Journal of Arid Environments (2003) 54: 553–564 doi:10.1006/jare.2002.1078
Agricultural land use change and sustainable use of land resources in the mediterranean region of Turkey
Harun Tanrivermis Department of Agricultural Economics, Faculty of Agriculture, Ankara University, 06110 Diskapi, Ankara, Turkey (Received 17 July 2002, accepted 17 July 2002) Agricultural land use has changed in the Mediterranean Region particularly since the 1950s. Factors affecting these changes include increasing agricultural productivity and intensification, changes in population density, industrialization, urbanization, tourism, agricultural mechanization and use of agri-chemicals. Farms have been fragmented and the average farm size has decreased because of rapid rural population growth. During this period, most pasture and meadow land has been transformed into crop cultivation. Once productive farmlands have been used for industrialization, urbanization and tourist developments. For sustainable agricultural land use, new legal and institutional regulations are required, which integrate environmental concerns and agricultural policies. These regulations must be defined in terms of multiple use of agricultural land and strict conservation of prime agricultural land. # 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. Keywords: land use change; agriculture; sustainability; natural resource management
Introduction In ancient times, agriculture was a basic economic activity, using natural resources in harmony with the environment. Following the industrial and green revolutions of the 19th and 20th centuries, agriculture began to have negative impacts on the environment (Rehber, 1991). Over several centuries, farming techniques gradually spread and agricultural tools and practices became easier to use and more efficient (Beazley, 1993). Agricultural chemicals, machinery, and high-yielding crops and animals began to be used in agriculture for high profitability. These advances changed the structure of production, and market-oriented or commercial farming gained importance, so enhancing trade in food and agricultural products. The agricultural sector combines the production factors of land, labour, capital and entrepreneurship in different ways and combinations. The main factor limiting the quantity of production in agriculture is land. From the viewpoint of economists, prime agricultural land is a scarce factor of production and a finite, exhaustible national Email: [email protected]
0140-1963/03/030553 + 12 $30.00/0
# 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd.
resource. Although its amount and quality are limited, there are many alternative usesFall competing with each other. Land can generate returns from more than one alternative use. Land use is transferred to the area which generates the highest return, unless legal and/or institutional regulations and monitoring systems are set up. The market price of land reflects the value given by society. The use of land would tend to maximize social welfare, but its market price is far from being a good indicator of its social value (Azqueta, 1995), particularly in developing countries, because perfectly competitive land markets and strict legal regulations of land use rarely exist. During the second half of the 20th century, changes in land use have been very rapid, due to the implementation of agricultural and economic policies in Turkey. These changes are linked to achieving sustainable management of natural resources in the Mediterranean region. The objective of this paper is to evaluate the change in agricultural land use in the Mediterranean region of Turkey between 1950 and 1998. The changes in agricultural land use, production patterns, relationships between land and population, and use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides will also be evaluated in this paper. The legal and political regulations, and agri-environmental policies needed for the appropriate and sustainable use of agricultural and rural land in this region are discussed.
Data and methodology Data on land use change are available from cadastral surveys, agricultural census, digitized maps and remotely sensed data (Whitby, 1991). The main sources of data on agricultural land use in Turkey are agricultural census results, conducted in each decade by the State Institute of Statistics (SIS) (SIS, 1956, 1982, 1994). Data from individual owner-occupied farms are aggregated at the provincial, regional and national level. Data on agricultural land use are also collected by the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, and the General Directorate of Rural Services (GDRS, 1995; MARA, 2000). In this paper, both data sources are used to evaluate changes in land use. In this paper, the Mediterranean region covers the provinces .of Adana, Antalya, . Aydın, Balıkesir, Burdur, C ¸ anakkale, Denizli, Gaziantep, Hatay, Ic¸el, Izmir, Isparta, Kahramanmaras¸, Manisa, Mugˇla, and Osmaniye. Data from these provinces are aggregated to represent the regional level. To assess the change in land use in this region, time-series data from 1952 to 1998 are considered (TCZB, 1952–1990; SIS, 1989–1998, 1950–1998). Many socio-economic factors affect changes in agricultural land use. The impacts of these factors are analysed with regression analysis, which determines the factor causing variation in the independent variable, or the annual change in agricultural land use. The regression equation used is ðEqn 1Þ LUCt ¼ a0 þa1 ðAPVt Þ þ a2 ðTt Þ þ et ðIÞ where LUC is the percentage change in agricultural land use in the region annually. APV represents the real value of agricultural production in Turkish Lira (TL) per hectare, deflated by the wholesale price index (1948 = 100). This indicator is also a measure of agricultural intensification. T defines the trend of land use change and may also reflect other factors that may affect land use change. et defines stochastic variables omitted in this regression model, such as income generated from alternative use of agricultural land. Some variables such as agricultural production value and population density are used as independent variables, and a second model was derived: ðEqn 2Þ LUCt ¼ a0 þa1 ðAPVt Þ þ a2 ðPDt Þ þ etðIIÞ where PD defines the population density as people per square kilometre in the region. All the variables in the two equations are in natural logarithms and estimated by the
LAND USE CHANGE
ordinary least square (OLS) techniques. The second regression model gave the same results as Eqn (1). To test the statistical significance of the estimated parameters of the two regression equations, t-statistics is used. The statistical significance of the multiple coefficient correlation is expressed by the F-statistic (Koutsoyiannis, 1993). All parameters are tested at 1% and 5% level of significance. The serial correlation of errors is tested by the Durbin–Watson statistic.
