“Grains are not only an agricultural commodity; they are the foundation of food security, economic stability and strategic independence. Increasing wheat production in Türkiye is vital not merely as an economic target, but for national food security, strategic independence and rural development. That is why the question ‘Why should we increase wheat production?’ is not only an agricultural issue; it is also an economic, social, political, national security and ecological strategic matter.”

Grains are emerging as one of the key building blocks not only of agricultural production, but also of food security, economic stability and countries’ strategic independence. Climate change, rising geopolitical risks, supply-chain disruptions and shifts in agricultural policy are making grain markets more fragile—and more strategic—than ever.

Yaşar Serpi
Chairman
of the Board
Turkish National
Grain Council
(UHK)

For Türkiye, grains represent not only domestic supply, but also the potential to play a stronger role in regional and global balances, supported by its production base, processing industry and export capacity. Turning that potential into sustainable outcomes, however, requires production stability, a structure resilient to climate risks, and policies that prioritise productivity and quality.

In this interview with Yaşar Serpi, Chairman of the National Grain Council (UHK), we discuss the current state of Türkiye’s grain sector, supply-demand balance, harvest expectations and developments in global markets. Speaking both as the Council’s Chairman and from an industrialist’s perspective, Serpi offers a wide-ranging assessment—from production and trade to price formation, sustainability and strategic stock management.

Mr. Yaşar Serpi, thank you for accepting our interview request and making time for us. Could you tell us about yourself and UHK’s work?

The National Grain Council was established in 2010 under the framework of the Agricultural Law. It is a legal entity that brings together all stakeholders in the sector—from producers to industrialists, from universities to public institutions. Today, the Council has 185 members and operates from its headquarters in Ankara.

UHK’s core mission is to contribute to policy-making processes across the entire value chain—from planting to final consumption and trade. Producing sector-guiding analyses in line with market conditions, climate risks and international developments; preparing data-driven reports; and building a shared strategic perspective are among our main areas of work.

In this framework, we are not an organisation that produces desk-based reports only. We have held sector meetings in 17 centres across Türkiye. For the past three seasons, pre-harvest congresses have also been organised with participation at ministerial level. Our Scientific Board’s reports on wheat, barley, paddy rice, triticale, oats and rye have become reference publications for the sector. In addition, we regularly publish crop development and harvest-forecast reports throughout the year and share our views and recommendations on regulatory changes with the public.

Where does Türkiye’s grain supply-demand balance stand today? Do harvest forecasts match what is seen in the field?

In general terms, we can say Türkiye’s grain supply-demand balance is broadly in equilibrium. On average, we produce around 20 million tonnes (Mt) of wheat, 8 Mt of barley and 8.5 Mt of maize each year. There can be year-to-year variability in some products. For example, due to last season being dry, our wheat and barley needs increased, but because TMO held strong stocks from the previous season, there was not significant import demand.

Unfortunately, our 2024/25 harvest season was affected by drought. In the 2024/25 production season, total grain output fell by 12.3% to around 34.2 million tonnes. Compared with the previous season, wheat production declined by 13.7% to 17.9 million tonnes; barley production fell by 25.9% to 6 million tonnes; rye production decreased by 20.9% to around 203,000 tonnes; and oats fell by 26.3% to around 288,000 tonnes. Maize production, however, increased by 5% to around 8.6 million tonnes.

Our Ministry revised its initial report and confirmed our harvest estimates in the “2025 Crop Production Second Estimate” report published on 24 October 2025. Based on our reports and the Ministry’s latest report, we can say the overall picture aligns with field conditions.

While this production volume can cover domestic consumption in the short term, it is not sufficient when Türkiye’s potential and strategic position are taken into account. The critical issue is not only total output, but also production stability, continuity of quality, and resilience to climatic conditions. As UHK, our core approach is to focus not only on increasing planted area, but also on achieving higher and better-quality yields per unit area.

You view the sector from multiple angles—both as Chairman of the National Grain Council and as an industrialist. How do you assess 2025 in terms of grains?

For the grain sector, 2025 has been a year in which multi-dimensional risks were experienced simultaneously, while the sector’s resilience was also tested. Drought linked to climate change, rising input costs and volatility in global markets put pressure on production; however, thanks to producers’ experience, the processing industry’s sourcing flexibility and coordination with public institutions, supply security was maintained. As UHK, we see this year as a threshold year—one that clearly reveals the limits of our current production model and the need for structural transformation.

Türkiye’s agriculture, food and beverage exports declined by 1.02% year-on-year in January–November 2025 to USD 24.79 billion. Over the same period, imports rose by 22.83% to USD 20.52 billion. While the agricultural sector generated a trade surplus of USD 4.27 billion in that period, the unit export value increased by 8.8% to USD 1,422 per tonne.

