International Soil Congress (ISC) on

“Natural Resource Management

for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

FARMER PROBLEMS AND THE FACTORS LIMITING

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION IN NORTHEAST ANATOLIA
Abdurrahman KARA1, Sibel KADIOGLU1, Nevzat KUCUK1, Fahri YAVUZ2
1
Eastern Anatolia Agricultural Research Institute, 25090, Erzurum, Turkey
2
Department of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture,
Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey

ABSTRACT

This study aimed to determine the factors limiting agricultural production and the farmer problems in
Erzurum, Kars, Agri and Ardahan provinces of Eastern Anatolia. Farmer conversation meetings were
held in total of 147 villages chosen from four type of villages (mountain, plain, mountain-plain passage
and valley) in 41 districts for informal survey in 1998. At these meetings, farmers were asked about the
problems they faced during agricultural production activities. Questionnaires for formal surveys were
prepared according to the results of the first survey. Stratified random sampling method was used to
determine sample size of villages and farms. Formal survey study was conducted between March-July
1999 resulting in 1116 questionnaires through face-to-face farmer interviews in 76 villages. The results of
the survey revealed that the problems related to agronomy, animal health, animal diseases, input, credit
and socio-economic structure were ranked the first priority respectively. Problems were also classified
according to the responsible institutions. It was determined that 24, 37 and 39 percent of the problems
could be solved by research, regulation and extension, respectively.

Key Words: Northeast Anatolia, priorities in farmer’s problems, policy, research,

extension

INTRODUCTION

Agricultural research strategies have not taken into account the farmer participation to
the research and extension studies (down-up) by near past in the world and by recent in
Turkey. Agricultural development was considered as a production increase and the
series of technology transfer studies to provide higher welfare. Whereas, as mentioned
by Mannion (1994), these strategies, also called green revolution, provided
heterogeneous benefit distribution among regions and the communities but the majority,
except farmers having favorable conditions has not benefited much from these green
revolution types of studies.

Mentioning research-extension activities and technologies best fitting to the needs of

farm and farm family, a large number of authors emphasized on the importance of the
factors limiting production. These factors have gained much more importance as the
farm size decreases, towards self-sufficient small family farms (Collinson, 1985). The
importance of this subject may be better understood by taking into account the size of
the farms of which 67 percent has less than 5 hectare of land, while 85 percent of them
has less than 10 hectare of land in Turkey (Anonym, 1995a).

Adams (1982) stated that agricultural extension studies should be started after a survey
study with which the objectives and the problems of the farmers related to farm
management is determined and that reasonable solutions may be found. Also, it is
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

agreed that identification and definition studies are the first step of the research studies
(Norman and Collinson, 1987).

Although many survey studies have been conducted by different institutions in Erzurum
Province, especially by the College of Agriculture at Ataturk University, they were
limited in both subjects examined and the sample size. That is, a detailed survey study
in Erzurum province has not been conducted except Farming Systems Research (FSR)
study carried out by Eastern Anatolia Agricultural Research Institute (EAARI), which
was criticized that it did not represent the province as a whole.

Having a weak linkage between agricultural research and extension activities is an

important problem in Turkey. Agricultural researches determine their subject of
research without knowing the exact problems of farmers, thus the results of research do
not have their clients. On the other hand, extension people do not have a good
connection to the results of research that has been conducted. This study aimed to
determine the factors limiting agricultural production and the problems of farmers along
with their priorities in Erzurum, Kars, Agri and Ardahan provinces of Northeast
Anatolia. Determining the problem of farmers would help the researches and extension
people to plan their activities in a correct direction in line with the problems faced by
the farmers in the region.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Material

Questionnaires completed through face-to-face farmer interviews constituted the main

study material. In addition to this, records of provincial and district directorates of
agriculture in the study area, statistics from different institutions and other relevant
literature reviews were also used as the study data.

