Alternative marketing strategies for honey and other bee products in Turkey

Turkey is the fourth leading honey producing country in the world after China, the United States, and Argentina, with around 5.35% of the market. One of the most important problems facing the Turkish beekeeping sector is marketing. In general, the market structure for animal products in Turkey has a confusing chain, which causes great differences between producer and consumer prices. Beekeepers have several alternatives for marketing their honey in Turkey: they may sell directly to consumers (in local markets or roadside stands), to a honey cooperative, to a wholesaler, to a honey packer or dealer, and/or to the export market. This study examines the marketing channels for honey and other bee products in Turkey, discusses the problems and defects of the current system from the perspective of producers and other actors in the market, and suggests solutions that include an increased role for cooperatives and extension services. © 2007 by The Haworth Press.School of International Service, American University Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, MAFRAThis study has been supported by the Mugla Beekeepers Union’s (Maybir) Project and the State Planning Organization (SPO). -- The data for this study have been obtained from the sources published by the SIS (State Institute of Statistics, Prime Ministry, Republic of Turkey), SPO (State Planning Organization), the Turkish Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, the FAO, and the Aegean Exporters’ Union. -

Developing participatory extension applications in Turkey

The purpose of extension is to increase the living standard of the farmers and their families in the rural areas. Extension services in Turkey have been implemented mainly by the Ministry of Agriculture since the 1940s and are currently organized by the administrative districts of the Provincial Agricultural Directorates. Agricultural extension approaches in Turkey have been mainly derived from extension applications in different countries and the previous projects of the World Bank and FAO. For that reason Turkey has tremendous experience on the application of agricultural extension approaches from many countries. Agricultural extension activities are implemented by several institutions; each of them has a different legal status. The extension programmes were accepted and implemented using six approaches during different periods in Turkey. During this period the dominant approach was the promotion of technology transfer by the 'general agricultural extension approach' until the 1990s. The 'training and visit approach' has also been used since the 1984s. The common characteristic of these two approaches was the lack of farmers' participation. This was an important detriment to the effectiveness of extension services in Turkey. The implementation of participatory extension approaches was very limited but effective. The contribution of universities, NGO's (e.g. producers' organizations and farmers' unions) and private firms to extension activities were limited. Thus, it will be very useful to apply the participatory approach where rural people have to take the initiative and think about their own problems with appropriate solutions by relevant extension organizations in Turkey. © 2011 Academic Journals