Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Answers.com

collective farm

 
Dictionary: collective farm

n.
A farm or a group of farms organized as a unit and managed and worked cooperatively by a group of laborers under state supervision, especially in a communist country.


Search unanswered questions...
Enter a question here...
Search: All sources Community Q&A Reference topics
Britannica Concise Encyclopedia: collective farm
Top

In the former Soviet Union, a cooperative agricultural enterprise operated on state-owned land. Under the policy of collectivization, which was pursued most intensively by Joseph Stalin in 1929 – 33, peasants were forced to give up their individual farms and join large collective farms. They objected violently and in many cases slaughtered their livestock and destroyed their equipment before joining. By 1936 almost all the peasantry had been collectivized, though millions had also been deported to prison camps. With the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1990 – 91, the collective farms began to be privatized.

For more information on collective farm, visit Britannica.com.

Geography Dictionary: collective farm
Top

A type of farm organization identified with socialist regimes, such as North Korea and the Republic of China. The farm, made by the merging of farms which used to be owned by individuals, is owned by the state, but permanently leased to the members of the collective. The workers are shareholders, rather than state employees. The collective is responsible for paying employees and for inputs such as machinery or fertilizers, and is, in theory, self-governing, although the centrally planned state usually sets production targets. With the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, this is a form of organization which is becoming much less common; and even in China rural collectivism is being replaced by private forms of agricultural organization.

Russian History Encyclopedia: Collective Farm
Top

The collective farm (kolkhoz) was introduced in the Soviet Union in the late 1920s by Josef Stalin, who was implementing the controversial process of collectivization. The collective farm, along with the state farm (sovkhoz) and the private subsidiary sector, were the basic organizational arrangements for Soviet agricultural production, and survived, albeit with changes, through the end of the Soviet era.

The concept of a collective or cooperative model for the organization of production did not originate in the Soviet Union. However, during the 1920s there was discussion of and experimentation with varying approaches to cooperative farming differing largely in the nature of membership, the form of organization, and the internal rules governing production and distribution.

In theory, the collective farm was a cooperative (the kolkhoz charter was introduced in 1935) based upon what was termed "kolkhoz - cooperative" property, ideologically inferior to state property used in the sovkhoz. Entry into and exit from a kolkhoz was theoretically voluntary, though in fact the process of collectivization was forcible, and departure all but impossible. Decision making (notably election of the chair) was to be conducted through participation of the collective farm members. Participants (peasants) were to be rewarded with a residual share of net income rather than a contractual wage. In practice, the collective farm differed significantly from these principles. The dominant framework for decision making was a party-approved chair, and discussion in collective farm meetings was perfunctory. Party control was sustained by the local party organization through the nomenklatura (appointment) system and also through the discipline of the Machine Tractors Stations (MTS). Payment to peasants on the collective farm was made according to the labor day unit (trudoden), which was divided into the residual after the state extracted compulsory deliveries of product at low fixed prices. As collective farm members were not entitled to internal passports, their geographical mobility was limited. Unlike the sovkhoz, the kolkhoz was not a budget-financed organization. Accordingly, the state exercised significant power over living levels in the countryside by requiring compulsory deliveries of product. Peasants on collective farms were entitled to hold a limited number of animals and cultivate a small plot of land.

By the early 1940s there were roughly 235,000 collective farms in existence averaging 3,500 acres per farm, accounting for some 80 percent of total sown area in agriculture. After World War II a program of amalgamation and also of conversion to state farms was implemented along with a continuing program of agroindustrial integration. As a result, the number of collective farms declined to approximately 27,000 by 1988, with an average size of 22,000 acres, together accounting for 44 percent of sown area. By the end of the 1980s, the differences between kolkhozes and sovkhozes were minimal.

During the transition era of the 1990s, change in Russian agriculture has been very slow. Collective farms have for the most part been converted to a corporate structure, but operational changes have been few, and a significant land market remains to be achieved.

