
    6. Crudeli, Luca & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Pitoro, Raul, 2022. "Beyond individualistic behaviour: Social norms and innovation adoption in rural Mozambique," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    7. Munasib, Abdul B.A. & Jordan, Jeffrey L., 2011. "The Effect of Social Capital on the Choice to Use Sustainable Agricultural Practices," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 213-227, May.
    8. Duke, Esther Alice & Goldstein, Joshua H. & Teel, Tara L. & Finchum, Ryan & Huber-Stearns, Heidi & Pitty, Jorge & Rodríguez P., Gladys Beatriz & Rodríguez, Samuel & Sánchez, Luis Olmedo, 2014. "Payments for ecosystem services and landowner interest: Informing program design trade-offs in Western Panama," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 44-55.
    9. Konrad, Maria Theresia & Nielsen, Helle Ørsted & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Elofsson, Katarina, 2019. "Drivers of Farmers' Investments in Nutrient Abatement Technologies in Five Baltic Sea Countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 91-100.
    10. Mariano Mezzatesta & David A. Newburn & Richard T. Woodward, 2013. "Additionality and the Adoption of Farm Conservation Practices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 722-742.
    11. Veldstra, Michael D. & Alexander, Corinne E. & Marshall, Maria I., 2014. "To certify or not to certify? Separating the organic production and certification decisions," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(P2), pages 429-436.
    12. Jacobson, Sarah, 2014. "Temporal spillovers in land conservation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 366-379.
    13. Geoffrey Castillo & Lawrence Choo & Veronika Grimm, 2022. "Do different people report the same social norms?," Working Papers hal-03901206, HAL.
    14. Blanco, Julien & Sourdril, Anne & Deconchat, Marc & Barnaud, Cécile & San Cristobal, Magali & Andrieu, Emilie, 2020. "How farmers feel about trees: Perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices associated with rural forests in southwestern France," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    15. Canales, Elizabeth & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery & Peterson, Jeffrey, 2015. "Estimating farmers’ risk attitudes and risk premiums for the adoption of conservation practices under different contractual arrangements: A stated choice experiment," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205640, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Sauer, Johannes & Walsh, John & Zilberman, David, 2012. "Behavioural Change through Agri-Environmental Policies ? – A Distance Function based Matching Approach," 86th Annual Conference, April 16-18, 2012, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 134783, Agricultural Economics Society.
    17. Sauer, Johannes & Wossink, Ada, 2010. "The Marginal Cost Of Agri-Environmental Services," 50th Annual Conference, Braunschweig, Germany, September 29-October 1, 2010 93939, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    18. David Weisberger & Melissa Ann Ray & Nicholas T. Basinger & Jennifer Jo Thompson, 2024. "Chemical, ecological, other? Identifying weed management typologies within industrialized cropping systems in Georgia (U.S.)," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 41(3), pages 935-953, September.
    19. Walters, Cory G. & Shumway, C. Richard & Chouinard, Hayley H. & Wandschneider, Philip R., 2012. "Crop Insurance, Land Allocation, and the Environment," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 1-20, August.
    20. Chai, Yuan & J. Pannell, David & G. Pardey, Philip, 2023. "Nudging farmers to reduce water pollution from nitrogen fertilizer," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13326-:d:944325. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.