Farm Restructuring Research Articles

Land Reform and Farm Restructuring in Ukraine

The rush to privatize farming in Ukraine has ground to a halt. Ukrainian agriculture remains predominantly collective, and the switch to private farming has slowed considerably. Unless the government steps in soon, land reform in Ukraine will be in danger of stagnating.

Land Reform and Farm Restructuring: What Has Been Accomplished to Date?

The countries of East Central Europe (ECE) and the former Soviet Union (FSU) entered the transition in 1989–1990 with a common heritage in agriculture: most land, regardless of its ownership, was cultivated collectively in large-scale farms with thousands of hectares and hundreds of member-workers; the commercial production from the collective sector was supplemented by subsistence-oriented individual agriculture based on rural household plots of less than one hectare; product markets and input supply channels were largely controlled by state organizations within an administrative command framework; budget constraints virtually did not exist. The persistent inefficiency of socialized agriculture was usually attributed to collective production, which is rare in countries with a marketoriented economy, and to farm sizes that were too large compared to the observed market ‘‘best practice.’’ The strategy of agricultural transition formulated in the early 1990’s accordingly envisaged a transformation from collective to individual agriculture as the ultimate goal. Individual farmers could form associations to ensure efficient farm services and engage in land transactions to achieve optimal farm sizes. Pragmatic considerations suggested an intermediate stage involving transition to downsized but still relatively large corporate or cooperative farms based on private ownership of land and assets and with radically modified, profit-motivated management.

Measures of Agricultural Support Policies in Transition Economies: 1994–1997

In the pre-reform period, agriculture was heavily subsidized in most Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC's). Around 1989, most CEEC's began to open up their markets, liberalize prices, and reduce subsidies, and the level of support provided to agriculture declined drastically. While not questioning the direction of economic reforms, there was concern that the decline in profitability in farning would slow down the impetus for farm restructuring, in particular, the drive for privatization of land as demanded by potential new farmers. However, after pursuing rather liberal agricultural policies at the beginning of the transition period, some CEEC's in recent years have reintroduced higher levels of support (Stefan Tangerman, 1996). In this paper, based on estimates of various support indicators for the period beginning roughly in 1994, I will address some of the more important questions regarding agricultural support: What has been the impact of trade and price policy interventions on the net income of farmers and government budgets? How level has the playing field been since the reintroduction of support? Does the current economic environment provide an appropriate and sound basis for adjustment toward a more competitive agricultural sector? This analysis is part of a comparative study by the World Bank, which covers Bulgaria, Poland, Romania, Ukraine, and Russia (in progress), plus Germany and Turkey, two reference cases geographically located at the border of the CEEC' s. For each country, employing the same methodology, the study considers approximately eight commodities which are representative of the country's major import-competing and export products.

Shirkats, Dekhqon farmers and others: Farm restructuring in Uzbekistan

Shirkats, Dekhqon farmers and others: Farm restructuring in Uzbekistan

The Economics of Agricultural Decollectivization in East Central Europe and the Former Soviet Union

1989 include both the privatization of agricultural production assets and the restructuring of state and collective farms. Farm restructuring and, more specifically, the breakup of large-scale agricultural production units into individually operated farms—a process we define as ‘‘decollectivization’’—differ considerably for the various ECE and FSU countries. Differences in decollectivization can be observed across countries, between regions within a country, and over time. We argue that these differences are not random. This article identifies the factors that affect the decollectivization process and shows how they are consistent with empirically observed differences in agricultural decollectivization in ECE and FSU countries. The decollectivization process is a consequence of the decision of collective farm members to leave the collective production framework and start up individual farms. Factors affecting this decision are the expected productivity and profitability of individual farming relative to collective farming and the costs for individuals to leave the collective farm and start up an individual farm. These costs are affected by land reform, privatization, and decollectivization regulations. The relative productivity of individual versus collective farming depends on the distribution of collective farmers’ productivity, the prereform average collective farm productivity, and the advantages and disadvantages of individual farming compared to collective farming. The literature on decollectivization identifies both advantages and disadvantages in collective production, some of which would not extend beyond the transition period. Disadvantages include high transaction costs associated with the monitoring of labor and inefficiencies due to the right of

Agricultural Privatization, Land Reform and Farm Restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe

Agricultural Privatization, Land Reform and Farm Restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe

Restructuring of Hog Farming in North Carolina: Explosion and Implosion

Over the past six years hog farming in North Carolina has undergone a significant restructuring. For most of this century raising hogs was a casual farm activity found throughout the state. During the past decade hog farming has been transformed along industrial-corporate lines. In the process, the swine population has expanded rapidly (exploded) and simultaneously collapsed in geographical bounds (imploded). This paper examines the linkage between the development of the industrial-corporate hog farming regime, the rapid growth in hog populations, and the geographical concentration of hog production in a newly emerging high-density hog production district in the south central area of the Coastal Plain region.

Land reform and farm restructuring in East Central Europe and CIS in the 1990s: Expectations and achievements after the first five years

The countries of East Central Europe and the former Soviet Union have achieved considerable progress with land reform and farm restructuring since 1991. Yet the achievements fall short of original expectations, both it scope and in character. So far, agricultural transformation has not produced a quick increase in production; most land remains in collective ownership; most peasants prefer to remain in the safety of large cooperatives, which still dominate agriculture. The accomplishments of agrarian reform have been modest due to political and legal uncertainty, lack of a supportive environment, high risk, and inadequate mechanisms for farm restructuring and individual exit. The future agriculture in the region will be characterized by the coexistence of private farms, restructured cooperatives, commercial farms of various sizes, and part-time subsistence farms. Copyright 1997 by Oxford University Press.

