Strategies for Sustainable Development, Kars, Turkey

Transcription

Province of
Kars
Municipality
of Kars
Strategies for Sustainable Development,
Kars, Turkey
Prepared by:
Institute for International Urban Development
Cambridge, MA
Sponsored by:
The Christensen Fund
September 2006
Report for The Christensen Fund: Strategies for Sustainable Development in Kars, Turkey
Cambridge, MA
-2-
STUDY TEAM
Mona Serageldin, Team Leader
Beti Minkin
Berhan Ipek
Mustafa Gönen
Christa Lee-Chuvala
Felicity Chan
The Institute would like to acknowledge the excellent assistance received from
Ceren Özgen of Istanbul Technical University and Ihsan Karayazi of Kars
Municipality in the preparation of this report. We also wish to recognize the
contribution of Turan Atalay of Kars Municipality and Yusuf Yurdalan and
Medet Özeri of Kars Province.
This study is sponsored by the Christensen Fund.
Cambridge, MA
-3-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF MEETINGS................................................................................................................... 7
1
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 9
2
THE ROLE OF KARS PROVINCE IN THE EASTERN ANATOLIA REGION ...... 11
2.1
Socio-economic Development.................................................................................... 11
Turkey State Planning Organization’s Socio-economic Development Index ......... 11
Priority Development Regions Program.................................................................. 14
Major energy and transportation projects affecting the region ............................ 15
2.2.1 The TRACECA Transit Corridors........................................................................... 15
2.2.2 The Baku-Ceyhan-Tiblisi Pipeline .......................................................................... 17
Preserving biodiversity in the Kars region .............................................................. 19
2.3.1 Irano-Anatolian Biodiversity Hotspot ..................................................................... 20
2.3.2 The World Wildlife Fund’s Global 200................................................................... 20
2.3.3 Ecoregions in Kars Province ................................................................................... 21
2.3.4 Internationally Important Bird Areas in the Kars Region........................................ 22
2.3.5 The Coruh River Hydroelectric Project ................................................................... 23
Regional rural settlement patterns ........................................................................... 24
2.4.1 Distribution of Rural Settlements ............................................................................ 24
2.4.2 Water infrastructure in villages in the Kars region.................................................. 26
Migration .................................................................................................................... 26
2.5.1 Migratory Movements in Eastern Anatolia and the Kars Region............................ 26
2.5.2 Survey on Rural-Urban Linkages ............................................................................ 27
2.5.3 The Emergence of Hometown Associations............................................................ 34
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF VILLAGES IN KARS PROVINCE .............. 37
3.5
Interviews of village households ............................................................................... 38
Profile of Rural Households .................................................................................... 38
Livelihoods .............................................................................................................. 39
Rural standards of living.......................................................................................... 41
Challenges facing rural households ......................................................................... 42
Links between rural and urban economies .............................................................. 43
Case studies: Links between village households and migrants in Kars................... 47
Villages affected by the BTC Pipeline ...................................................................... 49
3.2.1 BTC’s Sustainable Rural Development Projects implemented in Kars Province by
SÜRKAL ................................................................................................................. 49
Assessing rural development potential..................................................................... 53
3.3.1 Animal Husbandry................................................................................................... 53
3.3.2 Comparative analysis of the experience of three villages: Azat, Borluk and
Bulanik..................................................................................................................... 55
3.3.3 Selected villages with high development potential in key areas.............................. 57
Meetings with women, youth and children in the villages...................................... 63
3.4.1 Pilot session with youth in Akcakale Village .......................................................... 64
Summary of recommendations for village development ........................................ 65
4
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN KARS MUNICIPALITY............................. 67
3.1
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.1.5
3.1.6
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.1
4.2
Improving access to donor grants and other funding opportunities ..................... 67
Development of Urban Agriculture in Kars ............................................................ 68
Cambridge, MA
-5-
4.3
Preparation of a Development Plan for the Municipality through a TESEV-led
participatory process ................................................................................................. 72
5
TOURISM IN KARS PROVINCE ................................................................................... 75
5.1
5.2
Visitors to Kars Province .......................................................................................... 75
Major eco-tourism potential in Kars........................................................................ 78
5.2.1 The Ministry of Tourism Regional Development Plan ........................................... 79
5.2.2 Tours that offer visits to Northeast Anatolia ........................................................... 79
5.2.3 Major eco-tourism assets in Kars ............................................................................ 80
5.2.4 Potential thematic tourism routes ............................................................................ 83
5.2.5 Summary of recommendations for tourism development........................................ 88
6
RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 91
7
ANNEXES ........................................................................................................................... 95
Cambridge, MA
-6-
LIST OF MEETINGS
Province
ERDEN, Mehmet Ufuk
BEKİS, Kenan
Governor of Kars Province
Province Directorate of Culture and Tourism, Ministry
of Culture and Tourism of the Central Government
Director, Department of Agriculture
Department of Agriculture
YURDALAN, Yusuf
ÖZERI, Medet
Municipality
ALİBEYOĞLU, Naif
Mayor of Kars; President, Turkish Association of Local
Authorities
Consultant to the Mayor
Project Coordinator
Directorate of Public Works – Kars Municipality
Director of Women’s Commission, Kars City Council
ERDEM, Funda
KARAYAZI, İhsan
ATALAY, Turan
ŞAMİLOĞLU, Nihal
International Organizations
INNES, John
ÇAĞLAYAN, Şükran
DENIAU, Laurent
Principal Social Sector Specialist, World Bank, Ankara
Office
CIP/Social Coordinator, The Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan
Pipeline Company (BTC)
Embassy of France, Bilateral Program Coordinator with
the Ministry of Agriculture
National Organizations
KAVALA, Osman
PAŞAOĞLU, Serbülent
AYTAR, Volkan
TOKSÖZ, Fikret
ASLAN, Meltem
Anadolu Kültür
Project Manager, SÜRKAL
TESEV
Director, TESEV
TESEV
Local Organizations
YAZICI, Sezai
SEZER, Erhan
GÜVENSOY, Ali
ZAMAN, Ali
DANYILDIZ, Mustafa
KOCABIÇAK, Yasemin
AKAT, Soner
KIZIR, İsmail
Secretary General of Kars City Council
Member of Commission of Trans-border Economic and
Trade
Relations with Caucasian Countries
Head of Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Head of Council, Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Board Member, Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Professor of the EU Tourism Training Course,
Department of Tourism and Hotel Management, Kafkas
University
Head of the Kars Bee-Breeders Union
Assistant to the Head of the Kars Bee-Breeders Union
Cambridge, MA
-7-
1
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the findings and recommendations of a project undertaken in close
collaboration with the Provincial Administration and the Municipality of Kars to formulate
guidelines for local development that integrate environmental sustainability and the protection of
biodiversity. The guidelines take into account the effect of migration, trends in tourism
development and the impact of energy projects affecting the natural assets and environment of the
region and its ecosystems.
The convergence of climatic zones and the physical geography of the Kars region account for its
rich biodiversity. This unique asset is today threatened by development ranging from large-scale
infrastructure projects to uncontrolled urbanization. While economic development is badly
needed in an area suffering from high unemployment, rural depopulation and poverty, the
challenge is to enhance agricultural productivity and promote tourism through environmentally
sound policies and programs.
Building an outreach to local communities is a priority for sound management. At the Provincial
scale it is a prerequisite to policy implementation and action on the ground in an ethnically
diverse and sparsely populated area. Similarly nurturing the region’s human resources is a
precondition to the successful implementation of sustainable development strategies and must
constitute an integral component of policies and action plans.
The team assessed the dynamics of rural-urban linkages and the socio-economic impacts of
migration and remittances by conducting meetings and interviews in Kars city and selected
villages experiencing different levels of outmigration. Special emphasis was placed on
documenting the changes induced in rural living practices and lifestyles, as the rate of change has
accelerated in an age of increasing mobility.
In the 22 villages visited by the teams, meetings were held with villagers including women and
youth and interviews conducted with some households in their homes. Pressures leading to the
conversion of traditional agriculture to more intensive and inappropriate methods of cultivation
and food processing were identified. Specifically the team documented conditions in the villages,
observed farming and stockbreeding practices and identified traditional farming methods still in
use and categories of handicrafts still produced in each village. We elicited farmers’ perceptions
of the present situation, the challenges they face and their outlook to the future. With
inappropriate stockbreeding and farming practices that degrade the environment and destroy the
biodiversity of meadows and perpetuate low productivity, rural households subsist in poverty,
rural development lags and rural depopulation continues unabated.
The harsh climate and the high cost of energy preclude many of the conventional methods of rural
development and demand a more creative approach to this challenging task. Five key policies
were addressed:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Diversifying production
Promoting high quality food products and improving marketing channels
Fostering the development of organic farming and products
Supporting the revival of traditional handicrafts and in particular the distinctive
handwoven wool carpets for which a “niche” market can be promoted
5. Developing the potential for agri-eco-tourism in the longer term.
Cambridge, MA
-9-
The team noted that the villagers didn’t know how to access information, and as a result were
unable to improve their productivity. It seems they still have a tendency to shy away from
officials and therefore missed benefiting from programs that would help them. The efforts by the
Stockbreeder’s Union and the Beekeeper’s Union are first steps in this direction.
Out of the 22 villages visited, eight villages with the highest development potential were selected
to demonstrate the effectiveness of recommended strategies. Each village shows outstanding
potential in one of the five policy areas:
•
•
•
•
•
Animal Husbandry: Karaurgan, Sarikamiş and Bulanik, Kars
Dairy Production: Çakmak, Kars, and Boğatepe, Susuz
Organic Farming: Büyük Çatma, Arpacay and possibly Derinöz, Digor
Carpet weaving: Kocköyü, Arpaçay and Yolboyu, Susuz
Eco-tourism: Çilehane, Kağizman
Northeast Anatolia has not been able to capture a share of tourism in Turkey commensurate with
the assets it has to offer. Inadequate marketing and perceptions of remoteness and lack of
appropriate facilities hinder the development of both cultural and eco-tourism in the region.
Despite its unique natural assets, including pristine landscapes, mountains, lakes and wetlands
and the rich biodiversity of its flora and fauna, the potential for ecotourism remains largely
unrealized. A discussion of policies and opportunities that enhance the development of thematic
eco-tourism is given in Section 5 of the report.
The concept of urban agriculture was introduced to the Municipality as an effective strategy to
protect the Greenbelt designated in the Master Plan from encroachment while simultaneously
alleviating poverty and supplying locally grown produce on the market. Information on a number
of Best Practices from around the world prompted the Municipality to take a more realistic
approach. We are working with the Department of Public Works to develop a pragmatic
operational strategy based on urban agriculture as well as open space for active and passive
recreation.
The project interlinked activities undertaken with the Provincial and Municipal Governments in
order to further the key strategic objective of mainstreaming conservation and sound management
of the natural environment in all its dimensions at a time of change and promote biodiverse
agriculture in the strategic plans mandated by the 2005 Municipal Law.
Recommendations for developing an outreach program, structuring of a productive interface
between local authorities and village communities, fostering community organization by
encouraging villagers to form associations and cooperatives and delivery of awareness building
and skill development programs are discussed in Section 6 of this report. They were discussed
with the Governor and the Mayor and senior officials in the Provincial Department of Agriculture
and the Municipal Department of Public Works. Furthermore, the issues raised in the assessment
of rural development potential were discussed with NGOs active in Kars.
Cambridge, MA
- 10 -
2
THE ROLE OF KARS PROVINCE IN THE EASTERN ANATOLIA REGION
Source: Mona Serageldin
Illustration 2.1: Rural landscape in Kars Province, gateway to the Southern Caucasus.
2.1
Socio-economic Development
The Northeast Anatolian region has suffered from economic recession caused in large part by a
lack of affordable fuel sources. Despite the fact that the region is crossed by major oil and gas
pipelines (see Map 2.1), the topography, altitude, climate and sparsely populated settlement
patterns make it difficult and costly to service. High operation costs create challenges for those
trying to develop successful manufacturing operations in the area.1
The region has wonderful cultural and natural assets and valuable human resources derived from
its ethnically diverse population reflected in the rich tradition handicrafts, food, music, and dance.
Its archeological sites go back to prehistoric times and its architectural heritage testifies to its long
history as the gateway to the Caucasus and Central Asia. However, the remoteness, harsh climate
and lack of investment coupled with political instability, border closures and wars and civil strife
in neighboring Middle Eastern countries are hindering the ability of the Northeast Anatolian
provinces to realize their development potential.
2.1.1
Turkey State Planning Organization’s Socio-economic Development Index
In 2003 Turkey’s State Planning Organization (SPO) prepared a study to evaluate the socioeconomic development level of Turkey’s 81 provinces aggregated into seven geographical
regions based on indicators for 10 different categories, including demography, employment,
Cambridge, MA
- 11 -
education, health, industry, agriculture, infrastructure, construction, finance and other welfare.
The primary objective was to determine the performance of the provinces in meeting the needs of
their populations and assessing the impact on this performance of key factors including of
demographic structure, labor demand, the sectoral distribution of employment, education and
health services, physical and social infrastructure, and production and income level.
The study groups the provinces into five categories, with Category One representing those with
the highest development index and Category five representing the lowest. The fifth category
consists of 16 provinces in the Eastern and Southeastern regions, including Kars and several of
the surrounding provinces. (Table 2.1). All 16 are also are covered under the State Planning
Organization’s Priority Development Regions Program, discussed in section 2.1.2.
Table 2.1: Socio-economic Development Index Values for Provinces in Kars Region
Province
Erzurum
Kars
Iğdir
Ardahan
Ağri
Rank (out of 81)
60
67
69
74
80
Index Value
-0.53286
-0.81944
-0.89089
-1.07318
-1.28116
Source: State Planning Organization, 2003
In the Category-five provinces, 69.3% of the active population works in agriculture and within
that sector the primary economic activity is stockbreeding. With the GDP per capita of Turkey
indexed to 100, the GDP per capita in the Category Five provinces was 38. Household incomes
in these provinces are less than half the national average, and the total amount of bank credits
issued in the provinces constitutes only 1.2% of the total issued in Turkey.
Migration from Category five provinces to larger urban centers is quite high and contributes to
challenges these provinces face in meeting their potential. There is an urgent need for the creation
of policies that address regional inequalities. Migration is a critical issue affecting the rural
economy and is discussed in further detail in section 2.4.
Cambridge, MA
- 12 -
Map 2.1: Turkey’s natural gas and oil pipelines
Directorate General of BOTAŞ
Natural Gas and Oil Pipelines
current natural gas pipelines
Source: Botaş
Cambridge, MA
- 13 -
Map 2.2: The Categorization of Provinces According to the Socio-economic Development Index
1st level developed provinces
2nd level developed provinces
3rd level developed provinces
4th level developed provinces
5th level developed provinces
Source: State Planning Organization, 2003
2.1.2
Priority Development Regions Program
A program to support Priority Development Regions was introduced by the State Planning
Organization in 1968 to address regional inequalities. The program was instituted by an official
decree of Parliament and over time its objectives and methods have been revised and adjusted
according to changing socio-economic conditions. Provinces covered by this program are
identified according to objective criteria developed by the SPO, including socio-economic
development indicators.
49 provinces were covered by the program in 2004 (Map 2.3), and Kars has been under the
program since its inception. The area of the selected provinces is about 55% of the entire area of
Turkey and comprises 36% of the population. The GDP per capita in the Priority Development
Regions is 56% of the national average. Law 5068/2004 was approved in order to support job
creation and economic investment in these provinces, offering financial incentives to investors
and employers. The government encourages investment through both fiscal incentives
(investment credits, tax relief, postponement of the VAT, subsidies, relief from customs tax, tax
and fee exceptions) and direct public investment. For example, 10% of the investments of the
Public Fund (Kamu Ortaklığı Fonu) must be earmarked for employment generation, and tax
reductions are given on labor salaries.
Cambridge, MA
- 14 -
Map 2.3: Provinces included in the Priority Development Regions Program, 2003
Source: http://www.dpt.gov.tr/bgyu/koy/koy68-99.html#koy68-73
2.2
2.2.1
Major energy and transportation projects affecting the region
The TRACECA Transit Corridors
To strengthen links between Europe and Asia, the European Union has launched a program
known as TRACECA providing for the development of transport corridors from Europe through
the Caucasus to Asia. (See map 2.4). Anticipating ever faster and more fuel efficient rail systems,
the ultimate objective of the East-West Transport Corridor is to link major EU railway networks
to the networks of Turkey, South Caucasus, Central Asia and China. A Multilateral Agreement
between the ten initial participating countries was signed in 1998 and the remaining three
countries, including Turkey, applied to be included in 2000. Since then, the project has become a
symbol of cooperation between Europe, Caucasian and Central Asian countries. The
governments of the 13 participating countries with the help of the European Union have
collaborated to identify obstacles to smooth transport along the route and implement projects
mitigating these constraints. The TRACECA program funds technical assistance studies and
Investment Projects along the corridor.
The TRACECA railway corridor Istanbul/Sivas/Kars/Gumri with an extension to Tiblisi under
construction will put Kars Municipality on the TRACECA network. A major connector road
links it to the TRACECA highway corridor Istanbul/Batum/Vale/Gumri. These corridors will
bring substantial change to the region. As more projects are undertaken, the development
impacts, both positive and negative, on Kars Province will be significant. In particular the new
line Kars-Akhalkalaki-Tiblisi-Baku international railway corridor will provide Kars with a badly
needed crossborder rail link since the crossing to Armenia at Akyaka/Gumri was closed in May
1992. Most of the 258 km line is already in place, following an existing railway from
Akhalkalaki to Baku. The only missing portion is a 98 kilometer connection between Kars and
Akhalkalaki. The projected cost of this section ranges from $300 million to $500 million, and
funding could come from a range of sources including the European Union, the United States, or
Japan.
The plans for the rail link have drawn significant attention from the international community.
The corridor will provide a badly needed connection between the Turkish and Georgian rail
systems, facilitating the expansion of East-West trade and eventually linking the railway
Cambridge, MA
- 15 -
Map 2.4: The TRACECA Transport Corridor.
Source: TRACECA, www.traceca-org.org
Cambridge, MA
- 16 -
networks of China, Central Asia, South Caucasus, Turkey and the European Union. However,
Armenia is protesting the construction of the new railway, suggesting that an existing century-old
right-of-way from Kars to Tiblisi through the Armenian cities of Gumri and Vanazador be used
instead.
Map 2.5: Proposed routing of Kars-Akhakalaki section of Kars-Akhakalaki-Tiblisi-Baku railway line
Source : www.traceca.org
Most projections estimating the potential cargo volume along the East-West Transport Corridor
indicate that the transport volume in the first two years of operation will be about two million
tons and will reach eight to ten million tons in the following three years. The United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) has placed this corridor on a list of Priority 1
projects that could be completed by 2010. 2
Although the alignment to the border crossing is not yet finalized, the potential impact of the
connection is significant. It will affect future development in and around the nodes where stops
are placed and generate economic activity at the border crossing and along access roads leading
to the crossing. It will also further develop the synergies between border provinces in Turkey and
Georgia. The environmental impacts of the project have yet to be studied.
2.2.2
The Baku-Ceyhan-Tiblisi Pipeline
A second key regional development project is the Baku-Tiblesi-Ceyhan oil Pipeline, set for
completion at the end of 2006. This pipeline transports crude oil over 1,000 miles from the
Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean and is the second longest oil pipeline in the world. The BTC
pipeline was carried out by a consortium of 11 energy companies led by BP (formerly British
Petroleum) and opened officially in May of 2005. The new pipeline will allow boosting Caspian
Cambridge, MA
- 17 -
Sea oil production to about 1.5 million barrels per day, increasing the revenues accruing to
Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan. The consortium is sponsoring ‘sustainable development’ in
affected villages within a 300-meter corridor along the pipeline’s alignment and has also
developed “Environmental Investment” and “Community Investment” Programs.
i.
Community Investment Program
The objectives of BTC’s Community Investment Program are to:
•
•
•
Improve livelihoods and economic opportunities (using microcredit, enterprise
development opportunities, training and capacity building, and other income-generating
activities)
Support access to improved social infrastructure (clean water, schools, health care,
irrigation systems, sanitation)
Support the development of the agricultural and service sectors3.
About 300 villages are affected by the pipeline. BTC is building partnerships with a range of
organizations – national and international NGOs, civil society groups, and the communities
themselves – to assist in implementing and managing the Community Investment Program.
Individual projects will be selected through the RFP process and will aim to foster local business
development, develop effective civil society institutions, enhance educational capacity, assist
vulnerable groups, and promote local
culture. The Program plans to address
the limited availability of energy in
communities along the pipeline route
due to a lack of infrastructure,
interrupted supply, and severe poverty.
