Local People's View of Non-Benefiting from Murat River Projects: Examples of Bingöl, Elazığ and Muş Basins
-
Published:2024-06-26
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:1302-7050
-
Container-title:Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi
-
language:tr
-
Short-container-title:JOTAF
Author:
Karakaya Ersin1ORCID, Çamuka Semra2ORCID, Uslu Ahmet2ORCID, Yuksel Alaaddin2ORCID, Çelik Şenol3ORCID, Hopur BayramORCID, Yaşar Mehmet Emin2ORCID, Meral Alperen2ORCID
Affiliation:
1. BİNGÖL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ZİRAAT FAKÜLTESİ 2. BİNGÖL ÜNİVERSİTESİ 3. BİNGÖL ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ZİRAAT FAKÜLTESİ, ZOOTEKNİ BÖLÜMÜ, BİYOMETRİ VE GENETİK ANABİLİM DALI
Abstract
In Bingöl, Elazığ, and Muş, micro-basin projects have been implemented, but not all local residents have benefited from these initiatives. This study aimed to understand the views and experiences of those locals who did not benefit from the projects, assessing the potential impact on productivity and income. The study was conducted in the provinces of Bingöl, Elazığ, and Muş. Data was gathered between 16-25 August 2021. The primary sources of information were interviews with 168 non-beneficiaries, complemented by focus group discussions and key informant interviews. Findings showed that 75% of participants linked increased productivity to the projects, and all acknowledged an enlarged production area due to project activities. There was no significant difference in production area or income from agricultural sales based on gender or the presence of cash income. However, cash income holders reported higher earnings from both agriculture and livestock. Provincial disparities in income emerged: residents of Bingöl had 2.439 times the income of those in Muş, while Elazığ inhabitants earned 0.882 times less. Men's income surpassed women's by 1.209 times, and those with a history of cash income earned 4.037 times more than those without. Interestingly, owning land or cultivating high-value crops was associated with lesser income. Measures to counteract drought could enhance production areas and, consequently, local incomes. A significant barrier identified was the 20% contribution requirement, preventing some locals from project participation. Recommendations include adjusting project criteria to increase local engagement and benefits. The original value of this article is to reveal the impact of microcatchment projects implemented in Turkey.
Publisher
Tekirdag Ziraat Fakultesi Dergisi
Reference27 articles.
1. Ağır, H. B. and Akbay, C. (2021). Tüketicilerin fast food tüketim sıklığını etkileyen faktörlerin analizi. Tekirdağ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 18 (3): 436-445. 2. Anonymous (2012). Anatolian Watersheds Rehabilitation Project Final Evaluation Report, Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs and Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock, Ankara 2012. 3. Baydaş, A., Demirkiran, A. R. and Bilinmiş, M. M. (2018). Determining the satisfaction level of local people from Murat river rehabilitation projects: Example of Bingöl (Lediz, Vahkin-Canakçı, Göynük stream and Çapakçur micro-catchments). JOEEP: Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 3 (1): 31-57. 4. Bilinmiş, M. M. (2016). Bingöl ili lediz, vahkin-çanakçi, göynük ve çapakçur mikrohavza projelerinden yöre halkinin memnuniyet düzeyinin belirlenmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi) Bingöl Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü. 5. Brown, S. C., Lester, R. E., Versace, V. L., Fawcett, J. and Laurenson, L. (2014). Hydrologic landscape regionalisation using deductive classificationand random forests. PLoSONE, 9(11): 27-35.
|
|