Is Politics Driving Turkish Agriculture to a Dead End?

When the government announces new agricultural packages, the cycle is painfully predictable: a brief wave of headlines, political fanfare, and short-lived optimism, only to give way once again to the entrenched problems that continue to paralyze the sector. The recent support packages, while offering short-term relief in the form of subsidies or loan rescheduling, fail to address the root causes of the crisis. What is missing is not intent but a comprehensive, depoliticized reform framework capable of reshaping agriculture into a sustainable and resilient driver of the economy. The question that lingers is why such overdue structural reforms remain perpetually delayed.

At the heart of this dilemma is a deep disconnect between policymakers and practitioners. Many of those designing agricultural strategies have never set foot in a field or experienced the uncertainty of rainfall, pest outbreaks, or fluctuating international markets. Agriculture does not follow a linear formula; the same inputs can produce dramatically different outcomes depending on seasonal conditions, global demand, or sudden disease outbreaks. A truly effective agricultural policy must therefore emerge from collaboration with those who hold firsthand knowledge of the soil, rather than being drafted in distant offices.

Calls for farmer mobilization are frequent, but the underlying constraints are rarely acknowledged. Farmer unions, in their current form, are often limited in capacity and at times function as intermediaries rather than authentic representatives of grassroots concerns. Many are led by individuals with little connection to farming realities, weakening their ability to propose transformative reforms.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, though vast and resourceful, often struggles to move beyond administrative duties into genuine strategic foresight. What is urgently required is a consistent, cross-party, long-term agricultural strategy that insulates the sector from short-term political cycles and builds trust with farmers who form its backbone.

From Scarcity to Misdirected Abundance: A Lost Opportunity?

Is Anatolia truly unable to feed its people? The reality is quite the opposite. Türkiye remains among the few nations in the world with the natural capacity to achieve food self-sufficiency. Its diverse climates, fertile soils, and rich agricultural traditions provide a strong foundation. Those who lived through the shortages of the late 1970s and early 1980s when sugar, oil, and meat were rationed, remember the vulnerability of that era. The subsequent transition from a state-controlled economy to one more open to privatization and global integration undeniably increased agricultural productivity and stabilized food supplies. Today, Türkiye even manages surpluses in certain commodities, such as sugar, which are regulated through quota systems (TÜİK, 2023).

Yet this abundance hides an uncomfortable paradox. While the country achieved higher output, it failed to channel this productivity into building lasting strategic advantages. Rather than focusing on a select group of native crops with global potential, policy choices often promoted scattered diversification, leaving no single area with strong technological or branding dominance. Developed nations, by contrast, have jealously guarded and expanded their competitive edge in crops like soybeans, wheat, and corn backed by research, innovation, and global marketing power.

The case of hazelnuts illustrates this lost opportunity vividly. Türkiye produces around 65% of the world’s hazelnuts (FAO, 2022), yet much of the technological innovation, high-value processing, and brand recognition are concentrated outside its borders (World Bank, 2021). Instead of becoming a global leader in hazelnut-based value chains, Türkiye remains largely a supplier of raw material. This reflects a deeper policy flaw: a tendency to prioritize short-term, politically visible gains over long-term strategies rooted in research, innovation, and knowledge-driven planning. Without a shift toward this vision, abundance risks turning into another missed opportunity.

A Reality Check on Recent Policy Pledges

A closer examination of recent government pledges in agriculture reveals a concerning gap between rhetoric and practical implementation. Take, for example, the promise to cultivate fallow lands. While the idea of bringing unused plots into production sounds appealing, the state’s own record with large-scale farming initiatives such as those under TİGEM casts doubt on the feasibility of managing fragmented and scattered lands through centralized intervention. A more sustainable pathway would be to empower private farmers and cooperatives with incentives to consolidate land, adopt modern techniques, and improve productivity, rather than repeating past state-led inefficiencies.

Similarly, the pledge to protect pastures through stricter penalties for misuse addresses only part of the problem. By the time penalties are applied, much of this land has already been compromised by urban sprawl, unregulated construction, or mismanagement. The emphasis should shift from reactive enforcement to proactive preservation and reclamation of these vital resources. Pastures not only support livestock but also sustain ecological balance, and their continued loss will have long-term repercussions for rural livelihoods and biodiversity.

Equally concerning are the promises to expand production of strategic crops. While politically attractive, these pledges overlook the fact that producers of Türkiye’s traditional export strengths, hazelnuts, apricots, figs, and cherries, are already under strain. Rising input costs, volatile markets, and inadequate state support have left many farmers disillusioned. Instead of celebrating export volumes alone, policymakers must address the realities on the ground: farmer protests, squeezed profit margins, and declining competitiveness (TMMOB, 2023).

In short, without honest acknowledgment of structural weaknesses and a focus on empowering farmers rather than making symbolic pledges, these policies risk remaining slogans rather than solutions.

From Political Stopgaps to Farmer-Centric Logic

The central question for Türkiye’s agricultural sector is whether productivity can genuinely rise in a system that remains heavily politicized and detached from farmers’ realities. Even if yields increase through new technologies or expanded cultivation, the outcome will remain hollow unless farmers themselves are ensured a dignified livelihood through fair and predictable prices. Agriculture cannot thrive on temporary packages or politically motivated announcements; it requires a structural transformation rooted in farmer satisfaction.

The path forward begins with a shift from ad-hoc subsidies to direct, consistent, and depoliticized support. A considerable share of the ministry’s vast budget should be allocated to predictable income support, delivered transparently and equitably. Such measures empower farmers to plan, manage risks, and adopt modern practices, unlike one-off subsidy packages that often arrive too late or miss their target altogether.

Equally important is restructuring production toward market-oriented, cluster-based systems. The greatest frustration for any farmer is not producing food but selling it profitably. By creating specialized production zones and integrating them into value chains, farmers can secure pre-determined marketing channels, reducing both pre- and post-harvest uncertainty. This model, widely adopted in developed economies, offers stability, competitiveness, and fairer income distribution.

Finally, institutional restructuring is indispensable. The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry should transform from a direct operator, often burdened by inefficiencies, into a facilitator and regulator. Allowing a competitive private sector to deliver support services, while the ministry ensures transparency and accountability, would foster efficiency and innovation.

In essence, a farmer-centric, depoliticized strategy is not only possible but necessary. True progress lies not in political stopgaps but in building an agricultural system where farmers are empowered as equal stakeholders in national food security and rural development.

Conclusion

Turkish agriculture stands at a crossroads where political rhetoric, and short-term packages can no longer disguise the sector’s structural weaknesses. Despite its natural abundance, rich agro-ecological diversity, and historical resilience, the sector has been weighed down by policy inconsistency, bureaucratic inefficiency, and a persistent disconnect between decision-makers and farmers. The paradox is stark: a country that leads the world in crops like hazelnuts still fails to capture value through innovation, branding, and high-end processing. Similarly, pledges to expand cultivation or protect pastures remain hollow when not matched by credible, proactive, and farmer-centered implementation.

The way forward demands a decisive break from politically motivated stopgaps toward a depoliticized, long-term national agricultural strategy. Farmers must be placed at the heart of this transformation, with predictable income support, stronger value chains, and institutions that serve as facilitators rather than controllers. Investments in research, climate-smart practices, and rural infrastructure can turn Türkiye’s potential into sustainable competitive advantage. Above all, farmer dignity and satisfaction must become the cornerstone of agricultural reform. Only then can the sector shift from stagnation to resilience, from missed opportunities to lasting prosperity, and reclaim its role as a true engine of national food security and rural development.

References: FAO; TÜİK; TMMOB; World Bank

Please note that the views expressed in this article are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of any organization.

The writer is affiliated with the Department of Agricultural Economics, Selcuk University, Konya-Türkiye and can be reached at mdirek@selcuk.edu.tr

Related Stories