The Winter Heat Program focuses on
tree planting, small-scale energy
projects and more efficient use of wood
for fuel. In Southeast Anatolia, a region
plagued by conflict from 1984 to 1999,
a program has been launched to
encourage a return to villages that have
been restored by the Government. This
Illustration 2.2: The BTC pipeline running through
program should be monitored to assess
eastern Turkey.
its success.
ii.
Environmental Investment Plan
Along with its community programs, the BTC consortium claims that it has taken measures to
mitigate the project’s adverse environmental impacts, including:
•
•
•
Avoidance of all IUCN Category I-V sites, Ramsar wetland sites of international
importance and globally Important Bird Areas (IBAs), including the Ardahan Forest in
Turkey;
Narrowing the pipeline right-of-way in forested areas;
Translocation of rare species;
Cambridge, MA
- 18 -
•
•
Erosion control and adoption of bio-restoration standards;
Development of an Environmental Investment Program and a regional Biodiversity
Action Plan to implement environmental projects and enhance biodiversity
In addition, the head of the consortium, BP, will fund the development of biodiversity mapping,
support research and education programs, and contribute to projects protecting biodiversity.
Map 2.6: The BTC Pipeline shown on the region’s unique topography.
Source: BTC Consortium
2.3
Preserving biodiversity in the Kars region
Turkey’s economic boom in the last 15 years has led to increased concern over the emerging
environmental issues associated with economic growth. The country’s urban population has
increased substantially in the last decade as rural inhabitants have migrated to cities in search of
employment. Although that rate has now declined from 4.5% to 2.5%, in 2004, it is estimated
that 67% of Turkey’s population now live in urban areas.4 Urbanization has brought an
escalation of environmental problems associated with urban centers. Air pollution has increased
in Northeastern Anatolian towns due to particulate matter caused by coal stoves used for heating
during the long, frigid winters. Land degradation from poor agricultural practices, overgrazing,
over-fertilization and deforestation has led to significant soil erosion on 60% of Turkey’s land
surface.5 In terms of water pollution, the Black Sea in the east has been damaged by severe
overfishing and pollution from surrounding countries. Increasingly, Turkey’s extraordinary
biodiversity is under threat.
Turkey and the southern Caucasus region are in fact world-renowned for biodiversity. The
country’s position between Asia, Europe and Africa has led to a unique commingling of species
representing all three continents6. It is also home to a substantial number of endemic species.
More than 30% of the almost 8,650 plant species found in Turkey and 3.5% of its wildlife species
are unique to the country7. Scientists believe this phenomenon is partially due to the four
converging climate zones in the region and extremes of topography that have combined to isolate
Cambridge, MA
- 19 -
various plants and animals leading to the evolution of new species.8 As development occurs in
remote or untouched areas throughout Turkey, however, the undisturbed ecosystems harboring
unique species are threatened.
2.3.1
Irano-Anatolian Biodiversity Hotspot
Particularly important to the biodiversity of Turkey is the Irano-Anatolian biodiversity hotspot,
designated as such by the Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Conservation International.
The 34 hotspots identified worldwide have been defined as areas whose ecosystems represent a
substantial percentage of global biodiversity but face tremendous development pressure. The
criteria for the “hotspot” designation include two factors: the area must contain at least 1,500
endemic plant species and must also have lost at least 70% of its original habitat.9 The IranoAnatolian hotspot, which includes parts of Kars Province, covers almost 900,000 km2 and extends
through a substantial portion of Turkey as well as parts of Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Iraq,
Iran and Turkmenistan. 85% of the vegetation in this region has been lost to development, while
several unique species face possible extinction.
Map 2.7: Irano-Anatolian Biodiversity Hotspot. Conservation International.
Kars Province
Source: http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/Hotspots/irano_anatolian/
2.3.2
The World Wildlife Fund’s Global 200
The Global 200, a World Wildlife Fund initiative, is a scientific global ranking of the Earth’s
most biologically important land and water habitats. Started in the late 1990s, this program
covers every major habitat type on five continents and in all oceans, and is used to focus
conservation efforts toward protecting key ecosystems. The unit of measurement used to identify
the Global 200 is the “ecoregion”, large areas that maintain a consistent climate, similar
ecological features and characteristic plant and animal species. Two of the Global 200 regions
fall in Eastern Turkey:
Cambridge, MA
- 20 -
•
•
The Caucasus-Anatolian Hyrcanian Temperate Forests, a 200,000 square mile region
replete with temperate rain forests, ecological gems that occur in only seven regions in
the world, comprises part of Kars Province. Many plant species and several animal
species in these forests are found nowhere else.
The Anatolian Freshwater region, an area of 193,000 square miles containing Lake Van
at its easternmost point.
Map 2.8: Eastern Turkey’s Global 200 regions
Caucasus-Anatolian
Hyrcanian Temperate
Forests (yellow)
Kars Province
Anatolian Freshwater
region (blue)
Source: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/wildworld/global.html
2.3.3
Ecoregions in Kars Province
Eastern Anatolia provides a home for species representing the three biological sub-areas of
Central/Northern Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East/North Africa. Kars Province
contains part of two distinct World Wildlife Fund ecoregions: the Caucasus Mixed Forests to the
north and the Eastern Anatolian Montane Steppe to the south. Both showcase large numbers of
endemic plants and some endemic animal species.
Very little of Turkey’s land in these ecoregions is protected due in part to a lack of national
regulations. In 1998 Turkey developed a 20-year National Environmental Action Plan with
technical and financial support from the World Bank, but the document focuses primarily on
identifying environmental problems with significant negative impacts on the economy. While
Georgia and Armenia have developed national Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans to protect
their fragile ecosystems, Turkey has yet to adopt plans of its own. However, the UN Global
Environmental Facility is currently supporting a Biodiversity and Natural Resource Management
Project in the Camili Region on the Turkish/Georgian border in Artvín Province, and it is possible
that the strategies developed during this initiative could be expanded into a nationwide plan.10
The Allahüekber Mountains in Kars were designated as a national park in 2004, but surrounding
Cambridge, MA
- 21 -
land is currently threatened by inappropriate agricultural use, overgrazing and deforestation for
construction materials and fuel. In fact, the overall deforestation rate in Turkey has increased by
31.9% since the end of the 1990s and from 1990 to 2005 Turkey lost 2.2% of its forest and
woodland habitat.11 Growing use and a lag in supply of electricity and gas have pushed the poor
to resort to wood for cooking and heating.
Map 2.9: Eastern Anatolia ecoregions designated by the World Wildlife Fund.
Caucasus Mixed
Forests
Kars Province
Eastern Anatolian
Montane Steppe
Lake Van
Source: www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/
2.3.4
Internationally Important Bird Areas in the Kars Region
Eastern Anatolia is a well-known haven for birds migrating between Asia and Europe. There are
56 Internationally Important Bird Areas (IBA) in the region, areas that have been designated by
the Audubon Society as critical to birds during parts of their life cycle.
Kars Province is home to part of five IBAs. Cagan Sekercioglu of Stanford University indicated
that the grounds of Kafkas University, while not technically an IBA, are nonetheless important as
a migratory bird stopover area and a breeding area for some birds. In three weeks, he recorded
105 different bird species on Kafkas University lands and forecasts that the number will
eventually exceed one-third of Turkey’s 465 bird species.
The following map shows a preliminary delineation of the most important bird areas in the
region, areas that should be completely protected against development. Unfortunately, one of
these areas is the Coruh River Gorge which has already been affected by the dam at Artvín and
will continue to be impacted by plans for other hydroelectric projects.
Cambridge, MA
- 22 -
Map 2.10: Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in the Kars Region.
Source: Cagan Sekercioglu
2.3.5
The Coruh River Hydroelectric Project
A major hydroelectric development project has been initiated by the Turkish Government to be
constructed on the Coruh River running through the Province of Artvín to the Black Sea. Three
dams, including the Artvín dam closest to the Black Sea, are under construction or have been
completed, and seven others are planned for completion by 201012. The forecasted outputs of the
project are 10,474 million kilowatt hours of electric power and irrigation water for 260,000
hectares of agricultural land.
Cambridge, MA
- 23 -
However, the damming of rivers often
takes a severe toll on surrounding villages
and on local ecosystems. Most notably,
the Yusufeli dam, currently under
negotiation, would completely or partially
submerge 18 towns and villages,
displacing 15,000 people and destroying
archeologically important structures. The
proposed project also seriously threatens
Illustration 2.6: The Artvín Dam on the Coruh River.
the
undisturbed
wildlife
habitats
surrounding the river, most of which have
not be properly documented. Dr. Cagan
Sekercioglu of Stanford University
Illustration 2.3: One of the dams under construction on indicated that migrating birds will lose
the Coruh River at Artvin
stopover points and breeding grounds, and
in particular riverine birds along this fast moving river will be threatened. While the full impact
of the dam has yet to be assessed, some impact on climate can be expected because of the size of
this dam and could irreversibly damage the habitats of certain plant and animal species. The
project is understandably controversial and made headlines at the end of 2002 when the lead
contractor, French company SPIE, withdrew from the deal along with Spanish and Belgian
companies under pressure from human rights and environmental conservation NGOs as well as
other civil society groups.
2.4
Regional rural settlement patterns
In the late 1990s the State Planning Organization prepared a regional plan targeting the
development of the Eastern Anatolia Region covering 16 provinces. We have focused on the five
provinces of Kars, Ardahan, Iğdir, Ağri and Erzurum. Available statistics for Artvín (which is
not included in the EAP Master Plan) have been displayed on several of the maps that follow. In
the course of preparing the Eastern Anatolia Project Master Plan (EAP), an analysis of the
region’s rural settlement patterns was undertaken and provides information relevant to
understanding the area’s rural development potential.
2.4.1
Distribution of Rural Settlements
The EAP Project region is home to 18.8 percent of Turkey’s villages with 6,556 village
administration units in 16 cities. However, a number of other smaller settlements exist where
legally designated lands are held in common by the village residents, usually under a usufruct
tenure system. These hamlets are legally tied to administrations in their vicinity. Taking these
into account, the total number of permanent settlements in the region reaches as many as 14,500.
Together, the five provinces have a total of 3,403 permanent settlements. Ağri and Iğdir are the
densest, with 62.5 and 66.4 villages per 1000 km2 while Kars is the most sparsely populated with
455 settlements and a density of 44.2 villages per 1000 km2.
Cambridge, MA
- 24 -
Map 2.11: Provinces of the Eastern Anatolian Region
Source: Eastern Anatolia Project Master Plan
Table 2.2: Distribution of Rural Settlements by Province
Provinces
Number of Population Smaller
Villages
Settlements
Ağri
570
242,585
359
Ardahan
239
115,635
45
Erzurum
1,035
362,808
486
158
73,500
56
Iğdir
Kars
383
212,455
72
Total
2,385
1,006,983
1,018
Total for
34,962
12,699,434 41,495
Turkey
Percentage 18.8%
18.3%
15.9%
Population
Total
33,813
8,855
42,328
8,637
7,997
101,630
3,554,223
929
284
1,521
214
455
3,403
76,457
Total
Population
276,398
124,490
405,136
82,137
220,452
1,108,613
16,253,657
13.7%
17.4%
17.3%
Source: SIS 1997 Census Results and 1998 GDRA Planning and Research Division
Table 2.3: Density of Rural Settlements by Province
Provinces
Total Number of
Total Surface area of
Villages
Villages (km2)
Ağri
570
9,124
Ardahan
243
4,364
Erzurum
1,058
22,526
161
2,426
Iğdir
Kars
384
8,679
Total
2,416
47,119
Source: Calculated from SIS 1997 Census Results
Cambridge, MA
- 25 -
Number of Villages
per 1000 km2
62.5
55.7
47.0
66.4
44.2
55.2
2.4.2
Water infrastructure in villages in the Kars region.
Access to potable water is a concern for many villages in Eastern Anatolia. In the EAP region as
a whole, 15% of villages have insufficient potable water supply, while 11% have no access to
potable water. In Kars Province, 19% lack an adequate supply of potable water and 13% have no
potable water. Of the four provinces surrounding Kars, Erzurum has the highest percentage of
villages with sufficient access to potable water at 82%.
Table 2.4: Villages with access to potable water by province
Provinces
Ağri
Ardahan
Erzurum
Iğdir
Kars
Sufficient
Potable
Water
468
218
1,252
115
308
%
51%
76%
82%
54%
68%
Insufficient
Potable
Water
254
25
129
80
86
%
28%
9%
8%
37%
19%
No
Potable
Water
197
42
161
19
61
%
Total
%
21%
15%
10%
9%
13%
919
285
1,542
214
455
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Source: GDRA-Planning and Research Division’s Service Applications Inventory, Ankara, January 1999
2.5
2.5.1
Migration
Migratory Movements in Eastern Anatolia and the Kars Region
Globalization of the world economy has negatively affected Turkey’s rural sectors, hitting the
Eastern Anatolian region particularly hard. As a result, Eastern Anatolia is experiencing
significant out-migration as rural inhabitants seek employment in more prosperous provinces or
larger urban centers.
Migratory movements in Eastern Anatolia generally take two forms: migration from rural areas to
urban centers within the same province, and migration from poorer provinces to richer provinces
within the country. The growth in the region’s
urban population demonstrates the large-scale
rural-urban movements. From 1960 to 1997,
the provinces’ cities grew from 324,654
persons, or 9.6 percent of the population, to
2,379,134 persons, or 40.5 percent of the
population. Regarding population movements
outside of the region, the fertility rate in the
Eastern Anatolian provinces is twice the
country’s average while the population growth
rate is lower than the national rate, indicating
that a substantial number of the inhabitants are
leaving the area. This is confirmed by the
migration data given below.
Kars and its surrounding provinces exhibit the
migratory patterns common to the region: A
growing proportion of the population living in
urban centers and a negative net migration
balance. Map 2.12 shows the rising growth
rate of urban populations in Kars and five of
Map 2.12: Growth rate of urban population by
Province, 1975-2000.
Source: Turkish Statistical Institute, 2000
Cambridge, MA
- 26 -
its surrounding provinces. Between 1975 and 2000, Erzurum’s urban population grew by over 50
percent, while all of the other provinces except Ardahan showed a 35 to 50 percent growth rate in
the same year. Erzurum has also experienced the most out-migration with up to 100,000 people
leaving the province between 1995 and 2000,
followed by Ağri with less than 75,000 and
Kars and Artvín in the 25,000 to 50,000 range
(See Map 2.13)
Overall, Northeast Anatolia has suffered from
negative net migration rates since 1975. This
phenomenon peaked from 1985 to 1990, when
net migration rates in Kars, Ardahan and Iğdir
peaked at -150% (See Map 2.16). In Kars
itself, significant migratory movements
occurred in two specific periods. In the 1960s
and 1970s, rural dwellers moved to the larger
centers within the Province and elsewhere in
Turkey. The second substantial shift came in
the 1990s during a redistricting that separated
Ardahan and Iğdir, once a part of Kars
Map 2.13: Emigration by Province, 1995-2000
Province,
into separate entities. During this
period urban and rural populations headed for
Turkey’s major urban centers or emigrated to
Germany (where a large Turkish community was already well-established) or to other E.U.
countries. Maps 2.14, 2.15, 2.16 and 2.17 on the following page show the net migration prior to
the redistricting and therefore grouping the three provinces together, and Map 2.17 shows the
figures after the redistricting with separate statistics for the three provinces. Ardahan has the
highest negative migration balance and Iğdir the lowest while Kars is in the middle range.
2.5.2
Survey on Rural-Urban Linkages
The Institute team conducted meetings and interviews in Kars city and undertook a survey of 50
households who had migrated to Kars from villages in the region to assess the dynamics of
rural/urban linkages and the socio-economic impacts of migration. During visits to Kaleiçi and
several gecekondu neighborhoods within the Kars city boundaries, the responses received
centered around lack of employment opportunities, reliance on government to provide jobs and
assistance and disappointment in the fact that it is not forthcoming. Women were skilled in
weaving and handicrafts but lacked organization and markets for their goods. Those interviewed
migrated primarily from surrounding villages but still felt they lacked stability. Some wished they
had stayed in their villages as their expenses went up considerably with city living. Most were
happy at the prospect of being moved to better accommodations by the Municipality but
wondered how they would pay their utility bills.
Because of the poverty levels prevailing among rural migrants to Kars, dwellers in the gecekondu
were unable to send remittances to their relatives back in the village. In fact most were receiving
food products from their relatives in the villages.
Cambridge, MA
- 27 -
Maps 2.14, 2.15, 2.16, 2.17: Rate of net migration from Kars and surrounding provinces
Map 2.14
Map 2.15
Map 2.16
Map 2.17
i.
Socio-economic profiles of migrants to Kars
The survey comprises interviews of 47 men and 3 women of whom 66% are in the 20 to 40 age
bracket. The average household size is 5.6 members per household, as several of the migrants
interviewed come from large families with about 10 members and may have elderly parents or
younger siblings living with them. Nuclear families are usually composed of two adults in their
late twenties to early forties and either young children or teenagers.
In 86% of the households, decisions on financial matters are made by male members, mostly
fathers in their late 50s or older. The other 12% of households have joint decision-making
between husbands and wives or shared with other adult family members. Only one family headed
by a single mother reported herself as the key decision-maker for her two sons aged 21 and 19
years old respectively.
Cambridge, MA
- 28 -
Education presents a bipolar distribution: 48% of the interviewees claim to have at least 11 or
more years of education, and 36% report 5 or less years of education (see Table 2.5). The three
female migrants interviewed have 15 years of education each.
Table 2.5: Number of Years of Education of Migrants to Kars
Education Years
5 and below
6 to 10
11 to 15
15 and above
Total
No. of migrants (%)
18 (36%)
8 (16%)
23 (46%)
1 (2%)
50 (100%)
Prior to coming to Kars, 82% of the migrants and their families worked in agriculture and/or
stockbreeding (see Table 2.6). Following the move to Kars, more than half hold jobs in the
service industries. The rest, mostly the younger adults, are in technical or clerical jobs.
Migrants’ expectations reflected in their desired first job do not match the realities of employment
opportunities in Kars or the jobs they are presently holding. Only 20% are actually working in
the type of occupation they looked for when they first moved to Kars.
Table 2.6: Past and Present Occupations
Employment Sectors
PRIMARY
Agriculture, Stockbreeding, Farming
SECONDARY
Construction
Past
Present
41
1
1
1
TERTIARY – TECHNICAL/PROFESSIONAL
1
10
TERTIARY – ENTREPRENEURIAL/SERVICE-BASED
Retail, personal services, small and microbusinesses
0
24
TERTIARY – GOVERNMENT
0
2
OTHER
Student, no job preference, unemployed
N/A
0
7
2
0
*The number listed in each column may not refer to the same respondents.
76% of the migrants interviewed spend 1000 YTL or less on monthly household expenditure13
(see Table 2.7). When asked if their monthly income covers their expenses, 72% of the
interviewees reported their income as insufficient to meet the expenses they incur. But it is
unclear whether the reference to income includes anything beyond earned wages and salaries or
pensions and most probably excludes all forms of in-kind assistance received from relatives and
friends.
Cambridge, MA
- 29 -
Table 2.7: Monthly Household Expenditure
Monthly Household Expenditure (YTL)
500 YTL or less
501 to 800
801 to 1000
1001-1500
1501 and above
N/A
Total
ii.
No. of Men
18
15
5
6
2
1
47
No. of Women
1
2
3
Total (%)
18 (36%)
15 (30%)
5 (10%)
7 (14%)
4 (8%)
1 (2%)
50 (100%)
Rural-Urban Linkages
Rural-urban migration to Kars began in the 1950s. However, the bulk of the influx occurred in the
1970s and 1980s (see Table 2.8).
On average, the migrants come from villages about 40 to 45 km away from Kars. 40% come from
villages around Kars including Boğatepe and Çakmak, 36% come from the southern rural regions
of Kağizman, Digor, Selim and Sarikamiş. Migrants from the Kağizman region typically travel
about 70 km to come to Kars.
The three most popular destination mahalles are Yusufpasa, Halitpasa and Bulbul. Unlike in
many larger cities, migrants from the same village do not congregate in the same mahalle.
However, Yusufpasa mahalle appears to be popular among migrants from the rural areas of
Boğatepe, while Bulbul mahalle attracts migrants from the Kağizman area.
