Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T15:01:02.432Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Soviet Agriculture Under Brezhnev

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2017

Alec Nove
Alec Nove*
Affiliation:
Institute of Soviet and East European Studies at the University of Glasgow
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Discussion
Information
Slavic Review , Volume 29 , Issue 3 , September 1970 , pp. 379 - 410
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies. 1970

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.)

References

1. Tsentral'noe statisticheskoe upravlenie pri Sovete Ministrov SSSR, Narodnoe khoziaistvo SSSR v 1967 g. (Moscow, 1968), p. 328.

2. I. Kebin was bitterly humorous about how his Estonians were deprived of the prize for the highest corn harvest because they did not use square clusters. Plenum Tsentral'nogo Komiteta Kqmmunisticheskpi.Partii Sovetskogo Soiuza, 24-26 tnarta 1965 goda : Stenograficheskii otchet (Moscow, 1965), p. 100.

3. “In six years output rose by only 21 percent, procurements by 70 percent.” Ibid., p. 208.

4. See, for instance, Fedor Abrarriov's story Vokrug da okolo (Neva, 1963).

5. The conversions were supposedly “voluntary.“

6. Matskevich, , “Ekonomicheskie problemy dal'neishego razvitiia sel'skogo khoziaistva,” Voprosy ekonomiki, 1965, no. 6, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

7. Ibid., p. 5.

8. G. Zolotukhin, in Plenum, p. 55; A. Ezhevsky, p. 149.

9. Matskevich, “Ekonomicheskie problemy,” p. 5.

10. The terms “profit” and “loss” have no precise meaning at this period in kolkhozes because payment to labor was still a residual. But prices were below costs on almost any reasonable assumption about what costs were.

11. Brezhnev, in Plenum, p. 14.

12. Zaslavskaia, T. I., Ekvivalentnosf obmena, obshchestvennaia otsenka i oplata triida v sel'skom khbziaistve (Moscow, 1966), p. 10 Google Scholar; Kraeva, A, “Voprosy sochetaniia lichnykh i obshchestvennykh interesov v- kolkhozakh,” Voprosy ekonomiki, 1961, no. 8, p. 55 Google Scholar; and E. Kapustin, in Ekonomicheskaia gazeta, Apr. 9, 1962, p. 8.

13. Plenum, pp. 148-49.

14. Thus the plan for state investments for 1964 was. 5.4 billion, the actual was 4.4 billion (productive investments). Cf. Pravda, Dec. 17, 1963, and Nar. khoz., 1968, p. 525.

15. Nar. khoz., 1960, p. 618; Nar. khoz., 1967, p. 680.

16. Plenum, pp. 142, 146.

17. For the story of successive upward amendment of the 1964 statistics, see Nove, A, “Some Thoughts While. Reading the. Soviet. Press,” Soviet Studies, 17, no. 1 (July 1965) : 97–102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and “Statistical Puzzles Continue,” Soviet Studies, 18, no. 1 (July 1966) : 83-85.

18. Brezhnev, in Plenum, p. 18.

19. See Venzher, V. G. et al., Proisvodstvo, nakoplenie, potreblenie (Moscow, 1965), pp. 274–75, 283Google Scholar.

20. Brezhnev, in Plenum, p. 22.

21. I., Suslov, Ekonomicheskie Problemy rasvitiia kolkhosov (Moscow, 1967), p. 149.Google Scholar

22. The latter figure is in Nar. khoz., 1967, p. 619. Note that investment data are not comparable with statistics published in earlier years.

23. See Pravda, Dec : 10, 196$ Fertilizer “output in 1965 was 3k3 millibn tons.

24. Pravda, Dec. 14, 1969.

25. See also Pravda, Dec. 27, 1969, where it was reported that the secretary of the Gomel obkom was dismissed for not ensuring fulfillment of plans.

26. Ekonomicheskaia gaseta, 1968, no. 22, pp. 30-31, and a number of other sources.

27. V. Garbuzov, in Pravda, Dec. 17, 1969.

28. Z. S. Beliaeva and M. I. Kozyr, “Razvitie khoziaistvennoi samostoiatel'nosti kolkhozov,” Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, 1967, no. 12, pp. 83 ff.

29. A. Emelianov, “Reforma i razvitie khozraschetnykh otnoshenii v sel'skom khoziaistve,” Voprosy ekonomiki, 1968, no. 5, pp. 48-49.

30. Indeed, the first meeting of the council was attended by the party officials responsible for agriculture, D. Poliansky and F. Kunakov, neither of whom are members of it. Pravda, Nov. 29, 1969.

31. Thus, to take one example, the average “sheep raising” sovkhoz also had 1, 968 head of cattle, and the average cotton sovkhoz 2, 196 head of sheep. Nar. khos., 1967, p. 483.