Results and discussion Basic agricultural characteristics of the mediterranean region The main objective of the agricultural sector is the production of food and fibre, but the role of agriculture in environmental management is also important (Pearce, 1993). Agriculture creates 18?4% of gross domestic product (GDP), and represents 22?3% of industrial output. Agricultural land and natural resources have been threatened by the rapid population growth rate ( = 1?4% in 1997; SIS, 2000) in the Mediterranean region of Turkey. In 1950, 73?6% of the population was rural, decreasing to 37?4% in 1997. Population density had increased from 30 to 94 people per square kilometre in the same period. In this region, 88?7% of the rural population was employed in agriculture, with widespread use of hired labour. The proportion of hired labour in the agricultural workforce overall increased from 47?0% to 68?0% (Yurdakul, 1990). Agricultural land in the Mediterranean region of Turkey makes up 20?8% of the total agricultural land of the country. This region has the most rapid growth in agricultural production since the 1950s. The value of agricultural production from the region has increased from 28?0% to 53?0% of the total agricultural production value of the country. The high value of agricultural production is due to the production of cash crops on the highest quality agricultural land. Most farms are small in size, with fragmented, spatially disparate land parcels. The number of farms was 590,814 in 1950, increasing to 1,275,207 in 1991. The mean farm size decreased from 6?8 to 3?9 ha (Table 1). Fragmentation of land has occurred because of population pressure and inappropriate legal regulations related to agricultural land use. The ratio of farms of 4?9 ha or less was 61?5% and 76?9% in 1950 and 1991, respectively. The proportion of agricultural land occupied by these
Table 1. Number and size of farms in the Mediterranean region, 1950–1991
Farm size (ha) o4?9 5–9?9 10–19?9 20–49?9 50+ Total number of farms Mean farm size Mean number of parcels
363,132 142,301 43,745 24,771 16,865 590,814 6?8 5?6
61?5 24?1 7?4 4?2 2?8 100?0 F F
725,413 192,277 93,207 34,242 1662 1,046,801 4?8 7?1
69?3 18?4 8?9 3?3 0?1 100?0 F F
980,094 195,472 72,236 23,947 3457 1,275,207 3?9 4?3
76?9 15?3 5?7 1?9 0?2 100?0 F F
Source: SIS (1956, 1982, 1994).
Table 2. Distribution of farms by the type of farming in the Mediterranean region, 1950–1991
Type of farming
Farms engaged only 282,892 47?9 172,650 16?5 428,814 33?6 in crop production Farms engaged only 16,239 2?8 18,003 1?7 37,463 3?0 in animal husbandry Farms engaged both in crop 291,683 49?3 856,148 81?8 808,930 63?4 production and animal husbandry Number of farms 590,814 100?0 1,046,801 100?0 1,275,207 100?0 % Change 100?0 177?2 215?8 Source: SIS (1956, 1982, 1994).
farms was 30?0% and 35?6% in 1950 and 1991, respectively. These indicators show that agricultural land is not distributed evenly among farms in the region. To achieve sustainable agriculture, crop production and animal husbandry should be integrated. While the proportion of farms engaged in mixed farming was 49?3% in 1950, this increased to 63?4% in 1991. During this period, the proportion of farms engaged solely in crop production decreased, and yet the proportion slightly increased for those solely concerned with animal husbandry (Table 2). Farmers, farmers’ organizations and governmental agencies should work together to reintegrate crop and livestock production especially in environmentally sensitive areas. Such improvements in agriculture practice should reduce the impacts of agriculture. In the region, family-owned farms dominate (64?0% and 85?8% of total farms in 1950 and 1991, respectively). The proportion of tenanted farms has increased from 1?0% to 2?6%. On the other hand, the proportion of farms run by share-croppers has decreased from 3?1% to 1?2%. These data are important as investment in protecting soil productivity and efficient land resource management are closely related to land tenure. Agricultural inputs such as fertilizers are higher in the region than the national average. The amount of chemical fertilizer use is 128 kg ha1 on average (Association of Fertilizer Producers, 2000). Near the coastal zone, particularly in greenhouses, fertilizer use is greater than the regional average. For instance, mean chemical fertilizer use on cut-flower farms in Antalya province under contract farming was ¨ zc¸elik et al., 1999). In Manisa, farmers used 3?6 times more fertilizer 3113 kg ha1 (O than the national average (C ¸ agˇlayan, 1983). In Izmir, cotton producers apply three ¨ zkaya & O ¨ zdemir, times more nitrogen fertilizer than the economic optimum level (O 1992), due to input subsidies and price support policies. Unsurprisingly, in the greenhouse area of Antalya province, underground water resources are heavily polluted by nitrogenous fertilizers (C ¸ olakogˇlu et al., 1995). These results indicate that agricultural policies have encouraged fertilizer use. In the past, there has been insufficient use of fertilizers, so an input subsidy was introduced in the 1970s. Consequently, current fertilizer use exceeds the economic optimum, especially in the coastal zone of the Mediterranean region. The price elasticity of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium fertilizers is 0?21, 0?36 and 0?07, respectively (S¸ener & Koc¸, 1999). So when the price of fertilizers increases by 10%, fertilizer demand decreases by between 0?7% and 3?6% for the next production year. To regulate fertilizer use, the input subsidy may have to be decreased, and fertilizer prices may have to increase in the 21st century.