Russia’s Legal Framework for Land Reform and Farm Restructuring

Russia’s Legal Framework for Land Reform and Farm Restructuring

K. Nagata (eds), Comprehensive Restructuring of the Japanese Paddy-field Farming

K. Nagata (eds), Comprehensive Restructuring of the Japanese Paddy-field Farming

Land Reform and Farm Restructuring in the Kyrgyz Republic

Two land tenure specialists chronicle initiatives in land reform and farm restructuring in the Kyrgyz Republic from 1991 to the present. A brief review of the legal basis for reforms to date is outlined and compared against progress in land reform and farm restructuring on the ground. Specific attention is devoted to regional variation in progress in farm restructuring, the impact of the reforms on farm size, farm labor requirements, and rural-to-urban migration. 1 figure, 9 tables, 10 references.

Restructuring of traditional farms and new land relations in Russia

AbstractUnder decrees defining the Russian program of land reform and farm restructuring from 1991 to early 1993, 46% of agricultural land in Russia was transferred from state to collective ownership; 80% of collective and state farms reorganized and most registered as shareholding structures. The number of independent private farmers exceeded 250000 in early 1995. Despite these changes, however, most farms reorganized as whole entities and members kept their land and asset shares in collective production. The paper reports the results of a survey undertaken in 1992/1993 of 2700 farm managers, farm employees, and private farmers in Russia, designed to elucidate changes at the farm level during the early stage of land reform and farm restructuring.

Restructuring of traditional farms and new land relations in Ukraine

AbstractThis paper reports the results of a 1993/1994 survey of 2500 farm managers, farm employees, and private farmers in Ukraine, highlighting changes at the farm level in response to programs of land reform and farm restructuring. As of early 1994, Ukrainian reform had moved to the first stage, which involves privatization of much of the agricultural land and creation of shareholding farms. Over 60% of agricultural land in Ukraine has been transferred from state to collective ownership; among the collective and state farms surveyed, nearly 75% have reorganized and most of them have allocated land and asset shares to members. The number of independent private farmers in Ukraine exceeds 30 000, but with an average farm size of 20 ha they cultivate less than 2% of farmland. Reform at the farm level in Ukraine has thus begun, but at present is at a very early stage.

Restructuring of traditional farms and new land relations in Ukraine

Abstract This paper reports the results of a 1993/1994 survey of 2500 farm managers, farm employees, and private farmers in Ukraine, highlighting changes at the farm level in response to programs of land reform and farm restructuring. As of early 1994, Ukrainian reform had moved to the first stage, which involves privatization of much of the agricultural land and creation of shareholding farms. Over 60% of agricultural land in Ukraine has been transferred from state to collective ownership; among the collective and state farms surveyed, nearly 75% have reorganized and most of them have allocated land and asset shares to members. The number of independent private farmers in Ukraine exceeds 30 000, but with an average farm size of 20 ha they cultivate less than 2% of farmland. Reform at the farm level in Ukraine has thus begun, but at present is at a very early stage.

Restructuring of traditional farms and new land relations in Russia

Restructuring of traditional farms and new land relations in Russia

Restructuring the Rural Farm Economy: Midwestern Women's and Men's Work Roles during the Farm Crisis Period

During the 1980s, the rural economy experienced extensive restructuring, evidenced in the farm crisis and changes in other traditional rural industries. This study focuses on a segment of the rural population particularly affected by these changes: farm women and men in the Midwest. We examine how experiences of farm and broader rural restructuring differ for women and men, resulting in a gendered response to farm and off-farm work participation. The study enables us to address empirical questions raised about women's work patterns during the 1980s. In spite of the farm crisis, the traditional gender division of labor in family-based production changed little. Observed increases in farm women's paid employment were more likely due to longer-term economic changes, coupled with lesser, shorter-term impacts of the crisis. The study underscores the limitations of traditional policy interventions for the farm and rural population and outlines new directions.

Regional variations in the development and restructuring of farming in Hokkaido, Japan

Hokkaido's agricultural districts are currently being restructured by contrasting processes of marginalisation, industrialisation, and off‐farm diversification. The south and west were settled earl...

Farm Restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe

Farm Restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe

Land Reform and Farm Restructuring in Russia: 1992 Status

The present study reports on the implementation of the land reform and restructuring process at the farm level and examines its implications for the performance of the agricultural sector. It is based on a survey conducted by the Agrarian Institute of the Russian Agricultural Academy of Sciences in five provinces during November-December, 1992. Three groups of economically active agents were surveyed: managers of collective farm enterprises (260 interviews), heads of households among employees of collective enterprises (1,487), and private farmers (984). In total, 2,731 interviews were conducted. The information from the surveys was supplemented by information from land committees, statistical organs, and district and village councils.

Les fermes d'État de la Basse Silésie au seuil de la privatisation

State farms of Lower Silesia, on the threshold of privatization. This article is concerned with the problems arising from the restructuring and privatization of State farms, which in Poland account for 3 459 000 hectares of arable land, or 17,4 % of the total. Following on the process of transforming the Polish economy to a market economy, which was started in mid- 1989, the state farms are now in a critical position. They employ some 400 000 or so workers, who with their families represent a total of 2 million people. Given its social cost, the rationalization of employment in state farms is difficult to implement, although it would bring about increased efficiency in production, and would simplify the restructuring of farming units. It is calculated that employment should be reduced by 40 %. In March 1992, an Agency for rural ownership was set up under the State Treasury, with the specific purpose of rationalizing employment in the state farms, and getting the process of privatization under way. It is thought that the Agency should be able to clear bottlenecks, and get on with the transfer of property, with the legal means now available to it. It will be in a position not only to guarantee investment credits, but also to participate on its own account in the development of the food and agricultural industry and infrastrusture.