Economic Analysis of Pesticide Use on Grape Growing: A Case Study for Manisa-Turkey

Türkiye sebze ve meyvelerde ilaç kalıntılarını azaltmanın yollarını araştırmaktadır. Bağlarda ilaç kalıntıları riskini azaltmak için öncelikle ilaç kullanımının azaltılması hedeflenmektedir. Günümüzde işletme düzeyindeki masraflar ilaç ve ilaçlama masraflarını da kapsamaktadır. Bu araştırmada Turkiye'den seçilmiş bir bölgede üzüm yetiştiriciliğinde ilaç kullanımının işletme düzeyinde ekonomik analizi gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma verileri 72 üreticiden derlenmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre üzüm yetiştiriciliğinin hektara değişken masrafları 3,497.85 $, hektara toplam üretim masrafları ise 4,923.35 $'dır. Toplam üretim masrafları içerisinde en önemli payı ilaç masrafları (%19.88) almakta, bunu sırasıyla arazi kirası (%19.66), gübre (%11.56) ve sulama masrafları (%11.31) izlemektedir. Ancak girdi kullanımı iklim koşulları ve girdi fiyatlarındaki değişmelere bağlı olarak değişebilmektedir. Hektara yapılan ilaç masrafı 978.70 $ ve ortalama üzüm fiyatı 0.32 $/kg olarak saptanmıştır. Dolayısıyla kar eşiği 3,058.44 kg/ha olarak hesaplanmıştır.

Üzüm Yetiştiriciliğinde İlaç Kullanımının Ekonomik Analizi: Türkiye'de Manisa Örneği

Turkey have been trying to decrease pesticide residues in vegetables and fruits. There is firstly a growing desire to reduce pesticide usage in vineyards to decrease the risk of pesticide residues. Today, farm-level costs include the costs of the pesticides, and their application. This study was conducted to analyse the farmlevel economics of pesticide use on grape growing in a selected regions from Turkey. Data was collected from 72 grape farmers. According to results of the study, the variable and total costs per hectare for grape production is 3,497.85 $/ha and 4,923.35 $/ha, respectively. The biggest share for total costs are pesticide (19.88%), land rent (19.66%), fertilizer (11.56%) and irrigation (11.31%). However, these figures can change depending on the climatic conditions and variation in input prices each year. According to the results of this study, average costs for pests and average grape price were $978.70/ha and $0.32/kg, respectively. Therefore, break-even yield was calculated to be 3,058.44 kg/ha.