Table 2.8: Number of years in Kars
Years
5 and
below
6-10
11-20
21-30
31
and
more
Total
No. of
migrants
(%)
5 (10%)
9 (18%)
14 (28%)
18 (36%)
4 (8%)
50
(100%)
County of Origin
KarsKağizman
Merkez
2
1
Selim
Sarikamiş
Digor
Akyaka
Susuz
Arpaçay
Gole
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
5
7
4
2
3
3
2
0
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
3
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
1
0
20
(40%)
9
(18%)
2
(4%)
2
(4%)
5
(10%)
2
(4%)
4
(8%)
5
(10%)
1
(2%)
A major cause of rural-urban migration is poverty and lack of opportunity in the villages. 64% of
the migrants have come “to earn income” in order to send money back to their families or in
search of stable jobs, while the rest have come to Kars to seek a better standard of living (see
Table 2.9). Almost all of the 13 migrants who have come to look for employment are now
working the service industries: Nine have found jobs as “workers” in hotels, cafés, shops, etc,
while the rest are working as taxi drivers, in marketing and two in the Municipality. A migrant
who expressed the specific desire to find work in Kars as a photographer/journalist did not find
the job he came for. He is now a folk-dance trainer.
Cambridge, MA
- 30 -
Table 2.9: Reasons for Migrating
Reasons
Send funds back to village
Earn income*
Find job*
Get an education
Achieve a better living standard*
Secure future for children and individual
Other reasons
Total
No. of migrants (%)
12 (24%)
6 (12%)
14 (28%)
4 (8%)
11 (22%)
2 (4%)
1 (2%)
50 (100%)
* The 4 migrants (who gave ‘N/A’ in the Qn24 that the above data is based on) have answered in another question (Qn15)
that they would only return to the villages under the circumstances of job opportunities (2 migrants), better living standards
(1 migrant) higher value harvest (1 migrant) and availability of water (1 migrant).
Only 30% of the households surveyed still have immediate family living in the rural areas i.e.
parents, siblings and in-laws. The rest have extended family members, i.e. uncles, aunts and
cousins.
Frequency of visits between the migrants and their relatives in the villages is determined more by
distance and family relations than the length of time the migrants have left their villages. Of the
20 migrants from Kars County, 55% visit their relatives frequently while only about 28% of the
18 migrants from Kağizman, Selim, Sarikamiş and Digor do so as frequently (see Table 2.10).
The survey results show that 74% of all migrants are still in frequent contact (several times a
year) with their relatives in the villages, traveling to the villages for major occasions and
receiving visiting relatives in their city homes. Even among migrants who left their villages over
ten years ago, family connections remain strong. This strong link can be an asset in promoting
sustainable rural development in the region.
Table 2.10: Frequency of returning to village for visits
Frequency
Everyday
Weekly
At least
once a
month
Several
times a
year
Subtotal
Twice a
year
Once a
year
Sometimes
Rarely
Not at all
Subtotal
Total
No. of
migrants
(%)
1 (2%)
5 (10%)
Location of villages
KarsMerkez
Kağizman
Selim
Sarikamiş
Akyaka
Susuz
Arpaçay
Gole
1
2
3
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
5
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
11
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
1
3
0
1
1
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
3
4
1
9
20
(40%)
0
2
0
7
9
(18%)
0
1
0
1
2
0
2
0
2
2
(4%)
0
2
0
3
5
(10%
)
0
1
0
2
2
(4%)
0
0
0
1
4
(8%)
0
2
0
4
5
(10%)
0
1
0
1
1
(2%)
Digor
7 (14%)
7 (14%)
20
4 (8%)
7 (14%)
3 (6%)
15 (30%)
1 (2%)
30
50
(100%)
(4%)
Cambridge, MA
- 31 -
Over 60% of the migrants who have immediate family still living in the villages visit their family
regularly. Only two migrants, one from a village in Arpaçay and one from Sarikamiş, have
‘rarely’ any contact with their fathers. However, the Sarikamiş migrant intends to bring his father
to live with him in Kars, a common practice when parents are too old to be on their own without
assistance from children or relatives. Even among migrants who have extended family in the
villages, only 20% have little regular contact with their relatives in the villages. Yet almost all of
them stated their intention to bring some of their relatives to Kars.
Despite the strong links between migrants and their families, only 30% send financial or in-kind
remittances back to their villages. Of these, 80% send remittances on a regular basis, mostly
during the planting and harvesting seasons. 24% of the migrants interviewed reported that they
migrated to Kars for the specific purpose of sending remittances back to their villages. Only half
of these have managed to do so.
It is typical that relatives bring agricultural and animal products as well as handicrafts from the
village as presents or to have them sold in the city. 34% of the migrants reported that they obtain
part of their food provision from the villages (e.g. cheese and honey) and 66% report that they
sell village products in the city.
iii.
Village Life
The villages the migrants come from range in size from 30 to 450 households. Over 76% reported
that their villages have experienced a loss of population in the previous five to ten years. Only
four reported an increase in the number of households in their villages. Three of these four
migrants come from the village of Akyayla in Kağizman County and report that the village has
grown from about 45 to 65 households. The other place that is increasing in size is the village of
Akyaka where 300 households presently live. In eight cases the number of households has not
changed but the village may have still experienced a loss of population.
When asked under what circumstances the migrants would consider returning to their village,
22% said they do not want to return at all. Only one migrant would like to return to the village
regardless of circumstances. The remainder offered specific conditions necessary to motivate
their return to the village. These responses, shown in Table 2.11 below, clearly indicate the need
for income supplementation through non-farm income-generating activities or financial support
and training to improve agriculture and stockbreeding practices.
Table 2.11: Conditions necessary for migrants to return to villages
Conditions stated by migrants
Subsidy for agriculture and/or stock breeding
Financial support to farmers
Subsidy for investments (e.g. tractor)
Job and income generation opportunities
Organic agriculture opportunities
Better living standards
Infrastructure: roads, water, education
N/A
Total
No. of responses (%)
18 (36%)
3 (6%)
2 (4%)
5 (10%)
1 (2%)
4 (8%)
4 (8%)
1 (2%)
38 (100%)
Most migrants have little knowledge concerning organic agriculture and little understanding of
the connection between infrastructure, productivity and marketing. Yet close to half of the
Cambridge, MA
- 32 -
migrants surveyed dream of returning to their villages stating that they miss the contact with
nature, working in the fields, close relations with family members and friends, and the sense of
solidarity and community that prevails in the village.
Table 2.12: Valued features of village life
Village qualities mentioned by migrants*
Stock breeding
Agriculture
Relationships and family
Nature (Fresh air, green fields, stream)
Solidarity among village residents
Peaceful and restful environment
Village food
Animals
Everything
N/A
Total
6 (9%)
10 (16%)
8 (13%)
25 (37%)
4 (6%)
3 (4%)
2 (3%)
2 (3%)
2 (3%)
6 (9%)
68 (100%)
* Some respondents mentioned several valued qualities of village life. All responses are shown here.
iv.
Urban Living Conditions
Despite their longing for some aspects of village life, 58% of migrants expressed satisfaction with
living conditions in the city (see Table 2.13). Of the 21 who said that they were not happy in the
urban environment, five did not want to return to their villages.
68% of the migrants surveyed own their houses in Kars and overwhelmingly feel that the house
they have in the city is of the same quality or better than their village home. Yet some of the
houses in the gecekondus are not connected to the water supply network. Residents have to carry
water up the slopes, buy water or wait for the fire department to bring water to the area. 38.2% of
the underserviced families stated that they are unhappy with their living environment.
Even among tenants, 68.8% feel that their rented house in Kars is better than their village home.
Except for one household who depends on the river as its source of water supply, the rest get their
water from the city network. Paradoxically 50% of renters are unhappy with life in the urban
environment.
Table 2.13: Urban Living Conditions
Ownership
type
No. of
migrants
Owners
34
(68%)
16
(32%)
Renters
Better House Quality
City/
Village
N/A
Same
31
1
2
(91.2%)
(3%)
(5.8%)
11
4
1
(68.8%) (25%) (6.2%)
Access to Water
City
Others
Network
29
5
(85.3%)
(14.7%)
15
1
(93.8%)
(6.2%)
Cambridge, MA
- 33 -
Happy in Kars
Yes
No
21
(61.8%)
8
(50%)
13
(38.2%)
8
(50%)
v.
Alternatives for the Future
82% of the migrants interviewed stated that they have some knowledge of traditional culinary and
medicinal plants and affirmed that they know of elders who have good knowledge of herbal
medicinal formulas. Half of the migrants interviewed stated that they are familiar with wild
animals or birds in the Province.
In terms of available skills and preferences, 74% of migrants reported agriculture and
stockbreeding as their preferred areas of expertise if opportunities existed to engage in these
activities and earn a decent income.
When asked what should be done to improve conditions in their villages so that they can become
a sustainable and attractive living environment for future generations, the predominant
recommendations were financial assistance and education (see Table 2.14). 20% were unable to
make any suggestions, a reflection of economic distress in the villages and lack of awareness of
the potential contribution of improved practices. Similarly, information regarding organic
agriculture and non-farm opportunities in rural areas is sorely lacking.
Table 2.14: Suggestions to improve village life
Suggestions
Financial Support and/or Fuel Oil
Information and Awareness
Education, training, coordination
Subsidy with training
Organic agriculture training
Entrepreneurship
Others
N/A
Total
2.5.3
14 (28%)
8 (16%)
10 (20%)
4 (8%)
1 (2%)
1 (2%)
2 (4%)
10 (20%)
50 (100%)
The Emergence of Hometown Associations
Hometown Associations (HTAs) are organizations of migrants from the same rural towns or
villages that group themselves to provide social support or to raise money to fund projects in their
home towns. This concept is still at an embryonic stage among migrants from Kars Ankara is
home to 50 Associations of migrants from Kars and the surrounding provinces. Of these, 30 are
active and 20 exist on paper only. The active associations primarily serve a social function,
providing opportunities to meet and engage in social activities such as card playing. Of the 30
active associations, only three or four have a formal organizational structure and have taken on
projects to benefit their members.
i.
Kars-Ardahan-Igdir Karslılar Federasyonu
The precursor to the Kars-Ardahan-Iğdir Karslilar Federation was founded as an Association in
1994 but merged with four other organizations to form the Federation in 2005. This Federation is
dedicated to supporting immigrants to Ankara from the Kars region. The five associations
involved are:
•
•
Kars-Ardahan-Iğdir Serhatlilar Cultural and Solidarity Association,
Promotion of Sarikamiş and Solidarity Association,
Cambridge, MA
- 34 -
•
•
•
Kars Kağizman Association,
The Association of Youth Born in Kars and Sarikamiş Living in Ankara,
Ardahan (Bagdat) Ovapinar Village Association.
The Federation has a formalized organizational structure. The organization’s first Chairman was
chosen from among the members of the founding associations. Within six months, the Federation
held meetings to determine its governing boards which then elected their own leaders. The
Federation will not be able to add more associations to its membership as a new law regulating
federations and foundations limits membership to founding associations only.
The Federation and all of its members do not hold regular meetings, though they do try to
assemble fairly frequently. Some of the group’s leaders come together each weekend to meet in
the Federation’s office in Ankara. According to the group’s constitution, it is requested that
members pay annual dues but contributions are more or less voluntary. These dues are then used
to sponsor the Federation’s projects in Ankara.
The Federation does not restrict itself to particular types of projects but is willing to undertake a
range of initiatives depending on cost. Their most recent projects have been purchasing new toys
and folkloric dresses for the Atatürk Day-Care Center and providing food subsidies to members
of their organization living in Ankara. They also offer low-cost language and music classes to the
public. The director of the Managing Board generally selects the projects the group will fund.
The group has not funded any projects in Kars, largely due to their recent establishment, limited
funds and lack of information on current projects. Leaders of the Federation state that members
might be interested in partnering with the Municipality or NGOs on projects designed to generate
employment or advance touristic activities, but securing contributions for these types of projects
might prove difficult. Eventually the Federation would like to see all associations interested in
promoting Kars residents’ well-being come under one umbrella, an achievement that would
enable them to secure more funding and leverage their resources.
Kars Cultural and Solidarity Association
The Kars Cultural and Solidarity Association was founded as an Association in 1990 and is open
to anyone from Kars Province. The 60 member group elects the association’s chair and board,
and meets primarily on weekends. As with the Kars-Ardahan-Iğdir Karslilar Federation,
members contribute voluntary dues which are used for a variety of projects.
So far, the group has been interested primarily in finding jobs for unemployed members in
Ankara and in giving musical instrument lessons. They have very little revenue from members’
dues and have found it difficult to start other projects. However, they would be interested in
partnering with other organizations on projects in Kars depending on their financial situation.
It is evident from the survey that many migrants from villages to the Kars area have not
succeeded in saving enough money to send significant amounts as remittances to their families in
the villages. It is unlikely that they will be able to donate to projects that are not profitable in
some form.
Cambridge, MA
- 35 -
Tourism is an exceptionally good sector in which to initiate both small and large financially
viable and civic-minded projects which may be of interest to migrants. In many countries in
Latin America, migrants abroad are investing in hotels and other touristic projects that promise a
fairly large return while also benefiting the home towns. However, to generate the funds needed
for such investments would require that hometown associations be more fully developed and as
entrepreneurial as their Latin American counterparts are today. Proactive outreach from the
Governor, the Mayor, council members and senior officials in Kars will help existing associations
move in this direction. Their leaders must be presented with projects that can meet their
expectations financially and socially. The Kars region can develop tourism-based profit-making
ventures in pilot villages and create a marketing strategy and project information packages to
attract private investors. These packages could also be distributed among Kars migrants through
the hometown associations in the different cities.
Cambridge, MA
- 36 -
3
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF VILLAGES IN KARS PROVINCE
Illustration 3.1: Children in Ali Sofu Village
The assessment of rural development potential in Kars Province is based on an analysis of:
•
•
•
•
The links between the rural and urban economies;
The prevailing conditions in the villages based on field visits to 22 villages and
discussions with the Kars Province Department of Agriculture.
Programs initiated by the Province’s Department of Agriculture regarding the restoration
of the natural vegetation of the region and the improvement of livestock breeding. The
livestock issues were also discussed with the Union of Stockbreeders.
Discussion with SÜRKAL and visits to villages affected by the BTC Rural Development
Program to assess the impact of the activities implemented by SÜRKAL in the most
promising villages.
To complete this assessment, eight villages having a high development potential were selected as
sites for pilot projects and activities specific to each village in order to realize this potential.
Cambridge, MA
- 37 -
Map 3.1: Villages visited in Kars
3.1
Interviews of village households
The second section of this report addressed rural-urban linkages by describing and analyzing data
gathered from interviews of 50 migrants from nearby villages living in Kars municipality. To
complete the analysis, 47 village households were also surveyed to gather detailed information on
the challenges rural households face and the economic and social links between villages and
urban centers. The households interviewed were asked a set of basic questions and were then
divided into two subsets of 25 and 22. The first group responded to specific questions on village
life and rural practices (subset 1), while the second gave information related to the links between
rural and urban economies (subset 2).
3.1.1
Profile of Rural Households
The team interviewed 46 men and 1 woman in the course of this survey. 49% of the heads of
household were in the 25 to 45 age bracket. The average household size was six members,
although some families reported their children who had migrated to Kars as part of their
households. The number of small families was offset by larger households of up to 15 members.
Cambridge, MA
- 38 -
Table 3.1: Ages of Heads of Household
Age Groups
25 to 35
36 to 45
46 to 55
56 to 65
65+
n/a
Total
No. of villagers (%)
11 (23%)
12 (26%)
9 (19%)
5 (11%)
9 (19%)
1 (2%)
47 (100%)
In subset 1, educational experience was closely divided between elementary and secondary
schooling. 44% of respondents reported that they had completed some secondary education, while
the rest indicated they had finished only primary school. Many villages have elementary schools,
but children must often be transported to high schools in neighboring towns to continue their
education.
Adequate health care is another concern for village dwellers. Only 32% of villagers in subset 1
reported having a health clinic in their village, and 80% stated that they do not have any form of
health insurance.
Table 3.2: Educational and Health Care Facilities by Village
Villages
Çakmak
Çilehane
Yolboyu
Handere
Koçköyü
Lehimli
Subatan
Tasbasi
Turkgozu
Elementary School
Yes
Yes, with 50-60 students*
Yes, with 100 students
Yes
Yes
Yes
Secondary School
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Health Clinic
Yes
Yes
No*
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
*These responses were reported by the villagers interviewed. In a few cases, respondents gave conflicting answers
regarding the number of students in the school or the existence of a health clinic.
3.1.2
Livelihoods
As in most villages in the region,
villagers’ primary occupations were
agriculture, stockbreeding and dairy
production. 89% were involved in cropcultivation, primarily of wheat, oats, and
barley. Other crops cited included corn,
beans, clover, flaxseed, and canola. 63%
also reported sowing high protein
animal feed such as yonca, korunga and
fig.
Of those who raise crops, 36% indicated
that they use chemical fertilizers to
increase production, and one individual
declared that nothing would grow on his
Illustration 3.2: Typical village in Kars Province
Cambridge, MA
- 39 -
land without them. Interestingly, 17% said they use only natural fertilizers, and almost 10%
reported using organic farming practices. The villagers growing organic crops were all from
Büyük Çatma, a community which prides itself on its farming methods. Two other individuals
expressed interest in learning organic farming techniques, while one villager claimed to have
knowledge of organic farming but not the budget to afford the expensive registration and
certification processes required for produce to bear the “certified organic” label.
Table 3.3: Fertilization Methods
Fertilization
Chemical fertilizers
Natural fertilizers alone
Natural fertilizers and organic farming methods
Fallowing land alone
Using higher quality seed
n/a
Total
Every household in subset 2 practiced
animal husbandry, and all except one
reported taking measures to improve
their stockbreeding. These activities
ranged from keeping a close watch on
the health of the animals to practicing
artificial
insemination,
and
the
responses demonstrated differences in
opinion on optimal methods of
maintaining their herds. Villagers in
Kars have had varying degrees of
success when taking part in projects to
advance
stockbreeding.
These
experiences are discussed in section
3.3.1.
No. of villagers who raise crops (%)
15 (36%)
3 (7%)
4 (10%)
1 (2%)
2 (5%)
17 (40%)
42 (100%)
Illustration 3.3: Many families continue to raise sheep
and use sheepskin and wool.
Table 3.4: Methods of Improving Stockbreeding (Subset 2)
Measures taken*
Monitoring animal health
Artificial insemination
Maintaining one species
Growing high protein animal feed
Crossbreeding
Improving fertility of blood
Maintaining the number of cattle
Proper hygiene
n/a
Total
No. of villagers (%)
14 (42%)
5 (15%)
3 (9%)
3 (9%)
2 (6%)
2 (6%)
2 (6%)
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
33 (100%)
*Some respondents gave more than one answer.
79% of the villagers reported producing dairy products including milk, yogurt, butter and cheese,
either for their families or to sell in town. Goods produced by villagers to sell in the city are
discussed in more detail in section 3.1.5.
Cambridge, MA
- 40 -
Carpet-weaving
and
crafting
of
traditional goods such as tablecloths,
socks, slippers and bedding are skills
that village women have passed down
through generations.
In the past,
women would weave not only for their
families but also to sell their products
for a decent price in town. However, as
the number of Turkish-made machinewoven carpets has rapidly increased, the
market for the more expensive
handmade ones has dwindled. As a
result, many women no longer weave,
Illustration 3.4: Older woman in Ali Sofu shows the
and their daughters have become less
beautiful carpet she has woven for her family’s guestroom. interested
in learning the craft.
However, the skills have not altogether disappeared. 68% of the villagers in subset 1 stated that
they have knowledge of weaving carpets and making other traditional handicrafts and several
expressed eager interest in producing these goods once again for a revitalized market.
3.1.3
Rural standards of living
The majority of villagers interviewed in subset 1 indicated that their income was insufficient.
While 28% could not calculate their income or did not answer the question, the incomes of those
who responded ranged from 100 to 600 YTL per month. 24% stated that their earnings did not
cover their expenses or covered the costs of food only. Surprisingly, 32% of respondents
reported having a bank account. Generally, those who had determined their monthly income were
more likely to place their money in the bank (see table 3.5). One individual with a bank account
who stated that the household generated no monthly income received remittances from a family
member in the city. Remittances are addressed in more detail in section 3.1.5.
Despite low income levels, 94% of the villagers surveyed (both subsets) owned their houses. Of
those, 38% inherited their homes, 17% built them, and 10% bought them from others. When
subset 2 was asked if they had repaired their homes in the last five years, 64% responded
affirmatively. Only two households indicated that they rent their dwellings: the first, a migrant
worker living in Subatan, and the second, a family of five with young children in Borluk.