Methods

In determination of the sample size, stratified random sampling method was used (Cicek
and Erkan, 1996). Stratification was made in determination of both village and farm
numbers. In order to ensure selected villages to represent the whole study area, villages
of the all districts including central districts of the provinces in the study area, in total of
41, were categorized into four groups namely mountain, plain, mountain-plain transition
and valley villages. The sample size of the farmers to be interviewed was calculated by
using previously estimated population parameters. To determine the sample size,
following formula of the stratified random sampling method was used.

n 
 N i xS i  2

 
2 2 2
N xD N i xS i

Where; D: d/Z,
Ni : number of units in ith layer, d: a certain deviation from the mean,
Si : standard deviation of ith layer, Z: table value of t-distribution
n : minimum sample size
N: Number of total units,

2
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

Deviation of sample mean ( x ) from that of population (µ) was taken 10% and 5% in
determination of sample villages and farms respectively. Sample sizes of villages being
72 and farms being 996 were calculated in 95% and 99% confidence levels,
respectively.

In 1998, informal surveys were conducted in total 147 villages in four village type in 41
districts in the study area. Farmers were asked about the problems they faced in farming
and the answers were used in preparation of questionnaire forms of formal survey. The
questionnaire forms were given the last shape by reviewing and reorganizing according
to the suggestions by the departments in the research institute. A valuable extension
work during informal survey was also performed and the farmers were introduced some
new varieties and technologies generated by Eastern Anatolia Agricultural Research
Institute (EAARI) and they were enlightened on the subjects of their interests.

Studies in the villages where sufficient number of farmers were not obtained or the
villages where it was not possible to go, were performed in the villages of the same
group. Formal survey studies were started on 8th of March, 1999 and ended in 14th of
July, 1999, resulting in 1146 completed questionnaires through face to face farmer
interviews in 76 villages.

Table 1. Number of villages and questionnaires taken into consideration

Village Groups
Mountain Plain Transition Valley Total
Province NV NQ NV NQ NV NQ NV NQ NV NQ
s
Erzurum 17 232 5 86 7 98 7 82 36 498
Kars 5 67 5 87 1 16 4 42 15 212
Agri 2 28 11 191 2 32 3 43 18 294
Ardahan 2 29 1 20 2 34 2 29 7 112
TOTAL 26 356 22 384 12 180 16 196 76 1116
NV: Number of village NQ: Number of questionnaire

Data from questionnaires were processed in the computer by the year 2000 and 30
questionnaires were eliminated due to their lacking of relevant data. SPSSWIN and MS
EXCEL software packages were used to analyze the data (Figure 1)

Figure 1. Method used in the analysis of the data

3
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

Natural factors, namely physical and biological, and socio-economic factors, grouped
into endogenous and exogenous, affect the agricultural production (Maxwell, 1986,
cited in Kara, 1996). In accordance to this reality, questions to elicit the factors having
effects on agricultural production were included in the questionnaires, along with those
to be reported directly by the interviewees and production customs. Farmer problems
and the factors affecting agricultural production were scored according to 1-5 Likert
Scale from minimum to maximum importance. In the light of the study findings, the
reasons were investigated and possible solutions were suggested. In prioritization of the
problems, following method (Woolley, 1989 cited in Uzunlu et all., 1993) was used.

1- In the first stage, problems were identified and each problem was given a rough
priority according to the number of farmers affected by this problem.
2- In the second stage, the importance of the crops grown for farmers and the severity
of the problems were taken into consideration
3- In the third stage, the reasons of the problems were identified.
4- In the fourth stage, possible suggestions to be proposed were investigated for each
problem, and finally
5- In the fifth stage, the list of the solutions for each problem was formed.

RESULTS

In prioritization, problems were categorized and grouped under 10 subject titles. As

seen Table 2, problems having higher priority are related to agronomy while problems
with subsequent priorities concerned with veterinary service and animal diseases. It
was determined that marketing problems ranked as the least priority. Possible reasons
for the problems given in Table 2 were examined in detail separately.