LAND USE CHANGE
In the region, the amount of pesticide use has steadily increased since 1950. In 1998, it reached 4?8 kg ha1 on average (MARA, 2000). Research in the region at the farm scale concluded that farmers generally use pesticides and fertilizers intensively, compared to the levels recommended by agricultural extension agents (Akbay, 1991; ¨ zc¸elik et al., 1999). Farmers generally Miran, 1996; s¸engu¨l, 1996; Zeren et al., 1996; O use pesticides unconsciously, and governmental institutions do not control their application. For soil fumigation in greenhouses where cut flowers are grown for example, methyl bromide is generally used, and this pesticide has negative impacts on soil and air quality, as well as on human health. The Montreal Protocol of 1987 recommended that this chemical would be withdrawn by the first decade of the 21st century. In crop production, the price elasticity of pesticide demand is lower than unity, and therefore a 10% increase in pesticide price has been estimated to decrease pesticide demand by about 9?5% (Tanrıvermis¸, 2000). This implies that economic instruments (such as taxes, charges, etc.) can be used as agri-environmental management tools to control pesticide use and subsequent pollution. Erbatur & Erbatur (1995) stated that pesticides were found in rivers, irrigation and drainage canals, and on greenhouse vegetables. They included some banned products such as DDT, aldrin, dieldrin and heptachlor, but were all below the legal limits for the Antakya-Samandagˇ district. These chemicals are probably imported illegally. These findings show that there are some serious environmental pollution problems caused by pesticides in the Mediterranean region. These problems also affect production costs and the profitability of agricultural activities. As a result, they hinder the viability of economic sustainability in the region. Agricultural mechanization has encouraged changes in land use in the region since the 1950s. Between 1950 and 1998, the transformation of meadows and pastures into farmland is correlated with agricultural modernization and mechanization. The number of tractors per 1000 ha was 4 in 1950, while it reached 51 in 1998. The area occupied by greenhouses in the region has reached 43,013 ha ( = 97?1% of the total greenhouse area in Turkey). Greenhouse cultivation of vegetables, fruits and cut flowers has grown in the region because of suitable climatic conditions, domestic demand and export potential. The modernization and intensification of agriculture has increased pressure on natural resources. The environmental impacts of agricultural technologies and practices are not new. For instance, increasing use of agri-chemicals has caused soil pollution, eutrophication of water resources, damage to ecosystems and contamination of drinking water and foodstuffs (Allanson & Whitby, 1996). In the region, rivers carry pollution from agricultural activities (such as phosphorus, nitrogen and pesticides) to the Mediterranean (OECD, 1999), as well as industrial pollutants and waste from tourist establishments. For control of agricultural pollution, command and control instruments of agrienvironmental management has been used in Turkey. For instance: K
K K K K
pollution and recharge standards, and tolerance limits defined by the regulation of water pollution, a minimum time period between pesticide application and crop harvesting, limits of pesticide residue on fresh foods determined by legal regulations, burning of cereal stubble is forbidden, especially in rain-fed areas, 29 different pesticides have been banned in the last 25 years, due to phytotoxicity, ineffectiveness and negative environmental impacts.
Despite these measures, agri-environmental quality has not improved efficiently. Therefore, as stated in the 5-year development plans, the use of economic instruments of environmental management is needed to improve environmental quality.
