In Turkey, the kilogram price of milk in 2010 was €0.89. Compared to the EU average, milk prices are 30 percent higher and milk consumption is 40 percent lower.

Statistics show that people in Turkey do not eat meat or drink milk. Why is meat and milk consumption low? The answer is out there: meat and milk are expensive. Let me stress it once again: meat and milk prices are higher in Turkey than in relatively wealthier countries. Not only that, people in Turkey do not have enough money to spare for meat and milk. We have a case of double jeopardy here. And the underlying reason is that the design of the agricultural and livestock policy is not consumer-oriented. Let me summarize the basics for you.

The annual per capita consumption of milk, milk equivalent, and milk products is 306 kilograms on average in European Union (EU) countries and 185 kilograms in Turkey. The kilogram price of milk in 2010 in EU countries was €0.69.

In Turkey, the kilogram price of milk was €0.89 in 2010. Compared to the EU average, milk prices are 30 percent higher and milk consumption is 40 percent lower. The same applies for red meat. We are talking about a country where milk is used to make yoghurt and ayran, a country that is the homeland of yoghurt and ayran. We get the same picture when we compare Turkey with the US. There is something problematic here and the cause is the state and its agricultural and livestock policy.

We can cite a number of root causes, but I believe some among these should be emphasized specifically. In Turkey, raw milk businesses are small-scale and scattered, due to which collection cost is high. Milk collectors in the EU on average cover a distance of 90 kilometers a day to collect milk while the number in Turkey reaches 650 kilometers. This process both raises the cost and reduces the quality of milk. A system that supports anyone who feeds two cows is a bad one.

Nutrition costs for urban consumers are high because of small-scale agricultural businesses. The problem is about the design of the system. The same problem also distorts feed prices, for instance. Turkey is not an ideal country for cheap animal husbandry. Cattles grazing in pasture suffer malnutrition due to low quality pasturage. And feed prices are controlled by the state. It always ends up with the same issue: Turkey’s agricultural and livestock policy is fundamentally problematic.

So, what is the problem? It is that the main axis of the agricultural and livestock policy is the rural population, not urban consumers. The policy framework is relevant rather for the 1950s when only 25 percent of the population lived in urban areas. Today, more than 75 percent of Turkey’s population lives in urban areas. The objectives and tools of a policy when 75 percent of the population is rural should differ from those of a policy it rural population is around 25 percent and decreasing. The policy administration per se should be restructured, too. The main issue for Turkey concerning the agriculture and livestock sector today should be how to ensure a cheaper and healthier diet for the urban population. But the current policy framework with its ungrounded quota regulations and price restrictions, works in the opposite direction. Urban consumers in Turkey pursue an expensive and unhealthy diet; they don’t consume meat and milk. In today’s Turkey, agriculture has to be for the urban population.

Looking at the agricultural policy system, I am increasingly convinced that the reforms of the 1980s have not yet reached the agricultural sector. The policy framework from the pre-1980s, has stopped Turkey’s agricultural and livestock sector. This, I believe, is what bodes ill.

This commentary was published in Radikal daily on 11.01.2013