Determination of Factors Affecting the Cumin Production Decision of Agricultural Enterprises: The Case of Konya Province

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v12i8.1281-1286.6969

Keywords:

Analytical Hierarchy Process , Cumin , Multi-Criteria Decision Making , Production Decision Criteria , Medicinal and Aromatic

Abstract

Turkey has vast agricultural lands and diverse climatic conditions, and different plant species can be cultivated. Especially, Konya province, located in the Central Anatolia Region, is an important agricultural centre in Turkey. Konya province, which has a polyculture production pattern, stands out in the production of medicinal and aromatic plants due to its favourable climatic conditions and soil structure. In Turkey, 26.33% of cumin, which is among the medicinal and aromatic plants, is produced in Konya province. This study aims to determine the factors affecting cumin production. For this purpose, 65 cumin producers determined by proportional sampling method were interviewed. The data obtained through these interviews were analysed by using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method to determine the weights of the criteria affecting the cumin production decision of the agricultural enterprises. In the process of determining the criteria influencing the cumin production decision, the opinions of subject experts working in universities, public institutions and organizations and producers were taken. Among the criteria determined as yield, price, labour requirement, water requirement, ease of marketing, mechanisation, input costs, cultivation knowledge, soil structure and subsidies, the most important criterion was found to be price with 28.11%. Price criterion is followed by input cost 22.57%, water requirement 12.13%,  yield 8.71%, cultivation knowledge 8.43%, subsidies 6.82%, ease of marketing 4.74%, soil structure 3.63%, mechanisation 2.54% and labour requirement 2.25%. It is thought that the solution of the mechanisation problem will make a significant contribution to cumin production as it will reduce the need for labour force.

References

Aghdaie, M. H., Alimardani, M. (2015). Target market selection based on market segment evaluation: a multiple attribute decision making approach. International Journal of Operational Research, 24(3), 262-278.

Bakan, H., (2013). Analitik Hiyerarşi Yöntemiyle Üniversite Kurulması Uygun Olan İlçelerin Belirlenmesi, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, C 2, S 2, ss: 4366.

Baytop, T., (1984). Therapy with Plants in Turkey (Past and Present). Publications of Istanbul University, Istanbul.

Bozdemir, M., (2017). Dane Mısır Üretiminde Kaynak Kullanım Etkinliğinin Belirlenmesi:

Konya İli Örneği. Selçuk Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Tarım Ekonomisi Ana Bilim Dalı, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Tarım Ekonomisi Anabilim Dalı, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Konya.

Bulmuş, İ. (1978). Tarımsal fiyat oluşumuna devlet müdahelesi. Ankara İktisadi ve Ticari İlimler Akademisi.

Çiftci, F., Oğuz, C., Çiftci, İ. (2023). Konya İlinde Çiftçilerin Kuru Fasulye Üretim Kararını Etkileyen Faktörlerin Belirlenmesi; Çumra İlçesi Örneği. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology, 11(5), 925-932.

Erdal, H., Akgün, İ. (2014). “Mühimmat Dağıtım Ağı Optimizasyonu ve Bir Uygulama”. 34. Ulusal Yöneylem Araştırması ve Endüstri Mühendisliği Kongresi YAEM, 25-27 Haziran 2014, Bursa.

FAO, (2022), http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data [Access Date: 18 June 2024].

Firdaus, A., Adiprasetyo, T., Suhartoyo, H. (2021). A Multicriteria Decision Making and Fuzzy-AHP Approach for Formulating Strategy to Develop Organic Agriculture in Bengkulu Province, Indonesia. In Proceedings of the International Seminar on Promoting Local Resources for Sustainable Agriculture and Development (ISPLRSAD 2020) (Vol. 13). https://doi.org/10.2991/absr.k.210609.034.

Günden, C., & Miran, B. (2008). Çiftçilerin Temel İşletmecilik Kararlarının Öncelik ve Destek Alma Açısından Analizi. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 5 (2), 67-80.

