The Science Work
Site is for sale:
Category: History

Agrarian reform and its results: starting conditions and beginning of agrarian reforms

prodovolstvenny complex: problems and solutions

1957- 1962- 1967- 1972- 1977- 1982- 1987- 1992- 1997- 20021961 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2007

♦ Wheat on GSU — ■ — Grain on GSU

Wheat on an arable land of Stepnoye LLP — and — Grain on an arable land of Stepnoye LLP

Figure 1. Average yield of grain crops on the Polovinsky ground on five-years periods from 1957 to 2007

identical, the difference in productivity can be explained with the level of the standard of farming which was on GSU. The greatest productivity on both agrobackgrounds is noted in the 70th years. On GSU it was 20-25 c/hectare higher, than now. During this period (1970-

1974) noted the maximum productivity and on production fields, but excess in comparison with earlier and later the periods made only 2-2.5 c/hectare. Increase in productivity in the first half of the 70th years is connected, before

everything, with improvement of agrotechnical conditions these years - systematic introduction of optimum norms of mineral and organic fertilizers on GSU and improvement of technological discipline in basic economy.

Since 1980th years and till present, the level of productivity both on the GSU fields, and on production fields was significantly reduced, at the same time and differences in productivity on agrobackgrounds. It is connected first of all with production chemicalixation reduction and also decrease in fertility of chernozems.


Thus, moderately intensive technology of cultivation of crops on Polovinsky GSU gives the chance to maintain the average level of fertility of chernozems and to slow down processes of a vypakhivaniye. Chernozems of GSU differ in slower rates of a degumifikation and surpass production fields in a humus state, the main physical properties and ability to provide higher productivity of crops.


1. V.P. Egorov, Krivonos L.A. Chernozems of the Trans-Ural region and their agricultural use. Lectures. - Omsk, 1983. -
37 pages
2. Krivonos L.A., I.V. Alekseeva. Influence of level of intensity of agriculture on properties of the ordinary solonetzic chernozem//Scientific results to agro-industrial production. Academic and research conference materials. T.1. - Barrow: GIPP "Trans-Ural region", 2004. - 504 pages


V.V. MILOSERDOV, academician of Russian Academy of Agrarian Sciences

The peasantry of our country historically was and remains the humiliated and offended class. According to N. Bukharin, "the city was always a bloodsucker in relation to the village". The poor peasantry constantly worried the power, but not peasants, but their escapes which were taking away from the government of recruits and podatny payers. "Ran not only the certain yards, but also the whole villages: from some manors all ran away without the rest" [1]. Every time, when changing the power, treated peasants by the principle: "If the stick is bent that to straighten it, it is necessary to bend strongly in the opposite direction". ____________________

Each new power, as a rule, tried to change violently settled way of economic life of peasants. And in words respect for national mind was declared, it was said that peasants ripened freely to choose a managing form, in practice proceeded from P. Stolypin's formula: "The people are dark, do not understand the advantage, and therefore it is necessary to improve its life, without asking it about opinion volume". There were years, the social and political system changed, the governments changed, but invariable the tribute source had the attitude of the state towards the peasantry as. New


the power thought that it corrects past mistakes, here and bent peasants in one, in other party.

In 1916 in Russia the surplus-appropriation system was for the first time entered: free of charge withdrew bread and other products from peasants. Then agriculture became the main donor of the state, the main source of means without which the country could not carry out industrialization to historically short time, create the heavy industry, Order ensure defense capability, a victory in -

Agrarian reform, basic preconditions of reforming, peasantry, authority, state policy in agrarian sphere.

Food complex: problems and solutions

which to Patriotic war, recovery of the national economy destroyed by war, nuclear control. Hard it was necessary those years to peasants, but there was also an understanding that the country resorted to such measures because of emergency of the solution of the economic tasks connected with existence of the state, ensuring sovereignty of the country.

In the late sixties there was an opportunity to repay debts to peasants. Investments went to the village, the areas of the reclaimed lands were expanded, poultry farms, livestock complexes were under construction, the material and technical resources of collective farms and state farms became stronger. Production grew, the standard of living of peasants increased. Compensation of workers of agriculture, in relation to the all-Russian level, rose up to 95%. However growth rates of production of food significantly lagged behind rates of increase in capital investments, fixed assets, material resources. Needs of the population for food grew slowly. The reasons for that - discrepancy of agrarian policy with real requirements of society, lack of the appropriate economic mechanism of managing, distortions in investment and structural policy, an extensive way of development, inattention to social reorganization of the village.