Table 3.5: Knowledge of Income with Number of Bank Accounts by Village
Knowledge of Income
100-200 YTL/month
200-300 YTL/month
300-500 YTL/month
500-600 YTL/month
No income
Does not cover expenses
Covers food only
No idea
n/a
Total
No. of Villagers (%)
2 (8%)
1 (4%)
3 (12%)
1 (4%)
1 (4%)
3 (12%)
3 (12%)
4 (16%)
7 (28%)
25 (100%)
Bank Account
0 (0%)
1 (4%)
3 (12%)
1 (4%)
1 (4%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
2 (8%)
8 (32%)
Cambridge, MA
- 41 -
Village
Koçköyü
Çakmak,
Handere
Yolboyu
Turkgozu
Yolboyu
Çilehane,
3.1.4
Challenges facing rural households
Residents of villages in Kars face some challenges common to rural dwellers around the world
and other difficulties unique to the region. Creative solutions to the most pressing of these
obstacles are a necessary part of any rural development strategy.
i.
Migration
Nearly every village in Kars has seen a decline in its population as individuals and families leave
rural areas to seek employment in the cities. The majority of villagers interviewed claimed to
know at least 100 people who had migrated, and one stated he knew of 500 households who had
left their villages. In interviews of subset 1 almost every villager described their community’s
dramatic loss of households and population.
Some rural families have been hard hit by the loss of able-bodied family members. While
migration has not affected every family equally, 7 households interviewed responded that their
workload had significantly increased when family members left for the city. Some households
hired workers to manage the activities, but others who could not afford to pay for labor have
divided the additional workload among themselves.
ii.
Diversification of income-generating activities
Most rural inhabitants are farmers,
making a living by cultivating crops and
practicing
animal
husbandry.
Unfortunately, the region’s long harsh
winters limit the diversity and yield of
crops, and animals are often susceptible
to a range of diseases. In fact, five
families interviewed stated that they
were negatively impacted by the Avian
Flu which raged through Eastern Turkey
and led to the culling of thousands of
geese and chickens.
80% of villagers in subset 1 reported
seeking supplementary sources of
income. When asked for examples of
projects in which they would be interested, villagers suggested the income-generating or incomeenhancing activities listed in Table 3.6.
Illustration 3.5: Some households raise bees in hives as
pictured here as a supplementary source of income.
Cambridge, MA
- 42 -
Table 3.6: Ideas for Income Generating Projects
Activities*
Carpet-weaving
Dairy compound
Associations/cooperatives
Better marketing of existing products
Alternative crops
Eco-tourism
Guesthouse
Subsidies
Beekeeping
Trout farms
n/a
Total
Responses from villagers (%)
7 (20%)
5 (14%)
5 (14%)
4 (11%)
3 (9%)
2 (6%)
2 (6%)
2 (6%)
1 (3%)
1 (3%)
3 (9%)
35 (100%)
*Most respondents gave more than one answer.
iii.
Services and village access
Road access to many villages is inadequate at best and dangerous at worst. Few roads are paved
and dirt roads are full of potholes and washed out of sections. In general, villages are only
accessible by four wheel drives particularly in the winter time.
Steady source of water supply is crucial for irrigation. Subset 1 responded to questions
concerning the village’s water supply. Although 92% of villagers affirmed that they had access
to potable water, 56% said that no water was available for irrigation. One villager in Yolboyu
mentioned that he was interested in planting more trees in his village but the lack of water for
irrigation made this idea impossible.
iv.
Lack of support
Village dwellers avail themselves of very few opportunities to better their living conditions,
although capacity building, educational initiatives and direct aid programs exist. Even in cases
where such programs are available, many villagers are unaware of their existence. While eight
families in subset 1 reported receiving some form of aid from government grants, SYDF, or the
Ministry of Agriculture, the majority stated they had not received any outside support.
3.1.5
Links between rural and urban economies
The extensive outmigration from villages in the region to Kars and larger cities over the last
decade has hurt some households economically, but it has also created new social and economic
links and strengthened existing connections between rural and urban areas. Even those who
prefer to live in villages go to the city often to acquire products and visit relatives, often bringing
food products to sell and village goods for family members living in the city. Some village
households are receiving remittances from relatives in urban areas and using these funds to cover
daily needs. Initiatives aimed at enhancing these associations between urban and rural economies
and creating a marketing program for rural products in urban centers have the potential to
contribute significantly to rural development and improve the living conditions of village
dwellers.
Cambridge, MA
- 43 -
i.
Familial connections and perceptions of the city
96% of the villagers surveyed reported having relatives that had moved to the city. Istanbul was
cited as a destination city by 71% of those interviewed, while Kars, Ankara and Izmir were also
mentioned frequently (see Table 3.7). While most of the migrants from Kars remained in Turkey,
one villager had children living as far away as Belgium and France. In the majority of cases,
villagers had at least one immediate
family member who had migrated (i.e.
children or siblings) and one or more
extended family members who had left
the village (i.e aunts, uncles, nephews
and cousins).
Communication links between the
village households and their migrant
family members remain strong. All of
the villagers interviewed maintain
contact with their relatives in the city
either by phone or through visits.
Among
those
who
reported
Illustration 3.6: Migrants to the city frequently miss the
communicating by phone, the frequency
beautiful landscapes surrounding their villages.
of calls ranged from twice per month to
once a year. 60% reported visiting their relatives in the city at least once, while 56% indicated
that their visits were more regular, some as often as once a month. The length of visits varied
from a few days when traveling to see relatives in Kars to two weeks when visiting Istanbul or
Izmir. Several villagers indicated that they were only able to visit their relatives in Kars as it was
too difficult to travel greater distances. Surprisingly, only one person cited lack of funds as a
reason for not visiting the city.
Table 3.7: Frequency of Visiting Relatives by City
City
Istanbul
Ankara
Kars
Izmir
Izmit
Bursa
Erzurum
Eskisehir
No. of villagers with
relatives in that city
32 (71%)
7 (14%)
14 (31%)
8 (16%)
3 (12%)
3 (12%)
1 (2%)
2 (4%)
Ability to visit relatives in the
city*
20 (63%)
2 (28%)
9 (64%)
6 (75%)
1 (33%)
2 (67%)
1 (100%)
1 (50%)
*Percentage of the number who indicated they had relatives in a particular city
83% of villagers had migrant family members who returned to the village to visit. The frequency
of these visits varied widely. In some cases in which the relative had relocated to Istanbul or
Izmir, visits would occur only once over several years. Other households with family members in
Kars stated that their relatives would return to the village quite often. One 55-year-old man
reported that his family members in Kars visited his village, Yolboyu, every day. These
responses are corroborated by information gathered in the previous survey of migrants in Kars
which indicated that although most migrants like living in the city, some miss the close
relationships with family and friends and the sense of community that life in the village provides.
Cambridge, MA
- 44 -
The survey showed evenly divided preferences for rural versus urban life. Over half of the
villagers indicated that they liked the city, but 6% of those noted that they preferred life in the
village although they enjoyed their city experiences. Over half of those who had family members
in urban areas expressed interest in moving to live with their relatives in the city. Interestingly,
age was not a strong determinant of preference for urban or rural areas. While a majority of those
in the 25 to 35 age bracket liked the city and were considering relocating, 7 out of 9 individuals
over 65 also indicated that they liked the city and four had thought of migrating. Those in the
middle age groups were more resistant to the idea of moving to an urban area.
Table 3.8: Preference for Urban Life and Desire to Migrate by Age Bracket
Age Bracket
25 to 35
36 to 45
46 to 55
56 to 65
65+
n/a
Total
Likes the City
Yes
No
7
4
(15%)
(9%)
7
5
(15%)
(11%)
4
5
(9%)
(11%)
1
4
(2%)
(9%)
7
2
(15%)
(4%)
1
0
(2%)
(0%)
27
20
(57%)
(43%)
Would like to move
Yes
No
7
3
(15%)
(6%)
6
6
(13%)
(13%)
3
6
(6%)
(13%)
2
3
(4%)
(6%)
4
4
(9%)
(9%)
1
0
(2%)
(0%)
23*
22*
(49%)
(47%)
Total %
11*
(26%)
12
(24%)
9
(20%)
5
(10%)
9*
(18%)
1
(2%)
47
(100%)
*One respondent in this age bracket did not answer the second question.
*Percentages are rounded off to the nearest whole number.
ii.
Economic links
The economic links between rural and urban areas covered in the survey can be divided into three
categories:
•
•
•
Purchases made by villagers in the city.
Products marketed and sold in the city by villagers and the uses to which earnings are
allocated
Remittances sent by migrants in the city to their families in the village.
Purchases made in the city
Apart from visiting relatives, villagers reported participating in other primarily economic
activities in the urban areas. 64% cited shopping or “household requirements” as key pursuits
when visiting urban centers. Others used their time in the city for health care, trade or work.
Several villagers indicated that they travel to Kars every day for shopping or other needs.
As links between villages and cities have strengthened, village households have begun to rely on
products acquired in town. When subset 2 was asked about the goods they buy during trips to the
city, about half cited clothes and food as their primary purchases, while 45% reported buying
products to meet “daily needs”.
Cambridge, MA
- 45 -
Products sold in the city
83% of the villagers surveyed sell one or more village products in Kars. Dairy products dominate
the list, with 72% selling milk, butter, cheese, yogurt or some combination of these goods. 24%
reported selling bulls or heifers, especially when money was needed. Four individuals mentioned
selling animals including cattle and lambs. Noticeably absent in this list of goods were carpets
and traditional handicrafts, as the market
for these products has all but
disappeared.
A portion of the money earned from the
sale of products in the city goes toward
some form of investment. Villagers
interviewed in subset 2 selected
categories on which they were likely to
spend part of their earnings. While 82%
stated they used some of the money to
purchase clothing, 77% also said they
spent earnings on seed and equipment
for improving agricultural production.
Illustration 3.7: Livestock is frequently sold in the city
Purchasing
livestock,
reinvesting
when money is needed.
income into the production of saleable
goods, and home improvement were other investment related categories on which a significant
number of villagers spent part of their income. 77% acknowledged that they used a portion of
their earnings to pay off debts.
Table 3.9: Uses of Income Generated by the Sale of Products in the City (Subset 2)
Uses
Seed or equipment for agricultural production
Livestock
Invested back into the production of saleable
goods
Land
Improve housing
Clothing
Pay debts
Medical expenses
Fruit trees or honeybees to diversify production
Cooperative dues
Yes
17
(77%)
17
(77%)
11
(50%)
9
(41%)
13
(59%)
18
(82%)
17
(77%)
11
(50%)
2
(9%)
2
(9%)
No
5
(23%)
5
(23%)
11
(50%)
13
(59%)
9
(41%)
4
(18%)
5
(23%)
11
(50%)
20
(91%)
20
(91%)
Total %
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
22
(100%)
As is typical in rural areas, male heads of household determine the family’s needs and
expenditures. The only exception among those interviewed was a household headed by a 68Institute for International Urban Development
Cambridge, MA
- 46 -
year-old woman who indicated that financial decisions were made jointly among family
members.
Remittances sent to village households
Migrants to the city often attempt to secure employment that will generate enough income to send
a portion to their families in the villages. However, the results of the survey indicate that this
goal is rarely achieved in Kars. Only 10% of the villagers interviewed reported receiving any
form of financial assistance from their relatives Kars, and only one indicated that he received
these remittances on a monthly basis. Interestingly, two of the five households that received
remittances stated that the funds were transferred to them through their bank account, a rare
occurrence in villages in the region.
3.1.6
Case studies: Links between village households and migrants in Kars
Four of the interviews conducted in the villages were undertaken with relatives of migrants in
Kars who had previously been interviewed and their responses noted in the first interim report.
Three of these four cases have been selected to show the challenges facing both rural dwellers
and urban migrants and the connections between rural and urban economies.
i.
Father and son from Boğatepe
In Boğatepe, the team interviewed a 55-year-old man with one son living with him in the village
and another son who had migrated to the Yusufpasa mahalle in Kars. One of the villager’s
children, the spouse and child lived with
him and his wife in the village. His son
in Kars had found a job in marketing but
was not earning enough to cover his
expenses of 600 YTL per month. He
was unable to send money back to his
family in the village, but he did bring
food and other goods from the city when
he returned to the village once a week.
In return, his father brought milk and
cheese to his son’s family when he
visited Kars each month.
Source:Mustafa Gönen
In addition to the food products for his
son, this villager also produced cheese
Illustration 3.8: Cheese production in Boğatepe.
to sell in Kars during his visits. He used
the income from the sales to improve
and increase production of his cheese, purchase equipment or seed to increase the yield from his
wheat and oat fields, repair and improve his house that he inherited, buy clothing and cover
medical expenses.
Although he said he preferred the village and would not like to move to Kars, he acknowledged
that the household’s lives were altered when his son and other family members migrated. He was
forced to hire more workers to meet the demands of the farming, cheese production and
stockbreeding.
Cambridge, MA
- 47 -
ii.
Cousins from Gunindi
Another interview was conducted with a villager from Gunindi, a man of 57 years who reported
having a number of relatives in Erzurum, Istanbul, Ankara and Kars. This villager had little
liking for the city and his visits were short and infrequent, although he did report selling milk and
cheese there. The earnings generated were used to purchase agriculture related products, buy
livestock, improve the home he had
built and diversify the goods he was
able to produce and sell. He indicated
that he was a member of the village’s
stockbreeding cooperative and grew
yonca, korunga and fig to improve the
diets of his cattle. He also has had to
hire workers to compensate for the loss
of migrating family members.
His cousin, a migrant to the Bulbul
mahalle of Kars, was also interviewed.
He had relocated his entire immediate
family of fourteen members with him to
Illustration 3.9: A field of korunga, a plant used as high
the city and had only cousins remaining
protein animal feed.
in Gunindi, but he reported visiting the
village once a month. Because of his
large family, his household faced monthly expenses of 2500 YTL. Although he had secured
employment as a construction worker his wages could not come close to covering his expenses.
He was unhappy in Kars and dreamed of returning to his village to practice stockbreeding, his
former occupation. He was interested in participating in projects aimed at improving living
conditions in his village and commented that he would return to Gunindi if a subsidy for
stockbreeding was made available.
iii.
Cousins from Mescitli
In the third case three cousins were interviewed. One had remained with his family in the village
of Mescitli in Arpaçay but the other two had migrated to the Halitpasa mahalle of Kars. The
cousin in the village was in his mid-thirties with four children 10 years of age and under. He
expressed a liking for the city but preferred to remain in the village. The products he sold in Kars
were butter, cheese and yogurt, and he reported using the income from the sales of these products
to improve his barley and wheat crops, repair and add to the house he had built, purchase clothing
and pay off debts. He would bring butter and cheese to his relatives when visiting them in
Istanbul and Kars.
The older of the two cousins in Kars, a 35-year-old father of four, kept in close communication
with his relatives in Mescitli. Besides visiting the village once a week, he continued to practice
stockbreeding in addition to working as a taxi driver. He indicated that he would be interested in
participating in projects to enhance agricultural production and stockbreeding in his village, and
stated that he would consider moving back to Mescitli if he could receive a stockbreeding subsidy
The younger cousin, in contrast, was not interested in returning to the village under any
circumstances. He had moved to the city to secure a better future for his two young children and
Cambridge, MA
- 48 -
enjoyed urban life. He reported visiting his relatives in Mescitli only on religious holidays and
they rarely visited him in the city. He had also found employment as a taxi driver in Kars and,
unlike his cousin, he found that this job generated enough income to cover his family’s living
expenditures of 900 YTL per month.
3.2
Villages affected by the BTC Pipeline
3.2.1
BTC’s Sustainable Rural Development Projects implemented in Kars Province by
SÜRKAL
Under its Community Investment Program (CIP), BTC has initiated projects promoting
“sustainable” rural development in villages affected by the pipeline including villages in Kars
Province. One of the implementation strategies of the CIP is to form partnerships with national or
local NGOs to facilitate completion of the projects. SÜRKAL (The Sustainable Urban and Rural
Development Association) has been overseeing the rural development projects in Kars using
USD$825,000 contributed by BTC. SÜRKAL also has received funding from several other
donors in support of these efforts.
The projects to be implemented fall into four categories:
•
•
•
•
Capacity Building: Improving the technical capacity of institutions and employees
Income Generating Activities: Support for greenhouse activities and vaccination of more
than 100,000 animals.
Social Infrastructure: Small infrastructure projects, potable water supply and repairing of
storage facilities.
Agricultural Education: Introduction of the nutritious corn pickle, instruction in
greenhouse growing techniques.
BTC’s CIP project area covers four kilometers on both sides of the pipeline. In Kars Province,
there are 24 villages within this band in which SÜRKAL is implementing projects. BTC has
committed funds towards the improvement of infrastructure for all of the villages along the
pipeline. In addition, 21 Quick Impact Projects (QIPs), initiatives designed to respond to an
immediate community need, have been completed in Kars. Below are several examples of these
smaller-scale projects:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bridge construction in Sarıgül village
Construction of an eight-kilometer potable water pipeline in Sırataşlar village
Construction of a five-kilometer potable water pipeline in Kurmançayı village
Kaptaj construction in Yalak village
Repair of storage facilities in Karaurgan village
Reforestation in Darboğaz village
Reforestation in Balyama village
Construction of water infrastructure in Başköy village
3.2.2
Assessment of program initiatives in villages with high development potential
Of the 16 villages in Kars Province affected by BTC’s Community Investment Program,
Karaurgan, Karakale, Hasbey, Darboğaz and Boğatepe were highlighted by SÜRKAL as having
Cambridge, MA
- 49 -
the highest development potential. The team visited these five villages to assess the impact of
SÜRKAL’s projects.
BTC is conducting training programs and funding and implementing infrastructure projects in
these five villages. This has caused many villagers some confusion over which organization is
responsible for particular initiatives. SÜRKAL has been spending too little money on marketing
and advertising and is therefore not well-known to local people. The NGO has included
advertising funds in its budget for the coming year.
Map 3.2: Kars Villages along the BTC Pipeline
* Villages in bold lettering were visited by the team. The alignment of the Pipeline on the map is approximate.
i.
Karaurgan
This village of about 1400 residents is a successful example of organization and cooperation. In
August of 2005 under the direction of SÜRKAL the village established an effective 40 member
association that is currently implementing a project to construct a village sewage system with
$90,000 donated in part by UNDP and SÜRKAL. The NGO has held two training sessions in
the village, one focused on improving conditions at 30 dairy farms and the other aimed at
teaching 15 women about environmental pollution and wastewater. At the end of the training
session the experts distributed detergent, toothpaste and toothbrushes. SÜRKAL has also helped
the villagers to prepare and submit an application for EU funding for qualifying projects under
the various EU programs.
Cambridge, MA
- 50 -
The NGO’s other activities in the village have been less successful. From 2003 to 2005
SÜRKAL had offered artificial insemination services to villagers at a price of 10 YTL per plant.
This project was discontinued when private providers where retrained by the department of
agriculture to offer this as a free service to farmers. In December of 2005, SÜRKAL’s project
manager signed a document promising a contribution of $10,000 to the village association. Eight
months have passed and that commitment has not been materialized.
BTC’s involvement in the village has been less pronounced. They held a training session for 50
villagers on the subject of animal health, and also donated $21,535 to the village association.
With these funds the association purchased 3,000 meters of pipe, 300 packs of cement and 1,200
cords of lumber for use in future projects. BTC also promised to purchase a slaj machine for the
village but has not yet fulfilled this pledge.
Overall, Karaurgan’s residents are industrious, capable, and able to understand and learn from
SÜRKAL’s project development and management training. They take responsibility to improve
their village’s living conditions and demonstrate innovation and openness to new ideas.
ii.
Karakale
After Karaurgan, Karakale is the second most productive and well-organized village. At the
request of SÜRKAL, in April 2005 120 villagers established the Karakale Development and
Improvement Association which is now seeking funding to purchase a fertilizer top-dressing
machine (gübre serpme makinası) to support farmers in their agricultural activities. In addition
the association is planning to rent the machine to farmers from other villages in order to generate
income for the association.
SÜRKAL’s activities received mixed
reviews in Karakale.
The village
association is still waiting for a pledged
donation of $4,000 from the NGO, as
well as a slaj machine that was promised
in 2005. The artificial insemination
project was also initiated in Karakale
and terminated when private companies
began to offer the service with an
overall success rate of about 60%.
