Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Comparative Analysis of Cost and Profitability in the Irrigated and Non-irrigated Chestnut Farming: Case of Aydin Province, Turkey

Vergleichende Kosten- und Rentabilitätsanalyse der Kastanienproduktion mit und ohne Zusatzbewässerung in der türkischen Provinz Aydin

  • 26 Accesses

Abstract

The objective of this paper was to examine comparatively the cost and profitability of chestnut farming in the irrigated and non-irrigated farms in Aydin Province. The data of this study was collected with face to face surveys from 99 chestnut farms using the stratified sampling method. Partial budgeting analysis was applied to 27 irrigated and 72 non-irrigated farms in order to explain the cost and profitability of chestnut production. The results of the study highlighted that the average production cost of chestnut per kilogram was US $1.26 in the irrigated farms, whereas it was US $1.21 in the non-irrigated farms. The chief element of cost was labor, and the share of labor in the total cost was 70.77% in the irrigated farms and 69.24% in the non-irrigated ones. The gross production value per decare and per tree were US $422.62 and US $47.01 in the irrigated farms, while they were US $270.83 and US $39.77 in the non-irrigated farms, respectively. In the irrigated farms, the gross profit and net profit were US $259.08 and US $158.14, whereas in the non-irrigated farms, they were US $184.50 and US $95.92, respectively. The rate of return was 1.60 in the irrigated farms and 1.55 in the non-irrigated ones. The results of the study confirmed that the chestnut production cost of the farms could be lessened via utilization of irrigation and the effective use of inputs particularly labor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Abreu CG, Carvalho L, Gaspar MJ, Gomes AL, Colaço J, Cardoso AO (1999) Assessment of resistance to chestnut ink disease. Acta Hortic 494:363–368. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1999.494.55

  2. Adua M (1999) Sweet chestnut production and marketing in Italy. Acta Hortic 494:49–54. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1999.494.5

  3. Baser U, Bozoglu M (2020) Chestnut blight and technical efficiency in chestnut production: case study of aydin province, Turkey. Sci Hortic 263:109048

  4. Bostan T (2012) A research on economics, problems faced and suggestions for walnut production in Bitlis province. Dissertation, Süleyman Demirel University

  5. Bounous G (2009) Chestnut industry development and quality of the productions. Acta Hortic 844:21–26. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2009.844.1

  6. Bozoglu M, Baser U, Alhas Eroglu N, Kilic Topuz B (2019) Developments in the chestnut market of Turkey. KSU J Agric Nat 22(1):1–25

  7. Breisch H (2008) The chestnut industry in France. In II Iberian Congress on Chestnut. vol 784, pp 31–36 https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2008.784.2

  8. Choupina AB, Estevinho L, Martins IM (2014) Scientifically advanced solutions for chestnut ınk disease. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 98:3905–3909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-014-5654-2

  9. Ding P, Liu FX, Xu CX, Wang KR (2007) Transmission of Cryphonectria hypovirus to protect chestnut trees from chestnut blight disease. Biol Control 40:9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2006.10.004

  10. Erkuş A, Bülbül M, Kıral T, Açıl AF, Demirci R (1995) Agricultural economics. Ankara University Faculty of Agriculture Education, Research and Development Foundation, Ankara

  11. FAO (2017) Food and agriculture organization of the united nations. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC. Accessed 3 Oct 2017

  12. Gentile S, Valentino D, Tamietti G (2010) Effectiveness of potassium phosphite in the control of chestnut ink disease. Acta Hortic 866:417–424. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2010.866.55

  13. Gold MA, Cernusca MM, Godsey LD (2006) Competitive market analysis: Chestnut producers. HortTechnology 16:360–369

  14. Grau P, France A (1999) Chestnut production in Chile. Some steps toward its improvement. Acta Hortic 494:37–42. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1999.494.3

  15. Jin Y (2014) Cost-benefit analysis of chestnut production in Xingtai County. Asian Agric Res 6:33–37

  16. Kanat Z, Çelik Y, Çay Ş (2017) The cost analysis of semi-dwarf and dwarf apple production in Konya. Selcuk J Agric Food Sci 31:56–62. https://doi.org/10.15316/SJAFS.2017.7

  17. Karadeniz V (2013) Chestnut agriculture in Turkey and its main problems. J Int Soc Respir 6:279–291

  18. Kıral T, Kasnakoğlu H, Tatlıdil F, Fidan H, Gündoğmuş E (1999) Cost calculation methodology and database guide for agricultural products. Agricultural Economics Research Institute, Ankara

  19. Oliveira MT, Martins LM, Abreu CG (1999) A method for evaluating the degree of defoliation on chestnut trees affected by the ink disease. Acta Hortic 494:443–446. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1999.494.66

  20. Özgürsoy S (2006) Economic analysis of olive farming and olive oil sector in Hatay. Dissertation, Çukurova University

  21. Ridley JD (1999) Market development opportunities in the Australian chestnut industry. Acta Hortic 494:55–60. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1999.494.6

  22. Robin C, Lanz S, Soutrenon A, Rigling D (2010) Dominance of natural over released biological control agents of the chestnut blight fungus Cryphonectria parasitica in South-Eastern France is associated with fitness-related traits. Biol Control 53:55–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2009.10.013

  23. TurkStat (2017) Turkish Statistical Institute. https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/bitkiselapp/bitkisel.zul. Accessed 5 Oct 2017

  24. Walker WR (1989) Guidelines for designing and evaluating surface irrigation systems. Logan, Utah

  25. Yamane T (1967) Elemantary sampling theory. Prentice Hall Inc, Engle woods, New Jersey

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study would not have been possible without the interest of chestnut producers, so we thank to their contributions on the primary data. Besides, we would like to thank Birol Kurt (Ondokuz Mayis University, Department of International Relations) for their helpful language comments on the paper.

Author information

Correspondence to Ugur Baser.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

M. Bozoglu, U. Baser, N.A. Eroglu and B.K. Topuz declare that they have no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bozoglu, M., Baser, U., Eroglu, N.A. et al. Comparative Analysis of Cost and Profitability in the Irrigated and Non-irrigated Chestnut Farming: Case of Aydin Province, Turkey. Erwerbs-Obstbau 62, 21–27 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10341-019-00467-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Chestnut
  • Production
  • Input use
  • Cost
  • Profitability
  • Aydin Province
  • Turkey

Schlüsselwörter

  • Kastanie
  • Produktion
  • Betriebsmitteleinsatz
  • Kosten
  • Rentabilität
  • Provinz Aydın
  • Türkei