Table 2. Distribution of the problems by priority and subject titles

Priority The Source of the Problem
1 Agronomy
2 Veterinary Service
3 Animal Diseases
4 Input and Credit
5 Socio-economic Infrastructure
6 Plant Diseases and Pests
7 Extension
8 Environment and Climate
9 Animal Husbandry
10 Marketing
Evidence of the Problems
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before
Available statistical data
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before
Formal and Informal survey results
Formal and Informal survey results
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before
Formal and Informal survey results
Similar study results obtained before

4
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

The most significant problem related to crop farming is the low yield in all products.
The factors bring about low yield are either related to incorrect or imperfect applications
or arising from socio-economic factors and the problems concerned with input supply.
Insufficient and expensive veterinary services were the most important problem.
Moreover, untimely and superficial vaccinations were determined to be another
important problem. Also, foot and mouth disease epidemics despite of vaccinations are
other important issues to be focused on. The leading reason of the insufficient
veterinary service is the lack of staff working in the provincial and district directorates
of agriculture in the study area; insufficient infrastructure and lack of communication
between farmers and the institutions.

Animal diseases were determined to be important animal keeping problems, which

ranked the third priority. The most important animal diseases reported by the farmers
were foot and mouth disease, hepatitis, blackleg, anthrax and brucellosis. Bunt smut of
wheat, rust, field mouse, potato beetle, weeds, dodder, and alfalfa weevil were the most
important plant diseases and organisms.

The most important economic and infrastructural problems were determined to be

insufficient operational capital, insufficient farmland and irrigation canals, along with
high tractor rentals, over fragmented and sloppy nature of the farmland.
Higher prices and untimely access to inputs were revealed to be the most important
problems related to input supply and credit use. The rest of the problems fall in this
group is mainly concerned with credit use.

The most important extension related problems were lack of on-farm applications, lack
of technical knowledge of the extension officers, ignorant farmers on some crop
farming. In addition, lack of communication of extension officers with farmers,
insufficient number of officers in regional agricultural institutions and lack of extension
work were also important problems.

Lack of water in meadows for animals, insufficiency of the graze lands and lack of
quality bulls for inseminations were reported to be the most striking animal husbandry
related problems. Moreover, problems, such as no artificial insemination activities,
roughage deficit, unsuitable animal houses for animal keeping and early drying of the
graze lands were the important problems in this context. On the other hand, the study
revealed that contrary to the assumptions, the rate of the farmers who were against to
artificial insemination due to religious beliefs or delusions was found to be very low.

Insufficient rainfall, the higher proportion of rain fed lands, short vegetation period,
infertility of the lands, insufficient irrigation water, extreme cold weather in spring and
fall, etc. were determined to be the most important problems related to environment and
climate.

As stated above, marketing problems ranked to be 10 th in priority order. The most

significant ones under this topic were low product prices, low quality of wheat that was
not purchased by the TMO, no market for the products, late payment for the products
purchased by TMO, EBK and Sugar Corporation.

5
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

DISCUSSION
The measures to be taken in achieving the higher yields are increasing registered variety
use, introducing winter varieties of wheat, barley and vetch, emphasis on extension,
introducing low cost tillage systems. Farmers do not tillage the soil adequately before
sowing due to high cultivation costs or they do not know the importance of good soil
preparation before sowing. Inadequate tillage brings about more seed use and low yield.
Farmers should be organized to obtain the inputs at low prices. By means of
development of early maturing varieties, plant growth will be completed before the
extreme and unfavorable weather conditions, along with that harvesting time will move
to an earlier time and so green sowing, not practiced due to the delay of previous
harvest, will be possible. This will also help increase the yield.

Among the infrastructural problems, over fragmentation comes first and this causes the
difficulties in planning, ineffective use of production factors, waste of labor, work and
time. For this reason, it is necessary to give priority to land reform studies in order to
increase the size of farms to an optimum level.

