ASSESSMENT OF THE RURAL ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF GÜDÜL TOWN (ANKARA) BY QUANTIFIED SWOT ANALYSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2020.132Keywords:
Analytic Hierarchy Process, Güdül, Rural Development, SWOT, TOWSAbstract
Purpose
Rather than solely having agricultural production at its core, rural development comprises of a multiaxial structure in which the socio-economic structure develops, non-agricultural economic diversification is assured, and a governance-based approached is adopted in the organization and participation mechanisms. The applicability and consistency of these intertwined axes entail an integrated approach to efforts in rural development. With the purpose of uncovering the critical points of the process, creating strategies intended for rural economic development within the axes valued by different stakeholders, and strengthening the participation mechanisms, SWOT Analysis, Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) integrated method, and TOWS matrix have been used to identify the Güdül rural economic development model.
Design/Methodology/Approach
In this study, the hierarchical structure established for the economic structure of Güdül is placed on the foundations of a SWOT analysis, quantified through Analytic Hierarchy Process, and evaluated within the framework of the three stakeholder’s perceptions (local people, experts, and local governments) according to their priority values.
Findings
Thus, the extent of the respective effects of important factors in rural economic development has been identified. In conclusion, the decisive role of quantified methods in the identification of strategies and policies utilized in the process of Güdül’s rural economic development has been manifested. Various strategies supporting the rural development and also institutions responsible for the implementation of these strategies were designated in light of the needs of Güdül and the expectations of the local people living in rural areas.
Research Limitations/Implications
The version of the questionnaire forms compatible with the SWOT-AHP technique, the scarcity of local manager surveys, the lack of answers to the questions of the local people are among the main difficulties encountered.
Originality/Value
This study is quite original in that it is the first strategic rural development plan model made specifically for Güdül, related to the participation of indigenous people in planning initiatives and transparently reflects the sometimes combined and sometimes changing views of local people, experts and local administrators about the importance of SWOT groups has a quality.
Metrics
References
Akbulak, C. (2016). Ardahan ilinde kırsal turizm potansiyelinin sayısallaştırılmış SWOT analizi ile değerlendirilmesi. doi:10.20304/husbd.86882
Aksoy, H. H., & Elmacı, D. (2009). Örneklem seçimi ve hesaplaması Retrieved from 80.251.40.59/education.ankara.edu.tr/aksoy/eay/eay/b0506/delmaci.doc. Retrieved 19 Temmuz 2019 80.251.40.59/education.ankara.edu.tr/aksoy/eay/eay/b0506/delmaci.doc
Anonymous. (2017). Güdül district research report. Retrieved from Ankara:
Anonymous. (2019a, 17 Temmuz 2019). Gudul investigation of development aspects. Retrieved from https://www.ankaraka.org.tr/tr/arama?q=g%C3%BCd%C3%BCl
Anonymous. (2019b). Gudul technical infrastructure. Retrieved from https://gudul.bel.tr/
Baycan Levent, T., Gülümser, A. A., & Nıjkamp, P. (2010). Türkiye’nin kırsal yapısı: AB düzeyinde bir karşılaştırma. İtü Dergisi/a, 9(2), 133-144.
Cengiz, T., & Çelem, H. (2005). Hızlı kırsal değerlendirme yöntemi: Alpağut köyü örneği (Seben, Bolu). Kafkas Üniversitesi Artvin Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 6(1-2), 161-170.
Champion, T., & Hugo, G. (2004). New forms of urbanization: beyond the urbanrural dichotomy. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Çelik, N., & Murat, G. (2008). Sayısallaştırılmış SWOT analizi ile Bartın ilinin ekonomik yapısını değerlendirme Paper presented at the 2. Ulusal İktisat Kongresi, İzmir.
Geray, C. (2011). Dünden bugüne kırsal gelişme politikaları. Ankara.
Gülçubuk, B. (2015). Dünya’da Avrupa Birliği’nde ve Türkiye’de kırsal kalkınma yaklaşımlarında değişimler Retrieved from https://acikders.ankara.edu.tr/mod/resource/view.php?id=8616 Retrieved 12 Haziran 2019, from Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Tarım Ekonomisi Bölümü https://acikders.ankara.edu.tr/mod/resource/view.php?id=8616
Ilbery, B. W. (1998). The geography of rural change. London.
