•Russia’s agriculture is growing faster than GDP since 2012, after decades of decline.•Food imports are decreasing, per capita food consumption is increasing, but food access of low-income families ...is restricted.•Land is concentrated in a small number of large users, and state support is allocated to the largest corporations.•Agroholdings increase their role relative to independent agricultural enterprises.•Size does not guarantee success as many agroholdings fail and reorganize.
Russian agriculture has shown stable growth since 1999. The food trade balance steadily improves and the share of imported food in retail markets is decreasing due to the government’s import substitution policies. Russia has re-emerged on the world arena as a food exporter and now ranks among the leading exporters of wheat and vegetable oil. Agricultural production growth has become export oriented. To continue its growth, Russia’s agriculture should emphasize returning unused land to cultivation and adopt new technologies to increase the comparatively low crop and livestock yields. The skewed land distribution and agricultural support system, both strongly biased toward large farms and agroholdings, constrain the development of small farms and prevent their participation in food value chains, negatively impacting on rural development.
Agroholdings have become a major player in Russian agriculture in less than two decades. Nevertheless, there is no legal definition of agroholding as an organisation, and no statistical information ...on agroholdings as a distinct category is collected. Only informal definitions exist, which regard agroholdings as groupings of agricultural enterprises linked into a single management network. The numerous publications on Russian agroholdings are mostly based on limited or sporadic data. This is the first study that assembles a full list of more than 1,000 agroholdings in Russia and analyses the corresponding data from official sources. The study examines the role of agroholdings in Russian agriculture and estimates some performance measures. We group all agricultural enterprises (corporate farms in their own right) in Russia into agroholding members and independent, non-member farms, and perform a comparative analysis of the two distinct organisational forms that are at the focus of Russian agricultural policy.
Russia has experienced dramatic changes in land ownership and land tenure since the dissolution of the Soviet Union at the end of 1991: agricultural land has been largely privatized, individual ...landowners now have legal rights to most agricultural land in the country, and previous prohibitions on buying and selling of land have been removed by recent laws. The necessary pre-conditions for the development of agricultural land markets have been met and we are beginning to witness transactions that involve individual landowners, and not only the state. However, further development of the embryonic land market is severely circumscribed by the inadequacy of the administrative and technical infrastructure. The paper reviews the dynamically evolving legal framework for land reform, considers the impacts of land reform on privatization and ownership structure of agricultural land, and analyzes the development of land market transactions. The analysis is based on the results of a questionnaire-based survey conducted by the authors in 2003 in three regions. The survey results are supplemented with data from official statistical sources when appropriate. The paper concludes with a review of the existing constraints on land transactions and some policy recommendations.
The article focuses on the concept of national interest, for the sake of which the Russian government implemented an embargo on the supply of food to Russia. It is shown that its implementation had a ...positive effect for agricultural producers and a negative effect for consumers. The economies of the countries that fell under the embargo did not suffer as a whole: the share of their food exports increased because they were able to shift to other markets. In Russia, the effect of the embargo was blurred by the devaluation of the ruble, as a result of which much of the public largely avoided imported food because it was more expensive. The growth of Russian production, especially of meat, in the context of a reduction in effective demand led to a change in prices. External benefits to other countries came in the form of reexporting food to Russia. When enacting countersanctions, other priorities could have been chosen, which would have been more effective and less negative for the Russian public.
The article reviews the laws relating to land privatisation and land transactions in Russia and describes the ownership structure of agricultural land after more than a decade of reforms. The main ...transactions in land are analysed on the basis of data collected in a 2003 survey of corporate farms and individual land users. Low demand for agricultural land, limited access to market information, and bureaucratic complexity are identified as the main obstacle to the development of a land market. Complicated bureaucratic procedures lead to high transaction costs that prevent individual landowners from registering their property rights. Some policy recommendations are proposed for facilitating the development of land markets. Comparative Economic Studies (2005) 47, 127–140. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ces.8100080
The article examines the outcomes of 20 years of land reform in Russia’s agriculture. The landownership structure is assessed, the risks voiced at the beginning of the reform are reevaluated, and new ...risks related to the development of landownership are highlighted. Russia’s land policy has gone through several stages since the beginning of reform: from clearly formulated policies and procedures in the early 1990s to a set of administrative activities entrusted to disjointed land authorities at the present time. Despite institutional difficulties, the land market in Russia is developing, land has become transferable, it is actively redistributed between peasant farms and corporate farms, flows to new users. Due to the absence of an organ that controls and manages the country’s land endowment, the land policy is unable to respond to new challenges that arise in the course of ongoing land reform.
Since the seminal work of Adam Smith, markets have been considered an efficienttool for co-ordinating the behaviour of economic agents. The basic characteristicof a market economy is that the complex ...system of interaction amongindividuals is not centrally coordinated. Under the assumption of profit and utilitymaximisation (and a whole set of assumptions about the institutional framework),relative prices and their change over time provide the signals that guide,like an invisible hand, the allocation of resources, i.e., the structure of productionand the intensity of input use in the various production processes. They dothis by co-ordinating the activities of economic agents, i.e., of resource owners,producers, intermediaries, traders, and consumers.After system change in the former Soviet Union and in Central and EasternEurope (CEE) central economic planning had to be replaced by other forms ofco-ordination. The general direction in all transition countries was towards amarket economy, but the speed and depth of reforms towards an environment inwhich markets can evolve differed largely between countries, sectors and betweendifferent phases during the past 15 years. IAMO Forum 2005 focuses onthis development and discusses the functioning of markets, the requirements forthis, and the advantages and disadvantages of other co-ordination mechanismsunder different environments in the agricultural and food sectors in Central andEastern Europe.CEE agri-food markets deserve researchers' and policy makers' attention forseveral reasons. Two of them regard the high demand for support to policy decisionsthat aim to stimulate economic and social development in the region.In most CEE countries, the significance of the agricultural and food sector isrelatively high with respect to income and employment. In particular, rural areas can benefit from the development of this branch of the economy. Also, there ismarked indication that agri-food markets in CEE are not ensuring exchange asfrictionless as possible. This means that large benefits can be expected if potentialimprovements of the economic environment are implemented and if individualagents adapt optimally to that environment.Another motivation for economic research on transition countries is that we arelooking at a huge region that started almost as a vacuum with regard to institutionalsettings. This means that a wide range of substantially different settingswere introduced in the respective countries, and were only weakly confined bypolitical rigidities or path dependencies. From a distant perspective, the repeatedfundamental shifts in recent economic policies almost evoke the impression of atrial and error approach. The consequences of distinctively different options(across countries and periods) can be observed in a way almost similar to a laboratorysituation. Such unique opportunity has attracted economists, particularlythose interested in institutional economics, to conduct research on CEE. However,this also means that the experiences made in CEEC can enhance the generalunderstanding of what markets can do and what the limitations of market coordinationare.This volume contains selected contributions presented at IAMO Forum 2005and gives an overview of the major topics discussed there.Partial analyses of specific economic problems usually abstract from the generaleconomic framework which is assumed to be more or less constant as expressedin ceteris paribus clauses. Oftentimes, the set of institutional conditions is evenassumed to be sufficiently well-described by the framework used in neoclassicalmodels. Particularly for transition countries, this has frequently led to spuriousresults because crucial aspects of the framework actually in place were not considered,and sometimes were not even thought of. An extreme and very obviousexample is the neglect of the effects of the replacement of monetary by nonmonetaryexchange in phases of a barter economy. There is no generic approachto avoid unintended omission of crucial framework conditions, but it must generallybe emphasised that a broad look at the various interdependent markets andat the entire socioeconomic context of a country is needed before going into detail.Descriptive analyses of the situation in various markets form part of such abroad look. The contributions of POPP, FERTÖ et al., WILKIN et al., and HEIN inthe chapter Selected analyses from CEEC provide excellent examples, and focuson market developments in new EU member countries. On the one hand, thepapers show the heterogeneity of problems e.g. due to largely differing farmstructures. On the other hand, several common patterns can be observed: Themarket shares and power of large processors and retailers (hypermarkets, etc.)are increasing. Also, international (especially intra-EU) trade in commoditieshas increased in response to CAP-induced price harmonisation. Both tendenciesweaken the market position of farmers, particularly small entities which cannotsupply in volumes sufficient for large processing and trade firms. Within the food industry concentration increased as many smaller firms could not complywith EU processing standards and had to quit the market. The increased size andspecialization of large producers, as well as of large processors, made many ofthose firms co-ordinate business with each other through long-term contractualagreements rather than by relying on spot markets. This tendency is very distinctin the fruit and vegetable sector, as WILKIN’s contribution describes.Two contributions draw attention to the institutional framework itself, mainlyby looking at circumstances which prevent market allocation from leading to anoptimal outcome. HOBBS describes factors that impede investment and growthby drawing on transaction cost economics. Situations typical for transition countriesare highlighted where e.g. transparency is not sufficient or the existence andreliable enforcement of contract or corporate law are not guaranteed. NUPPENAUstresses the need for the appropriate and precise formulation of land propertyrights, which should evoke a balance between governance and exclusion. Theimportance of appropriate and reliable institutions to avoid flaws is emphasised.But even with suitable institutions, transaction costs cannot be reduced to zero.The main reason for this is that since agents may gain form a head start of information,incentives to reveal their knowledge are quite restricted. Furthermore,some of the information required to make correct decisions is not available. Thisespecially concerns information regarding all future contingencies. An uncertainfuture and the asymmetric distribution of information impose special problemswhen decisions have long-term effects and agents are linked together throughinvestment decisions. This offers possibilities for opportunistic behaviour, i.e.,when an agent behaves in a way that allows him to extract rents from the partners'activities. The friction induced in such situations may result in a marketoutcome that is biased by transaction costs. Mitigating this bias should be a goalof public policy but it is also in the interest of (at least some of the) privateagents involved. This issue is discussed in more detail in the papers dealing withalternative governance structures.A number of contributions to IAMO Forum highlight approaches for measuringthe well-functioning of markets. While studies that aim to directly measuretransaction costs are very rare and are necessarily limited to comparing onlyvery specific portions of transaction costs, most studies focus on indirect indicators.These usually start from the idea that in a well-functioning, competitivemarket any supply or demand shocks are reflected in price changes, not only inthe particular market where the shock occurs but also in other, related markets,i.e., in different locations or at different stages of the production and marketingchain. Consequently, an approach for assessing the functioning of markets is tocompare price differentials with processing-, marketing- or transfer-costs, or –since these costs are usually difficult to quantify – to observe price differentialsover time. Accepting the assumption that the costs reflected by price differentialsare more or less constant (or stationary) over the observed time span, any additionalprice changes or a lack of price co-movement is interpreted as an indication for insufficiently connected or insufficiently functioning markets. Three contributionsin the chapter Analytical approaches for measuring market efficiencydescribe analyses which mainly focus on the vertical dimension, i.e., between marketstages. BOJNEC, in his descriptive price analysis for several agriculturalproducts in Slovenia since 1991, finds a heterogeneous development of the farmgate/consumer price spread: The processing and marketing margins increasedfor wheat and beef while they declined for grapes (processed to wine), sugar andpoultry. BRÜMMER and ZORYA, as well as BAKUCS and FERTÖ, use cointegrationanalysis to describe the degree and nature of vertical price integration in theUkrainian wheat market and the Hungarian pork market, respectively. Bothstudies find that price changes are transmitted vertically, that there is a tendencyto "correct" any deviations from some underlying equilibrium price-relationship.However, such error correction mechanisms are found not to be a constant, universalforce. In the Hungarian paper, it could only be found for a sub-period ofthe observed time span, excluding the highly volatile early 1990s. Also, equilibriumwas found to be achieved by adjustment of farm gate prices only while theretail prices were found to be exogenous, i.e., not responding to any disequilibrium.The paper on Ukraine shows that adjustment processes between wheat andwheat flour prices cannot be sufficiently described by a constant error correctionmechanism for the period 2000 to 2004. In fact, four different regimes of adjustmentproc
PDF