Bibliography

Davies, R. W. (1980). The Soviet Collective Farm, 1929-1930. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Stuart, R. C. (1972). The Collective Farm in Soviet Agriculture. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.

—ROBERT C. STUART

 
Columbia Encyclopedia: collective farm
Top
collective farm, an agricultural production unit including a number of farm households or villages working together under state control. The description of the collective farm has varied with time and place.

In the Soviet Union

In the Soviet Union a policy of gradual and voluntary collectivization of agriculture was adopted in 1927 to encourage food production while freeing labor and capital for industrial development. In 1929, with only 4% of farms in collectives, Stalin ordered the confiscation of peasants' land, tools, and animals; the kolkhoz [Rus.,=collective farm] replaced the family farm. The state would decide how much of what crops were to be produced, how much would be paid to the peasants for their work, and how much would go to the state at what price. Farmers who resisted were persecuted, exiled, even killed.

By 1931, more than half of all farms had been collectivized. Low productivity and inordinate government diversion of farm production contributed to a devastating rural famine in 1932-33. Under the Collective Farm Charter (1935), individual farmers were permitted to keep small garden plots and a few animals for domestic use, and to sell surplus production in local free markets.

Collectivization in the Soviet Union was almost complete by 1938. Successive reforms reflected the persistence of problems associated with centrally planned economies. In 1950 the government began amalgamating collective farms. The number of kolkhozy, which had peaked at 254,000, was reduced to 32,300 by 1972, while the average size of collective farms roughly tripled to approximately 7,500 acres (3,000 hectares), and the average number of households per kolkhozy increased from 75 before World War II to 340 in 1960.

In 1958 new laws abolished the government's power to requisition farm products and substituted direct state purchases at higher prices. In 1969 the Collective Farmers' Congress increased the size of private plots and instituted income guarantees and social insurance. In the 1970s, as an incentive to increase production, collective farmers were assured profits on various commodities. By this time about half of the cultivated land in the Soviet Union was in collectives; most of the rest was in state farms. As the Soviet Union and its bloc of Eastern European satellites disintegrated in the early 1990s, the collective farm faced a difficult and uncertain transition to new forms of ownership and management. In 1992, 7,000 farms chose to remain state-owned, while 9,000 chose to privatize, registering themselves as companies. Through the 1990s, Russia was forced to increase state subsidies to its collective farms, due to high inflation and price increases in supplies and equipment. In 2003, with the passage of laws permitting the sale of farmland, the foundations were laid for further changes in Russian agriculture.

In China

The commune of China is more strictly organized than the Soviet collective farm, including a wider range of activities, putting greater emphasis on communal living and including nonagricultural workers. Collectivization of agriculture in China began in 1955; by 1956, 96% of all farming households were included in cooperatives. The system failed to free the labor and capital needed for industrial expansion, and in 1958 the commune system was established.

Twenty to thirty cooperatives comprising over 20,000 members and 40 to 100 villages were merged into each commune. The land and equipment of the former cooperatives and any property and cash still held by the peasants became the property of the commune. In each commune an economic and administrative unit controlled the labor force and all means of production, providing central management of industry, commerce, education, agriculture, and military affairs. Living communally, workers performed both industrial and agricultural tasks and supported a military unit. They used communal nurseries, bathing facilities, barbershops, and similar facilities. Wages and perquisites were controlled by the state, and all products were marketed through state agencies.

By 1959 virtually all Chinese farm workers were members of communes. The inefficiency and management problems of large collectives, coupled with natural disasters and government errors, led to reforms. In the early 1960s communes were decentralized; some were divided into private farms. In the late 1970s, after the death of Mao Zedong, individual households were granted long-term leases on their farms, paying a fixed amount of their production to the state and consuming or selling the rest. For the first time the farm household was also allowed to sublet land, recover capital investments, hire labor, own machinery, and make agricultural decisions.