An important proportion of the applications and factors resulting in low yield are valid
for the pastures as well. In addition, another leading reason for low yield in pastures is
the over grazing because of high roughage deficit in the region. Pastures are heavily
grazed in the spring and in autumn. So, increasing the roughage production and
rehabilitation of the graze lands should be considered together to solve this problem.
Although a significant increase in literacy was achieved, this is just limited to primary
school with 67,6 percent. The proportion of the farmers graduated from advanced
schools is very low with 11,1 percent. Thus, present education level of the farmers is
not sufficient to follow up and adopt the technological innovations (Kara, 2000). Higher
education is also important with regard to effective management of the existing
resources (Karagolge,1976). Education level of the farmers, especially in the study area,
is very low when compared to the farmers of developed countries (Turkdogan, 1973).

Extension workers usually move to other provinces after they have a certain degree of
experience. Required measures to restraint the staff in the region should be taken, along
with a special emphasis on the training the trainees. The cooperation between extension
services and research institutes, in reality, is not tight. People in extension service
institution are not aware of the study results carried out in research institutes most of the
time. This cooperation should be improved and promoted with the legislative
regulations to be put into action. On-farm research and farmer participation to such
research studies should also be promoted and given high priority.

In solving these problems, agricultural organizations (i.e. extension service, namely

provincial and district directorate of agriculture) should be supported with qualified
staff, equipment and sufficient funds. On the other hand, naturally a fee must be applied
to the services provided to farmers by these organizations. However, at present
economic conditions it is not possible for farmers to pay for such services. The studies
carried out in the region previously revealed that farms closed the production period
with negative revenue (Kara, 2000). For this reason, measures should be taken to
improve the economic conditions of the farms on one hand, services to be provided for
farmers should be better on the other hand.

6
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

Table 3. Research Priorities

Priority Research Priorities Frequency Total
1 Winter and long-lived varieties in perennial crops adapted 10 485
2 Agronomic studies to increase productivity 4 215
Farmer participation to the research studies and on-farm
3 research 2 200
Rehabilitation of Graze lands and optimum grazing
4 systems 3 188
5 Research for alternative employment possibilities 3 162
6 Determination of low cost optimum tillage systems 1 100
7 Determination of water sources and effective water use 2 99
Determination of the disease types for effective
8 vaccination 1 74
9 Improvement of animal breeds 1 55
10 Development of effective protection methods 1 52
11 Research on the rehabilitation of the saline soils 1 32
TOTAL 1662

Moreover, farmers should be categorized for the service fees. Such services should be
provided to small farmers for free while big farms should be charged. The quality of
services makes farmers to be willing to pay reasonable fees determined for the services.

In putting the problems in order according to their possible reasons and solutions, the
scores given by the farmers to them were used in scoring their solutions and so, total
scores of the type of solutions (i.e. research, extension and policy measures) were
obtained. In enumeration with the consideration of these total scores, it was determined
that extension and policy measures came first and second respectively, while research
was the last (Table 3, 4, 5).

Table 4. Extension Priorities

Priority Extension Priorities Frequency Total
1 Higher intensity of extension work 10 596
2 Organizing the farmers 4 481
3 Introduction of early maturing varieties 3 238
4 Increasing the productivity 4 215
5 Introduction of the hardy varieties 5 239
6 Increasing roughage production 2 110
7 Increasing the use of registered varieties 1 100
8 Introduction of winter varieties 1 100
9 Introduction of low cost optimum tillage systems 1 100
10 Training the trainees 1 100
11 Rehabilitation of the graze lands 2 94
12 Application of optimum grazing systems 2 94
13 Introduction of effective protection methods 1 52
14 Introduction of the varieties developed for dry conditions 1 50
15 Fertilization demonstrations and farmer training 1 50
16 Effective use of existing water sources 1 43
17 Increasing the share of fodder crops in total cultivated land 1 40
18 Promotion of the use of animal manure 1 32
TOTAL 2734

