XAVIER FLORES
AGRICULTURAL ORGANISATIONS AND
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
IN RURAL AREAS
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE
GENEVA 1971
Studies and Reports
New Series, No. 77
The designations of countries employed, which are in conformity with United Nations
practice, and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression
of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the International Labour Office concerning the legal
status of any country or territory or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers.
The responsibility for opinions expressed in signed studies rests solely with their authors,
and publication does not constitute an endorsement by the International Labour Office of
the opinions expressed therein.
ILO publications can be obtained through major booksellers or ILO local
offices in many countries, or direct from the International Labour Office
(Sales Section), 1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland. The catalogue and list of
booksellers and local offices will be sent free of charge from the above
address.
Printed by Presses Centrales Lausanne S.A.
FOREWORD
The fact that the ILO is tripartite in structure has meant that from its
earliest days the Organisation has taken an interest in employers' and workers'
associations and similar bodies. Over the last few years it has been devoting
particular attention to them, since they constitute a means of enlisting broader
popular support for the process of development. These organisations have,
it is true, been the subject of an abundant literature, but there have been few
serious studies of the part they play in agriculture. Hence the ILO Permanent Agricultural Committee urged in 1965 that a general study of this
subject should be undertaken. This proposal was approved by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office in 1966.
The object of the present survey is to present a general picture of the
experience acquired (especially in the more developed countries) as to the part
which agricultural organisations of various kinds can take. We shall endeavour
to ascertain the extent to which an organisation of this sort can play (or
plays) an effective part in the developing countries, where the rural sector is
traditionally characterised by the weakness of organisations representing the
working population (where such organisations exist at all). Our aim, accordingly, will be to make a contribution to the existing literature, as regards both
popular participation and rural development in the strict sense of the term.
Our inquiry was launched in 1966, aseries of questionnaires (see appendix)
being sent off to all the organisations known to the ILO. Generally speaking
(although some countries or organisations failed to reply), the response was
exceedingly satisfactory. The information thus elicited was supplemented
from the literature assembled over the years. Most unhappily, a fair proportion
of this literature, together with some of the answers received from organisations, were destroyed by fire which broke out in an ILO annex. Hence the
literature in question had to be patiently re-assembled, with the result that
the completion of this study was delayed.
in
Agricultural organisations and development
We shall consider the development of agricultural organisations in the
historical context of rural development. Thus, the first part starts off by an
introductory section explaining the reasons for rural development in the
developing countries, and expatiating on the part agricultural and other
organisations might play in this connexion. There follow five sections,
dealing with Europe, Latin America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East, and
North America and Australia. Because the European countries are so rich
in experience, two chapters are devoted to them; the first briefly describes
developments from the time of the Industrial Revolution up to 1945, while
the second deals with the position as it is today. Each of these regional sections embodies its own conclusions. At the end of the book, there appear
the author's general conclusions. A fairly extensive bibliography is attached.
This volume has been written by Mr. Xavier-André Flores, consultant
attached to the Co-operative, Rural and Related Institutions Branch of the
Social Institutions Development Department.
The International Labour Office is profoundly grateful to all the organisations which provided the basic data for this international survey.
IV
CONTENTS
Foreword
Ill
Part I : The awakening of the under-developed world
An ancient problem still unsolved
Growth of population and the production of food
A false dilemma: industry or agriculture?
The urgent need for reorganisation of agriculture in the developing countries
1
3
10
21
30
Part n : The evolution of agricultural organisations in Europe
A. Historical background
The situation of agriculture and the peasantry between 1750 and 1848
Evolution between 1848 and the end of serfdom in Russia in 1861 . . .
The awakening and organisation of the peasantry in the nineteenth
century
The situation between 1900 and 1945
B. Contemporary Europe
Western Europe
Austria
Employers' organisations
Agricultural workers' unions
Chambers of agriculture
Agricultural workers' chambers
Belgium
General and employers'organisations
Workers' unions
Denmark
General organisations
Employers' and workers' organisations
France
General organisations
Employers' organisations
Agricultural workers' unions
Chambers of agriculture
35
37
37
55
62
74
87
100
100
100
102
105
108
Ill
Ill
120
123
127
129
131
131
136
138
146
v
Agricultural organisations and development
Federal Republic of Germany
General organisations
Employers' organisations
Agricultural workers' unions
Chambers of agriculture
Italy
General organisations
Employers' organisations
Agricultural workers' unions
Chambers of agriculture
Netherlands
Employers' organisations
Workers' unions
Sweden
General organisations
Employers' organisations
Workers' unions
Chambers of agriculture
Switzerland
United Kingdom
General organisations
Employers' organisations
Agricultural workers' unions
Eastern Europe
Bulgaria
German Democratic Republic
General organisations
Hungary
General organisations
Agricultural workers' unions
Poland
USSR
Conclusions
Part EQ : Latin America
Introduction
Obstacles to development
Structural obstacles and their repercussions
The technological time lag
Legislative obstacles
The progress and limits of land reform
Agricultural organisations: the present situation
Agricultural and rural associations
Chambers of agriculture
Workers' unions and peasant leagues
VI
149
149
152
153
156
161
161
165
168
181
181
182
183
185
186
190
192
195
195
201
201
202
206
210
210
217
218
220
220
225
229
244
255
267
269
271
271
278
284
295
299
300
304
306
Contents
The background
Chile
Uruguay
Bolivia
Brazil
Venezuela
Colombia
Nicaragua
Honduras
Guatemala
Conclusions
Part IV : Africa
Introduction
Customary law and the development of farming systems
Subsistence agriculture and its effects on food supplies
The modernisation of traditional agriculture
Agricultural organisations: the present situation
General and employers' organisations
North Africa
Tunisia
Libya
United Arab Republic
Sudan
Somalia
South of the Sahara
Cameroon
Central African Republic
Nigeria
Malawi
Mauritius
Zambia
Kenya, Liberia, Tanganyika
Senegal
Malagasy Republic
Workers' unions
Tunisia
United Arab Republic
Sudan
Malawi
Mauritius
Cameroon, Nigeria, Somalia, Uganda, Zambia
Malagasy Republic
Chambers of agriculture
Central African Republic
306
311
316
318
319
322
327
328
328
329
331
337
339
343
354
361
374
375
375
375
379
380
382
387
388
388
389
389
390
391
392
392
393
395
400
400
402
403
404
405
407
408
411
412
VII
Agricultural organisations and development
Mauritius
Malagasy Republic
Conclusions
Part V : Asia and the Middle East
Introduction
The modernisation of the rural sector
Agricultural organisations: the present situation
General organisations
Near and Middle East
Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia
Iran
Lebanon
Syria
Turkey
Cyprus
Israel
South Asia and the Far East
India
Ceylon
Thailand
China (Taiwan)
Japan
Philippines
Malaysia
Employers' and workers' organisations
Near and Middle East
Turkey
Israel
Cyprus
South Asia and the Far East
India
Ceylon
Malaysia
Japan
Viet-Nam
Chambers of agriculture
Near and Middle East
Lebanon
Syria
Turkey
South Asia and the Far East
Philippines
Japan
Conclusions
VIII
412
413
415
421
423
428
455
455
455
455
456
457
458
460
461
462
462
462
463
463
464
468
471
474
475
476
476
476
478
479
479
481
482
484
484
487
487
487
487
488
489
489
490
492
Contents
Part VI : North America and Australia
Introduction
United States
Canada
Australia
Conclusions
501
503
503
525
531
541
Part VII : General conclusions
Agricultural organisations in the developed countries
Agricultural organisations in the developing countries
543
545
553
Part VU! : Appendices
1. Text of the questionnaires
2. Bibliographical references
Publications of the ILO
Publications of the United Nations
Publications of FAO
Publications of UNESCO
Publications of WHO
Other publications
563
565
568
568
570
572
574
574
574
LIST OF TABLES
1. Latin America (Cuba excepted): Probable increases in rural and urban
population and of actively employed population, 1960-75
2. Active agricultural population: time required, from the beginning of
industrialisation, for the percentage of the active agricultural population
in the total active population to fall by about half
3. Europe: Principal agricultural workers' trade union organisations
between 1925 and 1928
4. Europe: Agricultural co-operatives (including rural credit unions and
agricultural and rural mutual insurance co-operatives), 1937
5. Europe: Changes in the active agricultural population and the size of
holdings
6. Europe: The development of agricultural mechanisation
7. Europe: Increase in fertiliser consumption
8. Socio-economic data for European countries (with special reference to
their agrarian situation)
9. Europe: Reduction of the working day and increase in paid holidays
10. Socio-economic data for Latin American countries (with special reference
to their agrarian situation)
11. Latin America: Distribution of agronomists, 1957-61
12. Latin America: Evolution of agricultural co-operatives, 1948-60/61-63
17
29
82
85
93
95
96
98
261
276
282
283
IX
Agricultural organisations and development
13. Ratification by Latin American countries of Conventions on freedom of
association and collective bargaining (year of registration)
14. Socio-economic data for African countries
15. Africa south of the Sahara: Active population and agricultural wage
earners, 1955
16. Africa: Estimated percentage of subsistence production in the total value
of agricultural output
17. West Africa: Head of cattle, 1961 estimates
18. Socio-economic data for countries in Asia and the Middle East (with
special reference to their agrarian situation)
19. Socio-economic data for Australia, Canada and the United States (with
special reference to their agrarian situation)
x
285
342
345
356
359
424
506
PARTI
THE AWAKENING
OF THE UNDER-DEVELOPED WORLD
THE AWAKENING
OF THE UNDER-DEVELOPED WORLD
D
AN ANCIENT [PROBLEM STILL UNSOLVED
The major event since the end of the Second World War, and the one that
in time will change traditional values the most, has undoubtedly been the
accession to independence of the majority of the developing countries and their
emergence on the international scene. Before the 1950s, political and economic decisions of moment were taken by the colonial Powers alone. Today, a
wide variety of problems, formerly regarded with fatalism or depending for
their solution on decisions taken by the colonial Powers, are the subject of
international attention. We are witnessing, in fact, an irreversible transition
from a state of affairs in which countries were guided by the maxim "every
man for himself" to one in which a nation should, ideally, act according to
the maxim "each for all". This second, highly desirable state of affairs is,
needless to say, still very far from being achieved.
The way has already been marked by a number of milestones and by
significant changes in attitude. Direct government has yielded to technical
assistance; the quantitative and qualitative assessment of economic and social
factors, considered too frequently in former times as the prerogative of the
colonial Powers, is now undertaken with an eye to the needs and possibilities
of the peoples concerned; the concepts of "progress" and "backwardness"
have been replaced by the more dynamic terms "development" and "underdevelopment". And although, all too often, the action taken to solve these
problems is taken with an eye to the traditional interests of the richer countries,
the latters' assistance and collaboration, whether technical or financial, in
bilateral and multi-lateral schemes represents a first step towards a world-wide
economic system. Finally, a new international consciousness has emerged,
albeit slowly and painfully, with the result that attitudes and ways of thought
3
Agricultural organisations and development
which had endured for centuries in people's minds are undergoing a thorough
overhaul.1
The nations of the developing world, which were until recently the colonies
of European Powers or, like the countries of Latin America, became independent early in the nineteenth century, today have to cope with problems of quite
extraordinary seriousness, the more serious in that they have been in existence
a long time. Invasion by the Western way of life had its good and bad
effects; but what it did above all was to upset the balance precariously maintained by many economically primitive societies, which henceforth were
obliged to play second fiddle to the economic interests of the colonial Powers.
The effect was twofold: in the first place, these under-developed countries
were obliged to concentrate on a few crops for export, and a deep split opened
up between traditional and modern agriculture, with all the advantages going
to the latter. Secondly, embryonic industries and traditional handicrafts were
paralysed by reason of the fact that colonies had to absorb the mother
country's manufactured goods. The economies of the colonial territories
were in no position to match up to the modern industrial giants, and in the
long run became excessively dependent on all the vagaries of international
trade.
Thus it is that India, "an empire which in the eighteenth century was
politically weak but economically prosperous",2 saw its industry and handicrafts gradually dwindle and decline, following the British occupation. Some
writers have gone so far as to coin a word in this connexion: "de-industrialisation". Colin Clark has estimated that between 1881 and 1911, the working
population employed in manufacturing, mining and transport fell from 35
to 17 per cent of the total labour force, while agricultural manpower increased
from 50.7 to 68.2 per cent.8 The introduction of one-way preferential tariffs
1
To measure how much ground has been covered, one need only compare current ways
of thinking, such as those put forward by Raúl Prebisch in the report he submitted in 1964
to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development {Towards a New Trade Policy
for Development; Sales No.: 64. II. B.4), with those obtaining in the 1950s. It will be remembered, for example, that K. Mandelbaum was apprehensive of the industrialisation of the underdeveloped countries and wanted to see the developed countries accelerate the pace of technical
progress, so as to keep a good distance between themselves and the developing world. The
same holds good of F. Notestein, who felt that by championing modernisation the present
Powers might well be helping to bring about a world in which their peoples might constitute
a dwindling minority, with an ever smaller share in world wealth and power. In this connexion,
see Georges Balandier: "La mise en rapport des sociétés 'différentes' et le problème du sousdéveloppement", in Institut national d'études démographiques: Le «tiers monde», sousdéveloppement et développement, Travaux et documents, No. 39 (Paris, Presses Universitaires
de France, 1961), p. 123.
a
Jacques Pirenne: Les grands courants de l'histoire universelle (Neuchâtel, La Baconnière,
1953), Vol. V, p. 36.
8
Colin Clark: The Conditions of Economie Progress (London, Macmillan; New York,
St. Martin's Press, 1957), pp. 499 and 515. This figure is discussed by Daniel Thorner:
4
The awakening of the under-developed world
for Manchester-made goods, at a time when high import duties were imposed
on silk and cotton goods made in India, explains why this industry, which
gave work to a high proportion of the Indian labour force, went into a decline.
India, which had traditionally exported such goods, began to import them
during the nineteenth century. A vast host of craftsmen were thus forced
to go back to the land, helping to aggravate a problem of over-population
already made more serious by the encouragement given to the growing of
flax and jute (required by industry in England), to the disadvantage of traditional crops. Besides which, the growth of the railway network from 1880
onwards, facilitating as it did the dumping of cheap foreign manufactured
goods in Indian villages, gradually ruined the local craftsmen, who were
unable to dispose of their wares locally, and even less able to sell them in the
towns, which were flooded with European goods (entry of which was rendered
easier by abolition of the 10 per cent import duty in 1882 x). Economic
ruin in the countryside, accompanied by rural over-population and a relative
reduction in the growing of food crops, definitely has something to do with
the increasing frequency of famine, that traditional spectre in the Indian
countryside. Between 1800 and 1950, 38.7 million people died of hunger;
of these, 26 million perished in the course of eighteen famines between 1875
and 1900.2
There are other examples, less complex and controversial than that of
India, which illustrate even more clearly how the colonies languished so that
the mother country might grow fat. Possibly the most striking example of
technical regression (not merely of stagnation) is afforded by Ceylon, where
the introduction of vast coffee plantations from 1825 onwards, followed by plantations of tea and rubber, led to a rapid dwindling in the land available for
food crops.
Under the traditional system, the Ceylonese peasant grew rice in the
valleys himself; a communal system applied in the highlands. However,
vast areas were expropriated for the benefit of European planters, thanks to
the introduction of English legislation by virtue of which all land and forests
abandoned, unoccupied or uncultivated were assumed to be Crown property
unless proof to the contrary could be adduced (this in a country where the
De-Industrialisation in India, 1881-1931 (First Economic History Congress, Stockholm, 1960)
Paris, 1960), pp. 217-226. See also Manilal B. Nanavati and J. J. Anjaria: The Indian
Rural Problem (Bombay, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, 1965), Ch. VII.
1
True, in 1894 a 5 per cent duty was re-imposed, but "the pressure of English commercial
interests (especially those of Lancashire) prevailed on the Cabinet, which decreed that English
cotton goods should pay no more than 3.5 per cent. At the same time, it decided that a
compensating export charge of 3.5 per cent should be levied on cloth which, produced by
Indian mills, might compete with Lancashire." See François Léger: Les influences occidentales dans la révolution de l'Orient, 1850-1950 0?aris, Pion, 1955), p. 31.
* Nanavati and Anjaria, op. cit., p. 31.
5
Agricultural organisations and development
peasant was unable to produce proper legal evidence of ownership). Hence
the local peasantry were obliged to abandon the traditional system of crop
rotation in favour of another, so that everybody might receive a plot. But, as
George Thambyahpillai remarks:
As the plots became smaller, the plough (primitive as it was) had to be replaced
by a still more primitive implement—the hoe. Production became less efficient.
No aid was provided to the peasant in the form of credit facilities and the like. The
peasant sector was condemned to complete neglect for over 125 years! Food came
to be imported, especially from Burma. The peasant at best managed to produce
for his own subsistence, with no surplus for sale.1
The dispossessed peasant could not even find employment in the plantations,
in view of his "irregularity of attendance", such absenteeism being unavoidable
in the context of his social obligations. The peasant, as an integral unit of the
socio-economic set-up, had to help out his fellow-villagers during times of communal
activity such as sowing, harvesting, threshing and the like. The plantations solved
this problem by the importation of cheap labour from India. The plantations thus,
in effect, absorbed the land but not the labour.2
No continent penetrated by Western man escaped the process whereby
land was occupied and the traditional economy transformed (where not deliberately held back), the native peoples frequently being simply driven off or
dispossessed. In East Africa, Albert Meister, in his study of Kenya in colonial
times, reached conclusions very similar to Thambyahpillai's:
The natives came into contact with a conception of work unknown to them and
incomprehensible. In their societies, work was a social obligation. Everybody took
a hand in the harvest or in the storage of food for ceremonial purposes. Everybody,
young and old, had a part to play. Work was not something which bestowed
individual economic advantages, but helped in strengthening the bonds of society.
Quite the contrary on a plantation, where men only, and amongst them only the
young and vigorous, were employed
In a very short time indeed the tribal societies
in contact with the first colonists were suffering from profound imbalances. Recruitment was no easy matter, since when the White man's harvest was ready on the
plantation, the harvest on the traditional plot often had to be brought in at the same
time. Although in certain cases the colonists recruited whole families, so as to be
sure of labour, the traditional organisation of society had been profoundly upset;
the old, the infirm, and even the womenfolk, were excluded from this new kind of
work. The only winners were the young, and the prestige conferred by money
and novelty ruined the standing and authority formerly enjoyed by the aged.8
To this it must be added that, as happened elsewhere in Black Africa, the
policy of settling native tribes in reserves in which, because of increasing
population pressure and poor farming practices, the land quickly became
1
George Thambyahpillai : "The Right to Private Property and Problems of Land Reform",
International Social Science Journal (Paris, UNESCO), Vol. XVIII, No. 1, 1966, p. 76.
2
ibid., p. 75.
8
Albert Meister: L'Afrique peut-elle partir ? (Paris, Editions du Seuil, 1966), pp. 47-48.
6
The awakening of the under-developed world
exhausted, radically and even dramatically heightened the contrast and widened
the gulf between traditional society and the way of life of the White man.1
If, now, we go from East to North Africa, we shall witness a remarkable
continuity in the process whereby native economies were upset (there were
differences, of course, from one area to another, and much depended on how
heavy was the domination of the colonial Power). Egypt, Algeria, Tunisia
and Morocco afford eloquent examples of our thesis. At the beginning of the
nineteenth century, Mehmet Ali's efforts to encourage the growing of a greater
variety of crops in Egypt and to introduce permanent irrigation came to
nothing when cotton became the principal export crop. In Algeria, on the
occasion of the colonisation of 1830, and especially from 1832 onwards, the
most fertile land in the plains along the coast was rapidly overrun by colonists.
Most of it was turned over to the vine—an export crop once again. Confiscation of the land belonging to the Beylik, and, in 1843, the declaration that the
inalienable habous property belonged to the State—together with large-scale
expropriation of private property (melk) or communal lands (arsh), on the
pretext of native revolts or because such land had ostensibly been left uncultivated—enabled the occupying Power to take over, almost from the outset,
some 500,000 acres, of which roughly 420,000 were around Algiers.2 Besides
which, the view was accepted that, as F. Godin stresses, "the State was the
only owner of land, and that tenants, be they individuals or tribes, merely
enjoyed a right of usufruct".3 This bizarre view facilitated the acquisition
of the best land, in exchange for a consolidation of the rights of the natives.
Out of 875,500 acres subjected to this system, 165,000—the best—were set
aside for European settlement. Later on, after the fall of Napoleon III,
the amount of State-owned land increased thanks to the expropriation of a
further 1.25 million acres in Kabylia. According to the calculations of
Leroy-Beaulieu in 1887, 3.25 million acres were occupied by 180,000 European
settlers.4 During the twentieth century, this surface was to grow to 6.8 million
acres, i.e. 25,000 farms with an average area per farm of 270 acres (155 of
them actually productive), against 532,000 native plots with an average size
of 35 acres (12.5 of them productive).5
1
We shall readily understand why one of the first claims made by the Young Kikuyu
Association, founded in 1920, was that the lands occupied early in the century should be
handed back to the tribes—especially since, in 1953, population density in these reserves
had reached the figure of 367 per square mile, as against 23 in the European highlands.
Meister, op. cit., pp. 133 and 156.
* Charles-André Julien: Histoire de l'Afrique du Nord (Paris, Payot, 1931), p. 658.
0
Quoted by Julien, op. cit., p. 665.
* P. Leroy-Beaulieu: L'Algérie et la Tunisie (Paris, Guillaumin & Gle., 1887), p. 110.
6
Francis Jeanson: L'Algérie hors la loi (Paris, Editions du Seuil, 1956), p. 141.
7
Agricultural organisations and development
Tunisia had a similar fate. Here, however, things were even worse, because
that country, which was already short of agricultural land, was invaded by
large-scale farming companies. This helped to reduce the natives to the
status of a landless proletariat, subject to a tiny handful of European settlers.
In 1930, at a time when such companies held one-third of the land colonised,
there were in Tunisia no more than 160,000 Europeans (71,000 of them French)
for a population of more than 2 million, most of them peasants. On
certain estates, such as that of Montarnaud (11,250 acres), belonging to the
Omnium company, there were barely fifty European settlers, a state of affairs
which would seem to justify Jean Jaurès's celebrated exclamation: "Many,
many acres and very few men—that's characteristic of settlement by companies." 1
The same holds good of Morocco, where expropriation and land purchase
led to a very similar state of affairs (in 1928, 2,800 settlers owned 1.85 million
acres), although it did not last so long.
To generalise, it may be said that colonialist domination led to most,
if not all, of the following effects : an intense concentration of landed property
in the hands of a handful of foreign settlers; traditional agriculture driven back
to the less productive land, and a reduction in the growing of food crops
relative to total agricultural output; a state of affairs in which agricultural
revenue redounded to the benefit of companies based in the mother country,
either directly (thanks to exports) or indirectly (import of manufactured goods
produced from colonial raw materials); reduction of the local peasantry to
the status of seasonal labourers and concentration on the growing of crops
for export, with the result that the economy of the territory in question becomes
subject to all the whims and vagaries of the international trade cycle.
In view of the above, it will be readily understood why the policy adopted
by the West with regard to the then under-developed countries has been
described as one of "imposed under-development".2 The same thing may
be said of policy with regard to Latin America. When the Latin American
countries became independent, early in the nineteenth century, the protective
legislation previously imposed by the Spanish Crown was abrogated, and
concentration of land in the form of huge estates, already begun by the settlers,
grew more pronounced. In the twentieth century the policy of protecting
the ejidos and communal lands was once more reverted to, and this improved
the position in certain respects. But on the whole the continued existence
1
Julien, op. cit., p. 717.
Y. Goussault, A. Meister and P. Marthelot: "Recherches sur les associationnismes
ruraux et sur la participation des masses aux programmes de développement dans les pays
méditerranéens", Bulletin de liaison (Paris, Ecole pratique des hautes études), No. 1, January
1966, p. 11.
2
8
The awakening of the under-developed world
of these very large estates, plus increased pressure on the land attributable to
growth of population, made the agrarian problem in these countries very
acute indeed.
Jacques Chonchol, a distinguished expert on Latin American affairs, has this
to say about the pernicious results of this trend:
There are two distinct sectors of agricultural production in Latin America:
production for export and production for the domestic market. The former has
always tended to enjoy priority in the eyes of governments and landowners, and to
attract the major share of investment funds; its growth has been restricted only by
market conditions essentially outside the control of the Latin American countries.
Despite the increasing needs of a fast-growing population, production for the domestic
market has expanded much more slowly than for export. This is mainly because the
uneven distribution of income restricts demand, because the traditional agriculturists
do not respond to the existing stimuli of the domestic market, and because there is
but little incentive to employ new and more efficient techniques. All these reasons
are closely connected with the concentration of land in the hands of a few. The
lack of dynamism in agriculture is an obstacle to the general development of the
economy through its negative effects on the balance of payments and its inflationary
pressures, and because it leads to a reduced state of physical well-being of the labour
force.1
Thus, by preventing the production of food crops from keeping pace with
the growth of population, plantation agriculture, designed essentially for the
export market, dealt a grievous blow to the social and economic balance of
native societies. This was almost everywhere the case. By paralysing such
developments, export-oriented plantation agriculture delayed the integration
of food-growing agriculture into the economies of the countries and territories
concerned. It helped to maintain vast hosts of people at subsistence level,
while giving a powerful impetus to the drift to the towns (a movement which
is today turning into a flood). Into traditional communities, foreign colonisation
introduced a monetary economy, for the purposes of which labour became a
commodity like any other. Integration into the new society, however,
remained something to which the native could not aspire. Thus he all too
often became, as it were, a stranger in his own house.
Hence, from the outset, and right up to the Second World War, the industrialised countries were above all concerned with what they could get out of
their colonies in an economic sense. Their relations with the colonies were
not unlike those which prevailed between one class and another in Europe
itself. Furthermore, although it is undoubtedly true that in many cases the
Jacques Chonchol: "Land Tenure and Development in Latin America", in Claudio
Veliz (ed.): Obstacles to Change in Latin America (London, Oxford University Press, 1965).
p. 89.
9
Agricultural organisations and development
European genuinely believed he had a civilising mission, his ignorance of
economics and of sociology (at this time Durkheim was still unknown) was
such that he could not grasp the web of subtle ties and bonds which over the
centuries had grown up within the peasant societies he had dealings with.
Today, it seems to us almost self-evidently true that any society devises a
form of organisation which will ensure balance and survival, and rejects a
potentially dangerous foreign graft. Butfiftyyears of sociological investigation
were needed for people to understand this, and in the meantime, all too often,
the graft had proved too vigorous; the tail, in fact, had finished by wagging
the dog.
Historians, economists and sociologists are familiar with all this, and we
would not presume to recall these facts, were they not the source and fount
of the problems with which the developing countries are today confronted.
However, enough has been said to show that under-development is nothing
new. It was a chronic evil in the nineteenth century; since then, it has got
worse because of a fearful growth in population, accompanied by a falling-off,
in relative terms, of agricultural production. The peoples concerned are by
now aware of this. Hence we are witnessing an acceleration of political change.
Running counter to this process, there is a tragic slowing-up in the pace of
economic development.
GROWTH OF POPULATION AND THE PRODUCTION OF FOOD
Before the Second World War, governments were more concerned with
internal problems than with the fate of their colonies, and were disinclined to
worry overmuch about the under-developed countries in general. In extenuation
it must, however, be remembered that these governments were much less wealthy
than they are today. Instability in the trade cycle, slump following boom in
seemingly inexorable sequence, all too often put them in a difficult position.
The 1929 depression, for example, which threw millions of people out of work,
was to reach such a pitch that the whole social, political and economic edifice
of Western society was threatened with destruction. This does not mean,
of course, that nothing was done to develop the colonies. But the action
taken overseas, as indeed in the mother countries themselves, was all too often
sporadic. Over-all plans were conspicuously absent; roads, schools and
hospitals were built, but only on the initiative of the ministries responsible.
Such a state of affairs is by no means surprising, if it be remembered that the
need for over-all planning was recognised only after the Second World War
(in the Western countries first of all, and then in the overseas countries when
they became independent, or shortly before).
10
The awakening of the under-developed world
Moreover, the situation was not then as grave as it has since become.
At that time, the growth of population had not yet completely outstripped
food production, since the death rate was still very high. This state of affairs
remained more or less unchanged during thefirstfew years after the war. Thus,
between 1938 and 1950, the annual compound rate of increase for the population of the under-developed countries remained steady at 1.3 per cent, and
the population of these countries increased from 1,478 million to 1,733 million.
But, in the 1950s, the campaigns launched to combat the traditional endemic
illnesses began to make their effects felt. Between 1950 and 1960, there was
a startling spurt in the rate of increase of population, which rose to 2.2 per
cent, while the population itself increased to 2,161 million. This rate was to
increase still further between 1960 and 1963; while the average annual rate
of increase in Europe remained at 0.9 per cent, the rate in Africa rose to
2.5 per cent, in tropical South America to 3 per cent, in continental Central
America to 3.2 per cent and in southern and south-east Asia to 2.4 and 2.5
per cent respectively.1
The not inapposite remark has been made that according to these figures
the developing countries are at present characterised by the kind of death
rate to be found in industrialised societies and by a birth rate of the kind
found in agricultural communities.
Now, apart from Asia, the areas affected were originally somewhat underpopulated, and this upswing would not in itself have justified anxiety. But
food production has not kept pace with the rapidly increasing numbers.
Preliminary data published by FAO show that in 1965-66 the production of
food per head stood at 92 per cent of the pre-war level in Latin America, at
97.2 per cent in the Far East (excluding mainland China), and at 96 per cent
in Africa. In the Near East, although harvests these last few yeats have
been disappointing, food production, exceptionally, has gone up: 10.8 per
cent per head over the pre-war level.
If we remember that the peoples concerned were under-nourished before the
war, that an increase of 3 per cent per annum is very difficult to achieve,
even in a highly developed country, and, finally, that the food stocks thanks
to which India and several African countries barely managed to escape
disaster in 1965-66 (as emphasised by FAO), have fallen to their lowest level
in more than ten years,2 we shall readily understand that the position may
1
United Nations: Demographic Yearbook, J964, p. 11. In 1962, it was estimated that the
annual increase for Latin America as a whole was a mere 2.7 per cent. But later estimates by
ECLA showed that as early as 1960 the rate already exceeded 3 percent. SeeECLA: Geographic Distribution of the Population of Latin America and Regional Development Priorities
(mimeographed doc. E/CN. 12/643), February 1963.
2
FAO: The State of Food and Agriculture, 1966 (Rome, 1966), p. 16.
11
Agricultural organisations and development
well become even more serious—bearing in mind that requirements cannot
be still further reduced, and despite the fact that the United States is to increase
the area under the plough. This, at least, remains the prospect for the immediate future. Unless there be a profound change—indeed, an "agonising
re-appraisal"—in present agricultural policy, it is hard to see how the aims
proclaimed in the Third World Food Survey1 (i.e. that world food stocks
should be increased by 51 per cent between 1963 and 1975, and by 174 per
cent by the end of the century) can possibly be attained.
It is true that in the meantime we have witnessed the beginnings of what
has been called the "green revolution", following the introduction of highyield cereals. The long-term effects of this are still uncertain, and the shortterm ones are already visible. Some are good, some bad. Hence they will
require very close and careful scrutiny and assessment if the bad are not to
outweigh the good.
According to the International Agricultural Development Service of the
United States Department of Agriculture, the area which in Asia alone is
devoted to the new varieties of cereals increased from some 250 acres in
1964-65 to nearly 25 million acres in 1967-68. Countries which traditionally
have to import food, such as Pakistan and the Philippines, are, it seems,
about to become self-sufficient. However, the introduction of these new
strains is not without its problems. Certainly, Mexican semi-dwarf wheat
varieties have proved a success in India and Pakistan, while the so-called
"miracle rice" devised by the International Rice Research Institute in the
Philippines (IR-288-3) has, according to FAO2, given record yields in India.
But other strains of rice have proved a failure, and the United States varieties
of hybrid maize have been found to be very poorly suited to conditions in
Latin America and Asia.3 In India, for example, while wheat production
increased from 12.3 million tons in 1964-65 to 16.6 million tons in 1967-68,
rice production fell during the same period from 39.4 million to 37.9 million
tons, despite the experience acquired under the programme for areas of intensive culture.4
The eventual outcome of the "green revolution" will depend on a number
of factors. Firstly, many of the new strains are more sensitive to local diseases ;
they need systematic irrigation and the water supplied has to be carefully
checked throughout the cycle of growth, whereas in many countries, and
^ A O : Third World Food Survey (Rome, 1963), p. 73.
2
See FAO: Conference, Fourteenth Session: Study on Food Production Resources in
Agricultural Development (Rome, 1967; doc. C67/41), p. 24.
3
See H. Laxminarayan: "The Small Farmers should be the Strategy Base", Yojana
(New Delhi), Vol. XII, No. 24, December 1968, p. 6.
4
ibid., p. 6.
12
The awakening of the under-developed world
especially in Asia, half or more of the land cultivated depends on seasonal
rain. There are other things, too, which might conceivably slow up the
introduction of improved seed: lack of transport and adequate storage facilities;
the reluctance of the peasant farmer, growing just enough to meet his own
needs, to undertake experiments which, if unsuccessful, might leave him and
his dependants to starve; the consumer's opposition when offered new varieties
of unaccustomed taste (whence problems in estimating how much should be
produced and how production should be marketed) ; the fact that new varieties
make special demands as regards the date of sowing, the use of fertilisers,
insecticides, pesticides, and so on; lastly, the cost of production (ten times as
high with IR-8 rice, for example), for although the new strain has increased
profits fourfold in the Philippines, for example, its use implies credit facilities
not always available to the peasantry.1
We may thus expect (and this has already happened) that the most advanced
farmers, possessing the best land and with the most highly developed nose for
money, will take the lion's share of any profits accruing. But reliance cannot,
of course, be put on this class alone in the race for development. As Clifton
R. Wharton, Jr., very appositely remarks:
As a result of different rates in the diffusion of the new techniques, the richer
farmers will become richer. In fact, it may be possible that the more progressive
farmers will capture food markets previously served by the smaller semi-subsistence
producer. In India, only 20 per cent of the total area planted to wheat in 1967-68
consisted of the new dwarf wheats, but they contributed 34 per cent of the total
production. Such a development could well lead to a net reduction in the income
of the smaller, poorer, and less venturesome fanners. This raises massive problems
of welfare and equity. If only a small fraction of the rural population moves into
the modern century while the bulk remains behind, or perhaps even goes backwards,
the situation will be highly explosive.2
Clearly, if the "green revolution" is to succeed, parallel efforts must be
made in all sorts of fields: in vocational training, improvement of roads and
communications, irrigation, provision of credit, and so on. Moreover (and
this concerns the new strains and varieties themselves), countries must realise
1
Clifton R. Wharton, Jr.: "The Green Revolution: Cornucopia or Pandora's Box?",
Foreign Affairs (New York), Vol. 47, No. 3, April 1969, pp. 464-476.
2
ibid., pp. 467-468. See also the reservations made by Wolf Ladejinsky, who says that
in the Punjab, where the new techniques have been successful, the gap between rich and poor
has been growing wider. "Most important and meaningful though agricultural progress in
the Punjab has been, the real sharing in it is restricted to relatively few—perhaps only 10
and surely not more than 20 per cent of the farm households. The new agricultural policy which
has generated growth and prosperity is also the indirect cause of the widening of the gap
between the rich and the poor. Precisely because the new strategy has found its widest
application in the Punjab, the probability is that, relatively speaking, the gap is greater there
than in any other part of rural India." See "The Green Revolution in Punjab, a Field Trip",
Economic and Political Weekly (Bombay), Vol. IV, No. 26, June 1969.
13
Agricultural organisations and development
that discoveries, when exported, often go attended by difficulties and risks;
it may well be that pulling oneself up by one's bootstraps is a surer way of
becoming wealthy than reliance on technical assistance from abroad. Thus,
to come back for a moment to India—a test case if there ever was one—
improvement in local strains of rice and maize has led to yields superior to
that of imported varieties. In the light of these results, H. Laxminarayan,
assistant director of the Agricultural Economics Research Centre at Delhi
University, understandably wrote as follows:
This poses a question whether we should continue to depend completely on
high-yielding varieties of seeds which have been successfully used in other countries,
or should try to develop our own high-yielding variety. It is not out of place to
mention that in agriculture also, as in the case of industry, we are trying to import
technologies from other countries, without taking into consideration the major fact
that the socio-economic problems of these countries are different from those of
ours. If we want to develop our agriculture quickly, it is necessary to develop our
own technologies keeping in mind
the local circumstances and adapt them according
to variations in local conditions.1
These are very timely words of warning, to be carefully heeded by all the
countries concerned. For only if national efforts and international aid go
hand-in-hand will the "green revolution" surmount the obstacles with which
it is confronted.
The difficulties now being encountered have not yet been overcome, despite
the successes already achieved. To grasp how this state of affairs came about,
it must be remembered that in many instances it is attributable to the imbalance
induced by excessive concentration on exports. Curiously enough, the developing countries are great exporters of agricultural produce, whilst importing
foodstuffs which their own farmers could, and should, produce. As exporters
of unfinished primary products and raw materials, they suffer all the fluctuations
of the world market (between 1901 and 1950, the prices of twenty-five selected
articles varied annually by, on the average, ±14 per cent).2 At the same time,
there is a steady deterioration in the terms of trade (how long this deterioration has been going on is still a matter of controversy, but the process itself
seems to have been speeding up these last few years, especially between
1954 and 19623). As importers of foodstuffs, such countries have to buy
3
Laxminarayan, op. cit., p. 16.
United Nations: Instability in Export Markets of Under-Developed Countries (New
York), 1952), p. 5.
3
This is a highly controversial matter which deserves thorough investigation. See the
following three papers, appearing in the collection "The Terms of Trade" (Washington,
D.C., Economic Development Institute): Gottfried Haberler: "Terms of Trade and Economic Development"; Charles P. Kindleberger: "Terms of Trade and Economic Development"; Theodore Morgan: "Long-run Terms of Trade between Agriculture and Manufac2
14
The awakening of the under-developed world
food with the currency they need to purchase equipment. A perusal of the
balance of payments of developing countries shows that their food imports,
although representing an excessive strain on their holdings in currency, are
not sufficient to meet the requirements of their peoples. In all these countries,
of course, there are masses of people living at subsistence level; it follows that
foodstuffs imported for sale on the domestic market are largely bought by
townsmen, whose needs are steadily increasing.1
Since food production is so stagnant in these countries, it might be thought
that there would be a general increase in prices. Not so, however. Except
at certain points, foodstuff prices remain astonishingly stable. This is because,
while supply remains stable, demand tends to remain unchanged too, since
most of the people in the countries concerned have so low a standard of
living.
Between 1958 and 1964, prices in Central America oscillated between 96
(1958 = 100) in Guatemala City and 113 in San José (Costa Rica), remaining
at 100 (absolute stability) in Managua (Nicaragua). On the other hand, in
South America, in the big cities where price increases depend on that host of
variables which characterise a monetary economy, world records for inflation
were easily beaten: Buenos Aires (Argentina), 627; Säo Paolo (Brazil), 1,445;
Santiago (Chile), 461, in relation to 100 in 1958. But inquiries in the countryside would show that supply and demand remain very much in balance and
that price movements are restricted in the extreme, whereas, in a developed
country, the differences between rural and town prices are usually insignificant.