In Israel

In Israel, collective farms pay nominal rents to the Jewish National Fund, which holds all land in the name of the people. Israeli collectives are based on three models. The kibbutz, the best known and most important economically, was inaugurated in 1909 as a purely agricultural collective. Light industry was added in the 1920s, and other types of businesses and tourism are now also important economically. In a traditional kibbutz, all property except specified personal possessions is collectively owned, planning and work are collective, and communal living is the rule. Work is assigned on the basis of ability; foremen are elected; and goods are distributed according to need. A town meeting governs; elected officials implement policy and administer economic and social affairs. Israel's couple hundred kibbutzim represent a wide range of political and social beliefs. Although only a small percentage of Israel's population have ever been members, the kibbutzim have wielded considerable political influence. Since the early 1980s, when the debt of kibbutzim soared, many have implemented some privatization measures, have hired rather than elected their managers, and have reduced other collective and communal elements of kibbutz life.

In the moshav ovdim, first established in 1921, each family owns its own house and leases and works its own land, retaining any income it earns. Hired labor is prohibited. Buying and selling are done collectively. In the moshav shitufi, a collective model developed in 1936, property is held communally and work is done collectively. Wealth and housing are private. Many moshav dwellers now hold nonfarming jobs in projects developed on the moshav or outside the village.

In North America

Communal farming has not been markedly popular in North America, although numerous attempts have been made (see communistic settlements). An exception is the agricultural communities of Hutterites (see Hutterian Brethren), who, as a result of persecution in central Europe, emigrated to South Dakota in 1874. They have increased in population and economic prominence to include (1999) some 36,000 members, living in over 430 colonies, mainly in the Dakotas, Montana, Minnesota, Washington, and the Canadian provinces of Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan.

See also ejido.

Bibliography

See R. W. Davies, The Soviet Collective Farm (1980); W. Hinton, The Great Reversal (1989); A. Etzioni et al., ed., The Organizational Structure of the Kibbutz (1980).


Economics Dictionary: collective farm
Top

In socialist or communist countries, such as the former Soviet Union, a collective is a cooperative association of farmers who work land owned by the state but who own most of their own farm implements.

Wikipedia: Collective farming
Top

Collective farming is an organization of agricultural production in which the holdings of several farmers are run as a joint enterprise.[1] A collective farm is essentially an agricultural production cooperative in which members-owners engage jointly in farming activities. Typical examples of collective farms are the kolkhozy that dominated Soviet agriculture between 1930 and 1992 and the Israeli kibbutzim.[2] Both are collective farms based on common ownership of resources and on pooling of labor and income in accordance with the theoretical principles of cooperative organizations. They are radically different, however, in the application of the cooperative principles of freedom of choice and democratic rule. The creation of kolkhozy in the Soviet Union during the country-wide collectivization campaign of 1928-1933 was an example of forced collectivization, whereas the kibbutzim in Israel were traditionally created through voluntary collectivization and were governed as democratic entities. The element of forced or state-sponsored collectivization that was present in many countries during the 20th century led to the impression that collective farms operate under the supervision of the state,[3] but this is not universally true, as shown by the counter-example of the Israeli kibbutz.

Contents

Communist collectivization

Collective farming was sweepingly introduced in the 12 core republics of the Soviet Union between 1928 and 1933. The Baltic states and the East European countries adopted collective farming after World War II, with the accession of communist regimes to power. In Asia (People's Republic of China, North Korea, North and South Vietnam) the adoption of collective farming was also driven by communist government policies. In all communist countries, the transition to collective farming involved an element of persuasion by force, and the collective farms in these countries, lacking the principle of voluntary membership, can be regarded at best as pseudo-cooperatives.

Soviet Union

Soviet propaganda poster: "Comrade, come join our kolkhoz!"

