Malatya İlinde Kuru Kayısı Pazarlaması Üzerine Bir Araştırma
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2018 Nisan
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Selçuk Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Bu araştırmada, Malatya ilinde kuru kayısı pazarlama yapısı analiz edilmiştir. Malatya ilinin kayısı üretiminin %50’sinden fazlasını sağlayan Akçadağ, Merkez ve Darende ilçeleri kapsama alınmıştır. Bu ilçelere bağlı dokuz köyde oransal örneklemeyle toplam 159 üreticiden anket yolu ile veriler elde edilmiştir. Araştırmada işletmeler kayısı üretim alanı büyüklüğüne göre (? 25 da, 26- 50 da ve 51 da ?) göre incelenmiştir. Araştırmada 2013 yılı üretim dönemi esas alınmıştır. Verilerin analizinde öncelikle incelenen işletmelerin sosyoekonomik özellikleri belirlenmiştir. Daha sonra kayısı birim maliyeti, pazarlama kanalları ve üretici eline geçen fiyatlar incelenmiştir. İncelenen işletmelerde ortalama kayısı arazisi 26.41 dekardır. Dekara elde edilen taze kayısı miktarı 877.26 kg, kuru kayısı miktarı ise 197.12 kg olarak hesaplanmıştır. Üreticilerin %38.99’u kuru kayısıyı tüccara pazarlamıştır. Üretici eline geçen ortalama kuru kayısı fiyatı 5.70 TL/kg, ortalama taze kayısı fiyatı ise 1.52 TL/kg olarak belirlenmiştir.
In this study, marketing structure of dried apricot in Malatya province has been analysed. The districts that have been included are Akçadağ, Central district and Darende which were providing more than 50% of apricot production in Malatya. Data was collected by survey from 159 growers who were determined by proportional sampling in nine villages that bound to these districts. In the research, the farms have been examined according to the extent of apricot production area ( ? 25 decares, 26-50 decares and 51 decares ?). The research was based on the production period of the year 2013. In the analysis of data, first of all, the socio-economical characteristics of the examined farms have been identified. After that, unit cost of apricot, dried apricot marketing channels and farmer prices have been examined. The average apricot production area was 26.41 decares in the farms. The fresh apricot production per decare was 877.26 kg, and dried apricot production per decare was calculated as 197.12 kg. 38.99% of the farmers have marketed own dried apricots to merchant. Average farmer price of dried apricots was 5.70 TL/kg, and average farmer price of fresh apricots was 1.52 TL/kg.
In this study, marketing structure of dried apricot in Malatya province has been analysed. The districts that have been included are Akçadağ, Central district and Darende which were providing more than 50% of apricot production in Malatya. Data was collected by survey from 159 growers who were determined by proportional sampling in nine villages that bound to these districts. In the research, the farms have been examined according to the extent of apricot production area ( ? 25 decares, 26-50 decares and 51 decares ?). The research was based on the production period of the year 2013. In the analysis of data, first of all, the socio-economical characteristics of the examined farms have been identified. After that, unit cost of apricot, dried apricot marketing channels and farmer prices have been examined. The average apricot production area was 26.41 decares in the farms. The fresh apricot production per decare was 877.26 kg, and dried apricot production per decare was calculated as 197.12 kg. 38.99% of the farmers have marketed own dried apricots to merchant. Average farmer price of dried apricots was 5.70 TL/kg, and average farmer price of fresh apricots was 1.52 TL/kg.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kayısı, Pazar analizi, Pazarlama kanalı, Kuru kayısı pazarlaması, Kuru kayısı fiyatı, Apricot, Market analysis, Marketing channel, Dried apricot marketing, Dried apricot price
Kaynak
Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
32
Sayı
3
Künye
Uçar, K., Engindeniz, S., (2018). Malatya İlinde Kuru Kayısı Pazarlaması Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Selcuk Journal of Agriculture and Food Sciences, 32(3), 249-256.
DOI: 10.15316/SJAFS.2018.91
