Äîêóìåíò âçÿò èç êýøà ïîèñêîâîé ìàøèíû. Àäðåñ
îðèãèíàëüíîãî äîêóìåíòà
: http://www.fadr.msu.ru/archives/mailing-list/priv-agr/art-eng/msg00002.html
Äàòà èçìåíåíèÿ: Sat May 25 16:17:59 1996 Äàòà èíäåêñèðîâàíèÿ: Tue Oct 2 17:35:06 2012 Êîäèðîâêà: |
I have read with great interest many of the papers posted on the Privatization conference. In particular I found the papers of Drs. Reed and Nikolsky on agrarian reform failures and suggestions intriguing. I would like to address a few questions to the authors. My questions primarily regard agricultural production issues. Dr. Nikolsky notes that: Agricultural production declined by 25 per cent between 1991 and 1995. The relatively "modest" decline of the past 5 years can be attributed to the fact that agriculture had good resources around 1991 including proper equipment and land in good condition. By 1995 agriculture had exhausted these resources. Therefore a further and probably even faster decline in production cannot be excluded as a possibility. One indication of the exhaustion of resources is the decline of chemical fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals (See Table 10). In 1995, five time less chemical fertilizers were used than in 1991. In Interfax·s latest Food and Agriculture report, Valentin Mironov, the official in charge agrichemicals at the Russian Ministry of Agriculture, confirms these findings. He claims that 24,000 tons of domestically produced crop protection chemicals and 5,000 tons of imported chemicals will be available for application this year, 30% of what is needed under current general production standards in Russia. Dr. Reed acknowledges the need to encourage alternative and more sustainable production methods, but recognizes that without ¸ownershipª of resources and economic incentives for protecting them, attempts to convert hectares to ¸sustainableª production may be futile Dr. Reed writes: As a consequence of the Soviet period, agricultural workers were only able to exercise any initiative and make their own decisions regarding production in their private plots. It is significant therefore that it is in private plot production that they do husband their soil and nutrient resources, made maximal use of available labour, demonstrate considerable ingenuity in preserving and storing output for winter consumption, and entrepreneurship in the marketing or barter of surpluses. Ownership is considered to bias the selection of agricultural production technologies from among the broad array of possibilities in favour of those which are sustainable. The superiority of ownership over tenancy in this regard was emphasized by Arthur Young (1741-1820), an English writer on agriculture, when he wrote ¸Give a man the secure possession of bleak rock and he will turn it into a garden; give him a nine years lease on a garden and he will turn it into a desertª. Given the current conditions for farm workers and rural residents in Russia, what do the authors feel, from an economic and social standpoint, are reasonable, low-cost and effective farming and crop protection strategies that a wide range of food producers could adopt? I am also interested in the authors· views on alternative marketing strategies. Could food products grown using ¸sustainableª farming techniques be sold through direct marketing techniques (farmers· markets, selling directly to restaurants and stores, Community Supported Agriculture programs, etc.)? I realize that an infrastructure for such things is not in place, but given the increase in imported food products in Russia, I am curious as to the authors· opinions on ways to market quality, domestically-produced goods. Comments from other conference participants are also welcome. Jennifer Abel, Rodale Institute, US ****************************************************************** ** Conference: Privatization of Russian Agriculture ** ** Sponsor(s): Foundation for Agrarian Development Research ** ** Email Contact: Alex Makeev: con-mgt@fadr.msu.ru ** ****************************************************************** ** Disclaimer: Neither the conference sponsors or UNDP accept ** ** any legal responsibility for either the contents of this ** ** message or any copyright laws that the person sending in ** ** this electronic message may have violated. ** ****************************************************************** ** To Comment: Unless you want to reply only to the person ** ** sending in this information, please send your comments to ** ** the address of this conference room: SARD-ROOM4@UNDP.ORG ** ******************************************************************