32. See admirable articles on the subject by P. Rebrin and A : ” Streliany in Novyi. mir, 1968, no. 3, pp. 157 ff.

33. L, Kopysov, Literaturnaia gaseta, 1968, no. 6, p. 10 Google Scholar.

34. See, for example, Sovety deputatov trndiashchikhsia, 1968, no. 6, pp. 19—24.

35. A. Sukontsev, in Pravda, Dec. 8, 1969.

36. “Real terms” in the sense that the increases were less than the extra expenses incurred by taking over the MTS.

37. L. Kochetkov, “Kontraktatsiia—osnovnaia forma zagotovok sel'skokhoziaistvennoi produktsii,” Ekonotnika sel'skogo khosiaistva, 1968, no. 11, p. 59.

38. It will be recalled that sovkhozes on full khozraschet are paid the same prices as kolkhozes.

39. For example, K. Pysin (Plenum, p. 46).

40. Ekonomicheskaia gazeta, 1968, no. 4, p. 9.

41. Emelianov, “Reforma i razvitie,” p. 54.

42. See M. Bronshtein, “K voprosu o ‘tsene’ zemli,” Voprosy ekonomiki, 1968, no. 5, pp. 102-12; E. Karnaukhova, “Ekonomicheskaia otserika zemel’ v sel'skom khdziaistve,” Voprosy ekonomiki, 1968, no. 8, pp. 88-104; and I. Smirnov, et al., Ekonomicheskaia otsenka zemli (Moscow, 1968)Google Scholar.

43. Suslov, Ekonomicheskie problemy, p. 61.

44. Zhurikov, V, “Luchshe ispol'zovat’ mery material'nogo pooshchreniia kolkhoznikov,” EkonomikaseVskogo kkoziaistvd, 1969, no. 1, p. 10 Google Scholar. (But if the peasants have to buy bread grains at retail prices, they may still prefer payment in kind I)

45. Suslov, Ekonomicheskie problemy, p. 171.

46. Based on Zhurikov, “Luchshe ispol'zovat’ mery material'nogo pooshchreniia kolkhoznikov,” p. 9.

47. Gusev, N, “Sel'skoe khoziaistvo v chetvertom godu piatiletki,” Ekonomika sel'skogo khoziaistva, 1969, no. 4, p. 14.Google Scholar

48. Zhurikov, “Luchshe ispol'zovat’ mery material'nogo pooshchreniia kolkhoznikov, “ p. 8.

49. Suslov, Ekonomicheskie problemy, p. 159.

50. Ibid., p. 188.

51. Nar. khoz., 1968, pp. 655, 640.

52. Radians'ka Ukraine, Nov. 15, 1969; Pravda, Dec. 27, 1969.

53. Plenum, p. 164.

54. See, for instance, Isvestiia, Nov. 26, 1967.

55. Komsomol'skaia pravda, Apr. 21, 1968.

56. Goldman, G., in Ekonomicheskaia gaseta, 1969, no. 25, p. 18.Google Scholar

57. Voprasy ekonomiki, 1969, no. 12, p. 149.

58. Finansy SSSR, 1969, no. 3, p. 16.

59. Calculated from N. Baibakov, in Pravda, Dec. 17, 1969, and Nar. khos, , 1967, p. 465.

60. Nar. khos., 1968, p. 578.

61. Ibid., p. 525.

62. Ibid., p. 422.

63. Karliuk, I, “Tekhnicheskii progress i ukreplenie material'notekhnicheskoi bazy sel'skogo khoziaistva,” Voprosy ekonomiki, 1969, no. 12, p. 64 Google Scholar; Pravda, Aug. 5, 1969.

64. Karliuk, “Tekhnicheskii progress,” p. 63.

65. Ibid., pp. 63, 66.

66. Ibid., and also Ekonomicheskaia gazeta, 1969, no. 6, p. 29.

67. Pravda, Dec. 10, 1963.

68. Literaturnaia gaseta, Dec. 18, 1968, p. 11.

69. Pravda, Nov. 26, 1969; Nar. khoz., 1967, p. 451.

70. Finansy SSSR, 1969, no. 3, pp. 17-18.

71. Nar. khos., 1967, p. 491. It seems certain that on the average each devoted more hours to collective agriculture in 1967 than in 1960.

72. Khlebnikov, V, “Sebestoimost’ produktsii i rentabel'nost’ proizvodstva,” Ekonomika sel'skogo khosiaistva, 1969, no. 3, pp. 3–4.Google Scholar

73. Suslov, Ekonomicheskie problemy, p. 103 (this is not M. Suslov the ideologist 1).

74. Ibid., pp. 151-53. An amount equal to 45-50 percent over costs is advocated by Emelianov in “Reforma i razvitie,” p. 48.

75. Zaslavskaia, Ekvivalentnost’ obmena, p. 31.

76. Ibid., p. 19.

77. T. I. Zaslavskaia, Raspredelenie po trudu v kolkhosakh (Moscow, 1966), p. 48. The “contribution” was by underpayment, and also via high profits of state enterprises using agricultural produce or supplying goods to farms.