Village women have also complained
that the training sessions on animal
Illustration 3.10: Education in maintaining animal health
health, infant care and hygiene were not
is vital for families engaged in stockbreeding.
satisfactory. However, SÜRKAL has
improved three kilometers of road in the village and has partially completed construction of a
water pipeline and a water storage tank. The organization also sold seed plants and seeds to local
farmers, after which the production of seed plants increased from eleven tons in 2005 to twentyfive tons in 2006.
BTC’s work is regarded with similar skepticism. They had committed to improve the village’s
internal road network and began construction on this project. However, the villagers are not
happy with these new roads as animals are not able to walk on them and have stated that they
prefer the older roads. BTC also gave 4,000 meters of pipeline to construct a water channel
Cambridge, MA
- 51 -
which has not yet been completed, and promised the village a fertilizer top-dressing machine and
a drinking fountain which have not materialized. The association is currently awaiting the results
of a project proposal on natural fertilizers and environmental protection in Karakale that was
submitted to UNDP in April 2006.
Karakale also has one of the most capable groups of residents who are able to make use of the
project development and management training and work together with SÜRKAL to implement
projects.
iii.
Hasbey
SÜRKAL’s staff describes Hasbey as a village with an efficient women’s association that helped
bring about the construction of a potable water pipeline. However, the perception in the village is
very different. A women’s association exists and the leader of that organization has been chosen
by SÜRKAL, but participants have not understood the content of the two organizational meetings
and the association is essentially non-functioning. As for the water pipeline, it was ultimately
constructed poorly by SÜRKAL and its impact is limited.
Training courses on human and animal health in Hasbey have also been relatively ineffective.
Women participating in the course indicated that SÜRKAL’s presentation was not clear and the
information was hard to understand.
SÜRKAL has successfully repaired three kilometers of gravel road, delivered 20 packages of
cement, and 30 seedlings to a number of households. They oversaw the construction of seven
greenhouses which were poorly built and have become rather dilapidated, and from 2004 to 2005
the NGO ran the artificial insemination program for 10 YTL per plant.
SÜRKAL has received $1,353,000 to implement the above projects. The villagers are aware that
BTC has contributed $850,000 to SÜRKAL and are quite critical of how the funding has been
spent. BTC is not currently active in Hasbey except for the funding channeled through SURKAL.
iv.
Darboğaz
In terms of productivity this village is also a successful case. Although the village does not yet
have an association, they plan to establish one in the near future. The villagers demonstrate
competence in project development and management.
SÜRKAL has had somewhat more success in Darboğaz than in Hasbey. They initiated the
planting of 2000 saplings and 95% of them have survived. Seven newly built greenhouses,
though poorly constructed, have provided villagers with space to grow vegetables for their
families, and SÜRKAL has made some contributions for seeds and animal feed. BTC’s only
activity in Darboğaz has been to repair three kilometers of gravel road.
Training sessions in animal health and artificial seed insemination were offered by a veterinarian
to 15 people, and meetings on avian flu were held for village women. Toothpaste, toothbrushes
and detergent were distributed following the meetings. Villagers complained that they did not
understand the sessions. In general, residents of Darboğaz seem less flexible and less eager to
improve their village than residents of Karaurgan or Karakale.
Cambridge, MA
- 52 -
v.
Boğatepe
This village is known for its dairy products. The residents would like to pool their resources to
establish a big dairy farm (mandıra) and continue their production at a larger scale, an effort
which SÜRKAL supports. In addition, Boğatepe’s stockbreeding has potential but more resources
are needed to expand this sector. Boğatepe is covered in more detail in section 4.3. as it is
included among the villages selected by this study for their high development potential.
3.3
Assessing rural development potential
A reconnaissance survey of villages in the Kars region showed that communities that offer the
greatest potential for sustainability in a region suffering from rapid rural depopulation and the
growing disaffection of youth for village life fall into four broad categories:
•
•
•
•
Villages close to Kars and/or to centers of historic, environmental or cultural interests;
Villages offering climatic and vegetative variations and/or diversity;
Villages presenting cultural, biological, occupational and agricultural diversity;
Villages with unique characteristics giving them a special development potential (specific
products, pool of skills, or multi-sectoral potential);
All of the villages discussed in section 4.3 fall into one or more of these categories. More
specifically, the villages were selected for their high development potential in one of the
following key areas:
•
•
•
•
Marketing of dairy products particular to the region;
The practice of organic farming methods;
Picturesque landscapes and natural features that could attract eco-tourism;
A significant number of skilled weavers interested in carpet production.
Stockbreeding is also an area of prospective growth as most village dwellers are eager to raise
cattle or expand their herds. However, programs to improve stockbreeding are urgently needed to
improve inadequate and enhance productivity.
3.3.1
Animal Husbandry
The government is eager to expand stock breeding in the Kars region and to promote cooperatives
in the villages as a key mechanism to raise living standards in the rural areas. This effort has met
with mixed results. To benefit from the government program farmers had to form cooperatives
having a minimum of 100 members where each member owned 5 heads of cattle. The program
offered 2 cows on credit to each member who owned only 3. The price was payable in
installments on subsidized financing terms.
Understandably the program was very popular with poor farmers who used it as a mechanism to
acquire 2 cows on very advantageous terms. Unfortunately establishment of cooperatives became
a vehicle to obtain the animals rather than a means of foster the cooperative spirit and spread an
understanding of the advantages of cooperative action in production and transactions. It is a fact
that cooperatives are often dissolved after the delivery of the animals as the farmers failed to see
their usefulness and did not want to pay membership fees to participate in an organization that did
Cambridge, MA
- 53 -
not offer them any tangible benefits. It is indicative that the union of cooperatives practically
inactive while the union of stockbreeders is growing in importance and visibility.
Providing poor farmers with a means to boost their incomes is a laudable goal. However the
granting of animals does not improve stockbreeding practices where such practices are wanting as
is the case in Kars. In the absence of training, monitoring and increased awareness of defective
practices, the health and productivity of cattle suffer. The first shipment of cattle (from the
Netherlands) was decimated by a combination of inadequate transport conditions, difficulties in
adapting to the harsh climate and bad animal husbandry practices. On arrival the dehydrated
animals were allowed to drink freely. They then had to walk for 1 to 2 hours on rough terrain to
reach their grazing grounds which exhausted them and damaged their hoofs. They were kept in
overcrowded unsanitary barns that fostered the spread of disease. The response to this disaster
was to discontinue the delivery of imported animals and only provide Kars farmers with sturdy
animals raised in Turkey. While this decision does help ensure the survival of animals, it does
little to improve stockbreeding practices. Among these practices are the early separation of calves
from their mothers and the early mating of young cows which stunts their growth and decreases
their milk production. The need for awareness and training is underscored by the fact that farmers
give higher priority to buying good furniture and appliances over the improvement of their barns.
There is little understanding of the contribution to their incomes could help them buy the items
they are keen on acquiring much sooner than they can manage at present.
The Province Department of Agriculture offers many supportive programs to cattle farmers
ranging from vaccination to artificial insemination. The need for training is clearly demonstrated
by the issue related to vaccination. Farmers complain their vaccinated animals catch the diseases
again. However the real issue is farmers do not understand that the animals need 2 injections for
the vaccine to become effective and do not bother to have the animals receive the second
injection.
An EU team is offering technical assistance and training to promote improved stockbreeding
practices. This project is funded by the EU. Since the province is not eligible to receive funding
under the EU regulations for this small grants program, the municipality who is eligible has
submitted the application together with the union of stockbreeders.
Of special interest is the program to
restore indigenous plants that provide
animals with high protein. Paralleling
the expansion of cattle raising, farmers
have expanded the planting of wheat,
barley and oats to use as animal feed.
This left animals lacking in protein and
therefore anemic and prone to disease.
The department has been promoting the
planting of korunga, fig and yonca to
supplement the feed. There are now
farmers who do not raise cattle but plant
these species for sale to stockbreeders.
Illustration 3.11: A field of Korunga mixed with other
The department also launched a
indigenous flora.
program to restore the biodiversity of
indigenous flora on land converted to agriculture but no longer in use through soil enrichment and
planting of high protein species at first, them letting the other species spread naturally in the
Cambridge, MA
- 54 -
fields. This process takes some years but eventually restores the rich biodiversity of the area. The
experimental projects have been successful but scaling up requires special attention to land tenure
and an implementation strategy that will ensure community rights to use and safeguard the
restored meadows. This is a topic that deserves to be studied in depth jointly with the Province
Department of agriculture. A program could be developed to promote this approach through
culturally adapted forms of collaboration and partnership between the province department of
agriculture and county administration and village residents.
3.3.2
Comparative analysis of the experience of three villages: Azat, Borluk and Bulanik
i.
Azat
The village is five kilometers away from the main road and eight kilometers from Kars city
centre. The infrastructure in general is of an average level, but the quality of the drinking water
has been a perennial problem for decades. The village has a primary school (5 years) but
secondary
school
students
are
transported to a school in the
neighboring town.
The village participated in the
government supported program for
stockbreeding cooperatives and each of
the 100 members received two Simental
cows. However, bad animal husbandry
practices and in particular crowded,
unsanitary barns led to the loss of a
large percentage of the animals.
Source: Mustafa Gönen
Farmers sold the surviving ones to pay
off their debts and the cooperative was
Illustration 3.12: A village household in Azat.
dissolved. They Wilaya Agriculture
Department had vaccinated the animals
but farmers kept both sick and healthy animals in the same quarters, making it difficult to check
the spread of disease. A subdued but perceptible tension prevails between the few families,
including the Muhtar’s, who do breed and sell cattle for meat production and those who keep a
few cows for milk production.
The stockbreeders practice artificial insemination and state that the animals they have cannot be
used for milk production since cows barely give six liters per day. The other villagers have a
milk tank and sell milk to middlemen who supply dairy businesses.
ii.
Borluk
Even though the village is not so far from Kars city centre, the access to the village is quite
difficult. The road off the main highway is in bad condition.
To participate in the government program, the villagers established a cooperative. The cattle they
received (Simental cows) fared badly and they lost close to 90 percent of the animals. The animal
husbandry practices are deplorable and only sturdy local cows manage to survive in these tough
conditions. The village lacks energetic leadership and collaborative spirit. The dairy they had
Cambridge, MA
- 55 -
was closed and the building used for storage. Villagers who produce milk sell individually to
dairy businesses in Kars.
It is indicative that the houses in the village are generally ill-maintained and in bad condition.
iii.
Bulanik
Bulanik is a village quite close to Kars
city centre. It is set in a nice natural
landscape.
The
Directorate
of
Agriculture runs a project there in
growing indigenous species that provide
high protein animal feed such as
korunga and fig.
Like most other villages in the Kars
Province, Bulanik households formed a
cooperative to benefit from the
government’s support program which
provides two cows per member for a
total of 200 animals. However, unlike
Illustration 3.13: Houses in Bulanik
most other villages, Bulanik residents
did not lose their animals to disease. As a matter of fact this village is remarkable in having the
best animal husbandry practices observed among the 22 villages visited and was often referred to
as a model precisely on that account.
The cooperative was dissolved but farmers paid back the outstanding debt they owed to the
government for the animals. Currently the village boasts 300 Simental cows and 250 bulls.
Farmers sell bulls regularly for meat production and their cows produce 25 to 30 kg of milk per
day each.
They take pride in their cattle. The barns are well-ventilated and have good lighting. They grow
wheat, barley and oats for feed and add high protein plants to the mix so the animals are well-fed
and healthy. Women and girls pay special attention to tending the animals and ensuring the
survival of calves.
Compared to other villages, the infrastructure in Bulanik is good but the village is organizing to
request improved services. It is a productive, socially cohesive settlement that should be able to
establish an association and manage projects to improve living conditions, agriculture and
stockbreeding and diversify income generating opportunities.
Cambridge, MA
- 56 -
3.3.3
Selected villages with high development potential in key areas
Map 3.3: The eight villages selected for pilot projects.
Cambridge, MA
- 57 -
i.
Animal Husbandry
Bulanik described in section 4.2.3 and Karaurgan described in section 3.2.1
ii.
Dairy Production
Boğatepe
This village is close to Kars Province’s western border. It is included in the BTC delineated
corridor for the promotion of sustainable rural development and community investment projects.
The access road to the village is relatively good and infrastructure in the region itself is
reasonable.
In comparison with other villages in the
region,
stockbreeding
is
quite
successful. The villages have inherited
and improved stables dating from the
Russian period. The stables are wellbuilt and well-ventilated. The lighting
is good and the barns clean. The
animals are not crowded and have space
to move.
There are several active dairies and the
village is known for its dairy products.
Three of the dairies are registered with
the Ministry of Agriculture and produce
Illustration 3.14: Cheesemaker in Boğatepe
Kars cheese.
The BTC program
implemented by SURKAL supported
the dairies. However, at this time market demand is low and the dairies are operating at reduced
capacity (50 percent in one, 40 percent in another and 35 percent in the third).
Boğatepe households benefit from strong rural-urban links. Many families have members living
in Kars and operating shops in the city center. They sell their products through these outlets
(milk principally, butter and cheese).
The villagers are industrious, productive and
entrepreneurial. They are open to new ideas. There is excellent potential to increase productivity
and rural incomes through improvement in animal husbandry and dairy farming practices and
marketing of products.
Çakmak
Çakmak is an old, well-established agro-dairy farming community of about 250 households seven
kilometers to the west of Kars. The cheese the villagers produce is internationally known and
available for purchase in Europe and the U.S. under the name “Kars Cheese”. The environment
is still unspoiled. Many locals have moved to Kars or commute daily to sell their famous cheese
for a disappointingly low price. They spoke of the difficulties of the trade and their dissatisfaction
with the lack of marketing efforts. The team discussed with them the possibility of establishing a
communal dairy compound for the production and marketing of high quality Çakmak cheese that
meets European food standards.
Cambridge, MA
- 58 -
The first household interviewed in Çakmak was a family of five with three children aged 19, 15
and 7. The household’s sole occupation was cheese production. Despite the broad international
market for the product, this family’s income is 350 YTL per month. The household head
emphasized the need for “better quality production and marketing” to increase revenues.
Regardless, he stated that he was happy to live in the village and much preferred village life to
city life. The family keeps in touch by phone with relatives who migrated to Istanbul, but they
have never visited that city.
Another household of seven the team interviewed is more diversified in its production. In
addition to selling Kars Cheese, they also grow wheat and raise geese. Unfortunately, they were
adversely affected by the 2005 outbreak of avian flu, which may partially explain their lower
income of 200 to 300 YTL per month. The head of the household indicated that he visited the
city quite often and was interested in moving to an urban area. As in the first interview in
Çakmak, he also suggested that the primary way to keep young people from leaving the village is
to focus on improving the production and marketing of Kars Cheese.
iii.
Organic Farming
Büyük Çatma
Büyük Çatma, located on the road to
Akyaka, has easy access to Kars and a
decent infrastructure.
This village
presents interesting contrasts. It has had
limited success with stockbreeding. The
cooperative established to benefit from
the government program was dissolved.
Despite the financial burden of losing
cattle, there are still some families
engaged in stockbreeding.
The villagers have purchased modern
agricultural equipment but do not use
chemicals, preferring to rely on organic
farming. Their crops are diversified:
flaxseed, linseed and several wheat
Illustration 3.15: Men having a discussion in Büyük
species. Some families are engaged in
Çatma
beekeeping. Many households produce
good artisanal cheese and honey. The premises visited were clean and the process was done
under hygienic conditions. The village has interesting development potential as a source of
organic products.
The villagers are hard workers, open to new ideas and ready to adapt to practices that will
improve their products, enhance their productivity and diversify their production. They could
benefit from establishing a village association to help them better deal with government
institutions, learn about new practices and opportunities and sharpen their ability to market their
products.
Cambridge, MA
- 59 -
The team visited a family in this orderly-looking community. Their house is located at the far
corner of the village and showcases a surprisingly forested backyard. The head of the family is a
young man who spent eight years in Istanbul in the hospitality sector but opted to return to his
village when his father died. He then continued his father’s tradition of environmentally
conscious approaches to business. He now runs a cottage dairy industry and also practices organic
farming, still planting an almost extinct heirloom grain called kavılca. His leadership is such that
most of the progressive entrepreneurial activities of the village are run out of his home.
Derinöz
This beautiful village with about 100 households and a population of 740 is located in Digor, 20
minutes drive along a windy dirt road from the center of town. The road is being resurfaced to
make it safer for driving, especially during the winter months. The village has its own elementary
school and older children are bussed to Digor to attend high school. There are a good number of
educated youth willing to learn new skills. In fact, a few asked for capacity building workshops to
be brought to the village. According to the muhtar, 90% of young people graduate from high
school, and most would stay in the village if they could support themselves.
The area is of special interest because the flora comprises a wide variety of wild and medicinal
plants, including some endemic species. In fact, a self educated village botanist takes pleasure in
guiding visitors in plant identification walks around the pastures and gorges. There is a protected
meadow which the team was unable to visit. Down a very deep gorge there is a mineral spring.
Improved access would allow a spa to be developed in the area.
The Muhtar of this village is an entrepreneurial and progressive man. He runs his own business
in town as a representative of John Deere tractors. He is interested in traditional / organic
farming/product development ventures, capacity building workshops for village youth, the
creation of a spa, a picnic area and a conservation park. There are some historical buildings in the
vicinity.
iv.
Eco-tourism
Çilehane
Çilehane is a picturesque village of 100 households located along the road to Kağizman with
reasonably good access to the highway.
The village has a significant population
of young people. Flora is plentiful, and
individual gardens are overflowing with
fruit trees. Services including electricity
and telephone are available in all
households and the villagers have access
to spring water flowing from the
surrounding mountains. A new project
is also in place to bring potable water to
the village. There is one elementary
school with 50-60 students, as well as a
health clinic. In the summer, domestic
tourists stop in the village to enjoy the
Illustration 3.16: The village of Çilehane.
beautiful landscape.
Cambridge, MA
- 60 -
In contrast to many other villages in Kars, Çilehane’s population is growing. Only ten years ago
the village comprised 50 to 60 households, while it now boasts 100. Villagers’ primary
occupations are agriculture-related but they are open to new ideas such as fish farming and ecotourism.
Two households were interviewed in Çilehane. The first, a young family of four, have their own
fields and produce wheat, barley and fig, some of which they sell. Although the head of the
household had worked in Izmir for three months as a construction worker, he preferred life in the
village to that in the city and did not want to move to an urban center. However, he did state that
the family income barely covers expenses and that he is seeking other sources of income. He also
mentioned that women in his village no longer weave carpets but that several have welldeveloped weaving skills. The second interview was with a 67-year-old man with five children.
He owns land but as it is not fertile he has moved into dairy production. The family markets both
cheese and heifers in Kars and earns an average of 480 YTL per month. Regardless of income
this villager also preferred the village to the city and expressed a desire to develop alternative
sources of income to support living in the village. Both of the men interviewed believed that
Çilehane would be a good candidate for an eco-tourism project and were interested in
participating in such an initiative.
v.
Carpet weaving
Yolboyu
Yolboyu is a village of 140 households situated on the road to Arpaçay along a meandering river
with peaceful rolling hills on the opposite bank. Access is good and the village gives the
impression of a more organized settlement. Houses are better built; villagers welcome novelty
and seem to maintain a community spirit. The village is connected to a potable water supply and
villagers state that the water is clean.
The team interviewed six households in Yolboyu. Family size ranged from two to six members
and each family reported growing crops, primarily wheat, barley and clover. Two respondents
complained that they were unable to earn a profit from the sale of their harvest, as their grain and
animal feed are purchased at below market price by middlemen. The village’s milk and cheese
are also sold for less than market value. Yolboyu residents are concerned that these financial
difficulties will induce more families to leave the village for opportunities in the city. Five
respondents expressed a strong need for projects to improve dairy production and increase
revenues.
Half of Yolboyu’s population has already migrated to the city, and the villagers maintain very
good ties with their relatives in urban centers. Most of those interviewed travel to Kars weekly or
daily for shopping, work or selling products. While one father expressed concern over the future
of his children in terms of education and employment and said he wants to move to the city for
their sake, several others were content to visit the city and enjoy village life. One household was
one of the few involved in the survey who receive monthly remittances from family members in
Kars. The couple, aged 72 and 67, has two children who had migrated to the city and were
sending 100-150 YTL to their parents each month. Interestingly, this respondent was also one of
the few who reported recently repairing his home, demonstrating the strong link between
remittances and an increased standard of living.
Cambridge, MA
- 61 -
Each household interviewed indicated that they have the skills to produce traditional carpets,
kilims, or handicrafts. Four respondents stated that they had stopped weaving as the market for
carpets had died out but were eager to begin again, and five said they would participate in
projects promoting carpet production and marketing.
