KOOPERATSIYA MUNOSABATLARIGA KIRGAN VA KIRMAGAN FERMER XO‘JALIKLARINING EMPIRIK DESKRIPTIV STATISTIKA TAHLILI
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17848614Ключевые слова:
fermer xo‘jaligi, deskriptiv tahlil, kooperatsiya, hosildorlik ko‘rsatkichi.Аннотация
Cheklangan resurslar sharoitida ulardan samarali foydalanish masalasi barcha tarmoqlarda, ayniqsa qishloq
xo‘jaligi sohasida alohida ahamiyat kasb etadi. Shu munosabat bilan ushbu tadqiqotda Samarqand viloyatida kartoshka
yetishtirish jarayonida mavjud yer resurslaridan foydalanish samaradorligini oshirishda kooperatsiya munosabatlarining
ahamiyati deskriptiv tahlil asosida o‘rganildi. Tadqiqotda Samarqand viloyatining 367 ta fermer xo‘jaligi bo‘yicha yig‘ilgan
bir yillik so‘rovnoma ma’lumotlaridan foydalanildi. Empirik deskriptiv statistika tahlili natijalari ko‘rsatdiki, kooperatsiya
munosabatlariga kirgan fermer xo‘jaliklarida texnika va agregatlarga egalik darajasi, kartoshka hosildorligi, iqlim
o‘zgarishlari bo‘yicha xabardorlik hamda bozor haqidagi ma’lumotlarga ega bo‘lish ko‘rsatkichlari kooperatsiyada
bo‘lmagan xo‘jaliklarga nisbatan yuqoriroq ekanligi aniqlandi.
Библиографические ссылки
1. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi. (2024). Qishloq xo‘jaligi kooperativi to‘g‘risida (O‘RQ–995-son Qonun, 2024-yil 8-noyabr).
2. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidenti. (2021, 26-fevral). Qishloq xo‘jaligida bilim va innovatsiyalar tizimi hamda
zamonaviy xizmatlar ko‘rsatishni yanada rivojlantirish to‘g‘risida (PQ–5009-son qaror). https://lex.uz
3. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidenti. (2021, 3-fevral). Qishloq xo‘jaligida bilim va innovatsiyalar tizimini rivojlantirish va
zamonaviy xizmatlar ko‘rsatishni kengaytirish to‘g‘risida (PF–6159-son farmon). https://lex.uz
4. Gibson, K. (2020). Collectively performed reciprocal labour: Reading for possibility. In J. K. Gibson-Graham & K.
Dombroski (Eds.), The Handbook of Diverse Economies (pp. 170–178). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.
org/10.4337/9781788119962.00027
5. Gulati, R., Wohlgezogen, F., & Zhelyazkov, P. (2012). The two facets of collaboration: Cooperation and coordination in
strategic alliances. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 531–583. https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2012.691646
6. Brunori, G., Rossi, A., & Malandrin, V. (2011). Co-producing transition: Innovation processes in farms adhering to
solidarity-based purchase groups (GAS) in Tuscany, Italy. The International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and
Food, 18(1), 28–53. https://doi.org/10.48416/ijsaf.v18i1.257
7. Schiefer, J., Lair, G. J., & Blum, W. E. (2015). Indicators for the definition of land quality as a basis for the sustainable
intensification of agricultural production. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 3(1), 42–49. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.iswcr.2015.03.003
8. Sutherland, L. A., Darnhofer, I., Wilson, G., & Zagata, L. (2014). Transition pathways towards sustainability in
agriculture: Case studies from Europe. CABI. ISBN 978-1-78064-219-2
9. Renting, H., Schermer, M., & Rossi, A. (2012). Building food democracy: Exploring civic food networks and newly
emerging forms of food citizenship. The International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food, 19(3), 289–307.
https://doi.org/10.48416/ijsaf.v19i3.206
10. Velten, S., Leventon, J., Jager, N. W., & Newig, J. (2015). What is sustainable agriculture? A systematic review.
Sustainability, 7(6), 7833–7865. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7067833
11. Möllers, J., Traikova, D., Bîrhală, B. A. M., & Wolz, A. (2018). Why (not) cooperate? A cognitive model of farmers’
intention to join producer groups in Romania. Post-Communist Economies, 30(1), 56–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/146
31377.2017.1361697
12. Cialdella, N., Dobremez, L., & Madelrieux, S. (2009). Livestock farming systems in urban mountain regions: Differentiated
paths to remain in time. Outlook on Agriculture, 38(2), 127–135. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000009788632412
13. Artz, G., & Naeve, L. (2016). The benefits and challenges of machinery sharing among small-scale fruit and vegetable
growers. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 6(3), 19–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.5304/
jafscd.2016.063.003
14. Willy, D. K., & Holm-Müller, K. (2013). Social influence and collective action effects on farm-level soil conservation
effort in rural Kenya. Ecological Economics, 90, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.03.008
15. Shiferaw, B., Kebede, T., Kassie, M., & Fisher, M. (2008). Technology adoption under seed access constraints and the
economic impacts of improved pigeonpea varieties in Tanzania. Agricultural Economics, 39(3), 309–323.
16. Croppenstedt, A., Demeke, M., & Meschi, M. M. (2003). Technology adoption in the presence of constraints: The case
of fertilizer demand in Ethiopia. Review of Development Economics, 7(1), 58–70.
17. Poulton, C., Kydd, J., & Dorward, A. (2006). Overcoming market constraints on pro-poor agricultural growth in Sub-
Saharan Africa. Development Policy Review, 24(3), 243–277.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Как цитировать
Выпуск
Раздел
Лицензия
Copyright (c) 2025 ЗЕЛЁНАЯ ЭКОНОМИКА И РАЗВИТИЕ
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution» («Атрибуция») 4.0 Всемирная.