The same phenomenon is observable in Asia too. Except in Djakarta
(Indonesia) (1,276 in 1963 in relation to 100 in 1958), Vientiane (Laos) (595 in
1964) and Seoul (Republic of Korea) (243 in 1964), prices in Asia have remained
remarkably stable, even in India, where, despite the extreme rigidity of supply,
the cost of foodstuffs has increased by a mere 31 per cent since 1958. Africa
obeys the same law. If we except the Democratic Republic of the Congo
(372 in relation to 100 in 1961), there have nowhere been increases which
could reasonably be described as abnormal. In fact, if we compare the
figures for Sweden (31 per cent increase since 1958), a country usually considered
to be extremely progressive, with those for the United Arab Republic, a country
battling against formidable problems of food supply (11 per cent) 2, we shall
turing. See also PaulBairoch: Diagnostic de l'évolution économique du tiers monde, 1900-1966
(Paris, Gauthier-Villars, 1967), Ch. VI.
1
Except, of course, for imports of cereals undertaken in accordance with United States
Act No. 480 to cope with a crisis.
2
FAO: Production Yearbook, 1965 (Rome, 1966).
16
Agricultural organisations and development
see that prices increases in the former country have been almost three times
as great as those in the latter. Since, in a normal economy, rigidity in supply
or a reduction therein in the face of unsatisfied demand at once leads to price
increases, we shall be quite justified in saying that price stability in the developing countries is typical of the stability obtaining in economies where vast
masses of peasants are living at subsistence level while the national wealth
is distributed in a manner which reduces the purchasing power of the working
class to a strict minimum; such stability, then, is the stability of underconsumption. A perusal of the figures for 1964-68 shows that these trends
remain quite remarkably stable.1
Two things help to make the position even worse : over-population in the
countryside, and the breakneck speed of urban development. In all the
developing countries, the working population in rural areas is increasing in
absolute numbers, even though it may carry less weight, relatively speaking,
within the economy as a whole. In the absence of effective agrarian reform,
this means increased pressure on the land and reduced productivity among
the poorest members of society, even though, taking the nation as a whole,
productivity may have increased in certain advanced branches of agriculture,
thanks to the introduction of new techniques. In this connexion, Latin
America provides an instructive example; between 1925 and 1960 the rural
population increased from 65.4 million to 111 million; in relative terms it
dropped from 70.5 to 53.9 per cent of the total population, which increased
from 92.9 to no less than 205.9 million. In the countryside, the population
actively employed (19.9 million in 1925) had increased by 1960 to 32.3 million;
in relation to total population, it had dropped from 61.3 to 47.3 per
cent.2
Since landed property in the countryside is concentrated in the hands of
a very few (a mere 1.5 per cent own 64.9 per cent of the area under cultivation) 3,
and since agricultural techniques are backward, this growth of population is
fraught with the gravest consequences, as will be apparent from a glance
at table 1.
A very similar situation, although a more serious one, exists in the developing countries of Asia within the area for which ECAFE is responsible;
density of population is higher than in Latin America and there is less agricul-
1
See ILO: Year Book of Labour Statistics, 1968 (Geneva, 1969), pp. 653-657.
See United Nations, ECLA: Economic Bulletin for Latin America, Vol. X, No. 2,
October 1965, p. 164.
3
Thomas F. Carroll : "Estructura agraria y distribución de los recursos", in Oscar Delgado
(ed.) : Reformas agrarias en la América latina (Mexico City, Fondo de Cultura Económica,
1965), p. 56.
2
16
The awakening of the under-developed world
Table 1.
Latin America (Cuba excepted) : Probable increases in rural and urban population and of actively employed population, 1960-75 (in thousands)
1960
199 144
107 954
54.2
91190
45.8
(%)
B. Actively employed population: 65 951
i. In agriculture
31480
47.7
(%)
2. Not in agriculture
34 471
52.3
(%)
A. Total population
1. Rural population
(%)
2. Urban population
1965
1970
1975
228 756
117 085
51.2
111671
48.8
75 490
33 850
44.8
41640
55.2
264 756
132 140
50.1
132 616
49.6
87 370
37 660
43.1
49 710
56.9
305 838
149 393
48.8
156 445
51.2
100 930
41830
41.4
59100
58.6
Source: United Nations, ECLA: Economic Bulletin for Latin America, Vol. X, No. 2, October 1965, p. 185.
turai land available per head (1.05 acres, as against 1.45 for Latin America).1
In most of these countries, the agricultural population actively employed varies
between 60 and 80 per cent of the total labour force ; it is increasing in absolute
terms and slowly—very slowly—decreasing relatively. It is exceedingly difficult to say how the rural manpower in these countries will evolve, for everything depends on how fast population and employment expand. However,
if we consider India, where the problem assumes its greatest dimensions
(although it may not be as acute as elsewhere), we shall not be inclined to
over-optimism. The population of India increased very nearly twofold
between 1901 and 1961 (from 236.3 million to 439.2 million); between 1901
and 1911, the rate of increase was 5.7 per cent, and between 1951 and 1961,
21.5 per cent.2 And yet, in relative terms, rural manpower as a proportion
of the total labour force displays an unexampled stability: 72 per cent in
1911, and 70 per cent in 1961.3 In 1961, rural manpower accounted for
120.8 million persons. It is expected to reach 140.2 million in 1975-76, by
which time it will represent no more than 57 per cent of the total labour force.4
Unless there is a speedy increase in agricultural productivity, the position is
likely to become highly dangerous; there is very little room for expansion of
1
For Asia, see United Nations, ECAFE: Economic Survey of Asia and the Far East,
1965 (New York, 1966; Sales No.: 66.II.F.1), p. 48. For South America, estimates based on
arable area are reproduced in the FAO Yearbook for 1965. It must be remembered that
in South America there is far more land available than in Asia.
2
Nanavati and Anjaria, op. cit., p. 55.
3
"The Population and Labour Force of Asia, 1950-80", International Labour Review
(Geneva, ILO), Vol. LXXXVI, No. 4, October 1962, p. 366.
4
Economic Survey of Asia and the Far East, 1965, op. cit., pp. 146 and 148.
17
Agricultural organisations and development
the areas under cultivation. And even as it is, the people of this country
are exceedingly ill-fed.
There are several such examples in this area. Here, as the Economic
Commission for Asia and the Far East observes, the increase in agricultural
production has these last few years been obtained more by bringing fresh land
under cultivation than by technical improvement. But such expansion has
its limits, and it is a fact that although imports of cereals increased by 41 per
cent between 1951 and 1963, the consumption of calories and proteins per head
has actually fallen below pre-war levels1 : production had failed to keep
pace with the increase in the number of mouths to be fed. While production
fell sharply in 1965-66, it increased again in 1967 following the introduction
of new high-yield cereals (and above all because the weather was better). But
rejoicing would be premature. We shall have to wait at least five years before
we can tell whether existing trends have been permanently reversed.
Africa is less populous than Asia, and should be able (with considerable
outside assistance) to solve the main problems of production and rural manpower. Ninety per cent of all Africans are peasants, and the population
actively employed in the countryside is increasing absolutely if not relatively.
Not enough historical data are available for us to assess in any detail the situation in individual countries, but for some of them, censuses taken before the
Second World War show that the trend has been much the same as in other
developing countries. In Morocco, for example, 1.27 million persons were
employed in agriculture in 1936 (74 per cent of the total manpower). In 1960,
1,834,000 persons were so employed (56 per cent of the total, i.e. relatively
less than in 1936). Similarly, in the United Arab Republic, between 1937
and 1960, agricultural manpower increased from 4.3 to 4.4 million—71 and
57 per cent respectively of the total active population.
This over-all increase in population (total or agricultural, active or not)
in the three continents we have mentioned has led to the growth of towns at
a dizzy speed. We shall not examine in detail the phenomenon represented
by the increasing congestion of towns and cities in the developing world, but
it may be worth while to summarise its salient features. The first thought
that comes to mind is that the growth of towns ought to be a good thing for
the countries in question : by taking some of the pressure off the land, the rush
to the towns ought to increase productivity; the growth of industry and services
would seem to make for a better apportionment of manpower and for the
production of more wealth; and social mobility ought to be facilitated, and the
standard of living of the newly arrived townspeople improved.
1
18
Economic Survey of Asia and the Far East, 1965, op. cit., p. 71.
The awakening of the under-developed world
In fact, matters are much more complicated than this. Nineteenth-century
Europe is not a valid model for the developing countries of today. Throughout
these countries, the growth of towns is encountering a problem for which, as
yet, no solution has been found : the fact that the demand for labour does not
keep pace with the increasing supply.
In the big towns and cities, the influx of people from the countryside has
pushed up urbanisation to a point which far exceeds the growth of population
in the countryside, but without (as we have seen) solving the problem of rural
over-population. And although governments have created employment
(sometimes jeopardising the balance of the budget in so doing) and set up fresh
industries, the rush to the towns has produced an urban population far in
excess of what cities can absorb.
Thus, in Asia, where towns have grown at twice the rate of increase of
national populations, with high points reached in Ceylon (5.5 per cent for 194663) and China (Taiwan) (10.6 per cent for 1958-62), the Economic Commission
for Asia and the Far East, in its report for 1965, observed that: "In most
countries, labourers have moved into urban areas at a rate much in excess of
the efficient absorptive capacity of the expanding urban activities." *
Africa, too, is in much the same position. In 1900, there were not more than
1.4 million people living in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants. In
1950, the figure was more than 10 million.2 At the beginning of the century,
Abidjan was a village of less than 1,000 souls; in 1936, it had 16,000 inhabitants,
some 200,000 in 1961, and is growing faster and faster all the time. The
population of Cotonou increased from 19,000 inhabitants in 1945 to 58,000
in 1956. In the same period, that of Dakar increased from 184,000 to 235,000.
By 1961, it had exceeded 300,000.
Similarly in Latin America, where Jacques Chonchol observes that: "In
Latin America the flow of rural labour to the urban areas has been much
greater than the number required for industrial expansion."8 Here, in 1960,
there were sixty-two cities with more than 100,000 inhabitants each, accounting
for roughly 40 per cent of the population of Latin America.
A paper by John D. Durand and César A. Peláez4 shows that urbanisation
in the countries with which we are here concerned is going ahead much faster
1
Economic Survey of Asia and the Far East, 1965, op. cit., p. 39.
See "Population and Labour Force in Africa", International Labour Review, Vol.
LXXXIV, No. 6, December 1961.
8
Conchol, op. cit., p. 80.
4
"Patterns of Urbanisation in Latin America", The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly
(New York), Vol. XLIII, No. 4, October 1965 ("Components of Population Change in Latin
America"), Part II, pp. 166-196.
a
19
Agricultural organisations and development
than was ever the case in the United States. For example, in Venezuela in
1936 the towns accounted for 16 per cent of the total population, a figure
reached in the United States in 1871. But since then the trickle to the towns
has turned into a flood and in 1960 the figure in Venezuela was 47.2 per cent,
thus exceeding the rate achieved in the United States (46.9 per cent) at that
date. Hence, in twenty-four years, Venezuela had made as much progress
along this road as the United States in eighty-nine. Similarly, in Peru the
urban population increased from 14 to 29 per cent of the total between 1940
and 1961 ; if the rate had been the same as that in the United States, this result
would not have been reached before 1979. Lastly, the major capitals of the
continent have been growing at a fearful speed. Buenos Aires had 4.7 million
inhabitants in 1947 and 6.7 million in 1960; Santiago, 952,000 in 1940 and
1.9 million in 1960; Rio de Janeiro, 1.5 million in 1940 and 3.2 million in 1960.
In the absence of industries and services on a scale sufficient to cope with
the influx (over and above the natural increase in population), it is easy to
imagine what this implies in terms of slums and shanty-towns, juvenile delinquency and prostitution.
In 1962, United Nations experts saw the matter in the following light 1 :
The magnitude of the resources required for dealing with the problem of urbanisation is very large. In India alone, for example, approximately US 81,000 million
a year will be required to house the new inhabitants of cities with over 100,000 people.
The provision of city-wide services, utilities and transportation would at least double
the needed investment. In Latin America it was estimated by the Organisation of
American States in 1954 that an annual investment of US $1,400 million was
required over a period of thirty years to wipe out the housing backlog, to replace
obsolescent dwellings and to provide homes for new households. According to
rough estimates by the United Nations Bureau of Social Affairs, as many as 150
million families in the less developed countries are in need of adequate homes.
These immense requirements are contributing in many under-developed countries
to the maintenance of a level of spending on housing and urban development such
that the pressing claims of directly productive sectors have to be curtailed.
To this should be added that despite such expenses, these countries are very
far from being able to find work for a labour force growing bigger with every
day that passes. Quite apart from industrial activities, all sorts of occupations
flourish. These are sometimes included under "services", but they are so
precarious, and bring in so little money to those obliged to resort to them, that
it would be more appropriate to include them under a new heading: "marginal
activities".
1
United Nations: Economic and Social Consequences of Disarmament (New York, 1962;
Sales No.: 62.IX.1), pp. 11-12.
20
The awakening of the under-developed world
A FALSE DILEMMA: INDUSTRY OR AGRICULTURE ?
To sum up, we may say that the developing countries have passed through
three phases of a continuing process: (a) the traditional, pre-colonial phase of
economic development, by virtue of which they were able to maintain much the
same sort of balance as that which obtained in Europe early in the eighteenth
century; (b) a phase in which colonial and traditional economy went hand-inhand, with the result that the countries concerned were brought up to date, but
at the cost of economic and social imbalance; (c) the present phase, during
which they are no longer bound by colonial ties, but are subject to the vagaries
of world trade and suffer from the dichotomy (modern economy/traditional
way of life) dating from colonial times.
If these countries are to embark on the fourth phase, that of a balanced
modern economy, they will have to overcome a number of hurdles. The most
formidable of these are,first,the growth of population, and second, inadequate
food supply.
Since the end of the Second World War, various ways have been tried (by
bilateral or multi-lateral assistance schemes) to increase food supplies and
to cope, one way or another, with the population explosion. Besides which,
development schemes have been devised to speed up the modernisation of the
developing countries; in the process, it may well be that a little too much
confidence has been shown in the ability of the developed countries to supply
agricultural surpluses (in 1953 there was still talk of "embarrassing surpluses";
today, the position is very different)1, in the ability of agriculture in the countries
concerned to cope (except in the very long run) with bursting demographic
pressures, and in the belief that faster industrialisation would reduce the pressure of surplus labour in the countryside.
The present position in the developing countries can perhaps be summed
up in a single question : is there a policy which would enable these countries
to catch up and achieve a self-supporting, balanced growth, without having
to plod along the path already followed by the industrialised countries ? During
the 1950s, debate on this matter was fierce and sometimes acrimonious.2 In
some countries, a victory had been won by those who thought that accelerated
industrialisation would offer that economic independence without which
1
FAO: The State of Food and Agriculture, 1953 (Rome, 1953).
Among the major works, see Raúl Prebisch: The Economic Development of Latin
America and its Principal Problems (New York, United Nations, ECLA, 1950; Sales No.:
50.II.G.2); H. W. Singer: "The Distribution of Gains between Investing and Borrowing
Countries", American Economic Review, May 1950, pp. 473-485; Gunnar Myrdal: An International Economy: Problems and Prospects (New York, Harper; London, Routledge & Kegan
Paul, 1956).
2
21
Agricultural organisations and development
political independence may prove a snare and a delusion. This was so in
Argentina, where, during a period of full employment, the rush from the
countryside to the cities, at a time when the high prices of agricultural produce
rendered it uncompetitive in international markets, gave rise to a terrible
imbalance, from the effects of which the country has not yet recovered.1 In
this connexion, Schultz observes that:
It is not surprising—so great has been the prestige attached to industrialisation
as a symbol of progress—that agriculture has been felt as a hindrance to growth. In
Argentina, agriculture was a potent source of wealth, and the country has paid a
high price for industrialisation undertaken at its expense. Brazil, too, has starved
agriculture in an endeavour to speed up the pace of industrialisation. There are
many countries which would have been well advised to 2devote to agriculture a part
of the money and energy they have devoted to industry.
Some countries have, indeed, tried to encourage agriculture without neglecting industry, but always with an eye to the export trade; traditional foodproducing agriculture has invariably suffered. Thus, with very few exceptions,
the food problem has, almost throughout the developing world, got worse.
This problem, and that of exuberant demographic growth, has become a
stumbling block for very many countries. Should they, in their plans, concentrate on agriculture, or should they give preference to industry (importing
the requisite foodstuffs for the time being and giving encouragement to agriculture later)?
The answer to this question depends very largely on how fast these countries
can industrialise. In this connexion, the once-current optimistic forecast that
these countries, by taking over modern techniques, would industrialise in less
time than it took Europe to do so, is giving way to an excessively pessimistic
view, namely that these countries are starting off more handicapped than the
"West" ever was.
Let us, however, try to see the problem in perspective. The Western
countries have by no means enjoyed industrial development at a constant rate.
Industrial development was everywhere preceded and accompanied by an
upswing in agricultural output and productivity. Let us consider the case of
England, which, while too exceptional to serve as a model for any country
today, offers some instructive conclusions as regards the process of industrialisation. In that country, agricultural production doubled between 1700 and
1800, whereas the Industrial Revolution only got going in 1760. Contrary
1
See La planification et l'industrialisation de l'Argentine, 1947-1957, Notes et études
documentaires, No. 1787 (Paris, 1953).
2
T. Schultz: "The Economie Test in Latin America" (Ithaca, New York State School of
Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University), Bulletin, No. 35, August 1956, p. 28.
22
The awakening of the under-developed world
to the common conception of England as a country importing food and exporting manufactured goods, she did not in fact draw on outside sources during the
first twenty or thirty years of the Industrial Revolution.1 Only during the second
half of the nineteenth century did she begin to import foodstuffs on a really
large scale; up to 1830, imported wheat represented a mere 3 per cent of the
total wheat consumed, whereas for 1831-50 the figure was 13 per cent, and for
1891-95, no less than 79 per cent.2 Thus, the country first on the industrial
scene did not become heavily dependent on the outside world until a century
after the process began. Other cases analysed by Paul Bairoch (concerning
Belgium, France, Germany, and even Japan) confirm this tendency, which
begins to change only with the advent of cheaper transport, between 1870
and 1880.3 The conclusion to be drawn is that the agricultural upswing freed
the manpower needed by industry, while providing the domestic markets which
industry needed in the initial stages.
The developed countries enjoyed other advantages too. The increase in
population during the initial stages of industrialisation did not exceed 1 per
cent, and indeed there was at certain times a fairly heavy loss due to emigration,
which corrected the imbalance between the demand and the supply of labour.
Emigration quickened its pace during the last half of the nineteenth century
and the first twenty years of the twentieth, to reach a scale which appears
barely credible today. Even overlooking the Irish who emigrated to the United
States as a result of the terrible famines of the 1840s, we find that the United
States alone welcomed 22.7 million foreigners between 1871 and 1910. Although, to begin with, the immigrants came almost exclusively from the
northern countries (from Scandinavia between 1870 and 1880, from England
and Germany between 1880 and 1890, with an average annual intake during
the first period of 200,000 to 300,000, and during the second, of 130,000)4,
the southern and central European countries then began to shed their
manpower surpluses. Between 1882 and 1887, some 23,000 Italians left
every year for the United States; but this figure reached 225,000 in 1902 to
1906 and 285,000 in 1907.6 The Slavs of Austria-Hungary (300,000 a year
from 1905), together with the Poles and the Jews from Russia (100,000 a year),
helped to swell the tide and contributed to the growth of America (very largely
that of the United States). When, in 1924, the United States imposed a quota
1
Paul Bairoch : Révolution industrielle et sous-développement 0?aris, SEDES, 1963), p. 225.
ibid., p. 227.
8
ibid., pp. 79-80.
* Pirenne, op. cit., Vol. V, p. 530.
5
See: Rural Social Development : Report of a United Nations European Study Group on
Rural Social Development within the Framework of Development in Southern Italy (Rome,
Amministrazione per le Attività Assistenziali Italiane e Internazionale, July 1965), p. 29.
2
23
Agricultural organisations and development
on immigration, the great influx from Europe, which had reached its peak in
the years 1906 to 19151, had already begun to dry up as a result of the First
World War, and was never again to reach the levels attained at the beginning
of the century. Thus, if the outlet and safety-valve afforded by emigration
had not existed, it is probable that European towns would have had to cope
with a much greater influx of peasants, and that urbanisation would have
proved correspondingly more difficult.
These two advantages (a low rate of population growth, except in England,
and large-scale emigration) are not enjoyed by today's developing countries.
Besides which, it is likely that their populations will continue to grow with
undiminished vigour for a fairly long time to come, anxious though certain
governments may be to reduce the birth rate. Hitherto, the experts have
usually under-estimated the rate of population growth. In India, for example,
the first and second plans for the period 1951-61 assumed an annual rate of
increase of 1.25 per cent.2 In fact, however, the rate during this period proved
to be 2 per cent, rising to 2.3 per cent between 1958 and 1964.3
Overlooking what modern science may manage to achieve over a lengthy
period, it would seem that rising prosperity has so far been the most potent
of all brakes on fertility. The very poorest classes are invariably the most
prolific, as is well known.4 Pending a miracle, we cannot but subscribe to
the following comments by Léon Tabah:
In every country, except perhaps in France, a considerable rise in income per
head, accompanied by a rise in health standards, has preceded—sometimes by a
good few years—a drop in the birth rate. In Germany, for example, annual output
per head, exceedingly low at the beginning of the nineteenth century, had increased
fivefold by 1870, when the birth rate began to drop. In Japan, the income per head
1
This process can be followed, for the period 1881 to 1939, in Ingvar Svennilson: Growth
and Stagnation in the European Economy (Geneva, United Nations, 1954; Sales No.: 54.
II.E.3), p. 65.
2
Figure for the period 1941-51. See United Nations: Demographic Yearbook, 1952
(New York, 1953), p. 110. See also Planning Commission (India): First Five-Year Plan
(New Delhi, 1952), p. 20; Second Five-Year Plan (New Delhi, 1956), p. 8. Estimates were
changed in the Third Five-Year Plan (New Delhi, 1962), p. 27, which already provides for an
annual increase of 2 per cent a year between 1961 and 1976. While the second plan estimated
the population at 465 million in 1970-71, and at some 500 million in 1975-76, the third plan
increased these figures to 555 and 625 million respectively, or an extra 125 million over and
above the estimates, at the end of the period. It estimated that the active population would
increase by no less than 70 million between 1961 and 1976 (see Third Five-Year Plan, pp. 22
and 27).
3
United Nations: Demographic Yearbook, 1962, p. 272, and Demographic Yearbook, 1965,
p. 113.
1
This fact, observed in Europe, is confirmed in India too. Here, according to the National Sample Survey, births vary between 2.6 among women with a secondary or higher
education, 4.2 among those who have completed the first part of their secondary education,
4.5 among those with a primary-school education, and 6 among the illiterate. See Planning
Commission (India): Annual Plan, 1966-67 (New Delhi, 1966), p. 87.
24
The awakening of the under-developed world
among the working population was in 1885 at about the level reached in Germany
in 1880; it increased more than threefold until 1925, when the birth rate began to
falter. It is certain, too, that income per head increased very considerably in England
between the beginning of the nineteenth century and round about 1885, when fertility
began to fall off. ... Thus, it would seem that the birth rate never starts to sink
unless there has been a substantial rise in consumption per head and in standards
of health
Hence it would seem fair to conclude that, as far as we can see at present,
a doubling of income per head is essential if there is to be some slackening in the
population growth of the poorer countries. These1 latter—we should do well to
remember—constitute two-thirds of the human race.
We cannot here embark on a discussion of the pros and cons of the methods
suggested as brakes on population growth. A point which might well be made,
however, is that even if the developing countries were as successful as Japan
has been with the legislation enacted in 1948, they would still needfifteenyears
or so to bring their birth rate to round about half what they are at present.
If they could do so, the position by 1980 may prove rather less gloomy than
it appears likely to be today.
The problem would be easier to solve if the developing countries could
ship their surplus millions overseas. This particularly applies to Asia, where
there is no more than one and a quarter acres of arable ground per rural
inhabitant, i.e. between a quarter and a half of the amount available in nineteenth-century Europe. But mass emigration of this magnitude would be
quite impossible nowadays, because the developed countries simply do not
have the capacity to absorb so many immigrants. On the other hand, we are
already witnessing a brain-drain (of doctors, engineers and technicians of
all kinds) from those countries where such persons are already in short supply—
countries which already have to call for technical assistance to fill the gaps.2
Hence we may reasonably conclude that as far as density and rate of population
growth are concerned, today's developing countries are far worse off than
nineteenth-century Europe ever was.
In the process of industrialisation, too, the Western countries enjoyed a
number of geographical advantages. Some, like the United States and Canada,
1
Léon Tabah: "Le problème population-investissement-niveau de vie dans les pays
sous-développés", in Institut national d'études démographiques: Le «tiers monde», sous-développement et développement. Travaux et documents, No. 39 (Paris, Presses Universitaires
de France, 1961), pp. 250-251. See also Léon Tabah: "Espoirs et illusions des politiques de
population dans le tiers monde", Le Monde (Paris), 20-21 January 1967.
2
See Angus Maddison: The Use of Foreign Training and Skills in Developing Economies
(Paris, OECD, 1964). According to the 1965 Report on the World Social Situation (New
York, United Nations, 1966), a high proportion of doctors in these countries—up to 50 per
cent, it is thought—emigrate to countries where they earn more money and where facilities
are better. The same applies to scientists, engineers, and others who can find an international outlet for their talents. On the whole, the most brilliant and ambitious young
people, who could make the biggest contribution to the development of a backward rural
area, are the first to quit.
25
Agricultural organisations and development
were very big, others (the great colonial Powers) controlled a foreign market,
and some profited from intercontinental trade. The developing countries
which today depend on the whims and vagaries of international trade, could in
theory profit from two of these factors: size, and intercontinental trade.
But here again, because the vast bulk of their populations are peasants hard
put to it to keep body and soul together, they will be able to make the most of
their natural advantages only if they radically overhaul their agriculture.
Moreover, the Western countries witnessed a progressive changeover from
rural handicrafts to industrial techniques, and the cost involved was very
slight.1 Paul Bairoch finds that :
By investing a sum for each person actively employed, equivalent to less than
four months' wages in England (at the end of the eighteenth century) and to six to
eight months' wages in France (early in the nineteenth century), quite a number of
former farmers and craftsmen were able to embark on industrial production.2
The same method of calculation shows that in 1950, in the United States,
industrial investment per person actively employed represented (on the average)
twenty-nine months' wages, and in the under-developed countries some 350
months' wages (assuming the technical level of the undertakings concerned
was about the same). True, this is not invariably the case, since handicrafts,
which are so very important in the developing countries, do not require
investments on anything like the same scale. But, considered as a whole,
industrialisation gives rise to two major problems, whose importance cannot
be under-estimated: firstly, how to adapt manpower to an increasingly complex
technology, and secondly, how to ensure that investments are commensurate
with available manpower. In fact, there is a link between the two. The
developing countries frequently have to choose between an industry demanding
heavy capital investment per man employed and one in which large numbers
are given work for relatively little capital investment. It is by no means
always easy to decide between the two, especially when the industry in question
will be concerned with the competitive export market, or is to produce power,
in which case poor productivity will adversely affect the price of local manufactured goods. Since the manpower available is steadily growing, and since
a modern refinery, for example, may cost more than US $60 million and yet
employ no more than three hundred people 3 , it would seem that the developing
1
On the difficulties encountered by peasants on becoming an urban proletariat, see Witold
Kula: Recherches comparatives sur la formation de la classe ouvrière (First Economic History
Congress, Stockholm, 1960) (Paris, Mouton, 1960).
* Bairoch, op. cit., p. 197.
'United Nations: The United Nations Development Decade at Mid-Point : An Appraisal
by the Secretary-General (New York, 1965; Sales No.: 65.1.26), p. 18.
26
The awakening of the under-developed world
countries should in every case try to strike a happy mean, so as to ensure
maximum employment in relation to (a) the imperatives of foreign trade,
and (b) the capacity of the domestic market.
This happy balance, which the European countries have often found by
purely pragmatic means (true, inter-European competition was far less severe
than competition between the developing and the developed countries today),
combined with a relatively low rate of growth in the labour force, enabled the
European countries to avoid a swollen services sector. To the extent that it
absorbs proportionally more of the national product than it provides employment, this helps (as Bairoch has shown) to push up prices and to put the
developing countries in an even more difficult position.1 In Europe during
the last twenty or thirty years of the nineteenth century, between 10 and 25
per cent of the total labour force was employed in services (between 29 and
32 per cent between 1920 and 1930 2)—a lower percentage than that of workers
in industry. However, in most of the developing countries, in 1954-60, the
services sector represented a higher percentage than industry3, and frequently
absorbed a disproportionately high percentage of the domestic product4 (a
phenomenon observable in nineteenth-century Europe, too, but in Europe this
sector occupied a much smaller percentage of the active labour force). In
Asia (if we exclude mainland China), for example, 67 per cent of the available
manpower was employed in agriculture in 1950-60, as against 21 per cent in
services and 12 per cent in industry.5
This being so, should the above-mentioned problems be tackled by giving
top priority to the accelerated industrial development ?
It is in fact simply not true that the developing countries have to choose
between industrial and agricultural development, and we cannot overstress
this point. There are certain countries which, having staked everything on
accelerated industrial development, have found themselves in a very difficult
1
Bairoch, op.Jcit., pp. 161-163.
These percentages (29 and 32 per cent) hold good of an ensemble composed of eleven
countries in central and southern Europe. Men only are concerned. See Svennilson : Growth
and Stagnation in the European Economy, op. cit., p. 75. As regards that proportion of the
national product represented by services, see Simon Kuznets: "Quantitative Aspects of the
Economic Growth of Nations. II. Industrial Distribution of National Product and Labour
Force", Economic Development and Cultural Change (Chicago, University of Chicago), Vol. V,
No. 4 (Supplement), July 1957, passim. The number of women now in paid employment, the multiplication of social services, and indeed the needs of industrial development led
to an increase in these figures after the Second World War. But this increase occurred
at the end of a lengthy period of development, not comparable to the inflation of services
in the developing countries. A comparative examination of productivity clearly brings this
out.
3
ILO: Year Book of Labour Statistics, 1965 (Geneva, 1966), Ch. I, passim.
1
Bairoch, op. cit., p. 163.
6
"The Population and Labour Force of Asia, 1950-80", op. cit., p. 362.
2
27
Agricultural organisations and development
position indeed, sometimes on the verge of famine. In all such cases, they
have had to revise their ideas and arrive at a more wholesome balance between
industry and agriculture. At a time such as today, what with soaring population figures and inadequate food production in the developing countries,
and bearing in mind the increased requirements of town-dwellers (and of
industrial workers in particular)1, it is easy to see the dangers inherent in a
policy of industrial development which under-estimates the importance of the
countryside as a source of food for the towns and as an outlet and a market
for manufactured goods. It is just as obvious that any embryonic industry
requires satisfactory internal markets and effective protection by import duties
until such time as it is ready to face international competition. Only close
ties between agriculture, handicrafts and industry (and respect for the necessary
balance between production for export and production for the home market)
will offer a way out of the vicious circle of agricultural under-development and
a proper link between town and countryside.
The experience acquired in the West is instructive for all those who believe
that industrialisation is the remedy for every ill, either because their economic
calculations have gone astray, or because they think that industrialisation is
a pre-requisite of political independence. A glance at the figures for a fairly
lengthy period reveals two salient facts.
In the first place, agriculture's contribution to the national product tends
to fall off progressively, but slowly, in the course of industrialisation. England
is an exception ; in that country, agriculture accounted for no more than 27 per
cent of the national income in 1812, 10 per cent in 1895, and barely 6 per cent
in 1950; everywhere else, it has remained relatively important, and dwindled
only very slowly. The data published by S. Kuznets show that at current
prices agriculture's contribution to the national product in France was 51
per cent in 1835 and 23 per cent in 1949; in Denmark, 45.1 per cent in 1870-79,
and 19.2 per cent in 1947-52; in Italy, 55.7 per cent in 1876-80 and 26.4 per
cent in 1950-54; in Japan, 64.6 per cent in 1878-82 and 24.4 per cent in 1947-54;
in the United States, 20.5 per cent in 1869-79 and 7.2 per cent in 1947-54.2 It is
clear, then, that between seventy and a hundred years have been required for
agriculture's share in national incomes to fall by half. Things being what
they are, it is therefore reasonable to assume that for a very long time to come,
agriculture will contribute a very large share to the income of the developing
countries.
1
In a great many countries, the changeover from agriculture to industry has meant a
substantial extension of the working day and working week, and hence a greater demand
for food, proportionate to output. See FAO: Nutrition and Working Efficiency (Rome, 1962),
passim, and p. 23 especially.
2
Kuznets, op. cit., pp. 68-73.
28
The awakening of the under-developed world
Secondly, at least fifty years have as a rule to elapse before agricultural
manpower, as a proportion of the total active population, is reduced by half. This
has been so in the developed countries (some examples are given in table 2).
It seems that the maximum rate at which the percentage represented by the
agricultural population falls off usually varies between 0.5 and 1 per cent per
annum, assuming the population to be increasing at the normal rate. Besides
which, it will be noticed that only quite a long time after industrialisation
begins does the agricultural labour force—in absolute terms—begin to diminish.
If we make an exception for the United Kingdom, where this labour force
was already dwindling in the nineteenth century, the phenomenon is observable
in the other Western countries only from about 1920 onwards.
Thus, if we optimistically assume that the developing countries will be able
to industrialise at something like the rate which characterised the developed
ones, between fifty and eighty years will nevertheless be required before their
agricultural labour force is reduced by half. For the time being, we can but
observe that industrialisation has lagged behind the increase in manpower,
and that the imbalance is largely due to an influx from the countryside which in
certain areas could have been to some extent dammed had thorough-going
agricultural reform and promotion been undertaken in good time. In some
instances, this phenomenon has been rendered worse by the preference shown
Table 2. Active agricultural population: time required, from the beginning of industrialisation, for the percentage of the active agricultural population in the total active
population to fall by about half
Country
Date of beginning of
industrialisation
Agricultural labour
force at that time
Agricultural labour
force later
%
%
United Kingdom
1783-1802
35 in 1811
France
1830-1860
64.4 in 1851
1833-1860
1843-1860
1850-1873
1868-1890
1878-1900
40.8 in 1866
53 in 1870
43 in 1882
48 in 1910
82 in 1880
1
Belgium
United States
Germany
Sweden
Japan
1
35 in 1861 and
13 in 1881
36.4 in 1931 and
28 in 1954
19.4 in 1910
28 in 1920
26 in 1939
21 in 1950
41 in 1955
Men only.
Sources: United Kingdom: P. Bairoch: Revolution industrielle et sous-développement (Paris, SEDES, 1963), p. 269;
"The World's Working Population", International Labour Review (Geneva, ILO), Vol. LXXm, No. 5, May 1956,
p. 507. France : Evolution de la population active en France depuis cent ans d'après les dénombrements quinquennaux,
Etudes et conjoncture (Economie française) (Paris), May-June 1953, No. 3, p. 249; "La population active de la
France de 1954 à 1957", Etudes statistiques (Paris, INSEE), No. 3, July-September 1957, p. 5. Belgium : UNESCO :
World Illiteracy at Mid-Century (Paris, 1957), p. 194. Germany, United States and Sweden: "The World's
Working Population", op. cit., p. 507. Japan: "The Population and Labour Force of Asia, 1950-80", International Labour Review. Vol. LXXXVI, No. 4, October 1962, p. 363. For the dates of the beginning of industrialisation, see W. W. Rostow: The Stages of Economic Growth (Cambridge University Press, 1966).
29
Agricultural organisations and development
for industries with big outputs and a small labour force, at the expense of
small-scale industry of the traditional type which, in 1964, nevertheless
accounted for 46 per cent of manufacturing employment in Latin America and
even higher percentages (as much as 70 per cent in India)1 in Asia. This is not
a root-and-branch denunciation of modern industry in the developing countries :
modern industries are essential, and help to develop a useful services sector;
they are thus instrumental, if only indirectly, in creating more employment.
Hence a proper balance must in each particular instance be struck. We must
not be deluded into thinking that industrial and agricultural development
are somehow incompatible.
THE URGENT NEED FOR REORGANISATION OF
AGRICULTURE IN THE DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Be this as it may, it seems unlikely that the developing countries will manage
to ensure absorption of future manpower increases, and ensure that the process
of industrialisation successfully runs its course, without a profound upheaval
in agriculture. Hitherto, development has been excessively one-sided, either
because undue importance has been attached to production for export at the
expense of the domestic market, or because too high a priority has been given
to industrialisation. A society can develop harmoniously only if it can secure
its food. Otherwise, its plans and projects for the future will be built on
sand.
These are self-evident truths, and it should not be necessary to repeat them.
But repeat them we must, for they are all too frequently forgotten. As the
Chairman of the OECD Development Assistance Committee has shrewdly
remarked, "Perhaps the greatest recent shift in emphasis has been the rapidly
increasing recognition of the necessity of making more progress in the agricultural field".2
Certainly, the road to development is liberally strewn with obstacles, but
it should not be impossible to surmount or otherwise obviate them. We
have already reviewed the advantages enjoyed at the time of the Industrial
Revolution by the countries now developed, and considered the difficulties
with which the countries newly arrived on the industrial scene are at present
1
A point emphasised by the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East in its
annual report: "In most countries (of ECAFE) modern industry has grown at a much faster
rate than traditional industry" (Economic Survey of Asia and the Far East, 1965, op. cit.,
p. 47).
a
Willard L. Thorp, "New Developments in Foreign Assistance", OECD Observer, Special
Issue on Development (September 1966).
30
The awakening of the under-developed world
confronted. These difficulties are compounded by survivals of the old
colonial era, in so far as the industrial Powers try to keep outfinishedor semifinished goods from the developing world. An extreme, and highly revealing,
example is afforded by cocoa powder and butter, taxed at no less than 136
per cent of their value when imported by the countries of the European
Economic Community, whereas cocoa beans pay a mere 5 per cent.1
A solution to these problems would certainly speed up industrialisation
in the developing countries, but would not necessarily provide thefilliprequired
to get traditional food-crop farming out of the rut in which it has for centuries
vegetated. The problem here is how to transform and improve farming
methods; how to change men's outlook and the way in which they organise
their labours. The problem, in short, is first and foremost a human one, and
cannot be tackled by the methods of economics, agronomics or sociology
alone. The introduction of new techniques inevitably proceeds in ups and
downs. New agricultural methods change traditional cycles and working
hours; the wandering shepherd becomes a stable-boy; many a farm labourer
becomes redundant and is not found work elsewhere. The part played by
the community is subtly changed, and work which commanded great prestige
ceases to have it. If innovation, in fact, is to prove successful, then a coherent,
co-ordinated attack must be launched on the past. Such an approach has been
accepted by all the United Nations agencies—happily so, for in the past the
need for it was sometimes overlooked and technical assistance activities carried
on without any over-all rhyme or reason. To sum up, then, we may say
that to exchange the hoe for the tractor is often by no means as simple a
process as it might appear.
Europe, too, had these problems at one time. Its history is extraordinarily
rich in lessons for the developing countries of today (hence we shall review
it in outline later on). The triumph of European agriculture is due to three
things: (a) the improvement of farming methods and abandonment of the
fallow system; (b) the introduction of fertilisers; (c) organisation of manpower,
taking the form, firstly, of co-operatives, and later, of trade unions. The
agricultural revolution, which lasted almost two hundred years (from 1750 to
the end of the First World War) was carried through almost without machinery
in the modern sense of the word. True, the basic implements (harrow, seeder
and plough) were greatly improved during this period. But only after the
Second World War did agricultural mechanisation really get under way. In
1938, Denmark, the Netherlands and France (to take but three examples)
1
See K. S. Sundara Rajan: "Tariff Preferences and Developing Countries", Finance and
Development (Washington, International Monetary Fund; Paris, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development), Vol. Ill, No. 4, December 1966, p. 265.