Land use change Land use has changed as a result of agricultural and economic policies since the foundation of the Turkish Republic. Between 1920 and 1950, land use was quite stable. Between 1950 and 1997, important changes occurred. Total land under crops increased by 39?1%, as pastures and meadows were cultivated as a result of the rapid spread of commercial agriculture. Consequently, total land under pasture and meadow has decreased by about 70?8%, because of inadequate legal and institutional regulations. In the same period, fallow land has decreased by 78?4% due to irrigation investment and the improvement of agricultural practices. Land under vegetables and orchards has increased by 135?9%, reflecting the intensification and specialization in agriculture at this time. The proportion of total agricultural land under fruits and vegetables has increased from 16?1% to 27?3% (Table 3). The intensive use of land resources for agriculture provides the setting for conservation policies. Agricultural land accounts for 32?9% of all land in the Mediterranean region, and 36?0% in Turkey as a whole. Agricultural activities have a vital role in maintaining the sustainability and conservation of the rural environment. Current farming practices in the Mediterranean region have a negative impact on natural resources. Crop rotations, especially in vegetables and industrial crops are uncommon. The decline in the amount of pasture and meadowlands affects the sustainable use of natural resources in the region. Between 1923 and 1998, pasture was regarded as ‘communal’, and hence policies for maintenance, improvement and conservation were not developed or implemented. The fertility of this land has decreased because of heavy grazing and land degradation. In 1998, the Pasture Law of 4342 defined pasturelands as a public good, and the management of these areas was developed according to the livestock population of the village and the vegetation characteristics of the land (Resmi Gazete, 1998a). An improvement programme has been started in these areas, and farmers who use the pasturelands have to contribute to the maintenance and operation costs of these areas. The changes in land use and management strategies in recent decades may cause pressure on biodiversity and the natural landscape. Policies aimed at encouraging livestock production tripled the density of animals per unit of land, relative to what it had been before. While grass yield and quality in pasturelands declined because of overgrazing, the number of pastoral vegetation species decreased from about 25 to 5–6 (Environmental Foundation of Turkey, 1998). Besides agriculture, there are many aspects of rural land use such as wildlife conservation, outdoor recreation, forestry, education and research, which are of value to the individual (Kula, 1994). The multiple land use approach sees the land resource supplying services to more than one user and produces more than one product.
Table 3. Land use change in the Mediterranean region, 1950–1997
Land use category (ha) Agricultural land Cultivated land Fallow land Vegetables and fruits Pasture and meadows Forest land Others Total area Source: SIS (1950–1998).
4,018,376 2,217,222 1,154,973 646,181 6,497,059 4,240,524 3,402,141 18,158,100
5,588,750 3,814,305 249,974 1,524,471 1,897,000 8,699,340 1,450,493 17,635,583
+39?1 +72?0 78?4 +135?9 70?8 +105?2 57?4 F
LAND USE CHANGE
Therefore, although the primary land use is agriculture, this also provides drainage for rainwater, a habitat for wildlife, and a facility for recreation and sport (such as game shooting) (Whitby, 1991). Many of these uses are for the public good, and yet do not usually bring revenue to land owners, and hence private land owners are reluctant to supply them (Whitby, 1991; Kula, 1994). These issues are more significant at the local level, but decision makers must develop specific policies related to these topics. Table 4 shows the present land use situation in the region based on land capability studies carried out by the General Directorate of Rural Services (GDRS, 1995). The most important problem is that land is not being used according to its capability classification. For instance, meadows, forest and non-agricultural lands were allocated capability classes ranging from I to IV. Land in classes V–VII is also being used for agricultural purposes (Table 4). Such inappropriate land use has caused soil erosion and land degradation. Indeed, soil erosion is one of the major land use problems in the region. Water erosion affects 40% of land in the region (Environmental Foundation of Turkey, 1998). The situation is critical on marginal land where agricultural plots have been created through deforestation, and are cultivated without soil conservation measures. Also, erosion due to overgrazing is especially serious in pasture and meadowlands in the region. Housing has been built on 178,095 ha of land classed between class I and IV ( = 3?7% of productive farmland in the region, GDRS, 1995). This is the result of governmental policies and inadequate legal regulation related to the planning, controlling and monitoring of land use change. Economic policies including taxes, charges, prices and incentives related to one economic sector must be harmonized with those in other sectors, otherwise developments in one sector may adversely affect the use of resources in other sectors. For the protection of specific natural resources, national parks, nature protection areas, nature parks and wildlife reserve areas have been legally defined. These areas occupy 1,133,453 ha in the region ( = 6?4% of the total land area). These protected areas are threatened by tourism, irrigation schemes, overgrazing, pollution, forest fires, and illegal hunting because there are no environmental management plans. Although, the total area under cultivation has increased, the crop production pattern has not changed. Cereals, pulses, oil seeds, cotton, tobacco and vegetables are the main crops cultivated in the region, occupying 82?3% of the total cropland in 1991, compared with 78?2% in 1950. Irrigation investment for agricultural development has increased and thus the rate of irrigated land increased from 7?7% to 18?4% during the same period. In general, degraded farmland requires more chemical input and more irrigation to sustain productivity. This is costly in terms of energy and capital input use. In Table 4. Land use and land capability classification in the Mediterranean region
Land capability classification (%) I
Agricultural land 20?9 21?2 17?3 12?5 F 17?0 Meadows and pastures 0?3 1?5 2?6 3?8 2?7 13?3 Forest land F 0?4 1?0 2?1 0?3 9?7 Non-agricultural land 10?4 10?5 7?9 4?1 0?6 6?7 Other lands F F F F F F Water surface F F F F F F Total 8?7 8?1 7?7 7?2 0?5 10?1 Source: GDRS (1995).