7
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

Table 5. Political and Administrative Measure Priorities

Priority Political and Administrative Measure Priorities Frequency Total

Supporting the extension organizations with qualified
1 staff 9 578
2 Measures for increasing the size of farms 6 437
3 Increasing the general education level of the people 4 229
4 Off-farm employment opportunities in rural areas 5 212
5 Reorganization of the extension service 2 160
6 Legislative arrangements for the farms 2 148
Elimination of the infrastructural deficiencies of the
7 farms 2 130
8 Giving priority to artificial insemination programmes 2 114
9 Replacement of the current inheritance law 2 106
10 Support for increasing the forage seed production 2 84
11 Promotions to trigger the Farmers to be organized 2 67
12 Promotions for stud animal production 1 64
13 Improvement of the Research-Extension collaboration 1 60
14 Acceleration of the extension work 1 60
15 Control of the nomad movements 1 58
16 Macro economic measures 1 29
TOTAL 2536

Table 6. Responsibility weighs of the Institutions to tackle the farmer problems

Institutions to tackle Total

Research Extension Policy Makers Score
Score (*) 1662 2734 2536 6932
% 24 39 37 100
(*) From the Tables 3, 4 and 5

In conclusion, the first step in solving the farmer problems should be acceleration of the
technology transfer studies. There have been a lot of research studies on the shelves
waiting to be conveyed to the farmers. Special emphasis should be given to extension
while structural deficiencies of the farms and agricultural institutions should be
eliminated.

REFERENCES

Adams, M. E., 1982. Agricultural Extension in Developing Countries, Intermediate

Tropical Agriculture Series (edited by Dr. W. J. A. Payne), Longman, Harlow
(Essex), U. K.
Anonim, 1995. Turkiye Istatistik Yilligi, T.C. Basbakanlik Devlet Istatistik Enstitusu,
DIE, Ankara
Collinson, M., 1985. "Farming systems research: Diagnosing the problems". In
Research-Extension-Farmer: A Two Way Continuum for Agricultural
Development, (edited by M. M. Cernea, J. K. Coulter, J. F. A. Russell), A World
Bank and UNDP symposium, Washington D.C., USA, pp. 72-86.

8
 International Soil Congress (ISC) on
“Natural Resource Management
for Sustainable Development”
June 7-10, 2004 Erzurum-Turkey, pp. F1-F9

Cicek, A. ve O. Erkan, 1996. Tarim Ekonomisinde Arastirma Ornek ve Ornekleme

Yontemleri, Gaziosmanpasa Universitesi Ziraat Fakultesi Yayinlari No: 12,
Tokat.
Kara, A., 2000. Erzurum ve Kars Illerindeki Tarim Isletmelerinin Sermaye Yapisi ve
Tarimsal Faaliyet Sonuclari Bakimindan Karsilastirilmasi, Yuksek lisans tezi
(basilmamis), Ataturk Universitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitusu Tarim Ekonomisi
Anabilim Dali, Erzurum, Turkiye
Kara, A., 1996. “Farming Systems Research: A Review and Baseline Study in
Developing an Appropriate Model for Turkiye”., unpublished M.S.c. thesis,
Department of Agribusiness, Extension and Rural Development, University
College Dublin, Ireland.
Karagolge, C., 1976, Mutesebbis Faktorunun Tarimsal Uretimdeki Etkisinin
Ekonometrik Bir Yontemle Arastirilmasi, Erzurum, s. 93
Mannion, J., 1994. Rural development initiatives; Dynamic mobilization of local
communities. Paper prepared for Forward Studies Unit, European Commission,
Vezelay Seminar on "Change in Rural Society", 27 to 28 May.
Norman D. and M. Collinson 1987. “Farming systems research in theory and practice”,
In Agricultural System Research for Developing Countries, second edition (edited
by J. V. Remenyi.), ACIAR Proceedings No. 11, Richmond, N.S.W., Australia,
pp16-30.
Uzunlu, V., A. Bayaner, J. D. H. Keatinge and R. Tutwiler, 1993. Problem
identification and priority setting in Agricultural Research: The case of eastern
margin of central Anatolia, Ankara.