31
Agricultural organisations and development
had 3,500, 4,000, and 36,000 tractors respectively; early in 1960, they had
96,000, 64,000 and 700,00o.1 Even in the United States a mere 23 percent of
all farms were mechanised in 1940.
It might not be amiss to keep thesefiguresin mind. For there is a tendency
to compare agriculture in the developing countries with agriculture as it is
in the developed world today. This is, of course, absurd, and tends sometimes
to make difficulties appear worse than they really are. The same holds good
of illiteracy, frequently alluded to in reports on the world social situation.
Certainly, illiteracy is a severe handicap in a country thirsting for industrialisation; but it is an inescapable fact that the extraordinary surge of European
agriculture in the nineteenth century occurred at a time when a very high
proportion of the population were able neither to read nor to write. In 1840,
42 per cent of the population of England were illiterate; in France, the figure
was 47 per cent. And these figures cover town and countryside alike; in the
countryside alone, they must have been greater. We do, in fact, have data
for Germany; these show that as late as 1882, 41.6 per cent of the peasantry
were still illiterate.2
Thus, while we must not underestimate this problem, it must not be considered an insurmountable obstacle. There are no less than 700 million
illiterates in the world today; agricultural progress in the developing countries
cannot be expected to wait until they all know how to read and write.
Clearly, these countries cannot afford to wait a hundred years before
their food problems are solved. The way ahead may seem rough, the difficulties formidable, yet these countries must make even greater speed than
Europe. International technical co-operation, a stabilisation of the prices
paid for primary produce, and a clean sweep of the barriers represented by
existing institutions would, in the not too distant future, produce a better
balance between that part of agriculture in the developing countries which
produces for export and that part still organised on traditional lines. But
if traditional farming is to develop at a reasonable speed, much more will have
to be done in the way of training, and a densely woven network of agricultural
organisations, local, provincial and national, will have to be created. Unless
the peasant knows how to make proper use of fertilisers and of the water
provided by irrigation schemes, unless there are men able to introduce and
popularise new methods of farming, then money, technical assistance and
supplies will be, if not entirely useless, at least inadequate. Clearly, technical
'See Henri Noilhan: Histoire de l'agriculture à l'ère industrielle (Paris, de Boccard,
1965), Vol. V, p. 125.
2
UNESCO: World Illiteracy at Mid-Century, op. cit., Ch. X; E. Levasseur: La population
française (Paris, Rousseau, 1889-92), Vol. II, p. 478.
32
The awakening of the under-developed world
assistance experts cannot make good all the shortcomings of the developing
world. The most they can do is to train those who will train others.
But to this end it is vitally important that every developing country should
realise how capital is the human element in development. They must be
made aware of the part which agricultural organisations can play in arousing
the countryside from its slumbers. It is in the hope of promoting this awareness that we shall now look at the development of European agriculture
from the agricultural revolution of the eighteenth century to the present day,
and then describe the position in the developing countries today, taking care
in so doing to eschew false and pernicious analogies. For our aim is to
make these countries fully aware of the possibilities, both hidden and apparent,
of a reorganisation of their agriculture.
33
PART II
THE EVOLUTION OF
AGRICULTURAL ORGANISATIONS IN EUROPE
A. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
G
THE SITUATION OF AGRICULTURE AND THE PEASANTRY
BETWEEN 1750 AND 1848
European thinking on the subject of agriculture may be said to have
received its impetus around 1750.1 This does not mean that the subject
had been absent from the minds of the writers and politicians of previous
centuries. In one way or another, it crops up throughout the whole of
classical literature since Greek and Roman times, whether in the Eclogues of
Theocritus, the Georgics of Virgil, Pliny's lamentation over the Roman
latifundia, or—nearer to our own time—in the sixteenth century, in the famous
Utopia of Sir Thomas More. But in the second half of the century that saw
the birth of the Encyclopaedia, in a climate of effervescent physiocracy, a
more scientific awareness of agriculture led to the creation of societies and
academies many of which are still in existence. It would be no exaggeration
to call this a true awakening of the mind. For, whereas as far back as the
seventeenth century arts and letters already had their own institutions, agriculture still had none. In France, for instance, the Académie Française was
founded in 1635, the Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres in 1663 and
the Académie des Sciences in 1666, though the only agricultural subject it
covered was botany. Not until a century later, in 1761, was the Société
Royale d'Agriculture founded, to become in 1915 the Académie d'Agriculture
of our time. Similarly, in England, while the Royal Society was set up in
1662, it was only in 1773 that the Board of Agriculture came into being, its
members studying inter alia the experience of farmers in various parts of the
world. And it was only in 1838, when the Royal Agricultural Society was
founded, that England finally acquired a real agricultural academy. In
Denmark, on the other hand, the Royal Danish Agricultural Society came
into being eight years after the French.
1
Suffice it to recall that the famous Traité sur la nature du commerce en général, in which
Cantillon states that land is the source of all wealth, appeared in 1755. Quesnay's Tableau
économique appeared in 1758 and Turgot's Réflexions sur la formation et la distribution des
richesses in 1766.
37
Agricultural organisations and development
In other countries, however, while no agricultural academies or societies
were set up at the national level, numerous small local societies were founded,
paying increasing attention to the problems of the land (the "Societies of the
Friends of the Country" in Spain are a typical example). This was followed
in the nineteenth century by a tremendous proliferation of agricultural organisations of every kind, including higher agricultural colleges and new scientific
institutes dealing with the problems of the land.
Parallel to this increase in the scientific interest shown in agriculture,
Europe witnessed a real revolution in agricultural methods which, to a certain
extent, began in England. In that traditional land of communal agriculture,
partly of the open-field variety and based on cereal crops and common pasture
land, there was a sudden spurt, from 1760 onwards, by the enclosure movement
which throughout Tudor and Stuart times had been making quiet headway,
to the advantage of the large landowners.1 This movement had begun to
spread as far back as 1720, but its acceleration in 1750 (when enclosure by
decree began playing an important part), and the application in 1801 of the
General Enclosure Decree contributed not only to the development of mediumsized and large holdings and the adoption of new farming methods (the raising
of fat stock, replacement of rye and oats by wheat, introduction of new plants
and artificial fodder), but also to the release of excess rural population for the
benefit of urban industry. In just over a century—1720 to 1840—this concentration of holdings affected 6.25 million acres and thus laid the foundation of
modern British agriculture. In this connexion it should be stressed, as pointed
out by J. Pirenne2, that in this country where agriculture had been free for so
long, the system of enclosures was evolved not for the benefit of any seigneur
and serf system, but for the benefit of capitalist landowners; and this, from the
point of view of the evolution of social structures, is of paramount importance.
It is true that this reform of land tenure and the drift towards urban
industry had their good and bad sides. They opened new prospects for the
working class of England; but these benefits were not felt until a century
later. More harsh was the fate of nearby Ireland, gradually conquered by
England between the twelfth and seventeenth centuries and despoiled of her
lands by English overlords, who then had these lands cultivated under a system
of tenancy at will. As there were no industries to absorb the excess population,
the agrarian problem of Ireland was not "solved", so to speak, until the mass
emigrations to America in the following century.
1
See T. S. Ashton: The Industrial Revolution, 1760-1830 (London, Oxford University
Press, 1948), passim; Noilhan: Histoire de l'agriculture à l'ère industrielle, op. cit., Vol. V,
Ch. II; Gilbert Slater: The English Peasantry and the Enclosure of Common Fields (London,
London School of Economics, 1896 and 1907).
2
Pirenne, op. cit., Vol. V, p. 29.
38
Europe: historical background
Turning now to agriculture in France at the end of the eighteenth century,
we find that although in theory serfdom had long been abolished, in practice
it still survived in an attenuated form, as mortmain, in the eastern part of the
country. Mortmain, either personal or real, determined the peasants' succession rights. In the first case, if a peasant's direct heirs did not live with
him, they had no right to his property, not even to his goods and chattels.
In the second case, the mortmain affected only mortmainable property occupied
by the deceased, leaving him free to dispose of the rest. This still applied to
about a million persons.1 In general, French agriculture was dominated by
small landowners as well as by farmers and tenants cultivating the land of the
privileged class. But, in that country where the nobility, clergy and bourgeoisie of the time owned scarcely half the land2, the movement of prices from
1740 onwards helped to enrich those who cultivated the land at the expense
of those who owned it and who had signed long-term leases3; and in spite of
the rise in prices which affected the new farmers, France experienced neither
the drift from the land to the towns, as in England, nor emigration, as in
Ireland. As a result, when the time came for industrialisation after the end
of the Ancien Régime, France had at her disposal a relatively small proportion
of former agricultural workers, especially as the peasants (the vast majority of
whom were already free before the Revolution) took advantage of the sale
of national property at the time of the Revolution to round off their plots or
open up new holdings. In the nineteenth century the number of small rural
landowners rose from 6 to 7.5 million between 1830 and 1850. Thus, for a
long time—in fact, until the Second World War—France retained a considerable
active agricultural population. And when the co-operatives and trade unions
began to make their appearance, they did so later and more slowly than in
England, and in a profoundly individualistic rural environment.
This, very briefly, is the fairly exceptional situation in these two countries
at the end of the eighteenth century. If we extend our survey to the east,
north and south, the picture changes considerably. East of France, where the
land was generally held by the nobility, the German peasantry was subjected
to a variety of legal systems ranging from freedom to serfdom.
1
In spite of the abolition of mortmain in the royal domain, ordered by Necker in 1779,
this form of exploitation disappeared completely only at the time of the Revolution. Other
forms of exploitation of feudal origin persisted in certain regions of France in the first half
of the nineteenth century; see in this
respect Albert Soboul: "Survivances 'féodales' dans la
société rurale française au XIX me siècle", Les Annales (Paris), No. 5, September-October 1968, pp. 965-986.
2
See Jean Loutchisky: L'état des classes agricoles en France à la veille de la Révolution
(Paris, Champion, 1911), pp. 42-43, 45 et seq.
8
See in this connexion C. E. Labrousse: Esquisse du mouvement des prix et des revenus
en France au XVUI™ siècle (Paris, Dalloz, 1932).
39
Agricultural organisations and development
In south-west Germany (Baden, Württemberg, Bavaria), as a result of
successive measures the majority of peasants were free, and although serfs
were still to be found—particularly in Bavaria—they were mostly peasants
subject to taxation and certain corvées, but not to the arbitrary obligation
typical of the Middle Ages, such as tallage, mortmain and "formariage"
(which required the serf to obtain the seigneur's permission to marry outside
the domain). Unlike the eastern regions, there were no large estates, the
land being parcelled and granted by the landowners to the peasants in tenure
for life or on a hereditary basis. In general, a serf was no longer bound to the
soil as in the Middle Ages, except in Baden where his departure entailed the
confiscation of his goods and of the land he held. He was allowed to sell
or exchange his tenure or bequeath it to his children even if they belonged to
a different domain, for serfdom was personal by virtue of birth and it was
frequent for a serf to till the tenure of one seigneur while belonging to another.
A similar system prevailed in north-west Germany (Westphalia, Hanover,
Lüneburg) where serfdom had also disappeared from practically every region,
although traces of the system could still be found in Hanover and the counties
of Haya and Diepholz. Those who were born serfs or who became serfs
by acquiring land subject to serfdom had certain obligations to the seigneur:
without the seigneur's permission they could not sell, mortgage, sue or marry,
and they had to pay a due to leave the domain. On the other hand, the dues
they were required to pay were equal to or lower than those of free tenants,
and in general it may be said that from the economic point of view their position
was no worse under one form of tenancy than under the other. Moreover,
towards the end of the eighteenth century the gradual emancipation of the serfs
began to spread throughout the whole of north-west Germany. As in the
south-west of the country, there were no large domains in this region: peasant
holdings of medium size were subject to the property rights of the seigneurs
and leased by them to farmers on a tenancy (usually six, nine or twelve years)
in exchange for certain dues payable in money or kind, sometimes even for a
share of the crops equivalent to a quarter or a third of the harvest. This
was known as the Meiergut, a rather special system which gradually became
transformed into hereditary tenancy. It may be noted that the Meier (tenant)
was compensated at the end of his lease for any building he may have erected
and any improvements made by him—a remarkable aspect for the times, if
we remember that in some countries the question is still being debated of
whether tenancy and share-cropping leases should provide for final compensation for improvements made by the tenant. Of course, not all aspects of
the Meiergut were positive: the tenant was required to grow certain crops
and not others and could not make a change without the permission of his
seigneur; he could not share out his holding, which had to go to his eldest
40
Europe: historical background
son, and he could be evicted if he failed to work his land adequately. The
freedom of the Meier thus differed considerably from that of the farmer of
more recent times. Alongside this institution, there were in Lower Saxony
systems of hereditary quit-rent tenure under which peasants could cultivate
the land with greater freedom and for which the dues payable were lower
than was the case for the Meiergut. As Henri See rightly points out, whereas
the purpose of the Meiergut was to maintain not only the Meier, but also the
landlord, who received a considerable share of the revenue, in the case of
quit-rent tenure the seigneur was entitled only to the ordinary revenues of the
seigneurial system.1
It should be pointed out that from the point of view of communal organisation the north-west of Germany, like the south-west, was endowed with a
solid structure going back to the Middle Ages in all matters concerning justice
(the seigneur who rendered justice was not necessarily the same seigneur who
owned the land, as was the case east of the Elbe), the upkeep of roads and
bridges, customary rights, administration of communal property, the fire
service and tax collection. In the south-west it was the Schultheiss (mayor),
appointed by the seigneur and paid by the community, who presided over
the organisation of the village and sometimes even of its tribunal, which
consisted of twelve members. In the north-west it was the Bauermeister
(president of the peasant council) who administered the village under the supervision of the prince's officials. But the village community here enjoyed a
great degree of independence. Its members all enjoyed the same democratic
right to vote. As an organisation, the community was free from the authority
of the landowner in all matters concerning private law, since his authority
extended only to individual members; for public law, the community was
placed under the supervision of the princely state.2
East of the Elbe, where large estates were exploited directly by their owners,
the situation was entirely different. Just as the origin of the latifundia in
Spain may be situated at the time of the Reconquest (i.e. of territories occupied
by the Arabs), in eastern Germany the Thirty Years War, with its devastations
and the departure of the peasants from their land, contributed to the formation
of large estates by the simple annexation of abandoned tenures. The same
phenomenon may be found elsewhere; in Bohemia the Hussite Wars, in the
fifteenth century, were its cause; in the Baltic region it was the result of successive wars which set those territories aflame during the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries.
1
Henri Sée: Esquisse d'une histoire du régime agraire en Europe aux XVIII™' et XlXm*
siècles (Paris, Bibliothèque internationale d'économie politique, 1921), p. 73.
2
ibid., p. 80.
41
Agricultural organisations and development
The existence of large estates in eastern Europe is connected with the
fact that the peasant is bound to the soil. In certain regions (Holstein, Pomerania, Mecklemburg, Livonia, eastern Austria and Poland), the seigneur held
the power of life and death over his subjects and could sell them simply as
slaves. Elsewhere his subject was legally free and could dispose of his goods
and chattels ; but he was in fact reduced to a state of serfdom through numerous
ties with the seigneur. The landed aristocrats of German origin who reigned
over the Slav populations dominated the State by their political power; it
was as if they were ruling a conquered people.
After the Thirty Years War Electoral Saxony witnessed the development of
the notion of compulsory service by peasants (Gesindezwangsdienst) against
payment of a meagre wage.1 This service, which initially was restricted to
one year's work for the seigneur, was extended to four years in 1766. Moreover, the subjects were compelled to perform a multitude of corvées which
the landed aristocracy attempted to increase, at the same time reducing the
development of home industries in order to have more manpower at its disposal. Between 1764 and 1766 the government introduced a whole series of
new measures, in spite of the opposition of the universities and the city dwellers:
industry and commerce could be carried on only in the cities, hawking was
forbidden, there was to be only one haberdasher in each village, special permission was required to establish workshops or factories in rural areas, and
finally no child over the age of 14 was allowed to leave the country or become
apprenticed to a factory without having worked for four years in agriculture.
In this way the nobility, which held discretionary powers of justice and police
and issued economic regulations, established a system which may be termed
a system of forced labour on a time basis.
In countries under the Prussian monarchy2 where the situation had been
deteriorating since the end of the fifteenth century, following the Hussite
Wars, German seigneurs practised a policy of gradual aggrandisement of their
domains either through expropriation pure and simple, or by transforming
hereditary possessions into tenancy at will, or else by increasing the corvées
imposed upon the peasants. In any case, the latter were frequently too poor
to buy a tenure and were content to farm the land for life, such tenure being
termed Lassgut, from which they derive their name of "lassite" peasants.
1
For further details see Fr.-Joh. Haun: Bauer und Gutsherr in Kursachsen (Strasbourg,
Social Science Seminar, 1891).
8
See Georg Friedrich Knapp: Die Bauernbefreiung und der Ursprung der Landarbeiter
in den älteren Theilen Preussens (Leipzig, 1887), 2 vols. ; Grundherrschaft und Rittergut, Vorträge,
nebst biographischen Beilagen (Leipzig, 1897). See also Philipp August Meitzen: Der
Boden und die landwirtschaftlichen Verhältnisse des preussischen Staates (Berlin, 1868-1908),
8 vols.
42
Europe: historical background
The farmer thus held the land on a tenure at will and at his death it reverted
automatically to the seigneur. In practice the latter transferred the land to
one of the children of the "lassite". Contrary to the situation prevailing in
north-west Germany the "lassite" did not receive any compensation for the
improvements made to his tenancy, and naturally enough this did little to
encourage the development of agriculture. Moreover, in the eighteenth
century the tendency was to render tenure even more precarious by fixing a
term to the leases (from three to nine years) which served to decrease yet
further the farmers' interest in any long-term improvement of crops or rural
dwellings.1 Here the peasant was deprived of any possibility of claiming his
rights ; magistfates' courts or the agents who in western Germany represented
at one and the same time the inhabitants and the seigneur, did not exist on the
territories of the Prussian monarchy. There the power of the seigneur was
absolute.
The same considerations apply to Lower Silesia, which was integrated into
the Prussian monarchy in 1763. However, the Thirty Years War, which in
other regions was the source of the Lassgut system, hardly affected this province, and here the peasants, although obliged to perform certain corvées
for the seigneur, could dispose of their tenure and pass it on to their heirs
provided they made no attempt to divide it.2
This brief survey would not give a faithful picture of the situation if it
omitted to take into account the Crown domains, which covered one-quarter
of the land and where the sovereigns (moved by considerations which without
doubt sprang from an economic rather than a humanitarian source) attempted
to raise the technical level of agriculture, realising that this would likewise
require a change in the social condition of the peasants. Under Frederick
William I (1688-1740) government policy, guided by the king, tended towards
the suppression of serfdom. The "Sergeant-King" rightly believed that in
the hands of free men hereditary tenure would promote agriculture progress.
However, this freedom was still of a limited nature, for the peasant remained
1
The problem of precarious tenure is stressed in this study, because it is still present in
many countries even in our days. One of the arguments most frequently invoked by specialists of agrarian law against restricted tenancies (fermage à temps) is precisely the fact that
by discouraging the farmer the whole economic development of rural areas is impeded.
2
This policy of parcenary of land was not devoid of meaning. The authorities were
doubtless aware of the fact that below a certain size the tenancy became too small to be
viable. The problem of an endless sharing-out of land is still very acute in several regions
of Western Europe where the trend is towards a policy based on the creation of self-supporting
family units. On the subject of the drawbacks arising out of the conception of property in
the French civil code it may be useful to refer to A. Poulain: "L'évolution du droit rural",
(in Noilhan: op. cit., Vol. V, pp. 624-652), which also contains comments on other European
countries. Concerning Spain, for instance, a country which French influence makes a
typical example, see Alberto Bailarín: Derecho agrario (Madrid, 1965), Ch. VI and VII.
43
Agricultural organisations and development
bound to the domain and subject to compulsory service. This policy, which
at the time had no practical effect in view of the considerable resistance it
encountered from officials and from the peasants themselves, was finally
developed under Frederick II; servitude was abolished on Crown lands in
1763, compulsory labour under constraint was forbidden in 1767, and in 1804
the Ordinance of Schön finally established the personal liberty of the peasants
on the royal domains. Unfortunately, on private domains all these measures
remained practically without effect in spite of the personal efforts of Frederick II.
Only in the course of the nineteenth century did the emancipation of the peasants begin to acquire its full meaning.
A situation similar to that of eastern Germany prevailed in law or in fact
in the northern countries, with the exception of Norway, a nation of landowning peasants without a traditional aristocracy and where in 1814 the people
compelled Bernadotte to accept a liberal constitution and a Storting elected
by landowners and city burghers. True, Sweden and Finland too had traditional representative institutions in which peasants and burghers participated ;
but in Sweden, although there was no serfdom (except in Pomerania1), the
Diet was in fact only a delegation of landed nobility from the south and confined itself to registering the laws dictated by the latter (it was only in 1862
that Sweden acquired the modern parliamentary system); and in Finland,
which showed similar characteristics, the situation was aggravated by the fact
that in culture and language the aristocracy was alien to the peasant classes
of the country. In the two duchies of Schleswig-Holstein serfdom predominated, with all its obligations : marriage, choice of trade, departure from the
domain possible only with the consent of the seigneur. This situation was
remedied only at the beginning of the nineteenth century, by the Ordinances
of 1803-1805 which abolished serfdom.
The same problems, with slight variations, were to be found in Denmark
where the peasants, who were free in the Middle Ages, became gradually
bound to the soil in the course of the sixteenth century. It is true that
Christian IV had already emancipated his serfs in 1620 on part of his domains
but the almost unanimous opposition of the Diet prevented him from extending
this measure in 1634 to Zeeland and Laaland. When in 1702 Frederick IV
decreed the abolition of serfdom in these provinces the edict remained a dead
letter. Indeed, until the end of the eighteenth century the situation continued
to deteriorate as far as the peasantry was concerned. In spite of the abolition
1
See C.-Joh. Fuchs: Der Untergang des Bauernstandes und das Aufkommen der Gutsherrschaften in Neu-Vorpommern und Rügen (Strasbourg, Social Science Seminar, 1888),
fase. 6.
44
Europe: historical background
of serfdom by an Ordinance of 20 June 1788 effective emancipation did not
take place until the following century.1
In the motley assembly of countries under the Austrian monarchy2 there
were, as in Germany, some differences between the eastern and western parts
of the region. In the west, the seigneurial system was predominant; in the
east, the Gutsherrschaft held sway—a similar system, but based on the latifundian
principle. Here too, the Hussite Wars and the Thirty Years War contributed
to an increase in the seigneurial holdings, for the benefit of a class which in
many places was completely foreign to the local peasantry from not only the
linguistic but also the religious and the ethnic points of view. It may be noted
that while in Austria itself—particularly in Upper Austria—the bondage of
the peasants was less harsh than in eastern Germany, in Bohemia, a country
of latifundia, the situation was very different. As in the case of Moravia and
Silesia, authority was vested entirely in the seigneur who was not only competent in matters of civil and criminal justice, police and taxation, but also
had the monopoly of productive activities (brewing, distillation and sale of
alcoholic beverages, commerce in general) and compelled his subjects to buy
all their implements, cattle, seeds, etc., from him.
Here the virtually landless peasantry may be divided in three classes: the
Bauern (cultivators) who held their land under hereditary tenure or at will and
were thus able to subsist; the Häusler (small farmers) who had a house but
very little land and were consequently forced to hire themselves out to the seigneur; andfinallythe Meute (journeymen) who had neither house nor land and
were merely wage earners. The whole of this peasantry depended on the
large domains of the seigneur and was subject to the obligations and
corvées, whether ordinary or extraordinary, already described with regard to
eastern Germany.
However, the reforms carried out by Maria Theresa and Joseph II should
not be overlooked. Both the empress and her son helped to improve the lot
1
The emancipation of the Danish peasant in fact goes back to 1861, when the corvée
disappeared completely. It was also in the 1860s that agriculture, which until then had been
stagnant, began to react. The loss of Schleswig-Holstein to Bismarck's Germany in 1864
gave it its impetus. This was marked particularly by the establishment of the Hedeselskabet
(a society for the reclamation of heath lands) which, adopting the motto "What was lost
without shall be regained within", reclaimed some 2 million acres in a few years and, with
the tenacity characteristic of northerners, established 25,000 new farms. It is paradoxical
to think that this country, now in the vanguard of agricultural progress, was one of the last
Western countries to make a start during the last century. For more details see Noilhan, op.
cit., Ch. IV, pp. 388-395; also C. Christensen: Agrarhistoriske Studier (Copenhagen, 18861891), 2 vols.
a
See Karl Grünberg: Die Bauernbefreiung und die Auflösung des gutsherrlich-bäuerlichen
Verhältnisses in Böhmen, Mähren und Schlesien (Leipzig, 1894), 2 vol.; Georg Grüll: Bauer,
Herr und Landesfürst, Sozialrevolutionäre Bestrebungen der oberösterreichischen Bauern von
1650 bis 1848 (Cologne, 1963), particularly Ch. IV, pp. 363-419, and Ch. V, pp. 421-439.
45
Agricultural organisations and development
of agriculture in the second half of the eighteenth century. A legislative
evolution begun in 1750 led to the gradual emancipation of the peasants from
the hold of the seigneurs. A first stage carried out under Maria Theresa dealt
mainly with the regulation of charges. In Silesia, where peasant revolts had
taken place, the duration of the corvées was determined by statute in 1771.
In 1772 this was done in Lower Austria, and in 1775 in Moravia and Bohemia.
On the other hand the efforts undertaken in Hungary between 1766 and 1768
failed due to the opposition of the Diet; it was only in 1790 that the regulations
were provisionally recognised.
The second stage under Joseph II, the friend of the physiocrats, saw a
rapid acceleration in this evolution. Serfdom was abolished in quick succession
in Austria (1781), Transylvania (1783) and Hungary (1785). Henceforth
peasants were no longer compelled to pay dues to the seigneur before they
could get married, nor to solicit his permission in order to take up a trade.
They were even allowed to leave the domain without paying anything, on
condition that they asked the seigneur's permission—for the abolition of
serfdom did not mean the abolition of all obedience. Joseph went still
further; he did away with the Zwangsdienst (compulsory service for young
men) and restricted the powers of the seigneurs in matters of criminal justice.
He also tried to apply some other measures relating to the transformation of
precarious tenure into hereditary tenure, the introduction of a single land
tax, the creation of a general land register (which was completed in 1789)
and finally the transformation of all seigneurial services connected with tenure
into monetary dues freely agreed between the seigneurs and their subjects.
Although this last measure did not affect the landless peasants, who were
directly bound to the domains, it was too much for the patience of the seigneurs,
and the reaction of the Estates was such that in 1790 Joseph was forced
to repeal it in Hungary and give up the idea of applying it elsewhere. At the
end of the eighteenth century the limit had for the moment been reached :
the time was not yet ripe for the total emancipation of the peasantry, which
occurred only half a century later under the pressure of events.
The situation was much worse in Russia \ where the peasants, who had
been free during the Middle Ages, had been under bondage to the nobility
since the sixteenth century, and particularly so since the promulgation of the
1649 Code under Alexei Mikhailovitch. From that time onward the inscription
of the peasant on the tax roll marked his perpetual bondage to the domain
as a serf and became a rule of public law. The peasant was part of the goods
1
In addition to the numerous untranslated Russian sources, it may be useful to consult
Peter I. Lyashchenko: History of the National Economy of Russia (New York, Macmillan,
1949), particularly Ch. XV, XVII, XX and XXI.
46
Europe: historical background
sold with the domain. Later, in the eighteenth century, he could even be
separated from the land and sold or exchanged as a simple personal chattel.
The census of 1741 merely aggravated the situation, for the authorities took
advantage of it to assign to nobles men who until then had been free but who
had the misfortune of not belonging to the established classes: i.e. nobles,
government officials, clergy or traders. As Henri See points out:
The peasant no longer has any real guarantee: he is handed over body and soul
to his seigneur. In 1762 it is declared that there is no law under which a seigneur
may be punished for murdering a serf. Seigneurial justice is expressly recognised
and extended. A ukase of 13 December 1760 gives landowners the right to deliver
their serfs to the authorities and have them sent to Siberia if they have committed
a serious offence. In the case of revolt it is recommended that military
chiefs should
punish or reprieve serfs only according to the wish of their owner.1
For a long time this situation remained unchanged, in spite of the current
of reform which crossed the Russian frontiers. Jacques-Jean Sievers, a
favourite of Catherine II, proposed a whole string of reforms relating to the
cultivation of lands and the criminal justice meted out by seigneurs, but failed
to set up a purely academic agricultural society. Alexander Nicolaievitch
Radichev was sent to Siberia on his return from Europe in 1790 for having
dared to describe the lot of Russian peasants.
In the second half of the eighteenth century serfdom, which until then had
been predominant in Great Russia, extended to other regions of the empire :
White Russia, following its annexation in 1772; Little Russia in 1783, after
the revolt of the Zaporozhian Cossacks ; Crimea, Caucasus and South Russia
in 1796, under Paul I. It was abolished only in March 1861, by Alexander II,
following a long series of events to which reference will be made later.
To conclude this survey, we should take a look at the countries of the south
where in spite of a few tremors of a purely transient nature, time seems virtually
to have stood still in the rural areas. It is true that serfdom was unknown in
these regions. But that did not prevent the peasants from being oppressed
by taxes, insufficient wages and lack of land. There is almost everywhere a
sharp division which has caused much ink toflow,right up to the present day :
on the one hand, the north and its minifundia system where the peasant struggled
under a subsistence economy; and on the other, the south with its latifundia
1
Henri Sée, op. cit., p. 178. The Moscow Gazette of 1801 still carried advertisements
such as the following, which is a striking illustration of the situation of the serfs: "For sale,
three coachmen, well-trained and of good build, and two girls, one eighteen and the other
fifteen years old, both of good appearance and skilful in various handiworks. In the same
house, for sale, two hairdressers: one aged twenty-one, able to read, write, play musical
instruments and act as a studgroom; the other is able to dress the hair of ladies and gentlemen.
In the same house, for sale, pianos and organs." Quoted by D. McKenzie-Wallace: Russia
(London, 1879), 2 vols.
47
Agricultural organisations and development
where, deprived of ownership, he was merely a wage earner on a large estate.
Sometimes wefindthe two systems existing side by side, as well as mixed forms
of farming. In Italy, in northern Lombardy and Venetia, the peasant was
a small landowner on the mountain slopes or a tenant farmer or share-cropper
working the lands of the nobility in the plains. In Tuscany, he was usually
a share-cropper; in Parma and the Romagna, he was the owner of smallholdings. But as soon as we go south, whether to the Roman countryside,
Naples or Sicily, we find only day-labourers working on the large domains.
Here evolution was much slower than in the north, so much so that it was
only after the Second World War, at the time of the Vanoni Plan, that the
problem of the Mezzogiorno began to receive serious attention.
A similar and perhaps more pronounced duality characterised the Iberian
peninsula where the peasantry, free but for the greater part destitute, was
crushed beneath the burden of the social and economic structures handed down
from the sixteenth century practically unaltered. Portugal experienced hardly
any change throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Spain quite
simply failed to pass into the modern era. In the eighteenth century under
Charles III, the whole "Enlightenment" movement took an interest in the
peasantry, and Jovellanos, particularly, came to grips with the substance of
the problem in his report on agrarian law (Informe sobre la Ley Agraria)
submitted to the Council of Castilla in 1795. In his opinion, the peasantry
was then faced with three types of obstacles: (1) political obstacles, resulting
from legislation; (2) moral obstacles, resulting from opinion; (3) physical
obstacles, resulting from nature.
In the first group of obstacles were the following: the baldíos (waste land),
given over since the sixteenth century to cattle-breeders who, moreover, had
the right to graze their herds on private pasture lands; mainmortable lands,
which placed a large part of the agricultural acreage outside the economic
circuit ; obstacles to the free circulation of agricultural produce ;finally,excessive
taxation levied on small-holders.
In the second category Jovellanos included the ignorance of labourers, the
absence of centres teaching agronomy, and the insufficient protection given
by the government to agriculture which it crushed under all sorts of burdens
from which other sectors of the nation's economy were exempt.
Finally, in the third series he included the absence of irrigation canals,
the absence of land and river communications and the insufficient number of
commercial ports.
Jovellanos suggested several solutions to these problems, including: the
sale of the baldíos and municipal lands; the transfer of ownership over redeemed
lands belonging to the nobility, the clergy, the military orders and municipalities,
in order to put them back into the economic circuit and thus create a middle
48
Europe: historical background
class of labourers; freedom of trade; revision of the taxation system; the creation of agricultural institutes for the education of landowners; the elimination
of illiteracy in rural areas and the provision of agricultural handbooks for
peasants relating to their work. In short, he sketched out a whole programme
which, sadly, his contemporaries did not follow up.1 A few years later the
revolt of the Spanish people against the French invasion put an end to liberal
ideas, at the same time destroying the Francophile movement (that of the
afrancesados) to which most of the reformers of the time belonged. Even
the reform of Mendizabal, which came into effect in 1835, failed to reach to
the roots of the problem, although by selling the property of the clergy and
finally cancelling the legal bonds of the mortmains he helped to break down
the ancient structures and promoted the ascension of a landowning bourgeoisie.
But the poor peasants could not afford to buy the lands put up for sale, and
as a result these frequently served to increase the size of existing latifundia
or to create new estates. Thus between the minifundian north and the latifundian south a tragic dichotomy was created which persists even in our
times.
Such, in its broad lines, was the situation of the agricultural world at the
time of the French Revolution : full of hope in some countries of the west,
where the peasantry was rapidly moving towards modern production methods ;
apparently without hope in the north and east, where the old régime was due
to crumble in the next decades; stagnant in the south for a long time yet.
But the year 1789 was also the prelude to the great Napoleonic adventure
which, with or without the consent of the countries concerned, was to spread
liberal ideas throughout Europe either purely and simply by applying the
decrees of the Convention in regions invaded or temporarily annexed by France,
or by the introduction of liberal constitutions following the anti-Bonaparte
wars. The decrees of the Convention relating to the rights of the seigneurs
were applied in Belgium on 5 November 1795. In Holland the constitutions
of 1801 and 1804 abolished these rights and freed the land from any feudal
servitudes (certain rights, reintroduced in 1814, werefinallyabolished in 1848).
The whole of the left bank of the Rhine was subject to French legislation,
and this also applied in the Hanseatic countries where the rights of the seigneurs
were suppressed by decrees of 1811.
Similarly in Westphalia, which was a Napoleonic kingdom, the constitution
of 1807 abolished without compensation the remaining vestiges of serfdom
1
For more details see: Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos: Informe sobre la Ley Agraria
(Madrid, Rivadeneyra, 1859); Jean Sarrailh: L'Espagne éclairée de la second moitié du
XVIII™ siècle (Paris, Klincksieck, 1954), Ch. I, pp. 7-24.
49
Agricultural organisations and development
and arbitrary corvées. In Württemberg in 1808 King Frederick allowed
peasants to redeem their charges; in 1817 a new law abolished serfdom, but
this was not applied until 1846 and then only in certain of the nobility's
domains. In the meantime the laws of 27 and 28 October 1836 allowed
peasants to redeem themselves from having to pay dues in money or in kind.
In Bavaria the process of emancipation also began in 1808, with the edict
of 31 August abolishing serfdom and servitudes and the remaining traces of
Zwangsdienst without, however, affecting the system of seigneurial property.
In Baden, where serfdom had already been eliminated in 1781 by the
Margrave Charles Frederick, a follower of the physiocrats, the first law
enabling peasants to buy their freedom from the services due to the landlord
and the corvées due to the judiciary seigneur was enacted in 1820.
In Electoral Hesse the code of 1811 abolished serfdom, services due and
corvées. However, after the fall of Napoleon all the ancient rights were
restored in this country, which had been annexed to the kingdom of Westphalia. Naturally enough, the peasants reacted against this, but as stressed
by Friedrich Lütge :
in spite of all the suggestions and complaints presented to the Elector the latter
could not make up his mind to take the measures which would ensure radical reform.
Thefirstlaws authorising peasants to redeem all services, tithes and other obligations
due to the seigneur were passed only on 5 January 1831 and 23 June 1832. It was
up to the peasants to ask to be allowed to redeem themselves. However, in Hesse
the peasants were almost all destitute and it would have been impossible for them
to bear the cost of this redemption (which amounted to twenty times the annual
income). Thus a second law was passed creating a Rural Credit Fund guaranteed
by the state, which granted loans to the peasants at favourable conditions.1
In Hanover at about the same time, the emancipation of the peasants was
proclaimed by a law of 10 November 1831, a consequence of the 1830 revolution, entailing the abolition of personal charges and the redemption of seigneurial rights. The revolution of 1848 completed the elimination of the old régime
both here and in the whole of western Germany.2
The whole of this great movement, for the time being confined to one part
of western Europe, favoured not only the emancipation of the peasants but
also the application of the flood of remarkable scientific achievements in
'Friedrich Lütge: Geschichte der deutschen Agrarverfassung vom frühen Mittelalter bis
zum 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart, 1963), p. 219. It should be noted that the Rural Credit
Fund of Hesse was the second of the kind instituted in Germany at the time. The first
was that of Saxony, established a few months earlier under the law of 17 March 1832. ibid.,
p. 220.
a
For further details see Ph. Sagnac: Le Rhin français pendant la Révolution et l'Empire
(Paris, Alean, 1917), passim; Sée, op. cit., Part II, Ch. III; Lütge, op. cit., Ch. V; Wilhelm
Abel: Die drei Epochen der deutschen Agrargeschichte (Hanover, 1964), p. 93 in particular.
50
Europe: historical background
agriculture. For between 1750 and 1800 it had already been realised almost
everywhere that a change in the economic and social structures of agriculture
was essential, otherwise production could be neither increased nor diversified.
And everywhere where reforms occurred, it must be said that they corresponded
to objective needs. If, for instance, we were to take England, we would see
that the retention of the open-field system would have been incompatible
with agricultural progress, and would have caused a grave problem for the
new industrial society. Since in each parish the open-field system was based
on common cultivation of the fields, in which the plots of individual holders
were intermingled, any change or improvement had to be decided by the
community; and agreement was by no means always reached. Enclosure
encouraged the progress of crops and helped tp delimit cattle pastures; it
increased soil productivity and aided the transition from a type of agiculture
based on triennial crop rotation and sheep-breeding to a system in which the
raising of fat stock and crop rotation over four years (with the introduction
of new crops, particularly for fodder) acquired primary importance.
In France, notwithstanding a regression between 1770 and 1789, it may
be said that agricultural methods which had remained unchanged from the
Middle Ages until 1750 suddenly underwent a remarkable transformation.
In the words of O. Festy :
From about 1750 onwards, various factors contributed to the elaboration of an
agricultural programme in France which, being an ideal replacement for the old
accepted practices, was adopted by all the agronomists, scientists, economists and
enlightened landowners in France at that time.1
The gradual elimination of fallow land, first to grow fodder and then to
grow root and tuber crops, was one of the great achievements of agriculture
for it made it possible to recover a third, or even half, of the agricultural
surface otherwise left fallow. To these factors of a purely technical nature
should be added the remarkable dissemination of agricultural literature in
rural areas, both in France and in England. In the latter country, the first
issue of the Farmer's Magazine appeared as early as 1776.2 All this went
hand-in-hand with the rapid development of scientific research: the empirical
cross-breeding methods of Robert Bakeweld in Leicestershire increased the
yield of horned cattle; the use of marl, clover and artificial fodder by Coke of
Holkham carried the fame of Norfolk agriculture far and wide. It is easy to
1
O. Festy: "L'agriculture pendant la Révolution française: les journaux d'agriculture
et le progrès agricole", Revue d'histoire économique et sociale CParis), Vol. XXVIII, 1950,
No. 1, p. 35.