Kangas, J., Kurtilla, M., & Kajanus, M. (2003). Evaluating the management strategies of a forestland estate - the S–O–S approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 69, 349-358.
Kaplan, H. (2007). Kentsel sit alanı bulunan Anadolu kasabalarında turizm seçeneği olarak eko turizm – Güdül örneği. (Uzmanlık Tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Ankara. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302460439_KENTSEL_SIT_ALANI_BULUNAN_ANADOLU_KASABALARINDA_tURIZM_SECENEGI_OLARAK_EKO_TURIZM_-_GUDUL_ORNEGI_-_ECO_TOURISM_AS_A_TOURIST_DEVELOPMENT_ALTENATIVE_FOR_ANATOLIAN_SMALL_TOWNS_WITH_A_CONSERVATION_AREA-_G
Kurtilla, M., Pesonen, M., Kangas, J., & Kajanus, M. (2000). Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process AHP in SWOT analysis – a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case. Forest Policy and Economics, 1, 41-52.
Leskinen Leena, A., Leskinen, P., Kurtilla, M., Kangas, J., & Kajanus, M. (2006). Adapting modern strategic decision support tools in the parcipatory strategy process – a case study of a forest research station. Forest Policy and Economics, 8, 267-278.
Masozera, M. K., Alavalapatı, J. R. R., Jacobson, S. K., & Shresta, R. K. (2004). Assessing the suitability of community-based management for the Nyungwe Forest Reserve. Forest Policy and Economics.
Moseley, M. J. (2012). Rural development principles and practice. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446216439
Nijkamp, P., Baycan, T., & Gulumser Akgun, A. (2006). Turkey's Rurality: A Comparative Analysis At the EU Level. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/23732183_Turkey's_Rurality_A_Comparative_Analysis_At_the_EU_Level
Özkan, E. (2007). Türkiye’de kırsal kalkınma politikaları ve kırsal turizm. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Kamu Yönetimi ve Siyaset Bilimi Anabilim Dalı, Ankara. Retrieved from http://www.hazarsam.com/up/doc/191/turkiye-de-kirsal-kalkinma-politikalari-ve-kirsal-turizm.pdf
Rovai, M., & Andreoli, M. (2018). Integrating AHP and GIS Techniques for Rural Landscape and Agricultural Activities Planning. In Multicriteria Analysis in Agriculture.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Relative measurement and ıts generalization in decision making why pairwise comparisons are central in mathematics for the measurement of ıntangible factors the analytic hierarchy/network process. Paper presented at the Review of the Royal Spanish Academy of Sciences Series a Mathematics (RACSAM).
Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2001). Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Boston, USA: Kluwer’s Academic Publishers.
Seebohm, L. (2014). Collaborative tools for strategic line planning. Retrieved from https://concurrentstrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/ConcurrentStrategies_SWOT-TOWS_12-14.pdf. Retrieved 22.10.2019, from Concurrent Srategies https://concurrentstrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/ConcurrentStrategies_SWOT-TOWS_12-14.pdf
Şahin, B., & Gündüz, E. (2018). A comprehensıve SWOT analysıs for strategıc rural development-Gudul case. Paper presented at the III. Ines Education and Social Science Congress, Alanya, Antalya. Sosyal ve Beşeri Bilimler Araştırmaları retrieved from
Tekeli, İ. (2016). Dünya’da ve Türkiye’de kent-kır karşıtlığı yok olurken yerleşmeler için temsil sorunları ve strateji önerileri (Vol. 2). Ankara: İdealkent Yayınları.
Yılmaz, A., & Zorlu, K. (2018). SWOT-AHS analizi kullanılarak Sinop’ta sürdürülebilir turizm stratejilerinin önceliklendirilmesi. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 11.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
COPYRIGHT POLICY
1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.
2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:
The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.
The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.
If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.
The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues.
The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs.
3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles.
4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material.
5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name.
6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.
ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning is an OAJ supported by 