Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:25:30.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eastern Europe: The Changes in Agriculture from Land Reforms to Collectivization1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Nicolas Spulber
Nicolas Spulber*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Indiana University; Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the most widespread and well-accepted assertions about Eastern Europe after World War II, was, and still is, that feudalistic vestiges had prevailed in this region as a whole until 1944, and that the “bold” new land reforms were aimed at sweeping aside these hampering pre-capitalist remnants. Actually, at the date considered, on the one hand, the structure of land tenure and ownership presented not a unique characteristic for the area as a whole, but a substantial diversity from one region (or country) to the next. On the other hand, the land reforms had quite different aims and impacts from one country to another.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Slavic and East European Review , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , October 1954 , pp. 389 - 401
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 1954

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

This paper is based on a section of a chapter of a study written under the auspices of the Center for International Studies, M.I.T. The opinions expressed by the author are his own, and not necessarily those of the Center.

References

2 Decrees: No. 12 of June 21, 1945, on the confiscation of land; No. 28 of July 12, 1945, on the settlement of Slav farmers; No. 63 of Sept. 3, 1945, on the institution of the National Land Fund. See: Valer Fabry, Agricultural Laws of the Czechoslovak Republic, May 1945-March 1949, Ministry of Agriculture, Library of the Czech. Institute for International Collaboration in Agriculture and Forestry (Prague, Brazda, 1949), Vol. 17.

3 The total surfaces of the Czechoslovak provinces are the following: Bohemia—52.0 thousand sq. km.; Moravia—22.3 thousand; Silesia—4.4 thousand; Slovakia—48.9 thousand. The total of the surface of the country, including South Karpathian Ukraine (12.6 thousand sq. km.), amounted to 140.4 thousand sq. km. in 1937; after the post-war cession of this latter province to the Soviet Union it amounted to 127.8 sq. km.

4 Kǒtátko, J., Land Reform in Czechoslovakia (Prague, Orbis, April, 1948)Google Scholar, passim.

5 Ibid., pp. 23–24.

6 Ibid., p. 13.

7 Bill of July 1947, No. 142 B.O.L. Fabry, op. cit., pp. 13–14.

8 Kǒtátko, J. , op. cit., p. 34.Google Scholar

9 March 21, 1948. Fabry, op. cit., pp. 13 sq.

10 Ibid.

11 Stejskal, L., “Program scitani zemedelskych v.g. 1950” (Program of the Census of Agricultural Holdings in 1950), Statistiky zpravodaj, XIII, No. 2 (1950), 46.Google Scholar

12 Decrees of Sept. 6, 1944, implemented by Executive Order of the Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reform on March 1, 1945. See: Stanislaw Gryziewicz, “Rolnictwo” (Agriculture), Kultura, special series (Paris, 1952), pp. 306, 307.

13 Ibid., p. 309.

14 Decree of Dec. 12, 1944, implemented by Executive Order of Jan. 20, 1945.

15 The peasant holdings created under the resettlement scheme “remained for a long time indeterminate as far as boundaries and recorded titles of ownership were concerned. From the legal point of view the situation of these holdings was rather undefined and fluid. 338 thousand holdings of this kind (with an area of 2.9 million ha.) were affected in this way up to Sept. 6, 1951, when a decree finally normalized their status.” S. Gryziewicz, op. cit., p. 315.

16 Zycie Warszawy of Sept. 6, 1949, gave the following figures: 200,000 families of repatriates; 40,000 families of former soldiers; 5,000 farm hands.

17 In a rather roundabout way, Mine states that this over-population has been only reduced, thanks to the transfers to the West: “The recovered territories are now inhabited by about six million Poles of whom five million are new settlers. The ethnical character of these lands has been changed completely and the agricultural over-population in Central Poland, materially reduced.” Hilary Mine, Poland's Economy, Present and Future, Polish Research and Information Service, Documents and Reports on Poland, No. 5 (New York, 1949), p. 21.

18 Decree of March 17, 1945.

19 Out of a total of 1,006,311 cadastral acres belonging to churches of all denominations, 862,704 belonged to the Roman Catholic Church. Some were very large estates—like the Hungarian Catholic Religious Foundation which covered 122,000 acres; the Principal Chapter of Eger, 94,000 acres; the Holy Benedictine Order of Pannonhalma, 84,000 acres; the Archbishopric of Kalocsa, 82,500 acres, etc. The total left to all religious denominations after the reforms amounted to 181,064 cadastral acres (about 104 thousand hectares), of which about one-half were left to the Catholic Church. See: Gazdásdgstatisztikai tájékoztato (Economic and Statistical Bulletin), 2nd year, No. 9 (July, 1948), p. 547. Also, Ilona Polanyi, “The Issues in Hungary,” World Affairs, Nos. 2–3 (1948/49); pp. 138–39.

20 Information Hongroise, Bureau Hongrois de presse et de documentation (Paris, March 18, 1946).

21 Hungary—Today and Yesterday, pub. by the Hungary Bull. (Budapest, State Printing Nat'l Co., 1949), p. 27.

22 March 22, 1945. La Reforme agraire en Roumanie (The Land Reform in Rumania), Ministry of Information, Direction of For. Cultural Relat. (Bucharest, November 1946), pp. 35 seq.

23 Ibid., p. 31.

24 “The Feudal Estates, Nests of Sabotage, Are Liquidated,” Scânteia, March 3, 1949.

25 Comunicari statistice (Statist. Information), No. 17 (Bucharest, 1947), Tables 6 and 9.

26 Golopentia, A. and Onica, P., Recensamantul agricol in Republica Populara Romana (The Agricultural Census from the Rum. Pop. Republic) (Bucharest, 1948), p. 18.Google Scholar

27 August 29, 1945.

28 Ivanovic, Milun, “The Development of Yugoslav Agriculture,” Review of International Affairs, Vol. III, Nos. 18 and 20 (Belgrade, September 16 and October 16, 1952).Google Scholar

29 Morris, John, Yugoslavia, p. 89.Google Scholar

30 Černokolev, T., “The Agrarian Policy of the Bulgarian Workers (Communist) Party,” For a Lasting Peace for a People's Democracy, July, 1948.Google Scholar

31 Ibid.

32 Cornăteanu: “Cercetǎri asupra rentabilitatii agriculture: Românesti” (Researches on the Rentability of the Rumanian Agriculture), Economia Româna, 27th year (December, 1945), p. 104.