The impact of IPARD supports on structural and managerial features of dairy enterprises in Afyonkarahisar province

DOI: 10.18805/ijar.v0iOF.6987    | Article Id: B-582 | Page : 151-156
Citation :- The impact of IPARD supports on structural and managerial featuresof dairy enterprises in Afyonkarahisar province .Indian Journal Of Animal Research.2018.(52):151-156

Mehmet Yardimci, Hikmet Ari and Recep Aslan

yardimcinku@gmail.com
Address :

Namik Kemal University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Tekirdag.

Submitted Date : 19-07-2016
Accepted Date : 21-10-2016

Abstract

A survey was carried out to determine the impact of IPARD supports on dairy enterprises in Afyonkarahisar. IPADR beneficiary group found to have 3-5 years of experience, university graduate owners with no extra income where records are kept and statistical analysis is performed. Non-beneficiary group was more experienced with less educated owners, half had an extra income but did not keep records and not perform statistical analysis. In the first group, average daily milk yield was 25 liters, calves were weaned at 90 days, automatic milking system was used, hoof care was regularly performed, manure was removed by scrapers, teats were cleaned before and after milking while in the second group average daily milk yield is 10-30 liters, calves were weaned between 30-90 days, mobile milking machines were used, hoof care was slightly performed, manure was collected manually, teats were cleaned before milking. Consequently, IPARD grants were useful for improving the production quality, hygiene and amount in dairy enterprises.

Keywords

Dairy Farm Grant Milk yield Rural development.

References

  1. Anonymous (2013). EU Dairy Farms report (2013) based on FADN data. European Commission.
  2. Anonymous (2007). Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance Rural Development (IPARD) Programme (2007-2013). Republic of Turkey Ministry of Food Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Turkey.
  3. Anonymous (2014). Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance Rural Development (IPARD) Programme (2014-2020). Republic of Turkey Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock, Turkey. 
  4. Curabaz A and Kayaalp GT (2009). Study of Dairy Cattle Enterprises in the Province of Adana. MSc. Thesis, Çukurova University, Inst of Sci and Tech, Adana, Turkey.
  5. Demir P, Aral Y and Sariözkan S. (2014). Socio-Economic Structure and Production Costs of Dairy Cattle Farms in Kars Province. Van Vet J, 25: 1-6.
  6. Denli M, Sessiz A and Tutkun M (2013). A Project on the General Structure and Care-Nutrition Methods of the Dairy Enterprises in Diyarbakir. TRC2/13/DFD/0023, Diyarbakir.
  7. Elmaz Ö, Sipahi C, Saatci M and Özçelik Metin M (2012). Current trends in dairy cattle farming in the Mediterranean region of Turkey. Outlook on Agriculture, 41: 133–138.
  8. Gülçubuk B, Köksal Ö and Ataseven Y (2016). Assessments of Rural Development Supports at the National Level: Research Results Related to Projects of Agriculture and Rural Development Support Institution (ARDSI). XII. National Agricultural Finance Congress, 25-27 May, Isparta.
  9. Ivanov B (2007). Problems and Opportunities for the Milk Sector in Bulgaria. Bulg J Agric Sci, 13: 85-98
  10. Koçyigit R, Diler A, Yanar M, Güler O, Aydin R and Avci M (2015). Structural Characteristics of Cattle Enterprises in Hinis County of Erzurum Province: Farm Management and Calf Rearing Practices. Igdir Univ. J Inst Sci & Tech 5: 85-97.
  11. Masuku BB and Masuku MB (2014). Technical and Allocative Efficiency of Smallholder Dairy Farmers in Swaziland. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 5: 1-9.
  12. Nizam, S (2006). Determining the Efficiency of the Dairy Enterprises towards Marketting in Aydin Province. MSc Thesis, Adnan Menderes University, Department of Agricultural Economy, Institute of Science and Technology, Aydin.
  13. O’Brien B, Shalloo L, O’Donnell S, Butler AM, Gleeson D, O’Donovan K (2006). Labour and economic aspects of dairy farming. 57th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Animal Production, Antalya (Turkey), September 17-20.
  14. Önal AR and Özder M (2008). Structural Characteristic of the Dairy Farms That Members of Cattle Breeders Associations in Edirne. J Tekirdag Agri Fac, 5: 197-203. 
  15. Rahman S and Gupta J (2015). Knowledge and adoption level of improved dairy farming practices of SHG members and non-members in Kamrup district of Assam, India. Indian J Anim Res, 49: 234-240.
  16. Soyak A, Soysal MI and Gürcan EK (2007). In Investigation of Structural Properties of Dairy Enterprises and Morphologic Characteristics of Black and White Cattle in Tekirdag Province. J Tekirdag Agri Fac, 4: 297-305.
  17. Weindlmaier H (2004). The consequences of changing conditions of the European Dairy Sector for the strategies of dairy companies. Acta Agriculturae Slovenica, 84: 63–80.
  18. Wille-Sonk S and Lassen B (2012). European Dairy Farmers: More Than 20 Years of International Comparisons and Knowledge Exchange. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych, Seria G, T. 99, 1.
     

Global Footprints