11?1 F 100?0 75?8 F 100?0 86?5 F 100?0 25?5 34?3 100?0 F 100?0 100?0 F 100?0 100?0 49?5 8?2 100?0
addition, the abandonment of some production techniques such as crop rotation has resulted in increased incidence of pest and diseases, which have required the intensive use of pesticides (Pimental, 1993). Particularly, farm chemical applications may significantly affect the cost of farm production, which will have implications for the competitiveness of agricultural markets. For instance, the cost of pesticides as a per cent of total production cost for cotton is between 24?3% and 39?1% in the Adana province (Gu¨nes¸ et al., 1990; Akbay, 1991). As a result, the area under cotton has decreased by over 4% between 1950 and 1991. Another serious problem in relation to the environment is burning of cereal stubble (Erkan, 1995). Farmers burn stubble after harvest for ease of subsequent cultivation. This practice results in air pollution from ash, increased risk of forest fires and damage to wildlife. Soil fertility can be adversely affected too. The practice of stubble burning was not controlled by legal restrictions nor by advice from extension or governmental agencies.
Legal and institutional approaches for controlling land use change The main objectives of national environmental and agricultural policies should aim to manage land use change in rural areas. Some governmental institutions, which are active in land resource management, have been established such as the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the Ministry of Forestry, the Ministry of Civilization and Resettlement, the Ministry of Environment, the General Directorate of Rural Services, the General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works and some scientific institutions in Turkey. These institutions are responsible for land use planning with various objectives, including the conservation of rural and urban land resources. In fact, there is an important coordination problem observed in practice between the different governmental and non-governmental institutions. Numerous laws and regulations have been issued since the foundation of the Turkish Republic regarding the use and conservation of land resources. Some policy proposals can be found in development plans. The Third to the Eighth (inclusive), Five Year Development Plans were focused on soil erosion and environmental problems, land use planning based on rational management, conservation of prime farmlands solely for agricultural production and the preparation of soil mapping based on sustainable development approaches and the need for legal and institutional regulations for achieving the defined goals were emphasized (SPO, 1962–2000). The basic principles of land use have been defined by the 1982 Constitution of Turkish Republic (articles 44–46), the Environment Law of 1983, the Preliminary Measurements of Land and Agricultural Reform Law of 1617, the Law on Land Reform in Irrigated Areas of 3083, the Regulation on Environmental Impact Assessment of 1997, the Regulation on Non-agricultural Use of Agricultural Land of 1998 and the Law on the Establishment of General Directorate of Rural Services of 3202 (Go¨kc¸e, 1989; Haktanır et al., 1995; Resmi Gazete, 1998b; Environmental Foundation of Turkey, 1999). In order to apply these regulations efficiently, detailed soil mapping studies must be completed in each province and the strategies for multiple land use planning should be developed and applied under the responsibility of competent central and local institutions. Between 1960 and 1984, policies of land use planning, mapping and monitoring were applied by the Soil and Water General Directorate (TOPRAKSU) of the Ministry of Agriculture. After that these functions were less successfully organized by some governmental agencies, because of inefficient co-ordination between the governmental institutions. There is a need for reorganization of public agencies and the creation of a competent public authority responsible for land use planning,
LAND USE CHANGE
mapping, monitoring and conservation as occurred with TOPRAKSU. For this objective, a new legal regulation covering the planning and use of land resources in urban and rural areas will be adopted and a competent governmental agency will be responsible for its application. Certain existing laws and regulations need to be updated according to recent developments and problems related to the physical planning of land resources caused by industrialization, urbanization, tourism and the lack of co-operation between public and private investment decisions.
