The Detriment of Northern Subsidies in Somalia

 

In Somalia, a situation has emerged where subsidies from Northern countries are having harmful effects on the local agricultural sector. These subsidies are causing problems for Somali farmers, making it difficult for them to compete and sustain their livelihoods.

Another issue is that products from Northern countries, which are being subsidized, are being sold in Somalia at much lower prices than locally-produced goods. This has put local farmers at a disadvantage because their products can't compete with these cheaper imports. As a result, the market is becoming flooded with cheaper foreign products, and the hard work of Somali farmers is going unnoticed.

Somali farmers, unfortunately, are not benefiting from any subsidies to help them in their efforts. This lack of support is making it incredibly tough for them to make a living from farming. This is leading to a decline in local food production and making the country more dependent on imports.

 

Possible Solutions:

Investment in Local Agriculture: Providing resources like better seeds, modern farming techniques, and access to markets can help Somali farmers produce higher-quality goods.

Promotion of Local Products: Encouraging people to buy locally-produced goods can help support Somali farmers and keep their products in demand.

The Impact of Imported Agricultural Goods on Somali Farmers and Strategies for Resilience

Introduction:

Somalia, a country with a significant portion of its population engaged in agriculture, faces a complex challenge as low-priced imported agricultural goods flood its markets. These imports, often subsidized in their countries of origin, are reshaping the dynamics of the local agricultural sector. This discussion report delves into the repercussions of this influx on Somali farmers and explores potential strategies for fostering resilience in the face of this challenge.

Disruption of Local Markets:

The introduction of cheap imported agricultural goods disrupts the equilibrium of Somali markets. These imports, sold at prices lower than what local producers can match, sway consumers towards the more affordable options. Consequently, Somali farmers find themselves struggling to sell their products competitively, leading to a pronounced disadvantage that threatens their livelihoods.

Economic Strain and Disincentive:

As farmers grapple with the inability to sell their produce at profitable prices, their income dwindles. The financial strain reverberates through their lives, and the allure of continuing agricultural activities wanes. Reduced profitability undermines the incentive to invest time, effort, and resources into planting crops and tending livestock, contributing to a decline in local food production.

Dependence on Imports and Food Security Concerns:

The local agricultural production decline exacerbates Somalia's reliance on imported agricultural goods to meet its food demands. This dependency raises alarms about the nation's long-term food security and self-sufficiency. In a global landscape prone to disruptions, such as supply chain interruptions and price fluctuations, this dependence can leave Somalia vulnerable and its population at risk of food shortages.

Wider Economic and Social Ramifications:

The effects of the agricultural import challenge extend beyond farming communities. Rural economies, traditionally rooted in agriculture, suffer contraction as incomes diminish. This contraction leads to a dearth of employment opportunities, economic instability, and even migration from rural areas to urban centers in search of alternative livelihoods. The decline in local agricultural activities also disrupts the social fabric of communities that have relied on farming for generations.

Charting a Resilient Path Forward:

Addressing the implications of low-priced imported agricultural goods requires a comprehensive approach tailored to Somalia's unique circumstances. Policy interventions, such as tariffs on heavily subsidized imports, can level the playing field for local producers. Strategic investments in market infrastructure can improve access for farmers to reach consumers more efficiently. Emphasizing value addition and quality assurance can help local products stand out amidst competition.

Capacity-building initiatives are pivotal in enhancing productivity and sustainable practices among Somali farmers. Encouraging diversification into different crops and income streams can enhance resilience against market fluctuations. Balancing the need for affordable food with the goal of nurturing a self-sufficient agricultural sector is imperative to safeguarding Somalia's long-term food security and economic stability.

Conclusion:

The surge of low-priced imported agricultural goods in Somalia has triggered a series of challenges for local farmers and the broader economy. However, with a strategic approach that encompasses policy measures, capacity-building efforts, and market-oriented strategies, Somalia can chart a path towards resilience. By revitalizing the agricultural sector, the country can better ensure its food security, bolster rural economies, and safeguard the livelihoods of its farming communities.

Food security challenges exacerbated by Al-Shabaab's disruptions in Somalia

    Image Source: Google, https://thearabweekly.com/isis-resumes-scorched-earth-tactics-against-iraqi-farmers

Al-Shabaab, an Islamist extremist group operating primarily in Somalia, has had a significant impact on food security in the region. Their activities and disruptions have exacerbated existing challenges and created additional obstacles for both the local population and international humanitarian efforts. Here are some ways in which Al-Shabaab has contributed to the food security challenges:

Disruption of agricultural activities: Al-Shabaab's presence in rural areas has led to the disruption of agricultural activities. They often target farmers, looting their crops, livestock, and equipment. This creates a sense of fear and uncertainty among farmers, discouraging them from cultivating their land or investing in agricultural activities. As a result, agricultural productivity is significantly affected, leading to food shortages and increased food prices.

Control over strategic areas: Al-Shabaab has established control over certain regions in Somalia, including major ports and transportation routes. By controlling these areas, they can impose taxes and levies on the movement of goods, including food and humanitarian aid. These additional costs make it more difficult for aid organizations to deliver assistance and for traders to transport food to markets, resulting in higher food prices and limited availability.

Displacement of communities: Al-Shabaab's violent activities, including attacks on villages and communities, have resulted in the displacement of thousands of people. Displaced populations often lack access to adequate food and nutrition, as they are forced to leave their homes, livelihoods, and farmlands behind. This exacerbates food insecurity, as these individuals become reliant on humanitarian assistance, which is often limited or hindered by Al-Shabaab's presence.

Humanitarian access restrictions: Al-Shabaab's presence and control in certain areas have led to restrictions on humanitarian access. They impose strict regulations and demands on aid organizations, making it challenging to deliver assistance to vulnerable populations. This limits the reach and effectiveness of humanitarian efforts, exacerbating the food security situation for those in need.

Targeting of aid workers: Al-Shabaab has targeted and attacked aid workers operating in Somalia. These attacks not only endanger the lives of humanitarian personnel but also disrupt the delivery of aid and assistance. Such incidents increase the risks and costs associated with providing food and other forms of humanitarian support, further impacting food security.

Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach involving security interventions, peacebuilding efforts, and sustained support for agricultural development and humanitarian assistance. It is crucial to work towards stabilizing the region, promoting economic opportunities, and enhancing the resilience of local communities to withstand the disruptions caused by groups like Al-Shabaab.

Author: Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Fursad iyo Braarujin

 Fursad iyo Braarujin

Dagaalka ka socdo dalka Ukarine ee u dhaxeeya Russia iyo Ukarine dunida wuxuu ku keenay qal-qal aad ufara badan, ha ahaado dhibaaatada dagaalka, iyo bur bur dhaqaale kaasoo saameyay dunida oo idil.

