Policy Assessment of Wheat Production in Turkey

Article Sidebar


PDF (English)

Opublikowane:
Jun 30, 2020
Numer
Tom 20 Nr 2 (2020)
Dział
Articles
CitedBy/Share
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Main Article Content

Nazli Ceylan
Szent Istvan University, Hungary
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7568-5938

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22630/PRS.2020.20.2.8
Abstrakt
Turkey plays a significant role in global wheat trade, importing wheat grain and exporting processed wheat products such as pasta, flour and biscuits. Wheat growing areas in Turkey have shown a decrease of about 10% over the last decade. Although an increase in yields keeps the production amount in balance, policies toward the wheat sector have reached a more critical point due to an increasing population and growing demand on the wheat flour sector. In this study, the profitability and sustainability of the sector were analyzed by using the Policy Analysis Matrix (PAM) approach, and by examining the effects of the policies that have been applied on the wheat market recently. According to the PAM results, domestic wheat prices are higher than world prices due to existing policies and the wheat sector is not competitive without support.

Article Details

Jak cytować
Ceylan, N. (2020). Policy Assessment of Wheat Production in Turkey. Zeszyty Naukowe SGGW W Warszawie - Problemy Rolnictwa Światowego, 20(2), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.22630/PRS.2020.20.2.8
Bibliografia

Adesina, A.A., Coulibaly, O.N. (1998). Policy and competitiveness of agroforestry-based technologies for maize production in Cameroon: An application of policy analysis matrix. Agricultural Economics, 19(1-2), 1-13. (Crossref)

Agraja, L. (2006). Assessing the Comparative Advantage of Wheat Produced in Albania. Cuvillier Verlag.

Agricultural Economic And Policy Development Institute of Turkey (SGB), (2019). Wheat Report, January, 2019.

Bahadır, B. (2006). Competitiveness of cotton production in cukurova region and Turkey: Policy analysis matrix (PAM) approach.

Eskisehir Odunpazarı Ziraat Odası, (2019). Retrived December 8 from http://www.ezo.org.tr/Maliyet.

Fang, C., Beghin, J.C. (2000). Food self-sufficiency, comparative advantage, and agricultural trade: a policy analysis matrix for Chinese agriculture. Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.

Halicioglu, F., Karatas, C. (2011). A social discount rate for Turkey. Quality & Quantity, 47(2), 1085-1091. (Crossref)

International Trade Centre (ITC), (2019). Intracen database. Retrived December 10 from https://trademap.org/Index.aspx.

Martinez, E.R., Tadeo, A.J.P., Estruch, V. (2008). The policy analysis matrix with profit-efficient data: evaluating profitability in rice cultivation. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, (3), 309-319. (Crossref)

Mashayekhi, A. (1980). Shadow prices for project appraisal in Turkey. The World Bank.

Mohanty, S., Fang, C., Chaudhary, J. (2002). Assessing the competitiveness of Indian cotton production: a policy analysis matrix approach. CARD Working Papers. 328.

Monke, E.A., Pearson, S.R. (1989). The policy analysis matrix for agricultural development (Vol. 201). Ithaca: Cornell University press.

Nelson, G.C., Panggabean, M. (1991). The costs of Indonesian sugar policy: a policy analysis matrix approach. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73(3), 703-712. (Crossref)

OECD, (2019). OECD Database. Retrived December 2 from https://www.compareyourcountry.org/support-for-agriculture?cr=aus&lg=en&page=2&visited=1.

Onay, Y., Korkmaz, H.I., (2018). The Determinants of Currency Risk Premium in Emerging Market Countries. CBT Research Notes in Economics from Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey.

Pearson, S., Gotsch, C., Bahri, S. (2003). Applications of the policy analysis matrix in Indonesian agriculture. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Stout, J.V. (1991). Direct comparison of general equilibrium and partial equilibrium models in agriculture (No. 1799). US Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

The Central Bank of the Republic of Turkey, Exchange rates database. Retrived December 8 from https://evds2.tcmb.gov.tr/index.php?/evds/serieMarket/#collapse_2.

The Official Journal Republic of Turkey. (2018).URL: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2018/02/20180226-15.pdf.

The Official Journal Republic of Turkey. (2018).URL: https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2018/02/20180210-4.pdf.

Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK), Agricultural statistics database. Retrived November 25 from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1001.

Turkish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, (2018). Antalya Province Crop Report. URL: https://antalya.tarimorman.gov.tr/Belgelerb/2018%20ANTALYA%20TARIMSAL%20ÜRÜN%20MALİYETLERİ.pdf.

Turkish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, (2018). Konya Province Crop Report. URL: https://konya.tarimorman.gov.tr/Belgeler/konyatarimi20092018.pdf.

Turkish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, (2018). Manisa Province Crop Report. URL: https://manisa.tarimorman.gov.tr/Belgeler/Dokumanlar/2018%20Tarımsal%20Maliyetler.pdf.

Turkish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, (2018). Tokat Province Crop Report. URL: https://tokat.tarimorman.gov.tr/Belgeler/2018%20YILI%20TÜM%20ÜRÜNLER%20MALİYETİ%20ve%20AĞAÇ%20DEĞERİ%20(27.12.2018).pdf.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), (2018). Turkey Grain and Feed Annual Report, Report Number: TR8010, March 2018.

Yao, S. (1997). Comparative advantages and crop diversification: a policy analysis matrix for Thai agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 48(1-3), 211-222. (Crossref)

Statystyki

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Rekomendowane teksty
Licencja
Creative Commons License

Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne 4.0 Międzynarodowe.