Main Article Content
In this study, 11 agricultural variables for 81 provinces in Turkey in 2016 were used to identify homogeneous province clusters with similar structures and reveal groups of similar provinces in Turkey. For this reason, "K average means clustering" and "Hierarchical clustering" methods were used. Using cluster analysis, provinces in Turkey were statistically separated into 5, 7 and 10 clusters and tested, and the number of clusters was determined. According to the results, the most significant clustering was obtained by 7 clusters. Analysis results were also supported by Dendrogram and Agglomerative Table. According to Quadrature Euclidean and Pearson Proximity Matrix criteria, which were used as distance in the analysis, the provinces most similar to each other in Turkey based on agricultural indicators were Rize and Yalova, while the least similar provinces were Konya and Adana. The clusters of provinces that were similar to each other in terms of agricultural indicators based on 7 cluster analysis were: Adana, Ankara, Çorum, Diyarbakır, Edirne, Mardin, Şanlıurfa and Tekirdağ in Cluster 1; Eskişehir and Yozgat in Cluster 3; Balıkesir, İzmir and Van in Cluster 4; Afyonkarahisar, Aksaray, Karaman, Kayseri, Sivas and Tokat in Cluster 5; Ağrı, Aydın, Bursa, Çanakkale, Denizli, Erzurum, Manisa, Muğla, Muş, Sakarya and Samsun in Cluster 6; Konya in Cluster 7; and the remaining provinces in Cluster 2. By means of clustering, variables causing the clustering of provinces and showing a homogeneous structure, and different agricultural regions formed by the provinces were identified.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
When the article is accepted for publication in the Journal of Awareness, authors transfer all copyright in the article to the Rating Academy Ar-Ge Yazılım Yayıncılık Eğitim Danışmanlık ve Organizasyon Ticaret Ltd. Şti.The authors reserve all proprietary right other than copyright, such as patent rights.
Everyone who is listed as an author in this article should have made a substantial, direct, intellectual contribution to the work and should take public responsibility for it.
This paper contains works that have not previously published or not under consideration for publication in other journals.
ALDENDERFER, M. S. R. K. BLASHFIELD. 1984. Cluster analysis, Beverly hills: Sage. Publications,
BLASHFİELD, R. K., ALDENFERDER, M. S. 1978. The Literature on Cluster analysis, Multivariate Behavioral Research,13:271-295.
EVERİTT, B., LANDAU, S., LEESE, M. 2001. Cluster analysis, Oxford University Pres, London.
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), 2016. FAOSTAT Livestock Primary, Production Quantity. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QL
HUBERT, L. 1974. Approximate evaluation techniques for the single-link and complete-link
hierarchical clustering procedures. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69:698-704.
GRIMM, L. G., YARNOLD, P. R. 2000. Reading and Understanding More Multivariate Statistics, American Psychological Assoc.,Washington, DC, ISBN 1-55798-698-3, s.173-174.
JOHNSON, A. R., WİCHERN, D. W. 1992. Applied multivariate statistical analysis. Prentice-hall international editions. New Jersey, 573-590. ss.
KALAYCI, Ş. 2008. SPSS Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistik teknikleri. Asil Yayın Dağıtım Ltd. Şti. 3. Baskı, ISBN 975–9091–14–3, s.350–369.
KARDI, T. 2015. Similarity Measurement. http:\people.revoledu.comkarditutorialSimilarity.
LANCLAN, G. J. 1999. Mahalanobis Distance. Resonance, June 1999, 20-26.
MARRİOT, F. H. C. 1971. Practical problems in a method of cluster analysis, Biometrics, 27.
SHARMA, M., WADHAWAN, P. 2009. A Cluster analysis study of small and medium enterprises, IUP Journal of Management Research, 8(10):7-23.
TATLIDİL, H. 2002. Uygulamalı çok değişkenli analiz, H.Ü. Fen Fakültesi İstatistik Bölümü, Ankara, 329-332. ss.
TURAN, Z., ŞANVER, D., Öztürk, K. 2017. Türkiye’de hayvancılık sektöründen süt inekçiliğinin önemi ve yurt içi hasılaya katkısı ve de dış ülkelerle karşılaştırılması. Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(3):60- 74.
TURANLI, M., ÖZDEN, Ü. H., TÜREDİ, S. 2006. Avrupa Birliği’ne aday ve üye ülkelerin ekonomik benzerliklerinin kümeleme analiziyle incelenmesi. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(9):95–108.
TÜİK, 2017. Bölgesel İstatistikler. Tarımsal Üretim Değeri.
YILGÖR, M., SEYHAN, M., SEVİM, Z. 2013. Türkiye'de tahıl üretimi. Bandırma Ticaret Borsası, Bandırma.