Factors affecting land use change Sustainability and environmental change in rural areas depend on various social, economic and demographic factors (Pearce, 1993), such as population density, economic growth, socio-economic development, and legal and institutional regulations. A regression analysis can be used to explain the reasons for the change in agricultural land use in the region, using Eqn (1). The result of the regression analysis is presented in Table 5. The equation provides a good fit to the data (R2 = 0?9081). It is significant (F-value is 212?519) at the 1% level. The Durbin–Watson statistic (1?7299) indicates no serial correlation. All the coefficients have the correct sign, and the coefficients are statistically significant at the 1% level. The findings are consistent with the theoretical expectations. Independent variables explain 90?81% of the reasons for land use change in the region. When the agricultural product value increases by 10?0% in real terms, there is a consequent intensification of agricultural production, and resultant land use change. The intensification of existing production technology is a key factor in determining rural land use change. For this aim, farmers tend to select cash crops or improved new crop varieties. The impact of other factors related to land use change is analysed by the trend factor. Between 1952 and 1998, agricultural land decreased by 0?7% annually. Some variables such as population density, urbanization, industrial development and tourism activities, etc. may decrease the amount of agricultural land. The impact of population density on change in agricultural land use was also tested by Eqn (2). The results of this equation are given in Table 6. The relationship between population density and land use change concurs with theoretical expectations. The goodness of fit is acceptable (R2 = 0?899), with a significant F-value of 191?403 (Table 6). The Durbin–Watson test (D–W = 1?7261) indicates that there is no serial correlation in the error terms. The estimated coefficients are of the correct sign and are statistically significant at the 1% and 5% levels. The results of these two equations indicate that the sustainability of land use depends on intensification and socio-
Table 5. Result of regression estimation (Eqn (1))
Dependent variable Constant Agricultural product value (TL ha1) Trend R2 Adjusted R2 F-statistic D.W.
Land use change 13?585 (53?96) 0?49558 (6?817) 0?0066128 (3?701) 0?9081 0?9039 212?519 1?7299
Note: t-Statistics are in parentheses. Parameter values are significant at the 1% level.
Table 6. Result of regression estimation (Eqn (2))
Land use change
Constant Agricultural product value (TL ha1) Population density R2 Adjusted R2 F-statistic D.W.
14?088 (77?53) 0?39398 (5?786) 0?0061512 (2?614) 0?8990 0?8943 191?403 1?7261
Note: t-Statistics are in parentheses. Bold denotes significance at the 1% level and italics denotes significance at the 5% level.
economic factors. For this reason, new agricultural and regional development policies must be investigated and applied at local and regional levels.
Conclusion Land use in the region has changed rapidly since the 1950s as a result of industrialization, urbanization, tourism, migration, and changes in agricultural technologies and practices. An increase in agricultural productivity per unit of farmland and population density has affected the amount of cropland, as well as other socio-economic factors tested by two regression equations. Typical scenarios are the use of prime farmlands for urbanization and industrialization, or the use of permanent pasture and meadowlands for cultivation. The planning and control of land use change should be an essential part of a strategy for sustainable agricultural development. It is quite difficult to conserve prime agricultural land solely for agricultural production because of the rapid population growth rate, localization of industry and tourism investments in the region. For these reasons, new legal and institutional regulations should be made. Also it is necessary to highlight the public benefit of natural resources such as pasture and meadowlands by the Pasture Law of 4342 in 1998. In terms of sustainable land management in the region, a change in land use strategy to better integration of crops, woodland and meadowlands should be encouraged by the governmental policies particularly in marginal land which covers farmlands between land classes V and VII described in Table 4. Such a strategy should also reduce the environmental impacts of agricultural practices, and intensification on lowlands should be based on the development of low input and/or organic farming systems. Agricultural support policies which cover input subsidies and price supports currently encourage further input use and the intensification of agriculture. Attention needs to be given to integrating environmental concerns into agricultural policies and to adopting conservation approaches of natural resources. Instruments such as pollution standards, tolerance limits for water quality, bans of some farm chemicals, limits of pesticide residue on food and ban of cereal stubble burning as well as market-based tools such as taxes, incentives, charges, deposit refund systems are often recommended as flexible policy tools for land use management (Harou, 1995). The application cost of such schemes is quite high, and the improvement and control of environmental quality in rural areas is not
LAND USE CHANGE
guaranteed but these steps should be used to achieve better agri-environmental quality in the 21st century.