Ka sokoow burburka dhaqaale wuxuu sababy cunto yari soo wajahday wadama badan, maadaama ay ku tiirsanaayeen wax soo saarka qamadiga iyo saliid ee dalka Ukarine.

Wadama badan ayaa waxeey ku baraarugeen dhibaatada ay leedahay in lagu tiirsanaado wax soo saar wadan kale. Durba waxeey sameeysteen qorshooyin kale oo ay uga maarmi karaan dhibaatadaa cunto yarida ee soo wajahday.

Soomali ahaan nolosheena oo idil waxeey ku tiirsantahy wax dibada laga keeno ama lasoo dhoofiyo bal kawaran 1 wadan uu dagaal ka dhacay saameynta ay wadama awood badan ku yeelatay. Anagu dhibaato intee la eg Ayaan nasoo wajahi karta maadaama nolosheena oo idil wax dibada laga soo dhoofiyo ku xerantahy.

Saliida manta dunida ka yaraatay oo laga sameeyo geedka (sunflower) ka, soomali ahaan lagu magcaaabo Gabal-daye cimilo ahaan waa mid aad ugu haboon kana bixina kara wadankeena. Wuxuuna kamid yahay dhirta ganacsi ahaan looga beerto Somalia (commercial crops)

Waxeeynu heeysanaa fursado ganacsi oo dahabi ah kuwaa oo dhaqaale ahaan kor ugu qaadi karno wadankeena ugana kaaftoomi karno kasoo dhoofiska dibada.

Hadii aan ku tiirsanaanta dibada aan la yeereyn dadku waxeey noqon doonaan kuwa aan awoodin soo iibsadasha walxaha lasoo dhoofiyo, Noloshuna waxeey noqon doontaa mid aad u adag.

Qoraa:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Kala xiriir:- 00905531710490/ 00252615587465/ 00252615206230/ 00252615825475

Cinwan:- crisaaqali@gmail.com

1st International Conference on Sustainable Ecological Agriculture (1 st ICSEA)

 

Waxaan ka qaybgalay (1st International Conference on Sustainable Ecological Agriculture (1 st ICSEA) kaas oo lagu qabtay Konya, Turkiga.

Shirku wuxuu fursad weyn siinayay shirkadaha agabka beeraha, beeraleyda, ganacsatada, ardayda, aqoonyahanada ku sugan adduunka oo dhan si ay u wadaagaan aqoonta iyo waayo-aragnimada ku saabsan baridda iyo cilmi-baarista ee beeraha iyo deegaanka.

Bandhiga Beeraha ee Konya wuxuu martigeliyay 304,855 booqdayaal oo ka kala yimid 101 waddan iyo 72 gobol oo ka tirsab Turkiga wuxuu soconayay muddo 5 maalmood ah iyada oo ay ka qaybgaleen 441 shirkadood iyo wakiillo shirkadeed oo ka kala socda 20 waddan. kuwaasoo soo bandhigayay tiknolijiyadii ugu danbeysay ee loo isticmaalo beeraha

sidoo kale waxaa halkaa laga soo jeediyay in ka badan 200 cilmi baaris oo laga kala sameysay daafaha dunida. Anigoo ka faaideysana cazuumad la ii siiyay waxaa halkaas ka jeediyay (Agricultural Structure in Somalia) hab-qaab dhismeedka beeraha Somalia.

HOGAAMIYE

Ummad walba waxey yeelataa hogaamiyayaal ummadaa u qalma” 

Sababta oo ah hogaamiyaha sidiisaba ummada ayuu ka soo dhaxbaxaa oo sidii roobkii cirka kama soo dhaco. 

Ummad aqoontooda aad u hoseysa oo habka ama nooca hogaamiyayaasha u xushaan ama ku taageraan ay tahay asbaabo aad u liito, sida dhaqaale, xil, kursi, qabiilka iyo wax lamid ah wey adagtahay in ay helaan hogaamiye fiican. 

Dabcan Hogaamiyaha noo qalma anagaa keensanay hadii aanu dooneeyno Hogaamiye wanaagsan waa inaa u marnaa wadooyin aan kuwaan aheen.

Qoraa:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Kala xiriir:- 00905531710490/ 00252615587465/ 00252615206230/ 00252615825475

Cinwan:- crisaaqali@gmail.com

HADALKA XUN

Eeebe subaxaanahu watacaalaa majecla hadalka xun, sidaa daraateed yuusan carrabkaagu baran ku hadalka wax aan wanaagsaneeyn. 

Hadalka xun wuxuu awoodaa inuu si dhaqasi ah ku faafo taasoo dhibaato aduun iyo mid aakhiro kuu horseedi karta. hadalka xumi waxaa awoodaa inaa usheegto sifo wanaagsan. Hadaba Nabigu CSW wuxuu yiri Hadaa hadleysid wax wanaagsan ku hadal ama iska aaamus oo afkaaga qabso.

Qoraa:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Kala xiriir:- 00905531710490/ 00252615587465/ 00252615206230/ 00252615825475

Cinwan:- crisaaqali@gmail.com

QAB IYO QAX

 

QAB IYO QAX

Qabkii mudada badneed lagu maawelinayay Dadka Soomaliyed oo isku badalay ama sababay Qax iyo Qaxooti ayadoo lajoogo Qarnigii 21aad. Dhaqankii Farmaajo wuxuu dhalay in bulshada Soomaalidu aysan ahayn waddaniyiin, in yar oo fara ku tiris ah mooyee, waxaa taas u sii dheer waa duul xiiso badan oo hadba dal cusub u hayaama ama Dal kale ku booba cadaawtooyo dhaxal u noqon doonto Soomalida iyo Jiilka danbe.

Belaayada ugu darran iyo dhibaatada ugu culus ee Maamul ama Madax soo foodsaarta, waxay tahay markay isku dhex yaacdo oo la kala garan-waayo: danta guud iyo danta gaar, nacabka iyo nasteexa, cadowga iyo saaxiibka, shisheeyaha iyo sokeeyaha, wadani iyo muwaadin.

Taariikhdu waa mid dhigan, dhambaaley uruurisaa, dhacdiyo mid la dhowrayoba. Muhiimaddda ugu weyn ee loo diiiwaangeliyo taariikhda, waxay tahay in la barto xumaan iyo samaan wixii dhacay

sooyaalka.