Efforts for transition of economy to an intensive way of development, to more rational use of resources, to the economic attitude towards public good are in the late eighties made. But changes were carried out extremely slowly, only separate elements of a system were improved, and therefore they could not provide appropriate increase in production and its efficiency. Attempts to construct the economic model providing an acceptable combination of the plan and the market where the talent and enterprise, increase in productivity of work would be rewarded were not realized. Measures for activization of "a human factor", interest of people in achievement of the best end results were taken for improvement of a situation, intraeconomic calculation was improved, real responsibility for obligations to divisions suppliers which passed to the self-financing relations amplified. In separate divisions the intraeconomic calculation yielded good results. But the more became such divisions, the less there were differences in efficiency between new and old forms of managing. Analysis of the reasons of decrease effektiv-

Nosta of new forms of the intraeconomic economic relations demonstrated that each new model proved to be from the best party until was concerning Novaya Gazeta while all clauses of the contract were complied (selection of the best participants of collective, providing it with necessary resources - the equipment, fertilizers, means of protection of plants). In process of growth of number of such collectives their providing with resources and the best shots worsened, the efficiency fell. In a word, conceived as progressive forms of the organization and work incentives encountered "price scissors", resource shortage, a lack of qualified personnel. As a result, they "put wings" and dived in ordinary: in number increasing, they could not but suffer fetters of poverty and lack of independence. Need of basic changes of relations of production became more obvious.

Without pressing in the main point, the liberal democrats, some scientists, mass media accused collective farms and state farms of difficulties with supply of the population of the country with own food. According to them, these organizational and legal structures failed, so far as could not give to the country the necessary volumes of food. Agriculture was represented to them as "abyss", "a black hole". Though problems of food supply of the country were outside collective farms and state farms. In conditions when extensive factors of increase in production sputtered out, and rates of increase in capital investments were not boundless when the economic capacity of agrarian and industrial complex reached huge scales, the advancing growth of the end results, in comparison with increase in labor and material inputs became characteristic of the forthcoming period. In a word, the task consisted in more effective use of already available production potential. It was supposed to strengthen not so much the investment potential of agrarian and industrial complex how many it is better to dispose of it due to formation of optimum structure of agrarian and industrial complex, skillful use of the created production and scientific potential, introduction of the energy saving equipment and technology. All this would allow to increase efficiency of functioning of agro-industrial complex, but, unfortunately, all these plans were not fated to come true. The liberal democrats who came to the power developed the country in other naprav-

of the line. Rash and destructive reforms began. Here it is valid as soon as there is, at last, an opportunity to make ends meet, someone removes this end. The philosopher Seneca said: "Who does not know to what harbor to float, for this purpose there is no fair wind". It is the cap fits to our reformers of the first wave and their followers.

The truth forces the way through when its time, came not earlier. No passion, any enthusiasm will bring to life what did not ripen yet. Instead of being exempted from excessive centralization of management, to transfer a part of economic functions on places, having left behind the center only questions of formation of fundamental proportions, reforms were directed on other way, other train of thought fed by other ideas prevailed. The liberal democrats who came to the power by 1991 planned to make bankrupt 25% of agricultural enterprises, to privatize the main part of lands and all processing industry. Without having constructed elementary infrastructure of the market, in an expedited manner destroyed the state system of regulation. In a word, transformations took the ugly forms: doubtful ideological postulates were their cornerstone unchecked our practice: change of a social order, privatization, fermerization, liberalization of the prices and foreign trade, refusal of the state of formation of food fund of the country, of support of the agrarian sector. P. Chaadayev wrote: "... whether the people, time which realized can that within a century went on a false way, one day the simple act of conscious will to return on the passable trace, to tear with the course of the development, to begin it once again, to reunite the interrupted thread on that place where it is once, it is not really clear how, broke".

Without having understood the reasons of low efficiency of collective farms and state farms, they were outlawed. These organizational and legal structures tried to replace with millions of farms, allegedly because they failed, so far as could not feed the country with own food. Supporters of the western form of managing assimilated to a rooster from the play of Rostan Shantekler which noticed that when he began to sing in the mornings, the sun ascended, and came to a conclusion that it the singing causes the sun on a sky. If farms of the West worked more effectively than our collective farms and sovkho-

Food complex: problems and solutions

call, it did not mean at all that such success is caused by a small-scale form of managing. Where there is no state support, or it is scanty, the country with any form of managing is not able to provide itself with food because, owing to the objective reasons, agriculture is noncompetitive.

Reform is a progressive transformation, the change in legislative and state system which is carried out under the direction of the government without violation of bases of the existing political system. The reorganization which began 20 years ago, has nothing in common with progressive transformation because the deeds destroyed bases of the political system and did not bring the improving changes. On the contrary, - agrarian national economy was rejected for decades ago, there was a landslide decline in production, the living standards of the people catastrophically decreased, the population was quickly reduced. Deep changes of mainly destructive character covered all spheres of life of Russians. Crisis of agriculture reached such disorder when its revival became less probable and possible.