2
Ashton, op. cit., p. 83.
51
Agricultural organisations and development
understand why Marc Bloch stressed the influence of the English innovators
(who were in turn influenced by their Flemish counterparts) in French
agricultural circles.1 One may well agree with P. Mantoux that, in both
England and France, and bearing in mind a certain time lag, the foundation
of modern agriculture had been firmly established when large-scale industry
made its appearance. It only remained to oust the last of the old routine
habits.2
After the year 1800 scientific progress began to make great strides throughout the whole of Europe. It is sufficient to recall here the work of Liebig,
Chevreul and Dumas, who revealed the agricultural value of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, potassium and lime, and thus contributed to the progress achieved
in fertilisers and the increased yield of land. Mention should also be made
of the improvement in farming equipment as a result of the application by
Fowler, in 1851, of steam to ploughing. It was at this time that the plough
was perfected by the improvement of the mould-board, of the shape of its
sole, and of its regulating lever, due in part to the work of Mathieu de Dombasle, Fondeur and Bella. At the same time new forms of harrows made their
appearance: coupled harrows in England, rolling harrows in Norway and
France, making it easier to use the seed drills invented at the beginning of the
century by James Smith and Robert Salomon of Woburn. From then
onwards the number of inventions increased tremendously: as an example,
at the 1853 Universal Exhibition in Paris no fewer than thirty-two types of
seed drill were on show. That same year Europe imported from the United
States the mowing machine invented by Wood, preceded in 1852 by MacCormick's mechanical harvester.
These discoveries spread throughout agricultural circles, all the more so
since the coming of the railways provided greater facilities for the exchange
of information to develop the economy of rural areas which had been cut off
until then, thus fostering the transition from a subsistence economy to a
market economy.
This scientific and technical progress also had its effect in eastern Europe
where the old triennial crop rotation system was gradually abandoned, first
in favour of alternate crops, then in favour of intensified cultivation helped
by chemical fertilisers. But here the old patterns persisted, opposing a true
development of the rural sector, and although voices were raised calling for
the necessary reforms, they remained unheeded. Thus, when the universities
of Electoral Saxony demanded freedom for peasants and their children to
enable them to take up manufacturing employment and thus to contribute
1
Marc Bloch: Les caractères originaux de l'histoire rurale française (Oslo, Instituttet for
sammenlignende Kulturforskning, 1931), p. 220.
2
P. Mantoux: La révolution industrielle au XVIll™ siècle (Paris, Génin, 1959), p. 155.
52
Europe: historical background
to the development of industry, the government ignored them. The same
fate befell the protest of the Economic Society of Leipzig, founded in 1764,
when it criticised serfdom, Gesindedienst and the corvées. The government
sided systematically with the large landowners who wished to keep their labour
on the spot. Even the protests of the economist Kleefeld in 1783 against
fallow land and vain pasture fell on deaf ears. Not until 1832 did the government, prompted by the imperative needs of industry, introduce thefirstreforms.
Of course this was an extreme case, where agriculture was curbed in all its
aspects. The situation was not the same in all countries and if, in other lands,
it left much to be desired on the social plane, on the technical plane mention
should be made of the efforts undertaken since the eighteenth century by
certain leaders and a minority of far-sighted men in order to improve and
modernise agriculture. Taking Austria as an example, we find that the first
royal agricultural society, which was a forerunner of the present-day agricultural society and the Landeskulturrat, goes back to January 1766. Between
1770 and 1780, as G. Grüll points out, a number of measures were taken to
further technical development, such as the fight against harmful insects, the
importation of merino sheep to improve wool quality and the introduction of
bonuses to encourage bee-keeping.1 In Styria, Archduke John gave active
encouragement to cultivation in the mountainous areas in 1819 and established
a local agricultural society, followed in 1844 by the Agricultural Society for
Upper Austria—which two years later already had over 2,000 members in
twenty-six local groups; he also published a number of first-class papers on
the subject. However, it should be said that "with three or four exceptions
these local groups were made up not of peasants but of property administrators,
rich brewers, millers and priests".2
That is the nub of the problem. In spite of the abolition of serfdom in
1781 the peasant was still a man who was more or less bound to the soil and
crushed by taxation and corvées. Crushed, but not resigned. As early as
1754 there were already cases of revolt against the corvées (particularly during
the period 1754-78); in 1784-87 there was a succession of complaints against
the landed seigneurs; and during the wars against France between 1794 and
1809, the countryside was in turmoil. From 1800, leaders appeared up and
down the country, particularly in Upper Austria, and revolts occurred in rapid
succession: the uprisings organised by Andreas Resch between 1816 and 1833,
the struggles of the Seitlschlag peasants against the convent of Schlägl between
1820 and 1834 over forestry rights, the uprisings of the Schwertberg peasants
against the new corvées imposed on them between 1822 and 1829, and finally
1
Grüll, op. cit., p. 418.
• ibid., p. 419.
53
Agricultural organisations and development
the revolts organised between 1819 and 1849 by the famous Kalchgruber,
whose real name was Michel Huemer.1
With certain differences the same situation could be found in other parts
of Europe. The kings of Prussia carried out a considerable amount of
colonisation in the course of the eighteenth century and abolished serfdom on
Crown lands. On 27 July 1808 they went so far as to turn the peasants of the
domain into landowners, and while the acquisition of land was optional in
the Kurmark and in Pomerania, it was compulsory in Prussia; 30,000 private
estates thus arose on the State domain. In the meantime private domains
were also affected by government decisions. On 9 October 1807 the first
Prussian edict on the subject appeared, "an edict to facilitate the possession
and free use of immovable property and bring under regulation the personal
relationship between the inhabitants of the countryside". This instrument,
which accurately reflected the policy of Stein and which was supplemented
by the publicandum of 8 April 1809, resulted in the suppression of such servile
charges as the payment for authorisation to leave the domain, the Gesindedienst
and the authorisation to marry or to learn a trade. Moieover, on the pretext
of abolishing all legal distinction between the various types of property, the
restrictions protecting peasant tenures were abolished and it was stipulated
that both the peasants and the nobles could henceforth buy and sell land.
In fact, these measures simply helped to increase the domains of the nobility,
who were the only ones capable of buying land; and although certain legal
aspects of the problem were settled, from the structural point of view it became
even more acute.
Hardenberg, Stein's successor, attempted to go still further and to impose
on the assembly of nobles of the country a project under which tenants would
be given ownership of the land they held on life, hereditary or temporary
tenure, without any compensation for the seigneur. In addition, Hardenberg^ project provided for the abolition of the last charges and rights of the
seigneurs which burdened the land. The nobility's opposition ensured the
project's failure, and in its place an edict was adopted on 14 September 1811
under which tenants could become owners provided they abandoned to the
seigneurs a third of the hereditary tenure or half the life or temporary tenure.
This was tantamount to encouraging the creation of minifundia beside the
large estates while ensuring the existence of a docile labour force anxious to
supplement its gains by undertaking paid work for the seigneur {mutatis
mutandis, the same situation may be found in many places in the present-day
world). However, the emancipatory legislation gradually continued to gain
1
64
Grüll, op. cit., p. 609.
Europe: historical background
ground, particularly with the prorogation of the ordinance of 7 June 1821,
and most of the remaining rights and charges were abolished one after the
other. In 1845, three years before the events of 1848, the reforms were practically complete. But here, as elsewhere, it was the revolution which did away
with the last vestiges of the feudal system, if not of the domanial economy.
EVOLUTION BETWEEN 1848 AND THE END OF
SERFDOM IN RUSSIA IN 1861
It cannot be said that the revolution of 1848 burst upon Europe like a
thunderbolt out of a clear blue sky. The events of that year, which were of
such significance for the history of the peasantry, were everywhere preceded
by a long and painful crisis in agricultural production. This began in Ireland
in 1845 with the potato disease which destroyed the crop, causing, according to
conservative estimates, half a million deaths1, and then spread to Europe
through Flanders, the Netherlands and Germany. This disaster was followed
by the bad cereal harvest of 1846 which doubled and even trebled the price
of wheat in western and central Europe. The social consequences of this were
all the more profound and violent in that potatoes and cereals were the
very basis of the workers' diet.2 In England, where there was widespread
unemployment, workers organised strikes and demonstrations and looted
shops in the towns during the winter of 1847-48. In western and central
France, peasants and workers hampered the transport of grain, looting the
convoys. In Wallonia, organised, bands reached Brussels, where a revolt
broke out in March 1847, and subsequently invaded the north of France.
This profound crisis in western European agriculture was the background
to the revolution of 1848. The movement began in Italy, in the Kingdom of
the Two Sicilies where with the support of Austria Ferdinand II attempted
in vain to set his absolutism against the constitutional current which carried
along the other Italian sovereigns. Popular uprisings in Naples and Palermo
1
See in this connexion Cecil Woodham-Smith: The Great Hunger (London, Hamish
Hamilton, 1962; New York, Harper, 1963). Mrs. Woodham-Smith puts the number of
deaths resulting from the famine at over a million.
a
This may be seen from the following gripping description by Engels which refers to
1844-45: "The usual food of an industrial worker obviously varies according to his salary.
The better paid, particularly those factory workers each member of whose family is able to
earn something, have, as long as it lasts, good food, meat every day and in the evening bacon
and cheese. But in families earning less, meat is eaten only on Sundays or two or three times
a week, but there are more potatoes and bread; if we go further down the scale we find that
food of animal origin is reduced to a few bits of bacon, mixed with potatoes; lower still
bacon, too, disappears and there only remain cheese, bread, porridge and potatoes, until
we reach the lowest degree of all with the Irish, for whom potatoes are the only food." Friedrich Engels: The Condition of the Working Class in England (Oxford, Blackwell, 1958).
55
Agricultural organisations and development
forced him to grant his people a constitution similar to that which had been
adopted in France in 1830. A month later, revolution broke out in Paris.
Louis-Philippe did not accept the electoral reforms proposed by the opposition
and was forced by the people to abdicate in favour of his grandson, the Comte
de Paris. From capital to capital the revolutionary movement spread across
several countries of Europe. In France it was above all the workers of Paris,
who were then beset by unemployment, who rallied to the cause. As the
peasantry had already been freed by the 1789 revolution, they did not as yet
participate in the movement, even though crippling mortgage rates and oppressive taxation had brought them to a critical phase. 1 In central Europe,
however, the revolutionary impetus helped, if not to crack the very structure
of domanial property, at least to break down some of the feudal bonds which
still subsisted in rural areas.
In February 1848 revolts broke out in the Land of Baden, in Electoral
Hesse, in Württemberg, in Saxony; and one after another the governments
yielded up their power to the men of the left who embodied opposition to
absolutism. In March the revolt spread to Silesia, where the reforms of Stein
and Hardenberg had failed to break completely the bonds of vassalage. It
may be said that in Germany the situation was even more complex than elsewhere because of the existence of a mediatised nobility which did not directly
depend upon the Empire. As Lautenschlager rightly points out:
The struggle was not confined to a class struggle between nobility and peasantry
but also reflected a political and legal conflict between the sovereign and the mediatised
nobility. But it was not possible to satisfy the demands of the peasants unless this
conflict were settled in favour of the sovereign. In order to achieve this, the governments of the various states had to have the strength to make the state laws prevail
against the laws of the other parties concerned. The events of 1848 forced them to
take measures and it was for this reason that the "anti-feudal laws" were among the
first results of the revolution of 1848.2
At the time of these events in Germany, riots were beginning to erupt in
Vienna too. Under pressure from the emperor, Metternich (that henchman
of all absolutist régimes) resigned from office. The news spread like wildfire
throughout the Austrian Empire, where the oppressed classes and nationalities
"In February 1848 the provinces did not respond to the Paris uprising. The people
from the countryside entered the political arena only after the election of Louis-Napoleon
as president in December, and particularly after the rural population had voted massively
in favour of the "Montagne" at the elections for the Legislative Assembly. See the thesis of
Philippe Vigier: La Seconde République dans la région alpine (étude portant sur cinq départements) (Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1963), 2 vols., and by the same author: La
Monarchie de Juillet (Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1962).
8
Friedrich Lautenschlager: Die Agrarunruhen in den badischen Standes- und Grundherrschaften im Jahre 1848 (Heidelberg, 1915), p. 3.
56
Europe: historical background
were waiting only for a favourable occasion to press their claims. On 3 March
Kossuth had already protested in the Lower Hungarian Chamber against
Austrian absolutism, and had demanded a national government for Hungary.
The petition voted by the Chamber, which took advantage of popular unrest
in order to vote equality in taxation and redemption of feudal charges at the
same time, was accepted in Vienna on 16 March, and on 30 March Hungary
became an independent State within the Empire.
Meanwhile, in Bohemia, the Assembly, meeting in Prague, had sent to
Vienna a petition which concerned only the right of assembly, the abolition
of feudal rights and a closer union with Moravia and Silesia. But the delegation which was to transmit the petition was overtaken by events; the Czech
democrats and nationalists had in the meantime prepared a new petition to the
effect that Bohemia should have a special minister who would be responsible
to a Diet enjoying administrative autonomy.
The government in Vienna, faced with a serious insurrection in Italy, where
Venice and Milan had rebelled upon receiving the news of the Viennese
insurrection, gave in on every count, and a de facto Czech government was
formed in Prague under the presidency of the Governor of Bohemia. Moreover, at Press burg on 15 April the Emperor Ferdinand I confirmed all the
Hungarian petitions, accepting in the Diet a series of constitutional laws
relating to universal suffrage, freedom of the press and (for the peasants)
the repeal of feudal laws. Ten days later in Vienna, Pillersdorf, the Minister
of the Interior, proclaimed a constitution modelled on that of Belgium, by
virtue of which a parliament was appointed, which on 26 July abolished all
the ancient feudal rights. As a result of these concessions Austria was able
to concentrate her efforts on the Italian front and to hold on for a little longer
to her positions in Lombardy and Venetia.
The reactions of the ruling classes to this brief awakening of the peoples
are well known. In France the 1848 revolution led straight to the dictatorship
of Louis-Napoleon. In Italy, in spite of a return to absolutism throughout
the peninsula—with the exception of the Kingdom of Piedmont and Sardinia—
it triggered off an inexorable movement which later led to the independence
and unification of the country under the aegis of the House of Savoy. Everywhere in central Europe liberal promises were extracted from the authorities
in power and in certain cases these promises were temporarily kept (for
instance the independence and constitutional laws of Hungary granted by the
Emperor Ferdinand at Pressburg). But a few months later innumerable political complications marked a sharp turning-point in the situation; these
included in particular the Serbo-Hungarian conflict of September, which ended
some time later in the exile of Kossuth, and the siege of Vienna in October
following a popular uprising against the despatch of Austria troops to support
57
Agricultural organisations and development
the Serbs. Moreover, the abdication of the Emperor Ferdinand and the
succession of his nephew Francis Joseph opened the way to military dictatorship
in Bohemia, Hungary and Lombardy. In March 1849 the new emperor signed
an imperial constitution which created two Chambers: a Lower Chamber
elected by voters who qualified for suffrage according to an assessment, and
an Upper Chamber where three-quarters of the seats were reserved for the
landed nobility. In Prussia Frederick William IV acted in a similar fashion
in 1849 when he gave his kingdom a liberal constitution under which all
remaining traces of the feudal system were to be abolished but which instead
turned out to be a mere caricature of the parliamentary system.1
In spite of the defects of the new constitution and of the reactions of the
nobility there was no return to the old régime as such. Of course the restoration of the German Federal Diet in Frankfurt in August 1851 entailed the
loss of the freedom gained two years earlier, and the same thing happened to
the Austrian Empire under the unitarian reform of Francis Joseph. Most
of the rights acquired by the peasantry were respected, not through generosity,
but because it was necessary to neutralise the excessive powers of the nobility,
whose privileges were henceforth incompatible with the objective needs of
unitarian absolutism.
Thus, under the Austrian monarchy, Francis Joseph maintained the emancipation of the peasants and the redemption of feudal rights. The redemption
payments had a threefold effect: on the one hand the high nobility found itself
in receipt of considerable capital which it used to a great extent to buy back
available domains and to modernise operational methods. On the other hand,
the petty and middle nobility which had previously enjoyed lesser rights
suffered a hard blow due to the scantiness of the redemptions received, and
in part came to swell the ranks of the urban middle class. As for the peasants,
while many abandoned the countryside in search of employment elsewhere,
those who remained on the land no longer feared for their freedom. Henceforth, the problem of the peasant class became one of structure and latifundia:
the struggle between "the 600 families" which owned most of the land (in Bohemia, for instance, at the end of the century 73 per cent of the land belonged to
the nobles and 7.69 per cent to the bourgeoisie) was not settled until much later,
in the course of the twentieth century.
1
It will be remembered that the electoral law proclaimed by Frederick William—the
famous "three classes law"—remained in force until 1914. This law divided the electors
into three groups—each representing the same amount of taxation and the same number
of electors—and thus gave much greater weight to the rich classes which, though a minority,
represented the same amount of taxation and had the same number of secondary electors
as the classes representing the majority. There is no need to stress the nature of the obstacle
this law represented for the development for the peasant classes.
68
Europe: historical background
In Germany, too, the situation was consolidated. A whole string of laws
had been adopted, on which there was no going back. Generally speaking,
the process which had now begun was continued long after the revolution
right to the end of the century and even through to the First World War.
In western Germany the reform went through the following decisive
stages :
In the Land of Baden the policy introduced in 1781 by the Margrave
Charles Frederick led to the adoption on 10 April 1848 of a law under which
all feudal rights, as well as all hunting andfishingrights, werefinallyredeemed.
The state took upon itself a large proportion of the payments involved.
In Württemberg, where the reform went ahead very slowly in spite of
government policy, the compulsory redemption of dues, fixed at sixteen times
the income, was enacted in 1848, and in the following year the government
decreed the final abolition, without compensation, of vassalage bonds and
seigneurial justice, as well as the redemption of tithes. The redemption operation
lasted until 1873.
In Bavaria, too, reform dragged its feet in spite of the edict of 1808
mentioned earlier.
However, the Act of 4 June 1848 was decisive in this
respect : it abolished the jurisdiction of the seigneur, the monopoly of the hunt,
corvées in kind, tithes on catties and several other dues, and it instituted the
redemption of land dues. Peasants had to pay a sum equal to eighteen times
the annual income. The difference between the total amount of the compensation (twenty times the income) and the sumfixedfor the peasants was borne
by the state. The state also set up a redemption fund, paid the compensation
to the seigneur and fixed the annuities of the peasants. Finally, the Act of
1872 (in force until 1906) accelerated the process by setting up an amortisation
fund and decreasing the amounts payable. But it was not until 1918 that
many peasants managed to pay off their remaining debts.1
In Electoral Hesse, thanks to the legislation of 1831-32 and the creation of
the Rural Credit Fund, the redemption of dues was already under way when
the Act of 26 August 1828 abolished all dues still in force, with or without
compensation as the case might be. Finally, in Hanover, the reform had
already been completed in 1833.
In eastern Germany the revolution also speeded up the adoption of several
legislative measures aimed at completing the work undertaken by Hardenberg. By virtue of the legislation of 2 March 1850, twenty-four rights relating
to services due for hunting and for the repair of the seigneur's buildings were
abolished without compensation. But the most important aspect of the
1
See Lütge, op. cit., p. 215; Sée, op. cit., pp. 218-219.
59
Agricultural organisations and development
reform was the abolition, again without compensation, of the superior ownership right of the seigneurs; the peasants thus became outright owners. There
only remained redeemable rent, in respect of which a sum wasfixedcorresponding to twenty-five times the income. This matter was carried through thanks
to a number of banks which, in the same way as credit funds elsewhere,
played the role of intermediaries between the seigneurs and their former
tenants.
In the north, Denmark and Schleswig-Holstein completed the emancipation of the peasants through the democratic constitution of 1849, which was
common to both countries, and through Danish legislation in 1851 and 1854-61
which authorised the sale to the peasants of land belonging to the State and
to the nobility. Even Sweden, a country where the old régime still persisted,
went over to the parliamentary system in 1862. Here, as in Denmark, political
reform favoured the development of the peasant middle class which was
responsible for the remarkable development, both economic and social, of
present-day agriculture.
Finally, in Russia the emancipation of the peasants was inevitable from
the moment when the feudal economy became a real obstacle to the development of capitalism, and they were freed in 1861.1 This emancipation was
triggered off by the rescript of 1857 which set up commissions to study the
problem in the various provinces of the country; but it was also the result of
a long series of revolts which the economic and political circumstances merely
aggravated and increased. Some idea of the extent of these revolts is gained
from the estimate of I. Ignatovich, based on the official report of the Imperial
Chancellery and the Ministry of the Interior: the number of uprisings had
increased from 138 in the period 1830-39 to 348 for the period 1845-54.
Benkendorff, the head of police at the time, said not without reason: "The
system of serfdom is a powder keg placed under the edifice of the State."
The fact that it was impossible to develop a modern industry based partly
on serfdom, the Russian defeat in the Crimea in 1855, and the economic
crisis of 1857 doubtless acted as catalysts in the process which led to the ukase
of 5 March 1861 and consequently to the emancipation of 20 million serfs.
It is true that on the State domains emancipation had already taken place
in 1858; the peasants had become life tenants of the land they occupied, with
the possibility of buying it against payment of one-fifth of its value, with the
remainder being paid off over twenty years at 5 per cent. But in freeing
1
For more details see P. A. Zaisichkovski: Otmena Krepostnogo Prava v Rossii [The
abolition of serfdom in Russia] ( Moscow, 1960), pp. 46-52; also by the same author: Provedenie v Zhizn Krestianskoi Reformy 1861 goda [The implementation of the peasant reform
of 1861] (Moscow, 1958), pp. 64-78. Also See, op. cit., Part II, Ch. VII; Lyashchenko,
op. cit., Ch. XXI.
60
Europe: historical background
the serfs from the nobility Alexander II did not automatically give them
ownership of the means of production, and it appears that, far from stopping
altogether, insurrections actually increased. There were at least 2,000 such
uprisings between 1861 and 1863. The government had, of course, provided
for the purchase of a definite quantity of land by the peasants and for the
granting to them of advances by the State, repayable over forty-nine years at
6 per cent. In fact, in the so-called "black earth" region the plots granted
to the peasants were actually smaller than those they had cultivated before the
reform.1 Lositstkii estimated that the area which the peasants had lost in this
way amounted to 26 per cent in twenty-one of the imperial provinces.2 To this
were added the conditions of payment; the first "deciatina" (slightly less than
three acres) cost half the dues, and thus the smaller the plot, the greater in
proportion was its price.3 Many peasants preferred to wait, and in 1875
2.5 million serfs had still not bought their plot and were thus "temporarily
bound"—in other words not emancipated from the obligations entailed by
serfdom. Faced with this situation, the government made purchase of the
land compulsory in 1881.
The emancipation of 1861, which has been described as the greatest social
movement since the French Revolution, was thus partly a mere hoax since
in many cases, particularly in the north where the poor peasants were not able
to bear the cost of emancipation, the lot of former serfs became even harder.
Many migrated to the towns where they swelled the ranks of the nascent
industrial proletariat. Some, endowed with better financial means, improved
their situation and became future kulaks. Finally, others took part in a succession of revolts which broke out practically everywhere in the country between
1861 and 1918, particularly after 1905 when the peasant risings spread to the
whole of Russia. It may be said that through being unwilling to allow the
movement of reform to attain its full flowering, the Russian Government and
nobility sounded the inexorable knell of the old régime in all its aspects.4
1
Lyashchenko, op. cit., p. 382.
ibid., p. 384.
3
Under this system, according to Lyashchenko (op. cit., p. 385), "if a plot of 4 deciatinas
in a region not situated within the 'black-earth' belt brought dues of 12 roubles, the dues for
a smaller plot were calculated in the following manner: for the first deciatina, half the abovementioned payment, i.e. 6 roubles, and for the second deciatina, one quarter; i.e. 2 deciatinas
brought in 9 roubles and the remaining quarter of the payment corresponded to the last
2 deciatinas. Thus, if the landowners in regions outside the 'black-earth' belt thought it
profitable, they could grant their peasants a fairly large plot and, if not, they could grant
them a smaller plot the value of which was proportionately higher. This progressive assessment also included, in a concealed fashion, the redemption of the peasant's own person".
•The Marquis of Custine, travelling in Russia in 1839 (thus long before the reform)
was wrong only as far as the date was concerned when he gave the following verdict on the
8
61
Agricultural organisations and development
With the emancipation of the Russian serfs (followed three years later by
the emancipation of the serfs in Poland), the whole of Europe entered a
new era as far as the legal status of the peasantry is concerned. But at this
point two quite separate Europes emerged : western Europe, where the abolition
of the old régime and its persistent social and economic remnants marked
the awakening, in every sense, of a peasantry which acquired ownership of the
means of production and was thus enabled to set up large associations to defend
its interests ; and eastern Europe, where limited reform on the one hand and
the immense sums required to compensate the nobility on the other x helped
to consolidate the existence of a latifundian economy. In these regions,
although the peasants were free they held too little property except for the
very limited number who were well off; and although they were wage-earning
they were threatened with expulsion at the slightest hint of a claim on their
part. Only much later were they able to organise. From the legal viewpoint
everything, or almost everything, was neat and tidy; but from the structural
viewpoint nothing had changed. Much later, well into the twentieth century,
technical development could be seen existing alongside a high degree of social
underdevelopment; such was the fruit of the purely nominal freedom granted
to the peasants of those countries.
THE AWAKENING AND ORGANISATION OF THE
PEASANTRY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
It is against this background that, slowly and painfully, European peasantry
began to awake. So far mention has only been made of revolts, whether or
not they were favoured by political events or wars ; but a revolt is not necessarily
or everywhere synonymous with a final awakening. In many cases it is merely
the expression of unbearable stress channelled into the most readily available
outlet. Destitute, illiterate, oppressed for centuries past, European peasantry
could do no more.
Happily, even in their poverty they were not entirely abandoned. We
have already mentioned the mounting interest of European thinking in agriculture towards 1750. This awakening was first marked by concern for
old régime: "Either the civilised world will once more come under the barbarian yoke in
the next fifty years, or Russia will suffer a revolution still more terrible than the one the effects
of which are still felt by western Europe." La Russie en 1839 (Paris, 1843), letter of 12 July
1839.
1
In Austria the Schwarzenberg family alone, whom we quote merely as an example,
received over 2 million florins of the time in redemption of their feudal rights.
62
Europe: historical background
things scientific, and to the extent that such thinking led to practical improvements which did not run counter to the interests of the governing classes,
technical development was faced with far fewer obstacles than social development; agreed, it had to overcome traditional practices, but the support of
far-sighted men who could persuade the peasants was assured.1
Social development met other much more serious difficulties, for it was
closely linked with trends which questioned the old régime in all its aspects :
political, economic, social and legal. The aim was nothing less than a radical
change in the whole concept of existence—a change which eventually did take
place. It is, in fact, not possible to understand this awakening of the peasantry
in the nineteenth century—from the creation of the first co-operatives to the
setting-up of trade unions—except in the light of such currents of thought of
which it is a part and, indeed, the final result.
Mention should be made, if only briefly, of certain aspects of the evolution
in European thinking which preceded this awakening of the peasantry. The
eighteenth century was deeply affected by the fact that the social pact and the
laws enacted by men were being questioned; this was the era of the return to
natural law and also of the heyday of reason, widely regarded as a cure for all
ills. It may well be that at no other time has so much confidence been placed
in man and his ability to reorganise society according to the laws of nature,
which were preferred to the laws of the State, the latter being as numerous as
they were contradictory. In this setting the prevailing vogue was not the
lucid pessimism of Hume, but the optimism of the Rousseau of the Contrat
social, whose influence extended across the Channel to the Whigs whom the
politics of George III did not please.2
In the field of economics this confidence in the natural order of things
was shared by the physiocrats, for whom the production and distribution of
wealth (of which land was the principle source) must follow a course similar
to that determined by the laws of nature and free from the restrictions and
interference of governments. Adam Smith was more practical and utilitarian
1
Since the present study concentrates on the social and economic aspects of the development of the peasantry, we cannot dwell at length on purely technical problems which would
deserve a study of their own. The evolution of new techniques raises problems which vary
with time and place. This was the case in Europe. In the south, the region of latifundia
and absentee landowners, the fact that even a scant return per acre would be sufficient to
provide an ample living, on account of the vast areas which they owned, did not prompt the
landowners to make technical improvements which, moreover, would require direct supervision of their domains. This situation continued until the twentieth century. On the other
hand, in England, which again was a pioneer in the matter, technical innovations were
welcomed with great interest. We may recall the experiments that George Sinclair carried
out at Woburn, on the instructions of the Duke of Bedford, into the production and nutritive
qualities of grain crops for fodder. Details of these remarkable experiments may be found
in Sir Humphry Davy's work, Elements of Agricultural Chemistry (1813).
a
See Joseph Priestley: Essay on the First Principles of Government (1768).
63
Agricultural organisations and development
than the physiocrats in that unlike them he considered work to be the main
instrument of wealth. In The Wealth of Nations (1776), the great theoretician
of laissez-faire defended the belief in the harmony of the natural order, which
is distorted by the artificial restrictions invented by man.
With the gradual development of the British trend towards utilitarianism
and of French individualistic thinking1, many of the abstract ideas relating
to the perfections of the natural order were abandoned in favour of a more
precise analysis of the social conditions which determine human relations.
But something has remained of the natural order, and for good: the idea of
the equality and freedom of men within the political community, as opposed
to the traditional concept of an order established by a minority and decreed
by Providence. And although Jeremy Bentham commented ironically on the
rhetorical void of the natural laws compared with the "principle of utility"
as a measure for human actions (which are good or bad according to whether
or not they favour the general welfare), he nevertheless supported universal
suffrage and considered law to be an expression of the sovereign will of the
political community, expressed through mandate.2
This philosophy was maintained by his disciple, James Mill, and was
further developed and transformed by John Stuart Mill who at the end of his
life came very near to socialism.3 Thus a permanent stamp was imprinted on
the whole of nineteenth-century Britain; and there was a very definite influence
on the chartist movement and in the gradual extension of universal suffrage
to the various social strata.
In the midst of this ideological effervescence of paeans to industry and
free trade, when machines—those "rivals of man" and "creators of unemployment"—are occasionally destroyed, appear the first reformers. These men
will have a certain responsibility, albeit indirect, for the evolution of the
agrarian problem. In such an ideological climate there is nothing surprising
in the fact that the first experiments were frequently of a Utopian nature and,
at the beginning, restricted to the co-operative movement—for trade unionism
was still a long way away. At that time mutual aid was primarily of a local
nature and was centred much more on the urban working class than on the
peasantry as such.
In England the first period, which covered the years from 1817 to 1840,
was dominated by an outstanding personality: Robert Owen. That country,
1
Expressed by Tocqueville, Taine, Laboulaye and Michel in particular.
The clearest concept of these ideas will be found in Fragment on Government, published
anonymously in 1776 and subsequently by Montague in London in 1891.
* In his Autobiography (London, 1873, pp. 230-234) John Stuart Mill defends common
ownership of the raw materials of the world and identical participation of each individual
in the funds of labour.
2
64
Europe: historical background
which was the first to have felt the effects of the Industrial Revolution, was
going through a difficult phase after the victory of Waterloo; the drop in
industrial production following the war had led to the dismissal of thousands
of workers for whom no work could be found. It was in this environment
that Owen, the son of a craftsman, and now an industrialist, attempted to
establish relations between employers and workers on a co-operative basis.
In keeping with the ideological trend of his time he took as his premise the
innate goodness of man, and considered that it would be sufficient to place him
in a social environment corresponding to the harmony of nature in order to
develop a new system of relations which would make it possible to overcome
the ills of a society based on free competition.
The solution advocated by Owen in his famous Report on the Poor Law,
presented to the Select Committee established by the House of Commons for the
study of the Poor Law, consisted in establishing "co-operative villages" of
500 to 1,500 persons, who would be given land and tools to enable them to
devote themselves freely to agriculture and manufacture. This mixture of
activity was characteristic of the global concept of the times ; not until much
later did the agricultural co-operative movement confine itself to its own
sphere of interest.
To Robert Owen's experiments at New Lanark in Scotland, which are too
well known to need restatement here, were added those he carried out in 1824
in the co-operative community established at New Harmony, in the state of
Indiana (United States). But numerous quarrels amongst the members of
New Harmony ruined the experiment in a short time, and within three years
it had failed completely—and Owen had lost two-thirds of his personal
fortune.1 Nevertheless, the influence of his ideas, and those of his disciple
William Thompson, on the subsequent development of the co-operative
movement cannot be denied; and these same ideas had their part to play too
in the creation of the International Labour Organisation.
At the same time as Owen, Dr. William King was carrying out his own
experiments. Like Owen, King was rich, but he lacked his philanthropic
sentiments (King believed in self-help rather than in assistance). He was the
originator of the "Union Shops", the forerunners of modern co-operatives.
In his journal The Co-operator of May 1828 King set out the aims of his
project; they were in fact confined to the building-up of an initial fund through
individual weekly payments in order to constitute a consumers' co-operative.
As funds increased the intention was to purchase new articles. Of course,
Dr. King saw further:
1
For more details see Arthur Eugene Bestor, Jr. : Backwoods Utopias (Philadelphia,
1950); Frank Podmore: Robert Owen (London, Hutchinson, 1906; New York, 1924).
65
Agricultural organisations and development
When sufficient capital is accumulated the society will be able to acquire land,
live on that land, cultivate it and produce all the articles necessary to satisfy all needs
in housing, clothing and food. The society will then be called a community.1
Four years later, in 1832, there were between 400 and 500 Union Shops.
But after another two years this great experiment suffered a complete and general
failure. This has been attributed both to its imperfect regulations and to its
paradoxically too great success; it would appear that the Brighton Society,
the first to be created, was dispersed when, having acquired considerable
capital, the majority of its members decided to move on to the next stage and
split into two groups : one of these declared itself to be a community and the
other, consisting of an individualistic minority, withdrew its funds to build
a fishing vessel. By 1840 Dr. King's movement had been practically wiped
out; a few survivors held on, but not for long.
Similarly in France, excessive industrialisation led to the appearance of a
Utopian socialist school which likewise dreamt of a world closer to the harmony
of nature. Utopian thinking was successively influenced by the theories of
Saint-Simon, who aimed at a technocratic society governed by a representative
industrial parliament,2 and by the experiments of Fourier, who founded the
phalansterian movement. Fourier wanted men to be able to organise society
in a just and orderly manner after the image of the universal harmony created
by God. For him, association was the principle of irresistible attraction which
governs men just as the law of gravity governs nature. On these principles
he founded his system of phalansteries—a kind of agro-industrial community
of about 400 families settled on 2% square miles of land, living under a system
of equitable distribution of profits. His experiment at Condé-sur-Vesgre was
a total failure and lasted less than a year. The experiments carried out in the
United States by his disciples (the Americans Channing and Brisbane and the
Frenchman Victor Considérant) were also doomed to failure in spite of their
short-lived initial success.8
Much has been written about the history of these first attempts. Why did
they fail ? It would appear that the belief that it was enough to change his
environment in order to be able to change man himself was one of the most
glaring errors of the times. It had not yet been understood that it is wrong to
1
Quoted by T. W. Mercer: Dr. William King and the Co-operator, 1828-30 (Manchester,
Co-operative Union, 1922), p. 3.
a
See, for instance, his Système industriel (1821), in which he maintains that the true
leaders of the people are the leaders of industrial undertakings "since it is they who command
them in their daily work". In England too Utopian socialism had its followers, such as
William Morris and Samuel Butler, whose important work Erewhon became extremely
popular.
8
See Charles Gide: Fourier, précurseur de la coopération (Paris, Association pour
l'enseignement de la coopération, 1924), pp. 150-157.
66
Europe: historical background
consider man on the one hand and his environment on the other, but that
what does exist is man in his environment with all the inter-relationships that
this implies. Indeed, the attempt to integrate man in a prefabricated environment could never be successful. But it must be said that what seems obvious
now was much less so at a time when modern sociology had not yet been born.
Moreover, the co-operative movement was then considered as a sort of panacea
which, it was claimed, could change the government of mankind and even
introduce a world order (Fourier had in mind a great federation of phalansterian
nations, the capital of which would be Constantinople !). None of this could
last for long.
When we examine today the Utopian or ungainly nature of these undertakings we find it difficult to imagine the great attraction they held for the
labouring world of the times. And yet, this dream of refashioning society,
which inspired the second half of the eighteenth century, has persisted in one
form or another to the present day, though its Utopian aspects have been
ousted by scientific socialism and, with the exception of anarchism which
played a political role among the industrial working class and peasantry of
the south (particularly in Spain), have been confined to literature. However,
this collection of theories did much to further the passage of philosophers,
economists and politicians from an accepted world to a world which was
perpetually questioned. In the following era it also led to a more practical
and efficient examination of the problem, and only then did the co-operative
movement, having become "sensible", make a real contribution towards the
development of the peasantry.
This second phase, which throughout Europe was to be marked by a concentration on the reasonable and the concrete, opened in 1844, when twentyeight English weavers, to be known thereafter as the Rochdale Pioneers,
founded a consumer's co-operative; the initial capital was £28. It did £100
worth of business in the first year, and its success was thereby assured. This
experiment was based on seven fundamental principles: a democratic supervision of activities, a fixed return on capital, rebates for goods bought or
services used, cash purchases, distribution of good-quality articles, funds for
education, and political and religious neutrality.1 Ten years later, the movement, which was to give birth to the International Co-operative Alliance in
1895, had 1,400 members; membership, and with it turnover, increased
steadily. In 1914, the Rochdale Pioneers had 12,000 associates and a turnover
of £2 million.2 With the memory of Dr. King's failure still fresh in their
1
See G. D. H. Cole: A Century of Co-operation (Manchester, Co-operative Union, 1947),
p. 74.
2
Pirenne, op. cit., Vol. V, p. 28.
67
Agricultural organisations and development
minds, they avoided the mistakes he had made, and the Rochdale experiment
was to prove a real and lasting success.
The co-operative movement was now established on healthily pragmatic
lines. Henceforward it was to increase and multiply, in one form or another,
until the end of the century. In 1854, Friedrich-Wilhelm Raiffeisen, who
was the promoter of agricultural credit banks in Germany and the brains
behind the agricultural mutual benefit system, launched his celebrated cooperatives. Whereas the Rochdale movement had observed strict confessional
neutrality,
Raiffeisen's own type of co-operative had a strong religious spirit fostering cohesion,
and was encouraged by the government and by clergy of all denominations. It was
intended to do more than simply overcome the power of local money-lenders. Its
operations were limited to a parish or village, and entry to membership was based
on personal character as well as on the need for credit. No shares were subscribed,
so that, apart from character qualifications, entry to membership was easy. Liability
for bad debts was not limited. Special stress was put on the building-up of the
society's capital through careful management and saving. No dividends were paid;
nor were members paid for their work for the society.1
From Germany the Raiffeisen co-operatives soon spread to Czechoslovakia
(1868), Italy (1883), Austria-Hungary (1886), Switzerland (1887), Belgium
(1892), France (1893), Ireland (1894), and Russia (1894, but especially after
the ukase of June 1895 which ordered the creation of Raiffeisen banks with
initial financial support from the Imperial Bank).2 The example thus set was
speedily followed all over the world; the first people's banks in North America
(in Quebec) were inspired by Raiffeisen's principles, and although they were
not initially set up with an eye to the interests of agricultural workers, the latter
set up societies for themselves at a later date. In Latin America, European
immigrants arriving towards the end of the century were the apostles of the
new cult. In India, at about the same time, we find co-operative credit
societies springing up; after the promulgation of the Act of 1904, these were to
spread rapidly throughout the country.* In Japan, mujin and ko associations
were reorganised, to some extent with an eye to the Raiffeisen type of
association, after promulgation of co-operative law in 1899.4 Lastly, we
1
United Nations: Rural Progress through Co-operatives (New York, 1954; Sales No.:
54.II.B.2),p.41.
a
These dates are those mentioned in Horace Plunkett et al. : Report of the Recess Committee on the Establishment of a Department of Agriculture and Industries for Ireland (Dublin,
1906), passim, and especially pp. 331-332.