QABKII OO DASTUURKA DALKA IS BADAL KU SAMEEYAY

1. Soomaaliweyn waxuu ku beddelay - Soomaali yar-yar
2. Dimoqoraadiyad waxuu ku beddelay - Digtatooriyad
3. Dan guud waxuu ku beddelay - Dan gaar
4. Gole baarlamaan wuxuu ku badaly - Gole gaabsi
5. Wasiir waxuu ku beddelay - Dilaa-sare
6. Maxkamadihii dastuurka waxuu ku beddelay - Maxkamad farmaajo
7. Siyaasi waxuu ku beddelay - Qabqable
8. Aqoonyahan waxuu ku beddelay - Dagaalyahan
9. Indheergarato waxuu ku beddelay - Afmiishaar
10. Saraakiil waxuu ku beddelay - Rijaalul Seben
11. Ugaas waxuu ku beddelay - Afarjeeble
12. Xeelad waxuu ku beddelay - Xoog
13. Xukun waxuu ku beddelay - Xabad
14. Nabad waxaa beddelay - Colaad

 

GUNAANAD

Nabi MUXAMED-nnkh- wuxuu yiri “qofkii wax wanaagsan jideeya, wuxuu leeyahay ajirkeeda iyo dadka ku raaca ama uga dayda ajirkooda oo kale. Qofkii munkar iyo xumaan jideeya wuxuu helayaa dembigeeda iyo dadka ku raaca ama uga dayda dembigooda oo kale”. Haddaba Kumanaanka CBB ee Farmaajo 4 tiisa sano lagu aas-aasay ajar iyo eedba waxaa loo nisbayn doonaa Kali-Telis Farmaajo

Rag badan ayaa hidde raacay Kali-Telis Farmaajo, waxayna dalka u horseedeen qabyaalad, qalalaase iyo qaranjab. Kali-Telis Farmaajo inuu sababay Qax iyo Qaxooti 2021 waa mucjiso maanka fayow diidan yahay iyo waxaan la sugeyn oo weliba aan la sii saadaalin.

Qoraa:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Kala xiriir:- 00905531710490/ 00252615587465/ 00252615206230/ 00252615825475

Cinwan:- crisaaqali@gmail.com

LAND TENURE IN SOMALIA

 

INTRODUCTION TO LAND TENURE IN SOMALIA

In sub-Saharan Africa, Land is a key challenge for economic development, food security, and poverty reduction. However, in many regions, the land is gradually decreasing due to various pressures, including demographic growth. These pressures have resulted in increased competition for land between different groups such as multiple land users (farmers, shepherds, etc.), the urban elite, and foreign investors. Somalia is a country of vast rangelands, pockets of cultivated agricultural land, and growing urban areas which are governed by a diverse land tenure regime that suffered significant disruptions during the country’s prolonged civil war. The civil war in Somalia is often explained through the lens of clan rivalry and outside interventions,

Somalia occupies a land area of 637,540 square kilometers and only 13% of Somalia’s land is arable, of which only 8% has been cultivated and 98 % is made up of rangelands. Livestock production is the primary economic activity in the country, comprising approximately 50% of the gross domestic products and more than 80% of the export revenue.

About 55% of the national population participates in nomadic pastoralism and 80% is engaged in livestock raising of some kind. The use of land for grazing plays a crucial role in the lives of people and the economy in Somalia since roughly 55% of the Somali population is pastoralist. Pastoralists move seasonally with their livestock depending on the availability of pasture and water. In 2001, Somalia counted about 300 000 internally displaced persons and 264 000 refugees in neighboring countries.

Land is a major contributor to the social and economic development of many countries in Africa. Its long-term management and use have a profound effect on the environment as well.  The livelihoods of millions of people depend on secure and equitable access to land, fisheries, forests, and other natural resources. They are the source of food and shelter, the basis for their social, cultural, and religious practices, and a central factor in economic growth. As cities grow, the demand for food increases, and areas suitable for agriculture diminish. New urban populations seek access to cultivable land, while land values rise as demand for non-agricultural use grows.

In Somalia where the central government has little influence, the mediated state approach can offer an important framework for taking the first steps to reduce conflict and address the land tenure issues that are so closely related to the instability. Even in Somali cities where central government control is strongest and formal statutes have the most sway, there may be a role for a mediated state approach to land tenure.  As noted above, many neighborhoods in urban areas have a particular clan character and clan elders still play a role in governance

LAND TENURE IN SOMALIA

The word tenure derived from a Latin word “TENU” which means “holding of real state” or conditions of occupancy.

Land tenure represents one of the major challenges that farmers face, especially in developing countries. Many small-scale farmers, especially women, work on land that they do not own, exacerbating their poverty, lack of political power, and equal recognition of basic rights.

From the early 1900s until independence in 1960, large tracts of land along the Shebelle River was appropriated for concessionary development and large-scale private production of bananas and sugar. Following the socialist revolution of October 1969 up to 1976, the new government passed as many as 22 laws regulating the agricultural sector (Robleh and Hussen 1977).

Agricultural Crash Program of 1974, which established a program for temporarily allocating land to the government employees and students from agricultural training colleges. Also the Agricultural Land Law of 1975, was created which authorized the government to settle nomads and refugees in riverine areas.

The Agricultural Land Law of 1975 and subsequent decrees are the principal statutes governing statutory tenure. The law asserts state ownership of overall agricultural land but provides for the issuing of concessions to cooperatives, state farms, autonomous agencies, municipal governments, and private farmers.

Policymakers saw modern corporate structures as the solution for Somalia's agricultural decline. The government promoted the establishment of state farms, cooperatives, and large private farms under the rubric of agricultural modernization.

By 1979, 233 group cooperatives controlled nearly 35,000 hectares (ha),and 48 multipurpose cooperatives controlled more than 32,000 ha (Fadal et al 1985).

In 1984, state farms controlled more than 45,000 ha in the Shebelle valley and nearly 25,000 ha in the Jubba. Areas reserved for the Crash program contained 20,000 ha, and for resettlement schemes, another 27,000 ha.

Concessions are limited to one per family or individual. A family or an individual can obtain a concession of up to 30 ha of irrigated land and 60 ha of rainfed land; the ceiling increases to 100 ha for a banana plantation. The duration of the lease is 50 years renewable. State farms, cooperatives, private companies, and other autonomous agencies are exempt from these time and size ceilings.

Authour: Abdirizak Ali Abdullahi

Contact: 00905531710490 / 00252615587465/ 00252615825475/ 00252615206230

Adress: Değirmenaltı Mahallesi, Şht. Zülfükar Tezcan Sk. No: 2, 59030 Tekirdağ Merkez/Tekirdağ Turkey

MAXAA HIRSHABALLOOY KU LA HABOON?

 

Ka sokoow col-shisheeyaha iyo col-kalkaalka ku soo duulay oo gumaadaayo dalka, dadka iyo duunyadii Soomaliyed.

Hadii cod kuu hadla iyo cudud kuu hiilisa ka weyday xubnahaaga kugu matala dawlad-u-yaalka federalka ee aad ka tirsantahay, mid guud iyo mid gaar ahaaneedba.

Hadii dareen kuu damqada aad ka weysay intii badnayd Ugaasyadaadi, Isimadaadi, Imaamyadaadi, Wabaradaadi. Maxaa Hirshaballooy ku la Haboon?

