the emerging actor of decollectivization in uzbekistan n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
The Emerging Actor of “ Decollectivization ” in Uzbekistan: PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
The Emerging Actor of “ Decollectivization ” in Uzbekistan:

The Emerging Actor of “ Decollectivization ” in Uzbekistan:

2 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

The Emerging Actor of “ Decollectivization ” in Uzbekistan:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. The Emerging Actor of “Decollectivization” in Uzbekistan: Private farming between newly defined political constraints and opportunities Tommaso Trevisani – ZEF Bonn Cotton Sector in Central Asia: Economic policy and development challenges 3-4 November 2005 SOAS, London

  2. Intensification of reforms in agriculture • Private farms should become the main agricultural producers, taking over the growing of state order crops from Shirkats that are gradually dismantled. (Decree 24th March 2003) • In January 2003 in 4 Rayons of 4 Viloyats (Ferghana, Bukhara, Khorezm, Karakalpakstan) all Shirkats were dismantled and their lands transferred to private farms. • Dismantlement of all Shirkats nationwide is prospected for 2010.

  3. Private farm enterprises: economic freedom and embeddedness into State agriculture -legal status: The legal basis of the PFE is a land lease (up to 50 years) which charges the farmer with the obligation to use the land according to an approved business plan (cropping scheme+harvest target). If the plan is repeatedly not fulfilled the land will return to the state and the lease contract ceases. -how to become a farmer: No official land market: a farmer applies for land to a governmental land commission. Hokim/commission determine the distribution, the criteria are vaguely defined, the land issue is highly sensitive. -dependency from state agriculture: Agricultural inputs and credits are provided with agreements on the basis of state order cultivation. This fact maintains the dependency of the farms on input agencies controlled by the government.

  4. What changes with “decollectivization”? • Hierarchy of agricultural production: instead of decentralisation, downscaling of production B) Organization of production: new liabilities at farm level C) Land redistribution: new inequalities

  5. A) agricultural production hierarchy District Hokim …after Reform… …before Reform… AGROPROM Manager (RAIS) Agronomist Economist Land Measurer (zemlemer) FARMER ASS./UNION/MTP Manager (RAIS) Agronomist Economist Land Measurer Engineer KOLKHOZ/SHIRKAT Manager (RAIS) Agronomist Economist Land Measurer Engineer F Farmer F F F F Brigadier B B Pudrat P P P K K K K K Kolkhoz worker

  6. B) farm level organization of production …production outputs…. …production inputs… District Hokim Cotton gin District Department for Agriculture (formerly ‚RaySelVodkhoz‘ ) MTP (tractors) Water (WUA) Wheat factory Seed plant Bio-laboratory market Uzneftgaz Fertilizer Bank: state controlled agricultural credit system Farmer land labour

  7. C) land redistribution 1

  8. C) land redistribution 2

  9. Struggles for cropping patterns • Cotton: “safe” if target is matched, but low profits compared to rice; allows access to subsidised inputs. • Rice: high profits, unsubsidised, but growing is restricted and illegal growing sanctioned. District authorities: overcharge farmers with the plan Farmers: cheat on subsidized inputs to grow crops outside their leasing agreements

  10. “Decollectivization”: outcomes & trends • Farmers emerge as distinct class/category of producers • Exclusion of majority of rural population from farmland • Profitability of farming depends on land lease + conditions of farming (cropping scheme, agreements on production quota) • Dynamization of agriculture: profitable farms will grow while unprofitable farms will drop out