Koçköyü
Koçköyü, a village located between Arpaçay and
Akyaka in the Çildir Lake area, is known
internationally for the quality of its traditional
carpets. They were marketed until recently by a
local enterprise which closed down, mainly due to
the shrinking market for hand made carpets versus
cheaper machine made ones, of which Turkey has
become a major exporter. Women showed the
carpets they had woven from natural multicolor
local wool. The quality was remarkable. They also
produced wool garments including slippers with
traditional carpet designs. These highly skilled
women are now unemployed and interested in the
revival of the weaving traditions which kept them
occupied during the long winter season.
The three families interviewed in Koçköyü were
from different age brackets but shared similar
characteristics. The first was a young couple in
their mid-twenties with three children under eight
Source: Beti MInkin
years old, while the second, a couple in their
thirties, had four children between nine and
Illustration 3.17: An excellent example of
sixteen. The last family was older, with parents in
traditional carpet weaving in Kocköyü.
their sixties and four children ranging from 30 to
46. All three households raised crops, including
wheat, barley and animal feed. Each household also practiced animal husbandry and dairy
production, with cheese, heifers and bulls as their primary marketable goods. As expected from
the village’s history, the women in each household were skilled in weaving carpets and crafting
tablecloths, socks and slippers, and bedding, but two respondents acknowledged that they had
stopped weaving due to the disappearing market for their goods.
In terms of earnings, the three respondents stated they had “no idea” how much monthly income
they generated. One commented that when the family needs money, they sell a heifer. This was
in contrast to interviews in other villages where individuals had simply stated their monthly
income did not cover their expenses. Two of the household heads also mentioned that they were
hurt economically by the Avian flu as the government culled their flocks of geese and chickens.
Koçköyü is still a fairly large village with 400 households although it has lost one-third of its
families to urban migration. All three respondents indicated that they liked the city and would
like to move to an urban area, although one qualified his statement by saying he would move if he
had a job in a government office. The links between Koçköyü and urban areas do not seem as
strong as in other villages. The villagers interviewed reported that they sell products in the city,
Cambridge, MA
- 62 -
but they do not visit as often for supplies nor do they maintain as close connections with their
relatives in urban areas.
3.4
Meetings with women, youth and children in the villages
In every village visited, as well as in the gecekondu, there was a natural leader among the women,
a special woman who stood out with her ideas, contributions or the variety of her skills. Women’s
more active role in village/urban affairs would make a big difference in the improvement of
socio-economic structure of the region.
In contrast to the widespread belief that most young villagers prefer to live in big cities, many
young men and women in villages visited are very actively involved with the chores of rural life
and would rather stay where they are.
A few young men at Çilehane go away during the summer months to work in manual labor or
tourism in other parts of Turkey. They were very keen to hear about possibilities of village-based
activities including fish farming/restaurant complexes and agro-eco-tourism. One of them insisted
in taking the team all over the village to show the beautiful environment and the peaceful rural
environment. He was interested in
improving conditions to attract tourism to
his village. He said he had some money to
invest if an environmentally sound village
development project were to be initiated.
Another young man didn’t have the means
but he was interested in helping start an
organic food business marketing his
village’s products.
At Tasbasi, the children of the village
were highly opinionated about village
living/versus city living. Some “hated”
their village because of its dirt road, its
Source: Beti Minkin
stones and its harsh living conditions.
Those were mainly children who had
Illustration 3.18: The inside of the muhtar’s house in
visited relatives in big cities. Others
Tasbasi.
“loved” their village because of its dirt
road, its stones, and its living conditions which to them meant its fresh air and beautiful views!
The daughter of the muhtar has 2 rooms in their house that could be used to accommodate
tourists. She has become the team’s female “entrepreneurial” contact in the village. A young man
in his early twenties who has already moved to organic farming will act as an organizer for the
reintroduction and propagation of heirloom varieties of flax seed and cereal grains.
At Yolboyu, two young teen-agers showed the same kind of enthusiasm in showing the team their
village’s main features, which ranged from mysterious underground caves, to varieties of
fascinating big river fish, to village legends involving tragic love stories.
In particular, Beti Minkin noted a 14-year-old Kurdish girl in a village on the way to Ani. She
was the crafter of the best wool slipper the team had ever seen. When asked what grade she was
in, her brother answered that the whole family was illiterate as they couldn’t go to school during
the political problems they faced in their village.
Cambridge, MA
- 63 -
These and other positive discussions with village youth strengthened our belief that with a little
attention, young village men and women constitute the foremost community partners to help
create environmentally sound sustainable village projects. They are keen and energetic, and know
the environment better than anyone to become protectors of cultural and biological-diversity.
They need educational opportunities to learn how to build businesses or organizations in the
fields of agriculture, handicrafts, agro-eco-tourism, as well as skills in communications to connect
them with the outside world.
3.4.1
Pilot session with youth in Akcakale Village
During the spring and summer months, young men often travel to other parts of the country in
search of employment in tourism or building industries. Those who stay on the farm are busy
with work in the field. Some of those will come back specifically at harvest time. Young women
are busy, helping refresh the house, the bedding and furniture from the long damp winter damage.
They also assist with animal husbandry and harvest activities.
During fall and winter village activities wind down and villagers have ample time to engage in
other activities. They are easier to reach and often more receptive to new ideas. In particular,
young men returning from military service, and teen-age girls whose parents don’t allow them to
leave the village to continue their education complain about lack of activity. Boredom fuels
village youth dreams of migrating to a big city.
A pilot workshop session was conducted with village youth in Akcakale Village in Çıldır
Ardahan to find out what kind of educational opportunities would be of interest to them. The
village is located on Çildir Lake, right on the land linking the shoreline to the “island”, a bird
sanctuary as well as the side of a lake settlement dating back to the Urartu period. Development
in this village will affect the archeological side. Households are mainly engaged in animal
husbandry. Hygiene in barns is poor; affecting milk output and quality. Families know how to
produce different types of dairy products but cannot market them. No other products are
available. Young people don’t have much knowledge of the region’s flora and fauna, nor of its
history, culture and archeology.
The Muhtar of the village gathered 8 to10 young men with whom Berhan Ipek conducted a threehour session. Follow up discussions were held with the muhtar and one of the young man as
most villagers and instead had left for their summer settlement (yayla). The topics discussed
were: the efficient utilization of present resources, the creation of alternative sources of income,
the formation of village based NGOs, and the presentation of all of the above in an organized
workshop context.
Villagers are unaware of project funding possibilities from governmental or European sources.
Information on these subjects were given and received with enthusiasm. No cooperatives or other
village associations exist at this time which limits their eligibility to benefit from many programs.
Workshops in the following subjects would be of interest to youth: agriculture, ecological fishfarming, cottage industries and small businesses, environmental studies, local history and
archeology, eco-tourism services, marketing of traditional products, hospitality and restaurant
operation. The consensus was that the best period for workshops is after harvest, starting in late
September and throughout the winter months.
Cambridge, MA
- 64 -
3.5
Summary of recommendations for village development
Circumstances in the rural areas of Kars are challenging. Farmers are subsisting but rural
development is lagging. The expansion of cattle-breeding, considered the primary source of
income, wealth and status, is spreading at the expense of the more traditional sheep and goat
herding and raising of geese, all better adapted to the climate, terrain and vegetation. It is clear
that even with proper training and improved practices, stockbreeding alone will not suffice to
raise rural incomes. Other sources of income from agriculture and agriculture products as well as
alternative non-agricultural rural-based activities do exist. The region’s assets can be tapped and
its development potential realized in a manner that promotes sustainability through sound
management of environmental resources, safeguards the region’s biodiversity, and nurtures its
human resources.
The recommendations detailed in Section 6 cover five key policies and propose pilots in the
selected villages in order to assess the effectiveness of these policies:
•
•
•
•
•
Diversifying production
Promoting high quality food products
Fostering the development of organic farming and products
Supporting the revival of traditional handicrafts and in particular the distinctive
handwoven wool carpets
Developing the potential for agri-eco-tourism in the longer term.
Implementation of these programs will require partnership between local authorities, national and
local NGOs, CBOs and associations of producers and villagers. Such partnerships could also
bring to the villages additional resources, namely access to microcredit and skill development
programs that can assist the more entrepreneurial in starting new projects and expanding the scale
of their operations.
Cambridge, MA
- 65 -
4
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN KARS MUNICIPALITY
Source: Ihsan Karayazi
Illustration 4.1: Commercial street, Kars City Center
4.1
Improving access to donor grants and other funding opportunities
For the past several years, major donors and in particular the EU have been targeting the
Northeast Anatolia region in addition to the World Bank and UNDP. Despite the profusion of
funding opportunities, limited technical and managerial capabilities have constrained the
absorptive capacity of the region hindering its ability to benefit from the availability of earmarked
funds. In order to enhance its capacity to receive donor funds, the Municipality has retained a
consultant in Ankara to prepare applications for grants for which it is eligible. The EU funds a
grant program fostering development in the Northeast Anatolian region. The program offers
three “grant schemes”:
•
•
•
Small-scale infrastructure
Local development initiatives
Small and medium-sized enterprises
Municipalities, Provincial Special Administrations, NGOs and formal civic associations are
eligible to receive grants.
The Municipality selected four projects that met the qualifying criteria and sent the information to
the consultant in Ankara who prepared the applications and submitted them for EU funding in
July 2006. The selected projects are:
Cambridge, MA
- 67 -
a.
b.
c.
d.
Infrastructure in Lower Kaleiçi,
A new municipal slaughterhouse
Training for the members of the Union of Stockbreeders
City workshops and youth training programs in the renovation of old buildings.
The application for the new slaughterhouse was completed last and was not submitted on time to
be considered for this round of EU grants. The proposals are being evaluated and grant awards
will be announced in October. The Municipality hopes that the Kaleiçi project will be among the
projects selected for grant awards.
Urban agriculture projects can qualify for EU grants. The Municipality needs to work jointly
with local communities in order to develop projects that can be submitted for donor funding.
4.2
Development of Urban Agriculture in Kars
Kars is expanding along the major
transport corridors, particularly towards
the airport and along the ring road. To the
east of the ringroad and within a 300
meter corridor along its alignment, urban
development is authorized. This outlying
area is urbanizing rapidly fueled by the
transfer of major traffic generators out of
the city center, including the wholesale
market, the intercity bus terminal and their
ancillary uses. The area contains a range
of disparate elements:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Illustration 4.2: Small farms in the greenbelt area
Public
housing
projects
surrounding the Municipality
constructed by the national Mass
Housing Corporation.
Some factories, industrial plants and warehouses
Housing projects by cooperative associations, a popular program among middle income
groups and salaried employees, including government officials.
Rural settlements engulfed by urbanization.
The municipal dump in bad need of remediation and transformation into a sanitary
landfill
An open area to the north that the Municipality has designated for animal husbandry in
the Master Plan.
To the west of the ring road, there is an agricultural fringe that the Municipality would like to
preserve as a greenbelt around the city and has included this open space greenbelt in its Master
Plan (shown below). This fringe varies in depth from under one kilometer to over three
kilometers and contains villages surrounded by fields.
Cambridge, MA
- 68 -
Map 4.1: Kars Municipality Master Plan
Source: Kars Municipality
However, urbanization is spreading chaotically consuming fields and orchards and the villages
are being transformed by informal housing and unauthorized construction. This haphazard
urbanization is threatening the sustainability of the environmentally sensitive greenbelt area. An
updated map of the existing land uses has been prepared by the Municipality’s Public Works
Department for the purposes of this study. The map illustrates the gradual encroachments on the
farmland, but the Municipality’s inspectional services cannot keep up with unauthorized
construction activities.
Cambridge, MA
- 69 -
Map 4.2: Development in greenbelt surrounding Kars Municipality
Source: Kars Municipality
Cambridge, MA
- 70 -
It is obviously difficult for the
municipality to control illegal building
activities and subdivisions of fields in
an area of the size designated for the
greenbelt unless the land is put to a
productive use that is competitive
with the income that owners can
derive from selling it to informal
developers. It is therefore suggested
that the Municipality consider
designating fertile land within the
greenbelt suitable for environmentally
sound urban agriculture.
Illustration 4.3: Unauthorized development occurring in
Bringing agriculture to urban areas in
the greenbelt.
order to provide food security and
establish much needed green space is a fairly recent trend that is taking hold across the globe in
countries from Vietnam to Senegal. Governments have begun to recognize the unique role that
agriculture can play in both providing food for low-income communities and preserving open
green spaces in urban centers and on the urban fringe. Urban agriculture is not seen as an
alternative to rural food production but is rather an adaptation of the rural agricultural system that
can be employed in urban centers to supplement the food supply of the urban poor and provide
meaningful work to the unemployed while drawing communities together toward a common
objective. Modern urban agricultural practices include rooftop, hydroponic and community
gardens; cultivation on the peri-urban fringe; direct-sale farmers’ markets; and “garden parks”. In
the case of Kars, cultivation on the peri-urban fringe is the practice of interest that has to be
explored. Some outstanding examples for the Mayor and the Municipal Council to consider are
described in Annex 1.
The Institute team and the head of the Public Works Department visited the greenbelt area to look
at farming activities, existing projects and uncontrolled urbanization. The farmland is too close to
the ring road to be suitable for organic agriculture but could be developed as traditional farming
areas and dairy farms. The team noted that the Landscaping Architecture Department of Ataturk
University, Erzurum, has prepared a Landscaping Project for Kars in 2001 that could be revised
to include urban agriculture. Furthermore, the Municipality can be a partner and catalyst by
providing facilities for direct-sale markets at several points in the city for farmers from the
surrounding villages and those engaged in urban agriculture. These facilities can group farm
stands, flower shops and houseplant nurseries. It is also possible to add restaurants as this will
have the advantage of extending the active season. Beti Minkin and Berhan Ipek surveyed the
products sold in Kars markets and ascertained that some of the cheese and other goods as well as
almost all fruits and vegetables sold in Kars come from other regions of Turkey.
Turan Atalay, the director of the Municipality’s Public Works Department, has identified the
publicly owned sites within the greenbelt zone. Vacant sites should be assessed in terms of their
potential to serve as catalysts for urban agriculture development.
Cambridge, MA
- 71 -
4.3
Preparation of a Development Plan for the Municipality through a TESEV-led
participatory process
TESEV received a World Bank grant to prepare a manual to guide localities in the
implementation of the 2005 Municipal Law based on the experience of six pilot municipalities
and provinces including Kars. TESEV started its work with the Municipality in March 2006 but
the Governor decided not to implement this approach in the Province. However he did attend
some meetings at the Municipality and senior officials of the Province participated in most of the
sessions including the review session when the plan was presented. In accordance with the terms
of its World Bank contract, TESEV’s approach focused primarily on the participatory process per
se: establishing modalities for the participation of stakeholders and citizens. The resultant plan
lacks the technical components for the formulation of development strategies and the criteria for
assessing options and prioritizing projects needed to make it a strategic planning document.
In June 2006, we discussed with TESEV the effectiveness of this approach as a strategic planning
methodology and sent them a list of strategic objectives and priority actions derived from our
work with the Municipality to date and previously discussed with the Mayor. The list given
below took into consideration the projects that the Municipality intended to submit for EU
funding.
Strategic Objectives
• Preserve and enhance Kars’ rich cultural and natural heritage
• Develop tourism
• Improve the quality of the urban environment
• Expand employment opportunities for young people
• Develop the region human resource potential
• Promote sustainable development
• Strengthen and diversify the city’s economic base
• Leverage local resources through partnerships with NGOs
• Maximize positive impacts of the large transport projects that will benefit Kars
Priority actions
• Revitalize the city centre and upgrade its infrastructure
• Build the capacity of local organizations and their managerial skills
• Provide vocational training in selected occupations starting with tourism services
• Provide outlets to market the region’s products (agriculture and handicrafts) in the city
and at touristic sites.
• Improve public hygiene and move animal bazaars to the outskirts of the city
• Attract private enterprise to invest in developing the city’s touristic infrastructure
• Organize training programs to develop entrepreneurship and small business management
skills
• Create a new multimodal station in the Kars – Tblisi – Baku railroad.
• Develop new light industry zone around the planned international airport improve access
roads to transportation nodes (intercity bus station, railroad station etc)
• Clean and landscape the river banks
• Develop environmentally friendly urban agriculture in the green belt zone as outlined in
the city’s master plan
The extent to which this input was taken into consideration by TESEV is unclear.
Cambridge, MA
- 72 -
The results of the TESEV-led participatory process were compiled into a proposed plan including
a vision statement, objectives and activities. The July 14th deadline for the submission of plans
was not met, but the Interior Ministry officials indicated that since the mandates of the 2005
Municipal Law were new to Turkish local authorities, late submissions will be accepted this year.
The Municipality’s development plan was finally presented to the City Council on September 4th
and adopted, and will be submitted to the Ministry. TESEV plans to set up an observatory
managed by an NGO to monitor plan implementation.
The activities proposed in the plan drafted by TESEV are a compilation of stakeholder and
participant requests. The Municipality is now faced with the difficult mandate of operationalizing
the plan. This task demands that a budget envelope be determined and the activities detailed,
costed and prioritized, a task involving politically sensitive decisions. An investment program
and a management plan (including operation and management costs) will have to be prepared and
the priority activities selected for implementation in 2007 entered in the Municipal Budget. We
need to review the plan’s full text in order to assess the difficulties involved in this task.
TESEV has also announced that it will hold meetings in villages and towns in the Province since
their World Bank contract covers pilots at both the Municipal and Provincial levels. They will
send the proposed plan developed through this process to the Governor and the Provincial
Council with the hope that it will be integrated in the Province’s own plan.
Cambridge, MA
- 73 -
5
TOURISM IN KARS PROVINCE
Illustration 5.1: Mt. Ararat, one of the region’s key tourist attractions.
Turkey’s tourism sector is developing rapidly as more and more visitors are attracted by the
country’s unique natural and cultural features. In 2005, the number of tourists to Turkey reached
over 21 million, an increase of 22% over the previous year, and the tourism industry generated
$18 billion in earnings. However, the Eastern Anatolia region, despite its rich assets, receives
only a small share of the influx of visitors and
764348
the economic benefits that come with them.
203292
Turkey’s Minister of Culture and Tourism told
reporters in early 2006 that only 2% of tourists
visiting the country went to Eastern Anatolia,
and that they were aiming to attract more
tourists to this region.
5.1
Visitors to Kars Province
Examining data for five provinces, namely Kars,
Ardahan, Iğdir, Ağri and Erzurum gives a better
understanding tourism of in Kars and its
surrounding area. The Province of Artvín,
shown on the map below, borders the Black Sea
and therefore receives a far greater number of
tourists than its neighbors to the south. In fact,
the number of tourist nights spent in Artvín were
almost equal to the number spent in the five
provinces combined.
Map 5.1: The number of nights spent by
tourists in the provinces surrounding Kars.
Source: Turkish Ministry of Tourism, 2001
Cambridge, MA
- 75 -
Tourists spent a total of 544,090 nights in the five provinces in 2001. Although the fewest nights
were in Ardahan (less than 0.5% of all nights spent), Kars also lagged significantly behind its
counterparts. In all, tourists spent about 66,000 nights in Kars, or only 12% of the total nights
spent in all five provinces.
Nevertheless, the number of tourists visiting Kars has risen significantly over the past decade
although not in line with the overall number of tourists coming to Turkey. In 1992, Kars hosted
less than 7000 tourists while by 2000 that number had risen by more than 600% to 49,600 (See
Illustration 5.5). It is likely that as migration from the Province increased throughout the 1990s,
migrants made more frequent trips to visit their friends and family back home.
Illustration 5.2: The percentage of nights spent by
tourists in Kars and surrounding provinces, 2001
Illustration 5.3: The percentage of foreign tourists
to Kars by nationality, 2001
KARS
12%
ERZURUM
28%
Other countries
15%
ARDAHAN
1%
Germany
27%
Iran
5%
IĞDIR
25%
Georgia
14%
Azerbaijan
4%
AĞRI
34%
Belgium
2%
Holland
9%
Canada
1%
Japan
3%
Italy Spain
USA
4%
4%
2%
England
10%
Tourism in Kars is primarily domestic, with less than 10% coming from outside of the country.
Of the foreign tourists, the largest percentage comes from Germany, likely because of the fairly
large migrant community from Kars that resides in that country. Tourists from other countries of
Europe, as well as from North America and Japan also visit Kars.