 Maxaa kula haboon? 

• Waxaa ku la haboon inaad ogaato ama garato in maanta maamulkaaga iyo dhulkaaga uusan xor ahayn, dawlad qummanna lahayn oo u adeegta dadkaaga dagan hirshabeelle.
• Waxaa ku la gudboon inaad ogaato in Maamulada wadanka kajira eey gaareen guulo badan ha ahaadaan mid Hormar, mid Dib-uheshiisiin iyo mid Dhaqaale.
• Waxaa kula haboon inaa inaa garato awoodaada cududeed iyo mid dhuleed ee aad ka koobantahay ee hadane adiga iyo isirkaagaba wali dabandaab-yeentaada lagula howlanyahay.
• Waxaa ku la haboon inaad ogaato, haddii aadan yeelan maamul, Dib-uheshiisiin, kaladambayn iyo hoggaan fiican, inaadan dadkaaga iyo mid kale toona wax tari doonin.
• Waxaa ku la haboon inaad aruuriso awooddaada oo aad si habaysan u hawlgasho, waxaa hubaal ah inaad cadawgaaga iska difaaci doontid, Maamulkaaga iyo dadkiisana wax weyn tari doonto.
• Waxaa ku la haboon inaad ogaatid haddii aadan gudahaaga ka abaabulin kaladambayn, is-tixgelin iyo ku-midaysnaanta danta guud, waxaa hubaal ah in liidashada aad hada kujirto lagugu haadsan doono, dadkaaguna silic, saxariir iyo kala xirnaashaha kusii waari doonaan.

HABACSANAAN IYO HORMAR LA ISKUMA HELO

Qoraa:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Kala xiriir:- 00905531710490/ 00252615587465/ 00252615206230/ 00252615825475

Cinwan:- crisaaqali@gmail.com

ASTAAMAHA SIYAASIGA SOOMALIGA

 

ASTAAMAHA SIYAASIGA SOOMALIGA

Siyaasiinta Soomaalida

Guud ahaan siyaasiga  waa saddex nooc:

1.      Mid cunno ah

2.      Mid daawo ah

3.      Mid sun ah.

Kan cunnada ah waa Hoggaamiyaha/ Siyaasiga mar walba loo baahan yahay, oo bulshadiisa anfaco maalin walba sidii cunnada oo kale.

Kan daawada ah waa Hoggaamiyaha/ Siyaasiga xalka looga baahdo markay dhibtu timaaddo sida daawada oo kale.

Kan sunta ahina waa Hoggaamiyaha/ Siyaasiga shacabka walaalaha ah kala dilo, oo qaarna ka dhigo kuwo eeganaya kaalmo shisheeye, qaar kalena ka dhigo kuwo qurbaha qaxooti ku ah.

 

Astaamaha Siyaasiga Soomaalida

    Waa eedayn iyo dhaleecayn badan yahay, isagoon tusaale loo qaateena keeni karin, buu jecel yahay inuu cambaareeyo oo eedna dusha uga tuuro madaxdii hore

Waa xaflado badan yahay, isagoon waxyeello mooyee aan waxtar laga arag.

waa qudbada badan yahay, hadane mlaha oraaho laga xigto ama halhaysyo waayaha dambe halhays noqda

Waa cabanayaa, gooddinaya oo cartamayaa, sidaasna waxay la tahay inuu garawsho ku heli doono

Waxa uu sheegtaa Aqoon-yahannimo, hadane hab-dhaqankiisana aqoon ka ma muuqato

Waa tuug soo jabay haddana wuxuu u dhaqmaa sidii isagoo dhawrsan

Wuxuu cuskadaa awoodda qolodiisa, ama qabiilkiisa haddana qolana wax ma taro

Sidii isagoo waddani ah buu u murmaa, haddana waa dhagar-qabe aan ka gabbanayn waxyeellaynta dalka iyo dadka.

 

Qoraa:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Kala xiriir:- 00905531710490/ 00252615587465/ 00252615206230/ 00252615825475

Cinwan:- crisaaqali@gmail.com

IMTIXAAN NATIIJADIISA SANADO LASUGAYO

Waligaa imtixaan inaa gashay natiijadiisa masugtay 2 sano?

Waa Qiso aan kasameeyay dhamaan dhalinta kusugan wadanka somalia.

Waxaan kudhashay oo aan kusoo bar baaaray magaalada muqdisho. Waxbrashii dugsiga hoose iyo dhaxe waxaa kusoo qaatay magaalada Muqdisho ayadoo jirto xaalad adag oo dagaaladu daqiiqad walba la filan karo. Sidoo kale dugsigeeygii sare waxaan kusoo qaatay isla magaalada Muqdisho.

Xaalka aad ayuu u adkaa noloshu waxeey aheeyd mid cakiran mararka qaar imtixaanaadku masaajid ayaa ku gali jirnay. İnaad nabad kusoo laabato waxeey aheeyd wax aad u yar.

Waalidkeyga markeey baxayaan weey dar daarmi jireen Qofka baxaa inuu nolol kusoo laabto waxeey aheeyd %30.

Dhibkasta oo dhaca marnaba uma deeynin waxbrashadeeydi ilaaa Heer jaamacadeed aan gaaro. Wadanka dib buu usoo hagaagay.

Waxaa si nabad ah kudhameystay Waxbrashada Heerkii koowaad ee jaamacada waliba Jaamacad kamid ah jaamacadaha ugu tayada badan wadanka.

Waxaa raadis ugalay Shaqo iyo inaa Helo mirahii aan rafaadka badan usoo maray waliba xaalada adag aan usoo maray.

Nasiib darro Qof iyo garab midna maan heeysan oo igu caawiyo shaqo maadaama shaqadii wadanka kajirtay ay tahay Qolo- Qolo.

Waxaan aaminsanaa hadii si cadaalad ah shaqaalaha loo qaato inaaa heli lahaa shaqadii aan rabay. Balse kama quusan oo shaqa kasta oo lasoo bandhigo waaan xareeysan jiray.

Waxaan imtixaan ugalay in kabadan 20 shaqo oo aan Short list kusoo baxay, Balse jawaab kama helin in aan ku guuleeystay iyo in aan kudhacay imtixaanadaas.

Hada oo laga joogo 2 sano imtixaanadaas Wali jawaab kama helin balse kama quusan oo waan sugaa jwbta imtixaanadaas.

Waligaaa inaa imtixaan gashay natiijadiisa masugtay waqti intaa la eg.

Jawaabta aad filaneeyso waa nuucee?

Mahadsanidiiin.