8
United Nations: Rural Progress through Co-operatives, op. cit., p. 43.
* When the Second World War broke out, there were more than 4 million members.
ibid., p. 43.
68
Europe: historical background
cannot decently overlook the part played in Germany by Schulze (people's
limited liability banks) and Haas, who founded banks with unlimited
liability like those of Raiffeisen, but with share capital. At the end of the century, there were no less than 4,000 Raiffeisen, Schulze and Haas associations
in Germany; a figure which by 1950 had swollen to 20,000.
The best description of the technical developments taking place in European
agriculture at about this time, and of the growth of the co-operative movement,
is to be found in the report, published in 1896, of a committee of inquiry
presided over by Horace Plunkett and despatched to Europe by the Irish
Parliament. In its exceedingly careful and thorough report, the committee
gives a bird's-eye view of the position at that time. Here we can do no more
than summarise it1:
— In France, 5,300 agricultural associations, of which 500 were co-operative
banks and credit unions, and 1,200 cornices agricoles (i.e. agricultural
associations organising competitions and awarding prizes) ;
— In Holland, 45 dairy co-operatives, and 21 agricultural associations with
170 branches and 50,000 members;
— In Belgium, 417 co-operatives of which 37 were of the Raiffeisen kind,
and 150 farmers' unions with 3,000 members;
— In Denmark, some 1,200 dairy co-operatives and 101 agricultural associations, some of them going back to 1823, with, on an average, 500 members
each;
— In Switzerland, 6 Raiffeisen banks (a meagre figure, this, but explicable
by the existence of numerous savings funds), with agricultural associations
in each canton (the investigator was unable to calculate exactly how many
there were) ;
— In Austria, 994 Raiffeisen banks with 60,000 members (excluding Schulze
associations, probably twice as numerous) and 3,480 local agricultural
societies with 269,200 members;
— In Prussia, 7,200 co-operatives, of which 1,920 were Raiffeisen associations
and 407 dairies2 ;
— In Württemberg, 1,223 Raiffeisen and Schulze-Delitzsch co-operatives, of
which 649 were Raiffeisen-style, with 55,700 members, and 64 rural associations with 47,000 members, i.e. a quarter of the country's peasantry ;
— In Bavaria, 1,038 Schulze-Delitzsch and 713 Raiffeisen co-operatives in
1893 (62,000 and 157,200 members respectively), plus a powerful agricul1
Plunkett, op. cit., passim.
Plunkett sent no investigator to Prussia. The figures quoted are from a statement
made in the Vienna Reichsrath, in March 1896, by Councillor Scheimplug and reproduced
in the committee's report; as well as from the conclusions reached by Plunkett and his
colleagues (pp. 50 and 331).
2
69
Agricultural organisations and development
turai association with 226 local branches and 66,100 members, i.e. one in
eight of the Bavarian peasantry;
— In Hungary, 1,200 co-operatives, of which 320 were of the Raiffeisen type
(no detailed figures concerning membership);
— Lastly, in Ireland itself, from the shores of which the mission had sailed,
the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society (founded in 1894, largely
thanks to Plunkett's efforts) had just set up, within a year, 54 dairy co-operatives and one Raiffeisen bank.
There is clearly no need to emphasise the degree to which the extraordinary
boom in European agriculture which took place in the nineteenth century is
indebted to these various associations. In every country, too, we find the
authorities taking a keener interest in agriculture, and setting up ministries of
agriculture and technical colleges. Besides which, the co-operative movement,
which reached its climax in 1895 with the foundation of the International
Co-operative Alliance, everywhere helped to bring down the cost of credit
and hence to do away with usury, that age-old scourge of the countryside.
By thus reducing the cost of goods and services, it did much to improve the
peasant's lot while increasing both output and productivity, and hence made
a powerful contribution to the slow but steady improvement observable in
the supply of food to the towns.
While the co-operative movement in agriculture was thus growing, agricultural trade unionism was taking its first few halting steps. The movement
began in England. The Combination Act of 1825 had authorised the formation
of unions, whereupon the more advanced representatives of the working classes
organised their first associations, in London and the industrial north-west.
In 1830, there were already a number of wofkmen's associations and clubs
(the term "trade union" dates from the years 1830-34). By 1833 the movement
was rapidly gaining ground in the agricultural counties of the south and among
the workers in the countryside. In that same year, thanks to the efforts of
Robert Owen, it culminated in the creation of a "Grand National Consolidated
Trades Union". For a very brief period this body had a membership of no
less than 250,000 workers from town and countryside.
But Robert Owen, and with him the cause of trade unionism, was heading
for another calamitous setback. The mistake—if such it can be called—was
once more a failure to observe a balance between ends and means. In 1834,
the Grand Union decided to launch a general strike to obtain the expropriation
of the "masters of production". To this end, it supported a number of
partial strikes (which were obviously inadequate to secure anybody's expropriation). Having done so, it was obviously condemned out of hand by
every manufacturer and landowner in the country. Everywhere the workers
were enjoined to abandon the Grand Union under pain of instant dismissal.
70
Europe: historical background
The owners went so far as to declare lock-outs (as in Derby) to overcome the
last vestiges of resistance. In the southern counties, they acted with relentless
vigour: in 1832, the owners had agreed to an increase in wages but in 1833,
they decided to reduce them again, whereupon the workers' association of
these counties decided to join the Grand Union. On 21 February 1834,
things reached a climax. Under pressure from the farmers, the local magistrates
warned the farm labourers, by poster, that membership of the Grand Union
would entail deportation. On 18 March, six day-labourers from Dorchester
were condemned to seven years' deportation, the sentence being ratified by
William Lamb, second Viscount Melbourne, then Home Secretary, who in
so doing invoked a law passed in 1797 condemning illegal associations.
This sentence created quite a stir, and thefivemajor unions * not members
of the Grand Union organised a series of mass meetings, following which a
petition signed by 250,000 people was sent to the Home Office. Despite the
failure of these moves—Melbourne refused to reconsider his decision—they
helped to prevent the tabling of certain Bills designed to outlaw the occupational
unions (a prohibition ardently desired by the Whigs), and thus helped to
save the limited freedom of association granted in 1825.
Unfortunately for the Grand Union, the costs incurred during all these
strikes were to prove too much for it. Its failure to prevent a lock-out
organised against the building workers, and the owners' success in forcing the
Leeds drapers to abandon their union, led to its final dissolution at the end
of 1834. Its life had been very short.
However, the English workman was by no means ready to bend the knee.
In 1832, the passage of the Reform Bill, extending voting rights to the middle
classes, was to open the door to the chartist movement. The Grand Union
had disappeared ; but the National Union of the Working Classes and Others,
founded by William Lovett and his friends, still existed. At that time, it had
a mere 1,500 members. Vigorously opposed to the Reform Bill, it demanded
universal suffrage and political democracy, as a stepping-stone to economic
democracy. Then we have the Working Men's Association, also created by
Lovett and his friends (on 18 June 1836).2 To it we are indebted for the celebrated "People's Charter", reflecting the aspirations of the bourgeois radicals
1
The Builder's Union, the Leeds Union, the Drapers' Union, the Cotton Spinners'
Union, and the Potters' Union. See Edouard Dolléans: Histoire du mouvement ouvrier
(Paris, Armand Colin, 1957), Vol. I, p. 121.
2
As Dolléans recalls, "in November 1836, i.e. the very year of its foundation, the
Working Men's Association despatched a manifesto to the Belgian working class, and Lovett
claimed that his association had been the first to send an international message to the workers
of another country." The fact deserves to be recorded. For further information about this
period, see Dolléans, op. cit., Vol. I, pp. 111-168, and especially p. 129.
71
Agricultural organisations and development
and working-class democrats; up to 1848, this text was to be the banner of the
chartist movement. The charter contained six points, all drawn up by Lovett,
and was despatched to the workers' associations and guilds on 8 May 1838.
These points clearly set forth what the English working class would have to
achieve to ensure its political and trade union development : annual parliaments ;
universal suffrage ; equal electoral districts ; secret ballots; parliamentary allowances; and the abolition of the voter's property qualification.
The working class was to achieve all these objectives little by little, despite
the disappearance of the chartist movement in 1849, after numerous violent
episodes, such as the attempted general strike of 1839 and the Ashton strikes
in 1842. The social legislation enacted in 1844 and 1847, concerning women
and children employed in factories, marked a step forward. With income
tax, introduced in 1841, and the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846, we come to
a period during which the country's fiscal and economic systems were to be
completely overhauled. In 1859, the London building workers had successfully struck for a nine-hour day; in 1860, the creation of a Trade Union Council
meant that the English working class was now free to organise. With Disraeli's reform of the franchise in 1867, the vote was given to the whole of the
middle class and to most of the workers (the number of persons entitled to vote
leapt from 1,366,000 to 2,490,000). England was at last taking the shape she
possesses today.
Then, and only then, did the peasantry, which had more or less faded from
the scene since the Dorchester drama, begin to organise its trade unions.
Certainly, all sorts of bodies were already in existence—scientific institutes,
farmers' clubs, and so on—but only in 1872 do we find the first National
Agricultural Workers' Union, founded thanks to the efforts of a Methodist
preacher, Joseph Arch. In 1875, this union already had some 60,000 members
(it should be remembered that at this time there were something like 1.5 million
agricultural workers, all in all). Reorganised in 1906, it was to become the
present-day National Union of Agricultural Workers (England and Wales).
It is at about this time, too, that after a century of struggle for three basic
rights—the right to vote, the right to associate, and the right to strike—the
trade union movement first takes root among the French peasantry. We
cannot here describe in detail all that happened in the course of those many
years of constant social discontent; suffice it to recall that universal suffrage
was proclaimed in 1848 and consolidated in 1851-52, after a brief setback
when the system of property qualifications for the franchise had come back
into favour in 1850. Then we have the accession of the workers to the conciliation boards (conseils de prud'hommes) by a system of elections in two
phases (Decree of 27 May 1848); the Act of 25 May 1864, authorising workers'
organisations; and the recognition, step-by-step, of the right to strike, despite
72
Europe: historical background
certain legal restrictions. Finally, by virtue of the Act of 21 March 1884,
we have freedom of association without prior permission from the
authorities.1
The French peasant, like his English companion, had stood aside from
working-class struggles (he had remained impassive in 1848 and had voted
overwhelmingly for Napoleon III on the occasion of the plebiscite of 8 May
1870). He now took advantage of the 1884 Act to organise his unions.
However, mention ought to be made of the fact that in 1883 the peasants of
Loir-et-Cher, who had come together in 1880 to combat fraud in the supply
of industrial fertilisers, had already succeeded in setting up eighty little communal unions with a total of 313 members. Nevertheless, authentic trade
unions of agricultural workers began only in 1889, when the lumberjacks
of the Cher formed a union which took its final form on 27 December 1891.a
At the end of the century their example was followed by the Languedoc vineyard workers, and later by others, especially between 1907 and 1911. The
Central Union of Agricultural Trade Unions (which after 1918 was to become
the National Union of Agricultural Trade Unions) dates from 1886. Working
closely with this organisation, numerous occupational organisations sprang
up to defend the interests of the peasantry: the Wheat Growers' Union, the
Beet Planters' General Confederation, the Meat Producers' General Association, the Milk Confederation and the General Confederation of Fruit and
Vegetable Producers. Moreover, the Central Union, which had been set up
under the auspices of the French Agricultural Society (itself created in 1861),
witnessed with mixed feelings the creation of a new body: the National
Federation of Agricultural Unions, founded in 1909 under the auspices of
the National Society for the Promotion of Agriculture, created in 1880.
Its merger, in 1910, with the Federation of Regional Agricultural Credit
Funds, to constitute the National Confederation of Friendly Societies and
Agricultural Co-operation, was to make a powerful contribution to the progress
already being made by French mutual benefit societies and agricultural co-operatives. As for the French working class itself, it was to be nationally organised only in 1920, in the General Confederation of Labour.
Thus, real agricultural trade unionism sprang up first in England, then in
France. True, there were other countries in which certain associations performed similar functions. In Denmark, for example, the provincial unions
of agricultural associations submitted claims to the government on behalf of
1
For further information, see Dolléans, op. cit., Vol. I, Part Five, Ch. 1 and 2; Part
Six, Ch. 2; Vol. II, Part One, Ch. 1. Dolléans deals chiefly with the urban working class and
only incidentally with the peasantry.
* See Gérard Walter: Histoire des paysans de France (Paris, 1963), pp. 421^124.
73
Agricultural organisations and development
the peasants. But, on the whole, save in the above two countries, it can be
affirmed that peasant trade unionism was a phenomenon of the twentieth
rather than of the nineteenth century.
THE SITUATION BETWEEN 1900 AND 1945
At the beginning of the twentieth century, the peasants and agricultural
workers in most of the western European countries had been granted the
basic right to organise ; all they still had to do was to improve their organisation.
Of course, there were many difficulties still to be overcome, and topics such as
conditions of employment, the system of land ownership, agricultural credit,
technical development, marketing, and the maintenance of agricultural prices
have remained in the forefront right down to our own day.
In some countries, however, agricultural workers had to wait until the
First World War to obtain, on top of their right to organise, the right to
strike. This was so in Germany, where the Prussian Industrial Code of 1845,
which forbade any agreement such as might lead to a cessation of work, was
extended in 1854 to agriculture at the request of the German farmers. Fifteen
years later, in 1869, a new industrial code promulgated for north Germany
granted industrial workers the right to organise and the right to strike.
But
as far as agricultural workers were concerned, the position remained the same
right up to 1918; not until then could the German peasant and agricultural
worker really organise and use the strike as a weapon.
In Sweden, too, the agricultural workers to whom the 1833 legislation
governing relations between masters and servants (abrogated only in 1926)
applied, had to serve for one whole year (which always began on 24 October)
before they could go on strike. Since by that date the northern winter was
drawing nigh, their chances of obtaining whatever they were striking for were
always seriously compromised.
These, however, are exceptions. In the western European countries as
a whole, agricultural employers' and workers' unions were at this time developing normally. For the workers, an ILO inquiry undertaken in 1928 shows
the position between 1925 and 1928. Table 3 "• below summarises the data
1
Unhappily, no figures were given for Belgian and French trade unionists. As regards
France, there were in 1925 9,000 agricultural organisations belonging to 176 federations,
with a total membership of 1.5 million. Of these 9,000 organisations, more than 8,000 were
co-operatives, and to this figure we must add 3,000-4,000 other agricultural co-operatives,
with some 500,000 members. See ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural
Workers, Studies and Reports, Series K (Agriculture), No. 8 (Geneva, 1928), p. 122.
74
Europe: historical background
assembled. It will be seen that trade unionists were still few in number in
relation to the total; the peasant and agricultural worker has always been
much less keen on enrolment and regimentation than his brother on the
factory floor. Broadly speaking, between 10 and 15 per cent of all agricultural
workers were trade unionists. True, they wielded an influence out of all
proportion to their numbers. In Germany, for example, "those who, thanks
to trade union action, enjoyed a rise in wages numbered 2.35 million in 1924
and 1.6 million in 1925".1 Hence we must assess agricultural trade unionism
of this period more by results than by membership. Whatever approach
we adopt, however, the time taken by the trade union movement to take root
in the countryside (long after the peasants had thrown off the bonds imposed
on them in former ages) should surely teach us patience when we preach the
gospel of trade unionism to the peasant masses of the developing world.
We may note, finally, that at this time two big international federations
dominated agricultural trade unionism:
(a) The International Landworkers' Federation (social-democrat, affiliated to the International Federation of Trade Unions), created at an international congress of agricultural workers' unions held in Amsterdam on
17-19 August 1920, on the initiative of the Dutch union.2 This federation,
which had 2,104,000 members in 1920 (780,000 of them belonging to the
German unions and 846,000 to the Italian ones) had no more than 336,000
members in 1926, because the Italian federation was falling apart, while
German membership had shrunk during the Great Inflation.3
(b) The International Federation of Christian Land Workers' Unions,
founded in Coblenz on 27-28 April 1921. This body had 224,000 members
in 1921; later on, by about 1926, it had 1.06 million.4
Besides the above, mention must be made of the powerful body known
as the International Confederation of Agriculture, founded in 1889 as a result
of thefirstinternational agricultural congress organised on the occasion of the
Paris World Exhibition. This confederation, recognised in 1939 by the League
of Nations, the ILO, and the International Institute of Agriculture in Rome
(the predecessor of the FAO), was exceedingly active up to the beginning of
1
ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 91.
ILO: First International Congress of Landworkers' Unions affiliated to the International
Federation of Trade Unions (Amsterdam, 17-19 August 1920), Studies and Reports, Series K,
No. 1 (Geneva, 1920).
* The German agricultural unions had a membership of 680,000 in 1920; in 1923, this
figure had dwindled to a mere 123,000. The slump in membership—the latter was to climb
to 185,000 in 1925—was above all due to inflation, which led the unionists to despair of ever
improving their lot by trade union action.
4
ILO: First International Congress of Christian Land Workers' Unions (Coblenz,
27-28 April 1921), Studies and Reports, Series K, No. 7 (Geneva, 1921).
2
75
Agricultural organisations and development
the Second World War in organising international conferences and defending
the occupational interests of those who earned a living from the land. 1
The development of the co-operative movement in Europe, going hand-inhand with that of the occupational organisations, is of great interest too.
A study published by the ILO in 1939 (see table 4) shows that even in those
countries where the trade union movement had never really got off the ground
(Hungary, Spain, Portugal, etc.), co-operatives had been proliferating since
the turn of the century.2 In this respect, we can but applaud Henri Noilhan's
assessment of the present-day situation: it holds good of the position before
the war, especially in the western European countries:
There has been a prodigious growth of agricultural co-operatives throughout
the world. In this respect, the position is not at all the same as for the trade union
movement. The peasants and agricultural workers have set up many powerful
organisations which have come together to form unions and play an important—
an increasingly important—part in agriculture in the world today. The co-operative
movement has found champions among the supporters of collectivism and capitalism
alike. The former find in the movement a confirmation of the doctrines they hold;
it seems to them a step on the road leading to collectivism as illustrated by the Soviet
kolkhoz. The latter seek a consolidation of agricultural capitalism in a movement
which enables the small and medium-scale producers to band together, the better
to defend their interests against the giant food-marketing trusts. Thus the movement,
strangely enough, derives strength and vigour from two opposing camps. It may
also be that some supporters of the movement have at the back of their minds a
feeling that to organise co-operatives is one way of harnessing (for their own, perhaps
divergent ends) the energies of the peasant masses, which, if left to themselves,
would find expression in an uncontrollable multitude of tiny holdings.8
It must nevertheless not be forgotten that the co-operative boom of the
1920s and 1930s was not equally characteristic of all European countries.
At the end of the First World War—a starting-point for so many socioeconomic upheavals—there were two agricultural Europes, not one: western
Europe, developed and dynamic; and eastern and south-eastern Europe,
underdeveloped, indeed stagnant in so many ways, despite the co-operative
movement we have been describing.
1
After the Second World War, its successors were to be, in Europe, the European
Confederation of Agriculture, founded in October 1948 at Brugg (Switzerland). In 1965,
this body had a membership of more than 480 occupational organisations from twenty
European countries. Internationally, it was replaced by the International Federation of
Agricultural Producers, founded in The Hague in 1946. In 1965, this body had a membership
of forty-eight agricultural organisations from thirty-two countries.
8
ILO: Co-operative Societies throughout the World—Numerical Data (Geneva, 1939)
(an off-print of an article appearing in the International Labour Review, Vol. XL, Nos. 2-3,
August-September 1939).
8
Noilhan, op. cit., p. 691.
76
Europe: historical background
We now know, of course, that southern Europe was to wake up only
after the Second World War. This applies more especially to Italy and
Yugoslavia. The other southern countries—Portugal, Spain and Greece—
are still lagging behind for one reason or another, since these countries have
not yet overcome the considerable social, economic and organisational obstacles which prevent the peasantry from making progress. Turkey is in the
same position.
In eastern Europe, on the other hand, the process which was to culminate
in the great reforms of the present day got under way just after the First
World War. Although the peasants had been progressively freed, and although
so much work had been done in the fields of co-operative development and
technical innovation (it had not gone unattended by drawbacks, however;
we shall revert to them in a moment), agricultural development was still up
against a number of serious obstacles, of which the following were the principal
ones:
— Huge estates still existed, that is to say, millions of peasants were virtually
landless, while landed wealth was concentrated in the hands of an insignificantly small minority.
— There were differences of nationality v/ithin one and the same country,
over and above social differences. As Max Sering once pointed out1,
the land belonged to the descendants of a conquering race. This was true
of the Germans in Latvia, Estonia and Bohemia; of the Poles in Lithuania,
eastern Galicia, White Russia; of the Hungarians in Slovakia, the Carpathian parts of Russia, and Croatia.
— The intermediate class of small landowners were too weak and too few
in number to make themselves heard.
— Rural credit arrangements were inadequate; rates of interest were exorbitantly high, and the peasants, generally speaking, were heavily in debt.
— There were no powerful trade union organisations, and any attempt to
create them was ruthlessly suppressed.
Political upheavals resulting from the First World War—the advent of
parliamentary régimes in central Europe and of the Bolshevik revolution in
Tsarist Russia 2—were the signal for a whole series of land reforms. In
Russia, the old régime was completely swept away; in other eastern countries,
although foreign-held property was speedily dealt with (it was expropriated
1
Quoted by Josef Wiehen in Die Bodenreform der Tschechoslowakischen Republik (Berlin,
Verlag für Sozialwissenschaft, 1924), p. 11.
8
In the USSR, nationalisation of the land allowed more than 400 million acres to be
distributed free of charge to the peasants and swept away overnight an archaic situation in
which some 30,000 big landowners could own (before the revolution) 200 million acres, i.e.
77
Agricultural organisations and development
immediately after the war), it was decided that nationals could retain up to
a certain amount of land, the rest being expropriated by the State, with compensation. These reforms were not everywhere applied, and where they were,
their implementation was often sporadic and lacking in continuity.
In Czechoslovakia, for example, the land reform voted on in 1919 called
for the breaking-up of estates of more than 625 acres in total area (or with
more than 375 acres of arable land), but the only landowners to suffer were
foreigners—German and Hungarian. In 1930, when 4.25 million acres (12
per cent of all land) had been expropriated, 13 per cent of the country still
consisted of estates with more than 250 acres each. In answer to a United
Nations questionnaire, the Government of Czechoslovakia, referring to the
state of affairs which had prevailed before the Second World War, said that:
Large farms of over 125 acres owned 43 per cent of cultivated and forest land,
while 44 per cent of the farmers owned less than 5 acres and had only 4.5 per cent
of the total area. Nearly half (47 per cent) of the agricultural population worked
as paid labourers for large estate owners and large farmers. Several very large estates
remained;referenceis made to the1 largest of these, with an area of 145,000 acres,
and to another with 105,000 acres.
In Hungary, after the failure of Bela Kún's attempt to seize power, Admiral
Horthy's government took a resolutely conservative stance. The land reform
of the early 1920s was interpreted in an exceedingly liberal fashion for the
landed aristocracy, who owned 14,000 estates, or 46 per cent of all the land
in the country (1,560 big landowners alone possessed 25 per cent). On the
other hand, 1,143,000 farms (75 per cent of the total) of less than 12.5 acres
covered no more than 11 per cent of the surface under the plough. In the
light of these facts, we can easily understand the peasant uprisings of 1891
in Orosháza, of 1894 at Hódmezovásáfhely, and of 1897 in central and southern
Hungary2, and the stream of claims made by occupational organisations
from the beginning of the century. Admiral Horthy's government put a stop
to such claims by stamping out all signs of trade union life; in 1919-20, the
1,700 local sections of the Union of Agricultural Workers, founded in 1905, were
wound up by official order, with but four exceptions. Eight years later, the
union had been able to re-establish not more than sixty-eight sections, with
an average of 6,250 acres each (in fact, 700 persons alone owned some 61.5 million acres).
See V. R. Boev: "Agricultural Production and the Rural Standard of Living in the USSR
since 1917", International Labour Review, Vol. LXXXVII, No. 6, June 1963, pp. 520-550.
1
United Nations: Progress in Land Reform (New York, 1954; Sales No.: 54.II.B. 3),
p. 67. For further information about the 1919 reforms, see Wiehen, op. cit., passim.
2
See liona Reinert-Tárnoky: "Die ungarische Innenpolitik und das Agrarproblem in
der Zeit des Dualismus", Südost-Forschungen, Vol. XXIII, 1964, pp. 215-283.
78
Europe: historical background
10,000 members, whereas it had had 500,000 before the change of régime.1
As early as 1923 the union had been forbidden to publish its bulletin. Consequently, it was unable to do very much. This state of affairs was to last,
almost unchanged, until 1945.
In Poland, the approach of Russian troops in July 1920 induced the
Polish Government to adopt a law of land reform so as to ensure that the
peasantry would be on its side. No estate was to be larger than 450 acres in
Poland proper, or larger than 750 acres in the eastern provinces. But, after
the defeat of the Soviet forces, the reform was first put on one side, and then
amended in 1925. Henceforward, the breaking-up of estates was to depend
on agreements freely arrived at by the parties concerned. As a result, in 1939,
although 6,637,000 acres had been apportioned among 734,000 purchasers,
large estates covering a total of some 12.5 million acres still remained in the
hands of some 15,000 persons (0.6 per cent of all who earned a living from the
land). Certainly, the transfer of land in the course of this period had enlarged
the class of medium-scale farmers (farms of more than 125 acres covered an
area of some 11.5 million acres), but reform was proceeding at a pace such
that another thirty years would have been needed to see its completion. But
in 1939, 64 per cent of the population of 21 million depended on agriculture,
directly or indirectly, for a living, and since there were not more than some
3.3 million small farms, the vast majority of the rural population were the
landless victims of chronic unemployment. Summing up, President Gomulka
has pointed out that just before the Second World War, there were, among
the peasantry:
more than 3 million persons of working age in excess of requirements. Similarly,
in the towns, one worker in every three or four was constantly out of work. In
the countryside, one man in three, or at least one man in four, although capable
of work, was unable to find any. The one and only reason
these men stayed on
their plots was that nowhere else would they find a job.2
Such was the state of affairs in 1940, despite the fact that the co-operative
movement (as will be seen from table 4) had made quite remarkable progress.
In Rumania, land reform was of a much more radical kind. Eight thousand
landowners owned half the land. After the First World War, the Government
1
See ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 155.
"From a speech made in Cracow on 17 August 1957, reproduced in Documents sur
l'économie polonaise en 1956 et 1957, fase. 2: La nouvelle politique agricole en Pologne,
Notes et études documentaires, No. 2365 (Paris, 23 December 1957), pp. 12-17. For further
details about land distribution at this time, see Francis Bauer Czanowski (ed.): The Polish
Handbook, 1925 : A Guide to the Country and Resources of the Republic of Poland (London,
1925); Polish Central Statistical Agency: Statistics for Poland, Vol. V: Big Landed Estates
(Warsaw, 1925).
79
Agricultural organisations and development
expropriated the large estates owned by Rumanians and Greeks in Wallacbia,
and by Hungarians in Transylvania, recently annexed.1 It was decided that
no property might exceed 1,250 acres in extent. An area of 14.5 million
acres was then split up among 1.4 million peasants. By this one stroke,
the percentage of land held by the landed aristocracy was reduced from 42.4
to 13.3. But, as Pirenne has very pertinently observed:
The splitting-up of the big estates led to formidable difficulties. The agricultural
labourer, suddenly turned into a landed proprietor, had neither the education nor
the capital required to run his new holding. The situation was the more strained
in that Rumania, exhausted by German requisitioning, had lost a third of its head
of cattle. Agricultural output fell off, and many peasants sold out to wealthy peasants
or capitalists. Others again fell prey to the money-lender. Thus a fresh agrarian
problem arose. The big landed estate had disappeared, and with it the tenant in a
state of semi-serfdom. But an agricultural proletariat2 was springing up while landed
property was being reconstituted in a capitalist form.
This was a typical failing of the land reform schemes put into effect before
the Second World War, in that the land was simply distributed. In our day
and age, such schemes are much more far-reaching.
In Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, the position was somewhat unusual. After
the 1878 uprising, the Turkish owners of large estates had taken to their heels,
whereupon there had been a vast redistribution of land among the Bulgars
and Serbs. In Croatia and Slovenia, large estates existed down to 1919,
when a land reform movement divided them among some 500,000 families.
Thus, just after the First World War, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia (as it had then
become) were countries of small-holders. But the countryside was already
overcrowded, and as industry was still too little advanced to be able to absorb
the surplus manpower, much that had been achieved by land reforms was
simply undone. In Bulgaria,
Population pressure on the land intensified during the inter-war years, with consequent fragmentation of holdings so that each holding was, on average, composed of
ten separated strips; and Bulgaria had the highest density in Europe of agricultural
workers per acre of farm land, excluding the rough mountain pastures. Disguised
unemployment in 3the countryside has been estimated at the equivalent of over
1 million workers.
1
These expropriations gave rise to lengthy legal actions. See René Brunet: "La réforme
agraire et les intérêts privés hongrois en Transylvanie", Journal de droit international Q?aris,
Editions Godde), 1927, second issue, pp. 319-345.
8
Pirenne, op. cit., Vol. VI, p. 406.
'United Nations, Economie Commission for Europe: Economie Survey of Europe in
1960 (Geneva, 1961), Ch. VI, p. 16; Jacques Natan: Stopanska Istori/a na Bulgaria (Sofia,
1957), p. 492. According to W. E. Moore (Economie Demography of Eastern and Southern
Europe) (Geneva, League of Nations, 1945), between 35 and 53 per cent of the rural population
was redundant.
80
Europe: historical background
In Yugoslavia, just before the war, three-quarters of the population gained
a living from the land. No more than 7 per cent were employed in industry:
Rapid growth of population, the absence of employment outside agriculture, had
led to the splitting-up of large estates. The result was rural over-population. Of
the national income, 54.6 per cent was derived
from agriculture (including forestry),
and 19.8 per cent from industry and mining.1
All this illustrates very clearly the kind of problem with which, just before
the Second World War, eastern Europe was faced. Simply to distribute land
was not enough. Between 1930 and 1940, the agricultural population everywhere, except in Czechoslovakia (38 per cent), represented an excessive proportion of the total actively employed: Bulgaria, 83 per cent; Yugoslavia,
76 per cent; Rumania, 80 per cent; Poland, 65 per cent; Hungary, 50 per cent.
Hence nothing could be done for the peasant masses unless wide-ranging
series of reforms were undertaken, including putting in hand a redistribution
of land, creating co-operatives and credit unions (especially to enable the small
farmer to get going), and at the same time giving an impetus to industrialisation
so as little by little to absorb the redundant manpower from the countryside.
In other words, reforms limited to land distribution alone, as practised in
the 1930s, could not lead to positive results. But even a wider reform,
guided from above and complete with all the requisite operations, would not
have been really successful in countries where the pressure of people per farmable acre was just too great.2 Really effective land reform had to await the
advent of over-all economic planning and co-ordination, covering all branches
of the national economy. Now until quite recently, land reform was either
of the purely distributive type (as during the 1930s), or involved the many
operations which go by the name of "land settlement"; it did not, however,
go hand-in-hand with the development of other branches of the economy,
because national planning was absent.
The experience acquired by the eastern European countries before the
Second World War shows that unilateral development—purely technical, or
1
Milutin Bogosavljevié: L'économie yougoslave (Belgrade, 1961), p. 6.
* Whatever the system chosen, the ratio between agricultural income and agricultural
population actively employed may remain very low, if the surplus rural population is too
great. A typical example is afforded by Spain, where, for an active population of 4.8 million
(1940), there were only 51.25 million acres of farmable land, i.e. little more than 10 acres
per head. Since 85 per cent of the country is arid, plots of this size would have been quite
inadequate, and land distribution would have led to a catastrophe. In such a situation,
there is but one way out: general reform, accompanied by industrialisation as part of a
general development plan. As yet nothing on these lines has been achieved. See XavierAndré Flores: Estructura socioeconómica de la agricultura española (Barcelona, Ediciones
Península, 1969), Ch. IH and V.
81
co
Table 3.
Europe : Principal agricultural workers' trade union organisations between 1925 and 1
Country and organisations
Austria :
Österreichischer Land- und Forstarbeiterverband (Austrian Union of Agricultural and Forestry Workers)
Verband der Güterbeamten Deutschösterreichs (Austrian
Union of Estate Employees)
Zentralverband der Landarbeiter Österreichs (Central
Union of Agricultural Workers in Austria)
Verband aktiver und provisionierter christlicher Forstund Salinenarbeiter der Bundesbetriebe Österreichs
(Union of Active and Pensioned Christian Forestry and
Salt Workers in Austrian State Undertakings)
Year of
foundation
Membership
in 1925-28 or
on the date
shown
1907
37 133
1919
6000
1919
6000
1924
2000
1918
30 000
1919
5 500
1920
23 000
Belgium :
Centrale des travailleurs des industries alimentaires et
de l'agriculture de Belgique (Central Union of Workers
in the Food Industry and in Agriculture of Belgium)
Centrale de l'alimentation, des ouvriers agriculteurs,
jardiniers et forestiers (Central Union of Food and Drink
Workers, Agricultural Workers, Horticultural and
Forestry Workers)
Czechoslovakia :
Svaz zemedelskych a lesnich delniku (Union of Agricultural and Forestry Workers)
Verband der land- und forstwirtschaftlichen Arbeiter
(Union of Agricultural and Forestry Workers)
Vzeodborovy svaz zemedelského a lesniho delnictva
Ceskoslovenské strany sozialistické (organ of the trade
union movement of the National Socialist Party)
W
ag
ac
ce
Svaz Csl. Zemedelskych a Lesnich Zamestnancu (Union
of Czechoslovak Christian-social Agricultural and
Forestry Workers)
Denmark :
Landarbejderforbundet i Danmark (Union of Danish
Land Workers)
Finland :
Maatyöväen Liitto (Union of Agricultural Workers)
France :
Fédération nationale des travailleurs agricoles (National
Federation of Agricultural Workers)
Germany :
Deutscher Landarbeiterverband (German Agricultural
Workers' Union)
Allgemeiner Schweizerbund (General Union of Employees in Dairy Farms)
Zentralverband der Landarbeiter (Central Union of
Agricultural Workers)
Italy :
Federazione nazionale dei lavoratori della terra (National
Federation of Land Workers) (socialist) (wound up in
1926)
Federazione italiana dei lavoratori agricoli (Italian Federation of Agricultural Workers) (catholic) (wound up
in 1926)
Federazione nazionale dei sindicati fascisti dell'agricoltura (National Federation of Fascist Trade Unions in
Agriculture)
1925
12093
1915
15 000
1917
1 132
1920
1909
?
28
85 000
38
1909
20 000
1921
79 000
1901
850 000 (1920)
?
27 OOO (1923)
W2&
700 000
42
Table 3.
S
(Continued)
Country and organisations
Netherlands :
Nederlandsche Bond van Arbeiders in het Landbouw-,
Tuinbouw-, en Zuivelbedrijf (Netherlands Union of
Workers in Agriculture, Horticulture and Dairying)
Roomsch-Katholiek Bond van Bloemist-, Tuin-, Veen-,
en Landarbeiders (Roman Catholic Union of Floricultural, Horticultural, Peat Digging and Agricultural
Workers)
Nederlandsche Christelijke Landarbeidsbond (Netherlands Christian Union of Agricultural Workers)
Poland:
Zwiazek Zawodowy Robotnikow Rolnych (Union of
Agricultural Workers of the Polish Republic)
Zwiazek Robotnikow Rolnych i Lesnych (Agricultural
and Forestry Workers' Union)
Chrzescijanski Zwiazek Zawodowy Robotnikow Rolnych
(Christian Union of Agricultural Workers)
Sweden :
Svenska Lantarbetareförbundet (Swedish Agricultural
Workers' Union)
Upplands Lantarbetareförbundet (Uppland Agricultural
Workers' Union)
Svenska Skogs- och Flottningsarbetarefdrbundet (Union
of Forestry Workers and Timber Floaters)
United Kingdom :
England and Wales:
National Union of Agricultural Workers
Scotland:
Scottish Farm Servants'Union
Year of
foundation
Membership
in 1925-28 or
on the date shown
1909
5 988
?
6 845
Wa
agr
acc
cen
399
1914
5 646
1
72 000
?
86 000
?
21000
1918
6 205
1918
4000
1918
20 000
1906
30 000
61
1912
10 000
10
62
25
Source: ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, Studies and Reports, Series K (Agriculture
Europe: historical background
Table 4. Europe : Agricultural co-operatives (including rural credit unions and agricultural
and rural mutual insurance co-operatives), 1937
Country or territory
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Czechoslovakia
Danzig
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Great Britain
Greece
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland (Eire)
Ireland (Northern)
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Rumania
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
Yugoslavia
Total for Europe
(less the USSR)
USSR
Number of primary societies
Federated NonTotals
federated
3 804
2 349
1665
11531
86
5 408
2117
2 386
64 656
40 300
5 948
3 292
40
434
94
7 765
990
659
951
3 896
2 616
8 710
6 751
3 056
2 690
7 070
694
7 900
20
1 100
3172
—
—
2116
524
2 305
23 395
700
—
153
14
73
—
421
327
79
383
—
7 768
4 836
16
—
197858
47402
—
—
Membership
Federated
320 441
3 824
3 449
203 346
4 837
253 020
2 227 348
11531
86
3 357
7 524
650 950
2 641
224 286
4 691
242 474
88 051
3 956 710
41000
4 370 502
1 175
5 948
250 890
1 156 847
3 445
54
10 428
507
101 340
94
15 054
7 765
1 621 742
1411
231 187
986 1
129 443
1030
46 701
3 896 »
648 054
2 616
232 368
9 093
1 893 831
6 751 s 1 149 689
3 056
400 688
10 458
551 111
11906
336 509
122 712
710
7 900
804 045
246 435 22155 606
246 905 *
—
Nonfederated
Totals
106 520
199 750
—
—
35 106
20 272
61799
1 752 861
.
—
11 122
,
9 982
—
47 392
1026
29 304
—
77 205
190 744
3 708
—
2 546 796
—
320 441
309 866
452 770
2 227 348
3 357
686 056
244 558
304 273
5 709 571
4 370 502
293 662
250 890
1 167 969
10 428
111 322
15 054
1 621 742
278 579
130 469 »
46 701
648 054»
232 368
1 923 135
1 149 689 a
400 688
628 316
527 253
126 420
804 045
24 995 522
19156 921
1
A few urban consumers* co-operatives are included in these figures. * The Dutch Statistical Yearbook indicates
no more than 2,807 agricultural co-operatives, because of the counting methods used. ' A few fishermen's
co-operatives are included. ' Of which 243,000 are kolkhozes, with 18,786,300 members.
Source: ILO: Co-operative Societies throughout the World—Numerical Data (Geneva, 1939); also appearing in
International Labour Review, Vol. XL, Nos. 2-3, August-September 1939.