The methods of direct and barefaced robbery, capture, violence going to a time, far from us, were applied. So young reformers attached the country to a civilization. Beginning reforms, they demanded liberalism which by means of "an invisible hand of the market" had to make Russians rich and happy. And, having received liberalism, it became much worse to live. Then started talking about acceleration of reforms, about a bigger liberalism. But situation in the country continued to worsen. The reason was seen at big presence of the state at economy. Though there is a lot of freedom that the fact of existence of the state looked funny.

F. Dostoyevsky wrote that in any transitional time this swine who is in each society rises, and already not only without any purpose, but even without having also sign of a thought, and only expressing to itself very much concern and impatience. I cannot agree that in any society there is this swine. Reforms in China, Germany after war radically changed these countries because there they were seen off by people who had the power as S. Solovyov spoke, "it is strong to hold horses during abrupt descent". It were grown wise experience the experts of the business supporting the country and the people living the own way, working for the benefit, but not to the detriment of the fatherland. Ludwig Erhard wrote in the memories of that time,

that the first federal government, entering execution of the functions, agrees to the general provisions existing then, was obliged to present the draft of any law for joint discussion of the Supreme Commission of allies. And each decision came into force only after a statement it by the occupational authorities. To receive the consent of military bureaucracy to carrying out to the necessary country of reform was business, according to him, hopeless. Knowing that on Sundays the Americans have a rest, on June 20, 1948 Erhard declares introduction from the next day of the new prices, anticartel and other measures. Subsequently he wrote: ".soyuznik did not expect that the German will be able to show so much courage through so short term after the end of war, - it did not keep within categories of thinking of occupational management soon, after the end of the gained total victory" [2]. The military authorities recognized these actions as illegal, however, as speak, the train already left, business was made.

Otherwise the Russian reformers of the first wave behaved with "Uncle Sam" though our state and was not the defeated country. The boy in short panties - E. Gaidar was appointed the Acting Prime Minister. To the country the many thousands flow of foreign advisers rushed. The beginning of reforms was surrounded with a bright romantic aura. Without having created the new system of relations of production, old quickly collapsed. The vacuum of the power - disorder of the state discipline, non-obligation of performance of laws was formed, economic communications broke up. Quickly the living standards of the population decreased. The private property was created not for the sake of its usefulness for society, and for enrichment of the persons which are brought closer to the power who in fantastically short time turned into billionaires, and the great country in the beggar asking a humanitarian handout from the West.

B. Yeltsin in the Message told Federal Assembly in 1999 that soon ten years as the country came to a track of reforms. "It is a high time to be defined, estimate reached, to shake all false and empty, to collect the strength and to move forward. The decade marked by return of Russia to the main way of world development comes to the end. It is the way inseparably linked with democracy and market economy. For last years the economy of our country gained many civilized lines. It both free prices, and uniform exchange rate, and domination of non-state property. Due to

a difficult economic situation the opinion widely extended that all these years the country went the incorrect road that shift is necessary. However there is a confidence that most of Russians, even those who appeared in a difficult, critical situation today will not want to refuse that positive that was brought by changes".

In what positivity of reforms, and in what false and empty? For years of reforms the moral level of society fell, development is interrupted, all advanced, vigorous is deleted from life. Years are necessary to come round. The political idealism which interferes with her correct understanding took control of reform. In these conditions even separate modest achievements of reform seem something unattainable on courage and width of scope. It also is clear, say: "than night is more dark, that stars are brighter". The political sky was in the nineties to such an extent black that even small stars lit up gloss of large stars, and eyes of the huge most of conscious people were fixed towards this deceptive gloss with alarm - differently and cannot be. There cannot live society without guiding fires.

The political idealism used those few elements of democratism and ideological hobby which were the cornerstone of reform. It made of them some kind of banner which flew over the Russian society. Under this banner the demolition of the political system was carried out, the social and economic relations radically changed. The independence of regions was to the point of absurdity finished. The president published "theory" of new state system which essence was that the rights do not go down from above, and undertake bottoms, and - in the volume which the territorial subject of the federation will consider necessary. It pushed Russia to smashing to national and territorial apartments. The formed interregional economic relations, specialization, the system of cooperation and integration of production, the uniform food market were destroyed decades that inevitably led to landslide decline in production, decrease in its efficiency.

In a word, long-awaited freedom turned back chaos, and so-called democracy gained ugly lines of the power of crowd and money. The state property was plundered wholesale and retail. The resourceful grabbers who came to the power grew fat on troubles of citizens which half they appeared below the poverty line. There came the period, tragic for the Russian history, which it is possible okharak-

Food complex: problems and solutions

to terizovat as general chaos.