Fikradii:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Qoraa:- Abdirizak Ali Tajir

Kala xiriir:- 00905531710490/ 00252615587465/ 00252615206230/ 00252615825475

Cinwan:- crisaaqali@gmail.com

AGRICULTURAL POLICIES APPLIED LIVESTOCK IN TURKEY

T.C

TEKİRDAĞ NAMIK KEMAL ÜVİVERSİTY

Faculty of Agriculture

Department of Agricultural Economics

AGRICULTURAL POLICIES APPLIED LIVESTOCK IN TURKEY

Abdirizak ALI ABDULLAHI’

crisaaqali@gmail.com

2019

Abstract

             Livestock products are an important source of household income for many farmers and households in rural areas. For small farmers, livestock products such as cattle, generate income and ensure food security for these households because an important amount of their incomes comes from the sales of animal and milk In this study, it has been examined the relationship between developments of Turkish livestock production for the last ten years and supports given to livestock production. Although there is a significant potential in terms of the number of animals, yields obtained those animals are low.  The main factor is the devaluation of the currency. The currency fluctuation and devaluation is difficult for importers, including the Turkish Milk and Meat Board as they are importing cattle in dollars and selling on the local market in Turkish Lira (TL). Changing which is started in 2000 in Turkish agriculture policies has taken back the livestock production sector. The import of cattle reached in 2-17 113.566 heads 2.244 $ per head and reached 254.793.487 million dollars. Current findings revealed that the share of agriculture in the total budget was quite low compared to other sectors and such a share did not change much despite the continuous changes in agricultural and support policies. Considering the distribution of the supports based on types, it was observed that the increase in livestock supports and subsidiary payments made especially to supply-deficit products were considered as positive outcomes of implemented support policies. In the livestock sector such as cattle production is low In order to improve it is important to develop management and maintain support policies for the livestock sector. Livestock sector in turkey needs to turn to the construction and improvement of permanent end sustainable-sized enterprises.

 

Keywords: Livestock, milk production, meat production, consumption, import, export, support payment, policy

Introduction

            The Turkish livestock sector has considerable potential and is an important part of the agricultural sector and the economy. Livestock constitutes approximately 25% of the value of all agricultural production and contributes to the economic development of rural households. The establishment of the Republic of Turkey today, the presence of animals showed significant changes. From the first years of the Republic to the Second World War, there was a significant numerical increase. In the war years, the rate of increase has fallen and even some species have decreased. In the period following the end of the war, the numerical increase accelerated, and the highest numerical values were reached between 1960-1980 depending on the species. In the 1980s, the number of animals in all species began to decrease rapidly (Akbay & Boz, 2019).

            Livestock products are an important source of household income for many farmers and households in rural areas. For small farmers, livestock products such as cattle, generate income and ensure food security for these households because an important amount of their incomes comes from the sales of animals and milk (Akbay & Boz, 2019).

The livestock sector in turkey

            The world cattle inventory in 2018 is at 1.002 billion head. Are shown in Table (1.0) roughly 63% of the world's cattle are in India, Brazil & China.  (The cattle inventory in India includes water buffalo). Turkey is one of the ten largest cattle-producing countries due to the ranking of countries in 2018.

Table (1.0) shows World cattle inventory: Ranking of Countries

World cattle inventory: Ranking of Countries Rank Country % Of  World 1 India 30.44% 2 Brazil 23.19% 3 China 9.67% 4 United State 9.42% 5 EU 8.83% 6 Argentina 5.37% 7 Australia 2.55% 8 Russia 1.83% 9 Mexico 1.66% 10 Turkey 1.45%

   USDA: 2018

 The livestock sector in Turkey, which plays an important role in adequate and balanced nutrition of people; to increase national income and employment, to provide raw materials for meat, milk, textile, leather, cosmetic and pharmaceutical industries, to contribute to the development and to increase foreign exchange revenues through export. 

Livestock is essential for both human nutrition and agricultural industries. Hence, governments often apply some support policies in order to develop profitable livestock husbandry and a better life. Although the governments applied some statist support policies until 1980, some public support policies have started to be applied after this year. In the following table (2.0) and graph (1.0) we will see protein production and consumption for an animal in some countries respectively (NEWS, 2018) (Ertürk & Orhan, Livestock Support Policies In Turkey Since 2000, 2015).

Table (2.0) shows protein production in some countries

Country	Herbal Protein (G / person / day)	Animal Protein (G / person / day)	Total Protein (G / person / day)	Animal Protein Rate (%)
EU Countries	43	60	104	58
African countries	53	16	69	23
Turkey	72	36	108	34

Source: FAO

Graph 1.0 shows Protein Consumption Per Capita

Large animals in turkey (cattle)

            According to FAO data, there were 1,426,064,857 cattle in the world by 2013. The three biggest producers in the world were Brazil (211.8 million), India (189 million), and China (113.6 million). In terms of cattle presence France, Germany, and England were the leading countries in the EU. Turkey was the 7^th in the world and 2nd in the EU for cattle existence (FAO, 2016).  The number of cattle in Turkey was around 14.4 million, 42.6% was cross-bred, 43.4% was culture race and 14.0% was a native race (TURKSTAT, 2016).  The cattle number estimate for 2019 is expected to be 15.8 million head which is only four percent higher than 2018 due to several factors. The main factor is the devaluation of the currency. The currency fluctuation and devaluation is difficult for importers, including the Turkish Milk and Meat Board (an affiliated body to the Turkish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry), as they are importing cattle in dollars and selling on the local market in Turkish Lira (TL).  As shown in graph (2.0) the production of cattle in turkey between 1960-1980 increased while 1990-2010 decreased because of some droughts and challenges faced by livestock production. In 2017 reached 15.944 million heads of cattle are produced. Nowadays, livestock sector; feed industry, meat, and products industry, milk, and products industry, leather and textile industries, veterinary drugs and livestock equipment industries, etc. components create new employment areas and create added value by processing animal products (Ertürk & Orhan, 2015).

Turkey's 1991 total of 11 million 973 thousand which is 11% of culture breeds of cattle, 34% hybrid race, while the 55% are indigenous breeds 49% of the culture breeds of a total of 16 million head of cattle in 2017 41% are cross-breed and 10% are indigenous. There are some differences according to the years.