N.B. The sign (.) indicates that no particulars were obtained. The sign (—) appears whenever no particulars
should appear. Furthermore, the co-operatives affiliated to the federative organs appearing in the International
List of Co-operative Organisations have been counted as federated. The figures for non-federated co-operatives
represent the difference between the figures in the List and the figures provided by sources which indicate the
total number of co-operative societies and their membership. In some instances, it has been impossible to separate
the figures for federated co-operatives from those for non-federated ones, and the data available appear under
"Totals". But the absence of figures in the columns reserved for non-federated co-operatives does not necessarily
imply that no such co-operatives exist; sometimes the sources available provide data for federated co-operatives
only.
85
Agricultural organisations and development
economic, or social—is not enough to ensure the balance of a branch of the
economy as complex as agriculture. Neither the remarkable expansion of
co-operative farming, nor technical developments in methods of cultivation,
nor the promising beginnings of trade unionism could on its own effect that
structural transformation so necessary before agriculture can attain a viable
balance. The land itself is a basic factor in agricultural production, and
without it (and the bulk of the peasantry had none, or too little to live off)
the peasants cannot take advantage of the means theoretically made available
to them by technical progress. Indeed, the peasantry often suffers from technical innovations, when (as has often happened) under-employment is replaced
by chronic unemployment, or when the provision of credit merely drives the
peasant further into debt. The same holds good even of the co-operative
movement, for a careful scrutiny of the way co-operatives were organised
and run at this time reveals that in many cases it was the well-to-do who
derived the most profit therefrom. The future of the peasantry (so many of
whom were landless), appeared—bearing in mind the dictatorships which at
that time were appearing everywhere in central Europe except Czechoslovakia
—very dim indeed.
In the following section we shall study the development of agricultural
organisations, and the social and economic effects of that development, in
these countries and in western Europe after the Second World War. Before
doing so, however, it might be well to say yet again that many developing
countries are today faced with problems very similar to those which Europe
had to solve, one way or another, between the eighteenth century and the
present day. Such countries could learn much from a study of the slow and
often painful evolution of the European peasantry.
86
B. CONTEMPORARY EUROPE
D
Lamentable though it was, the Second World War nevertheless helped to
accelerate progress in European agriculture. Immediately after the events
of 1939-45, only the most optimistic could have foreseen that the Europe
which was so soon to rise again from its ashes would reach its present level of
prosperity or that, nearly everywhere, it would catch up with its pre-war
levels of production in a merefiveyears.
It must be remembered, however, that after every war European governments have always looked to agriculture to redress the balance of their
economy. Each time this has resulted in a more active rural development
policy. Taking the case of France, as just one example, the years following
the defeat of 1871 saw the creation of the National School of Horticulture
(1873); the reopening (in 1876) of the Agricultural College, which had been
closed for twenty-four years ; and the establishment of the Departmental and
Municipal Organisation for Agricultural Training (1879). The 1918 victory
had the same effect; the need to raise the country once more from its ruins
motivated the Act of 2 August 1918—a new charter for agricultural education
which was to enable basic education to be provided for the majority of future
agricultural workers, only 1 per cent of whom (3,000 out of 300,000 on the
eve of the war) had hitherto received any agricultural or domestic training in
State establishments.1
The same was inevitably true in 1945, this time on a continental scale. If
anything, the need for progress was more acute, in that European agriculture,
despite its advances in farming techniques and in co-operation, had not yet
succeeded in emerging from the pre-industrial period. As a United Nations
report emphasised in 1961 :
1
For further details, see L'enseignement agricole en France, Notes et études documentaires,
No. 3152 (Paris, January 1965), passim.
87
Agricultural organisations and development
Until recently, even in the industrialised countries of north-western Europe, tradition continued to prevail in agriculture. The productivity of land and animals had
slowly developed with the application of new techniques, but the division of labour
which was the basic element in the development of industry and the corresponding
emphasis on investment in more productive and labour-saving plant had scarcely
yet begun. Moreover, industry itself was not always sufficiently developed to furnish
the means of production which could basically alter the kind of production methods
inherited from the past. Agricultural production was as yet scarcely market-oriented,
or at least not in any way comparable to that of industry, although income and the
standard of living had become increasingly dependent on the market. Only in
Denmark and the Netherlands did the striking changes begin relatively early, for the
agricultures of these two countries turned towards the conversion of imported
feedstuffs into livestock products for export with its accompanying dependence on
foreign outlets.1
Such relatively slow progress as there was in pre-war agriculture was brought
to a sudden halt by the devastation that followed in the wake of the Second
World War, particularly in Eastern Europe. Apart from its 500,000 war dead,
Hungary lost 40 per cent of its national income. Like many other Eastern
European countries, Hungary relied mainly on draught animals to supplement
human labour; but by the end of the war only 40 per cent of its horses and 50
per cent of its cattle remained.2 Poland lost approximately 60 per cent of its
productive strength. More than 350,000 farms were partly or completely
destroyed (including about 250,000 farmhouses lost through fire or other
causes). Two million horses, 4 million cattle and 2 million pigs perished.
In 1945 the total losses of all kinds suffered by Poland amounted to
$US 5,000 million.3 In Yugoslavia the havoc of war resulted in the destruction
of approximately 290,000 holdings (representing 15 per cent of the total),
18 million fruit trees, 62 per cent of the horses, 56 per cent of the cattle, 63 per
cent of the sheep and goats, and 59 per cent of the pigs. Losses of farm
equipment and machinery amounted to 70 per cent of the total value of these
items.4 The USSR, which suffered the most during the war, lost 9,800 collective farms, 2,980 machine and tractor stations, 1,876 State farms, 7 million
horses, 17 million cattle, 20 million pigs, 27 million sheep, 137,000 tractors,
49,000 combine-harvesters, 46,000 seeders, 285,000 buildings for animals,
1
United Nations-FAO: European Agriculture in 1965 (Geneva, 1961; doc. ST/ECE/
AGRI/4) pp. 8-9.
8
Roger Kérinec: "La Hongrie adhérente à TACI", Revue des études coopératives, No. 144
(Paris, 1966), p. 155; La Hongrie de 1945 à 1956, Notes et études documentaires, No. 2245
(Paris, 1965), p. 7.
* L'agriculture polonaise (Warsaw, Editions Polonia, 1963), p. 8, and Pologne, chiffres et
faits (Warsaw, Editions Polonia, 1962), p. 19.
4
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Agrarian Reform and
Economic Development, report presented by Yugoslavia (doc. RU: WLR-C/66/18), p. 4;
1,000 datos sobre la Yugoeslavia (Belgrade, Publicistiéko Izdavaöki Zavod Jugoslavie, 1961),
p. 21.
88
Contemporary Europe
1.26 million acres of orchards and 337,500 acres of vineyards.1 Although
actual destruction was less in the Western European countries, these lands
nevertheless suffered heavy losses. In the Netherlands, for example, approximately 575,000 acres were flooded by fresh or salt water between 1944 and
1945, and 8,000 farmhouses, 8,500 cowsheds and 7,800 other farm or horticultural buildings were completely devastated.2 But despite the lower incidence
of destruction in the west, the upheavals of the war had nevertheless reduced
production to such a level that it could not satisfy the demand of populations
patently underfed as a result of the exactions made under the occupation.
The urgent nature of the situation, in both east and the west, led the
authorities to intervene directly in agricultural matters, either to control food
distribution (ration books continued in use for some years after the war)
and to raise the level of production, or to correct the serious structural defects
which in some countries—southern Italy, Eastern Europe, for instance—prevented the balance from being redressed.
As a result of the joint efforts of the authorities, agricultural organisations
and private individuals, pre-war productionfigureshad already been overtaken
(by approximately 2 per cent) in Western Europe by 1949-50. By that time
the USSR had reached its 1940 level. The other Eastern European countries
were involved in sweeping agrarian reforms, and had not yet succeeded in
reaching former levels; they were nevertheless laying the foundations of their
present development. Since the main obstacle was of a structural nature,
private property was restricted at the end of the war to 50 acres in Bulgaria,
25 in Yugoslavia (1953), 125 in Rumania and Czechoslovakia and between
125 and 250 in Hungary and Poland. Quite apart from the new restrictions
imposed in the last twenty years (the private sector still represents 86 per cent
in Poland and 88 per cent in Yugoslavia, whereas in Czechslovakia it does not
exceed 12 per cent, and in Rumania 10 per cent3), from a strictly technical
point of view it may be said that these reforms did much to standardise the
size of private holdings, bringing them nearer to the average sizes in Western
Europe. Moreover, the creation of collective undertakings and State farms
enabled the adoption of modern methods of production, hitherto practically
unknown throughout the region.
Can as much be said of the southern countries (Greece, Turkey, southern
Italy, Spain and Portugal) which were affected to varying degrees by the war
1
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Land Reform and
Organisation of the Peasants into Co-operatives in the USSR (doc. RU: WLR-C/66/49), p. 6.
2
Ph. C. M. Van Campen: Le système du crédit agricole dans les Pays-Bas (Eindhoven,
April 1950; mimeographed), p. 2.
s
United Nations-FAO-ILO: Progress in Land Reform, Third Report (New York, 1963),
Ch. II and III.
89
Agricultural organisations and development
and then either returned to their former systems (in some cases re-establishing
the same institutions) or kept the system they had in 1940 ?
Except in Spain and Portugal, the need for more or less extensive reform
was felt throughout this region immediately after the war. Whilst it is true
that the measures taken aimed far more at splitting up large holdings and
State-owned land than at a general improvement of farming structures at the
national level, they nevertheless helped to reduce the chronic unemployment
and under-employment and to increase the production and productivity of
both land and men. Admittedly, in Turkey the Law on Land Reform of
1945 failed to achieve genuine agrarian reform since, in 1963, 80 per cent of the
land was still in the hands of 22 per cent of the rural population; and when a
census of the 7,000 agas was carried out, it was found that half owned more
than 250 acres of land.1 The partial failure of the reform may be attributed to
the repeal in 1950 of the legislative measures providing for the expropriation
of holdings of over 1,250 acres. Nevertheless, between 1947 and 1964, some
4.5 million acres of land owned by the State, and sometimes by religious foundations and municipalities, were distributed to 360,000 families in 5,157 villages 2,
which somewhat improved the lot of the poorest classes.
In Italy the land reform carried out under the Sila Law and Stralcio Law—
of 12 May and 21 October 1950 respectively—involved the distribution of
approximately 1.75 million acres to 110,000 families. Although the reform
concentrated mainly on the southern regions, its effects, together with those of
the country's industrialisation, enabled agricultural underemployment to be
cut by 25 per cent during the period 1949-60.3 As a result of this reform,
which is still under way, the situation has been restored to such an extent that,
according to Mr. Nino Novacco, President of the Southern Development
Assistance Institute:
Nowadays southern Italy is the region with the highest growth rate in the country;
between 1953 and 1964, private consumption in this area went up by 78.8 per cent
in real terms. Average annual investment in industry rose from S5US484 million
during the period 1959-61 to SUS 846 million during the period 1962-64, i.e. an increase
in real terms of 74.7 per cent. The increase recorded in the centre and north of the
country over the same period was only 17.6 per cent. Unemployment figures in
the south of Italy dropped from 1 million to 600,000 in ten years. The days when
this region 4used to drop further and further behind the rest of the country belong
to the past.
1
Amber Busoglu: "Turquie, an quarante", Le Monde (Paris), 24 May 1963.
OECD: Low Incomes in Agriculture (Paris, 1964), p. 446.
8
ibid. pp. 269-270 and p. 273. See also Progress in Land Reform, Third Report, op. cit.,
Ch. Ill ; G. Barbero : Land Reform in Italy : Achievements and Perspectives (Rome, FAO, 1961 ).
* Statement made to the press. See Le Monde, 22 November 1966.
a
90
Contemporary Europe
In Greece, under the measures taken in 1952, uncultivated holdings of
62.5 acres, and all land in excess of 125 acres on cultivated holdings, were
expropriated; in this way, 1 million acres were distributed to 167,000 farming
families. As a result of this policy and of other measures such as land
consolidation, irrigation and drainage, and local road improvement schemes,
a 75 per cent increase in agricultural production was noted during the period
1950-62, with an accompanying rise of 87 per cent (1951-61) in farmers' per
capita incomes which was above the average in the OECD countries.1
This reorganisation, whether of a general nature or restricted to certain
categories of holdings, was not confined to the countries of eastern and southern
Europe. Western countries took similar reform action. Here, however,
the movement was towards consolidation rather than division, the characteristic Western European farm being the small or medium-sized holding
farmed directly by its owners. The limited size of a large number of these
holdings, as well as their undue fragmentation, led governments to adopt a
policy of land improvement which aimed both to regroup holdings and to
form viable family units, so as to bring agricultural incomes as nearly as
possible into line with those in industry and public services. Without this
land improvement policy (accompanied by effective measures as regards credit
facilities and price protection), farmers would have been unable to make the
transition from their traditional self-sufficiency to the increasing specialisation
required by modern production; in many cases rational and profitable mechanisation would have been impossible.
Legislation on various matters such as inheritance and transfer of property,
credit facilities for the consolidation or enlarging of holdings, installation expenses, terminal allowances for old farmers or those prepared to sell their
farms, and public or private land improvement companies, all helped to a
certain extent to channel and control the effects of the spontaneous drift from
agriculture caused by the demand for labour in other expanding sectors. In
France, for example, beginning with the Interministerial Order of 12 October
1949, measures were taken to grant subsidies and special loans to would-be
farmers who had no possibility of setting themselves up in their home areas
and who therefore wish to farm elsewhere in the country. The Agricultural
Guidance Act of 5 August 1960, under which the SAFER were set up2, the
1
Progress in Land Reform, Third Report, op. cit., Ch. II; OECD: Low Incomes in Agriculture, op. cit., pp. 219-230.
a
According to the Act, the SAFER (sociétés d'aménagement fonder et d'établissement
rural) are "land improvement and rural settlement companies" that "may be formed to
purchase land or farms freely offered for sale by their owners, together with wasteland, for
resale after possible improvement. Inter alia, they shall aim to improve agrarian structures,
enlarge certain farms and facilitate cultivation of the soil and the settlement of farmers on
91
Agricultural organisations and development
Acts of 3 March and 8 August 1962 respecting the special assistance scheme
for agricultural workers and the creation of the Agricultural Modernisation
Social Fund (FASASA), together with other legislative provisions, in particular
the Decrees of 15 July 1965 (making provision for loans of up to 75 per cent
for the purchase or extension of farms1, provided a framework for the reorganisation of French agriculture in which the agricultural organisations played
an active part. From 1955 to 1963 the number of farms fell from 2,286,000
to 1,900,000, i.e. an average drop of 50,000 per year. This decline, which
mainly affected small farms of less than 25 acres to the advantage of those of
over 50 acres, is not yet at an end since, in 1966, 29 per cent of farms still had
less than 12 acres whilst 20 per cent had an effective farming area of between
12 and 25 acres. The process may well be completed within ten years, however,
through the measures begun in 1960.
Fairly similar policies were adopted by the other Western countries, and in
all cases a cut in the number of holdings to allow for the setting-up of more
economic units has become one of the most striking characteristics of the increasing rationalisation of European agriculture (see table 5). Between 1949 and
1964 the number of holdings in the Federal Republic of Germany dropped
from 1,947,600 to 1,497,000, that is to say, a decrease of 450,600 within
fifteen years. In Austria, during the period 1950-60, the number of farms
was reduced from 433,000 to approximately 402,000 (a drop of 31,000) and
in the Netherlands, between 1956 and 1962, from 179,473 to 158,572 (a drop
of 20,901). Throughout the region this decrease has been to the advantage
of the intermediate groups of farmers, and it is probable that it will continue
into the next decade as successive reappraisals of their economic potential
bring new areas into consideration. The desire of governments and particularly
the land." As private companies they must be approved by the Ministry of Agriculture and
the Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs. The State accords them a working capital
for land purchase and subsidies of between 50 and 80 per cent for improvement work. The
SAFER are required to resell the land they buy in the form of viable units to farmers, who
receive a loan of approximately 60 per cent repayable over 30 years at 3 per cent interest
for land, and a subsidy of 50 per cent for building. The activities of the SAFER are
co-ordinated by a semi-public central body, the Central Company for Land and Rural
Development {Société centrale d'aménagement fonder et rural—SCAFR). See OECD:
Obstacles to Shifts in the Use of Land (Paris, 1965), pp. 80-89; L'amélioration et la conservation
des exploitations agricoles dans les pays de l'Europe des Six, Notes et études documentaires,
No. 3178 (Paris, 1965), pp. 23-30. See also Les structures agraires en France et les sociétés
d'aménagement foncier et d'établissement rural (SAFER), ibid., No. 3422, 1967. It is worth
noting that in the seven years following their creation in 1960, the twenty-seven SAFER in
France purchased only 418,660 acres, of which they resold 221,460 to farmers, according to
the report submitted by their federation to the general assembly held in June 1967 (see
Le Monde, 14 June 1967).
1
See Journal officiel de la République française, Nos. 65-69, Decrees Nos. 65-576 to 65-582
and Orders of 15 July 1965. See also Pierre Legendre: L'exode professionnel des agriculteurs
et le fonds d'action sociale pour l'aménagement des structures agricoles (Paris, Institut des ha utes
études de droit rural et d'économie agricole, 15 January 1965; mimeographed).
92
Contemporary Europe
Table 5.
Europe : Changes in the active agricultural population and the size of holdings
Country
Active agricultural population
Period
Variation
Farm holdings
Variation
Period
in numbers
(%)
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany (Fed. Rep.)
Hungary
Iceland
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Rumania
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Turkey
USSR
United Kingdom
Yugoslavia
1951-61
1950-62
1950-56
1950-61
1950-60
1954-62
1950-60
1950-60
1950-60
1950-60
1951-61
1947-62
1947-60
1950-61
1950-60
1950-60
1950-56
1950-60
1952-62
1950-60
1950-60
1950-59
1950-60
1956-61
-30 1
-39 2
-17.7 s
-25
-24
-25*
-35 ,
-27.3 3
-25«
-24'
-28
-36*
-27»
-25
-12.8 s
-9
+ 1.7s
-91
-37l
-18 »
+20»
-24.8 3
-16'
-10 s
(%)
1951-60
1950-59
n.a.
1946-61
1950-59
1954-63
1949-62
n.a.
1951-60
1951-60
1930-61
1950-62
1950-59
1949-59
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
1951-61
1939-55
n.a.
n.a.
1950-60
n.a.
-7
-21
n.a.
-6
+9
-17
-19
n.a.
-6
-8
+2
-26
-12
-8
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
-17
-14
n.a.
n.a.
-11
n.a.
Variation
in average
size
CO
+ 10
+21
n.a.
+4
0
n.a.
+ 19
n.a.
+81
n.a.
+1
+31
+11
+6
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
+12
+10
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
n.a. : not available
1
Including employment in agriculture, hunting and fishing. ' Expressed in full-time labour units. * Male
population only. * Including employment in forestry. 6 Full-time workers only. • Active population of
15 years and over. 'Including, employment in forestry and fishing. ' Full-time male workers only. • Covers
rural population and share of this population group in the total population.
Sources: For the countries of southern and western Europe including Yugoslavia: OECD: Interrelationship
between Income and Supply Problems in Agriculture (Paris, 1965), pp. 117 and 153. For Eastern European
countries: percentages calculated on the basis of data published for 1950 by Folke Dovring in Land and Labour
in Europe, 1900-SO (The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1956), p. 66 and, for 1960 or the most recent year, by the FAO
in its Production Yearbook, 1965 (Rome, 1966).
of farmers to raise agricultural incomes to the same level as those in other
industries can only encourage this trend.
This progress towards structural balance, although never fully achieved,
is giving rise to increasing satisfaction; and other accompanying factors, of
which it is both cause and effect, have contributed to the recovery of European
agriculture as a whole. These are the outflow of labour from agriculture,
with consequent agricultural mechanisation, and the extension of agricultural advisory work and vocational training. These two factors have had a
93
Agricultural organisations and development
decisive influence on the increasing integration of agriculture within the industrial economy.
In 1945, despite the considerable progress achieved before the war, European
agriculture suffered from over-population which, in view of the large number
of non-viable holdings in the West1 and the predominance of latifundia in the
East, had hitherto prevented it from modernising its equipment and farming
methods. Neither the structure of the holdings nor the surplus active population were likely to encourage farmers to invest their income in modern
capital goods. Immediately after the war the reforms undertaken in the East
(in the West land improvement policies came later), and above all the emphasis
being placed everywhere on the necessity to boost industry, were to be decisive
in reducing the importance of these negative factors. During the decade
1950-60, the expansion of industry and services, together with the policies of
support for agriculture, enabled the latter to get rid of some of its surplus
active population and proportionally to increase its productivity. This
decrease in manpower, shown in table 5, has become still more marked since
1960. In recent years it has even exceeded the expectations of the national
development plans: in 1962 a further 160,000 departures per year were recorded
in France, i.e. twice the number anticipated in the Fourth Plan. In Germany
the outflow continues at a rate of 120,000 persons per year; in Italy 300,000
workers left the land in 1966; in Spain the figure is approximately 150,000 per
year since 1959. These statistics tally with the forecasts made in March 1961
by Mr. Sicco Mansholt, at the Seminar on European Integration organised
by the International Press Institute of Zürich. He estimated that in the
European Economic Community, 8 million workers would have left the land
by 1975 (4 million in Italy, 2.5 million in France and 1.5 million in Germany).
In view of the outflow of labour from agriculture that has already taken place
in recent years, the Mansholt Plan, submitted in December 1968 to the Governments of States Members of the European Community, provides for the departure of only 5 million agricultural workers out of 10 million, between 1970
and 1980, in the Common Market. On the wider scale of the OECD, Professor
Folke Dovring anticipated that over the period 1960-70 the agricultural population would decline by a further 25 to 30 per cent.2 If the agricultural labour
force remained stationary, and in view of the growth target of the OECD
for this period (i.e. a 50 per cent rise in the national income of the Western
1
There were still 900,000 non-viable units in France in 1956-57, i.e. 40 per cent of the
total, and 201,000 in the United Kingdom in 1959, i.e. 50 per cent. During the same period
thefigureswere 26 per cent in Austria, 53 per cent in Greece, 50 per cent in Ireland and 64 per
cent in Italy. See United Nations-FAO: European Agriculture in 1965, op. cit., annex II,
p. 8.
2
Folke Dovring: Problems of Manpower in Agriculture (Paris, OECD, 1965), p. 61.
94
Contemporary Europe
Table 6.
Europe : The development of agricultural mechanisation
Country
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Denmark
France
Germany (Fed. Rep.)
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Rumania
Spain
Sweden
USSR
United Kingdom
Yugoslavia
1
Number of tractors
in 1938
in 1964
1 800 (1939)
1 200
3 500 (1940)
6 600 (1935-39)
36 000
38 000
?
7 000 (1935)
36 000
4 000
1000
600
4 049
5 300 (1940)
22 600
680 000
50000
2 500(1939)
178 492
61377
61723
161 700 (1965)
952 718
1 106 899
33 500
60 555
377 107
111 701
106 789
14 086
75 386
130 132
168 000 (1963)
1 539 000
389 250 (1963)
45 394
Arable land per tractor in
1964 (in hectares ')
9.0
15.3
74.0
16.8
21.9
7.6
114.9
93.1
40.8
8.8
149.0
293.2
139.2
160.1
19.6 (1963)
149.6
19.1 (1963)
183.8
1 hectare = 2.471 acres.
Sources: Tractors in 1938: Henri Noilhan: Histoire de l'agriculture à l'ère industrielle (Paris, 1965), Vol. V, p. 125;
Svetolik Popovic : La politica agraria en Yugoeslava (Belgrade, 1964), p. 59 ; Evolution économique de la Hongrie,
Notes et études documentaires, No. 2883 (Paris, 1962), p. 29; L'économie roumaine, Notes et études documentaires,
No. 3151 (Paris, 1965), p. 31; K. Kiriakov et al.: La réorganisation socialiste de l'économie rurale en République
populaire de Bulgarie (Sofia, 1965), p. 6; Aperçu du Danemark (Copenhagen, 1967), p. 53; Austria, Hechos y cifras
(Vienna, 1965), p. 72. For Poland, estimate of the Central Office of Statistics, Warsaw. United Nations-FAO :
European Agriculture in 1965 (Geneva, 1961), annex I, p. 6. Tractors in 1964: FAO: Production Yearbook, 1965
(Rome, 1966), p. 308. Hectares of arable land per tractor in 1964: figures calculated on the basis of the arable
area indicated in ibid., p. 3.
countries) the farmers' per capita income "would grow only half as fast as
that of the community at large, unless its terms of trade were improving correspondingly".1 This seems unlikely to occur, however, in view of the fact that
technical progress, particularly mechanisation, has swept European agriculture
into an irreversible process, that of its own "industrial revolution".
The figures in table 6, referring to tractors, reveal the extent to which
European agriculture was "under-capitalised" in 1940. Statistics in respect
of other factors of production show a similar trend, particularly during the
period 1950-60, which was so decisive. An example in this respect is the increase
in fertiliser consumption since thefive-yearperiod 1948-49 to 1952-53 (table 7).
A further important factor is the joint use of agricultural equipment.
Whether instigated or organised by the authorities, or resulting from a spontaneous decision by the farmers themselves, in either case such co-operation
1
D o v r i n g , Problems
of Manpower
in Agriculture,
o p . cit., p. 29.
95
Agricultural organisations and development
Table 7.
Europe : Increase in fertiliser consumption (thousands of metric tons)
Region and country
Eastern Europe (including Yugoslavia):
Nitrogenous fertilisers
Phosphate fertilisers
Potash fertilisers
Western and southern Europe:
Nitrogenous fertilisers
Phosphate fertilisers
Potash fertilisers
1948-49/
1952-53
1960-61
1964-65
679.2
729.8
1 071.5
1 727.6
1640.0
1 888.9
2725.5*
2 164.5 •
2267.6*
1 547.8
2 350.2
1860.5
3 446.9
3 540.8
3 316.4
5 413.9
5 241.2
5 243.1
* 1963-64, more recent data not being available for all the countries in this region.
Note: For lack of data, Albania is not included among the Eastern countries. For further details see FAO:
Production Yearbook, ¡963 and ibid., 1965 (Rome, 1964 and 1966).
between farmers involved a gradual departure from the individualism that
had characterised pre-war agriculture. According to a survey carried out in
1965 \ the number of tractors worked on a pool basis, by co-operatives or other
types of associations, represented 6.2 per cent of the total in Finland, 4 per
cent in the Netherlands, 3 per cent (?) in France, under 2 per cent in the
Federal Republic of Germany, 8 per cent in Norway and 5 per cent in
Turkey. For reaper and binder machines, the percentages are more significant :
23 per cent in Finland, 11 per cent in the Netherlands, 27.5 per cent in France,
60 per cent in Germany, 20 per cent in Norway, 13 per cent in Turkey.
The gap between the two series of percentages shows the link between the
pooling of machinery and the amount of investment involved. This collective use of equipment has also been applied to the land in the case of group
farming. The latter is too recent a development for its results to be assessed
with any certitude (in France, a pioneer country in thisfield,the Act respecting
joint farming groups dates from August 1962) but it would seem to be the
answer to the new needs resulting from constantly changing economic conditions, with which the traditional institutions such as co-operatives no longer
appear able to cope satisfactorily in their present form.
Here we have been able to follow these developments in outline only, but
a glance at the production indices (see table 8) and at the output of agricultural
produce will show the extent of the progress made. For example, a comparison of the European (excluding the USSR) average output in quintals per
hectare of the main cereal crops reveals that between the periods 1934-38 and
1961-65 output went up from 13.9 to 19.6 for wheat, from 13.6 to 17.5 for
' F A O : Existing Forms of Mutual Assistance among Farmers in Europe (Rome, 1966),
passim.
96
Contemporary Europa
rye, from 14.4 to 25.4 for barley, from 15.1 to 19.5 for oats and from 14.3 to
22.5 for maize.1 It should further be observed that these are aggregate averages
for the whole of Europe and that the low output of the dry southern regions
pulls down the general average. A comparison limited to countries in the
forefront of agricultural progress would reveal far greater increases.
The technical progress of European agriculture is also reflected in other fields
—closer participation of agricultural organisations in economic and social
planning, higher wages and standards of living, etc.—that will be considered
below, country by country. Lastly, and although statistics similar to those in
table 4 of the previous chapter are not available, the remarkable advances
made by the co-operative movement in all European countries must not be
forgotten. Although the inevitable trend towards concentration, which is a
general phenomenon, has involved a drop in the number of co-operatives
in many countries, this does not mean that their activities have likewise
diminished. On the contrary, there has been an unprecedented increase in the
volume and diversity of their operations, whilst the impact made by co-operatives throughout Europe is stronger than ever.
It would have been impossible to achieve all these results had similar
progress not been made in vocational training and agricultural advisory
work (the latter was reorganised in nearly all countries during the decade
1950-602), nor could they have been obtained without the active co-operation
of agricultural organisations in every field.
This study was designed to give precise information on the part currently
being played by these organisations in the economic and social development
of rural areas. To this end, questionnaires were submitted to the general
farmers' organisations and to employers' and workers' organisations, as well
as to the chambers of agriculture, wherever these existed, in Europe.* No
country was intentionally left out of the survey, but only those which replied
to the questionnaires appear therein. The information received and the
documentation available have provided a general picture of the situation in
the following countries, and enabled the relevant conclusions to be drawn:
— Western Europe : Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Federal Republic
of Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom,
1
For the 1934-38 figures, see FAO: Yearbook of Food and Agricultural Statistics, 1947
(Washington, 1947), passim. The averages for 1961-65 are based on annual averages published in the latest FAO yearbooks.
3
As regards the progress and methods of European advisory services, see the periodical
reports published by OECD under the heading Agricultural Advisory Services in Europe and
North America.
3
For the text of these questionnaires, see Appendix 1 to this volume.
97
Agricultural organisations and development
Table 8.
Socio-economic data for European countries (with special reference to thçir
Country
National per
capita income
in 1965
(USS)
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Czechoslovakia
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany (Fed.Rep.)
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Malta
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Rumania
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
USSR
United Kingdom
Yugoslavia
970
1406
650 (1964) 1
1200 (1964) 1
1652
1399
1436
1 447
566
890 (1964) 1
783
883
1498
429
1265
1453
930 (1964) 1
351
710 (1964) *
594
2 201 1
1928
890 (1964) x
1451
390 (1964) 1
Share of agriculture Active agricultural
in gross domestic
population
product in 1963
(% of total active
(%)
population)
11(1962)
7
—
14
12
19
92
6 (1962)
29
21
22
16
8 (1961)
8
9
9
26(1960)
23
30
24 (1962)
6 (1964)
5
22 (1962)
4
28
22.7 (1961)
7.4 (1961)
48.6 (1963)
22.6 (1963)
17.7 (1960)
35.1 (1960)
20.7 (1962)
11.0(1961)
53.7 (1961)
35.0 (1963)
35.7 (1961)
24.6 (1964)
15.0(1960)
10.3 (1957)
10.8 (1960)
19.4 (1960)
47.8 (1963)
42.0 (1960)
48.0 (1963)
34.4 (1964)
13.4 (1960)
11.4(1960)
32.0 (1965)
4.0 (1962)
56.7 (1961)
Index of per capita
food production in
1964-65 (1952-53 to
1956-57 = 100)
134
120
—
—
114
120
116
112
144
—
126
113
120
—
120
92
—
106
—
122
100
90
—
129
147
*GNP estimated by the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development; for Sweden, United Nations
figures. " Excluding fishing. s Provisional data. ' 1 gram = 0.035 oz.
Sources: ILO: Year Book of Labour Statistics, 1965 (Geneva, 1966); FAO: Production Yearbook, 1965 (Rome,
1966) and The State of Food and Agriculture, 1966 (Rome, 1966); IBRD: World Bank Atlas of Per Capita Product
and Population (Washington, 1966); United Nations: Statistical Yearbook, 1964 (New York, 1965);
— Eastern Europe : Bulgaria, Eastern Germany, Hungary, Poland, USSR.
Of the fifty-nine central organisations in these fifteen countries which
replied to the questionnaires, there were twenty general organisations, twelve
employers' associations or unions, twenty-three workers' trade unions, and
four chambers of agriculture. The rarity of the latter, which were so numerous
before the war, is due to the fact that many of them failed to survive the
political upheavels of the period 1933-45. In Germany and Austria they were
abolished by the national-socialist régime, but reorganised at the end of the
war. In the Eastern countries—Poland, Hungary, Rumania—they were not
98
Contemporary Europe
agrarian situation)
Available calories,
1964-65 (number
of calories per
capita per day)
2 980
3 150 (1963-64)
—
—
3 330
3 070 (1963-64)
3 070 (1963-64)
2 920
2 960 (1963-64)
3 020 (1962)
3 480 (1963-64)
2 810
3 150 (1963-64)
—
3 080
2 920
3 350 (1961-63)
2 670
3 040
2 850 (1963-64)
2950
3 150 (1963-64)
—
3 300
3 110(1963-64)
Available fats, 4
1964-65 (grams per
capita per day)
118.8
140.9 (1963-64)
—
—
157.8
116.5(1963-64)
129.7 (1963-64)
131.0
93.5 (1963-64)
99.6 (1962)
133.3 (1963-64)
86.8
140.9 (1963-64)
—
143.1
132.3
97.2 (1961-63)
70.3
60.8 (1961-63)
98.5 (1963-64)
132.9
134.7 (1963-64)
—
147.4
78.8 (1963-64)
Available proteins,
1964-65 (grams * per
capita per day)
Total
Animal
86.7
91.1
49.0
51.0 (1963-64)
—
—
93.1
95.1
100.3
80.4
98.0
90.9
91.6
81.5
91.1
—
84.6
81.6
92.9
76.6
92.2
78.6
83.1
89.3
—
89.8
97.2
—
—
58.5
58.0 (1963-64)
58.0 (1963-64)
51.1
35.9 (1963-64)
37.1 (1962)
55.5 (1963-64)
32.3
51.0 (1963-64)
—
51.7
50.4
40.4 (1961-63)
28.7
27.7 (1961-63)
28.0 (1963-64)
55.6
52.3 (1963-64)
—
54.0
24.2 (1963-64)
Percentage of
illiterates
(total)
Infant
mortality
in 1963
(deaths per
1,000 births)
1-2 (1950)
3.3 (1947)
14.7 (1956)
2-3 (1950)
1-2 (1950)
1-2 (1950)
3.6 (1946)
1-2 (1950)
19.6 (1961)
3.2 (1960)
1-2 (1950)
8.4 (1961)
3-4 (1950)
40-45 (1950)
1-2 (1950)
1-2 (1950)
4.7 (1960)
38.1 (1960)
11.4 (1956)
17.6 (1950)
1-2 (1950)
1-2 (1950)
1.5 (1959)
1-2 (1950)
23.5 (1961)
31.3
27.2
35.7
22.0
19.1 3
18.2
25.4
26.9
39.3
42.9
26.6
39.5 s
28.6
34.2
15.8
17.7(1962)
49.1 s
73.1
55.2
40.5
15.4
20.5
30.9
21.8 '
77.5 s
Demographic Yearbook. 1964 (New York, 1965) ; Yearbook of National Accounts Statistics, 1966 (New York, 1967) ;
UNESCO: Statistical Yearbook, 1964 (Paris, 1966) and World Illiteracy at Mid-Century (Paris, 1957). See also,
for income per head of population: A. Lasso de la Vega: Classification Internationale des pays d'après leur niveau
de développement. Essai de systématisation des différentes méthodes proposées jusqu 'à présent. UNCTAD, Research
Memorandum, No. 3 (Geneva, 17 June 1966); (UNCTAD/RD/MISC.4). For the active agricultural population in
the Eastern European countries, statistics have been taken from United Nations: 1967 Report on the World
Social Situation (New York, 1969).
re-established. Some remained in Sweden until recently but it was decided
to transfer their activities to government bodies—the agricultural councils of
the counties—as from 1 July 1967. Other countries such as the Netherlands,
the United Kingdom and Switzerland have never had chambers of agriculture.
Lastly, Spain and Italy have joint chambers, whose activities, of varying scope,
differ from those of the traditional chambers. This is why only those of
France, Germany and Austria are mentioned in this survey.
It will further be noted that the organisations consulted do not cover the
entire range of possible or existing types of association in the rural world.
99
Agricultural organisations and development
For obvious reasons of time and space, many types of association that are of
great interest have deliberately been left outside the scope of the survey.
This applies to co-operatives, which are worth analysing afresh in order to
sum up their present situation, despite all that has already been written on
them. The same is true of other types of association that have been less often
studied, such as the marketing boards encountered in many countries. In
the descriptions of the Western countries given below, it will be seen that where
such types of association are mentioned, it is only in so far as they come under
the occupational organisations studied or have close links with such organisations. In the case of the Eastern countries, the co-operative organisations are
analysed because they not only carry out their own role but also fulfil a number
of functions that elsewhere come within the province of farm or farmworkers'
organisations.
Nevertheless, despite these limitations necessarily imposed on a survey
that cannot be exhaustive in view of its wide geographical scope, it may be
considered that, altogether, thefifteencountries covered in this chapter provide
a sufficiently wide and complete sample of the manner in which European
organisations are run and that, where necessary, models might be put together
from this sample for the guidance of the developing countries.
WESTERN EUROPE
Austria
The end of the Second World War brought many changes to Austria—
division of the country into occupation zones, general reorganisation of the
economy, adoption of a democratic political structure and renaissance of the
former political parties and industrial associations—which had salutary and
far-reaching effects in every sphere, particularly that of agriculture.
Today, rural life is centred on a wide range of agricultural organisations,
similar to those in other Western countries, the most important of which have
been good enough to reply to our questionnaire.
Employers' organisations
• Conference of Agricultural and Forestry Employers' Organisations
The Conference of Agricultural and Forestry Employers' Organisations
(Obermännerkonferenz der Arbeitgeberverbände der Land- und Forstwirtschaft)
is the central organisation for the employers' associations in the different
regions, with the exception of the Tyrol and Vorarlberg. These associations
100
Austria
were founded in the years immediately following the war, and banded together
in 1948 into the present central organisation with a view to the co-ordination
and collective representation of their interests.
The primary concern of the employers' associations is the negotiation with
the trade unions of collective agreements on wages and general conditions of
work. These agreements cover wage-earning and salaried employees of both
private and State-managed agricultural undertakings. But it should be pointed
out that in some provinces the power to negotiate agreements is held by the
chambers of agriculture. In all cases, the agreements must observe the provisions of the federal Agricultural Labour Act of 1948, which was adopted to
give workers in agriculture and forestry equal status with industrial workers,
with due regard, however, to the special conditions prevailing in agriculture.1
As in other countries, the employers' associations offer advice to their
members on all questions arising in connexion with the labour laws, social
insurance or tax problems, and support them in bringing grievances to the
attention of the official authorities. In addition they collaborate closely in
the framing of social laws or new labour regulations by stating their views
jointly with the chambers of agriculture.
On the other hand, as far as economic policy—i.e. price fixing, production
targets, etc.—is concerned the employers' associations (while showing their
interest through the positions they adopt and the recommendations and
resolutions passed at their congresses) leave action in this field mainly to the
chambers of agriculture and the Farm and Forest Owners' Association.