In the Soviet Union, collectivization was introduced by Stalin in the late 1920s as a way, according to the theories of communist leaders, to boost agricultural production through the organization of land and labor into large-scale collective farms (kolkhozy). At the same time, Soviet leaders argued that collectivization would free poor peasants from economic servitude under the kulaks. Stalin believed that the goals of collectivization could be achieved voluntarily, but when the new farms failed to attract the number of peasants hoped, the government blamed the oppression of the kulaks and resorted to forceful implementation of the plan, by murder and wholesale deportation of farmers to Siberia. Millions of unfortunates who remained died of starvation, and the centuries-old system of farming was destroyed in one of the most fertile regions in the world for farming, once called "the breadbasket of Europe." The immediate effect of forced collectivization was to reduce grain output and almost halve livestock, thus producing major famines in 1932 and 1933.

In 1932-1933, an estimated 3.1–7 million people, mainly in Ukraine, died from famine after Stalin forced the peasants into the collectives (this famine is known in Ukraine as Holodomor). Most modern historians believe that this famine was caused by the sudden disruption of production brought on by collective farming policies that were implemented by the government of the Soviet Union. Some believe that, due to unreasonably high government quotas, farmers often received far less for their labor than they did before collectivization, and some refused to work; others retaliated by destroying their crops. It was not until 1940 that agricultural production finally surpassed its pre-collectivization levels.[4] [5]

Baltic states

The Baltic states — Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania — were only occupied by the Soviet Union after the outbreak of the World War II, and had thus missed the first wave of Soviet collectivization. Furthermore, the opposition to kolkhozy was rather high in these countries. Primarily to break this opposition, Stalin ordered the wave of March deportations of 1949. This was successful in motivating peasants and brought great acceleration to collectivization in most regions.

Romania

In Romania land collectivization began in 1948 and continued over more than a decade until its virtual completion in 1962.[6]

Hungary

In Hungary, agricultural collectivization was attempted a number of times between 1948 and 1956 (with disastrous results), until it was finally successful in the early 1960s under János Kádár.

The first serious attempt at collectivization based on Stalinist agricultural policy was undertaken in July 1948. Both economic and direct police pressure were used to coerce peasants to join cooperatives, but large numbers opted instead to leave their villages. In the early 1950s, only one-quarter of peasants had agreed to join cooperatives.[7] In the spring of 1955 the drive for collectivization was renewed, again using physical force to encourage membership, but this second wave also ended in dismal failure. After the events of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, the Hungarian regime opted for a more gradual collectivization drive. The main wave of collectivization occurred between 1959 and 1961, and at the end of this period more than 95% of agricultural land in Hungary had become the property of collective farms. In February 1961, the Central Committee declared that collectivization had been completed.[8] This quick success should not be confused with enthusiastic adoption of collective idealism on the part of the peasants. Still, demoralized after two successive (and harsh) collectivization campaigns and the events of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, the peasants were less keen to resist. As membership levels increased, those who remained outside likely grew worried about being permanently left out.

Czechoslovakia (1948-89)

In Czechoslovakia, land reforms after World War I distributed most of the land to peasants and created large groups of relatively well-to-do farmers (though village poor still existed). These groups showed no support for communist ideals. In 1945, immediately after World War II, new land reform started. The first phase involved a confiscation of properties of Germans, Hungarians, and collaborators of the Nazi regime in accordance with the Beneš decree. The second phase, promulgated by so-called Ďuriš's laws (after Communist Minister of Agriculture), in fact meant a complete revision of the pre-war land reform and tried to reduce maximal private property to 150 hectares (ha) of agricultural land and 250 ha of any land (forests, etc...). The third and final phase forbade possession of land above 50 ha for one family. This phase was carried out in April 1948, two months after Communists violently overtook power. Farms started to be collectivized, mostly under threat of sanctions. The most obstinate farmers were persecuted and imprisoned. The most common form of collectivization was agricultural cooperative (in Czech Jednotné zemědělské družstvo, JZD; in Slovak Jednotné roľnícke družstvo, JRD ). The collectivization was implemented in three stages (1949-1952, 1953-1955, 1955-1960) and officially ended with implementation of the constitution establishing the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, which illegalized private ownership.