Table 3.0 shows annual turkey assets from (1991 to 2017)

Years Cattle Culture Cattle-culture hybrid Cattle-Indigenous Total 1991 1.253.865 4.033.375 6.685.683 11.972.923 1995 1.702.000 4.776.000 5.311.000 11.789.000 2000 1.806.000 4.738.000 4.217.000 10.761.000 2005 2.354.957 4.537.998 3.633.485 10.526.440 2010 4.197.890 4.707.188 2.464.722 11.369.800 2011 4.836.547 5.120.621 2 429 169 9.957.168 2012 5.679.484 5.776.028 2.459.400 13.914.912 2013 5.954.333 6.112.437 2.348.487 14.415.257 2014 6.178.757 6.060.937 1.983.415 14.223.109 2015 6.385.343 5.733.803 1.874.925 13.994.071 2016 6.588.527 5.758.336 1.733.292 14.080.155 2017 7.804.588 6.536.073 1.602.925 15.943.586

TURKSTAT

      According to (TAPKI, KAYA, TAPKI, DAĞISTAN, ÇİMRİN, & SELVİ, 2018) In Turkey, Cattle Culture, Cattle-culture hybrid, Cattle-Indigenous are found in the presence of cattle which constitute 98.99% of the cattle. According to the data of 2017 in total cattle, the rate of cattle breeding was 48.95% while the ratio of the crossbreed cattle was determined as 40,99% and the rate of domestic breed cattle was 10,06%. When the years are examined, the rate of culture breed cattle is increasing gradually between 2002 and 2017, and the proportion of domestic race cattle is gradually decreasing. While the proportional shares of the hybrid breed cattle are declining between the years 2002-2017, the decrease in domestic breed cattle is faster (Table 3). Indigenous breeds of cattle are abandoned by culture breed the increase in cattle milk and meat yield of these races to be very low compared to culture races, more animals are grown in the pasture is due to the low size of small and carcass weights and the fact that animal husbandry is mostly done in closed system barns. (TAPKI, KAYA, TAPKI, DAĞISTAN, ÇİMRİN, & SELVİ, 2018) The difference increasing and decreasing between 1991 and 2017 in Cattle Culture, Cattle-culture hybrid, Cattle-Indigenous are shown in the following graph (3.0).

Graph 3.0 show comparisons of cattle between in 1991 and 2017 

TURKSTAT

Livestock milk production in Turkey

The amount of milk production was around 768.6 million tons in the world by 2013, and 635.6 million tons of that was cows’ milk. Turkey is among the 10 largest milk producers in the world. Dairy products have an important role in the Turkish diet. Consumption level of liquid milk is very low; the most common form of milk consumption is yogurt, followed by white cheese (feta type) and Ayran, a liquid salted milk drink.   When analyzed according to the number of animals milked a year in Turkey is the total number of animals per milking 20.699.894, while the number of milking cattle is 18.831.720 million tonnes. Although the rate of cattle in the animals is low, 90.64% of the milk production is obtained from bovine animals. Total raw milk production in 2017 amounted 20.7 million tons and 18.8 million ton of them comes from cattle are shown in Table (4.0). Turkey ranks in 10th place among the world milk producers. Approximately 91-92 % of the total raw milk production is cow’s milk production (ÇEVİK, 2018).

When examined between 2002-2017 years milk production in Turkey seems to rise to 20,699,894 tons of total milk production of 8,408,568 tons. Total milk production is composed of cattle and sheep. However, more than 90% of milk production is obtained from bovine animals. This share has not changed much since the years examined. Cattle that are milked consist of cattle and latches. The milk yields obtained from animals were examined by years. Milk productivity increased by 84.6% between 2002 and 2017 (ÇEVİK, 2018). While the lactation milk yield per animal was 1.705 kg in 2002, it reached 3.148 kg in 2017. This is due to the high milk yield, improvements in nutrition and housing conditions. When milk yield per animal was examined, it was observed that milk yields varied between 980 kg and 1000 kg per year (Table 4.0).

Table 4.0 shows milk production from 2002 to 2017
years	Total milk production (tonnes)	Cattle milk production (tonnes)	Rate (%)
2002	8.408.568	7.541.555	89,69
2003	10.611.011	9.562.916	90,12
2004	10.679.407	9.648.605	90,35
2005	11.107.897	10.064.260	90,60
2006	11.952.100	10.903.660	91,22
2007	12.329.789	11.309.715	91,73
2008	12.243.040	11.286.598	92,19
2009	12.542.186	11.615.756	92,61
2010	13.543.674	12.454.031	91,95
2011	15.056.211	13.842.800	91,94
2012	17.401.262	16.024.827	92,09
2013	18.223.712	16.706.956	91,68
2014	18.630.859	17.053.653	91,53
2015	18.654.682	16.996.271	91,11
2016	18.489.161	16.849.348	91,13
2017	20.699.894	18.831.720	90,97

Graph 4.0 shows total milk production

Livestock meat production in Turkey

            Red meat production, which was 329.25 thousand tons in 2002, increased by more than 1 million tonnes with an increase of 49.29% in 2017 compared to 2002. (Table 5.0). The number of slaughtered cattle increased by 103.03% in 2017 compared to 2002, according to the index values fluctuating between the years 2002-2017. The number of slaughtered buffaloes decreased to 60.56% in 2017 as a result of 2002. The total number of slaughtered cattle increased by 107%. (ÇEVİK, 2018)The number of buffaloes cut increased by 55.49% in 2010 and remained behind 2002 in other years (Table 5.0).

            Utilized in various ways, by cutting the number of cattle in Turkey is given in Table 5.0. The number of slaughtered cattle increased by 103.03% in 2017 compared to 2002, according to the index values fluctuating between the years 2002-2017. The number of slaughtered buffaloes decreased to 60.56% in 2017 as a result of 2002. The total number of slaughtered cattle increased by 107%. The number of buffaloes cut increased by 55.49% in 2010 and remained behind 2002 in other years (Table 8). The share of cattle in red meat production is given in Table 9. The share of cattle in total red meat production was 87.79% in 2017. This rate fluctuates a little though by years. The remaining 12.21% share belongs to small ruminant animals and the meat production from bovine animals is about 7 times higher than the meat products obtained from bovine animals. Proportionally 99, 86’s% of red meat derived from beef cattle in Turkey belongs. (Ertaş & Orhan, 2018) This ratio has not changed significantly since 2002-2017. In 2017, meat production was low compared to 2016 and 2017, mainly due to red meat imports. In our country, buffalo meat production has a very low share in total meat production (ÇEVİK, 2018).