Production targets are influenced by the Government's policy of subsidies and
aid to the rural sector as defined in the Agricultural Act of 1960. Under
this Act the Government submits to Parliament each year a "Green Report"
on comparative trends in the agricultural sector and the measures applied in
1
This Act is a model of its kind in its provisions for the protection of young workers,
which are all too often inadequate in other countries. Mention may be made, by way of
illustration, of some of its provisions, quoted in a 1955 publication: "The employer must
devote particular attention to the vocational training and moral welfare of juvenile employees ;
special attention must be paid to their health and physical development, and they must be
given an opportunity to attend agricultural or forestry continuation schools or courses;
they must not work overtime or at night (the term 'night' is defined, as a rule, for young
workers and for adults, at any time of the year (including the busy season), as being an uninterrupted period of 10 consecutive hours in every 24, including, as a rule, the time between
7 p.m. and 5 a.m.) The weekly working hours of young persons must not exceed an
average of 48 over the year or 54 during the cultivation and harvest period, and they must
be allowed a continuous holiday period of 24 working days during each year of service. . . .
The employer is bound to draw the attention of apprentices to the dangers arising out of the
work (in particular, to the rules for the prevention of accidents) and to ensure that equipment
and machinery are safe before they are used by the apprentice." It should be added that
conditions have improved even further over the past ten years, particularly as regards hours
of work. For further details see "The Protection of Young Agricultural Workers in Austria",
International Labour Review, Vol. LXXI, No. 2, February 1955, pp. 195-206.
101
Agricultural organisations and development
accordance with the provisions of the plan. Of course, arrangements exist
for agricultural interests to be represented on the Ministry of Agriculture
commission responsible for drawing up the report. The machinery for price
fixing varies according to the product, and it is worth recalling here the distinction made in the last OECD report on agricultural policies:
For some agricultural products (bread-grains, milling products, milk, butter,
cheese) prices are determined through decisions by public authorities. Any price
changes of goods which fall under this jurisdiction are discussed by representatives of the responsible ministers and the three chambers (commerce, labour,
agriculture). The result of this consultation is submitted to the Price Commission,
seated in the Ministry of Agriculture. The Commission forwards its decision to the
Minister who confirms it definitely.
Price changes not falling under the jurisdiction of the above-mentioned law on
price regulations, as for instance packed cheese, curd, melted cheese, whipped cream,
condensed milk, insecticides, etc., are discussed by the "Parity Commission on Prices
and Wages Questions" which is composed of representatives of the interested groups
(chambers of commerce, labour and agriculture, as well as trade unions) and of the
Government, the latter however with no right to vote. Thus changes in prices of
agricultural products also can come before this Commission. In practice the Commission has served as an instrument of delaying or moderating price increases and
clearing opposed interests.1
In so far as they belong to agricultural organisations—membership of
which may be voluntary or (as in the case of the chambers of agriculture)
compulsory—employers therefore have the opportunity of exerting direct
influence upon general agricultural policy. But as far as their own employers'
associations are concerned, their role seems to be voluntarily limited to the
legal and social aspects of their profession.
The Conference of Employers' Organisations does not belong to any national
federation or confederation, nor is it affiliated to any international organisation.
Agricultural workers' unions
•
Union of Agricultural and Forestry Workers
The trade union for agricultural workers in Austria is the Union of Agricultural and Forestry Workers (Gewerkschaft der Arbeiter in der Land- und
Forstwirtschaft). This union, founded in 1906, is intended for employees
only.2 Its paid-up membership at 31 December 1965 was nearly 50,000,
a figure higher than that of 1926 (just over 37,000) but not as high as that
reached in the years 1921-23, which fluctuated between 60,000 and 70,000.
1
OECD: Agricultural Policies in 1966 (Paris, 1967), p. 145.
On the origins of this union see ILO : The Representation and Organisation ofAgricultural
Workers, op. cit., pp. 87-88.
2
102
Austria
This decline does not, however, reflect a falling-off of influence—far from it:
in 1921-23 about 14 per cent of the employed agricultural population belonged
to the union, whereas today about 50 per cent are members. Hence, as in
many other countries, the decline is in the number of agricultural employees,
estimated at 500,000 in the 1920s and at barely 100,000 today.1
The union's influence is wielded first and foremost for the benefit of its
own members, but the rise in the standard of living as a result of union action
(conclusion of collective agreements, improvements in labour legislation, etc.)
has also been to the advantage of non-members. Most of the union's members
are employed full-time throughout the year. But great importance is also
attached to seasonal work, and one of the union's main tasks is to strive to
halt the extension of this system and to combat growing winter unemployment
among agricultural and forestry workers. Tenant farmers and peasants have
their own associations to defend their interests, membership of which is
voluntary. They are not allowed to join the employees' union.
The union is represented, directly or indirectly, on a number of public
bodies, including the following:
— the bodies responsible for legally representing the interests of agricultural
and forestry workers: agricultural workers' chambers, chambers of labour;
— the Ministry of Agriculture commission responsible for drawing up the
"Green Report"2 which, by law, has to give an assessment each year of the
situation in agriculture;
— all the autonomous bodies for the administration of the social insurance
schemes;
— the Parity Commission on Prices and Wages Questions, an unofficial
body but one recognised by the Government (indirect participation);
— the commissions established by law to handle vocational training in agriculture and forestry;
— the labour courts and social insurance arbitration tribunals (nomination
of assistant judges) ;
— a large number of other bodies of lesser importance.
The influence exerted within these public bodies ranges from consultation
to direct participation through the exercise of the right to vote.
' I L O : The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 87;
OECD: Manpower Statistics, 1950-1962 (Paris, 1963), p. 23.
2
The decision to draw up a "Green Plan" was taken on 13 July 1960, the date of the
promulgation of the Agricultural Act, whereby the Ministry of Agriculture is required each
year to draw up a report on the country's agricultural situation on the basis of data furnished
by a commission whose terms of reference are fixed by law and on which various groups of
interests are represented. For further details see L'économie agricole de l'Autriche, Notes
et études documentaires. No. 2987 (Paris, 3 May 1963).
103
Agricultural organisations and development
The main tasks of this organisation are as follows:
— taking part in collective bargaining with a view to improving wages and
conditions of work through the conclusion of agreements ; collaborating—
mainly by wielding its influence—in the framing of economic and social
legislation so as to ensure that employees' interests are effectively safeguarded (legislation on employment in agriculture, social insurance, vocational training, etc.);
— participating in attempts to create employment opportunities and ensure
job security (full employment policy) ; furthering the development of the
agricultural milieu in general through the improvement of the financial
position of agricultural and forestry workers;
— providing information, instruction and further training for agricultural
and forestry workers by issuing publications and organising weekend
schools, meetings, etc.
As regards obstacles which might stand in the way of the development of
trade union activities, the union states that there are none of a legislative
character and that, generally speaking, the employers and their organisations
recognise the trade unions as economic partners and respect them. Nevertheless, in one specific respect—the access to trade unionism of farm domestic
servants—there do still appear to be stumbling-blocks due to the scattered
nature of peasant farms and the small number (one or two on average) of
workers employed on these farms, some of whom are still treated by their
employers in a patriarchal manner. Many of these workers are in fact relatives
of the farmer employing them, and hence opposed to the union.
The union considers that its main successes have been in :
— maintaining a steady improvement in the standard of living of agricultural
and forestry workers thanks to a dynamic wage policy;
— securing, after agricultural and forestry workers had remained in an underprivileged position for decades, the promulgation in 1948 of up-to-date
legislation dealing with all matters pertaining to contracts of employment
and the protection of workers;
— securing the placing of agricultural and forestry workers on the same footing
as workers in industry, commerce and handicrafts as concerns social insurance, by bringing them within the scope of the General Social Insurance
Act promulgated in 1955;
— securing the adoption in 1959 of the 45-hour week for agricultural and
forestry workers;
— bringing about the adoption in 1952 of up-to-date legislative provisions on
vocational training, which were adapted in 1965—thanks to a new law fought
for by the trade unions—covering the changes which had taken place in
the meantime in agriculture and forestry as a result of technological progress ;
104
Austria
— providing on a continuous basis (and not without success) training for union
members to groom them for membership of works councils or for union
office;
— participating in the framing of housing regulations by virtue of which federal
subsidies are granted to workers wishing to build a home.
The union belongs to the Austrian Federation of Trade Unions, the central
organisation to which the sixteen existing Austrian trade unions are affiliated.
It should be pointed out in this connexion that Austria follows the principle
of a single trade union organisation for all workers, regardless of their ideological beliefs. This explains why the Austrian Federation of Trade Unions
is affiliated both to the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions
and to the World Confederation of Labour. The same principle is valid
in the case of the Union of Agricultural and Forestry Workers, which belongs,
like the great majority of its members, to the European Land Workers'
Federation, the regional organisation of the International Federation of Plantation, Agricultural and Allied Workers, which in its turn is affiliated to the
International Confederation of Free Trade Unions. Along with the rest of
its members, the union belongs to the International Federation of Christian
Land Workers' Unions, which is itself affiliated to the World Confederation
of Labour.
Chambers of agriculture
• Conference of Chairmen of Austrian Chambers of Agriculture
The representation of agricultural interests at the national level in dealings
with the public authorities dates from 1898, when a central body was set up
to safeguard the interests of agriculture and forestry during the negotiation
of trade agreements. This body may be looked upon as the pilot body in
the field.
Central representation of organisations has existed since 1908, the year of
the founding of the Conference of Chairmen of Länder Agricultural Councils
and Farming Societies. Fifteen years later, on 10 January 1923, the representative bodies finally combined into the present Conference of Chairmen of
Austrian Chambers of Agriculture (Präsidentenkonferenz der Landwirtschaftskammern Österreichs), consisting of the chairmen of the country's nine provincial chambers. The Conference also embraces the Raiffeisen associations—
those pioneers in the field of agricultural co-operation.
The conference was abolished during the period of Nazi rule, and re-formed
in January 1946; it assumed its present form only on 27 February 1953.
105
Agricultural organisations and development
Austrian chambers of agriculture take action at three levels: cantonal,
provincial and national. At the cantonal and provincial levels (every provincial
chamber has cantonal branches) they keep in direct touch with farmers and
advise them on all matters relating to markets and prices, on the legal and
fiscal aspects of farming, and on improvements of all kinds in matters concerning output and productivity. The provincial chambers also collaborate
closely with the Ministry of Agriculture and the provincial authorities, and with
the agricultural workers' chambers, in the implementation of agricultural
development projects under the "Green Plan". These projects fall under
four major headings :
— improvement of output (research and experimentation, extension and
educational work, cultivation of quality crops, drainage, irrigation and
hydraulic installations, soil improvement, forestry);
— improvement of transport and communications (roads, electrification,
sharing of transport costs);
— improvement of the structure and management of farms (consolidation and
exchanging of holdings, land settlement, reorganisation of farms, plant
protection, agricultural mechanisation, cattle-breeding, dairy production,
etc.);
— improvement of distribution and marketing (exhibitions, eradication of
brucellosis and tuberculosis, marketing of cattle, marketing and processing
of agricultural produce, advertising and sales promotion, agricultural
credit, etc.).
In addition to these projects, which also cover all kinds of welfare measures
for the benefit of agricultural and forestry workers, the Conference of Chairmen of Austrian Chambers of Agriculture intervenes at the national level in respect of prices. Besides the ministerial commissions to which reference is made
above in the section on employers' organisations, there exist in Austria three
marketing boards responsible for stabilising the prices of cereals, milk and
dairy products, and livestock and meat respectively. These boards operate
under the authority of the General Marketing Law of 1958, which replaced
the three marketing laws in existence since 1950. The Ministry of Agriculture
supervises the administration of the boards, whose activities cover more than
two-thirds of total agricultural production. The chambers are represented
on a proportional basis. For instance, the Dairy Products Board, which
was founded in 1950, is directed by a commission of twenty-seven members
representing the three sectors interested: the producers' side (chambers of
agriculture), the consumers' interests (chambers of labour) and private enterprise
(chambers of trade and commerce). Each sector has nine representatives.
Similarly, the Cattle Marketing Board is run by a smaller commission consisting
of nine people nominated in the same proportion. These boards act as
106
Austria
veritable regulators of production, imports and prices. Thanks to a system
for the pooling of prices in the case of milk and bread-grains—highly complex
in the former case—producers all over the country receive the same price.
Since consumer prices may not exceed a maximum fixed by the authorities, a
system of State subsidies ensures the maintenance of profit margins at a normal
level; otherwise they would be inadequate. 1
The chambers of agriculture have also played a major role from a legislative
standpoint since the right was conferred upon them, by the federal Act of
18 July 1924, to state their views on all Bills and decrees of major importance
drafted by the ministrial authorities.
Not only in the economic and technical fields do the chambers exercise
supervision and wield influence. They also concern themselves with social
matters, and with vocational training in particular. Although little information is available on the subject, it is worth recalling that the chambers are
primarily concerned, as regards young persons, with the conclusion and supervision of contracts of apprenticeship, and collaborate closely with the agricultural labour inspectorates in this field. In Lower Austria, for instance, "the
chamber of agriculture has introduced compulsory free medical examination
for young persons wishing to be apprenticed in agriculture".2 In some
provinces the chambers also assume responsibility for concluding collective
agreements in respect of adult workers.
The Austrian chambers of agriculture are financed partly by farmers and
partly out of the federal State and provincial budgets. Their method of
financing is similar to that of the German chambers 3 and differs from that
of the French chambers, which have to make do with the revenue from a
supplementary tax added to the rural tax or the tax on undeveloped land.
Hence they are much better off financially : if we take the case of the Lower
Austria Chamber of Agriculture, it may be seen from data published by L. Prault
that in 1958 it could count on a budget equivalent to 15 million French francs
(62 per cent derived from federal or provincial government subsidies), or
13.16 francs per hectare, as compared with the French average of 1.25 franc
in 1964.4
As the Conference of Chairmen of Austrian Chambers of Agriculture is
itself the central body representing the interests of agriculture and forestry,
1
For further details of the operation of these marketing boards, see OECD: Agricultural
Policies in 1966, op. cit., pp. 145-149.
* See "The Protection of Young Agricultural Workers in Austria", op. cit., p. 205.
8
See below, pp. 156 et seq.
* See L. Prault: "La politique des organisations professionnelles agricoles: les chambres
d'agriculture", in Henri Noilhan: Histoire de l'agriculture à l'ère industrielle (Paris, de Boccard, 1965), Vol. V, Part Six, Ch. VIII, p. 724.
107
Agricultural organisations and development
it does not belong to any other national organisation; but internationally
it is a member of the European Confederation of Agriculture.
•
Agricultural workers' chambers
Under the federal Constitution, legislation in respect of the formation of
occupational associations in agriculture is a matter for the provinces. As
we have seen above, the chambers of agriculture in the nine Austrian provinces
were reorganised in 1946 so as to equip them to defend the professional interests
of independent farmers. After the Second World War, between 1948 and 1954,
a number of occupational chambers for employees (both wage-earning and
salaried) in agriculture and forestry, were established, and these are the only
specimens of their kind in Western Europe. Today such chambers exist in
seven provinces: Upper Austria (founded in 1948), Salzburg (1949), Styria
(1949), Lower Austria (1950), Carinthia (1954). The Tyrol and Vorarlberg
do not have a separate chamber as such, the defence of the interests of agricultural employees being entrusted to a special section of the provincial chamber
of agriculture, so that the latter is divided into two independent sections.
However, their independence is guaranteed by the fact that not only are their
finances kept on a separate footing but also the employees' section has its
own committee and its own staff. In both these provinces the employees'
sections were established in 1949. So the only provinces where agricultural
workers still have no chambers to represent their interests are Vienna and
Burgenland.1
All salaried employees in agriculture and forestry are entitled to join these
workers' chambers (Landarbeiterkammern). So are the staff of agricultural
and forestry occupational associations and of agricultural co-operatives.
Employers and their families, on the other hand, and managerial staff of large
undertakings who are performing the functions of an employer are not allowed
to belong to these chambers.
The range of action of the agricultural workers' chambers is defined in
more or less the same terms in all the provincial Acts. In principle their
task is to represent and safeguard the occupational, economic, social and cultural interests of wage-earning and salaried employees. To illustrate this more
specifically and in more detail, we shall quote section 6 of the Act for the estab1
For more details see the texts of the relevant legislative enactments as published in the
Landesgesetzblatt [Compilation of Z-anrflaws]: Acts Nos. 12/48 of 7 July 1948 (Upper Austria),
53/49 of 10 March 1949 (Salzburg), 45/49 of 8 June 1949 (Styria), 49/50 of 30 June 1950 (Lower
Austria), 40/54 of 16 November 1954 (Carinthia), 36/49 of 23 March 1949 (Tyrol) and 38/49
of 1949 (Vorarlberg). All these Acts have already been amended several times, but as
regards the essential points they remain unchanged.
108
Austria
lishment of an Agricultural and Forestry Wage-Earning and Salaried Employees' Chamber in Lower Austria, under the terms of which the chamber is
called upon, inter alia:
(1) to make known to the legislature and to the authorities its proposals and
views on all matters of concern to workers in agriculture and forestry, particularly
the most important Bills and draft ordinances;
(2) to take measures and set up institutions with a view to improving the economic
and social position of agricultural and forestry workers;
(3) to participate in the intellectual, physical and vocational training of agricultural and forestry workers, while at the same time encouraging such training;
(4) to participate in the regulation of the conditions of employment of agricultural
and forestry workers and to conclude collective agreements in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph 41 (1) of the Agricultural Employment Regulations;
(5) to take steps to provide supplementary assistance to agricultural and forestry
workers in the event of sickness, invalidity and old age by the setting up of assistance
funds and the opening of convalescent or retirement homes;
(6) to take or support measures to encourage the building of houses or settlements
for agricultural and forestry workers, with a view in particular to improving housing
conditions, promoting the building of job-tied accommodation and family dwellings
and making it easier for workers to set up house;
(7) to co-operate with institutions for the encouragement of apprenticeship within
the framework of the legislative provisions, while at the same time helping to supervise
the conditions in which young workers are receiving instruction or being trained;
(8) to assist the agricultural and forestry inspectorate in the performance of its
functions of supervising conditions of employment having regard to the provisions
in force;
(9) to assist shop stewards to perform their functions;
(10) to appoint representatives to other public corporations or bodies, or make
nominations for the appointment of staff to these corporations or bodies where
this is provided for by law or by special provisions;
(11) to provide free of charge, within the limits prescribed by law, legal advice
to wage-earning or salaried employees in the branch and to represent them free of
charge in dealings with the authorities and the administrative services;
(12) to carry out or collaborate in carrying out, in accordance with the provisions
in force, statistical surveys on the economic and social circumstances of agricultural
and forestry workers.
The agricultural workers' chambers are autonomous bodies. The supreme
organ is the general assembly, which consists of a certain number of councillors
fixed by law (forty, for instance, in Lower Austria). These councillors are
directly and democratically elected by the members of the chamber aged
18 years and over. The lists of candidates are drawn up by the trade unions and
by voluntary occupational associations, with the result that very often leading
trade union officials also hold senior office in the chambers. This strengthens
even more the representation of the wage-earning and salaried employees'
unions, or of other occupational associations of employees in agriculture and
forestry.
109
Agricultural organisations and development
Relations between the chambers and the federal authorities are also
regulated by law. Once again we shall quote, by way of an example, the Act
respecting the Agricultural Workers' Chamber of Lower Austria, which lays
down in section 7 that :
(1) the Agricultural Workers' Chamber shall be required, as concerns matters
within its terms of reference, to supply upon request to all authorities and other
public bodies information and statements of views, as well as supporting them in
the action they take;
(2) all authorities and associations called upon under the terms of legislative
provisions to defend economic interests, or established for such a pupose in pursuance
of a freely concluded agreement, shall be required to supply to the Agricultural
Workers' Chamber, upon request, all the information it needs to perform its functions,
and to support it in its activities;
(3) the authorities shall be required to submit to the Agricultural Workers'
Chamber for opinion all Bills of concern to wage-earning and salaried employees
in agriculture and forestry before tabling them in the legislature, as well as the texts
of such particularly important ordinances as are also of interest to the wage-earning
and salaried employees in question before they are promulgated.
We should take particular note of clause (3) above; such a clause entitles
a chamber to make known its views on draft legislation before it is submitted
to the legislature by the federal Government or by a provincial government.
This right, coupled with that of submitting proposals and statements of views
to the legislature and to the authorities, affords to the Austrian workers'
chambers a means of participating directly in the framing of agricultural
policy whereas as a general rule in other countries the representatives of the
workers' organisations have to content themselves with indirect participation,
which often consists merely in such pressure as they are able to bring to bear
upon Parliament. Within their own area and within the terms of reference
laid down for them by law, the chambers also concern themselves with acquainting employers and workers with the legislation in force; they conduct surveys
and keep the labour inspection services informed of all facts brought to their
attention which appear to involve an infringement of the statutory provisions.
Continuous assistance is given to the agricultural workers' chambers by
the public authorities. Federal subsidies are granted to help workers build
their own homes, undergo vocational training or meet the expenses of setting
up house. The work involved is carried out by the chambers. In addition
provincial governments grant financial assistance to agricultural workers'
chambers, to a varying degree, to facilitate their performance of these tasks.
To cover their administrative expenses and finance other related activities
the chambers receive contributions from their members in proportion to their
earnings (the average rate of contribution is 0.5 per cent of the monthly wage).
As stated above, under the federal Constitution responsibility for dealing
with matters pertaining to the representation of occupational interests in
110
Belgium
agriculture and forestry lies with the provinces. But major decisions must
of necessity be taken at the national level by the federal legislature. The
chambers have therefore considered it necessary to form a united body, and
have founded for this purpose the Congress of Austrian Agricultural Workers'
Chambers (österreichischer Landarbeiterkammertag). Within this organisation the chambers join forces to examine matters of concern to more than one
province, particularly topics such as the attitude to be adopted towards federal
legislation, or the appointment of representatives to associations and bodies
whose range of action covers more than one province.
At the international level, the Congress of Austrian Agricultural Workers'
Chambers maintains relations with associations and organisations with identical or similar aims to its own. But there are no arrangements for collaboration with salaried agricultural workers' organisations, since, as the congress
points out in its reply to the present questionnaire, the organisations responsible
in other countries for defending the interests of wage-earning and salaried
employees in this branch of activity are not comparable to the Austrian
chambers.
Belgium
General and employers' organisations
In Belgium, farmers' organisations date back to the last century. In order
to understand why they came into being, we must place them in the context
of the crisis that was then affecting the countries of western Europe. In
Belgium this crisis broke out in 1878 with the collapse of cereal prices (the
price of a quintal of wheat plummeted from 31 francs in 1870 to 14 francs in
1894) and went on to affect livestock products; as a result, many mixed farms
were ruined, particularly in the Flemish part of the country.
The crisis was largely due to improved communications and the policy
of free trade—two factors which encouraged the importing of cereals from
North America, Australia and Russia. Nevertheless, it had one beneficial
effect in that it obliged the farmers to organise, first of all in the Boerenbond
and subsequently, in the twentieth century, in farmers' associations and the
Belgian Agricultural Alliance.
As will be seen below, these three organisations play the part both of
employers' and of general organisations; it is for this reason that they are
included here under a double heading.
• The Boerenbond
The creation of the Boerenbond in 1890 is indissolubly linked with this
crisis in agriculture. When the Catholics came to power following the 1884
111
Agricultural organisations and development
elections, they tried in vain to find suitable means of solving the Belgian agricultural problem and to this end set up a Ministry of Agriculture. But in
spite of the efforts of the latter in the field of agricultural advisory work and
despite also the formation of independent associations of farmers (most of
which were purely local), no one succeeded in straightening out the situation,
and three years passed with little or no progress.
Then, in January 1887, there arose the figure of the Abbé J. S. Mellaerts,
founder of the Boerenbond. In the presence of a mere handful of farmers,
he outlined his idea of a Christian union of agricultural guilds; and four
weeks later, on 26 February, he organised the constituent assembly of the
first guild, with thirty-five founder members, at the Heist-Goor church. This
first guild, which was formed along the lines of the local groups of the Rhineland Farmers' Association (Rheinischer Bauernverein) which had been studied
by the Abbé Mellaerts, was really only a co-operative for the joint purchase
of fertilisers and animal fodder. Things might have remained at this point
had it not been for a meeting between the Abbé Mellaerts and J. Hellepute,
a professor and Member of Parliament, who had created the Louvain Trade
and Business Guild. The outcome of this meeting, and of the subsequent
co-operation of F. Schollaert, Professor Hellepute's brother-in-law, was the
Boerenbond, which came into being on 20 July 1890 and which, according
to the Abbé Mellaerts, was to take an interest in :
— everything connected with the material interests of a farm: purchase on
a pool basis, savings and loans funds, agricultural training (co-operation
and advisory work);
— national legislation in so far as it might affect agriculture and land tenure:
equality of treatment, protection of domestic production, laws against
usury, land banks (defence of farmers' interests) ;
— raising the status of farmers as a social class, by organising them in guilds
based on Christian principles (Christian class organisation).1
Five years after its foundation, and as a result of the active participation
of parish priests, the Boerenbond had 200 guilds with more than 10,000
members and 39 loans guilds set up along the Unes of the Raiffeisen banks.
Three-quarters of a century have gone by since then, and although the
aims of the Boerenbond have remained basically unchanged, they have become
more varied and wider in scope. The organisation now groups more than
90,000 agricultural employers, that is to say the majority of farmers in the
Flemish- and German-speaking provinces, together with the French-speaking
district of Nivelles.
1
112
Le Boerenbond belge (Louvain, 1965), p. 7.
Belgium
To become guild members, applicants must under clause 6 of their charter
"be farmers or market gardeners, have a producer's interest in agriculture and
market gardening or exercise a related liberal profession, uphold the Catholic
religion, the family, the institution of property and the social doctrine of the
church; they must live according to these principles, and be accepted by the
guild committee".1 Once they have been accepted, farmers and market
gardeners pay an annual contribution, the amount of which varies in relation
to the size of their holding and the type of farm. This system is reminiscent
of that adopted by the French chambers of agriculture.
The Boerenbond, whose general council and management committee run
a highly centralised organisation, exerts its influence on the Catholic farming
circles through its four branches :
— the agricultural guilds, set up on a parish basis and composed of the farm
employers and heads of families in the agricultural and horticultural
sectors;
— the parish farmers' wives' institutes, together forming the Farmers' Wives'
League (Boerinnenbond), and made up not only of farmers' wives but also
of other women in the rural parishes, with the exception of the French-
speaking part of the province of Brabant;
— the parish youth clubs for boys and girls which together form the two
branches of the Catholic Rural Youth Movement (Katholieke Landetijke
Jeugd).
At the local level these four branches have, jointly or separately, created
a whole range of organisations, from purchasing associations to rural funds,
which constitute the main axes of local development.
At the regional level, as is emphasised by the Boerenbond itself, "there
are no cross-structural links in the general sense". There are, however,
specialised federations at this level, pursuing limited aims such as inter-regional
representation, defence of farming interests, and dissemination of information
—for example, the district federations of agricultural guilds and the regional
horticultural federations, which in turn form national bodies with limited
objectives; among these are the Central Committee for the Defence of Agricultural and Horticultural Interests (political action) and the national horticultural federations. At the provincial level also, there are a few federations
with limited aims, such as livestock improvement. Structural unity is seen
most clearly in the central management bodies which together run the four
branches of the movement. On the basis of the idea that the entire family
belongs to the agricultural guild by virtue of the membership of the head of the
family, the management bodies (the general council and the management
1
Le Boerenbond belge, op. cit., p. 13.
113
Agricultural organisations and development
committee) are almost entirely made up of representatives of the agricultural
guilds.
The special structure of the Boerenbond is clearly reflected in its present-day
activities. The local village guilds, in accordance with clause 3 of their
statutes, undertake a large number of economic activities for the sole benefit
of their members. These activities include the joint purchase of animal
fodder, fertilisers, coal, lime, plants and seeds, agricultural machinery, etc.;
the sale or joint processing of agricultural and horticultural produce; cooperative dairies; joint action for the improvement of livestock farming;
co-operation in the field of agricultural credit (Raiffeisen rural funds) and
mutual insurance companies.
In principle these activities ought to be carried out directly by the guilds
but since under Belgian law all organisations engaged in commercial activities
must assume the legal form of a commercial company, the Boerenbond
leaders, after trying in vain at the end of the last century to have the law
modified to meet the guilds' requirements, finally decided to create separate
corporate bodies in order to observe the prescriptions of the law. Thus, for
example, the purchasing sections (which have taken the place of the former
consumer societies), whilst still supervised by a committee elected within the
guild, are entrusted to an independent retailer who manages them and passes
on their orders to his immediate wholesaler, that is to say to the purchasing
and sales agency of the Boerenbond or its intermediary. The latter take over
the marketing of their members' agricultural and horticultural produce.
Whereas the purchasing sections are reserved for members of the guilds,
the Raiffeisen rural funds (which replaced the savings and loans guilds of the
Abbé Mellaerts) accept members without any restriction. The purpose of
these funds is the well-known one of acting as local savings and credit cooperatives. All belong to the Central Rural Credit Fund (Caisse centrale
de crédit rural—CCCR), which will be examined below. Apart from these
funds, there are other local co-operatives which are not centralised at the
national level but which usually belong to a federation and are constituted in
the form of occupational societies or de facto associations ; these provide
farmers with all kinds of services. Examples are the beet growers' and cattle
farmers' association, the mutual aid associations of agricultural machinery
enterprises and co-operatives, and mutual livestock insurance associations.
In addition to these economic activities, the local guilds fulfil a definite
social function through two bodies: the farmers' wives' institutes and the youth
clubs. In the charters of the old guilds,
the farmers' wives' institute was considered merely as a section of the guild; fairly
soon, however, the women formed their own association with its own committee and
members. The central administration followed suit. At the beginning, the women's
114
Belgium
activities programme formed part of the general services of the occupational organisation; subsequently they were hived off to a separate central organisation, whilst at
the same time continuing to form an integral part of the organisation's activity and
to be run by the central management bodies of the Boerenbond. By paying an annual
contribution, any country woman can join the parish farmers' wives' institute, and
as it happens, the majority of members of the institute are not farmers' wives. Attention continues to be paid, however, to the training of the farmer's wife as a "comanager" of the farm. In the local institute, members elect a committee and a
president. Activities generally follow a programme proposed by the central management at Louvain. The Farmers' Wives' League concentrates its activities on training
women as the mainstay of the family. This training is designed to help women in
their various tasks: as wives from the point of view of marital relations, as mothers
from that of the education and care to be given to their children, as farmers' wives
as concerns their entire work, as housewives in the fields of food, clothing,
hygiene and house arrangement. The activities of the Farmers' Wives' League are
based on Catholic morals, and considerable importance is attached to religious
instruction.1
The boys' and girls' youth clubs (which are off-shoots of the guilds and the
farmers' wives' institutes respectively) concentrate on preparing young people
for their adult life and, in addition to providing a wide programme of recreative
activities, deal with training future agricultural employers and their wives in
farm management and in the social and religious fields.
All the local activities described above are co-ordinated by the district
federations, which in turn come under the central general services of the
Boerenbond whose task is to follow the activities of the agricultural guilds
and of the clubs set up by them, in accordance with the instructions and advice
of the general council and the management committee.
For this purpose the central services are divided into several branches
covering the whole network of local guilds : the farm services, the study and
advisory services, the organisation services, the agricultural co-operation
service and the secretariat and public relations services.
The farm services deal with the economic and technical aspects of improving
farm management, machinery, farming methods and production materials.
Apart from the research work and studies they undertake, and the written and
oral information they give to the members of the guild through their agricultural
and horticultural advisory offices, they are also responsible for the training
of future farmers. The study and advisory services, whose job is to advise the
top management, the other sections and departments of the organisation and
individual members, include the following branches: legal studies, economic
and sociological studies, cultural activities and documentation. They are also
responsible for preparing the Boerenbond publications and for the editorial and
film services. The organisation services back up the entire occupational
1
Le Boerenbond belge, op. cit., pp. 16-17.
115
Agricultural organisations and development
organisation in its local and regional branches and, in their capacity as advisers
to the guilds and federations, train leaders and new members. The agricultural
co-operation service plays a similar role in respect of the non-centralised
co-operatives to that performed by the other services in respect of the guilds
and individual members, by assisting in managing the agricultural co-operatives.
Lastly the secretariat and public relations services cover the central office
of the Farmers' Wives' League and the central office of the Catholic Rural
Youth Movement.
Apart from its activities in the field of training and advisory work, the
Boerenbond maintains a strong commercial organisation through its central
co-operatives: the Purchasing and Sales Agency, the Central Rural Credit
Fund and the insurance company of the Belgian Boerenbond.
In January 1901 the Purchasing and Sales Agency (Comptoir d'achat et
de vente—CAV) replaced the consumers' society created in 1891 as the central
body of the local purchasing section. Since its creation, the CAV has dealt
with the joint purchase of raw materials for agriculture and horticulture,
as well as with the joint sale of the produce of these two branches. It has
its own factories for making flour and animal fodder and, in the industrial zone
at Merksem, it has installed research laboratories and exprimental centres.
The CAV is a wholesaler and, in some cases, a retailer in cattle fodder, bread
and fodder crops, chemical fertilisers, coal, lime and peat, cereal seeds, horticultural
seeds, various supplies and raw materials for agriculture, vegetables, eggs, butter and
powdered milk
In order to promote the sale, on a pool basis, of butter, eggs,
vegetables and fruit, the CAV has set up branch establishments and auctions. In the
poultry sector, it has developed a comprehensive battery. In collaboration with the
Dutch poultry co-operative, it has built a poultry selection centre in Poppel, where
new types of table and laying hens are bred. In connexion with this selection activity,
the CAV has set up a marketing organisation for table poultry at Hulshout. The
CAV attaches particular importance to the information it provides for members of
of co-operatives, teaching them to buy raw materials with discernment and to use
them carefully. These information activities are far more than the normal "aftersales service" of a commercial undertaking; they are carried out in co-operation
with the services of the agricultural organisation in order to ensure that members
are systematically informed. The activities of the CAV are confined to the members
of the Boerenbond. Outside the field of action of the association, the CAV works
mainly through the regional agencies.1
The role of the Central Rural Credit Fund (CCCR), to which all the local
funds are affiliated, consists in collecting and redistributing money. It collects
surpluses from the richer funds and advances money to those whose savings
deposits are insufficient to meet the demand for credit. The resources of
1
116
Le Boerenbond belge, op. cit., p. 22.
Belgium
the CCCR are also derived from the issue of savings certificates and bonds as
well as from fixed maturity savings accounts. As a specialised company, it
finances agricultural co-operatives and agricultural and horticultural associations. It should nevertheless be emphasised that the CCCR does not work
solely for members of the occupational organisation, but receives savings
deposits from anyone and grants credit to the members of, and persons who
have savings accounts with, the rural funds. Within the sphere of action of
the occupational organisation, these members are practically all members of
the Boerenbond and the funds work solely within the agricultural guilds.
Beyond this sphere, the funds work in collaboration with the Belgian Agricultural Alliance at the regional level.1
Lastly, just as the rural funds have their origins in the former loans guilds
of the Abbé Mellaerts, the insurance scheme of the Belgian Boerenbond is
also the outcome of development within its Insurance Committee. This
committee originally advised both the guilds and the members on the accident
and fire insurance necessary in farming, initially as an agent for established
insurance companies and subsequently as an independent insurer. This trend
was eventually to result in the creation of the Belgian Boerenbond Insurance
Company (SA Assurances du Boerenbond beige—ABB). Today the ABB
extends far outside the original framework conceived by the Abbé Mellaerts,
since, although it specialises in insuring against agricultural risks, its activities
extend to the entire insurance industry, and the ABB has in fact become one
of the largest Belgian insurance companies. Its activities cover the urban
and rural sectors, including industry and commerce as well as agriculture.
In its organisational capacity, the Boerenbond thus covers all possible
spheres of activity. Moreover, representing as it does the interests of the
Belgian small-holder, it is also concerned with all the activities dealt with in this
survey. With particular regard to bargaining on wages and conditions of
work it is represented, in its capacity as employer, on the official joint committees set up for this purpose. In Belgium these committees have a sectoral
character, that is to say each one covers an important branch of production:
the main crops, horticulture, tobacco, flax, etc.
As regards the maintenance of prices for agricultural produce and agricultural policy in general, there exists a liaison committee of the three big Belgian
groups—the Boerenbond, the Agricultural Alliance and the farmers' associations—which has regular meetings with the Minister of Agriculture to discuss
current issues. The three groups are also represented on the Central Economic
Council in an advisory capacity, as well as on the Supreme Council for Agriculture
and on the Supreme Council for Horticulture, official bodies on which the
1
Le Boerenbond belge, op. cit., p. 23.
117
Agricultural organisations and development
occupational agricultural organisations are represented according to the
size of their membership.
In general the Belgian agricultural organisations have an advisory role
and the representations they make to the authorities take place unofficially and
indirectly. This being said, in the opinion of the Boerenbond there is no
particular obstacle to the development of these organisations.
The Boerenbond does not belong to a national federation since none exists
in Belgium. At the international level, however, it is affiliated to the Committee of Agricultural Organisations (COPA) in the European Economic
Community and to the European Confederation of Agriculture. It is also
a member of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
• The Belgian Agricultural Alliance and the farmers' associations
Two other organisations on which, unfortunately, few details are available
complete the picture of general organisations. These are the Belgian Agricultural Alliance and the farmers' associations.
The Belgian Agricultural Alliance (Alliance agricole belge—AAB) was
created in January 1930 through the amalgamation of the organisations then
existing in the French-speaking, or Walloon, provinces of the country. It is
a national federation, and as such it groups regional areas formed by local
agricultural associations.
The aim of the AAB is to defend farmers' interests and to secure their
individual and family advancement both economically and in the social, moral
and cultural fields. It has approximately 25,000 members and exercises its
activity more particularly in the Walloon part of the country. In the spheres
just mentioned, its activities cover numerous aspects, from its members'
association with co-operatives and production and sales groups to agricultural
education and vocational training. In its work to bring about the advancement
of the rural population, it has created specialised services, publications, a
young farmers' service (for both boys and girls), young farmers' and farmers'
wives' groups, correspondence courses in farming (three years), extra-mural
classes, farming exhibitions and competitions, etc.
The AAB considers that it has achieved striking results in allfieldsincluding
agricultural price maintenance, the improvement of rural structures and infrastructures, and the marketing of agricultural produce, as well as by securing,
for the farmers' benefit, advantages equivalent to those provided under social
legislation for other categories of workers.
As a representative organisation, it carries out its work by making frequent
approaches to the authorities and by having delegates on the semi-State bodies
and official committees set up in the various ministerial departments directly
118
Belgium
or indirectly connected with agriculture. Examples of semi-State bodies are
the National Agricultural and Horticultural Marketing Boards, the National
Agricultural Credit Institute and the National Milk Office.
As regards wages and conditions of work, its delegates sit on the joint
national agricultural and horticultural committees. In an advisory capacity,
it also forms part of various official committees such as the Agricultural
Investment Fund, the Central Economic Council, the National Labour
Council, the Family Allowances Board, the Committee on Pensions for Selfemployed Workers, the National Sickness Insurance Institute, the Prices Board,
the National Accounts Committee, the Employment and Labour Board and
various working parties set up by the Ministry of Agriculture.
It is also represented on various advisory committees set up by the Economic
Commission for Europe.
At the international level, the AAB is a member of the European Confederation of Agriculture (whose present chairman holds the same office in the
ABB) as well as of the Committee of Agricultural Organisations (COPA)
in the European Economic Community.
The National Federation of Farmers' Associations was created in 1919
by the farmers themselves as a reaction against public opinion of the time
which was decidedly unfavourable towards the agricultural class.
The main activities of the farmers' associations lie in the followingfields:
— furtherance of farmers' interests and demands in all branches of farming
activity;
— representation of farmers on bodies at all levels where they appear as
employers (Prices Board, Central Economic Council, etc.) ;
— organisation of the services which farmers need in their capacity as businessmen (economic, tax, social and legal services, etc.);
— organisation of further education for farmers through courses, seminars,
lectures, etc.
