Factors Affecting Membership to Breeders Association and Contributions of The Associations to The Farmers Training

Authors
1 Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Dicle University, 21280, Sur/Diyarbakır, Turkey.
2 Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Dicle University, Sur/Diyarbakır, Turkey.
Abstract
It is possible to achive the rural development by using the technological innovation obtained by the scientific research findings widely and organization of the producers. Giving agricultural extension within a certain system is the first factor affecting its success. While there have been significant developments regarding a pluralistic publishing system in recent years, studies are being carried out to activate the agricultural extension role of producer organizations in Turkey. On the other hand it is also true that the discrepancies in Turkey between expectations from agricultural organizations and realizations as in many developing countries in terms of producers and government policy. In this study, factors affecting the membership to Diyarbakır Province Cattle Breeders Association (DCBA) and Diyarbakır Sheep and Goat Breeders Association (DSGBA) and required agricultural extension training contributions by the Association were determined. It was seen that 94,07% of DSGBA members and 82,64% of DCBA members have not taken any training relating to animal breeding. It was found that 75,86 of the DSGBA members and 53,84 4% of DCBA members have joined to the training given by the Diyarbakır Agriculture Provincial Directorate. In this case, the lack of education in rural areas related to agricultural extension reveals again. It was seen that 87.68% of DCBA members and 89.32'% of DSGBA members could not participate any agricultural training since there is no training organized by both Associations.

Keywords

Subjects


1. ABPRS. 2011. Address-based Population Registration System. http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1059
2. Akkurt, M. and Köknaroğlu, H. 2016. Isparta İli Damızlık Sığır Yetiştiricileri Birliğine Üye Olan ve Olmayan İşletmelerin Performanslarının Karşılaştırılması ve Üreticilerin Damızlık Sığır Yetiştiricileri Birliği İle İlişkilerinin İncelenmesi. SDÜ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(2): 79-90.
3. Aydoğan, M. and Yulafcı, A. 2013. Determination of the Structural Problems of Agricultural Producer Organizations in Samsun: The Final Report. General Directorate of agricultural Studies and Policies Black Sea Agricultural Research Institute Publications, Samsun, Turkey, 49 PP.
4. Anonymous. 2014a. Turkey Statistical Institute. (Access Date, May 10 2016), http://tuikapp.tuik.gov.tr/hayvancilikapp
5. Anonymous. 2014b. Diyarbakır Food, Agriculture and Livestock Provincial Directorate Data (Access Date, May 10 2016), http://Diyarbakır.tarim.gov.tr/Menu/25/Tarimsal-Yapi
6. Bhuyan, S. 2007. The People Factor in Cooperatives: An Analysis of Members’ Attidutes and Behavior. Can. J. Agric. Econ., 55(3): 275-298
7. Can, M. F. and Yalçın, C. 2015. Investigation of Organizational Responsibility and Satisfaction Level of the Cattle Producers in Turkey. Kafkas Univ. Vet. Fak. Derg., 21(5): 711-717.
8. Çiçek, A. and Erkan, O. 1996. Agricultural Economy Research Sample and Sampling Method,pp 209 pp .Gaziosmanpaşa University Faculty of agriculture Publishing, Tokat, Turkey.
9. Hansen, M. H., Morrow., Jr. J. L. and Batista, J. C. 2002. The Impact of Trust on Cooperative Membership Retention, Performance and Satisfaction: An Exploratory Study. Int. Food Agribus. Manage. Rev., 5: 41-59.
10. Gül, U. 2015. Examination of Attitudes and Behaviors in Extension and Training Activities of Amasya Cattle Breeders Association Member Breeders. J. Econ. Res., 1: 1-8.
11. İnal, Ş. and Çam, M. 2016. Türkiye’ye 2015 Yılında Sperması İthal Edilen Boğalardaki Kalıtsal Kusurlar. Eurasian J. Vet. Sci., 32(4): 278-284.
12. İnan, İ. H., Direk, M., Başaran, B., Birinci, S. and Erkmen, E. 2005. The Organization in Agriculture. Turkey Agricultural Engineering Congress, Ankara, PP. 1133-1157.
13. Karlı, B. and Çelik, Y. 2010. Effectiveness to Organization Members and Commercial Relationship of Members to Producer Organizations Were İnvestigated in GAP (Southeastern Anatolia Project) Region. Working Paper, Agricultural Research Institute Publications. Ankara.
14. Kızılaslan, H. and Doğan, H. G. 2013. Importance and Status of Producer Unıons in the Producer Organızatıons of Turkey (A Case Study with Fresh Vegetable and Fruit Producers Organization Of Kazova Region In Tokat Province). Acad. J., 38(5): 1.
15. Köksal, Ö. 2009. Technical Efficiency of Alternative Farming Systems: The Case of Greek Organic and Conventional Olive-Growing Farms. PhD. Thesis (Unpublished), Department of Agricultural Economics, Institute Of Science And Technology, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkey.
16. Özyılmaz, O. and Özdoğru, H. 2011. Evaluatıon of Servıces in Assocıatıon of Raısers That Have Veals Used for Breedıng in Ankara. Indust. Arts Edu. Faculty J. Gazi Univ., 27: 41-51.
17. Rehber, E. 2009. The Problem of Agricultural Organization. (Access Date, May 16, 2016), http://www.erekonomi.com/orgut.pdf.
18. Saltan, A. 2006. Socıo-Economıc Structure and Assessment of Agricultural Extension Activities on Development of Kökez Vıllage In Aladag Dıstrıct of Adana Provınce. Master Thesis (Unpublished), Department of Agrıcultural Economıcs, Instıtute of Natural And Applıed Scıences, Unıversıty of Çukurova, Adana/Turkey
19. Terin, M. and Çelik, A. H. 2010. A Study on the Level of Cooperation among the Farmers and Their Expectations From the Associations: The Case of Van Province. J. Ege Univ. Faculty Agri., 47(3): 265-274.