The border closure between Armenia and Turkey significantly affects the number of visitors
entering Kars from bordering countries as Kars shares its entire eastern border with Armenia.
Ağri, on the border with Iran, received more than 227,000 Iranians over its border in 2004, and
Artvín and Ardahan, who share a border with Georgia, received more than 180,000 Georgians
into the country in the same year. The Armenian visitors that come have to go through the
Nakhitchevan enclave or Georgia.
Table 5.1: Border entrances into Turkey from Armenia, Georgia and Iran, 2004
Armenians
31
4926
950
5907
Ağrı
Artvín
Ardahan
Iğdır
Regional Sum
Georgians
87
176371
9587
376
186421
Cambridge, MA
- 76 -
Iranians
227345
221
103
634
228303
Table 5.2: The number of nights spent by tourists according to the purpose of the visit (2001)
Purpose of Visit
Kars
Travel/Entertainment
Culture
Sporting events
Visiting relatives
Health reasons
Religious reasons
Shopping
Meeting/Conference/Training
Job
Commercial relations and
exhibitions
Transit
Other
Total
15,027
3,916
17,546
9,097
10,892
8,942
293
65,713
Ardahan
Iğdir
Ağri
Erzurum
Total
370
1,807
-
10,323
8,664
31,837
198
18,796
893
5,323
43,844
19,011
47,123
2,069
3,414
3,124
22,409
11,084
3,568
85,816
2,887
8,768
91,973
42,675
3,568
182,322
198
2,069
36,001
893
28,107
562
2,738
52,385
4,298
2,125
134,841
19,675
35,401
16,606
190,267
4,122
1,899
9,979
150,531
85,686
41,598
29,003
544,090
Source: Turkish Ministry of Tourism
Visitors come to these five provinces for various reasons including entertainment, shopping and
employment-related opportunities. However, the primary reason by far for visiting the area is to
spend time with relatives (See Table 5.2). In fact, the largest percentage of nights spent by
tourists in Kars in 2001 (27%) was for that purpose.
The other primary touristic draw is
entertainment, a category that includes winter sports, with 23% of tourist nights spent in Kars for
that purpose in 2001. In general, when visiting Kars tourists stay in a hotel or with a friend or
relative. (See Illustration 5.4) The data underlines the importance of migration and seasonal
activities and shows that Kars is not realizing its cultural and eco-tourism potential.
Illustration 5.4: The number of nights spent by tourists in Kars according to accommodation type, 2001
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
nd
of
e
m
od
In
Cambridge, MA
- 77 -
er
th
O
t io
tra
fr i
e
of
us
e
or
ta
np
/ re
ho
ed
Ho
Source: Ministry of Tourism, 2001
n
e
us
la
tiv
e
e
us
nt
Re
n
w
O
th
l/ y
ou
st
e
Ho
ho
m
ca
ar
/C
ng
m
pi
Ca
p
av
an
io
ns
Pe
la
v il
Ho
lid
ay
n
ge
el
ot
M
Ho
te
l
0
The State Planning Organization (SPO) considers the number of the listed cultural sites and some
natural features as the indicators of touristic significance in the analysis and evaluation of the
current state of tourism in Eastern Anatolia. The SPO deplores the fact that despite the region’s
rich touristic potential tourism has not grown in line with the growing importance of Turkey as a
tourism destination. The only exception noted is winter sports, especially in Sarikamiş with its
large ski resort described in more detail in section 5.2.4.
Illustration 5.5: Tourists visiting Kars Province, 1992-2000
Domestic Foreign
Total
Tourist Tourist
1992
3.212
3.720 6.932
Years
Domestic
Foreign
1993
2.450
3.980
6,430
1994
5.370
8.010
13.380
1995
12.560
8.750
7.842
1996
25.600
7.842
33.442
1997
32.000
8.719
40.719
1998
34.000
9.550
43.550
2000
42.863
6.742
49.605
Source: State Statistics Organization, 2000
5.2
Major eco-tourism potential in Kars
Developing the eco-tourism potential of Kars will bring badly-needed income to the Province and
the city as well as those of its villages whose location or natural setting can allow them to benefit
from the new tourist facilities in their vicinity.
The preservation of the area’s natural sites and the protection of its ecosystems should be given
urgent priority. Already there has been some unfortunate degradation of wetlands while others
are threatened by transnational and national transportation and energy projects. These projects
are needed for the Turkish economy but as pointed out in Section 2 they will have adverse
impacts on the ecosystems in their paths. Channeled by topographical features, the alignment of
the oil and gas pipelines, and the regional transportation corridors pass through Kars giving it a
special importance that the Province and the city have yet to capitalize on. Conversely measures
must be urgently taken to protect threatened ecosystems, restore degraded wetlands and meadows
and safeguard biodiversity.
Awareness of the importance of these unique assets in any strategy aiming to promote tourism
will provide an incentive for local authorities to make preservation an issue of concern in any
development plan. Grasping the potential of eco-tourism in the region and the synergies between
cultural and eco-tourism are the first steps required in making it a strategic objective of
development.
Cambridge, MA
- 78 -
5.2.1
The Ministry of Tourism Regional Development Plan
The Ministry of Tourism has prepared a Tourism Development Plan for the seven regions of
Turkey. It also established the parameters of tourism planning at the sub-regional level. The plan
should identify assets and take into consideration tourism infrastructure and facilities. The
objectives to be achieved are the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Extending the season
Providing multi-functional facilities to optimize economic use
Offering alternative types of tourism to diversify supply and enhance attractiveness
Ensuring the harmony of touristic facilities with the surrounding environment
Preparing site management and protection plans for natural and cultural sites as an
intrinsic component of the tourism development plan
The proposed method is sound although a greater emphasis should be placed on the protection of
environmentally sensitive sites and the interface between different thematic tourism categories.
The Ministry of Tourism Plan identifies a Tourism inventory of Assets in the Kars Province
covering the following categories grouped under headline themes:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Cultural Tourism
o Ancient Cities: Ani
o The Silk Route: Ani
Religious tourism: Historic churches and mosques
Eco-tourism
Botanical study: Rural areas
Photography: Archeological sites
Sport activities: Line fishing at Cengelli Lake, Kağizman and Aygir Lake, Susuz
o Trekking: Sarikamiş
o Thermal stations: Kötek, Kağizman, Akyaka
o Winter sports: Sarikamiş ski resorts
Interestingly, the eco-tourism category does not include birdwatching or nature photography, nor
does it identify the best locations for the observation of different plant species and flowering
plants despite the spectacular seasonal bird migrations and magnificent landscapes and color
displays that can be viewed during the height of the blooming season in May/June.
Increased awareness of the diversity and potential of eco-tourism is badly needed not only to
enhance tourism but even more importantly to foster the preservation of fragile environmentally
sensitive areas and safeguarding of ecosystems.
5.2.2
Tours that offer visits to Northeast Anatolia
The Eastern Anatolia Master Plan developed by the SPO made a distinction between tours of
three to five days for which demand is higher than for longer tours. The short tours go through
Kars and are essentially for visiting Ani. The longer tours visit Ani but also other sites.
Cambridge, MA
- 79 -
A thorough search on the Internet yielded fifteen tours to the region that pass through Kars.
Cultural heritage-oriented tours dominate the offers. However, there are two eco-tourism trips
among the listed tours that focus on Lake Van, and one also visits Ani. The routing of the tours is
shown on Map 5.2 and clearly demonstrates the mutually reinforcing links between cultural and
natural sites and the potential of cross-border tourism.
Of the two UK-based travel agencies which offer tours in Eastern Turkey with a clear ecological
orientation, only one passes through Kars. The first, Greentours Natural History Holidays, visits
some archeological sites but states its focus as “flowers, birds and superb landscapes.” The small
group of five to fifteen tour participants walk up to four miles in a day at a relaxed pace suitable
for photography, and spend the majority of time on the tour exploring the mountains, forests and
lakes of the region.
The tour begins with a visit to the area around Mt. Ararat including the Ishak Pasha palace before
moving on to volcanoes and waterfalls near Tatvan and the sacred site of Nemrut Dag. It then
proceeds to Tatvan’s oak woodlands before heading to the Lake Van area, where participants visit
the Hosap Castle and Akdamar Island. Upon leaving Lake Van, the tour continues on to the
Karabet pass, the volcanoes and waterfalls at Bendimahi, and the lake at Erçek Golu, an excellent
birdwatching area. Participants generally stay in moderately priced hotels in Doğubeyazit,
Tatvan, and Van.
The second tour, though more culturally oriented, gives ample time to the natural environment.
Gorges, valleys, birds and wildflowers are emphasized along with the areas’ cultural sites. The
tour begins at Trabzon and spends some time along the Black Sea coast before progressing
through the Pontic Alps to Artvín, viewing churches and monasteries along the way. Lake Çilder
is the next destination after which participants spend time in Kars and take a day trip to Ani
before heading to Mr. Ararat and Doğubeyazit. The tour ends in Van with a day trip to the Lake
and a visit to Akdamar Island.
Crossborder tourism is another area of unexplored potential. We located one tour given by the
Armenia-based Hyur Service in conjunction with Ani Tour, a Turkish company. The tour begins
in Yerevan and crosses into Georgia for a stop in Tiblisi. From there, it crosses the Turkish
border and includes some time in Kars and a visit to Ani, a climb up Mr. Ararat, a day trip to
Lake Van, and stops in the cities of Bitlis, Muş, Malatya, and Erzurum before crossing back over
the Georgian and Armenian borders to end with a day at Lake Sevan in Armenia. Tours such as
this one are not common, but participation among travel agencies could be encouraged to develop
similar cross-border tours with an ecological focus.
5.2.3
Major eco-tourism assets in Kars
Eco-tourism opens up many more avenues for the development of thematic tours than any other
category of tourism. It is habitat-oriented focusing on ecosystems to observe the geology, the
flora and the fauna. It is explorative in character seeking to find and observe rocks, plants, birds
and animals and spot particular species.
The region’s natural features outlined in Section 2 give Kars a unique variety of ecosystems and
rich biodiversity. These assets can generate significant eco-tourism but this is a potential that is
still largely unrealized. Most of the tourists that currently pass through Kars are visitors to
cultural sites, Ani being the major attraction. Indeed some tour organizers that offer tours
Cambridge, MA
- 80 -
Map 5.2: Tour routings through Eastern Anatolia
Cambridge, MA
- 81 -
focusing on Byzantine, Armenian, Seljuk and Ottoman cultural sites in Northeast Anatolia plan
the tours in late May-early June when the landscape is enhanced by the blooming wildflowers.
i.
Wetlands, Lakes and Rivers
The Province’s lakes, rivers and wetlands
are key assets. They support an impressive
number of indigenous bird species in
addition to providing stopover points for
migratory species in this major flyway for
bird migration. Dr. Sean Anderson of
California State University who visited
Kars in April 2006 with the Stanford team
noted that despite severe degredation due
in
part
to
overgrazing
and
sedimentation/erosion,
“wetland
and
Source: Cagan Sekercioglu
riparian improvements hold great promise
for improving biological diversity” and
Illustration 5.6: The stunning Lake Van area.
the prospects for their restoration were
quite good. Of area’s lakes, the most
well-known is Lake Çildir, an established bird habitat and migratory stopover. Located in
Ardahan at the border between the two provinces, the lake is part of a nature preserve that
provides an excellent area for outdoor activities. It is one of the largest lakes in Eastern Anatolia,
second in size only to Lake Van which together with Ani and Mt. Ararat are the major tourist
destinations in the region.
While neither Lake Van nor Lake Çildir fall within the boundaries of Kars Province, they
nevertheless constitute major regional draws that can bring tourists to Kars for one or two nights.
In addition to its magnificent landscapes, flora and fauna, Lake Van has unique species of fish,
birds, flowering plants and of course the famous Van cat. Both lakes have cultural sites in the
lake itself, on the lakeshore, and in the vicinity: an archeological site 4000 years old in Çildir and
in Van a tenth century Armenian church on Akdamar Island and a twelfth-century church on
Çarpanak as well as the ancient Urartian citadel. As noted in Section 5.2.2, the tours that go to
Van do not necessarily go to Kars, but visits to Lake Çilder are invariably associated with stays in
Kars to visit Ani.
ii.
Indigenous Flora
The short growing season that is so
limiting to agricultural production
paradoxically enhances the area’s ecotourism potential.
It makes for a
concentrated plant cycle whereby the
large variety of indigenous plants in the
region’s grass and steppe communities
flower at the same time in May and June
all over the landscape. It can be a major
attraction in its own right. In the
northwest part of South Africa a similar
phenomenon occurs in the Cederberg
Illustration 5.7: Beautiful wildflowers in Kars Province.
Cambridge, MA
- 82 -
mountain range. Well-marketed, it is a major draw attracting a substantial number of domestic
and foreign tourists to the area every year. The same could be achieved in Kars. From the
mountains to the lakeshores an impressive array of blooming flowers make for a wonderful
display of color and smell attracting insects and birds. It is a show that can be enjoyed by all
those interested in nature and not just naturalists and ecologists. Unfortunately, overgrazing and
unrestricted development are threatening the region’s flora and fauna.
iii.
Links to passive and active recreation
By its very nature, eco-tourism can also
be easily linked to both active and
passive recreation. Hiking is an integral
component of nature walks. Nature
photography and wildflower and rock
collecting entail long walks at a slow
pace. Birdwatching can be an activity
by itself in special observation stations
or can be combined in a more leisurely
manner with nature walks. Horseback
riding and cross-country skiing require
trails that can be integrated with the
development of eco-tourism facilities.
Illustration 5.8: The Kars River running through the
City.
Other outdoor destinations drawing
local and regional tourists are the
Sarikamiş Forests, Susuz Waterfalls, the Kars Telsizler Resort Park, and the Ataturk and Iskan
Parks.
The Kars River, which begins in the mountains in Sarikamiş, bisects Kars Municipality and is
used as a picnicking area by the population in the valley north of the City’s citadel. Kars
Province also boasts a number of thermal and mineral springs, most notably Akyaka Thermal
Springs located 1 km east of the Akyaka district, Susuz Thermal Springs located in the river 2 km
east of the center of Susuz, Kağizman Thermal Springs, located on the road to Kağizman, and the
Thermal Spring of Selim Dolbentli Village, located in the Dolbentli Village of Selim District.
The cultural diversity of Kars enriches its folklore (traditional music, dances and song) as well as
handicrafts, food products and cookery. This living heritage constitutes added attractions that can
keep tourists a day longer in the region if properly integrated in a tourism development strategy.
At this time, the Traditional Caucasian Cultures Festival held in Kars in September is the only
event giving international visibility to the region’s touristic assets.
5.2.4
Potential thematic tourism routes
The seven major transportation corridors starting from Kars Municipality and going through the
Province form the background of routes for both cultural and natural thematic tourism. The
primary cultural and ecological attractions are located either on or just off of these roads, and are
shown on Map 5.3 below.
Cambridge, MA
- 83 -
i.
Road to Lake Çildir
The route to Lake Çildir in the north runs through the wetlands and passes over the Arpaçay
River, one of the large rivers of the Province. The road offers spectacular views of rich pastures
on rolling hills fed by brooks connecting the surrounding mountains to the Lake. Within the lake
the artificial island of Akcakale houses a village of the same name. At the tip of the island there
is an archeological site of a 4,000-year-old lake settlement. Lake Çildir is second only to Lake
Van for the viewing of pristine landscapes, birds and wildflowers. It is a designated Important
Bird Area site.
Illustration 5.9: Wetlands on the road to Lake
Çilder.
Illustration 5.10: View of Lake Çilder.
ii.
Road to Akyaka
The route to Akyaka towards the Armenia border is one of the best locations to view the stunning
array of wildflowers blooming in May and June and rolling hills dotted with grazing animals.
The road passes by Başsüregel Kalesi, a historic fortress near Kalkankale village. Along the
border there are villages and the reservoir of the Arpaçay River dam, a joint project built some
time ago by the two countries. Some of the sites for the experimental meadow restoration
program are located near villages off this main road.
Illustration 5.10: Village by Arpaçay River dam
Illustration 5.11: Wildflowers on the route to
Akyaka.
Cambridge, MA
- 84 -
iii.
Road to Ani
The archeological site of Ani is about 45 kilometers from Kars, on the banks of the Arpaçay
River. This site draws most of the tourists who spend the night in the City. The road passes
through several small villages en route, but the village of Ocakli very close to the site seems to
hold the most potential for the location of tourism facilities outside the boundaries of the Ani
ecological site as listed with UNESCO/World Heritage. Furthermore, the village activities have
to be reorganized so that they do not encroach on the site itself.
Illustration 5.12: The archeological site of Ani.
iv.
Illustration 5.13: The bridge at Ani.
Road through Digor to Doğubeyazit passing Mt. Ararat
This route runs fairly close to the Armenian border most closely, passing through meadow and
mountainous terrain with several ancient fortresses and churches embedded in the landscape. It
offers excellent perspectives of Mt. Ararat. In particular the small village of Karabulac boasts a
magnificent view of the mountain and its foothills just before entering the town of Doğubeyazit
where the larger hotels are located. The combination of two major tourist attractions: spectacular
views of Mt. Ararat and Ishak Pasa palace, an impressive fortress/palace perched on top of a steep
hill overlooking the routes crossing the mountain passes and intersecting in this location have
made Doğubeyazit an important tourism center in Northeast Anatolia. As noted earlier, some
tours that do not go to Kars stop at Van and Doğubeyazit.
Illustration 5.14: The Ishak Pasa Palace.
Illustration 5.15: Village near Mt. Ararat.
Cambridge, MA
- 85 -
v.
Road to Kağizman
The eastern Kars-Kağizman region is shielded from the north winds by high mountains and
therefore enjoys a milder climate giving the area a longer planting season and allowing villagers
to plant orchards. The mountains in view on the road to Kağizman offer a stunning backdrop to
the already beautiful rural landscape and feed small rivers and brooks. This route passes through
Çilehane, a village the Institute has chosen as one of the few villages that do possess development
potential in the area of eco-tourism because of the setting and the brook running from the
mountain through the village as well as the hospitality of its inhabitants. Villagers stated that
some Turkish tourists do stop there in the summer. Unfortunately, other picturesque villages on
the mountain slopes that benefit from springs and mountain brooks are only accessible by fourwheel drive vehicles.
Illustration 5.16: Village on the road to Kağizman
vi.
Illustration 5.17: Small brook in Kağizman
Road to Sarikamiş
The route to Sarikamiş passes through Kars Municipality’s industrial zone and the Municipality
of Selim as well as several small villages as it winds its way through rolling hills and pastureland.
It is an excellent wide road aimed at giving easy access to tourists from Kars airport to the winter
sports resorts. The topography of Kars Province’s mountain ranges has led to the development of
an important winter sports center in Sarikamiş. Situated in a forest of giant pines 54 km
southwest of Kars, this ski center has long courses and trails as well as ideal snow conditions
which are at their best from December until April. It has a capacity of 15,000 skiers per day and
boasts two five-star ski lodges. Proximity to the Kars airport has helped increase its popularity
and the Center’s capacity is being increased. Unfortunately, the development associated with the
expansion of the winter sport resort is leading to significant logging of the surrounding pine
forests.
Cambridge, MA
- 86 -
Illustration 5.18: The ski lodge at Sarikamiş.
vii.
Illustration 5.19: The logging of the pine
forests in Sarikamiş.
Road to Artvín
The corridor to Artvín has particular significance in terms of eco-tourism because of its stunning
landscape and transition through several climatic zones. As the route heads toward Susuz from
Kars Municipality, it crosses wetlands with interesting bird populations. From Susuz to Ardahan,
the alignment of the BTC pipeline parallels the road for some kilometers at a few locations across
a landscape of meadows and villages.
From Ardahan to Savşat, the road follows hairpin turns up a high mountain range covered with
alpine forest vegetation and villages where the traditional timber log vernacular architecture is
being replaced by concrete and cement block houses. From October to May, snow-covered
landscapes are prominent. The route continues through the spectacular deep gorges of the river
before ascending toward Artvin. There are the ruins of ancient fortresses that controlled the
mountain passes at strategic points along the road.
The town of Artvín built on terraces in the mountain slopes has spectacular views although the
view today is the construction of the large dam on the Coruh River. Unfortunately this beautiful
area which attracts tourists today extending all the way to the gorge will be flooded by the
reservoir with adverse impacts on its diverse ecosystems.