In 2025, Türkiye imported around 4 million tonnes of wheat (including the wheat equivalent of processed products), while exporting processed products equivalent to 6.4 million tonnes of wheat—generating USD 3.5 billion in export revenue against USD 1.14 billion paid for imports.

However, one key point must be underlined: the fact that production volumes cover domestic consumption is not sufficient on its own. The real issue is ensuring stability in production, protecting continuity of quality, and building a production structure resilient to climate change.

Why should we increase wheat production?

Increasing wheat production is vital not only as an economic target, but also for national food security, strategic independence and rural development. Therefore, the question “Why should we increase wheat production?” is not only an agricultural topic; it is also an economic, social, political, national security and ecological strategic matter.

Since the 1990s, economic conditions have been the determining factor behind the contraction of wheat planting areas in Türkiye. Twenty years ago, wheat area was 9 million hectares; it fell to 6.8 million hectares. Today, it stands at around 7–7.5 million hectares. The decline in planting area was not strongly felt due to yield gains driven by modern agricultural techniques. Despite reduced area, annual wheat production rose from around 15 million tonnes to around 20 million tonnes. But as our population increased, our needs increased as well. In recent years, strong and strategic policy supports by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and TMO’s price-regulating policies—especially for wheat—have helped strengthen national wheat production and trade, alongside rising planted areas.

Although we are above the global average with an average yield of 270 kilograms per decare, we remain slightly below developed countries. Climate and rainfall, of course, are important factors here. From this perspective, we need to reduce agriculture’s dependency on climate conditions. In Türkiye, around 4 million hectares are still left fallow. The biggest reason is insufficient water. Within certain principles, water transfers between basins should be implemented. In addition, irrigation systems in currently irrigated areas should be modernised. Also, in line with the government’s decision to lease unused lands, we strongly support bringing these lands into production, as it is extremely important for the agricultural sector.

Expanding crop rotation systems and using drought-tolerant and early-maturing wheat varieties will both protect soil fertility and reduce fallow areas by shortening the production cycle. In addition, soil-analysis-based fertilisation, digital agriculture practices and satellite-supported crop planning can enable sustainable production in these areas.

WHEAT ENTERS A TRANSFORMATION PERIOD

Over the past 15 years, Türkiye’s grain production has experienced average annual production volatility of 3–5%; wheat production has fluctuated within an 18–22 million tonne range; and in drought years, declines of 15–20% have been seen. Similarly, while agricultural production has followed a relatively stable path, it has struggled to reach productivity-growth targets. With the contribution of GAP and other irrigation projects, and with supports providing visible benefits, progress has been achieved including: a 25% yield increase in irrigated areas, a 40% increase in technology adoption, and a 60% increase in the use of modern equipment. In addition, the “New Support Model and Production Planning in Crop Production (No. 8859)” and the “Contract Farming Model” published by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry on 28 August 2024 have been valuable developments, signalling the start of a new era.

Türkiye’s yield per hectare is around 2.6 tonnes—above the global average—yet there is a 40% improvement potential to reach EU standards. This increase could significantly lift production on existing land. In terms of our wheat production: we view 2015–20 as a Stabilisation Period, 2021–25 as a Growth Period, and 2026–30 as a Transformation Period with a vision of 25–28 million tonnes on average. In this framework, policy priorities—first to feed our population of 100 million, and then to supply as much as possible from domestic sources the raw material needed for exports of wheat-based products such as flour, pasta and bulgur—include: basin-based dynamic production planning, yield-based support, carbon-neutral production models, digital agriculture infrastructure, and R&D and breeding-focused approaches.

With these strategies implemented, it would not be unrealistic for Türkiye to achieve, by 2040, 30 million tonnes of wheat production and export revenues of USD 8 billion from exporting processed products equivalent to 15 million tonnes of wheat.

FLOUR PRICES CANNOT DIVERGE FROM THE GLOBAL TREND

Are the recent fluctuations in flour prices driven more by domestic dynamics or by global grain markets?

Price formation in flour markets is largely determined by developments in global grain markets. The main reasons are wheat’s nature as an internationally traded commodity; the fact that pricing is formed on exchanges such as Chicago (CBOT) and Paris (MATIF); the rapid transmission of global supply-demand shocks; and the domestic industry’s tendency to pass import prices into the local market.

That said, domestic factors such as inflation, exchange rates, labour and logistics/energy costs are also important complementary drivers that can amplify or dampen the magnitude and speed of price movements.