References . Akbay, C. (1991). As¸agˇı Seyhan Ovası’nda Tarimsal Savas¸ Ilac¸larının Pazarlanması ve Tarım . Ilac¸ları Kullanımının Ekonomik Analizi (Economic Analysis of Pesticide Use and Pesticide Marketing in Lower Seyhan Valley). C ¸ ukurova Universitesi, Yu¨ksek Lisans Tezi, Adana. Allanson, P. & Whitby, M. (1996). Prologue: rural policy and the British countryside. In: The Rural Economy and the British Countryside, pp. 1–16. Allanson, P. and Whitby, M. (Eds) London, U.K.: Earthscan Publication Ltd. 1–226 pp. Association of Fertilizer Producers (2000). Fertilizer Consumption Catalogue 2000, Ankara. Azqueta, D. (1995). Land economic value and the environment: some ethical points, In: Environmental and Land Use Issues, an Economic Perspective, pp. 27–34. Albusi, L.M. & Romero, C. (Eds), Proceedings of the 34th EAAE Seminar. Kiel: Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk, 1–540 pp. Beazley, M. (1993). Caring for the Earth, IUEN-UNEP-WWF. London, U.K.: Reed International Books Limited, 1–159 pp. . . C ¸ agˇlayan, L. (1983). Manisa Ili Merkez Ilc¸e Ova Ko¨ylerinde Kimyasal Gu¨brelerin Tedarik ve ¨ Kullanımı Uzerine Bir Aras¸tırma (A Research on the Supply and Usage of Chemical Fertilizer in the Farms . of Valley Village in the Central District of Manisa). Yas¸ar Egˇitim ve Ku¨ltu¨r Vakfı Yayın No. 3, Izmir. C ¸ olakogˇlu, H., Hatipogˇlu, F., Fırat, B., Yurtsever, N. & Du¨zbastılar, M. (1995). Gu¨bre Kullanımı ve U¨retimi (The Production and Usage of Fertilizer), pp. 999–1013. Tu¨rkiye Ziraat Mu¨hendisligˇi IV. Teknik Kongresi, TMMOB Ziraat Mu¨hendisleri Odası, TCZB Ku¨ltu¨r Yayınları No. 26, Ankara. Environment Foundation of Turkey (1998). Environmental Profile of Turkey ’99, Ankara. Environment Foundation of Turkey (1999). Environmental Laws of Turkey, Ankara. Erbatur, N.G. & Erbatur, O. (1995). Dogˇu Akdeniz Bo¨lgesi’nde Pestisit Kirliligˇinin . Aras¸tırılması (A Research of Pesticide Pollution in the Eastern Mediterranean Region). TUBITAK Proje No: KTC ¸ AG:134, Adana. Erkan, O. (1995). Economics of land use and environmental problems of agriculture in the C ¸ ukurova region of Turkey. In: Albusi, L.M. & Romero, C. (Eds), Environmental and Land Use Issues, an Economic Perspective, pp. 413–420. Proceedings of the 34th EAAE Seminar. Kiel: Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk. 1–540 pp. Go¨kc¸e, O. 1989. Tu¨rkiye’de Arazi Kullanımı, Sorunları ve C ¸ o¨zo¨m Yolları (The Land Use of Turkey, . Problems and Solutions). Tabiat ve Insan. No. 2, pp. 8–14, No. 3.pp.5–9, Ankara. GDRS (1995). Tu¨rkiye Arazi Varlıgˇı (The Land Inventory of Turkey), Ankara. Gu¨nes¸, T., Kıral, T., Bu¨lbu¨l, M., Vural, H., Tatlıdil, F.F., Turan, A., Albayrak, M., Albayrak, M., Fidan, H. & C ¸ etin, B. (1990). Bas¸lıca Taryim U¨ruo¨nleri Maliyetleri Aras¸tırma Projesi II (A Research on Production Costs of Major Agricultural Products II ) Ankara: TMO Alkasan Matbaası. Haktanır, K., Karaca, A. & Turgay, O.C. (1995). Legislative approach to soil protection and land use in Turkey. In: Kapur, S. et al. (Eds), First International Conference on Land Degradation Proceedings, Adana, Turkey, pp. 273–278. 1–401 pp. Harou, P. (1995). Wetland economics and land use. In: Albusi, L.M. & Romero, C. (Eds), Environmental and Land Use Issues, an Economic Perspective, pp. 61–74. Proceedings of the 34th EAAE Seminar. Kiel: Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk. 1–540 pp. Koutsoyiannis, A. (1993). Theory of Econometrics, an Introductory Exposition of Econometric Methods (2nd Edn). London, U.K.: The Macmillan Press Ltd. 1–681 pp. Kula, E. (1994). Economics of Natural Resources, the Environment and Policies. London, U.K.: Chapman & Hall. 1–377 pp. Miran, B. (1996). C ¸ ok Amac¸lı Karar Alma Yo¨ntemiyle Salihli ve Ahmetli Yoo¨resinde Tarımsal . Ilac¸ların Optimum Kullanımı U¨zerine Bir Aras¸tırma (A Research on the Optimum Use. of Pesticide with the Methods of Multi-Objective Decision in Salihli and Ahmetli Districts). Izmir: Ege Universitesi. MARA (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs) (2000). Pesticides Consumption Statistics. Ankara. Unpublished data. OECD (1999). Environmental Performance Reviews, Turkey, Paris, France.
