Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi Turkish Journal of Agricultural Economics ISSN 1303-0183 http://journal.tarekoder.org The Role of Producers' Markets in Empowering Rural Women Sevgi Tüzün RAD Orc�d no: 0000-0003-0111-8417 Mersin University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Deparment of Economy, Mersin Alaiddin KOŞAR Orc�d no: 0000-0002-5481-403X Mersin University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Deparment of Economy, Mersin Abstract Purpose: This study aims at analyzing the behaviors of women producers in producers' markets and obtain results that will help the decision and policy makers in local governments. Des�gn/Methodology/Approach: The content-text analyses done with the Maxqda data analysis software on the answers to the face-to-face interviews, the changes in the producer women's lives, feelings and perceptions have been analyzed. F�nd�ngs: According to the results of the study, it has been concluded that the women who are economically powered feel better about themselves and their self-confidence improve. In conclusion, this study emphasizes the importance of producer women's places in the labor market. Or�g�nal�ty/Value: The importance of producer women's places in the labor market and changes in women's lives are identified. Key words: Women, Producers' Market, Maxqda Data Analysis, Rural, Socio-Economic Status, Mersin Kırsaldaki Kadınların Güçlendirilmesinde Üretici Pazarlarının Rolü Özet Amaç: Bu çalışma, üretici pazarlarındaki kadın üreticilerin davranışlarını analiz etmeyi ve elde edilen sonuçların yerel yönetimlerde politika yapıcılara ve karar vericilere yardımcı olmasını amaçlamaktadır. Tasarım/Metodoloj� /Yaklaşım: Üretici kadınların hayatlarındaki, hislerindeki ve algılarındaki değişimler yüz yüze yapılan görüşmeler sonucunda Maxqda veri analizi yazılımı yardımıyla yapılan içerik analizi ile analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: Araştırma sonuçlarına göre ekonomik olarak güçlü olan kadınların kendilerini daha iyi hissettikleri ve öz güvenlerinin arttığı sonuçlarına ulaşılmıştır. Sonuç olarak bu çalışma, üretici kadınların iş gücü piyasasındaki yerlerinin önemini vurgulamaktadır. Özgünlük/Değer: Kadın üreticilerin iş gücü piyasasındaki önemleri ve hayatlarındaki değişimler belirlenmiştir. Anahtar kel�meler: Kadınlar, Üretici Pazarı, Maxqda Veri Analizi, Kırsal, Sosyo-Ekonomik Statü, Mersin 1.INTRODUCTION Markets are �mportant places where producer and consumer �nteract�ons are exper�enced �ntensely. The markets, wh�le reflect�ng the soc�o-econom�c and cultural character�st�cs of the�r reg�ons, along w�th the concepts of urban�zat�on and modern�zat�on, they also reveal the changes and transformat�ons �n soc�et�es (Sar�tas, 2017). Producers markets are the means of d�rect sales to local consumers, �nstead of global markets or wholesalers of goods. In other words, they are the channels through wh�ch farm produce are d�rectly prov�ded to local consumers (Mart�nez et al., 2010). The sales of local produce �n these markets supply a cash flow �n the local economy. Because open�ng a stall �n a producers' market does not requ�re cap�tal, the producers der�ve supplemental �ncome from them. Add�t�onally, these markets are places where producers and consumers come together for face-to-face transact�ons. These markets allow the producers sell the�r extra goods left after meet�ng the�r own needs. In th�s respect, they are �mportant sales channels contr�but�ng to added �ncome of small scale operat�ons. Accord�ng to Wolf et al. (2005), producers' markets have become lead�ng places where espec�ally small operat�ons can der�ve �ncome from market�ng the�r produce d�rectly and nat�onw�de. In the study by Serc�noglu and Bektas (2014), �t was emphas�zed that producers' markets were part�cularly �mportant for small fam�ly operat�ons ut�l�z�ng the�r extra produce. From the v�ewpo�nt of consumers, ne�ghborhood markets serve as local alternat�ves to supermarkets and grocery markets to meet the�r needs for food. Accord�ng to Farma (2011), the produce sold �n producers' markets must be produced locally and the sellers must be the producers, themselves. Makale Künyes� Araştırma