Even though TMO’s intervention purchase and sale prices aim to balance the domestic market, structural divergence from the global trend is not possible when global prices rise sharply and import wheat costs increase in TRY terms. Interventions provide only temporary stabilisation.

Even when there is global surplus supply or rising production, in countries like Türkiye that both import and export, local dynamics such as exchange rates, taxes and logistics can dominate price pressures. Internationally, grain production is breaking records despite climate conditions. Excess supply pressures prices, and can even drive them down temporarily. The global grain price index and changes in international markets (supply-demand, stock levels, international trade, etc.) have eased pressure somewhat; however, increases in exchange rates, freight and logistics costs have lifted prices in TRY terms to some extent, while the rise in flour prices was not continuous and occurred in line with—indeed at times behind—the rise in raw material prices.

FLOUR EXPORTS CONTRACTED BY 22%

In 2025, Türkiye earned USD 874 million from exporting 2.35 million tonnes of flour. This represents a 22% contraction compared with the previous year, which increases price sensitivity during domestic supply-demand cycles. The global price index and international sourcing conditions provide a “background”. However, for Türkiye specifically, exchange-rate volatility, TMO purchase prices, production costs and the domestic supply-demand balance largely determine the direction of prices.

Therefore, for sustainable stability in the flour market, it is not sufficient to track external factors alone; local agricultural policies, exchange-rate balance, supports provided to producers and the domestic supply-demand balance must also be considered.

QUALITY AND PRICE DIFFERENTIATION IN COMPETITION

For flour industrialists, 2025 was a year in which raw material sourcing, continuity of quality and cost management stood out. In the domestic market, quality was decisive; in external markets, price competition was decisive. Despite this, the sector managed the process thanks to its flexible sourcing structure and export reflexes.

Looking specifically at the flour industry, the biggest risk facing the sector in 2026 is global uncertainty and price volatility. The biggest opportunity is strengthening Türkiye’s potential to become a regional flour hub, supported by its logistics advantage and production capacity. Despite the contraction in exports in 2025, Turkish flour industrialists protected and dominated their markets. This will be the key to a new export success story in 2026 and in the years ahead.

While geopolitical risks create uncertainty in the short term, they also offer Türkiye an opportunity to be a reliable supplier. The Turkish flour industry now competes not only on price, but also on continuity and trust.

In global markets, price formation can no longer be explained solely by supply-demand balance. Financial flows, logistics costs and geopolitical risks have become permanent factors. In this environment, Türkiye needs to establish balance through strategic stock management and predictable policies.

How are global climate change and geopolitical risks affecting grain markets?

Rising temperatures reduce yields, especially for cool-season crops such as wheat and maize. A one-degree increase in temperatures reduces wheat yields by 4–6% and maize yields by 7–10%. Drought, floods and extreme heatwaves make production planning more difficult. For example, heatwaves in Europe and the United States reduce wheat yields, while drought in Australia and Argentina tightens global supply.

Rising irrigation needs increase farmers’ costs. Fertiliser-use plans, pest populations and disease cycles change. Ports, storage areas and transport routes can be damaged by disasters. Sudden rainfall during harvest causes quality losses.

The wheat production belt is shifting northward: Canada, Russia and Northern Europe are gaining importance. Because the Russia–Ukraine war affects 25% of global wheat exports, it shocks markets sharply. Security problems in the Red Sea and the Black Sea increase freight costs. Countries sometimes impose export bans to control domestic inflation—such as India’s rice export ban, Russia’s grain taxes, and Argentina’s maize and wheat export quotas.

Geopolitical tensions push up oil and natural gas prices, raising costs for fertilisers (especially nitrogen fertilisers), agricultural machinery and logistics. Major power competition—such as between the United States and China—spills into agricultural trade. China’s stockpiling policies play a major role in global price formation; at times, prices are shaped not by “true supply-demand” but by “expectations and stock management”.

Reduced production due to drought and constrained exports due to war create imbalances in prices. Energy crises combined with climate-driven production declines accelerate food inflation. Disrupted supply routes, risks and extreme weather events lengthen supply times and raise freight prices.

As a result, price volatility is increasing. Whereas long cycles of 5–10 years used to be the norm, sharp short-term price spikes have become more pronounced. Global grain stocks are of critical importance. Countries able to stockpile gain an advantage; stock management has become a strategic weapon.

Trade routes and production centres are changing. The Black Sea region remains important but risky. North America and Australia are gaining importance again. Import dependence deepens in Africa and the Middle East.

Major producers such as Russia, Ukraine, the EU and the US continue to shape global wheat prices through harvest policies and export restrictions. Looking ahead, will supply security or price stability be the bigger risk in global wheat markets? What strategic position should Türkiye take in this global landscape?