Kaya, E., Aytaç, Z., & Balaban, M. (2022). Ankara Ekolojik Koşullarında Bazı Kimyon (Cuminum cyminum L.) Genotiplerinin Verim ve Verim Öğelerinin Belirlenmesi. Uluslararası Anadolu Ziraat Mühendisliği Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(3), 72-80.

Macit, N. Ş. (2023). Tedarikçi Seçimi Probleminin AHP Temelli MAIRCA Yöntemi ile Çözümü. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (37), 42-63.

Miran B. 2003. Temel İstatistik, Ege Üniversitesi Basımevi ISBN 975-9308800 Bornova İzmir.

Oğuz, C., Çiftci F., (2023). Çevre Dostu Tarımsal Ürünlerin Üretim, İşleme, Pazarlama Potansiyellerinin Araştırılması Yayın Yeri:Atlas Akademi, Basım sayısı:1, Sayfa sayısı:169, ISBN:978-625-8101-49-2.

Özensel, İ. E. (2023). Çiftçilerin Ekim İçin Hububat Seçiminde Etkin Rol Oynayan Faktörlerin Dematel Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi:(Konya İli Örneği). Yüksek Lisans Tezi

Özdemir, Y. S., & Savalan, Ş. (2022). Farklı tarımsal üretim yöntemleri sonucu elde edilen ürün kalitesi analizi için sürdürülebilir melez bulanık ÇKKV yaklaşımı uygulaması. Journal of Turkish Operations Management, 6(1), 1121-1133.

Pilevar, A. R., Matinfar, H. R., Sohrabi, A., Sarmadian, F. (2020). Integrated fuzzy, AHP and GIS techniques for land suitability assessment in semi-arid regions for wheat and maize farming. Ecological Indicators, 110. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ecolind.2019.105887.

Pourkhabbaz, H. R., Javanmardi, S., Faraji Sabokbar, H. A. (2014). Suitability analysis for determining potential agricultural land use by the multi-criteria decision making models SAW and VIKOR-AHP (case study: TakestanQazvin plain). Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 16(5), 1005–1016. Retrieved from https://jast.modares.ac.ir/ article-23-4889-en.pdf.

Saaty, L.T. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. USA, McGraw Hill.

Saaty T L. (1994). How tomake a decision: theanalytichierarchyprocess. Interfaces, 24(6), 19-43.

Tekin M. (2008). Sayısal Yöntemler, Nobel Kitap, Ankara.

TOB, (2024). https://konya.tarimorman.gov.tr/Belgeler/liflet /KİMYON.pdf. [Access Date : 18 June 2024].

TÜİK, 2023. www.tuik.gov.tr [Access Date : 22 June 2024].

Ustalı, N. K., & Tosun, N. (2019). Bulanık AHP ve Bulanık WASPAS yöntemleri ile yeni ürün seçimi. Pazarlama İçgörüsü Üzerine Çalışmalar, 3(2), 25-34.

Ünal Z., & Çetin, E. İ. (2019). Gübre üreticisinin hedef pazar seçiminde bütünleşik AHP-TOPSIS yöntemi. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences, 32(3), 357-364.

Wind, Y. & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing Application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process”. Management Science, 26(7), 641-658.

Yang, J., Lee, H. (1997). An AHP decision model for facility location selection. Facilities, 15(9/10), 241-254.

Zolleh, H.H., Bahraminejad, S., Maleki, G., Papzan, A. H. (2009). Response of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.) to sowing date and plant density. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 5(4), 597-602.

Downloads

Published

24.08.2024

How to Cite

Çiftci, F. (2024). Determination of Factors Affecting the Cumin Production Decision of Agricultural Enterprises: The Case of Konya Province. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 12(8), 1281–1286. https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v12i8.1281-1286.6969

Issue

Section

Research Paper