TÜRKİYE VE KUZEYDOĞU ANADOLU TARIMINDA BELİRSİZLİK VE EKONOMİK ETKİLERİ

Authors : Ergün Kip

Pages : 0-0

View : 18 | Download : 12

Publication Date : 2010-12-20

Article Type : Research

Abstract :ÖZET Bu, araştırmada, Türkiye ve özelliHe Kuzeydoğu Anadolu tarımlarının bitkisel üretim kesimlerini temsilen ele alman muhtelif ürünlerin verim, fiyat ve gayrisafi hasıla1amufu yıldan yıla görülen şiddetli dalgala:nmalardan ileri gelen belirsiz· lik ve bu belirsizliğin iktisadi tesirleri incelenmektedir,. Elde edilen bulgulardan, gerek Türkiye ve gerekse Kuzeydoğu Anadolu düzeyinde yetiştirilen belli başlı ürünlerin verim, fiyat vıe dolayısiyle gayri safı hasılalarının yıldan yıla şiddetli dalgalanmalar gösterdiği anlaşılmaktadır. Bu ise, çiftçiyi önemli bir teknik ve ekonomik beMrsizlikle karşı karşıya bırakmaktadır. Bu durumun bir sonucu olarak; tarım· ~al üretimin rasyonel bir şekilde planlanması güçleşmekte, kaynaklar etkin olmıyan bileşim 'Ve miktarlarda kullanılmakta, işgücü sermaye yerine ikame ediımek~e ve uzun vadeli yatırımlardan kaçımlmaktadır. SUMMARY: UNCERTAINTY AND ITS ECONOMIC EFFECTS ON THE AGRICULTURE OF TURKEY AND NORTH EAST REGION Decision-making withDut complete knowledge is a problem of major significance in the _agricultural economy. Because of lincertainty, productian planning is frequently imperfect. This results in lowt:r incomes for farm people and a mis-alloca~ion of produe.üve resources. This study estimates the degree of variabi1ity in yields, prices and gross incomes associated with varioliS types of crop pm· duction in Turkeyand specifically in the Northeastern Region and investigates the relationships between stability and level of farm income from particular cropping systems. Knowledge of these relationships is prerequisite to rational choices among crops or combinations of crops to .produce. For example, farmers must decide whether to pioduce: a) high income crops with a correspondingly high risk of large losses, b) lower risk crops with tower aver- 22' age iDeome, c) a combination of high and low risk crops. In line with these ge;1eral goals: the specific objectives of this studyare: 1) to estimate absolute and relative variability of product priees, yields, and gross income of major crops, 2) to compare various 'erop diversi· fication systems from the stand. point of variability and level of income in the Northeastern Region, 3) to investigate the effects of uncertainty upon allacative efficiency in agriculture. Variability measures of indi· vidual crops were derived exdusivelyfrom the yield and prke series compiIed by the State hıstitute of Statics and the gross income computed here as unit prke X yield per hectare for the period of 1948·1970 for Turkeyand 19511970 for the Northeastern ~egion. Variability, in erop produetion stems form the fact that eornputed associated with the individual farrner's view of un. predictable or «randam» variation. In the first, it is assamed that in the eyes of the farmer any deviation from the long-rurn. mean is a randam or unpredictable event and the original series used to compute the «coefficient of variation'} by the fol1owing equation: yields, priees and ineames are influeneed by many variables in an unpredictable or «randam» manner, From the standpoint of the individual farmer, what portion of the total variation in yield priee and income is unpredietable or «random» aııd what portian predietable? In this study, two types of variabiIity measures are Coeffident of variation ----- ...; variance 1948-70 or 1951-70 mean X 100 eaeh series and then deviations from this trend line is used to eompute the «eoefficient of random variation» by the fol1owing equation: In the second, it is assumed that farmers reeognize certain longmn physİcal and eeonomie trends and view the «randoID,) element as a deviatimı from these trends. Thus, a trend Line is fitted to . . ... Standard deviation of regression Coeffıcıent o randoın yanatıon ='1948-70 or 1951-70 mean X 100 The results obtained on the oasis of the variability measures, cpmputed as described ab'ove, are suınmarized in Table ı. Thus : A - Yield uncertainty: Accarding to the coeffieients of variation and random variation, there is a great deal of uneertainty in yields of principal crops of both Turkeyand the speeifıc region of Northeast, The ranking eorresponds c10sely with eommon kn-owledge cemeerning relative yield variabiIity of crops. ,Yield variability of irrigated crops usual1y is less than for dryland farmed crops. B -- Priee uncertainty: Coefficients of variation on priees are also' high in almost all crops. Thus, farmers who do not aware of the, long-run price trends are faeed with a high deg~ee of priee uneertainty, However, eoefficients of random variation are mueh lower than coeffieients of variation. c - Gross income uneertainty: Gross income variability results fröm the interaction of yield and price. Sİnee yİeId variability is higher than priee variabi·" lity for almost aU crops, the most iınportant faetor eontribııting to gross income variability of crops is the variahility of yields. Because of unce~tainty, praduction planning is frequently imperfect. in order to lessen incôme variabiIity, farmers apply crop diversification, liquidity. and flexibility. This results in a mis~ allocation of productive resources. Some means of lessening uncertainty and its economic effects are: a) credit policy, b) decreas~ ing the dependanceof farming on natural conditions, c) agricultural insurance, and d) forward pric- . ing.
Keywords :