In today’s global picture, the two risk headings are linked. However, the larger and more difficult-to-manage risk in the period ahead tends to be supply security.

Why?

Export restrictions, quota/tax practices and the reflex to “protect the domestic market” are no longer exceptions; in certain periods, they have become “standard policy instruments”.

Climate-driven production volatility (drought, excessive rainfall, heat stress) increases uncertainty in harvest outcomes.

Disruptions in the Black Sea basin and logistics corridors (insurance, freight, routes, port restrictions) can make access to physical product difficult.

In these conditions, price stability matters—but price volatility is often the result of supply/access uncertainty. In other words, as supply security weakens, price stability deteriorates as well.

What strategic position should Türkiye take?

Türkiye’s correct strategy is to establish a balance between “supply security + a competitive industry” at the same time. This requires a four-axis positioning:

1. A transformation that increases stability in production (insuring domestic supply)

– Production planning based on water availability, drought-tolerant varieties, productivity-focused technology (precision agriculture)

– Quality standardisation (protein, gluten, hectolitre, etc.) and managing inter-regional quality differences

– A predictable income expectation for producers (timing and clarity of supports/premiums)

2. Strategic stock and “buffer mechanism” management (a shield against market shocks)

– Stock policy should be managed not only by quantity, but also by quality breakdown (bread wheat vs. durum, different quality classes)

– A rules-based approach that calms markets during shock periods, but does not distort market functioning in normal times

3. Diversification in sourcing and foreign trade (reducing dependence on a single origin)

– Diversity in supplier countries, alternative route/port planning, flexibility in trade contracts

– Import–export balance: a “balance” that preserves competitiveness for industry (flour/pasta) without undermining producer motivation

4. Positioning Türkiye as a “regional supply and processing hub” (strategic strength)

– Türkiye’s strengths: processing capacity, logistics advantage, market access, experience

– Goal: not only to be an “exporter”, but to strengthen its identity as a stable supplier and a reliable partner in crisis periods

– Key requirement: predictability in the domestic market and confidence in rules

Türkiye is among the world’s highest bread consumers (around 200 kg per person per year). Yet countries like Germany and France have built far more variety and value in bakery products. Where do you think Türkiye falls short in turning high consumption into higher value-added bread and bakery?

There is diversity, but “classification and narrative” are weak. In reality, Türkiye has very high regional diversity in breads and bakery products. However, we struggle to present this as a “product family” to national and international markets—supported by standardised quality criteria, geographical indication/registration infrastructure, and a story/identity/brand language.

Quality standardisation and a shared “flour quality language” are not sufficiently established. In Germany/France examples, consumers know the “character” of bread. In Türkiye, price-focused perception often dominates. A stronger system is needed for standardisation in flour quality based on end-use, process standards in baking, and training. R&D, innovation and product development remain limited. The functional/health-focused product segment should be developed further. Shelf life, packaging, cold chain and ready/semi-ready product innovation are critical for converting consumption into value-added output. Türkiye is developing in these areas, but still lags behind its potential in scale and brand strength.

An “bread culture brand” integrated with gastronomy and tourism has not been sufficiently established. France’s baguette is a cultural brand; gastronomy, training and standards move together. Türkiye has equivalents—such as somun, bazlama, lavaş, pide, yufka and tandır—but coordination is weak to turn this into a “national brand umbrella”.

Waste and efficiency issues reduce value-added potential. A significant part of high consumption is associated with waste. Waste increases costs, lowers quality perception and weakens sustainability claims. Reducing waste, however, generates social, economic and environmental “added value”.

DEFINING TÜRKİYE’S BREAD ROUTES

Is the sector reading this richness?

A significant part of the sector is reading it—especially among large-scale companies, where innovation, packaged products and export capability are rising. But in the overall picture, due to a fragmented baking ecosystem, gaps in standardisation/training, and the weakness of brand and product architecture approaches, this “richness” has not yet fully turned into economic value.

What is your recommendation? What should a concrete roadmap look like?

Varieties should be documented and quality criteria defined. Regional products should be linked to a national story through geographical indications and a brand umbrella. R&D incentives for special, functional products should be put on the agenda. With waste-reduction programmes, the focus should shift to packaged, portioned solutions. By integrating gastronomy and tourism, initiatives can be developed around themes such as “Türkiye’s bread routes”.

Finally, what core message would you like to deliver to producers, industrialists and decision-makers?

The grain sector is the foundation not only of agriculture, but also of food security and social stability. As UHK, our core message is that a knowledge-based, planned production model—centred on water and encompassing all stakeholders—is now a necessity.