___

  • Abbona, E.A., S.J. Sarandon, M.E. Marasas and M. Astier. 2007. Ecological sustainability evaluation of traditional management in different vineyard systems in Berisso, Argentina. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 119: 335-345.
  • Akgungor, S. 1995. Grape Producers' Pesticide Use Decisions in Turkey's Aegean Region. Staff Paper No: 95-31, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, USA.
  • Anonymous. 1998. Technical Information for IPM Practices in Viticultures, Republic of Turkey Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Ankara, 96 p.
  • Artukoglu, M.M. 1990. Economic Analysis of A Selected Group of Viticulture Farms in Aegean Region, Journal of Faculty of Agriculture of Ege University, 27(1):1-9.
  • Bakirci, G.T., D.B. Yaman Acay, F. Bakirci and S. Otles. 2014. Pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables from the Aegean region,Turkey, Food Chemistry, 160:379-392.
  • Bayramoglu, Z. and E. Gundogmus. 2008. Cost efficiency on organic farming: a comparison between organic and conventional raisin- producing households in Turkey, Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(1): 3-11.
  • Cebeci, N. ve H. Yener. 2013. A research on the general status of vineyard enterprises' marketing and organization in Sarigol, Manisa, Journal of Faculty of Agriculture of Ege University, 50(2):205-212.
  • Cornejo, J.F. 1998. Environmental and Economic Consequences of Technology Adoption: IPM in Viticulture, Agricultural Economics, 18(2):145-155.
  • Engindeniz, S. and G. Öztürk Coşar. 2013. An economic comparison of pesticide applications for processing and table tomatoes: a case study for Turkey, Journal of Plant Protection Research, 53(3):230-237.
  • Engindeniz, S. 2008. Economic analysis of agrochemical use for weed control in field-grown celery: a case study for Turkey, Crop Protection, 27(3-5):377-384.
  • Engindeniz, S. 2006. Economic analysis of pesticide use on processing tomato growing: a case study for Turkey, Crop Protection, 25 (6):534-541.
  • Engindeniz, S. and D. Engindeniz. 2006. Economic analysis of pesticide use on greenhouse cucumber growing: a case study for Turkey, Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection, 113(5):193-198.
  • FAO. 2015. Agricultural Statistical Database, http://www.fao.org, September 21, 2015.
  • Greaser, G.L. and J.K. Harper. 1994. Enterprise budget analysis, agricultural alternatives. leaflet 62, Pennsylvania State University, College of Aagricultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension.
  • Hildebrandt, A., M. Guillamon, S. Lacorte, R. Tauler and D. Barcelo. 2008. Impact of pesticides used in agriculture and vineyards to surface and groundwater quality (North Spain), Water Research, 42(13):3315-3326.
  • Kara, Z. 2007. Sustainable viticulture activities in Turkey, Agriculture, 61-62(1-2):1-12.
  • Kiral T., H. Kasnakoglu, F. Tatlidil, H. Fidan, E. Gundogmus. 1999. Database Guide and Income and Cost Calculation Methodologie for Agricultural Products (Turkish). Publications of Agricultural Economics Research Institute, No. 37, Ankara-Turkey, 133 p.
  • Kizilaslan, N. and E. Somak. 2013. Consciousness level of producers for pesticide use at viticulture farms at district of Erbaa in Tokat, Gaziosmanpaşa Journal of Scientific Research, 4 (2013):79-93.
  • Kocturk, M. and S. Engindeniz. 2009. Energy and cost analysis of sultana grape growing: a case study of Manisa, West Turkey, African Journal of Agricultural Research, 4(10):938-943.
  • Koc A., H. Tanrivermis, F. Budak, E. Gundogmus, I.H. Inan, A. Kubas and B. Ozkan. 2001. Pesticide Use in Turkish Agriculture: Ineffectiveness, Problems, and Impacts of Alternative Organizations. Publications of Agricultural Economics Research Institute, No. 64, Ankara, Turkey, 316 p.
  • Lescot, J.M., S. Rousset and G. Souville. 2011 Assessing investment in precision farming for reducing pesticide use in French viticulture, EAAE 2011 Congress Change and Uncertainty, Challenges for Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources, August 30 to September 2, 2011 ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland, 1-19 pp.
  • Mulayim Z.G. 2001. Agricultural Valuation and Expertise (Turkish). Second ed. Publications of Yetkin, Ankara, 367 p.
  • Newbold P. 1995. Statistics for Business and Economics. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, London, 867 p.
  • Ozkan, B, A. Kuklu and H. Akcaoz. 2007. Energy and cost analysis for greenhouse and open field grape production, Energy. 32:1500- 1504.
  • Scholefield, P. and J. Morison. 2010. Assessment of Economic Cost of Endemic Pests & Diseases on the Australian Grape & Wine Industry, Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation, Project Number. GWR 08/04, Australia, 1-145 pp.
  • Turgut, C. 2003. The contamination with organochlorine pesticides and heavy metals in surface water in Küçük Menderes River in Turkey, 2000-2002, Environment International, 29(1): 29-32.
  • Turgut, C. 2007. Organochlorine insecticide residues in Turkish mineral waters, Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 16(3): 252- 255.
  • Turgut, C., H. Ornek and T.J. Cutright. 2011. Determination of pesticide residues in Turkey's table grapes: the effect of integrated pest management, organic farming, and conventional farming, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 173(1-4):315-323.
  • TurkStat, 2015, Agricultural Statistics, http://www.tuik.gov.tr, September 21, 2015.
  • Wheeler, S.A. and P. Crisp. 2010. Evaluating a range of the benefits and costs of organic and conventional production in a clare valley vineyard in South Australia, The workshop on The World's Wine Markets by 2030: Terroir, Climate Change, R&D and Globalization, Adelaide Convention Centre, Adelaide, South Australia, 7-9 February 2010, pp:1-19.
  • Zabadal, T.J. 1999. Pest Control in Small Vineyards, Michigan State Univeristy, Extension Bulletin, E-2698, Michigan, 13 p.
Ege Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi-Cover
  • ISSN: 1018-8851
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 1964
  • Yayıncı: Prof. Dr. Banu YÜCEL
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Organik Gübrelemenin Zeytinin Makro Element İçeriği ile Verim ve Bazı Kalite Özelliklerine Etkisi*

Nilgün MORDOĞAN, Bihter ÇOLAK ESETLİLİ, Şafak CEYLAN, Evren GÜNEN, Hakan ÇAKICI

Tüketicilerin Markalı Gıda Ürünü Tercih Etme Eğilimleri: Zeytinyağı Örneği *

Metin ARTUKOĞLU, Esra TARKAN ERBAŞ

Kıyı Ege Havzasında Çiftçilerin Üretim Dalı Tercihleri ve Tarım Politikaları

Cihat GÜNDEN

Economic Analysis of Pesticide Use on Grape Growing: A Case Study for Manisa-Turkey

Sait ENGİNDENİZ, O. Murat KOÇTÜRK

Çiftçilerin Toprak Analizi Desteğinden Yararlanma Eğilimleri: İzmir İli Örneği

Duygu TOSUN, Subhiye ÇÖNOĞLU, Tülay KAYNAK, Nevin DEMİRBAŞ

Red Şadok x Rio Red Altıntop Melezlemesinden Elde Edilmiş Turunçgil Melezlerinin Morfolojik Karakterizasyonu

Bilge YILMAZ, Turgut YEŞİLOĞLU, Berken ÇİMEN, Meral İNCESU

Computer Literacy and Information Society Skills of Public Extension Workers in Turkey

Murat BOYACI, Özlem YILDIZ

Antalya İli Kepez İlçesinde Karanfil Yetiştirilen Sera Topraklarının Bazı Verimlilik Durumlarının Belirlenmesi

Cevdet Fehmi ÖZKAN, Asri Nuri ARI, E DEMİRTAŞ IŞIL, Dilek GÜVEN, Filiz ASRİ ÖKTÜREN

Kırsal Alanda Üreticilerin Arazi Alım-Satım Kararlarını Etkileyen Faktörlerin Analizi: İzmir'in Kemalpaşa İlçesi Örneği

Gökhan ÇINAR, Yarkın AKYÜZ, Sait ENGİNDENİZ, Suada İBRAİMİ, Derya KARACA

Kumlu Tınlı Toprakta Yetiştirilen Kabak Bitkisinin Verim ve Mineral İçeriği Üzerine Yeşil Gübrelemenin Etkisi

Bülent BUDAK, Şafak CEYLAN, Ömer LÜTFÜ ELMACI, Funda YOLDAŞ