Land and usage structures and their impacts on rural livelihood in Central Europe

Katalin KovácsCentre for Regional Studies,Hungarian Academy of Sciences

Content

Agricultural restructuring of the CEE-s: an overview Farm structures in three Central European

countries Countries:

Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Hungary

Dimensions: share of large-scale/small-scale, similarities, differences, reasoning

(Small-scale) farming and livelyhood – the Hungarian case

Agricultural restructuring of the CEE-s

Models of collectivised agricultre

Stalinist (Romania, Albania)

Neo-Stalinist (Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, GDR)

Hungarian

A Swain typology from 2000

De-collectivisation models

Rapid destructuring, then building up from grassroots Dominant: small-scale Secondary: medium-scale

company

Slow transformation Strong large-scale sector Multiple transformation rounds Weak small-scale sector

Rapid and relatively balanced transformation

Agricultural restructuring of the CEE-s Structuring principles

The overall economic conditions, the scale of state control over the events

The flexibility of late socialist collectivisation models, the presence of market-principles

Ownership relations Food-chain and inter-farm connections Preferences at policy-making level: privatisation +

restitution policies and legislations Power relations and preferences at grassroots level:

convictions, beliefs and expectations of elit and ordinary population circles

Agricultural restructuring of the CEE-s•Fragmented ownership

•Dual farm structure with low share of the middle: = the Western-like family farm model

Large-scale farm-dominated systems:

Czechia, Slovakia

Household plot dominated systems: Albania, Romania

Combined:

Hungary, Bulgaria

General outcome

Farm systems

S-m farms’ social role Not so

important Important

Very importan

t

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary

Duality in the Czech, Slovak and Hungarian agriculture: farm categories by the number

and area of farms %, 2000

Farm sizeCategories

CzechiaSlovak Republic Hungary

number

area

number

areanumbe

rare

a

Below 10 ha 72 3 94 4 94 15

10-50 17 6 3 2 5 17

50-100 3 4 1 2 1 8

over 100 ha 7 88 3 93 1 60

Total 99 101 101 101 101 100

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary

What statistics tell about: The overwhelming prevalence of large-scale

farms in the usage of agricultural land (the share of farms over 100 hectares) Slovakia (93%)

average large-scale farm size: 1200 ha in the Czech Republic (88%)

average large-scale farm size: 960 ha

Less so in Hungary (60%) average large-scale farm size: 600 ha

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, HungaryThe number of farms and their share in agricultural land-

use by legal titles, 2000

Countries Legal type of farmsNumber of

farmsShare %

Czech Republic

State undertakings 0 0

Co-operatives 728 28

Commertial companies 2,055 43

Individual farms 35,219 26

Other 168 1

Slovakia

State undertakings 1 0

Co-operatives 695 46

Commertial companies 707 29

Individual farms 5,292 7

Household plots n.a. 16

Hungary

State undertakings 0 0

Co-operatives 1,88650

Commertial companies 9,479

Individual farms 949,005 49Source: NIAE: The Future of Rural Areas in the CEE new Member States, pp 14-15

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary

Further characteristics (data 2000) The role models of the collectivised agriculture,

producer co-operatives have been loosing out to a large degree, except Slovakia (46%)

An emerging wide variety of company and co-operative forms

Czechia took the lead in terms of the importance of companies as land operators (43%)

The individual forms of land-use is the strongest in Hungary (49%)

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary

Ownership of agricultural land %

Land ownersCzech Republic

Slovakia

Hungary

2003 2000 2004

Natural persons 72 76 83

Legal persons 28 24 17

of which state 17 24 11

cooperatives10

 

2

companies 3

others (LG,s, NGOs, churches)

1 1

Total 99 100 100

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary

Land-use by title in Hungary (on the basis of registered arable land,

2002 august)

Area total (Ha) 3 168 229

Own property % 37

Ordinary rented schemes %

51

Rented on reciprocal basis %

12

other % 1

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary

What case studies suggest about the characteristics of post-soc large-scale farms They are not so big, not so overstaffed, but … They are not so pluriactive, many opted for the „either” / „or” approach

(cropping / animal breeding); The „many own, few use” principle is still

prevalent as well as that of „the farms are run according to the managers’ and not the owners’ interests” (Fertő 1999)

Their interlinkages with small-scale farms diminished radically

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, HungaryThe characteristics of

the small-scale sector

Czechia + Hungary: 12-14% commertial farms

Czechia + Slovakia: relatively weak plot farming (14-16%)

Slovakia: weak individual commertial farm sector

Hungary: strong plot-farm sector (40-42%)

% in the area

„Farms”

„Plots”

Czechia 12 14

Szlovakia

7 16

Hungary

12-14 40-42

Farm structures in Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary

Roots of differences Different starting models

Less developed small-scale sector in the former Czechoslovakia, restricted to household consumption and the local markets to a large extent – vs. integrated and specified small-scale farms

Ownership (landed property) Differences in

Land privatisation legislation (full restitution vs. „allotment + compensation + land auctions)

Privatisation of the assets Policies („pro”-s and „conra”s) Locally/culturally determined sentiments, beliefs

towards company-forms

Small-scale farming and rural livelyhood

The Hungarian case A huge drop of permanent jobs (80% of agricultural

jobs were lost) A continuous and sound drop of plot farms

20% between 1994-2000 (1.207.000 996.000) 20% between 2000-2003 (996.000 773.000)

The shrinking categories: Small-size plots, mostly the below 2 ESU size Semi-subsistence farms

The loss of integration with large-scale farms Concentration, specification as a response for the

challenges

Small-scale farming and rural livelyhood

Sound regional differences emerged, reflecting the profitability of farming the proximity of on-farm and off-farm jobs the rate of unemployment the composition of the population

age education „peasant traditions”

Spatial seggregation has become a major issue

Small-scale farming and rural livelyhoodThe share of under age pensioners within the group of retired people; deviation from the country

average (2003)

Small-scale farming and rural livelyhoodThe share of households without active employees. The

deviation form the country average (2001)

Small-scale farming and rural livelyhoodSocial crisis areas 2001

with profound social segregation the target area of the urban poorwith polarised pop. structureageing, emptying

Small-scale farming and rural livelyhoodThe proportion of family labour engaging in individual

farming in the % of the population over 15. Deviation from the country average 2000.

Small-scale farming and rural livelyhood Small-scale farming is strong

where people have no other choice than agriculture either as a first or a secondary source of income (in the latter case frequently as social transfer recipients)

Where „peasant” and entrepreneurial traditions are strong and natural endowment are favourable

Small scale farming is weak where there are other choices, on the spot or accessable

off-farm jobs, and/or elderly population is increasing

here professionalised and commertial small-scale farms and hobby farms are increasingly dominate the sector

where spatial seggregation of the poor (Roma + non-roma) population takes large holds

Concluding remarks

To provide remedy for the damages caused by globalisation, transformation, etc. in rural spaces long-term and realistic coping strategies should be developed jointly

The shrinkage of agricultural job-opportunities will continue as much as investors’ favoring urban spaces, therefore accessibility of urban areas becomes a key issue + Internet access

Primary education has a major importance in combating social segregation

Concluding remarks

Linkages should be promoted between small-scale production and the food

chain between the growing rural underclass and the

society at large As rural poverty seems to reflect the patterns

of spatial accumulation in peripheral rural districts in each country, a Europe-wide, joint integrated cohesion policy targeting rural peripheries should be developed or reinstalled as soon as possible