Table 5.0; the amount of red meat production of the large animals in Turkey (ton)

Years	Beef meet	Rate (%)	Buffalo meat	Rate (%)	Total red meat production	Rate(%)
2002	327.629	99,51	1630	0,49	329.259	100,00
2003	290.454	99,42	1709	0,58	292.163	100,00
2004	365	99,47	1950	0,53	366.95	100,00
2005	321.681	99,51	1577	0,49	323.258	100,00
2006	340.705	99,48	1774	0,52	342.479	100,00
2007	432.406	99,54	1989	0,46	434.395	100,00
2008	370.619	99,64	1334	0,36	371.953	100,00
2009	325.286	99,69	1005	0,31	326.291	100,00
2010	618.584	99,46	3387	0,54	621.971	100,00
2011	644.906	99,75	1615	0,25	646.521	100,00
2012	799.344	99,78	1736	0,22	801.08	100,00
2013	869.292	99,95	366	0,04	869.658	100,00
2014	881.999	99,94	526	0,06	882.525	100,00
2015	1.014.926	99,97	326	0,03	1.015.252	100,00
2016	1.059.195	99,97	351	0,03	1.059.546	100,00
2017	987.482	99,86	1.339	0,14	988.821	100,00

Source; Anonim, 2017b

Cattle price in Turkey

            Animal product efficiency is an important factor in the price formation of bovine animals. The price of an average culture animal is much higher than that of hybrid and domestic animals (28% and 59%, respectively) are shown in the graph (5.0). In Turkey, animal prices are on an upward trend. In the 2013-2017 periods, the average annual price increase was 15% in culture animals and 16% in hybrid animals. In the same period, the increase in domestic animal prices displayed a more stable outlook and was realized like 18%. It is thought that this situation is caused by the sacrifice of animal market dynamics that do not hear the pressure of import and that the demand progresses regularly (ÇEVİK, 2018).

Graph 5.0 shows cattle prices in Turkey from 2013 -2017 periods

This year, the producers do not earn a profit from the sales of the defending the Bronze, "Prices of bovines are nearly the same as last year's prices. Producer this year, crushed under input costs." found in the evaluation. There is a problem with the presence of sacrificial animals. Describing the animals should be preferred when the hair is smooth, eyes bright and over two years of age, said that all the limbs of the sacrificial animals should be in place. Information about sacrificial prices, "Bovine animal prices starting from 7 thousand pounds, 15 thousand pounds are reached. Every year in Turkey 3.5 million animals (approximately 950,000 head of cattle, 2.5 million of sheep) are slaughtered for the sacrifice holiday. If total animal numbers are taken into consideration, this amount to about eight percent of the total population is sent to sacrifice holiday per year. While the price of live weight cattle was 28 TL ($8) per kg last year, the current price has increased 35 TL ($10) in 2017 due to the continued high feed prices and other increasing costs (Oktay, 2018).

Consumption

According to TURKSTAT data, in 2016, the average price of beef meat increased by 7% compared to the previous year and was realized as 38.42 TL.  In 2017, it increased by 8% compared to the previous year. In 2017, the price of veal consumers increased by 8% compared to the previous year and rose by 41.63 TL / kg.  While Dana carcass prices were 18, 07 TL / kg in 2014, 26, 21 TL / kg and Lamb Carcass Prices increased by 38% to 27, 28 TL / kg in 2017 with a 45% increase (Oktay, 2018).

Table 6: Turkey Meat and Meat Products Consumer Prices (TL / kg)

Products	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017
Dana Eti	15,32	17,36	24,14	23,27	23,80	24,66	28,43	35,82	38,42	41,63
Sucuk	24,87	26,50	32,93	33,45	34,80	37,76	43,84	51,05	53,68	57,66
Salam	20,21	21,46	25,35	27,59	27,59	29,21	33,64	40,16	38,52	37,19
Sosis	19,63	20,17	22,45	25,73	27,83	29,25	32,88	33,10	34,55	37,96

Source: TÜİK

            There is a reference base price application in the dairy market where informality is high. The relevant application is the determining factor in the course of consumer prices. During the period of July 2014-December 2016, the fixed reference price of milk at the level of 1.15 TL / liter has been gradually increased in the following periods and it has been determined as 1.70 TL / liter from August 2018 (Zübeyir, Dilek, & Kezban, 2017).

In parallel with the reference price, milk prices, which remained relatively flat until 2017, turned their upward trend in the recent period due to increased feed costs. As of August 2018, domestic milk prices increased by 20.9%. The milk/feed parity show how large milk producers can buy milk for 1 kg of milk. According to the data published by the Meat and Milk Institute (ESK), the profit margin of the milk producers displayed a positive outlook in the first quarter of 2018 but decreased significantly in recent months due to higher feed prices (Mehmet, 2016). 

Cattle Import and Export in Turkey

            Turkey in 2017 import 113.566 head of cattle with 254.793.487 million dollars, at 2.244$ per cattle. And imports of live animals closely by investors in evaluating the current growers to enter the market are shown in Table 7.0. Sector officials state that the animals supplied from abroad are about 300 kg and the cost is around 4 dollars/kg. While it takes 6 months for the animals to reach the feeder, the breeders usually make the payment via the spot exchange in the delivery. The daily feed requirement of bovine animals is 2% of the total body weight. Animals brought from abroad are sent to slaughter between 6-8 months (Zübeyir, Dilek, & Kezban, 2017). In this process, industry officials stated that the animal weight of the animals reached 550 kilos and 300 kg of carcass meat production per animal was targeted. The price of cattle that can be imported into 4.380 TL in 2017 is increasing due to the depreciation of TL. Moreover, the increasing volatility in exchange rates increases the exchange rate risk that producers are exposed to due to payments made at the spot exchange rate at the date of delivery of imported animals, and it makes the predictability of costs difficult. Turkey imports within the framework of the declining profit margins in the industry based on agriculture and livestock policies followed and therefore manufacturers are increasing capital needs. Considering that the inputs are priced at the exchange rate and the sales are made with TL, concerns regarding the sustainability of the production model applied in the current conjuncture are raised. On the other hand, it is observed that most of the producers do not take measures against currency risk (Zübeyir, Dilek, & Kezban, 2017).

Table 7.0 Turkey's Cattle Imports and Exports

Years         Export Quantity  (head) Import Quantity (head)   Exports (USD) Imports (USD) Imports (USD /  Head) 2000 0 2.695 0 3.238.192 1.202 2001 0 290 0 829.52 2.86 2003 0 2.127 0 3.272.729 1.539 2004 1 0 184 0 0 2005 0 1.579 0 3.135.607 1.986 2006 0 483 0 1.165.806 2.414 2007 0 3.854 0 6.625.418 1.719 2008 0 5.393 0 16.417.761 3.044 2009 0 4.01 0 13.306.818 3.318 2010 0 19.928 0 65.544.857 3.289 2011 0 78.565 0 292.952.534 3.729 2012 0 48.702 0 163.824.429 3.364 2013 319 31.873 1.120.080 102.182.831 3.206 2014 540 23.676 1.948.050 71.878.355 3.036 2015 9 48.595 51.32 133.329.302 2.744 2016 0 64.126 0 169.120.707 2.637 2017 0 113.6 0 254.793.487 2.244

Source: TURKSTAT

Livestock support in Turkey

            The livestock sector having considerably high added-value has been tried to be supported via various policies from 1923 to the present time. When compared to vegetative production industry in the past, desired goals for livestock could not be achieved because livestock supports are not continuous, do not have adequate infrastructure for applying supply policies and accordingly, problems of livestock could not be eliminated (Ertürk & Orhan, Livestock Support Policies In Turkey Since 2000, 2015). Livestock was not imported because the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs did not issue the control certificate for livestock and meat import since 26.8.1996 on the account of the fact that “foot and mouth disease existed in Turkey and health of imported animals could not be protected because of the illness in Turkey. Tools of agricultural support to be used until 2010 are Direct Income Support (DIS), Deficiency Payments, Compensatory Payments (Farmer Transition), Livestock Support (fodder crops, artificial insemination, breeder incentive, milk premium, risk-free livestock region, bee-keeping, fisheries) (Ertürk & Orhan, Livestock Support Policies In Turkey Since 2000, 2015).