Makales� / Research Art�cle SorumluYazar / Correspond�ng Author Ala�dd�n KOŞAR ala�dd�nkosar@mers�n.edu.tr Gel�ş Tar�h� / Rece�ved: 02.09.2020 Kabul Tar�h� / Accepted: 05.04.2021 Tarım Ekonom�s� Derg�s� C�lt:27 Sayı:1 Sayfa: 1-8 Turk�sh Journal of Agricultural Econom�cs Volume: 27 Issue: 1 Page: 1-8 JEL Classification: Q13, M31 Rad, Koşar / Tarım Ekonom�s� Derg�s� 27 (1), 2021 2 Producers markets are not new concepts. D�rect markets go back thousands of years (Mazoyer and Roudart, 2006). However, �n the way �t �s understood �n today's Br�ta�n, producers' markets are a new phenomenon (Holloway and Kneafsey, 2000). In the last twenty years, there has been a lean�ng towards d�rect markets also �n the countr�es wh�ch are European Un�on (EU) members. Accord�ng to the results of Eurostat's Farm Structure Analys�s, 15% of the EU farmers, 6.9% of the U.S. farmers and 25% of Canad�an farmers have sold the�r products d�rectly to the consumers (Adanac�oglu, 2017). In recent years, a growth �s be�ng observed �n d�rect market�ng of agr�cultural products. There have also been academ�c stud�es focus�ng on the econom�c, soc�al and env�ronmental benefits of d�rect market�ng. In the stud�es on producers' markets, trust, face- to-face commun�cat�on, r�valry and soc�al �ntegrat�on factors have been cons�dered (Guthman, 2008). In general, the top�cs �nclude advantages the markets br�ng to producers, the products sold �n the markets, the consumer profiles and the reasons for producers prefer these markets (Gov�ndasamy et al., 2002; Vecch�o, 2009). On the top�c of the trust placed on local products of producers markets, the percept�ons of the consumers and the�r purchas�ng behav�or have been stud�ed. It has been determ�ned that, producers' markets enable the consumers to access safer food �tems and local products are super�or �n terms of freshness, food safety and nutr�t�onal value (L� et al., 2017). It �s noted that the stud�es undertaken �n th�s context generally have exam�ned the producers' markets from the demand (consumer) v�ewpo�nt, wh�le the supply s�de has been �gnored and the effects on producers have been analyzed w�thout d�fferent�at�ng the genders. Therefore, stud�es that w�ll d�st�ngu�sh producers' genders w�ll be extremely �mportant. In S�mone Beauvo�r's words, woman �s the “second sex” (the man be�ng the first). Cons�der�ng the types of work done trad�t�onally by men, women's labor came �n second (Marçal, 2018). Indeed, Serdaroglu (2010) stated that neo-class�cal theory of human cap�tal �gnored the women's labor and treats the work performed by women as act�v�t�es outs�de the economy. In other words, the women who undertake ra�s�ng ch�ldren, car�ng for the elderly and produc�ng at-home were not cons�dered a part of product�ve labor force. Consequently, the women were attr�buted no roles �n economy, or the�r roles were downplayed. However, when the value of unpa�d labor was calculated �n Canada, �t was found to be between 30.6% and 41.4% of the gross nat�onal product. Marcal (2018) stated that th�s po�nt of v�ew changed after 1950s and Ch�cago econom�sts �ncluded women as parts of economy. One of the first experts to recogn�ze the �mportance of women's part�c�pat�on �n the labor market �s cons�dered to be G�lman (1898) w�th h�s study of women's at-home statuses (Pujol, 1992). The low human cap�tal attr�buted to women and the�r burden of house chores h�nder the�r part�c�pat�on �n the labor market. The foremost actors of these producers' markets, wh�ch are also becom�ng popular �n Turkey, are women producers. The producers' markets prov�de women w�th opportun�t�es to soc�al�ze and find means of employment. Women have been sell�ng the�r produce �n these markets �n accordance w�th the�r sk�lls. Producers markets are �mportant �n terms of prov�d�ng rural women w�th �ncome. Wh�le women play act�ve roles �n household consumpt�on and produce for the market, they also contr�bute to cont�nu�ng agr�cultural product�on process and �mprov�ng the econom�c well-be�ng of the household (Hablem�toglu, 1998). However, women's act�v�t�es �n the product�on and d�str�but�on of food �tems are cons�dered to be of secondary �mportance, even though the food �tems are cruc�al for