This scenic route is ideal for tourists, and particularly eco-tours that usually involve groups of 15
persons. However it is far too slow with its two-lane hairpin curves for commercial trucks going
to the crossing at Batum to use. It would be time-consuming and costly. Truck drivers prefer to
take the longer route going to the coast and the follow the coastal road to Batum. Although it is
100 km longer, going through Erzurum County to Tortum then north to rejoin the road towards
the coast at the foothills of Artvín then along the coast to Batum is safer, faster and easier on the
vehicle.
Cambridge, MA
- 87 -
Illustration 5.20, 5.21, 5.22, 5.23: Scenic views along the route to Artvín: Crossing wetlands, hairpin
curves through the mountains, a village in the snow, and a farm in the river gorge.
5.2.5
Summary of recommendations for tourism development
It is important for Kars to capture a share of tourism in Turkey commensurate with the assets it
has to offer: Distinctive cultural heritage, ethnic diversity and folklore, and most importantly the
attractiveness of its natural environment, the variety of its ecosystems and the rich biodiversity of
its flora and fauna.
Enhancing tourism in Kars will require that action plans and pilot initiatives be developed to
achieve five key policy objectives:
• Fostering the development of thematic eco-tourism;
• Linking cultural and eco-tourism routes;
• Exploring regional themes and cross-border tours;
• Developing an appropriate tourism infrastructure;
• Initiating an effective marketing strategy.
Current policies must be reconsidered to place on the protection of natural assets equal
importance to that given to the conservation of cultural sites. These assets are not only needed for
the promotion of eco-tourism. If their degradation is not reversed the sustainability of
development in Kars will be eroded.
Cambridge, MA
- 88 -
Map 5.3: Major transportation corridors through Kars Province with their cultural and ecological attractions.
Cambridge, MA
- 89 -
6
RECOMMENDATIONS
Two strategic objectives underpin the recommendations presented in this section to foster
environmentally sustainable development in Kars.
•
•
Safeguarding the region’s rich biodiversity;
Nurturing its human resources.
A development strategy solidly grounded in these objectives includes six interlinked components:
1. Formulating a strategy framework and a coordinated action plan. Policies
promoting sustainable rural development and ecotourism and sound urban management
must be coordinated to shape a coherent integrated strategy framework leading to
mutually reinforcing action on the ground.
2. Creating a productive interface between local authorities and village communities.
The Provincial administration and the Municipality have initiated programs that can
make a significant contribution to the two headline strategic objectives mentioned above.
The effectiveness of these efforts can be enhanced by structuring a culturally adapted
interface between communities and local authorities. The objectives and outputs of each
program will shape the structure of this interface. It can range from supportive initiatives
to collaboration on specific activities to partnerships in order to achieve a particular
objective or reach a performance target. Fostering the establishment of CBOs, unions,
cooperatives and associations in the villages and the urban neighborhoods will facilitate
this interface as well as promote community organization and collaborative action and
marketing of products.
3. Actively promoting sustainable rural development through five policies and
associated action programs:
•
Diversifying production with a focus on market-oriented “niche” products in both the
agriculture and the non-agriculture sectors to expand the sources of income to the
villagers.
•
Promoting high quality food products. Kars is already reputed for its Çakmak
cheese. With proper animal husbandry practices and improvements in quality control
(including hygiene) during the production process, Kars cheeses can command higher
prices and eventually earn a recognized label.
•
Fostering the development of organic farming and products. The market for organic
food products has expanded rapidly in the West with growing awareness and concern
about the health impact of chemicals and additives in food. Despite their higher
price, organic foods have benefited from growing demand. Today in Kars Province
the use of fertilizers and pest-control chemicals is widespread. However, there are
still areas where for different reasons traditional practices are still in use. These
farms and villages should form the springboard for a program to foster the
development of organic farming.
•
Supporting the revival of traditional handicrafts and carpets. Traditional handicrafts
are on the verge of being lost. Already in most villages, the beautiful hand-woven
Cambridge, MA
- 91 -
carpets that line the floor of guest rooms in the homes are the work of the older
generation of women (45 years and older). Younger women no longer want to learn
the skill since there is no market for the carpets beyond their use in their own homes.
High quality handicrafts cannot be marketed in competition with factory-made
products. They are special artifacts that have to be marketed as such: handmade
North East Anatolian carpets from the Kars region. The Kockoyu carpets made from
natural, non-dyed wool testify to the enduring beauty of this art form. The Provincial
administration should put in place a marketing strategy for the Province’s traditional
“ouya” handicrafts, its kilims and in particular, its carpets. This will help revive the
traditional handicrafts, provide non-agricultural rural-based jobs and enhance
opportunities for women to generate an independent source of income for their
priority expenditures in the household.
•
Initiating outreach and education programs in the villages. There is an urgent need to
introduce information technology in the villages, upgrade skills, improve practices
and build entrepreneurship and marketing capabilities. Disseminating good practices
through exchanges among villages must be an integral component of these programs.
Fostering awareness and appreciation of the region’s rich biodiversity and its natural
and cultural assets must be a cross-cutting theme in all the programs. Special
programs must be directed at women who play a key role in all aspects of production
in the household and the village. In this respect, SÜRKAL’s experience in Hasbey is
instructive. It demonstrates the importance of such a program and the difficulties
encountered in its implementation.
Youth are ready to move in search of more remunerative jobs, more exciting
surroundings and new lifestyles. Education programs oriented at youth must include
computer training and open up new perspectives on rural development and highlight the
potential of new income-generation opportunities in the rural areas brought about by the
development of tourism and the stewardship of the natural environment. This is needed
to slow the rate of outmigration and engage youth who can bring to the depressed rural
economy their energy and enthusiasm and an optimistic outlook to the future.
4. Promoting eco-tourism. The region’s magnificent natural features and its rich
biodiversity particularly as regards its flora and its wetlands that support an impressive
number of resident and migratory bird species are key regional assets that can generate
eco-tourism bringing badly needed income to the Province and those of its villages whose
location or natural setting allows them to benefit from the development of this sector.
This requires first and foremost the preservation of these sensitive assets. Two
opportunities exist to initiate immediate action on this front:
•
Preserving biodiversity and restoring degraded wetlands and meadows. Lakes, rivers
and wetlands must be protected and their further degradation prevented. Dr. Cagan
Sekercioglu and Dr. Sean Anderson indicated that despite pollution and
eutrophication many sites could be improved and their degradation reversed if urgent
measures are adopted and implemented. Access to the range of specialization
provided by the Stanford University team is a unique opportunity for the Province
and the Municipality to benefit from this expertise in order to put in place a program
to protect these valuable assets.
•
Scaling up the Provincial administration’s experimental program to restore the
indigenous flora in the degraded meadows. This program will have to be based on a
Cambridge, MA
- 92 -
study of land tenure and property rights in the Province as well as on environmentally
sound techniques of restoration.
The Province and the Municipality in collaboration with the Kars Chamber of Industry
and trade as well as the travel and hospitality business sectors should initiate a program
and hold events that give visibility and build the reputation of Kars as a tourism
destination in its own right. At present, the Traditional Caucasian Cultures Festival is the
only event giving the city international exposure.
Cultural tourism benefits from having unique assets to help promote it. Mt. Ararat is
known worldwide, Ani is a World Heritage Site and the proximity of the Ishak Pasa
palace to these landmarks as well as the medieval churches in Lake Van encourage
visitors. Aside from Lake Van, most of the other ecological resources of the region are
not marketed and its magnificent landscapes are hardly known outside Turkey.
An eco-tourism strategy must be complemented by:
•
•
A proper interpretation at the sites to be visited;
The establishment of tourist service stations at strategic locations, landscape
viewing points and places where hiking, riding and walking trails would offer the
best opportunities to explore the richness of the area’s ecosystems, its spectacular
flora blooming season and its bird migration flyways.
The Province and the Municipality can work in partnership with NGOs and the private
sector to provide these facilities that will bring new employment opportunities to the rural
areas as well as to the City.
In the longer term the potential of agri-eco-tourism should be explored. Throughout the
region, there are villages that have a unique vernacular character, are located in
spectacular settings, produce specialized products or simply offer a possibility to explore
traditional hospitality in an attractive natural environment. At present, with few
exceptions, difficult access, inadequate water supply and lack of sanitation hinder the
development of this category of thematic tourism.
Finally, capitalizing on the synergies between cultural and eco-tourism allows the
adoption of mutually reinforcing policies and action plans and opens up opportunities for
public/private partnerships, greater involvement of NGOs and joint financing of projects.
5. Providing incentives for the development of urban agriculture. In a city where the
economy is lagging, jobs are scarce and the food products come from elsewhere in
Turkey, measures that foster urban agriculture can create income-generating
opportunities and bring to the market local produce. Furthermore, in some parts of the
greenbelt conditions are adequate to experiment with more intensive but environmentally
sound agriculture.
Kars Municipality should consider structuring partnerships with NGOs and the private
business sector to:
•
Work with residents living within the designated beltway to form cooperatives,
unions and associations to facilitate the marketing of their products. These
Cambridge, MA
- 93 -
•
•
•
•
associations should be open to producers in other sites within the Municipal
boundaries where urban agriculture is established.
Encourage the development of urban agriculture in the wide corridor designated
as a greenbelt on the City’s Master Plan.
Launch a program to better manage solid waste, clean up the riverbank and
support the production of cloth shopping bags to replace plastic bags.
Establish a permanent women’s carpet and handicraft workshop and store in
town which would sell articles produced by women in the villages and the rural
migrants in the City. This project has already been recommended to the
Municipality as part of the Institutional Assessment in the section regarding the
advancement of opportunities for women.
Encourage the development of farms, dairies and market stands for the products
along the ringroad preferably in association with restaurants and shopping
facilities.
6. Concentrating on areas with high development potential in a first phase. The
magnitude of the challenge and the scarcity of local resources entail a strategy of
concentration rather than thinly spread dispersion. Resources must be directed at areas
where development potential is highest and concentrated in those sectors and products
where Kars has a competitive advantage.
Having surveyed 22 villages and reviewed the experience of the BTC Sustainable Rural
Development Project implemented by SÜRKAL in Kars as well as the programs of the
Kars Province Department of Agriculture, eight villages were identified for their
particularly high development potential in the following sectors:
•
•
•
•
•
Animal Husbandry: Karaurgan, Sarikamiş and Bulanik, Kars
Dairy Production: Çakmak, Kars, and Boğatepe, Susuz
Organic Farming: Büyük Çatma, Arpaçay and possibly Derinöz, Digor
Carpet weaving: Kocköyü, Arpaçay and Yolboyu, Susuz
Eco-tourism: Çilehane, Kağizman
The selected villages provide a good geographic coverage of the Province. They will
form a network for the preparation of an action plan that simultaneously responds to
community needs and is designed to promote environmentally sustainable development.
The action plan should introduce environmentally sound methods to enhance productivity
and include:
•
•
•
•
Projects to upgrade infrastructure with special attention to access roads, water
supply for domestic use and irrigation, and appropriate sanitation options;
Training in health, hygiene and entrepreneurship;
Measures to encourage villagers to form associations and cooperatives to
organize the community and engage villagers in joint action;
Opportunities to disseminate the pilot experiences to other villages.
It is essential that an adequate framework for monitoring and performance assessment be put in
place to ensure a timely review and evaluation of the adopted strategies. This is especially
important in order to assess the effectiveness of the rural development strategies in the pilot
villages, a prerequisite to scaling up from project to strategy.
Cambridge, MA
- 94 -
7
7.1
ANNEXES
Annex 1: Successful examples of Urban Agriculture for Kars to consider
Following an extensive review of 15 successful urban agricultural projects, the following
examples are selected to present to the Kars Municipality as potential models to follow in
initiating a similar program in the designated greenbelt around the urbanized area.
Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture in Russia
Despite Russia’s harsh climate, the cultivation of land in urban areas produces 30% of all the
food grown in the country and 80% of all vegetables14. Peri-urban agriculture is promoted, and
generally consists of three types of agricultural plots. Dachas are gardening blocks of up to 0.15
hectares with one-story cottages. They are usually owned privately and are located within 50
kilometers of older city centers. Sadovodstos are gardening communities of up to 600 plots with
common infrastructure and small houses, located primarily in the peri-urban areas of new or
industrial cities and towns. Finally, Ogorods are informal, sometimes illegal community plots
that are often established in or on the outskirts of small towns on either municipal or privately
owned land.15 Most often the funding for urban agriculture comes from loans from friends or
relatives. However, some international organizations such as Fund Eurasia and the Centre of
Civil Initiatives have sponsored programs offering microcredit loans of up to USD$2000 to periurban farmers for the purchase of small tractors, cattle or seeds.16
St. Petersburg, Russia, is a city with a long history of successful urban and peri-urban agriculture.
Within the city, gardening takes place almost everywhere, including backyards, vacant land,
rooftops, public land, rooftops, and basements. On the urban fringe, there are approximately
150,000 dachas, 2,800 sadovodstos, and 180,000 ogorods in the metropolitan region.17 Russia
does not stand alone in its urban agricultural traditions and success; in most Eastern European
countries similar in climate to Russia, particularly Poland, there is a long tradition of peri-urban
gardening by urban households.
Programa de Agricultura Urbana (PAU) in Rosario, Argentina
A striking example of the success of
urban agriculture is the Programa de
Agricultura Urbana (PAU) in
Rosario, Argentina (population
910,000), which received worldwide
praise and many awards. Launched
in 2002 as a means of
supplementing the city’s food
donation programs in the midst of
the severe financial crisis that led to
the devaluation of the peso to onethird of its former value and pushed
the majority of the population below
Source: IDRC, http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-32860-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
the poverty line, the program started
with a pilot giving gardening tools,
Illustration 4.3: Programa de Agricultural Urbana, Rosario, Argentina
materials and seeds to 20
impoverished groups as a way to
supplement their food sources. Based on the success of this experience, Rosario extended the
Cambridge, MA
- 95 -
program to a city-wide scale putting all vacant land within jurisdictional boundaries in temporary
agricultural use. The national assistance initiative referred to as the “Unemployed Heads of
Households Program” further increased demand by promising $50 per month to participants
engaged in labor, community work, employment training or schooling. In Rosario, most chose
urban agriculture.
As the program picked up speed, in 2002-2003 the municipality worked with the National
University of Rosario and a local NGO to identify and analyze available vacant land in the city
limits that could be used for urban agriculture and initiated measures to formalize the temporary
ceding of property for urban agriculture. The new regulations established in 2004 exempted
owners of ceded land from paying municipal taxes on the land for two years, with the option of
renewing the contract for a longer time if desired. In contrast, public land used for the urban
agriculture program was pledged for agricultural use for 10 years. The Municipality realized the
advantages to temporarily cede the vacant land it owned to farmers who would care for the land
and prevent the spread of informal
subdivisions.
As of 2006, the Programa de
Agricultura Urbana comprises over
600 community gardens on formerly
vacant private or publicly owned land,
involves 7000 Rosario residents, and
provides food to an estimated 40,000
people living below the poverty line.
The municipal government covers the
costs of transporting the produce, the
stalls and awnings set up for the seven
Source: IDRC, http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-32860-201-1city-wide farmers’ markets, the
DO_TOPIC.html
baskets for the merchandise and the
uniforms and gloves to meet hygiene
Illustration 4.4: Women selling their produce at one of the
standards. One important unintended
markets set up around Rosario.
benefit of the program is its role in
empowering women. Of the participants, 63% are women. In many cases, women are making
key decisions, performing tasks similar to those of men and being recognized by the community
for their role. 18
The latest development in Rosario’s program is the development of “garden parks”, or productive
gardens with a landscaped design that are planted along major roads and on tracts of land that are
unsuitable for housing. Rosario is part of a network of cities exploring the concept of urban
agriculture, supported in part by the Resource Center for Urban Agriculture and Forestry in the
Netherlands.
Allotment Gardens in Cagayan de Oro, Philippines
Cagayan de Oro (population 470,000) in the Philippines launched a model urban agriculture
program to promote urban environmental management and food security. A pilot project that has
received international recognition concerns allotment gardens, large gardens on peri-urban private
land with six to twenty 300 m2 land parcels farmed by individual families. The produce from
these gardens provides supplements of both food and income. Participants’ income has grown by
20% because of the gardens, while many of the families’ vegetable intake has doubled. Another
benefit of the program is its use of biodegradable household waste as compost, significantly
Cambridge, MA
- 96 -
improving sanitary conditions in the neighborhoods surrounding the gardens. To date five
allotment gardens have been established providing agricultural opportunities to 50 families, but
the municipal government is currently integrating the concept of allotment gardens into future
city planning and development. GIS and participatory activities will be used to locate new garden
sites, and taxes will be reduced for landowners who allow their property to be used for this
purpose.19
Greenbelt Agriculture in Ottowa, Canada
Agricultural preservation in greenbelts surrounding urban areas is also a popular concept.
Throughout Canada, municipal governments are establishing greenbelts devoted to or partially
devoted to agriculture. The greenbelt surrounding Ottowa, Canada is considered one of the
largest urban parks in the world. One quarter of this large peri-urban greenspace has been
devoted to agriculture to reflect Canada’s commitment to preserving agricultural land. 65 farms
are leased to private farmers by the National Capital Commission (NCC), the organization in
charge of promoting and programming the greenbelt.
Cambridge, MA
- 97 -
ENDNOTES
1
Serageldin, M. et al. Institutional Assessment of Kars Municipality. Study sponsored by the Christensen
Fund, September 2005
2
Ziyadov, Taleh. “The Kars-Akhalkalaki Railroad: a missing link between Europe and Asia.”
http://acturca.wordpress.com/2006, August 30, 2006
3
Regional Review: Economic, Social and Environmental overview of the ACG, BTC and Shah Deniz/SCP
Projects in the National and Regional Context of Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey. Environment Section.,
p.119.
4
UNICEF Turkey Statistics, http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/Turkey_statistics.html
5
Turkey National Environmental Action Plan 1998, quoted in BTC regional review, 2004
6
Nigros, J.E., “Turkey: May Our Forests Never Thin Out”. www.islamonline.net, health and science
section, 2003.
7
“Turkey Deforestation Rates and Related Forestry Figures”.
http://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/2000/Turkey.htm
8
BTC Regional Review, 2004, p 177.
9
Roach, John. “Conservationists Name Nine New ‘Biodiversity Hotspots’”. National Geographic News,
February 2005.
10
Descriptions of Turkey eco-regions, World Wildlife Fund, www.worldwildlife.org.
11
“Turkey Deforestation Rates and Related Forestry Figures”.
http://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/2000/Turkey.htm
12
Kupatadze, Giorgy. “Turkey’s Black Sea Dams Anger Georgia”. Environment News Service, www.ensnewswire.com/ens/may2005/2005-0506-02.asp. May 2005.
13
It is common that women migrants do not report the entire household expenditure. As such, the
expenditures reported by the women interviewees were doubled to maintain consistency in comparison and
analysis.
14
United Nations Sustainable Development Success Stories. Volume 4, quoted in Urban Agriculture and
Food Security in the United States: Farming from City Center to Urban Fringe. Prepared by the
Community Food Security Coalition’s North American Urban Agriculture Committee. October 2003.
15
Moldakov, Oleg. “The Urban Farmers of St. Petersburg.” Urban Agriculture Magazine, Resource
Centers on Urban Agriculture and Food Security (RUAF) Foundation, July 2000.
16
Moldakov, Oleg. “Microcredit and Investment for Urban Gardening in St. Petersburg, Russia.” Urban
Agriculture Magazine, Resource Centers on Urban Agriculture and Food Security (RUAF) Foundation,
April 2003.
17
Moldakov, Oleg. “The Urban Farmers of St. Petersburg.” Urban Agriculture Magazine, Resource
Centers on Urban Agriculture and Food Security (RUAF) Foundation, July 2000
18
Merzthal, Gunther. “Urban Agriculture in Rosario: An opportunity for Gender Equality”. Urban
Agriculture Magazine, Resource Centres on Urban Agriculture
19
Holmer, Robert J. and Axel Drescher. “Building Food Secure Neighborhoods: the Role of Allotment
Gardens.” Urban Agriculture Magazine, Resource Centers on Urban Agriculture and Food Security
(RUAF) Foundation, December 2005.
Cambridge, MA
- 98 -

Strategies for Sustainable Development, Kars, Turkey

Transcription

Similar documents

Kar`s Otel Brochure

VM - Village Market

ITEM MOT 00-05141 Ammunition Purchase from Kiesler Police

Newsletter - Mar 13 - SCROLL vr

June 2014

Village Ecodevelopment Committee

view pdf - Weiss Realty

AUGUST - Village of Beiseker

Don Gasgarth`s Sunday November 13th 2016 From 8:00 am to 3:00