Many early cooperatives collapsed and were recreated again. Their productivity was low since they provided tiny salaries and no pensions, and they failed to create a sense of collective ownership; small scale pilfering was common, and food became scarce. Seeing the massive outflow of people from agriculture into cities, the government started to massively subsidize the cooperatives in order to make the standard of living of farmers equal to that of city inhabitants; this was the long-term official policy of the government. Funds, machinery, and fertilizers were provided; young people from villages were forced to study agriculture; and students were regularly sent (mandatorily) to help in cooperatives.

Subsidies and constant pressure destroyed the remaining private farmers; only a handful of them remained after the 1960s. The lifestyle of villagers had eventually reached the level of cities, and village poverty was eliminated. Czechoslovakia was again able to produce enough food for its citizens. The price of this success was a huge waste of resources because the cooperatives had no motivation to improve efficiency. Every piece of land was cultivated regardless of the expense involved, and the soil became heavily polluted with chemicals. Also, the intensive use of heavy machinery damaged topsoil. Furthermore, the cooperatives were infamous for over-employment.

In the late 1980s, the economy of Czechoslovakia stagnated, and the state-owned companies were unable to deal with advent of modern technologies. A few agricultural companies (where the rules were less strict than in state companies) used this situation to start providing high-tech products. For example, the only way to buy a PC compatible computer in the late 1980s was to get it (for an extremely high price) from one agricultural company acting as a reseller.

After the fall of Communism in Czechoslovakia (1989) subsidies to agriculture were stopped with devastating effect. Most of the cooperatives had problems competing with technologically advanced foreign competition and were unable to obtain investment to improve their situation. Quite a large percentage of them collapsed. The others that remained were typically insufficiently funded, lacking competent management, without new machinery and living from day to day. Employment in the agricultural sector dropped significantly (from approx. 3% of the population to approx. 1%).

People's Republic of China

Collective farming began in the People's Republic of China under Mao Zedong. It was further pursued during the Great Leap Forward, an attempt to rapidly mobilize the country in an effort to transform China into an industrialized communist society. The policy mistakes associated with this collectivization attempt during the Great Leap Forward resulted in mass starvation. According to many other sources,[9] the death toll due to famine was most likely about 20 to 30 million people. The three years between 1959 and 1962 were known as the "Three Bitter Years" and the Three Years of Natural Disasters.

North Korea

While Hungary arguably provides the best positive example of collective farming in a communist state, North Korea provides its negative counterpart. In the late 1990s, the collective farming system collapsed under the strain of droughts. Estimates of deaths due to starvation ranged into the millions, although the government did not allow outside observers to survey the extent of the famine. Aggravating the severity of the famine, the government was accused of diverting international relief supplies to its armed forces.

Socialist Republic of Vietnam

Following the Fall of Saigon on April 30, 1975, South Vietnam briefly came under the authority of a Provisional Revolutionary Government, a puppet state under military occupation by North Vietnam, before being officially reunified with the North under Communist rule as the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on July 2, 1976. Upon taking control, the Vietnamese communists banned other political parties, arrested suspects believed to have collaborated with the United States and embarked on a mass campaign of collectivization of farms and factories. Reconstruction of the war-ravaged country was slow and serious humanitarian and economic problems confronted the communist regime. In a historic shift in 1986, the Communist Party of Vietnam implemented free-market reforms known as Đổi Mới (Renovation). With the authority of the state remaining unchallenged, private ownership of farms and companies, deregulation and foreign investment were encouraged. The economy of Vietnam has achieved rapid growth in agricultural and industrial production, construction and housing, exports and foreign investment. However, the power of the Communist Party of Vietnam over all organs of government remains firm.

