In 2001, Turkey started an agricultural reform program which ended at the end of 2008. The major component of the reform program was to make the transfers decoupled from production. In this scope, direct income support (DIS) was the tool that has been used to reduce the price distortions. DIS received noteworthy criticisms since the first signs of it and now, even after it is over, the prejudice against DIS prevails in Turkey. On the other hand, Turkey&rsquo / s commitments to WTO&rsquo / s Agreement on Agriculture insist on replacing price supports with non-distortionary policy tools and its candidacy to the membership of the EU requires harmonizing its agricultural policy to the CAP which is shifting towards direct income payments. Criticisms against DIS in Turkey are determined in this thesis, grouped and analyzed by investigating official data to see whether the fears came true. There were both rational and irrational criticisms and consequently, they could not be justified and agricultural issues were not worse off in DIS years. Turkey will eventually have to implement direct income payments again due to both domestic and international forces. Therefore, it is essentially important to understand how it was implemented previously and which aspects of it were exposed to criticisms, and design future policies accordingly.

This thesis analyzes the efficiency structure of Turkish agriculture in farm household level by using various models of stochastic frontier analysis. A household level survey conducted in 2002 and 2004 is used in the analysis. Firstly, an efficient production frontier is estimated by a panel data models. By using these estimates, relative importance of production factors and their interaction with various farm specific factors are inspected. The parameters of production frontier show that agricultural production is crucially dependant on land and there is an excessive employment of labor in Turkish agriculture. Secondly, the efficiency scores are estimated at farm household level. The results are reported according to NUTS-II regional classification and many other farm specific characteristics. The western parts of the country are found to be relatively more efficient and there is a high deviation in mean efficiencies of different regions. There is an increase in mean efficiencies of all regions from 2002 to 2004. Besides, crop patterns, farm size, education level of household chief and irrigation are found to be effective on efficiency.

Les cas polonais, roumain et turc constituent d’excellents exemples de l’évolution de l’agriculture paysanne dans un contexte d’intégration au marché européen et mondial. Tout l’enjeu de l’intégration de la Pologne et de la Roumanie, aujourd’hui effective, et d’une hypothétique adhésion de la Turquie, est de pouvoir intégrer une paysannerie numériquement forte et peu performante [caractérisée par des rendements agricoles relativement faibles], à une agriculture européenne très productive. Ces pays,par les volumes de leur production, par l’étendue de leurs terres cultivées, et par l’importance de leur main-d’œuvre, sont les puissances agricoles les plus importantes des trois vagues successives de l’élargissement de l’Union européenne. Les trois pays compte le plus de paysans parmi les pays membres et candidats à l’UE. Ces élargissements de l’UE à ces pays concernent un problème social de transition. Les campagnes polonaises, roumaines et turques se trouvent donc devant le défi d’une modernisation de leur agriculture et de leurs structures sociales. Pour les trois pays, les possibilités de suivre le modèle européen de modernisation ! agricole, et plus particulièrement le modèle français, restent limitées et son application est porteuse de problèmes multiples. Des voies alternatives permettant la survie des petites et moyennes exploitations familiales dans ces pays sont indispensables face aux dangers de l’agriculture productiviste en termes d’exclusion sociale et de « paupérisation »rurale et urbaine. Il faudra inventer des voies de sorties pour les agriculteurs des trois pays, en particulier pour ceux qui sont les plus vulnérables face à ce processus de modernisation / The cases of Poland, Romania and Turkey constitute excellent examples for the evolution of peasantfarmer-driven agricultures in the context of integration into the European and the world markets.Today, the challenge of Poland and Romania’s integration, and a possible membership of Turkey arein fact to be able to integrate an agricultural system numerically strong but inefficient [characterized by relatively low yields] into a highly productive European agriculture. These countries, by their production volumes, by the extent of their croplands and by the size of their labours are the most important agricultural powers among the three successive waves of the enlargement of the European Union. The three countries contain the most farmer numbers among the member countries and the candidates. The enlargement of the EU to these countries is associated with a social problem relative to the transition process. The integration of these countries is therefore faced with the challenge of modernizing their agricultures and the related social structures. For these countries, the possibilities to follow and apply the European model of agricultural modernization, particularly the French model, remains limited and associated with the multiple problems. Alternative solutions wh! ich allow the survival of small and medium family farming in these countries are indispensable face to the dangers of productivist agriculture as social exclusion and rural and urban pauperization. New solutions and suitable models must be invented to protect the farmers of these countries, especially those who are most vulnerable to this process of agricultural modernisation