¨ zc¸elik, A., Turan, A. & Tanrıvermis¸, H. (1999). Tu¨rkiye’de Tarımın Pazara Entegrasyonunda O So¨zles¸meli Tarım ve Bu Modelin Su¨rdu¨ru¨lebilir Kaynak Kullanımı ile U¨retici Geliri U¨zerine Etkileri (The Role of Contract Farming for the Integration of Agriculture to Market and its Impacts on Producer Income and Sustainable Use of Natural Resources in Turkey), Publication No. 14. Ankara: Agricultural Economics Research of Turkey. . Institute . ¨ zkaya, T. & O ¨ zdemir, S. (1992). Izmir Ilinde Pamuk U¨retiminde As¸ırı Gu¨bre Kullanımı (Excessive O . Fertilizer Use in Cotton Farming in Izmir Province), pp. 45–58. Taryim Ekonomisi Dergisi, No. 1, . Izmir. Pearce, D. (1993). Blueprint 3 Measuring Sustainable Development. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd. 1–224 pp. Pimental, D. (1993). Environmental and economic benefits of sustainable agriculture. In: Paoletti, M.G., Napier, T., Ferro, O., Stinner, B. & Stinner, D. (Eds), Socio-economic and Policy Issues for Sustainable Farming Systems. pp. 5–20. Padova, Italy: Cooperativa Amicizia S.r.l. 1–308 pp. Rehber, E. (1991). Alternatif Tarım U¨zerine Bir Tartis¸ma (A Review on Alternative Agriculture), pp. ¨ niversitesi Ziraat Faku¨ltesi Dergisi No. 8, Bursa. 153–160. Uludagˇ U Resmi Gazete (1998a). 4342 Sayılı Mer’a Kanunu, No. 23272, Tarih: 28?2?1998, Ankara. . Resmi Gazete (1998b). Tarim Alanlarının Tarım Dıs¸ı Gaye Ile Kullanılmasına Dair Yo¨netmelik, No. 23445, Tarih:26?08?1998, . Ankara. . S¸engu¨l, M. (1996). Adana Ili Yu¨regˇir Ovasında Turunc¸gil U¨retiminde Tarımsal Savas¸ Ilac¸ları Kullanımı ve Ekonomik Analizi (Economic Analysis and Usage of Pesticides in Citrus Fruits ¨ niversitesi Yu¨ksek Lisans Tezi, Adana. Farming in Yu¨regˇir Valley of Adana Province). C ¸ ukurova U S¸ener, A. & Koc¸, A. (1999). Tu¨rkiye’de Kimyasal Gu¨bre Talebi (The Demand of Chemical Fertilizer in Turkey), Publication No. 25. Ankara: Agricultural Economics Research Institute of Turkey. SIS (1950–1998). Agricultural Structure and Production (1950–1997). Ankara: SIS Publications. 1–599 pp. SIS (1956). 1950 Ziraat Sayımı Neticeleri, Publication No. 371, Ankara. SIS (1982). 1980 Genel Tarim Sayımı Hanehalkı Anketi Sonuc¸ları, Publication No. 1028, Ankara. SIS (1989–1998). Agricultural Structure (Production, Price, Value). Ankara: SIS Publications. 1–588 pp. SIS (1994). 1991 Genel Tarım Sayımı Hanehalkı Anketi Sonuc¸ları, Publication No. 1691, Ankara. SIS (1999). 1997 Domestic Product By Provinces, Turkey, Publication No. 2276, Ankara. SIS (2000). 1997 Population Count Administrative Division, Publication No. 2281, Ankara. SPO (1962–2000). Five Year Development Plans, Ankara. . Tanrıvermis¸, H. (2000). Orta Sakarya Havzası’nda Domates U¨retiminde Tarimsal Ilac¸ Kullanıminın Ekonomik Analizi (Economic Analysis of Pesticide Use in Tomato Farming in the Middle Sakarya Basin), Publication No.42. Ankara: Agricultural Economics Research Institute of Turkey. TCZB (Agricultural Bank of Turkey) (1952–1990). Agricultural Production Value. Ankara: Publication of Head of Budgeting and Planning Division. Whitby, M. (1991). The changing nature of rural land use. In: Hanley, N. (Ed.), Farming and the Countryside: an Economic Analysis of External Costs and Benefits, pp. 12–25. Wallingford, U.K.: CAB International. . Yurdakul, O. (1990). Akdeniz Bo¨lgesi Tarım Is¸letmelerinde Sosyo-ekonomik Yapı (The socioeconomic structure of farms in the Mediterranean region). In: Akdeniz Bo¨lgesi’nde Tarımın Verimlilik Sorunları Sempozyumu, Publication No.. 433, MPM Publications. . pp. 24–33. Ankara: . Zeren, O., Kumbur, H. and Tas¸demir, H. (1996). Ic¸el Ilinde Tarımsal Ilac¸ Pazarlama, Kullanım ¨ zerinde Aras¸tırmalar (Researchs on the efficiency, usage techniques and Teknigˇi ve Etkinligˇi U . . marketing of pesticide in Ic¸el province). In: Tarım-C ¸ evre Ilis¸kileri Sempozyumu Dogˇal ¨ niversitesi Mu¨hendislik Kaynaklarin Su¨rdu¨ru¨lebilir Kullanımı, pp. 259–269. Mersin: Mersin U Faku¨ltesi.