آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 13 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 665 |
| تعداد مقالات | 6,953 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 10,244,053 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 9,459,416 |
An Evaluation of the Market Strategies and Decisions of the Contracted Broiler Enterprises in Bolu, Sakarya and Ankara via Analytical Hierarchy Process | ||
| Poultry Science Journal | ||
| دوره 9، شماره 2، اسفند 2021، صفحه 221-232 اصل مقاله (518.1 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22069/psj.2021.19046.1689 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Seyfettin Tuncel* 1؛ Tamer Eren2؛ Şeyda Gür3؛ Gökhan Şen4؛ Cevat Sipahi5 | ||
| 11Kirikkale University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Animal Health Economics and Management, Kirikkale, Turkey | ||
| 22Kirikkale University, Engineering Faculty, Department of Industrial Engineering, Kirikkale, Turkey | ||
| 33Harran University, Engineering Faculty, Department of Industrial Engineering, Şanliurfa, Turkey | ||
| 44Kirikkale University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Depertment of Animal Nutrition and Nutritional Diseases, Kirikkale, Turkey | ||
| 55Mehmet Akif University, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Animal Health Economics and Management, Burdur, Turkey | ||
| چکیده | ||
| This study was performed to evaluate the decisions of the contracted broiler enterprises for the integrated company selection in terms of 5 criteria (C1: Stability, C2: Crisis management, C3: Profitability C4: Flexibility, C5: Supply). In this study, 68 enterprises were selected with stratified random sampling among the broiler enterprises, operating in Sakarya (12.0%), Bolu (11.0%) and Ankara (3.2%) those constitute 24.2% of contracted broiler enterprises in Turkey in 2017. The research was conducted with two large scales (A and B) and two small scales (C and D) integrated companies in the broiler sector, where broiler enterprises produce under a contract. According to these 5 criteria, the optimum selection of integrated companies of broiler enterprises among A, B, C, and D was analyzed using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). As a result of the analysis, the importance level of C1, C2, C3, C4, and C5 criteria among 5 criteria was found strategically significant at 46.0%, 20.0%, 18.0%, 10.0% and 6.0%, respectively. Thus, C1 criterion was determined as the most dominant criterion. The selection weights of integrated companies A, B, C, and D were 34.5%, 36.7%, 12.6% and 17.1%, respectively. This result shows that working with large-scale A and B integrated companies is strategically advantageous for broiler enterprises. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Meat sector؛ Broiler enterprise؛ Broiler production chicken؛ Broiler integration company | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Amiri F & Arzani H. 2012. Determination of site priority for apiculture by using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 19: 159-177.
Berry J. 1999. Factors Involved in Site Selection for New and Modified Poultry Facilities. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service, Oklahoma State University, August 1999.
BESD-BİR- Turkish Poultry Producers and Breeders Association. 2019. Broiler Statistics, Ankara, Turkey.
Eşidir A & Pirim L. 2013. Broiler sector report in Turkey. 1nd Fırat Kalkınma Ajansı. FKA Press. Elazığ. 18 Pages.
Easterling EH, Braschler CH & Kuehn JA. 1986. Optimal Location of The U.S. Broiler Industry. Journal of Agribusiness, 4: 57-62.