The time of troubles - the event, tragic for Russia, led to serious social and economic consequences. There was an estrangement of the upper class from the people, an era of early, unreasoned decisions. The love of power, envy, vanity, the egoistical beginnings bringing disharmony in the social sphere amplified. There was a thesis: "Everyone for and for". Government officials stopped thinking about the state interests.

F. Tyutchev after the death of the tsar Nicholas I wrote:

Not to God you served also not Russia, Served only the vanity,

And all your affairs - both kind, and angry, - Everything was a lie in you, all ghosts empty:

You were not the tsar, but the actor.

On the verge of centuries Russia appeared on historical crossroads, endured one of dramatic situations of the historical existence. The further the agrarian sphere was included into reforming process, the destructions became deeper, position of the industry is more hopeless. Hlestakova in power ruined the village, organized to peasants the Massacre of St. Bartholomew. Many scientists, heads of regions asked about need of correction of the direction of reforms. Westernized politicians and scientists considered that negative trends in development of a food complex of the country are caused by slow destruction of last agrarian relations and suggested to accelerate reforming, without having thought that it is impossible to destroy an old economic mechanism, without having created new. Having lost a half of production potential, the country appeared on "boondocks" of world economy. The power, great in the recent past, became impractical, all time of its power is penetrated by crime, everything is more notable pressure from global capitalism is felt. The accounts payable of the agricultural enterprises which grew to 480 billion rubles do not allow them to function normally. The analysis shows that the main reason for the saved-up debt in the budget and off-budget funds consists in tsele-

the directed, destructive public policy in relation to own peasants. The delayed and delayed debt was formed at agricultural enterprises, mainly, owing to circumstances. Let's call the main:

1. The price index for products of the resource providing industries from 1990 for 2000 by 5.3 times advanced the cumulative price index for agricultural products. By nonequivalent exchange from the village more than 500 billion rubles were rolled out. Specific weight of income of agricultural producers in retail price for end products was reduced by the majority of types of products by 3-4 times.
2. Swindle with currency checks of the 90th years: the government promised to pay peasants for the grain taken from them 75 dollars for ton (at the world price of 140 dollars). But paid only 75 Russian rubles, and with a delay more than for half a year. At inflation about 200% a year it did not compensate also the tenth share of costs of production. The agricultural enterprises at once appeared in a debt hole. The counter of penalties and penalty fee began to grow as a snowball. Racket of the authorities in relation to the peasants undermined their confidence to the state. The Russian market became transparent. Twenty-year deposits of food went to Russia a never-ending stream. But reformers, did not understand that reduction in production leads not only to rise in unemployment in agriculture, but also in the industries delivering to the village resources, rendering him services, processing its products. They did not want to know also that each worker of agriculture provides with jobs in other industries, at least, five people. But probably this mathematics was too much for gaydaroobrazny reformers.
3. The debt of the agricultural enterprises was created also because of obligatory monthly assignments from the added, but not paid salary at seasonal receipt of money from realization of agricultural products, high rates of a penalty fee for delay of payment, collection of payments without acceptance from the account of the organization. Despite the fact that,

that agricultural enterprises due to the lack of means were not able to pay salary, they were obliged to deduct monthly from the unpaid salary of means in the budget for income tax and off-budget funds of 44% of fund of the added compensation. And for their untimely transfer for each day of delay it was raised

0.7% on payments in the budget and 1% - in off-budget funds.
4. Reformers many nonsenses did and in the land legislation - brought a problem of a turn of farmlands to such jungle that now it is in a civilized way simply impossible to solve it. Peasants cannot exercise the property right to the earth. A civilized turn of the earth is absent. As a result the earth continues to leave economic circulation.
5. The Russian Federation Government decree of December 29, 1991 and provided on July 17, 1995 transfer of the objects of the social sphere which are on balances of the agricultural enterprises. Unfortunately, these resolutions in large part it was outstanding. Still many agricultural enterprises support healthcare institutions, infrastructures, the cultural sphere, child care facilities and housing. In the same place, where the social sphere was transferred to local bodies and ceased to be supported by agricultural enterprises, it was in most cases destroyed.

The disparity of the prices, vicious credit policy, vulnerability of domestic market from intervention of food, a burden of the social sphere lying on producers sharply reduced their solvency, led to deep system crisis. Physical disintegration of productive forces in agriculture came so far that its restoration began to be defined by a factor of survival of the industry.

In a word, "the stone of future building is put by reformers crookedly and constantly needs props". As speak, have it coming. Instead of elimination of a mistake of Bolsheviks the young reformers disorganized the country.


1. Klyuchevsky V.O. Soch. in 9 volumes. - M. "Thought" 1989, t.1U. - Page 287.
2. L. Erhard. Welfare for all. - M.: Nachala-Press, 1991. - Page 28.
Arwed Johann
Other scientific works: