GeoJournal 38.2: 137-149.

© 1996 (February) Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

Agriculture in Eastern Europe: Communism, the

transition and the future
Turnock, David, Geography Department, The University, Leicester LE1
7RH, UK

ABSTRACT: The paper summarises the East European experience with socialist agricul-
ture and notes that while production often failed to meet plan targets (thereby giving the
impression of a sector in crisis), there was steady growth based on substantial investments
in buildings, machinery, fertilisers and irrigation systems which provided food for the pop-
ulation at affordable prices. The increased spending power of higher salaries during the 1970s
and 1980s also drew a positive response from agriculture in the context of significant reforms
which, unintentionally, contributed to the demise of the communist system in 1988-1990.
Transition to a market economy has cast agriculture into a state of great uncertainty through
restitution and the end of price controls, combined with the disruption of trade contacts
with the Former Soviet Union. Falling real wages have reduced demand while the overtures
being made to the European Union (with its substantial food surpluses) suggest that reduced
agricultural output may be a permanent reality. In this case the thrust of rural development
will have to give more attention to the quality of the environment and the provision of alter-
native employments for country dwellers. It remains to be seen how far small family holdings
can be maintained in the context of farm diversification and pluriactivity.

Introduction: The communist legacy can be p a r t i a l l y a l l e v i a t e d by irrigation, while soil

T h e r e are s u b s t a n t i a l p o t e n t i a l s for a g r i c u l t u r e in
Eastern E u r o p e b u t the situation varies from c o u n t r y
to c o u n t r y as the l a n d use p r o f i l e i n d i c a t e s (Table
1). The c o n t i n e n t a l extremes of climate and the fluc-
tuations from year to year i m p o s e constraints which
fertility varies b e t w e e n the c h e r n o z e m s of the
southern steppelands and the podzolised soils of the
n o r t h e r n p l a i n where glacial activity has resulted in
m u c h local variation ( D a w s o n 1982). Fertilisers can
i m p r o v e y i e l d s b u t i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n requires h e a v y
i n v e s t m e n t . T h e m o u n t a i n o u s r e g i o n s have s o m e

Table 1. Land use 1989

Country Land type (million ha A and percentage B)

Total Forest Arable Perm. crop Pasture Other

A A B A B A B A B A

Albania 2.87 1.05 36.6 0.58 20.2 0.12 4.2 0.40 13.9 0.72
Bulgaria 11.09 3.87 34.9 3.85 34.7 0.30 2.7 2.02 18.2 1.05
Czechoslovkia 12.79 4.61 36.0 4.98 38.9 0.13 1.0 1.64 12.8 1.43
GDR 10.83 2.98 27.5 4.68 43.2 0.24 2.2 1.26 11.6 1.67
Hungary 9.30 1,69 18.2 5.05 54.3 0.23 2.5 1.20 12.9 1.13
Poland 31.27 8.75 28.0 14.41 46.1 0.34 1.1 4.05 13.0 3.72
Romania 23.75 6.37 26.8 9.90 41.7 0.45 1.9 4.41 18.6 2.62
Yugoslavia 25.58 9.33 36.5 7.04 27.5 0.73 2.9 6.35 24.8 2.13
Total 127.48 38.65 30.3 50.49 39.6 2.54 2.0 21.33 16.7 14.47

Source: FAO Yearbook.

138

limited value, especially in the south, because the
scope for summer grazing provides a useful com-
plement to the arable enterprises on the adjacent low
ground. This highly variable resource base was
exploited under communism to gain unprecedentedly
high levels of output through a combination of reor-
ganisation to create a large socialist agricultural
sector and transform social relations in village
life (Allcock 1980); also by capital investment to
modernise the infrastructure (Jackson 1971; Wadekin
1977; 1982). In the process distribution was im-
proved and closer links were forged with the food
processors (Bencze 1971).
There were exaggerated expectations of produc-
tivity gains to follow simply from the abolition of
private ownership, overlooking the problem of
dependence of agriculture on the residual labour
force which lacked the ability or motivation to
migrate to the towns. Yet there were some striking
contrasts in policy between countries, dictated by
pragmatism (Kostrowicki 1975; Trend 1974). K.-E.
Wadekin (1990, p. 326) outlined the strategy of
extracting capital from agriculture tied (indirectly)
to the idea of collective production: discrimina-
tion against private farms arose from "ideological
prejudice and a preference for directive planning".
Thus in Romania cheap food and cheap labour
were extracted while capital inputs remained low
and collectivisation extended to all areas except
those with severe administrative and infrastructure
problems where a quota system retained. But in
Czechoslovakia and GDR there was less labour in
agriculture (Lazarcik 1967) and so "remuneration of
labour and capital inputs on socialist large-scale
farms could not be kept much below that in order
sectors of the e c o n o m y " (ibid, p. 325). Table 2
examines the changing relationships between labour
and capital and shows some evidence of a split
between the north where capital investment was
maintained and the south where the size of the
residual labour force allowed a degree of sub-
stitution.
Large-scale socialist farming limited the role of
private peasant farming. Hungary succeeded not only
in meeting home market demand but in boosting
exports (Held 1980). On the other hand small farms
were retained in Poland and Yugoslavia (Szurek
1987) and were valued as an alternative to col-
lectivisation (Korbonski 1965; 1967) (Table 3).
However, such were the increases in home demand
for food, fodder and agricultural raw materials that
in Eastern Europe as a whole a net surplus was con-
verted into a deficit. In 1934-8 net exports from
Eastern Europe were equivalent to the production
from 3.74 million ha (6.4 percent of a total area of
58.30 million ha). By 1962-6 however there was a
net import equivalent to the output from 2.97 million
ha (5.9 percent of the total land area of 50.56 million
ha) (Borgstron and Annegers 1971). Increases were
achieved in per capita production in the range of
1.7 percent per annum (Romania) to 2.7 (Bulgaria)
for 1952-1982, but performance was constrained by
the imperative of party control and the emphasis on
scale, rather than initiative and innovation by dedi-
cated workers. Few workers had good qualifications
and there was little interest in agriculture as a worth-
while career: peasant parents felt ashamed if their
children chose to work on the land in preference to
following a professional career. At the same time,
some land was underused: although the urban fringe
lands were highly valued (Daroczi 1984), 'a dramatic
decrease in agricultural land, especially of arable
land [complemented by] the expansion of forests'
occurred in peripheral areas like Sudetenland (Bicik
and Stepanek 1994, p. 259).

Table 2. Agricultural output employment and investment 1960-1980

Country 1960 1970 1980

A B C D A B C D A B C D

Albania 44.4 71.3 1.6 0.3 34.5 62.0 1.8 0.5 n.a. 55.9 n.a. n.a.
Bulgaria 32.2 55.5 1.7 1.2 22.6 35.7 1.6 0.9 16.5 18.1 1.1 0.9
Czechoslovakia 14.7 25.9 1.8 1.5 10.1 18.3 1.8 1.5 7.3 13.1 1.8 1.6
GDR 16.4 17.3 1.1 0.9 11.6 13.0 1.1 1.3 8.5 10.6 1.2 1.1
Hungary 30.8 38.9 1.1 0.6 17.7 26.4 1.5 1.5 15.8 18.2 1.2 0.5
Poland 30.3 44.2 1.5 0.6 17.5 34.7 2.0 1.3 15.3 28.5 1.9 1.1
Romania 34.9 65.6 1.9 0.7 19.1 49.3 2.6 1.1 14.5 30.5 2.1 0.7
Yugoslavia 25.0 56.2 2.2 0,9 18.3 49.8 2.7 0.7 14.8 32.3 2.2 0.4

A = Contribution of agriculture and forestry to national income (percent);

B = Ditto employment;
C = B divided by A;
D = Agriculture and forestry's share of state" investment divided by A.
Sources: Wadekin (1977) and statistical yearbooks.
 139

Table 3. Socialist agriculture 1950 and 1980

Country Year State farms Cooperatives Percentage of the

total farmland in
A B A B socialist agric.

Bulgaria 1950 90 0.77 2,501 0.23 11.4

1970 156 6.00 744 5.50 99.6
Czechoslovakia 1950 182 0.49 3,138 0.31 27.1
1980 200 10.50 1,722 2.50 92.7
GDR 1950 559 0.32 1,906 0.11 5.7
1980 469 0.87 3,946 1.28 94.5
Hungary 1950 454 1.48 2,185 0.20 30.6
1980 131 7.59 1,338 3.48 n.a.
Poland 1950 5,679 0.29 635 0.30 10.4
1980 2,096 1.67 2,286 0.37 25.1
Romania 1950 363 2.07 1,027 0.28 23.6
1980 407 5.00 4,011 2.26 90.6
Yugoslavia 1950 858 0.43 15,605 0.13 31.6
1970 270 1.32 1,102 0.56 30.1

A = Number of units; B = Average area '000 ha.

The nearest available figures have been used for Czechoslovakia, GDR and Hungary in 1950.
Sources: Miller et al. (1973); Trend (1974) and FAO Yearbooks.

Reforming the communist system
Throughout Eastern Europe there was pressure to
produce more food to compensate for the inadequate
supply of consumer goods (Deutsch 1986). Adminis-
trators and industrial workers had to be given
incentive even though there were too many of them
in employment. So a higher agricultural output
was needed to provide for salaried workers whose
incomes rose faster than their production: "under
these circumstances the excess purchasing power
turns to foods to an overproportionate degree, while
the regimes hesitate to raise the official retail food
prices": so there is increasing food production "but
at high and growing subsidy cost, and still lagging
behind the rise in demand' (Wadekin 1990, p. 327).
"The explicit or implicit return, although to vary-
ing degrees, to the small, mainly family unit of
production under the constraints of natural endow-
ment and low economic development level is the
common denominator of recent agrarian policies"
(ibid, p. 330). But little was seen of this trend in
Czechoslovakia and the GDR with better conditions
for large-scale modernised farming. The GDR was
perhaps the most successful in expanding output
within the confines of the socialist system. Farm
workers were better integrated into the collective and
state farms than even their Soviet counterparts. They
purchased most of their food and spent relatively
little time tending private plots. Specialisation was
very evident (Bajaja 1980) as the collectives and state
farms combined effectively within specific areas
of specialised production (Freeman 1983; Sinclair
1979).
The other countries also tried to increase cereal
production to avoid the burden of imports which
came increasingly from outside Comecon (Dando
1974). The crisis was deepened by the need for live-
stock feed (given consumer demand for more meat)
and by transfers of cereal lands to other arable enter-
prises such as industrial crops (Turnock 1989, pp.
239-253). Higher yields were obtained during he
1980s while the sown area was broadly maintained
(Table 4). There was better storage and increased effi-
ciency in irrigation. Investment included World Bank
assistance to Yugoslavia in the mid-1980s. Efforts
in plant breeding to produce new varieties were
adjusted to prevailing climatic conditions and disease
hazards. As domestic cereal production increased
from 97.38 million tonnes in 1980 to 108.95 in 1985
imports fell dramatically from 16.12 to 1.85 million
tonnes. Large-scale organisation, with efforts to inte-
grate farmers and food processors more efficiently,
was certainly attempted, notably through the coop-
eration councils in the GDR (Schinke 1990) and
Agricultural Industrial Complexes (AICs) in Bulgaria
(Wiedermann 1980; 1982). The latter were first
approved in 1970 and by the end of the year 170 were
in existence, each with 28,000 ha of land and 6,200
workers on average (Entwistle 1972). The AICs
then integrated with industry to create Industrial-
Agricultural Complexes; with the first ("Dimitur
Blahoev" at Ruse 1973) combined the local sugar
refinery with two AICs working a total of 40,000 ha.
There was a tendency towards gigantism when an
"Agrokomplex" of eight large enterprises based on
Nitra in Slovakia managed 45,000 ha and enjoyed the
backing of a local agricultural college.
Reform also sought to release peasant energies
(Bell 1984; Cochrane 1986). Arguably, small-scale
140

Table 4. Yield and production of major crops

Country Average yield (quintals per hectare) and production (million tonnes)

1961-5 1981-5 1986-90 1991-3

Cereals
Albania 10.6 0.29 28.6 1.02 29.1 1.01 20.3 0.51
Bosnia a - . . . . . 36.6 1.31
Bulgaria 19.0 4.86 41.4 8.55 39.5 8.20 33.2 7.13
Croatia a - . . . . . 41.2 2.54
Czechoslovakia 21.8 5.66 43.2 10.90 47.7 11.81 43.7 10.60
GDR 25.3 5.97 41.4 10.37 45.5 11.16 -
Hungary 20.3 6.90 49.5 14.41 48.5 13.78 41.2 11.61
Macedonia a - . . . . . 25.0 0.56
Poland 17.0 15.43 27.4 22.23 31.1 26.11 27.9 23.73
Romania 15.9 11.10 34.4 21.70 39.3 23.39 25.9 15.70
Sloveniaa - . . . . . 35.2 0.41
Yugoslavia 17.3 3.80 39.0 16.77 37.4 15.65 36.8 14.45
Yugoslavia a - . . . . . 29.0 7.26
Total 23.7 54.01 36.5 105.95 - 111.11 -

Potatoes
Albania 73.1 0.03 83.9 0.13 88.4 0.11 85.0 0.07
Bosnia a - . . . . . 51.1 0.03
Bulgaria 86.0 0.40 106.3 0.42 120.0 0.43 115.0 0.52
Croatia a - . . . . . 78.3 0.49
Czechoslovakia 114.0 5.63 185.7 3.59 183.1 3.19 172.2 2.76
GDR 166.0 12.07 205.9 9.95 240.0 10.37 -
Hungary 79.0 2.00 182.1 1.44 176.9 1.26 146.8 1.18
Macedonia a - . . . . . 91.2 0.11
Poland 154.0 43.68 167.0 36.59 190.2 36.14 168.9 29.57
Romania 85.0 2.60 192.3 5.75 163.6 5.51 116.4 2.73
Yugoslavia 87.0 2.71 92.5 2.57 79.9 2.27 76.9 2.07
Yugoslavia" - . . . . . 62.0 0.65
Total 139.6 69.12 166.9 60.44 182.4 59.28 -

Sugar Beet
Albania 172.1 0.08 371.2 0.32 347.8 0.32 91.9 0.06
Bosnia . . . . . . 503.3 0.08
Bulgaria 205.0 1.44 220.9 1.11 157.9 0.63 191.0 0.43
Croatia" - . . . . . 331.9 0.53
Czechoslovakia 270.0 6.28 244.6 7.30 345.6 6.26 349.5 5.57
GDR 243.0 5.37 287.1 7.09 303.4 6.47 -
Hungary 246.0 3.09 382.2 4.45 393.4 4.50 303.1 3.70
Macedonia" - . . . . . 346.7 0.05
Poland 268.0 11.44 330.3 15.61 345.9 14.67 335.3 12.69
Romania 149.0 2.64 217.1 6.07 210.0 5.83 195.7 3.13
Slovenia a - . . . . . 304.0 0.08
Yugoslavia 279.0 2.34 426.6 6.12 406.0 5.82 359.7 3.96
Yugoslavia a - . . . . . 280.1 2.02
Total 244.3 32.68 324.6 48.07 316.5 44.51 -

Countries of Former Yugoslavia whose figures have been added together to produce the totals for Yugoslavia for
1991-3. Yugoslavia" refers to Serbia and Montenegro.
Source: FAO Yearbooks.

o r g a n i s a t i o n is n o t p r e f e r a b l e p e r se but it is attrac- 1985; 1987) as the g o v e r n m e n t s t i m u l a t e d a business

tive in the c o n t e x t o f surplus u n s k i l l e d rural l a b o u r
and d e f i c i e n t l i n k a g e s ( u p s t r e a m and d o w n s t r e a m )
that c o n s t r a i n the e f f i c i e n c y o f large o r g a n i s a t i o n s .
T h e c h a n g e o f e m p h a s i s c a n be s e e n in the v i a b l e
s y s t e m o f c o o p e r a t i v e s c r e a t e d in H u n g a r y ( S w a i n
culture a m o n g the peasantry ( S z e l e n y i 1988; S z e l e n y i
and M a n c h i n 1986). T h e r e was a s i g n i f i c a n t subsis-
tence e l e m e n t in p easan t activity and s o m e l o cal f o o d
stores w e r e f o r c e d to close. Bu t p e a s a n t f a r m i n g gen-
erated m o d e s t i n c o m e s and was e s p e c i a l l y significant

in marginal areas (away from the plains) where
large-scale farming required high subsidies (Elek
1980; Enyedi 1990). As Hungary's New Economic
Mechanism allowed unprecedented autonomy, the
primary sector attracted investment, maintained a
good food supply and so ensured political stability
(Swain 1992a). The silent revolution was effective in
producing more food, boosting rural incomes and
promoting embourgeoisement "of great masses of
people" (Kovach 1993, p. 175). Importance attached
to marketing (Benet 1988; 1990) and agricultural
exports to Comecon countries were buoyant (Jaehne
1980). But the investment costs led to high market
prices which many could not afford. And because the
farms were over-staffed and insufficiently committed
to innovation and efficiency they made little profit.
Elsewhere, M. L. Wyzan (1990) relates the success
in Bulgarian agriculture to the encouragement of
individual peasant farmers under the Bulgaria's
economic reforms of 1973 which allowed peasants to
own unlimited numbers of animals and required the
AICs to provide pasture and vetinerary assistance
under a contracting system established in 1977.
Meanwhile in Poland General Jaruzelski wanted
improved food deliveries to help normalisation and
the peasants increased output (Korbonski 1990).
Intensive enterprises on the edge of cities became
very prominent, such as the production of flowers in
the Warsaw area (Morgan 1985) and productivity
gains were achieved elsewhere (Morgan 1989; 1990).
But although the Polish reforms were significant
(Cook 1984; Galeski 1982), there was no interest
in structural change to boost efficiency in private
farming (Tomczak 1988). Peasant farming was
deemed acceptable in a transitional situation, so the
industry remained weak and a generation of Polish
youth left the land. Ideology had a destructive influ-
ence in terms of feeding the population: it was "not
adjusted to our present-day reality and problems:
(Tomczak 1990, p. 288).
In Former Yugoslavia farms remained small, with
curbs against amalgamation, but people were keen to
retain land for reasons for sentiment and security
(Halpern 1967; Stipetic 1982). Tax concessions and
subsidies were advocated to retain mountain farms
(Meze 1984) and in recent years Croatian farms have
decreased more slowly than production (Stambuk
199 I). Feminisation is more pronounced (First-Dilic
1978) and some land has fallen into disuse, as on the
Adriatic coast where terraced fields have reverted to
juniper scrub (Thomas 1978). By contrast Romania's
private peasant farmers were tightly controlled during
the 1980s by the reimposition of production plans
(quotas) and the setting of maximum prices which
often made it unattractive to sell additional produce
on the free markets. Agroindustrial Councils for State
and Cooperative Farms were integrated with the work
of land survey institutes concerned with irrigation
and fertiliser use; also with a rural planning system
141
that designated the council seats as new towns and
envisaged the destruction of outlying villages that
were considered to have no place in the new order.
The reforms in agriculture solved immediate
problems but arguably contributed to the upsurge of
more radical change that overthrew the communist
system at the end of the 1980s. J. Szmatka (1993, pp.
4-5) refers to the notion of a threshold situation when
the system is poised to transform itself. To operate
smoothly the system must be "finished" but in such
a state it cannot easily change without the risk of dis-
solution. The inefficient state-socialist economy
could not fulfil rising expectations and so agriculture
played a significant role in bringing about the tran-
sition to a market economy (Elek 1991) because the
resumption of "bourgeoisification" among farmers,
even on a small scale, became a special form of
% silent revolution from below" (referred to by
both Gorlach 1993, p. 163 and Manchin and Szelenyi
1985, p. 266). Of course there were misgivings at the
time the reforms were introduced and, despite the
disappearance of the old Stalinist prejudice against
private-plot farming, ambivalence persisted. While
the urban population was pleased with the improved
food supply there was a supposition that small-
holdings were becoming "good mines" when the
high prices paid on urban markets appeared to be
financing new houses and consumer goods for the
villagers. Education was needed to legitimise the
materialist ambitions of the rural dwellers and
encourage the latter to direct their affluence along
socially acceptable channels. Higher taxes on the
peasants, like those imposed in 1974, could easily
sap initiative and result in a reduced output of fruit,
vegetables and meat. As it was, the reforms boosted
individual activity and initiative. People worked for
their own benefit and ultimately for the benefit of a
new system (Ziolkowski 1993).
Reorganisation of agriculture under the transition
The situation has become highly complex, with sub-
stantial variations in the thrust of agrarian legislation
among the 13 countries of the region, including
Germany (Braverman et al. 1993; Swinnen 1994).
Economic efficiency goals pointed to retention of
cooperatives with only limited opting-out; coupled
with indirect restitution as far as possible. On the
other hand, advocates of "natural justice" called for
full and direct restitution and the demise of the coop-
eratives; although in practice a compromise has
provided for partial restitution (combining the direct
and indirect options) which allows the cooperatives
to continue on a reduced scale where the member-
ship so desires. In Former Czechoslovakia (FCS)
where peasants retained ownership within the coop-
erative framework, private farms can now be set up
(Hudecova and Lostak 1992). At the same time, in
 142
Hungary, where the cooperative members did not
have ownership rights, the pressure of the Inde-
pendent Smallholders Party on the Antall govern-
ment ensured favourable restitution terms through
vouchers which could be used at land auctions
(Kovacs 1993; Swain 1993).
There are variations in the maximum size of
holding that can be acquired. Even 'kulak' farms
(sometimes small estates of some 300 ha) can be
regained under restitution in FCS whereas in
Romania the ten hectare limit, which rules out the
return of former landowners, ensures the support of
the mass of the rural population for the Party for
Social Democracy government against an opposition
that would allow restitution on a more generous scale
(Kideckel 1992). And while the system in Romania
has been tilted in favour of small claims, including
subsistence plots for country dwellers who have
no historic claim (but stand to lose by the demise
of cooperatives on which they were formerly
employed), the Hungarian system is less considerate
to such people. There are again differences in
practice in dealing with the state farms. In Romania
the state farms have remained intact whereas in
Poland land is being leased to private farmers. Yet
Poland has ignored restitution claims in respect of
legalised expropriation when peasants were intimi-
dated into selling land to the state at symbolic prices;
whereas Hungarian legislation seeks to address this
problem.
There are political vested interests in both coop-
erative and private farming. Yet while many deplore
the demise of cooperatives, there is a clear trend
towards private farming. Progress is slow because,
as in Bulgaria, farmers are unprepared for private
business (Buckwell et al. 1994; Dobreva 1994). Yet
there are no overwhelming economic advantages in
favour of really large holdings (Kovach 1994a). In
Czechia it has been shown that even where cooper-
atives remain there is much leasing of land and build-
ings to businesses which are now run separately
(often by people previously prominent in the co-oper-
ative organisation). And there is an effective choice
between farming companies running estates and
viable family farms which can employ people full-
time and justify ownership of machinery. Farms over
100 ha (some comprising small estates recovered
through restitution in FCS) are particularly rational
for the use machines, but 30-70 ha farms can also
be viable, specialising in grain and sunflowers. 'It
seems reasonable to expect the emergence of private
farms of 50-100 hectares in Romania, Bulgaria and
Poland' (Cochrane 1994, p. 335). Even mixed "nos-
talgia farming" on 15-30 ha restitution holdings is
satisfactory in the long term although it may suit
middle-aged people with income from other jobs and
access to basic machines. Holdings of ten hectares
can be rewarding where machinery can be acquired
cheaply (second-hand from Germany with loans
obtained through local contacts) and where crops
such as hops can be grown. Strategies seem to vary
with age but all peasant households are trying to
make rational decisions.
But the majority of private farms are even smaller.
Of the 52,003 private farms in Czechia in 1993, 53.6
percent were smaller than 1.0 ha and 28.5 percent
were between one and ten hectares; while 9.8 percent
were between 10 and 30; with 8.1 percent larger than
30 ha. Old people and the unemployed are often
active on 1-5 ha holdings. They produce their own
food, although the small plots are not suitable for
livestock. At the same time, increasing areas are
being taken over by people who want to use rural
land for non-agricultural purposes as part of a sub-
urbanising trend: including gardening and hobby
farming by the owners of weekend cottages and by
younger people from the towns who seek an escape
from unemployment in small-scale farming. Pavlin
(1991) describes this activity as "post deagrarization"
(rather than "reagrarization") because it lies outside
conventional farming. But hobby farming should not
be despised: not only can there be a useful combi-
nation of agriculture and other activities, but farming
may recruit talented young people from the towns
who may be able to take over holdings owned by
their fathers or even by their grandfathers.
Thus far the changes seem to have heightened
tensions within rural society where there is much dis-
illusionment over the progress of the transition. The
symbiosis between private and cooperative farms
achieved under communism is being replaced by
competition. Labour intensive activities left to coop-
erative members and workers are now becoming
independent. Conflict between private and coopera-
tive farmers may be heightened by allegations of theft
from the cooperative fields, but even the remaining
cooperative farmers seem to have lost some of the
solidarity and mutual support previously evident. The
increase in private farming brings the prospect of
increasing amounts of land being farmed by people
who have no links with the village concerned.
Incomers will have little idea about the village as a
community and may unwittingly upset the local
lifestyle. Tensions may be aggravated by "historical
resentments" (linked with pre-communist land-
holding) which complicate thinking about the most
desirable arrangements for the future. Yet, rather than
community stress, family farms need a supportive
environment of institutions concerned with informa-
tion and training as well as cooperation and mar-
keting (Cochrane 1991). But governments have little
money to finance structural change, although there
have been some limited programmes to help farmers
acquire machinery. In any case it has been argued that
state intervention should be resisted, despite the
temptations arising from the recent history of central
planning and the elaborate arrangements for agri-
culture in the European Union (Karp and Stefanou
 143

1994). But at least a s y s t e m o f p l a n n i n g c o n t r o l m u s t 1991). F e r t i l i s e r use in P o l a n d has d e c r e a s e d f r o m

be p r o v i d e d and l o c a l o r g a n i s a t i o n s s h o u l d e v a l u a t e
their r e s o u r c e s , e s t a b l i s h p r i o r i t i e s and try and attract
capital investment.
Agricultural production and food processing
S t r u c t u r a l c h a n g e has b e e n v e r y d i s r u p t i v e for agri-
cultural p r o d u c t i o n , l e a v i n g s p e c i a l i s e d s t o c k - r e a r i n g
units d i v o r c e d for their f o d d e r s u p p l i e s a n d u n d e r -
mining irrigation schemes which formerly depended
on j o i n t m a n a g e m e n t b y c o o p e r a t i v e and state f a r m s
(Vriger 1993). A r e d u c t i o n in the l e v e l o f inten-
s i f i c a t i o n is e v i d e n t t h r o u g h o u t E a s t e r n E u r o p e
w i t h l o w e r i n p u t s o f fertiliser, i r r i g a t i o n w a t e r and
m a c h i n e r y . Y i e l d s in cereals, p o t a t o e s and s u g a r b e e t
h a v e f a l l e n d u r i n g the y e a r s 1 9 9 1 - 3 after the gains
o f the c o m m u n i s t p e r i o d (Table 5); p u t t i n g into per-
s p e c t i v e the c o m p a r a t i v e l y m o d e s t shortfalls e n c o u n -
t e r e d a g a i n s t F i v e - Y e a r - P l a n targets ( o f t e n l i n k e d
w i t h an a l l e g e d n e g l e c t o f f a r m i n g b y c e n t r a l
p l a n n e r s ) . L i v e s t o c k b r e e d i n g has also s u f f e r e d a
s e t b a c k , for in H u n g a r y , for e x a m p l e , a r e d u c t i o n in
c o n s u m p t i o n o f m e a t and d a i r y p r o d u c t s o f 3 0 - 4 0
p e r c e n t has b e e n r e p o r t e d , w i t h b r e a d b e c o m i n g a
m o r e p r o m i n e n t e l e m e n t in the diet. T h e n u m b e r o f
p i g s has h a l v e d d u e to r e d u c e d h o m e c o n s u m p t i o n
and f a l l i n g e x p o r t s , w h i l e the cattle p o p u l a t i o n has
d e c l i n e d f r o m 1.25 to 0.78 m i l l i o n (and m a y fall
further to 0.60 m i l l i o n ) . F a r m i n c o m e s can only be
m a i n t a i n e d by r e d u c e d i n v e s t m e n t , inputs (fertiliser,
i r r i g a t i o n w a t e r and m a c h i n e r y ) and l a b o u r (Juhasz
200 to 70 k g / h a and there has b e e n a t e n - f o l d
d e c r e a s e in a g r o c h e m i c a l s . T h e r e is " a t e n d e n c y for
the e x t e n s i f i c a t i o n o f f a r m i n g o p e r a t i o n s in the f a c e
o f d e c l i n i n g p r o f i t a b i l i t y and m a r k e t u n c e r t a i n t y "
( M o r g a n 1992, p. 147) and t h e r e has b e e n o n l y a
s m a l l i n c r e a s e in the a v e r a g e size o f h o l d i n g s
( P i l i c h o w s k i 1993). M a r g i n a l areas h a v e b e e n m o s t
s e r i o u s l y affected: the r e d u c t i o n in the level o f inten-
s i f i c a t i o n is p a r t i c u l a r l y e v i d e n t in f r o n t i e r r e g i o n s
like W e s t B o h e m i a . P o o r soils in n o r t h w e s t P o l a n d
also i m p o s e c o n s t r a i n t s in the p r e s e n t e c o n o m i c
climate.
O t h e r f a c t o r s h a v e c o m p l i c a t e d the situation.
D e m a n d has b e e n r e d u c e d in part b y the w i t h d r a w a l
o f the R e d A r m y w h i c h g e n e r a t e d a s u b s t a n t i a l
m a r k e t in F C S , F o r m e r G D R and P o l a n d . A n d the
t e x t i l e i n d u s t r y , w h i c h u s e d to b e a v e r y h e a v y
c o n s u m e r o f a g r i c u l t u r a l r a w m a t e r i a l s , has b e e n
slimmed down. Restitution and other forms of
r e s t r u c t u r i n g h a v e l e d to s h o r t - t e r m d i s l o c a t i o n s .
P o o r p e r f o r m a n c e in R o m a n i a has b e e n attributed to
the e x h a u s t i o n o f the p e a s a n t r y after h a l f a century
of central planning, which included coercive pro-
d u c t i o n p l a n s for the s u r v i v i n g i n d i v i d u a l p e a s a n t
farmers. T h e r e h a v e b e e n l a b o u r shortages r e p o r t e d
in C z e c h i a , l e a d i n g to the r e c r u i t m e n t o f s e a s o n a l
w o r k e r s f r o m Ukraine. T h e r e is also the p r o b l e m o f
u n r e l i a b l e m a c h i n e r y w i t h f r e q u e n t b r e a k d o w n s and
h e a v y fuel c o n s u m p t i o n . Cuts in stocking levels h a v e
arisen t h r o u g h the a b a n d o n m e n t o f b u i l d i n g s i n c o n -
v e n i e n t l y s i t u a t e d in r e l a t i o n to the r e s t r u c t u r e d
f a r m h o l d i n g s . A n d f i n a l l y n a t u r a l hazards, such as

Table 5. Cereal production and trade 1980-1993

Country Domestic production million tonnes and net trade (+ indicates net import; ( - denotes net export) in

1980 1985 1990 1991 1992 1993

Albania 0.87 - 0.01 1.05 0.00 1.04 + 0.15 0.49 + 0.24 0.42 + 0.54 0.61 + 0.65
Bosnia-H ° - - - - 1.36e b 1.26e b
Bulgaria 8.68 + 0.04 7.13 + 0.45 7.89 + 0.27 8.97 + 0.51 6.67 - 0.54 5.75 + 0.14
Croatia a - - - - 2.36 - 0.04 2.73 - 0.04
FCS 10.74 + 2.05 11.77 + 0.39 12.49 + 0.05 11.94 - 0.17 10.20 - 0.12 -
Czechia . . . . . 6.47 + 0.27
GDR 9.64+4.01 11.64+ 1.72 12.33+ 1.27 - - -
Germany - - - 39.27 - 3.01 34.76 - 6.81 36.22 - 4.12
Hungary 13.61 + 0.06 14.78 - 2.14 12.51 - 0.85 15.80 - 1.25 9.98 - 4.19 9.04 - 2.06
Macedonia" - - - - 0.62 + 0.12 0.50 + 0.10
Poland 18.34 + 7.77 23.79 + 2.32 28.01 + 1.48 27.81 - 0.35 19.96 - 0.44 23.42 + 2.89
Romania 20.23 + 1.09 23.05 - 0.12 17.19 + 1.14 19.31 + 1.69 12.29 + 1.69 15.49 + 2.64
Slovakia . . . . . 3.20 b
Slovenia a - - - - 0.43 + 0.54 0.40 b
Yugoslavia 15.27 + 1.11 15.84 - 0.77 13.66 + 0.79 19.18 - 0.85 - -
Yugoslavia ° - - - - 6.85 b 7.66 b

a Countries of Former Yugoslavia whose figures have been added together to produce the totals for Former Yugoslavia
for 1992 and 1993. Yugoslavia ° refers to Serbia and Montenegro.
b Not available.
Source: FAO Yearbooks.
144

drought in Hungary and Romania in 1993, have
been compounded by the breakdown of irrigation
systems.
The infrastructure is often poor (Surd 1994), while
abandonment of the cooperatives has undermined
an established marketing system, albeit one which
involved bulk deliveries to government warehouses
(Stebelsky 1995). Usually the state has retained some
procurement role with some produce still being
offered at subsidised prices (Kwiecinski and Quaisser
1993), but there is increasing private involvement,
mainly by small operators who cannot transfer sur-
pluses in such a way as to offer farmers reliable
outlets. Thus the open market is not yet operating
efficiently in Poland although it was technically freed
at the beginning of 1990. The bulk of the marketing
is still handled by the cooperatives which are now
free to determine their own prices. But they have
been disappointed by falling consumer demand and
have lost the support of some farmers who find that
the cooperatives cannot always take their produce
through the need to pass on their marketing costs.
There are few experienced market managers and
consequently prices vary quite sharply through both
space and time (Morgan 1992). An increasing
number of private dealers offer a localised service
but have not yet got the expertise to operate through
wider networks so that surpluses and deficits can be
balanced out. They may prefer a small turnover with
prices as high as possible; which may result in
farmers being left with produce that is nevertheless
in short supply in areas just beyond the immediate
locality. Clearly they must increase their scale of
activity so as to interest the larger farmers, including
those catering for export markets.
Hence it is usual in Romania for state farms to
maintain production for the market but it is common
to find peasants preferring maize and potatoes at the
expense of sugar beet and fruit growing. Priority for
self-sufficiency in maize (for human food and animal
fodder) ensures ample provision of food for peasant
households (with surpluses which pass to family
members through private deals) but reduces supplies
to the open market. In Slovenia there is some con-
tinuing specialisation in fruit growing, olive growing
and viticulture, but there is also "deagrarization"
reported from the coastal zone where the intensively-
cultivated surfaces coexist with physically similar
ground when farmers are working along traditional
lines with low levels of intensification and consid-
erable neglect in the case holdings worked by older
people (Pavlin 1991, pp. 116-117). As in Croatia,
cattle rearing has declined and much of the poor
steeply-sloping meadow land has been taken out of
use. Yet there are some signs of a revival, for agri-
culture was prominent in Albania's recovery in 1993
(Pata and Osmani 1994). There is less emphasis now
on cotton, soyabeans and tobacco but more fodder
is being produced and food markets are well stocked
with dairy products, meat, fruit and vegetables which
earn profits to rejuvenate private agriculture. There
is some import of food from Greece and Macedonia,
but Albania should once again become a net exporter
(Zanga 1994). However there is still a long way to
go to restore supplies of fertilisers and pesticides and
renovate irrigation projects that were destroyed or
neglected during the transition.
A favourable trade balance in agricultural com-
modities in highly desirable but only Hungary has
remained a net exporter while Albania and Bulgaria
have become net importers; Poland and Romania
increasingly so (Table 6). The Hungarian government
is keen to maintain the ability to export (seen as
crucial for the balance of payments) and has some

Table 6. Net trade in agricultural products (including fish)

Trade balance (billion US dollars) in

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993

Albania -1.01 -0.77 -1.33 -0.70 +0.99 +0.01 +1.20 +2.42 +2.90
Bulgaria -4.73 -5.87 -6.27 -6.27 -6.66 -11.77 -4.56 +4.55 +2.92
Croatia . . . . . . . +0.38
FCS +11.71 +12.50 +12.88 +14.84 +9.87 +6.17 +2.21 +2.48 -
Czechia . . . . . . . . +0.84
Germany +13.62 +13.64 +13.24 +17.63 +17.30 +9.23 - - -
Hungary -11.16 -9.55 -10.11 -12.96 -14.51 -15.86 -19.61 -19.60 -11.48
Macedonia . . . . . . . . 0.92 +0.12
Poland +4.21 +2.42 +2.00 +5.43 +0.61 -6.41 -5.03 +0.88 +9.67
Romania +2.10 +0.56 -3.25 -2.05 +0.74 +12.79 -6.88 +8.14 +6.08
Slovenia . . . . . . . . +3.19
FYR +0.77 +3.45 +0.79 +1.64 +3.04 +15.41 +4.80 - -

+ denotes net import; - net export.

" Not available.
Source: FAO Yearbooks.

money for export subsidies. But over the long term
Hungary believes that competitiveness should not be
stimulated by subsidies but should arise by exploiting
comparative advantages (good arable land and skilled
farmers). Such a notion would radically alter the sit-
uation arising under communism when there were
ample subsidies for the less-favourable areas and low
prices. Farms on the richer lands were not necessarily
the most prosperous, given the largely undifferenti-
ated pattern of state and collective farms. However,
to maximise comparative advantages there may have
to be help to accelerate structural change and improve
marketing. Meanwhile, in Poland "soft loans" are
available for traditional priority sectors: dairying,
livestock and wool. These are considered necessary
to prevent excessive food imports (forecast at
USD400 million net for 1995). At the same time the
growth of food exports has been stimulated by
income tax exemptions for export-oriented invest-
ments. However, Czechia considers it is uneconomic
to try and produce more for export because of the
need to compete with subsidised exports from other
countries including the EU.
A key to the international trading position is the
quality of the food processing industry. Eastern
Europe has substantial capacity, but it is in great need
of modernisation. There is a need to catch up with
the West by offering a wider range of good-quality
products which can compete against foreign imports
and also penetrate Western markets. In Hungary,
where this process is well under way, some large
enterprises are getting support from banks that seem
happier to lend to food processors than farmers
because ownership and security are generally clearer.
But state intervention can help eliminate excess
capacity on a coordinated basis. And the trans-
formation is also being driven by foreign capital
introducing new technology in dairying, sugar
refining, meat processing, drinks and confectionary.
Foreign involvement is widespread in Poland, with
US interest in potatoes and perceived opportunities
in commodities as disparate as apples and oilseeds.
Danone of France is manufacturing dairy products in
Bulgaria while Danish firms are interested in the
country's meat processing, a Dutch firm is producing
baby foods and Australians are investing in turkey
farms. Unilever has purchased the Hungary's Baja
deepfreezing plant: it will improve technology and
develop the facilities to sell domestic produce.
Meanwhile, some small new processing units may
well appear through local initiatives, for Polish
farmers are setting up wholesale/retail trading busi-
nesses and food processing units. One case concerns
a meat processing business near Krakow: an abattoir
for pigs had been build and the farm holding
extended for self-sufficiency in fodder (Morgan 1992,
p. 146). Additional pigs are brought from neigh-
bouring farms in order to operate the abattoir and
processing plant at capacity.
145
The rural future
Since 1989, most rural areas have experienced some
degree of impoverishment which has undermined the
relatively comfortable lifestyles of even the village-
based elites. This is the result of deactivation, linked
with inflation and unemployment, which has arisen
in both agriculture and industry. Cooperatives have
shed labour and closed down many non-agricultural
activities and, at a time when farmers are receiving
less in real terms for their production, the growth
of unemployment among worker-peasants also
depresses family incomes. There is high unemploy-
ment among school leavers in Poland, arising out of
bankruptcy and privatisation of the less efficient
state-owned enterprises which used to benefit from
substantial indirect subsidies. Unemployment under-
mines the work ethic and aggravates problems of
crime, alcoholism and drug addiction although, to
some extent, the problem may be "hidden" on small
private farms which seek - albeit inefficiently - to
absorb the additional labour. Fear of pauperism leads
to higher involvement in small-scale farming to
ensure self-sufficiency although, at the same time, it
leads to higher consumption of animal fats which are
not good for public health. And people may also be
forced into activities on the margins of legality, such
as smuggling cigarettes across Poland's borders with
Belarus and Lithuania.
Hence the need for promotion of the secondary
and tertiary sectors in rural areas (Klodzinski 1992).
Swain (1994, p. 9) suggests that run-down or aban-
doned machine-tractor stations could be transformed
into "embryonic business parks". Some new busi-
nesses have emerged in this way but the rate of
progress is very slow. In Poland dealing with rural
unemployment of up to 2.0 million falls to the Agency
for Modernising and Restructuring Agriculture set up
in 1993 which works on domestic funding and
foreign aid. It is interested in rural infrastructure
(water, sewage and telephones) and food processing
projects. Eastern Europe may well identify increas-
ingly with the Swiss-Bavarian model of pluriactivity
which links small farms with rural industry and other
ancillary sources of income. South Moravia shows
this tendency for a dispersal of employment in
manufacturing; reinforced by workshops on the
state and cooperative farms. Population was stable
during the 1980s even in areas that were not the
most favourable for agriculture. So farm diversifica-
tion would appear to be an important objective in
the medium term (Harcea 1993; Kovach 1994b),
especially in areas where consolidation into viable
holdings would create massive social dislocations.
It has been suggested that consolidation of farms in
Poland may be a very gradual with the prospect of
some two million farms in the year 2000, with an
average area of 6.5 hectares (Staziak 1989, p. 112).
This will require a wide range of supporting activi-
146
ties such as linkage between organic farming, food
processing and agrotourism which offer possibilities
throughout the Carpathians (Turnock 1993).
The farming future may well require permanently
reduced production levels, for the rural areas of
Eastern Europe cannot be divorced from trends
occurring in the continent as a whole (Black et al.
1995). Surpluses in the EU threaten domestic markets
and although "Phare" funding for Eastern Europe is
still linked with classic production philosophy of the
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) this may not be
realistic over the longer term. Each country will cer-
tainly want the highest quotas it can get when EU
membership is negotiated and so there is a political
incentive to maximise agricultural production in the
short term. However, this approach could be irrele-
vant if the CAP changes to reflect current thinking
within the European Commission in favour of lower
levels of support for agriculture in future. This could
be beneficial to Eastern Europe in reducing the flow
of food (at subsidised prices) into the region at the
expense of domestic producers (Repassy and Symes
1993).
Environmental concerns must also be addressed
and although the result could be more jobs in tourism
in the long term there is again a conflict with the
development ethos of those who want to maximise
the agricultural potential. Ecological changes are
occurring through privatisation (Bettram 1992).
Whereas cooperatives tended to reduce pressure on
marginal land, leading to some conversion to forestry,
restitution is providing an incentive for some of the
private farmers in these areas to make fuller use of
the resources. Scrub is being cleared but erosion may
easily be increased if private farmers continue to
overstock steeply-sloping land (Muica and Muica
1995). So it is necessary to increase awareness of
the limitations of fragile ecosystems like Vrancea in
Romania which is prone to landsliding (Muica and
Turnock 1994). The forestry programme on eroded
land should be maintained in such areas and more
small hydropower projects should be implemented to
control flood hazards. In areas like the Danube Delta
the need for protection may restrict farming or even
close down operations altogether (Gastescu 1993).
Protective measures are also being taken in the
glaciated Tatra Mountains National Park (1954)
where tourism followed the railways into rural areas
previously concerned with pastoralism and mining.
To cope with the erosion some routes may be closed
and new mixed woodlands should be established
(Wiska and Hindson 1991). There is also scope for
conservation in rural settlements where the buildings
and cultural manifestations offer resources for com-
munity-based ecotourism. M. Pozes (1991) refers to
the neglect of traditional buildings in the village
cores in parts of Slovenia where between a third and
a half of the housing is derelict: the result of
upheavals at the end of the Second World War and
also the perceived inconvenience of the older prop-
erties. It is suggested that remaining agricultural
activities should be moved out and that property
should be refurbished; partly for permanent residents
(where properties can be combined) and partly for
second homes. There needs to be some financial
assistance for this.
So the Eastern European countryside seems
destined for further change with a more mobile
population bringing many new families into what
were previously relatively closed communities.
Rising incomes should increase demand for food and
make agriculture more profitable and a more buoyant
land market will reveal the optimum farm size
(Cochrane 1994, p. 335). N. Swain (1992b, p. 9)
thinks that if economic prospects pick up in Eastern
Europe and investment in agriculture becomes prof-
itable than people previously discouraged by the high
cost of loans and farm inputs "will take the plunge,
either singly or on a cooperative basis; while those
who prefer security will find jobs outside agricul-
ture or in agriculture-related services". Hungary
could do well in this context with some existing
economies of scale and a limited entrepreneurial
tradition. However, under the worst case scenario,
"private farmers will be created by poverty, by the
bankruptcy of the collective farms, by unemployment
in industry and by the withdrawal of unemployment
benefits from those who have their land to fall back
on" (ibid p. 10). But this will be subsistence agri-
culture with farmers taking on the characteristics of
the traditional peasantry and starting a drift back to
rural overpopulation. This might be particularly trau-
matic in FCS and Hungary where people working in
agriculture have become used to steady employment
and relatively good living standards, but it would be
close to recent experience in Poland and many parts
of the Balkans.
T h e essays
The essays in this collection explore these issues in
depth. The dilemmas of land reform in Slovenia
are revealed by I. Vriger while further papers by
O. Wilson and F. Bordanc reveal the contrasting
experiences in the Former GDR and in Romania in
transforming the former cooperatives. Cooperation
remains important in both cases but some viable
family farms are emerging in the former case in
contrast to the minifundia and pluriactivity in the hill
and mountain regions of the latter. Production has
fallen because of reduced demand and changes in
international trade but R. Mueller and J. Mueller
show that the Bulgarian food industry is lagging in
some critical performance areas. I. Ianos sees some
positive trends in the reorganization of the villages
in Romania but S. Varga explores the crisis in
northern Hungary that has arisen from reduced

e m p l o y m e n t in a g r i c u l t u r e at a time w h e n m a n y
f o r m e r c o m m u t e r s have lost their j o b s in industry.
Also, D.R. Hall d i s c u s s e s the m i g r a t i o n c u r r e n t s
generated by the transition in A l b a n i a and the con-
t i n u i n g u n c e r t a i n t y in agriculture. D i v e r s i f i c a t i o n is
needed and while W. K u r e k explores a g r o t o u r i s m in
Southern Poland, N. M u i c a e x a m i n e s traditional uses
for fruit in R o m a n i a and in particular the distilling
of p l u m brandy. E n v i r o n m e n t a l issues are discussed
by C. M u i c a and I. Z a v o i a n u who look at the eco-
logical changes to the l a n d s c a p e arising out of pri-
v a t i s a t i o n and r e c o m m e n d an i m p r o v e d flow of
i n f o r m a t i o n in critical areas. Also by V. D r g o n a who
approaches the future for rural S l o v a k i a through sus-
t a i n a b l e a g r i c u l t u r e and G. P l o a i e who a d v o c a t e s
further protected areas in the R o m a n i a n Carpathians.
References
Allcock, J. B.: The socialist transformation of the village:
Yugoslav agricultural policy since 1945. In: Francisco, R. A.
et al. (eds.), Agricultural policies in the USSR and Eastern
Europe, pp. 199-216. Westview, Boulder, CO 1980.
Bajaja, V.: Concentration and specialization in Czechoslovak
and East German farming. In: Francisco, R. A. et al. (eds.),
Agricultural policies in the USSR and Eastern Europe, pp.
263-294. Westview, Boulder, CO 1980.
Bell, D. P.: Peasants in Socialist Transition: Life in a Collectivised
Hungarian Village. University of California Press, Berkeley
1984.
Bencze, I.: Fruit and vegetable canning in the Great Hungarian
Plant. In: Sarfalvi, B. (ed.), The Changing Face of the Great
Hungarian Plain, pp. 89-105. Hungarian Academy of
Sciences, Budapest 1971.
Benet, I.: Hungarian agriculture in the 1970s and 1980s. In: Brada,
J. C. and Wadekin, K.-E. (eds.), Socialist Agriculture in
Transition, pp. 183-195. Westview, Boulder, CO 1988.
Benet, I.: Hungarian agricultural policy in an international per-
spective. In: Wadekin, K.-E. (ed.), Communist Agriculture:
Farming in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, pp. 307-320.
Routledge, London 1990.
Bettram, G.: Nature conservation and agricultural practices in
Slovenia. In: Gilg, A. et al. (eds.), Progress in Rural Planning,
vol. 2, pp. 167-175. Belhaven, London 1992.
Bicik, I.; Stepanek, V.: Post-war changes of the land-use struc-
ture in Bohemia and Moravia: Case study Sudetenland.
GeoJourual 32, 253-259 (1994).
Black, R. et al.: Rural Europe: Identity and Change. Arnold,
London 1995.
Borgstron, G.; Annegers, F.: Eastern Europe: An appraisal of food
and agriculture in the thirties compared with the sixties.
Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 62,
114-125 (1971).
Braverman, A. et al. (eds.): The Agricultural Transition in Central
& Eastern Europe and Former USSR. World Bank,
Washington DC 1993.
Buckwell, A. et al. (eds.): The Transformation of Agriculture: A
Case Study of Bulgaria. Westview Press, Boulder, CO 1994.
Cochrane, N. J.: The New Economic Mechanism in Bulgarian
Agriculture. US Department of Agriculture, Economic
Research Service, Washington DC 1986.
Cochrane, N. J.: Prospects for Eastern Europe's private agricul-
ture in the nineties. In: Lampe, J. R. (ed.), Private Agriculture
in Eastern Europe: Prospects for the 1990s and Lessons of
the Pre-war Cooperatives and Land Reforms, pp. 81-102.
147
Woodrow Wilson International Center, Eastern European
Studies Program, Washington DC 1991.
Cochrane, N. J.: Farm restructuring in Central & Eastern Europe.
Soviet & Post-Soviet Review 21, 319-335 (1994).
Cook, E.: Agricultural reform in Poland: Background prospects.
Soviet Studies 36, 406-426 (1984).
Dando, W. A.: Wheat in Romania. Annals Association of
American Geographers 64, 241-257 (1974).
Daroczi, E.: The protection of agricultural land on the urban
fringes: The case of Veszprem city. In: Compton, P.A., Pecsi,
M. (eds.), Environmental Management: British and Hungarian
Case Studies, pp. 51-74. Hungarian Academy of Sciences,
Budapest 1984.
Dawson, A. H.: An assessment of Poland's agricultural resources.
Geography 67, 297-309 (1982).
Deutsch, R.: The Food Revolution in the Soviet Union & Eastern
Europe. Westview, Boulder, CO 1986.
Dobreva, S.: The family farm in Bulgaria: Tradition and change.
Sociologia Ruralis 24, 340-353 (1994).
Elek, P. S.: The Hungarian experiment in search of profitability.
In: Francisco, R. A. et al. (eds.), Agricultural Policies in the
USSR and Eastern Europe, pp. 165-184. Westview, Boulder,
CO 1980.
Elek, S.: Part-time farming in Hungary: An instrument of tacit
decollectivisation? Sociologia Ruralis 31, 82-88 (1991).
Ellman, M.: Agricultural productivity under socialism. In: Wilber,
C. K., Jameson, K. P. (eds.), Socialist Models of Development,
pp. 979-989. Pergamon, Oxford 1982.
Entwistle, E. W.: Agrarian-industrial complexes in Bulgaria.
Geography 57, 246-248 (1972).
Enyedi, G.: Private economic activity and regional development
in Hungary. Geographic Polonica 56, 53-62 (1990).
First-Dilic, R.: The production roles of farm women in
Yugoslavia. Sociologia Ruralis 18, 125-139 (1978).
Freeman, V. D.: Agricultural reorganization in the GDR 1965-
1980. Geo,lournal 7, 59-66 (1983).
Galeski, B.: The solving of the agrarian question in Poland,
Sociologia Ruralis 22, 149-166 (1982).
Gastescu, P., The Danube Delta: Geographical characteristics and
ecological recovery. GeoJournal 29, 57-67 (1993).
Gorlach, K.: The embourgeoisement trajectory: How it works in
Polish society. In: Szmatka, J. et al. (eds.), Eastern European
Societies on the Threshold of Change, pp. 161-174, Edwin
Mellen Press, Lampeter 1993.
Halpern, J.: Farming as a way of life: Yugoslav peasant attitudes.
In: Karcz, J. F. (ed.), Soviet & East European Agriculture,
pp. 356-384. University of California Press, Berkeley 1967.
Harcea, I.: Small scale farming informal cooperation and the
household economy in Hungary. Sociologia Ruralis 33,
105-108 (1993).
Held, J. (ed.): The Modernization of Agriculture: Rural
Transformation in Hungary. Westview, Boulder, CO 1980.
Hudecova, H.; Lostak, M.: Privatisation of Czechoslovak agri-
culture: Results of a 1990 sociological survey. Sociologia
Rnralis 32, 287-304 (1992).
Iacob, G.: The rational use of sandy soils in Romania. Revue
Roumaine: Geographie 12, 171-174 (1968).
Jackson, W. A. D.: Agrarian Policies and Problems in Communist
and Non-Communist Countries. University of Washington
Press, Seattle 1971.
.laehne, G.: Problems of agricultural integration within the CMEA.
In: Francisco, R. A. et al. (eds.), Agricultural Policies in the
USSR and Eastern Europe, pp. 221-235. Westview, Boulder,
CO 1980.
Juhasz, J.: Hungarian agriculture: Present situation and future
prospects. European Review of Agricultural Economics 18,
399-416 (1991).
Karp, L.; Stefanou, S.: Domestic and trade policy for Central
& East European agriculture. Economics of Transition 2,
345-371 (1994).
148
Kideckel, D. A.: Peasants and authority in the new Romania. In:
Nelson, D. N. (ed.), Romania After Tyranny, pp. 67-81.
Westview, Boulder, CO 1992.
Korbonski, A.: The Politics of Socialist Agriculture in Poland
1945-1960. Columbia University Press, New York 1965.
Korbonski, A.: Peasant agriculture in socialist Poland since 1956:
An alternative to collectivisation. In: Karcz, J. F. (ed.), Soviet
& East European agriculture, pp. 417-436. University of
California Press, Berkeley 1967.
Korbonski, A.: Soldiers and peasants: Polish agriculture after
martial law. In: Wadekin, K.-E. (ed.), Communist Agriculture:
Farming in the Soviet Union & Eastern Europe, pp. 263-278.
Routledge, London 1990.
Kostrowicki, J.: Transformation trends in the spatial organiza-
tion of agriculture in Poland 1960-1990. Geographica
Polonica 32, 27-41 (1975).
Kovach, I.: Part-time small-scale farming as a major form of
economic pluractivity in Hungary. In: Szmatka, J. et al. (eds.),
Eastern European Societies on the Threshold of Change, pp.
175-191. Edwin Mellen Press, Lampeter 1993.
Kovach, I.: Privatization and family farms in Central & Eastern
Europe. Sociologia Ruralis 34, 369-382 (1994a).
Kovach, I.: Part-time small-scale farming or a major form of
economic pluriactivity in Hungary. In: Szmatka, J. et al. (eds.),
East European Societies on the Threshold of Change, pp.
175-191. Edwin Mellen Press, Lampeter 1994b.
Kovacs, K.: The slow transition of Hungarian agriculture.
Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 2, 105-127
(1993).
Kwiecinski, A.; Quaisser, W.: Agricultural prices and subsidies
in the transformation process of the Polish economy.
Economic Systems 17, 125-154 (1993).
Lazarcik, G.: The performance of Czechoslovak agriculture since
World War Two. In: Karcz, J. F. (ed.), Soviet & East European
Agriculture, pp. 385-410. University of California Press,
Berkeley 1967.
Manchin, R.; Szelenyi, I.: Theories of family agricultural pro-
duction in collectivised economies. Sociologia Ruralis 25,
248-268 (1985).
Meze, D.: Mountain farms in Slovenia. Geographic Iugoslavica
5, 47-54 (1984).
Miller, C. E. et al.: Agricultural statistics of the Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe. US Department of Agriculture,
Washington DC 1973.
Morgan, W. B.: Cut flowers in Warsaw. GeoJournal l 1,339-348
(1985).
Morgan, W. B.: Recent government policy and private agricul-
ture in Poland. Resource Management and Optimization 6,
291-305 (1989).
Morgan, W. B.: Some aspects of recent improvements in the pro-
ductivity of private agriculture in Poland. Geographica
Polonica 57, 99-I 10 (1990).
Morgan, W. B.: Economic reform the free market and agricul-
ture in Poland. Geographical Journal 158, 145-156 (1992).
Muica, C.; Muica, N.: Landcover change and its ecological con-
sequences. In: Turnock, D. (ed.), Rural Change in Romania,
pp. 64-66. Leicester University Geography Department,
Leicester 1995.
Muica, N.; Turnock, D.: Living on landslides: The Subcarpathian
districts of Buzau and Vrancea, Leicester University
Geography Department Occasional Paper 29 (1994).
Pata, K.; Osmani, M.: Albanian agriculture: A painful transition
from communism to free market challenges. Sociologia
Ruralis 24, 71-83 (1994).
Pavlin, B.: Contemporary changes in the agricultural use of land
in the border landscape units of the Slovene littoral.
Geografica Slovenica 22, 119 (1991).
Pilichowski, A.: Poland's agrarian structure: A sociological per-
spective Sociologia Ruralis 33, 92-95 (1993).
Pozes, M.: Development of rural settlements in the commune of
Koper. Geographica Slovenica 22, 114pp (1991) (in Slovenian
with an English summary).
Pryor, F. L.: The Red and the Green: The Rise and Fall of
Collectivised Agriculture in Marxist Regimes. Princeton
University Press, Princeton 1992.
Repassy, H.; Symes, D.: Perspectives on agrarian reform in East
Central Europe. Sociologia Ruralis 33, 81-91 (1993).
Schinke, E.: New forms of farm organisation in the GDR as
compared to the USSR and East European states. In: Wadekin,
K.-E. (ed.), Communist Agriculture: Farming in the Soviet
Union & Eastern Europe, pp. 251-262. Routledge, London
1990.
Sinclair, R. P.: Bureaucratic Agriculture: Planned social change
in the GDR. Sociologia Ruralis 19, 211-226 (1979).
Stambuk, M.: Agricultural depopulation in Croatia. Sociologia
Ruralis 31,282-289 (1991).
Staziak, A.: Changes in rural settlement in Poland up to 2000.
Geographia Polonica 56, 109-114 (1989).
Stebelsky, I.: The Food System in the Post-Soviet Era. Westview,
Boulder CO 1995.
Stefanescu, I.: Changes occurring in the agriculture of Dobrogea
during the last hundred years. Revue Roumaine: Geographie
21, 87-101 (1977).
Stipetic, V.: The development of the peasant economy in socialist
Yugoslavia. In: Stojanovic, R. (ed.), The Functioning of the
Yugoslav Economy, pp. 167-200. M. E. Sharpe, New York
1982.
Surd, V.: Critical status of rural Romania: In: Grief, F. (ed.), Die
Zukunft der l~indlichen Infrastruktur in Ostmitteleuropa, pp.
61-67. Schriftenreihe tier Bundesanstalt for Agrarwirtschaft
75, Wien 1994.
Swain, N.: Collective Farms Which Work. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge 1985.
Swain, N.: Hungarian agriculture in the early 1980s: Retrench-
ment followed by reform. Soviet Studies 39, 24-39 (1987).
Swain, N.: Collectivisation in Hungary: Background Notes.
University of Liverpool Centre for Central & Eastern
European Studies, Liverpool 1992a.
Swain, N.: Transitions from collective to family farming in Post-
Socialist Central Europe: Background and strategies for
change. University of Liverpool Centre for Central & East
European Studies, Working Papers Rural Transition Series 5
(1992b).
Swain, B.: Agricultural transformation in Hungary: The context.
University of Liverpool Centre for Central & East European
Studies, Working Papers Rural Transition Series 7 (1993).
Swain, N.: Agricultural development policy in the Czech
Republic: Is one really necessary? University of Liverpool
Centre for Central & East European Studies, Working Papers
Rural Transition Series 34 (1994).
Swinnen, J. F. M. (ed.): Policy and institutional Reform in Central
European Agriculture. Avebury, Aldershot 1994.
Szelenyi, I.: Socialist Entrepreneurs. Embourgeoisement in Rural
Hungary. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison 1988.
Szelenyi, I.; Manchin, R.: Peasants Proletarians Entrepreneurs:
Transformation of Rural Social Structures under State
Socialism. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison 1986.
Szmatka, J. et al: In search of the syndrome of threshold situa-
tion. In: Szmatka J. et al. (eds.), Eastern European Societies
on the Threshold of Change, pp. 1-14. Edwin Mellen Press,
Lampeter 1993.
Szurek, J.-C.: Family farms in Polish agricultural policy
1945-1985. East European Politics & Societies 1, 225-254
(1987).
Thomas, C.: Decay and development in Mediterranean
Yugoslavia. Geography 63, 179-187 (1978).
Tomczak, F.: The development strategy of agriculture in Poland.
In: Brada, J. C., Wadekin, K.-E. (eds.), Socialist Agriculture
in Transition, pp. 159-169. Westview, Boulder, CO 1981.
Tomczak, F.: Farming and socialism in Poland: Towards a new

understanding of the peasant question. In: Wadekin, K.-E.
(ed.), Communist Agriculture: Farming in the Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe, pp. 279-289. Routledge, London 1990.
Trend, H.: Agriculture in Eastern Europe: A Comparative Study.
Radio Free Europe, Munich 1974.
Turnock, D.: Eastern Europe: An Economic and Political
Geography. Routledge, London 1989.
Tnrnock, D.: Agricultural change in the Romanian Carpathians.
Leicester University Social Sciences Faculty Discussion
Papers in Geography G93/2 (1993).
Turnock, D.: The rural transition in Eastern Europe. GeoJournal
36, 420-426 (1995).
Vriger, I.: Agrarian economy in Slovenia. GeoJournal 31,373-377
(1993).
Wadekin, K.-E.: The place of agriculture in the European com-
munist countries. Soviet Studies 29,238-254 (1977).
Wadekin, K.-E.: Agrarian Policies in Communist Europe: A
Critical Introduction. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague 1982.
Wadekin, K.-E.: Determinants and trends of reform in commu-
nist agriculture: A concluding essay. In: Wadekin, K. E. (ed.),
Communist Agriculture: Farming in the Soviet Union and
Eastern Europe, pp. 321-331. Routledge, London 1990.
Wiedermann, P.: The origins and development of agro-industrial
149
development in Bulgaria. In: Francisco, R. A. et al. (eds.),
Agricultural Policies in the USSR and Eastern Europe, pp.
97-135. Westview, Boulder, CO 1980.
Wiedermann, P.: Agricultural development in Bulgaria
1976-1985. In: Wadekin, K.-E. (ed.), Current Trends in the
Soviet and East European Food Economy, pp. 273-302.
Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 1982.
Wiska, A.; Hindson, J.: Protecting a Polish paradise. Geographical
63(6) 1-2 (t991).
Wyzan, M. L.: Bulgarian agriculture: Sweeping reform mediocre
performance. In: Wadekin, K.-E. (ed.), Communist Agri-
culture: Farming in the Soviet Union & Eastern Europe, pp.
290-306. Routledge, London 1990.
Young, C.: A bitter harvest?: Problems of restructuring in East
Central European agriculture. Geography 78, 69-72 (1993).
Zanga, L.: Albania optimistic about economic growth. Radio Free
Europe/Radio Liberty Research 3(7), 14-7 (1994).
Ziolkowski, M.: Individuals and the social system: The types of
individuality and varieties of its contribution to society. In:
Szmatka, J. et al. (eds.), Eastern European Societies on the
Threshold of Change, pp. 207-224. Edwin Mellen Press,
Lampeter t993.