Garcia RGI, Almeida Paz ICLI, Caldara FRI, Nääs IAI, Pereira DFII & Ferreira VMOSI. 2012. Selecting the most adequate bedding material for broiler production in Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 14: 121-127. DOI: 10.1590/ S1516-635X2012000200006
Gempesawh CM & Bhargava S. 1990. Interregional profitability analysis of contract broiler grower investment decisions. Poultry Science, 69: 2092-2101. DOI: 10.3382/ps.0692092
Harrison RW & Sambidi PR. 2004. A conjoint analysis of the US broiler complex location decision. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 36: 639-655. DOI: 10.1017/ S1074070800026924
Jote N, Beshah B & Kitaw D. 2015. Ethiopian Livestock Husbandry Cluster Identification Using FUZZY-AHP Approach. Afro-European Conference for Industrial Advancement AECIA, 233-243. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-13572-4_19
Lamsali H & Ariffin AS. 2018. Multi criteria decisions making approach to choose ‘Integrators’ in Malaysian local broiler industry. MATEC Web of Conferences, 1-7. DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/ 201821502004
Lima KAO, Nääs I, Jorge D & Garcia R. 2017. Multi-criteria analysis to select the most appropriate rearing environment for broiler production. Information Processing in Agriculture, 1: 1-14. DOI: 10.13031/aim.201700795
Lopez RA & Henderson NR. 1989. The Determinants of Location Choices for Food Processing Plants. Agribusiness: Agribusiness 5: 619-632. DOI: 10.1002/1520-6297(198911)5:6<619:AID-AGR2720050607>3.0.CO;2-A
Mahalik DK. 2012. Selection of a plant site: A multi criteria decision making using AHP and GRA. Journal of Supply Chain Management Systems, 1: 23-29.
Rahardjo S, Hutagaol MP & Sukmawati A. 2017. Strategy to growth an excellence competitiveness in broiler chicken business. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 7: 593-598.
Rezaei J & Ortt R. 2013. Multi-criteria supplier segmentation using a fuzzy preference relation based AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 225: 75-84. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor. 2012.09.037
Saaty TL. 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation, 1st Ed. McGraw-Hill; New York, 54 Pages.
Samadpour E, Zahmatkesh D, Nemati MH & Shahir MH. 2018. Determining the contribution of ventilation and insulation of broiler breeding houses in production performance using analytic hierarchy process (AHP). Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 20: 211-218. DOI: 10.1590/1806-9061-2017-0593
Silva RBTR, Nääs IA, Garcia GR, Neves DP & Jacop FG. 2013. Welfare norms for broiler production. Enciclopédia Biosfera, 9: 2630.
Soner S & Onut S. 2006. Multi-criteria supplier selection: an ELECTRE-AHP application. Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 4:110-120.
Subaşi H. 2011. Comparison of topsis and ahp methods used in multi criteria decision process and an application. Master Thesis, University of Marmara. İstanbul, Turkey. 19-25 Pages.
Taşcioğlu Y, Akpinar MG, Gul M, Karli B & Bozkurt Y. 2020. Analysis of Buffalo Breeders' decisions in Turkey with Analytical Hierarchy Process. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 57: 315-323.
Tuncel S, Sipahi C & Şen G. 2017. Evaluation of Market Strategies and Decisions of the Broiler Integrations and Contracted Producers via Game Theory. Kirikkale University (K.U. BAP-project no:2014/28)
TURKSTAT- Turkish Statistical Institute. 2020. Livestock statistics, broiler data. Ankara, Turkey.
Vaidya SO & Kumar S. 2006. Analytic Hierarchy Process: An Overview of Applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 169: 1-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.028
Wasike CB, Magothe TM, Kahi AK & Peters KJ. 2011. Factors that influence the efficiency of beef and dairy cattle recording system in Kenya: A SWOT–AHP analysis. Tropical animal health and production, 43: 141-152. DOI: 10.1007/s11250-010-9666-3
Wijayanto AK, Seminar KB & Afnan R. 2015. Suitability Mapping for Broiler Closed House Farm Using Analytical Hierarchy Process and Weighted Overlay with Emphasize on Environmental Aspects. International Journal of Poultry Science, 14: 577-586.
Wijayanto AK, Seminar, KB & Afnan, R. 2016. Mobile-based Expert System for Selecting Broiler Farm Location Using PostGIS. Telkomnika, 14: 360-367. DOI: 10.12928/TELKOMNIKA. v14i1.2903
Yaralioğlu K. 2001. Performans Değerlendirmede Analitik Hiyerarşi Proses, Dokuz Eylül University Journal of Faculty of Economics and Administrative Science, 16: 129-142. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,164 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 945 |
||
سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. طراحی و پیاده سازی از سیناوب