Support payments of livestock

            Table 8.0 illustrates that agricultural support between 2000 and 2017 reached 4 billion dollars from 1.48 billion dollars by increasing 4 times in 2000. On the other hand, livestock supports increased to 1.16 billion dollars from 19 million dollars by increasing 60 times. While the rate of increase in livestock supports compared to the previous year.

Table 8.0 Total agricultural support payments and livestock supports * (Anonymous, 2017)

Years Total  agricultural Supports (Million  TL) Livestock support (million TL) Increase rate of agricultural supports compared to the previous year (%) Increase rate of livestock supports compared to the previous year (%) 2001 1.032 49 0.1 0.76 2002 2.276 75 0.55 0.35 2003 3.105 126 0.27 0.4 2004 3.084 209 -0.01 0.4 2005 3.708 345 0.17 0.39 2006 4.793 661 0.23 0.48 2007 5.643 741 0.15 0.11 2008 5.864 1.095 0.04 0.32 2009 4.749 908 -0.23 -0.21 2010 5.947 1.158 0.2 0.22 2011 7.085 1.728 0.16 0.33 2012 7.673 2.216 0.08 0.22 2013 8.774 2.756 0.13 0.2 2014 9.599 2.887 0.09 0.05 2015 10.141 2.953 0.05 0.02 2016 11.6 3.001 1.459 0.04 2017 12.8 3.793 1.2 0.79  * Complied by authors. ** With current prices Figure 7.0 illustrates payments of agricultural and livestock supports. It was observed that supports were in an increasing trend despite decreases in 2009 and 2017. Graph 7.0; shows the difference between Agricultural support and livestock support in recent years

 Figure 7.0 – Total agricultural supports and livestock supports (Anonymous, 2017)

            Annual increase rates for total agricultural supports and livestock supports from these supports were compared in Figure 3. The annual increase rate for livestock supports increased at a higher level compared to total agricultural supports. But, it can be asserted that I have followed a parallel trend since 2009 when a negative increase was observed compared to the previous year. Although the share of livestock supports increased to 30% after 2010, the rate of increase has shown a gradually decreasing structure as from 2011. Graph 10; shows an increasing rate of Agricultural support and livestock support in recent years (Sinem, 2017).

Figure 8.0– increase rate of agricultural and livestock supports compared to the previous year

 Result

            The livestock sector has an important place in Turkey and as with the whole world in terms of the sufficient and balanced nutrition of the growing population and its use as a raw material for many fields.  However, unlike other sectors, the livestock sector contributes to the economy of the country because it has many sectors and it also provides a solution to the social problems of the country. Through livestock production from 2000 up to the present day; measures for environmental protection have been put into practice along with supports regarding meat quality, marketing support, modernization of livestock enterprise.

            Current findings revealed that the share of agriculture in the total budget was quite low compared to other sectors and such a share did not change much despite the continuous changes in agricultural and support policies. Considering the distribution of the supports based on types, it was observed that the increase in livestock supports and subsidiary payments made especially to supply-deficit products were considered as positive outcomes of implemented support policies.

q  Although there is significant potential in terms of the number of animals, yields obtained from those animals are low.

q  According to 2000-2017 data from the Turkish Statistical Institute, the number of livestock and production of animal products responded to support policies and thus increased and policies were successful even though they were not sufficient enough to meet the demand of the increasing population.

q  The fact that changes in production are supersensitive to changes in supports indicates structural problems of livestock establishments have continued.

Conclusion 

            In the livestock sector such as cattle production is low In order to improve it is important to develop management and maintain support policies for the livestock sector. The livestock sector in turkey needs to turn to the construction and improvement of permanent end sustainable-sized enterprises.

Reference

A. C., & B. I. (2019). Turkey's livestock sector: Production, consumption and policies. Livestock Research for Rural Development.

ÇEVİK, B. (2018). BÜYÜKBAŞ HAYVANCILIK SEKTÖRÜ. Türkiye İş Bankası.

Ertaş, N., & O. D. (2018). 1991 Sonrasında Van’da Küçükbaş Hayvancılığın Gelişim Seyri ve Sorunları. TÜCAUM 30. Yıl Uluslararası Coğrafya Sempozyumu.

Ertürk, Y. E., & O. Y. (2015). Livestock Support Policies In Turkey Since 2000. 6th International Scientific Agricultural Symposium "Agrosym 2015", 15-18 October 2015. The University of East Sarajevo, Faculty of Agriculture, Jahorina, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Ertürk, Y. E., & O. Y. (2015). Livestock Support Policies In Turkey Since 2000. International Scientific Agricultural Symposium.

M. H. (2016). Agricultural Support Policies and Public Budgeting in Turkey. Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Livestock, Ankara, Turkey.

NEWS, D. (2018, February 07 ). animal, livestock, meat, food, Ahmet Eşref Fakıbaba, Fakıbaba .

O. G. (2018). TÜRKİYE BÜYÜKBAŞ HAYVANCILIK SEKTÖRÜNÜN AB ÜLKELERİ İLE KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ANALİZİ. ResearchGate .

S. D. (2017). Turkey Livestock and Products Annual Report 2017. Ankara: GAIN Report Number.

TAPKI, N., KAYA, A., TAPKI, İ., DAĞISTAN, E., ÇİMRİN, T., & SELVİ, M. H. (2018). Türkiye’de Büyükbaş Hayvancılığın Durumu ve Yıllara Göre Değişimi. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Mustafa Kemal University , 324-339.

Z. T., D. Ş., & K. Ö. (2017). TÜRKİYE’DE HAYVANCILIK SEKTÖRÜNDEN SÜT İNEKÇİLİĞİNİN ÖNEMİ VEYURT İÇİHASILAYAKATKISI VE DEDIŞÜLKELERLEKARŞILAŞTIRILMASI. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi , 60-74.

 Authour: Abdirizak Ali Abdullahi

Contact: 00905531710490 / 00252615587465/ 00252615825475/ 00252615206230
Email:  crisaaqali@gmail.com

Adress: Değirmenaltı Mahallesi, Şht. Zülfükar Tezcan Sk. No: 2, 59030 Tekirdağ Merkez/Tekirdağ Turkey