Cuba

Agricultural production cooperatives were experimented with in the first few years following the Cuban Revolution. Between 1977 and 1983, farmers began to collectivize into CPAsCooperativa de Producción Agropecuaria (agricultural production cooperatives in Spanish). Farmers were encouraged to sell their land to the state for the establishment of a cooperative farm, receiving payments for a period of 20 years while also sharing in the fruits of the CPA. Joining a CPA allowed individuals who were previously dispersed throughout the countryside to move to a centralized location with increased access to electricity, medical care, housing, and schools. Democractic practice tends to be limited to business decisions and is constrained by the centralized economic planning of the Cuban system.

Another type of agricultural production cooperative in Cuba is UBPCUnidad Básica de Producción Cooperativa (basic unit of cooperative production in Spanish). The law authorizing the creation of UBPCs was passed on September 20, 1993. It has been used to transform many state farms into UBPCs, similarly to the transformation of Russian sovkhozes (state farms) into kolkhozes (collective farms) after 1992. The law granted indefinite usufruct to the workers of the UBPC in line with its goal to link the workers to the land, establish material incentives for increased production by tying workers' earnings to the overall production of the UBPC, and increase managerial autonomy and workers' participation in the management of the workplace.

Voluntary collective farming

Israel

Collective farming was also implemented in kibbutzim in Israel, which began to be created in 1909 as a unique combination of Zionism and socialism. The concept has faced occasional criticism as economically inefficient and over-reliant on subsidized credit.[10]

A less known type of collective farm in Israel is moshav shitufi (lit. collective moshav), where production and services are managed collectively, as in a kibbutz, whereas consumption decisions are left to individual households. In terms of cooperative organization, moshav shitufi is distinct from the much more common moshav (or moshav ovdim), which is essentially a village-level service cooperative, not a collective farm.

In 2006 there were 40 moshavim shitufiim in Israel, compared with 267 kibbutzim.[11]

Collective farming in Israel differs from collectivism in communist states in that it is voluntary.

See also

References

  1. ^ Definition of collective farm in The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993.
  2. ^ Article on large-farm management in Encyclopedia Britannica 2004 CD.
  3. ^ Definition of collective farm in The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, 1992.
  4. ^ Richard Overy: Russia's War, 1997
  5. ^ Eric Hobsbawm: Age of Extremes, 1994
  6. ^ A. Sarris and D. Gavrilescu, "Restructuring of farms and agricultural systems in Romania", in: J. Swinnen, A. Buckwell, and E. Mathijs, eds., Agricultural Privatisation, Land Reform and Farm Restructuring in Central and Eastern Europe, Ashgate, Aldershot, UK, 1997.
  7. ^ Ivan T. Berend, The Hungarian Economic Reforms 1953-1988, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
  8. ^ Nigel Swain, Collective Farms Which Work?, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
  9. ^ Source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Twentieth Century Hemoclysm
  10. ^ Y. Kislev, Z. Lerman, P. Zusman, "Recent experience with cooperative farm credit in Israel," Economic Development and Cultural Change, 39(4):773-789 (July 1991).
  11. ^ Statistical Abstract of Israel, Central Bureau of Statistics, Jerusalem, 2007.

External links


 
 

 

Copyrights:

Dictionary. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2007, 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.  Read more
Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. Britannica Concise Encyclopedia. © 2006 Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved.  Read more
Geography Dictionary. A Dictionary of Geography. Copyright © Susan Mayhew 1992, 1997, 2004. All rights reserved.  Read more
Russian History Encyclopedia. Encyclopedia of Russian History. Copyright © 2004 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.  Read more
Columbia Encyclopedia. The Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition Copyright © 2003, Columbia University Press. Licensed from Columbia University Press. All rights reserved. www.cc.columbia.edu/cu/cup/ Read more
Economics Dictionary. The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition Edited by E.D. Hirsch, Jr., Joseph F. Kett, and James Trefil. Copyright © 2002 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin. All rights reserved.  Read more
Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Collective farming" Read more