the well-be�ng of the soc�ety. However, because the products of rural women are usually sold the�r husbands or fathers, those women have l�ttle or no control over that �ncome. In th�s context, producers' markets are �mportant places g�v�ng the women control of the�r own �ncomes. In Turkey, the producers' markets were establ�shed on the bas�s of a regulat�on �ssued �n 2012, w�th the “Regulat�ons on Market Places” publ�shed on July 12, 2012 ed�t�on of the Turk�sh Legal Gazette, numbered 28351. The stud�es on these markets are �nsuffic�ent, espec�ally on the place of women �n these markets. Furthermore, there �s a need for stud�es that establ�sh women's v�ewpo�nts. From th�s respect, th�s study has a�med at fill�ng �n th�s gap �n the l�terature, by analyz�ng the women producers' roles and consumer behav�or �n the Yen�seh�r and Mez�tl� county markets �n Mers�n prov�nce. It �s hoped that the results of the study w�ll contr�bute to the dec�s�ons made by local governors and pol�cy makers. 2.MATERIAL and METHOD The field of study There are 8 producers' markets operat�ng under Mez�tl� County Mun�c�p�al�ty �n Mers�n prov�nce. The market wh�ch served as a field of study covers an area of 1300 m2 and there are 200 women who have stalls �n that market. Yen�seh�r County Mun�c�pal�ty has one such market cover�ng an area of 2799 m2 and 62 women operate stalls there. The women producers sell�ng �n these Mez�tl� and Yen�seh�r County markets and consumers who shop there form the field of study. Method of sampling, data collection and analysis Since this study focuses on a specific geographical area, Yenisehir and Mezitli counties have been selected to form a sampling set. In addition, Yenisehir and Mezitli producers' markets were preferred for their convenience for the purpose as “targeted samplings”. The facts that these markets were the firsts of their kind, were known better and attracted applications from more women producers were also effective in the choice. The market stalls were given numbers in accordance with the systematic sampling method. Out of the 62 women producers' stalls in Yenisehir market, four stalls were to be selected, so the division of 60 by 4 being 15, every 15th stall was considered in the study. In order to select four stalls from Mezitli market, 200 divided by 4 being 50, every 50th stall was considered. In the two markets, detailed interviews were done with the eight women producers selected for the study, as done in quantitative studies. The method of “interview form” was preferred for this. In this method, a specific list of questions is formed and information are collected on the same subjects, but from different people (Patton, 1987). Using this method, data were collected in July 2019 from the producer women owning stalls. In this study, content-text analyses were done with Maxqda Data Analysis Software. In the analyses, considering the socio- demographic and economic characteristics of women and the changes in their lives, feelings and perceptions, 16 codes were produced. 3.FINDINGS In the interviews done in the study, the specified codes were encountered 99 times. The most-often-repeated codes were seen to be “Consumer-producer relationships” (f = 13, 13.1%), “Additional income” (f = 11, 11.1%) and “Personal effects” (f = 11, 11.1%). “Basic income” (f = 1, 1%), Spending on “To myself” (f = 2, 2%) and Spending “To house” (f = 2, 2%) codes were the least used. Socio-demographic and economic characteristics of the participating women producers The women producers interviewed in the field of study were aged from 28 to 52. Only one woman was single. All the married women had children. Except one high-school graduate, they had only finished the elementary school. Looking at the working-age women in Turkey for comparison, 78% of them are below high-school level, 58% are at or below primary school level and 17% are not literate. For that reason, the ratio of participation in the labor market is low for women (34.7%). The difficulty or the impossibility of rural women's access to education, financial loans, social security and technology hinder their participation in the labor force. However, according to Uraz et al. (2010), the level of education has little effect in rural areas on the decisions relating to participating in the labor market. In the rural areas, 38% of women are illiterate or without a diploma, while 43% are primary school graduates. Despite of this, 90% of the agricultural work force is made up of women who are at or below primary school level. Women with low education are barred from the labor market only in urban areas. The married women producers had social security due to their husbands. Their income from the sales in the market were additional income for their households, except for one woman. Considering that the means of employment were limited for women with low education in the area of study and the potential income would be low, producers' markets have created opportunities for them. The changes in the perceptions, emotions and livelihoods of the participating women producers In the study field, it was determined that producers market generally created means and opportunities for women to earn income, to improve marketing skills, to access public services, improve their statuses in the family and the society, while socializing and supporting each other. 3 The Role of Producers' Markets in Empowering Rural Women Table 1. The Codes Specified in the Study Code Code Frequency (f) Code Percentage (%) Personal effects 11 11.1 Consumer-producer relat�onsh�ps 13 13.1 Household relat�onsh�ps 8 8.1 K�n-ne�ghbor relat�onsh�ps 4 4 Soc�al effects 3 3 Dec�s�on mak�ng 8 8.1 Bas�c �ncome 1 1 Add�t�onal �ncome 11 11.1 T�me 4 4 Regular attendance 8 8.1 Improve operat�ons 5 5.1 To myself 2 2 To house 2 2 Product�on costs 5 5.1 To ch�ldren 6 6.1 Vegetable and own product�ons 8 8.1 TOTAL 99 100 In the rural areas of Turkey, women are not viewed as producers. It is generally accepted that women serve as helpers to men in agricultural production. Indeed, women have also adopted that role. The women interviewed in this study sold products with added value, such as tomato paste, pomegranate molasse, olive oil, jams and cheese, etc., as well as the produce from their gardens. Nevertheless, these women ignored their accomplishments as producers and sellers and stated their profession as just “housewife”. Multiple roles of women (being housewives and working in and outside agriculture) affect social statuses in their households (Rosada, 2016). Producers markets have now become one of the means of interaction between the rural and urban areas (Wolf et al., 2005). Producers are pleased by being there; they like the atmosphere in the market and they appreciate interacting with the consumers. They are also happy to be with the fellow producers. The direct interaction between the producers and the consumers help the producers to take pride in the produce they grew, to determine the expectations of the consumers and feel as an important part of the production/marketing chain (Kirwan, 2004). According to a study by Hunt (2007), the foremost factor that motivates the producers to sell in the markets is the direct interactions with the consumers, while earning income is the second factor. Indeed, the women producers interviewed in the field of study stated that their interactions with the consumers, as well as other women producers have been quite well, with conversations and tea parties. They also stated that sometimes they visited each others' homes and one of their most important motivations were these interactions. When the Code Matrix Browser in Table 2 is examined, it is seen that the code most repeated by the participants (13 times) was “the relationships with the consumers and producers”. Producers markets encourage the producers in increasing the variety of food items they produce. The increase in variety, in turn, help strengthen the small scale businesses (Brown and Miller, 2008). Feenstra et al. (2003), in their study on the human capital, noted that producer markets provide 80% of the producer-sellers with great opportunities to improve their operations. A woman producer interviewed in the field, code named Yenisehir-4 supported the findings of Feenstra et al. (2003): “… my most important sources of motivation are the consumers and the fellow producers who opened their stalls. I started with purslane. Now I am growing fresh fruits and vegetables. I also make and bring jams and tomato paste…” Another producer, code named Mezitli-1 expressed her thoughts: “Same people come to the market every week; they want me to bring new products. Thus the products I bring to the market become more varied. (Table 3). Another code mostly repeated in the field (11 times) was the increase in self-confidence, knowledge, skills, prestige and communication with the town (Table 2). An interviewed woman code named Yenisehir-1 and Yenisehir-2 said: “… my self-confidence improved; neighbors and relatives speak highly of me.” Two others, Yenisehir-3 and Mezitli-2 thus quoted their experiences: 4 CODE SYSTEM Yen�seh�r 1 Yen�seh�r 2 Yen�seh�r 3 Yen�seh�r 4 Mez�tl� 1 Mez�tl� 2 Mez�tl� 3 Mez�tl� 4 Total RELATIONSHIPS Personal Effects 11 Cons.-Produc. Relat�onsh�ps 13 Household 8 K�n-Ne�ghbor 4 Soc�al Effects 3 DECISION MAKING 8 INCOME Bas�c Income 1 Add�t�onal Income 11 TIME 4 REGULAR ATTENDANCE 8 EXPENSE Improve Operat�ons 5 To Myself 2 To House 2 Product�on Costs 5 To Ch�ldren 6 VEGETABLE 8 TOTAL 15 11 12 12 13 12 13 11 99 Red colour: Strong correlat�on / Yellow col our: Med�um correlat�on / Grey colour: Weak correlat�on / Wh�te colour: No correlat�on Table 2. Code Matrix Rad, Koşar / Tarım Ekonom�s� Derg�s� 27 (1), 2021 “… my communication with the town increased. Previously, I came to the city only when the chores required it, but now I come once or twice, every week. I also find time to sightsee.” It was noted that, the neighbors or relatives who saw how the lives of these women changed applied to the municipalities to open their own stalls in the markets. Women's mobility is limited and varied, depending on the hours of the day, distances to be covered, means of transportation, cultural norms, workload and house chores, etc. It is relatively easier for women to take short trips than long ones. However, women also need permission from their husbands to go anywhere. For example, in Bangladesh, women's movements are restricted to nearby fields where they perform limited types of works (weeding, post-harvest care, etc.). In Ethiopia, women can go to places in accordance with their marital statuses, financial means, the purposes of the trips, cultural and religious norms. In Tanzania, women's mobility primarily depends on their relationships with their husbands (Meinzen-Dick et al., 2019). Hunt (2007), in his study, also stated that markets boosted the self-confidences of the producers, while helping them improve their skills. The women who participated in the study stated that they wanted to open stalls in the market as long as they could afford. Earning income is the most important dimension in empowering women (Meinzen-Dick et al., 2019). Producer markets contribute to the producers' agricultural incomes (Brown and Miller, 2008). Payne (2002) found that producers sold as much as 28% of their produce in these markets. In another study, Varner and Otto (2008) stated that producers' markets supported the household income. The producers interviewed in this study expressed that they spent the extra income from the markets firstly for their children, then to household needs, and then sometimes for the agricultural costs (Table 3). All the interviewed women emphasized the importance of independently earning income. For example, Mezitli-4 and Yenisehir-4 said that they could also spend money for their own needs. Even if the women did not earn much in these markets, it was nevertheless the first income they independently earned. According to Chicago economists, the income derived outside home affect the power balance at home, and thus the household decisions. In case the man is the bread-earner, the woman has very little say at home (Marcal, 2018). The money earned by the woman at home or outside and her contribution to economic well-being of the household improve her effectiveness in the decision processes. For example, in rural Bangladesh, if a woman earns money and that money is needed by the man, she participates in the decision processes more often. However, again in Bangladesh, some men believe that men, not women should be the bread- winners. Such men insist that they should be the who make all the decisions (Meinzen-Dick et al., 2019). In Ghana, men do feel that women's monetary contributions relieve them financially, but they see the same contribution as a possible threat to their powerful roles in the households (Meinzen-Dick et al., 2019). Kieran et al. (2018) notes that women's contribution to family income improve the respect between the couples. According to Yuliati (2008), there are five types of decision making processes for women: 1.They make decisions on their own. 2.They make decisions with their husbands, but women dominate more. 3.They make decisions with their husbands, on equal terms. 4.They make decisions with their husbands, but men dominate more. 5.They let their husbands make the decisions. The important subjects they decide on are running the kitchen, managing the household finances, meeting the various needs, managing the time and chores outside home, earning money, education of children, and arranging the communications in and out of home (Rosada, 2016). In the study by (Meinzen-Dick et al. 2019), it is claimed that the man is the only decision maker at home about the family income, and that the woman cannot sell farm animals she cares for and the income earned by the woman belongs to her children. The women interviewed in the markets stated that their husbands dominated the decision process in agricultural production. IAs women, they primarily made the decisions about running the kitchen and taking care of the children and the children's education. In Damisa and Yohanna (2007) study, as well, it was noted that women did not take part agricultural decision processes and men ruled the subjects related to economy. On the other hand, Schultz (1999) claimed that women in Thailand not only participated in agricultural activities, but they also played important roles in management and decision processes (Yavuz et al., 2018). In all domains of work, at home, on the farm and in the society, the workloads of women are quite heavy. For example, in Mali, women are the first to rise and the last to sleep. In Ethiopia, it is reported that money-making activities increase the workload for women. Women are allowed to trade in mil by their husbands, only as long as they fulfill their responsibilities in cooking, house chores and the caring for the children or the elderly (Meinzen-Dick and et al., 2019). Demir et al. (2017), in their study undertaken in the province of Kars, determined that women worked on animal husbandry for 32 hours per week on the average, and had to do house chores and care for their children for the rest of the time. Arikan (1988) noted that the work hours for women remained the same as 16 hours per day, even though the men's work periods varied greatly, depending on the season and the region they lived in. An item that became prominent in this study were the increase in the burden of work for the women in producers' markets (Table 3). The women Yenisehir-3 and Mezitli-3 said that in their interviews: “… opening a stall in this market increased our burden of work. The time left for our children and house chores decreased. That's why I have been having problems with the children. 5 The Role of Producers' Markets in Empowering Rural Women CODE SYSTEM (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (�) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p) (q) (r) (s) RELATIONSHIPS (a) Personal Effects (b) Cons.- Produc. Relat�onsh�ps (c) Household (d) K�n-Ne�ghbor (e) Soc�al Effects (f) DECISION MAKING (g) INCOME (h) Bas�c Income (�) Add�t�onal Income (j) TIME (k) REGULAR ATTENDANCE (l) EXPENSE (m) Improve Operat�ons (n) To Myself (o) To House (p) Product�on Costs (q) To Ch�ldren (r) VEGETABLE (s) Red colour: Strong correlat�on / Yellow col our: Med�um correlat�on / Grey colour: Weak correlat�on / Orange colour: Too weak correlat�on / Wh�te colour: No correlat�on Table 3. Code Relationships Browser Rad, Koşar / Tarım Ekonom�s� Derg�s� 27 (1), 2021 6 4.RESULTS and RECOMMENDATIONS The interviews done in the field of study helped obtain subjective information about the perceptions and feelings of the producer women in the rural areas. Earning income and establishing social bonds empower women. Having these abilities are important tools for joining the producers' markets. Women selling in producer markets have started to connect to both each other and to consumers, and to participate in the social and economic activities. The women who have gained self-confidence by leaving the confines of home have also felt themselves more valuable. Producers markets help the women in rural areas the means for selling their produce they grew as part of “women's traditional roles”, in a way that suits their skill sets. Even though they did not make much money, the money they made were the first they made on their own. The women with economic power felt safer and more confident. They participated more in the household decision making and established better relationships. Rural women with an income generating work felt more like a part of the society, outside their traditional roles as mothers and wives. A woman who can access to the labor market outside home socializes, gains new skills, communicates better inside or outside home, while her respectability in the society improves. Economic empowerment provides security for women and it is effective in making the women feel better. Producers markets provide the women selling produce with a continuous flow of cash. The continuity of the income for meeting their needs help the women with the means to expand their operations and increase the product variety. In conclusion, the women have gained much from their operations in producers' markets, such as: ·Earning income, ·Socializing, ·Improving the skills in production and sales, ·Respectability inside and outside home, ·Expanding the labor outlets. In this context, any type of enterprise that will place the rural women in the labor market becomes crucial. Producers markets are especially important means to empower women socially and provide them with jobs. In order to improve and expand this effect of empowerment, other activities that will provide income for women must also be supported. Additionally, helping the women organize under the cooperatives will also contribute to the raising their levels of prosperity. Contr�but�on Rate of Researchers Declarat�on Summary The authors declare that they have contr�buted equally to the art�cle and have not plag�ar�zed. Confl�ct of Interest Declarat�on The authors of the art�cle declare that there �s no confl�ct of �nterest between them. REFERENCES Adanacioglu, H. (2017). Dogrudan Pazarlama Stratejisinde Kiraz Ureticilerinin Pazarlama Etkinliği. Balkan ve Yakin Dogu Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 3(1): 1-11. Ar�kan, G. (1988). K�rsal Kes�mde Kad�n Olmak. Hacettepe Un�vers�tes� Edeb�yat Fakultes� Derg�s�, 5(2): 1-16. Brown, C. and Stacy M. (2008). The Impacts of Local Markets: A Review of Research on Farmers Markets and Community Supported Agriculture (CSA). American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 90(5): 1298-1302. Damisa, M. A. and Yohanna, M. (2007). Role of Rural Women in Farm Management Decision Making Process: Ordered Probit Analysis. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 3(4): 543-546. Dem�r, P. A. Elmal�, D. A. and Is�k, S. A. (2017). K�rsal Alanda Kad�nlar�n Tar�m ve Hayvanc�l�k Faal�yetler�ne Il�sk�n Sosyo- Ekonom�k Katk�s�. Istanbul Un�vers�tes� Veter�ner Fakultes� Derg�s�, 43(2): 81-88. Farma. (2011). Fact Sheet. Accessed 10.09.2019. Feenstra, G. W. Lewis, C. C. Hinrichs, C.C. Gillespie, G.W. and Hilchey, D. (2003). Entrepreneurial Outcomes and Enterprise Size in US Retail Farmers' Markets. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 18(1): 46–55. Govindasamy, R. Zurbriggen, M. Italia, J. Adelaja, A. Nitzsche, P. and VanVranken, R. (2002). Farmers' Markets: Consumer Trends, Preferences, and Characteristics. Journal of Extension, 40(1): 1-7. Guthman, J. (2008). Bringing Good Food to Others: Investigating the Subjects of Alternative Food Practice. Cultural Geographies, 15(4): 431-447. Hablemitoglu, S. (1998). Kirsal Alanda Kadinlar ve Surdurulebilir Gida Guvenligi. Tarim ve Koy Dergisi, 123: 32-35. Holloway, L. and Kneafsey, M. (2000). Reading the Space of the Farmers' Market: A Preliminary Investigation from the UK. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(3): 285-299. 7 The Role of Producers' Markets in Empowering Rural Women 8 Hunt, A. R. (2007). Consumer Interactions and Influences on Farmers' Market Income. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 22(1): 54–66. K�eran, C. Gray, B. and Gash, M. (2018). Understand�ng Gender Norms �n Rural Burk�na Faso: A Qual�tat�ve Assessment. Grameen Foundat�on, 59. Retr�eved from https://grameenfoundat�on.org/documents/Understand�ng_Gender_ Norms_Basel�ne_Qual�tat�ve_Assessment_BRB.pdf Kirwan, J. (2004). Alternative Strategies in the UK Agro-food System: Interrogating the Alterity of Farmers' Markets. Sociologia Ruralis, 44(4): 395-415. Li, K. Weidhaas, J. Lemonakis, L. Khouryieh, H. Stone, M. Jones, L. and Shen, C. (2017). M�crob�olog�cal Qual�ty and Safety of Fresh Produce �n West V�rg�n�a and Kentucky Farmers' Markets and Val�dat�on of a Post-harvest Wash�ng Pract�ce w�th Ant�m�crob�als to Inact�vate Salmonella and L�ster�a Monocytogenes. Food Control, 79:101-108. Marcal, K. (2018). Adam Sm�th'�n Yemeg�n� P�ş�ren K�m? Ekonom�de Kad�n�n Gorunmez El�. Istanbul: Koc Universitesi Yayinlari. Martinez, S. Hand, M. Da Pra, M. Pollack, S. Ralston, K. Smith, T. Vogel, S. Clark, S. Lohr, L. Low, S. and Newman, C. (2010). Local Food Systems: Concepts, Impacts, and Issue. USDA Economic Research Report. 97. Mazoyer, M. and Roudart, L. (2006). A H�story of World Agr�culture. From the Neol�th�c Age to the Current Cr�s�s. New York: Monthly Rev�ew Press. Me�nzen-D�ck, R. Rub�n, D. El�as, M. Mulema, A. A. and Myers, E. (2019). Women's Empowerment �n Agr�culture: Lessons from Qual�tat�ve Research (Vol. 1797). The Internat�onal Food Pol�cy Research Inst�tute (IFPRI) D�scuss�on Paper. Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. CA: Sage Publications. Payne, T. (2002). U.S. Farmers' Markets 2000: A Study of Emerging Trends. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 33(1): 1-3. Pujol, M. A. (1992). Feminism and Anti-Feminism in Early Economic Thought. Books: Edward Elgar Publishing. Rosada, I. (2016). A Review on Multi-roles of Women and Their Influence on the Change of Functional Structure in the Farmer's Household. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 9: 47–53. Saritas, S. (2017). As Market Sellers and V�llagers, the Aspect of Women from the Socıo-economıc Perspect�ve. Internat�onal Journal of Euras�a Soc�al Sc�ences, 8(27): 576-587. Sercinoglu, O. and Bektas, V. (2014). Ulkemizde Yas Meyve, Sebze ve Sut Urunleri Pazarlama Kanallari Icinde Kucuk Aile Isletmelerinin Yeri ve Uretici Pazarlari Modelinin Degerlendirilmesi. Ulusal Aile Ciftciligi Sempozyumu, (October 30-31, Ankara). Serdaroglu, U. (2010). Fem�n�st Ikt�sat'�n Bak�s� Postmodern�st m�? Ankara: Eflatun Bas�m Dag�t�m Yay�nc�l�k. Uraz, A. Aran, M. Husamoglu, M. Sanalm�s, O. D. and Capar, S. (2010). Turk�ye'de Kad�nlar�n Isgucune Kat�l�m�nda Son Donemde Gozlenen Eg�l�mler.” T.C. Devlet Planlama Tesk�lat� ve Dunya Bankas�, Refah ve Sosyal Pol�t�ka Anal�t�k Cal�sma Program� Cal�sma Raporu. 2. 75443. Ankara. Varner, T. and Otto, D. (2008). Factors Affecting Sales at Farmers' Markets: An Iowa Study. Review of Agricultural Economics, 30(1): 176–189. Vecchio, R. (2009). European and United States Farmers' Markets: Similarities, Differences and Potential Developments. European Association of Agricultural Economists (EAAE), (September 3-6, Crete). Wolf, M. M. Spittler, A. and Ahern, J. (2005). A Profile of Farmers' Market Consumers and the Perceived Advantages of Produce Sold at Farmers' Markets. Journal of Food Distribution Research, 36(1): 192-201. Yavuz, F. Shivan, M. S. Terin, M. Akay, B. Guler, I. O. and Agsu, K. (2018). Gelir Getirici Faaliyetlere Karar Vermede Kirsal Kadinin Rolu: Kuzeydogu Anadolu TRA1 Bolgesi Ornegi. International Journal of Economic and Administrative Studies Special Issue :1-10. Yul�at�, Y. (2008). The Ecolog�c Change and Strategy of Soc�al Adaptat�on at the Upland of Tengger (Perubahan Ekolog�s dan Strateg� Adaptas� Masyarakat d� W�layah Pegunungan Tengger): An Env�ronmental Rev�ew on Gender-Perspect�ve. PPS UNIBRAW/S3. Un�vers�ty of Braw�jaya. Rad, Koşar / Tarım Ekonom�s� Derg�s� 27 (1), 2021