The farmers' associations have achieved much since their creation, including
taxation on a lump-sum basis, the legislation on farming leases (1929, 1951,
1966), the establishment of the Agricultural Fund (Fonds agricole) in 1955
and of the Agricultural Investment Fund (Fonds d'investissement agricole)
in 1961 \ the voting of the Parity Act (1963) and the raising of the level of
•The Agricultural Fund was created to regulate the market for agricultural produce
and capital equipment by grants of recoverable or non-recoverable funds. Its finance is
derived from various sources (special fees for issuing import and export licences for agricultural produce, levies on intra-Benelux trade, budgetary credits, etc.), it is mainly concerned
with cereals, meat and dairy produce and acts through the offices dealing with these goods.
The Investment Fund helps to meet the difficulties confronting farmers and agricultural
co-operatives in obtaining medium- and long-term credit. It grants subsidies on the interest
119
Agricultural organisations and development
selling prices for agricultural produce as from 1962, following demonstrations
organised with this end in view.
The farmers' associations have no official standing, but by virtue of the
large area of farming land they represent, their right to be heard by the authorities is recognised. They represent farming on certain official bodies where
other employers are also represented. Moreover, in its capacity as employers'
representative, the National Federation of Farmers' Associations takes part
in the work of the joint committees set up to determine the wages of both fulltime and seasonal agricultural workers. The role of the farmers' associations
on all these committees is to explain and defend the farmers' point of view.
No major obstacle prevents the development of farmers' associations,
beyond the individualist bent of the farmers themselves and the difficulty, in
view of the limited financial means available, of providing all the necessary
services (the National Federation of Farmers' Associations is financed solely
by its members' contributions).
The farmers' associations constitute a national federation by grouping
the provincial federations which, in turn, are made up of cantonal federations.
They represent farming throughout the Walloon region.
The National Federation of Farmers' Associations has joined the Committee of Agricultural Organisations (COPA) in the Common Market and is
also represented on the European Confederation of Agriculture as well as on
other international bodies concerned with specific products.
Workers' unions
Belgium has only a very small number of agricultural wage earners, estimated at approximately 16.000,1 and moreover the métayage or share-cropping
system, which in other countries swells trade union ranks, is unknown. Wage
earners are now divided between two organisations: the Belgian General
Federation of Labour and the Christian Association of Workers in the Food
Industries, which will be examined in detail.
charged by commercial credit establishments, thus enabling the latter to offer low interest
loans, which the Fund guarantees up to 75 per cent. For further details on the operation
of these funds, see OECD: Agricultural Policies in 1966, op. cit., pp. 165 and 172.
1
This figure reflects the drop in the wage-earning population over the last century. In
1856 the active agricultural wage-earning population represented 59 per cent; in 1910 this
figure had already dropped to 34 per cent. In 1947 there remained only 50,475 agricultural
wage earners, i.e. 12 per cent of the active rural population. See L'agriculture belge,
Notes et études documentaires, No. 3142 (Paris, 1964), p. 7.
120
Belgium
•
The Christian Association of Workers in the Food Industry
(Agricultural Workers' Section) and the Organisation of Agricultural Workers
of the Belgian General Federation of Labour (FGTB)
What is now the Agricultural Workers' Section of the Christian Association
of Workers in the Food Industry was created in 1932 as a separate trade union
affiliated to the Belgian Confederation of Christian Trade Unions. Its amalgamation with the Christian Association of Workers in the Food Industry
was decided on at the end of the Second World War and it now has 6,296
paid-up members, all full-time workers except for a few hundred who are
seasonally employed.
The main activities of this association are as follows :
— negotiation on wages and hours of work;
— demands concerning employment stability and social security;
— improvement of housing and health conditions.
The organisation of social activities does not come within itsfieldof action ;
this is taken care of by the Christian Workers' Movement, the association's
counterpart in cultural matters.
The union considers, too, that the creation of primary and vocational
schools is the responsibility of the local and national public services (communes,
provinces, State) and of the independent teaching institutions.
As regards demands concerning agrarian reform of land ownership legislation, the trade union is in favour of land redistribution but points out that
Belgian agriculture has no very large holdings and is mainly based on family
farms. Since land ownership legislation is very liberal, no demands are made
in this respect.
In the union's opinion the law raises no barriers to its activities. Nor does
the socio-economic structure present any major obstacle. Nevertheless the
fact that workers are dispersed over a large number of small and mediumsized farms, employing only one or two wage earners, naturally makes trade
union action somewhat difficult. The drop in the active agricultural population
due to increased mechanisation and a certain degree of concentration of
holdings reduces the possibilities of increasing trade union activity. The drop
in the number of members has however been slower than that of the agricultural
population.
Much of the union's activity is carried on in the joint committees set up
by the Order of the Regent dated 9 July 1945, which provides for the constitution of such committees for the various sectors of the economy. These joint
committees are bodies made up of an equal number of delegates from the
employers' and workers' organisations recognised as representative. On each
side, the quota of votes is allocated according to the importance of the
organisations represented. Officials of the Ministry of Agriculture, who
121
Agricultural organisations and development
are not entitled to speak or vote, fill the secretariat posts and the chairmanship.
All decisions of the joint committees must be reached unanimously by all
members present. If a quorum is required, half of each group must be present.
At the request of either of the parties, the Minister of Agriculture may,
by Royal Order, make the application of the decisions legally binding.
The agricultural sector as a whole maintains the following joint committees: one for the farming sector (crops, livestock); one for the horticultural
sector with seven subcommittees dealing with market gardening and floriculture, ornamental plants, nurseries, viticulture, fruit-growing, mushroomgrowing and landscape gardening; one for the sector covering agricultural and
horticultural machineryfirms(threshing machines, combine-harvesters, sprays) ;
and one for the forestry sector.
The union fully supports the working methods of the joint committees,
considering them of great value in defending the workers' interests. Much
has been achieved by these committees. They brought about the fixing of
minimum wages and standards on working conditions throughout the country,
particularly by means of the Royal Orders whereby the regulations are made
binding.
Apart from these joint committees, the union is represented on the Central
Economic Council, where it takes part in discussions on agricultural planning.
It is also consulted, when the need arises, by the National Labour Council
and by the Supreme Council for Industrial Safety and Health. All these bodies
have consultative status.
Since the time of its foundation, the union has achieved notable successes
in various fields, including the following:
Wages—The application of national minimum wage rates which have gradually come closer to wage rates for workers of equal skills in other sectors
of the economy. Moreover, since the beginning of 1965 the working week
has been reduced to forty-five hours, following the introduction of stricter
regulations on this subject.
Housing—A detailed agreement concerning the accommodation that
employers should offer to seasonal workers who do not return home each day.
Social security—As a result of union demands, agricultural wage earners,
whether seasonal or full-time, are now covered by social security. Entitlement
to social security dates from 1947 for full-time workers and from 1949 for
seasonal workers and was originally agreed on the basis of a system of lumpsum contribution. Since 1 January 1964 this system has been replaced by
the general scheme applicable to workers in other sectors of the economy.
Since then there has consequently been no discrimination in the field of social
security.
122
Denmark
Workers ' education—The union, like the confederation to which it belongs,
undertook from the beginning to provide its agricultural members with
training in practical and social matters in general and in trade union matters
in particular. For this purpose it organises both specialised and general training courses for its members every year.
In other fields, such as literacy campaigns or rural health, the union
considers it has no part to play since education is compulsory in Belgium up
to the age of 15 and the standard of living is generally satisfactory.
On the international plane, the organisation is affiliated to the World
Confederation of Labour, by virtue of its membership of the Belgian Confederation of Christian Trade Unions.
We have very little information about the Organisation of Agricultural
Workers of the Belgian General Federation of Labour beyond the fact that it
was founded in 1895 and that its members number some 3,000 full-time and
2,000 seasonal workers. Like the organisation discussed above, its main
activities are concerned with the negotiation of wages, hours of work, social
security and other conditions of employment. There is no opposition to its
activities from the law. It expresses its satisfaction with the joint committees,
through which it has achieved many successes in matters pertaining to salaries
and hours of work.
Since 1945 this organisation has been a member of the Belgian General
Federation of Labour, which is itself a member of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).
Denmark
As Einar Jensen said during the 1930s, the development of agriculture in
Denmark is the sort of thing which cannot be produced ready-made by any
five- or ten-year plan.1 We have already seen that Danish agriculture began
to develop rather late (from 1864 onwards, after the loss of Schleswig-Holstein).
Thereafter, the co-operative movement and legislative enactment, proceeding
side-by-side, were to produce the present state of agricultural equilibrium and
a farming system which is one of the most eflBcient in Western Europe. But
such developments were preceded by a vast effort of popular enlightenment,
beginning in 1814 (when universal compulsory education was introduced,
a full thirty years before the same took place in England). Then, in 1844,
1
Einar Jensen: Danish Agriculture : Its Economic Development (Copenhagen, J. H. Schultz
Forlag, 1937), quoted in Josephine Goldmark and A. H. Hollman: Democracy in Denmark
(Washington, National Home Library Foundation, 1936), p. 3. See also F. Skrubbeltrang:
Agricultural Development and Rural Reform in Denmark (Rome, FAO, 1953).
123
Agricultural organisations and development
Bishop Grundvig founded a group of popular secondary schools, designed
not so much to provide a complete education on classical lines, as to give the
Danish country-dweller a taste for Danish national culture by a short course
given largely in oral form.
This dissemination of culture, and the changeover to a constitutional
monarchy in 1849—whereby peasant interests could be represented in the first
Folketing (Chamber of Representatives)—prepared the way for the boom in
co-operative activities and legislative enactment which was to mark the second
half of the century. In 1882, a group of simple peasant folk from the little
village of Hjedding, in western Jutland, founded the first Danish co-operative
dairy on principles well known today: equal voting rights for the large and
small shareholder, membership open to any peasant in the area, and apportionment of profits in proportion to the turnover of each member.
The founding of this first co-operative dairy was of especial importance,
since it was not brought about by an organised movement in accordance with
a preconceived programme, but was something undertaken by the peasants
themselves in an environment traditionally none too well disposed towards
ventures of this kind.
Similar dairies were created later. And from 1887 onwards, co-operative
slaughterhouses began to spring up. In 1896, the first co-operative specialising in the collecting and export of eggs and butter came into being. Shortly
before 1900, co-operatives for the sale and export of cattle started to emerge.
Thus, at the beginning of the century, Danish foreign trade was already
organised to a great extent on co-operative lines. A mere fifty years later,
co-operatives would account for 55 per cent of butter exports, 30 per cent of
the export of eggs, and 35 per cent of beef-cattle exports. Domestically,
co-operatives were already handling 91 per cent of the milk delivered by Danish
farmers, 54 per cent of the fodder, and 38 per cent of the manure utilised.
Furthermore, the co-operative movement was to become ever more diverse in
response to the requirements of an agriculture exposed to international competition. Thus, from 1930 onwards, we see the emergence of fruit-selling cooperatives and of co-operative slaughterhouses handling fowl (mostly for
export purposes). In 1948, an agency was set up to handle the sale and export
of Danish cheeses, with responsibility for maintaining standards of quality.
The importance accorded to exports is the fruit of the radical changes
Denmark was obliged to make after the crisis of 1870-80. As happened in
Belgium, the dumping of overseas cereals, rendered possible by cheaper transport, led to a slump in Danish exports, which were just not competitive.
Happily, the prices of animal products remained fairly high. Hence the Danish
producer began to use Danish or foreign cereals as fodder for the intensive
production of such products. Thus it was that the crisis of the 1870s turned
124
Denmark
the country away from the export of cereals towards the import of cheap fodder
and the export of high-quality animal products, subject to inspection by the
State. When, in 1896, the Egg Collection and Export Co-operative came into
being, Denmark was certainly the first country in the world to introduce the
system of guaranteeing eggs by putting a stamp on them ; to begin with, the
stamp bore the name of the producer and his association, and later, the date
on which the egg was laid. Other products were later subject to a similar
system. Thanks to this progressive policy, Denmark secured a firm footing
in the international market.
Denmark played a pioneering role, too, in the reform of agricultural structures. Two major Acts were adopted, one in 1899 and the other in 1919.
The Act of 1899 created a fund for long-term loans to make it easier for the
peasants to buy land. Loans were offered on exceedingly easy terms. Funds
were decentralised; a candidate for land ownership first had his application
approved by a local board, whereafter he was granted a loan equivalent to
nine-tenths of the cost of the land and buildings, up to a maximum fixed
every year. Only after five years had elapsed would the person concerned
have to make a start with reimbursement, with interest at 4 ^ per cent.
In
this fashion, the Danish Government encouraged the emergence of small
family farms. To begin with, the area covered by the loan amounted to no
more than 15 acres; later on (depending on the fertility of the soil) this figure
was extended to 30.
The Act of 1919 was the fruit of the efforts made by the Danish social
democrats, and completed the process of land redistribution. This time, the
aim was to provide land on lease to those who wished to work it; the State
took the owner's role. This applied, not only to State lands, but also to the
big estates, the owners of the latter having to choose between cession of a part
of their lands and payment of a heavy fee to the Central Land Agency. The
advantages were in fact the same as with property traditionally owned, since
the tenant could cede the land thus leased among his heirs or make it over
to some third party (with a right of pre-emption reserved for the State),
against payment for the improvements introduced. Further, as in 1899, the
new Act provided for loans at 4% per cent interest, reimbursable from the
sixth year onwards and covering nine-tenths of the costs of the farmer's housing
and other buildings.
According to a recent study1, 26,300 new estates have been created as a
resultofthe 1919Act(7,500)orthatof 1899(18,800). Sincethe 1930s the process
seems to have slackened, as 20,000 new properties had already been created
1
See Jean-Daniel Gardère: L'économie du Danemark, Notes et études documentaires,
No. 3265 (Paris, 1966), p. 16.
125
Agricultural organisations and development
by 1933, three-quarters of them by virtue of the Act of 1899.1 The index
of land concentration (roughly 40) is at present one of the lowest in Western
Europe, which seems to show that distribution of agricultural property is very
close to the optimum (in 1965, the average area was 43.5 acres, one of the
highest in Europe).
What has happened in Denmark proves (if proof were needed) how close
is the link between the development of agricultural organisations and the
evolution of structures. It is a mistake—frequently committed—to take
factors out of context and to give them an importance which they possess only
when working in conjunction with others. Co-operation affords a capital
example of what is meant. What, we may wonder, would Danish agricultural
co-operatives have been like, how effective would they have been from 1880
onwards, if Denmark, a country of small-holders, had not abandoned cereals
for the intensive production of animal products, making use of imported
fodder for the purpose ? 2 Clearly, the slump in the international market for
cereals, coupled with Danish inability to compete, would in time have spelt
ruin for the Danish farmer. The co-operative movement, among peasants
growing cereals, could only have spread poverty rather more thinly, or have
served as an instrument in promoting the exclusive interests of the big landowners (a tiny class). The development of intensive cattle-raising and the
diversification of crops provided a means whereby traditional difficulties could
be circumvented. So much so, that during the 1950s (according to figures
provided by the Agricultural Economy Office in Copenhagen) the annual yield
per acre in little farms of less than 25 acres was higher than in big farms of
more than 250 acres (average gross yield per acre in a small farm was 1,050
crowns ; in a big one, it was 600).3 These results, largely due to the co-operative
movement, have marked the transition to a position in which the family farm
is of average size. In 1964, farms of this kind (between 25 and 150 acres)
occupied 72 per cent of all agricultural land. This percentage will in all
likelihood increase considerably with the amalgamation of very small plots
(70,600 with less than 25 acres each accounted for no more than 13.2 per cent
of all agricultural land in 1964) which can no longer be profitably worked
(by modern standards) because of technical developments and because farmers
now want to earn as much as the man in industry.4
1
See Goldmark and Hollman, op. cit., p. 13.
In 1866-70, cereals accounted for 60 per cent of Danish exports. In 1965, animal products accounted for 93 per cent. See Gardère, op. cit., p. 19.
8
See "La coopération danoise et son influence sur les petites fermes", Le coopérateur
suisse, 11 August 1954, p. 431.
4
According to Professor Skovgaard, parity with industrial wages would entail an average
size of farm of 50 to 75 acres. See OECD : Low Incomes in Agriculture, op. cit., pp. 137-153,
and especially pp. 143-144.
2
126
Denmark
General organisations
•
Federation of Danish Farmers' Associations
Apart from the co-operative network which dominates Danish agriculture,
there is a Federation of Danish Farmers' Associations (De Samvirkende
Danske Landboforeninger), which plays a decisive part in Danish agricultural
policies. The federation itself was created in 1893, but the first association
had been founded as far back as 1805. The federation now has 120,000
members and represents the interests of the medium farmer. The bigger
landowners (some 1,500 of them) belong to what is called the Committee of
the Twelve. The remainder (80,000 or thereabouts) belong to associations
of small-holders.
The farmers' associations are active locally, regionally and nationally,
and there are links between the top and the bottom of the pyramid. At the
local level, 139 associations provide a multitude of services for the farmer.
Each is headed by an executive committee controlling six subcommittees,
dealing with stock-farming, agriculture, mechanisation and equipment,
agricultural economy, domestic science, and youth. In technical matters,
the associations employ agricultural advisers whose services are available to
farmers and peasants. Apart from organising local fairs and meetings, some
associations run cattle auctions, buy, or finance the purchase of, agricultural
machinery, organise campaigns against plant disease and weeds, and encourage
the production of selected seeds.
The farmers' associations and their federations devote especial attention
to the vocational training of their future members and to this end take a part in
planning a whole range of educational programmes, from the instruction given
to youngsters in primary schools to the curricula prepared for agricultural
colleges (85 per cent of the younger generation of farming families take agricultural courses in private colleges subsidised by the State). In 1965, the
federation and the small-holders' associations together launched a new vocational training plan for young peasants, starting at the age of 15. Stress is
laid on practical activities, and the course provides for at least three years'
training on two separate farms, of which one may belong to the trainee's
own family. Within this period, the student devotes six to twelve months
to the study of stock-farming. In addition to this, the trainee has to attend
courses given at young peasants' schools—288 hours, spread over two years.
Throughout this time, the trainee is expected to take part in the activities
organised by the young peasants' clubs.
The period of agricultural training is completed by six months in an agricultural boarding school recognised by the State. Hence the total period
of instruction amounts to no less than three-and-a-half years. The Federation
127
Agricultural organisations and development
of Danish Farmers' Associations and the Small-Holders' Federation deliver
end-of-training certificates.
The federation observes that although social welfare activities are given
no particular emphasis in its programme, the local associations do display
very considerable energy in organising domestic science courses and demonstrations.
At the regional level, five federations co-ordinate occupational
activities from the regional and inter-regional points of view. The regional
federations are presided over by an executive board assisted by committees
comparable in type and number to those which assist the local associations.
They too employ agricultural specialists and advisers and organise fairs and
exhibitions. They also have to manage the assistance which the State provides
for agricultural extension services.
At the higher levels, the national federation has a chairman and vicechairman, an executive board of ten people, a council of directors (thirty
persons) and a variety of subcommittees. The national federation co-ordinates
occupational work and represents its members' interests vis-à-vis the Government, Parliament, and other sectors of the economy. Representing as it does
the majority of Danish farmers and peasants, it exerts a great deal of influence
on agricultural policy and is regularly consulted by the Ministry of Agriculture.
With the other agricultural organisations, it successfully bargained for the
drawing-up of a plan for the sale of agricultural produce within the country
and for the award of cash subsidies designed to maintain the peasants' standard
of living. In this connexion it will doubtless be remembered that since 1958
there has been a prodigious increase in State intervention in agriculture, and
hence in negotiations between the occupational organisations and the authorities; it was in 1958 that a series of Acts were enacted whereby consumers and
Treasury together would make considerable transfers of funds for the benefit
of agriculture.1
With the employers' organisation, the federation is represented on a joint
committee, within which general rules governing wages and employment
conditions are negotiated with the workers. It is represented, too, on the
agricultural committee appointed by the Government in 1960 to study the
effect of modern technical and economic trends on Danish agriculture. The
political parties, government organs and the other agricultural organisations
are represented thereon, and the federation occupies three of the thirty-two
seats available. This committee is the source and fount of the structural
reforms undertaken by the Government, and the Acts of 1962 and 1963 were
very largely drawn up by it. We have already seen that Danish policy was
1
128
For further details, see OECD: Agricultural Policies in 1966, op. cit., pp. 199 et seq.
Denmark
to protect the medium-sized family plot. But economic developments since
the Second World War, and the progress made by other branches of the
economy, have upset traditional habits and ideas. The Small Farms Act
(1948) assumed that the normal family plot would measure 20 acres; later
legislation is much less rigid. According to the 1962 Act, farms of less than
17% acres in extent may amalgamate with neighbouring ones to form new
farms of up to 53 acres in area. In 1965 the committee made proposals for
fresh legislation, providing for new systems of joint management and amalgamation. Under this scheme, the maximum allowable is 112 acres, and may
be as much as 187, provided that the additional land needed is not required
for the enlargement of individual small plots.1
Thus, after for a century trying to decentralise land ownership, in accordance with the circumstances existing before the war, Denmark is now endeavouring, with support from the agricultural organisations, to ensure that farms
are big enough to cope with the demands made on them by mechanised
agriculture.
The Federation of Danish Farmers' Associations is a member of the
International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP) and of the Joint
Council of Nordic Farmers' Organisations.
Employers' and workers' organisations
Two organisations only answered our appeal for information: the Federation of Agricultural Employers' Organisations and the Danish Gardeners'
Union. In describing their activities, we shall assume that those of the other
organisations are very much the same.
•
Federation of Agricultural Employers' Organisations
Created in 1947, this federation (Sammenslutningen af Landbrugets Arbejdsgiverforeninger) embraces the various associations of agricultural employers,
ranging from the simple farmer to the specialist in stock-farming or horticulture.
Since this body provides the upper level for a whole group of organisations,
it sometimes limits its activities to the consideration of questions of principle,
which it examines, within a joint committee, with the representatives of the
workers' unions; the actual application of the decisions taken is left to those
concerned. This is the case, for instance, with regard to collective wage
bargaining, which each employers' association settles by direct negotiation.
As regards agricultural policy and production targets, the federation merely
1
OECD: Agricultural Policies in 1966, op. cit., p. 211.
129
Agricultural organisations and development
advises the authorities. In the more specific field of prices, it has, with the
Federation of Danish Farmers' Associations, organised a joint committee
which discusses the price of agricultural produce. Proposed changes, however,
have to be ratified by the authorities.
All the employers' organisations belonging to the federation deal to some
extent with health, social security, and workers' vocational training. In its
answer to our appeal for information, the federation quotes, as an example,
the Bacon Factory Employers' Association, which has set up the following
insurance funds for the workers' benefit:
— a fund against tuberculosis, by virtue of which a sick worker can be sure
of drawing his wages for a certain period;
— a sickness insurance fund, offering the sick worker a daily allowance until
such time as the official sickness insurance scheme takes effect;
— a collective life-insurance fund which makes a payment to a deceased
worker's family. The federation observes in this connexion that all the
employers' associations belonging to it have a fund which assists the
families of deceased workers.
Lastly, the federation observes that a number of unions provide for
vocational training, sometimes working hand-in-hand with schools or colleges.
There are training programmes for managers and foremen, skilled and unskilled
workers, and apprentices. Between 30,000 and 40,000 workers are employed
in the undertakings of members of the Federation.
The Federation of Agricultural Employers' Organisations does not belong to
any national confederation. It is a member of the International Organisation of Employers.
•
Danish Gardeners' Union
This union (the Dansk Gartnerforbund) was created in 1894. Its members
are gardeners and horticulturalists; at present they number some 6,000.
Between 1,000 and 1,500 are jobbing gardeners, the others being permanently
employed.
Its chief activities are as follows :
— to conclude collective agreements in connexion with wages, working conditions and social security;
— to improve workers' professional qualifications by organising special
courses and by dissemination of the appropriate information;
— in conjunction with the employers' organisations, to extend and improve
the training of apprentices;
— to give systematic training to the representatives of the union and to
develop workers' education (every year, courses organised by the union
are attended by hundreds of workers).
130
France
There are no trammels of a legislative kind to hamper the work of the
union, but it does encounter difficulties. Firstly, there are many tiny plots,
and gardening is an activity carried on throughout the length and breadth
of the land; hence to make contacts with all gardeners is not by any means an
easy business. Secondly, a number of workers in this field have political
objections to the trade union movement, whence recruitment difficulties.
Thirdly, the employers, it would seem, are not too happy about the influence
of the trade union movement and oppose claims for profit-sharing.
The union belongs to the Joint Horticultural Committee, responsible for
the vocational training of gardeners and nurserymen, and to the Landscape
Gardeners' Vocational Training Board, which deals with the specialised courses
mentioned above. These bodies were set up by virtue of an amendment
to the Apprenticeship Act (1937), designed to facilitate the creation of joint
committees (with at least four members; two for the employers and two for
the workers). These bodies have to advise the Ministries of Labour and
Commerce, the Department of Labour and the Apprenticeship Council on
all questions concerning the training and protection of apprentices. The
union appears satisfied with the way these bodies work, and through them,
it has managed to secure an improvement in the training of apprentices and
adult workers, and recognition of the gardener as a skilled worker.
The Danish Gardeners' Union is also represented, in the Ministry of Labour,
on a council made up of employers' and workers' representatives and responsible for devising and proposing action in connexion with occupational health
and safety.
Among the union's achievements appear collective agreements on wages
and working conditions for all branches of gardening and horticulture (private
or public). By virtue of these agreements, the gardener enjoys wages and
conditions of work which in general are closely similar to those obtaining in
industry.
The Danish Gardeners' Union belongs to the National Confederation of
Danish Trade Unions and has done so from the beginning. This confederation,
in its turn, is a member of the International Confederation of Free Trade
Unions (ICFTU).
France
General organisations
There has been a continuing trend in France since the beginning of the
century towards the creation and development of multi-purpose organisations
in thefieldsof co-operation, mutual benefits and agricultural credits. Amongst
131
Agricultural organisations and development
the numerous organisations founded to date are the French Agricultural
Co-operation Confederation, the National Agricultural Mutual Benefit Federation, the National Agricultural Credit Federation, and the Central Agricultural Mutual Credit Federation. They form two enormous confederations:
the General Confederation of Agriculture and the National Mutual Benefit,
Co-operation and Agricultural Credit Confederation. Each of these expresses
the desires and preoccupations of its member associations, and we shall
now consider the part they play. We shall likewise consider the part played
by the National Young Farmers' Centre, itself an offshoot of the General
Confederation of Agriculture.
•
National Mutual Benefit, Co-operation and
Agricultural Credit Confederation
This was the product, in 1910, of a merger between the National Federation
of Agricultural Unions and the Federation of Regional Agricultural
Credit Funds. Its statutes lay down that it shall "serve as a link between
member organisations, co-ordinating the individual efforts of each of them.
It shall promote mutual insurance, co-operation and agricultural credits,
defending such institutions and pursuing any matter of common interest to
its member organisations and their members."
Like the other French multi-purpose national bodies, this confederation,
representing the agricultural mutual benefit and co-operative movements,
helps to devise and implement French national agricultural policy. It advises
the high-level bodies created within the Ministry of Agriculture (and is sometimes directly represented therein), as well as being represented at meetings
of the executive board of the Fund for the Regulation of the Market for
Agricultural Produce {Fonds d'orientation et de réglementation des marchés
agricoles—FORMA). Besides which, it belongs to the recently created French
Agricultural Council.1
The confederation embraces, firstly, the agricultural mutual benefit, cooperative and credit federations (within which employers and labourers are
represented), and secondly, the National Federation of Unions of Agricultural
Engineers, Technicians, Managers, Agricultural Association Employees and
Agricultural Workers. This latter body has a considerable number of wage
earners among its members.
1
The French Agricultural Council was set up in June 1966. It is made up of the National
Mutual Benefit, Co-operation and Agricultural Credit Confederation, the National Federation
of Farmers' Unions, the National Young Farmers' Centre, the French Agricultural Cooperation Confederation, the National Agricultural Mutual Benefit Federation and the
National Agricultural Credit Federation.
132
France
The confederation does not itself deal with such things as agricultural
vocational training, social problems in the countryside, or housing; these are
dealt with by the member federations or their member organisations.
Internationally, the confederation is a member of the Committee of Agricultural Organisations (COPA) within the Common Market. It should be
added, however, that the French mutual benefit and co-operative movement
is also represented within the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP), through various federations belonging to the General Confederation of Agriculture.
•
General Confederation of Agriculture
This body (Confédération générale de l'agriculture—CGA) was set up in
1945 in the form of an association governed by the 1901 Act. Its first statutes
were provisionally adopted by a congress which met in March 1945, and confirmed by the national council in February 1950; but they were considerably
amended in January 1954, and since that date the CGA has been above all
concerned with co-ordination.
According to its statutes, the CGA is designed to "unite, within a body
known as the confederal office of the General Confederation of Agriculture,
the representatives of member agricultural organisations, so that there may be
an exchange of views on agricultural matters of concern to farmers and
farming, with a view to co-ordinating, to the greatest possible extent, the views
and the activities of the various member organisations".
By virtue of an amendment to the statutes, adopted on 11 January 1967,
the "confederal office" meets whenever necessary (and in any case at least
once a quarter) to examine the means of liaison between the agricultural
occupational organisations which are members of the Agricultural Council,
and the other CGA member organisations. It may also be convened at any
time by the chairman or at the request of one or more member organisations.
The General Confederation of Agriculture is a member of IFAP on behalf
of all its member organisations.
•
National Young Farmers' Centre
This body (Centre national des jeunes agriculteurs—CNJA) was set up in
1947, as a section of the General Confederation of Agriculture, so that
at that time it did not legally exist as a separate entity. Its activities were
limited to organising study travel and undertaking a certain amount of vocational training. Not until 1954 does the "National Young Farmers' Circle"
emerge, as an independent body subject to the 1901 Act. Three years later
this entity officially became subject to the trade union system defined by the
133
Agricultural organisations and development
Act of 1884. Finally, in 1961, it amended its statutes and became a "Centre"
instead of a "Circle".
The CNJA is an exceedingly dynamic body, and its activities are numerous.
Thanks to its contacts with occupational organisations and with the authorities,
it has played a most important part in devising and implementing French
agricultural policy over the last ten years. It played an exceedingly important
part, too, in the adoption of the Agricultural Guidance Act of 5 August 1960,
and in that of the Supplementary Act dated 8 August 1962, which lays down
the following as aims to be pursued: integration of the French farmer and
peasant into the national economy, levelling-up of the peasant's standard of
living to that of other occupations of similar socio-professional standing, and to
ensure that certain predominantly agricultural areas catch up in the race for
economic expansion.
The CNJA collaborates in many ways with official organs. Many are
the ways, too, in which it helps in drawing up French agricultural policy:
1. The CNJA has two seats in the Economic and Social Council (merely
an advisory body).
2. As regards planning, it has several seats in the General Agricultural
Committee of the Fifth Plan, and in the various working parties set up under
the Plan. At the regional level, the CNJA is represented by one or two
delegates, as the case may be, on the committees for regional economic development (CODER).
3. The CNJA has a seat on the executive council of FORMA, which has
powers of decision with regard to the market for agricultural produce. Furthermore, the National Committee for Agricultural Extension and Progress,
which manages the budgetary resources of the funds and apportions credits,
includes two representatives of the CNJA. This committee has voting powers
and its decisions admit of no appeal.
4. The CNJA is represented on the General Technical Committee which
decides how producers' associations and agricultural economic boards shall
be set up, and what shall be done to encourage them; it also has seats on the
National Regional Economic Council and the Social Advancement Co-ordination Committee, of which the prime minister is the chairman. The task
of this latter body is to give its views on the action required to secure social
promotion in France.
5. Within the Ministry of Agriculture itself, the CNJA has one seat on
each of the high-level councils 1 set up to assist the minister in devising and
implementing the agricultural policy of the Government.
1
These are seven in number: the Supreme Educational Vocational Training, Agricultural
Social Promotion and Rural Youth Council; the Supreme Agricultural Social Benefits
134
France
6. In educational circles, the CNJA is represented at the national level by
persons who sit on the Supreme Council for National Education. Locally,
in each département, the directors of the "departmental" Young Farmers'
Centres sit on the Educational Committee presided over by the prefect. This
latter, an advisory body, helps the prefect to organise education, especially
in the countryside (setting-up of schools, children's bus services, and so on).
7. In addition, as regards health and housing, the CNJA enjoys a seat in
the "departmental" rural housing boards, where both farmers and the authorities are represented. Furthermore, many young farmers act as administrators
in co-operatives, known as SICAs (Sociétés d'intérêt collectif agricole),
concerned with rural housing. These bodies make a substantial technical
contribution to the erection and improvement of farmers' and farm labourers'
homes, and of farm buildings in general.
As the CNJA itself emphasises, it does far more than simply take part in
the work of official bodies, where its role is essentially advisory. The National
Centre has its own training programme, in fact: in 1965, no fewer
than 5,265 young farmers (most of them holding positions in the local,
"departmental", regional and national bodies of the CNJA, but also in agricultural co-operatives and agricultural credit funds) enjoyed at least six days'
training. Moreover, some 35,000 young people took part in short seminars
concerning technical progress or agricultural mechanisation, or on the organisation of farmers in order to ensure the more effective marketing of their
produce.
Further, the National Centre has helped create the Training Institute for
Farm Managers; it assists this body in recruitment and in the organisation
of courses. With the authorities, and with other agricultural occupational
organisations, it also helps in setting up "social promotion" centres, for the
vocational training and advanced vocational training of the farm workers.
Lastly, the CNJA manages the Technical Institute for Agricultural Promotion.
As regards relationships between employers and workers, the National
Centre has one seat on the Employers' Committee of the National Federation
of Farmers' Unions {Fédération nationale des syndicats d'exploitants agricoles—
FNSEA: see below). This committee has to consider the employment and
wages problems confronting the farm worker, and to this end has to maintain
contacts with farm workers' unions.
As regards rural leases, too, there is a tripartite national committee under
FNSEA including owners, tenants, and those who actually work the land.
Council; the Supreme Hydraulics and Waterworks Council; the Supreme Stock-Farming
Council; the Supreme Council for Forestry and Forestry Products; the Supreme Council
on Structures; and the Supreme Council for Improvement of the Countryside.
135
Agricultural organisations and development
The CNJA is not directly represented therein, but is consulted whenever the
committee sees fit.
The CNJA has belonged to FNSEA since 1957, but maintainsfinancialand
legal independence ; it manages its own training activities and decides on what
is to be done to publicise technical progress. It also belongs to the Comité
d'entente des jeunes agriculteurs of the European Economic Community and
to the Committee of Agricultural Organisations (COPA) of the EEC.
Through the General Confederation of Agriculture, it belongs to the
International Federation of Agricultural Producers.
Employers' organisations
•
National Federation of Farmers' Unions
In view of the part that this body (FNSEA) plays in bargaining with the
workers, it might be considered as an employers' organisation, although it is
more by way of being a general-purpose occupational organisation which,
through local unions and "departmental" federations, embraces all those who
work the land, whether or not they are employers of labour.
The federation has set up a number of sections or specialised committees
to study and defend the special interests of the various branches of agriculture
(dairy farming, fruit-growing, cereal production, and so on) and of the various
kinds of farmer (tenants, owner-operators, employers, and so forth). It closely
follows the problems of agricultural wages, their development over the years,
and the position of agricultural wages in relation to wages for other occupations.
To this end it has a say in the Agricultural Accounts Committee, in which it
has on several occasions effectively contested the Government's view of
developments.
As a private occupational organisation, FNSEA has no vote in the adoption
of decisions by the authorities. It intervenes more especially in Parliament,
where it indirectly provokes agricultural debates in the National Assembly,
and in official bodies such as the Plan Commissariat, the Ministry of Agriculture,
the Ministry of Finance, etc., where it puts forwards the farmers' claims. It
defends their interests, too, by organising public demonstrations and strikes
(such as the milk and meat strikes in 1964); it conducts campaigns among the
peasants and parliamentary deputies, and appeals to public opinion at large.
FNSEA represents the agricultural employers vis-à-vis official bodies and
workers' trade unions. In this capacity, it has a seat on the Supreme Committee
for Collective Agreements, which is responsible for advising on plans for
extending collective agreements. In its work for the benefit of adult farmers and
wage earners, it co-operates with the advisory bodies set up by the Ministries
136
France
of Agriculture, National Education and Social Affairs. It takes part in the
activities of the General Secretariat for Social Promotion.
As regards the medium-term prospects for French agriculture, as outlined
in the Fifth Plan (1965-70), FNSEA feels that trade union pressure is certainly
responsible for the scheme whereby agricultural wages are to catch up with
those in industry, and for the choice of 4.8 per cent per year as the rate at which
agricultural income per farm is to increase.
As regards manpower, FNSEA at the national level, and the FDSEAs
("departmental" federations) at the level of the département, are the only
organisations representative of labour-employing farmers in the fields of
stock-farming and general farming. Certain highly specialised branches, such
as horticulture, fish-breeding, etc., have their independent unions which directly
negotiate collective agreements, but remain attached to the general movement
through a co-ordination committee for specialised associations.
The Act dated 11 February 1950 limited the effect of agricultural collective
agreements to the département or region, and the FDSEAs therefore negotiate such agreements with the workers' unions in "departmental" joint committees. They also take part, in the joint committees, in drafting prefectorial
Orders, which in the absence of a collective agreement (or supplementary
to such an agreement) regulate agricultural working conditions.
FNSEA trains, and keeps informed, the "departmental" officers who take part
in such negotiations, and tries, within its National Manpower Committee, to
ensure the requisite co-operation and co-ordination, while respecting the
independence of the FDSEAs and making allowance for regional diversity.
It considers that despite a particularly unfavourable economic situation, great
improvements have been made these last few years, in the country as a whole,
in the lot of the agricultural wage earner, especially as regards wages, paid
leave, social security and supplementary retirement pensions, which are now
virtually general. On several occasions, the farmers have officially announced
that they agree to wages parity, as defined by the agricultural workers, but have
emphasised that only if the farmer's income increases can the workers expect
a higher standard of living.
As regards action to improve the standing of the country-dweller, FNSEA
itself provides training for union officials at every level. In 1963, it had
organised 3,000 man-days for trainees; in 1965, this figure stood at 11,000,
and in 1966, at no less than 19,00o.1
FNSEA is active, too, in extension work and in disseminating information
on technical, economic and social progress among the farmers. These
1
See H. de Farcy: "Lentes transformations des organisations agricoles", Projet (Paris),
No. 15,1967, p. 623.
137
Agricultural organisations and development
two activities—promotion and extension—are to some extent subsidised.
Furthermore, in conjunction with the workers' trade union federations, it
set up in 1966 a standing joint committee for the vocational training of agricultural wage earners. The role of this body is to encourage and co-ordinate
private initiative in this sphere and to put the occupational organisations'
points of view to the authorities.
Agricultural workers' unions
We have already described the birth and growth of agricultural trade
unionism in the historical part of this volume. After the Second World
War, there was much reorganisation in this important branch of the French
trade union movement, and finally the following three major organisations
emerged :
— the Federation of Agricultural, Forestry and Similar Workers, attached
to the General Confederation of Labour (CGT);
— the General Federation of Agriculture (FGA), attached to the French
Democratic Confederation of Labour (CFDT);
— the National Agricultural Federation, attached to the General Confederation
of Labour-Force Ouvrière (CGT-FO).
It is impossible to say exactly how much weight these different organisations
carry, since there is a tradition, going back to before the war, that membership
figures are not revealed ; table 3 (pp. 82-84) bears out this statement.
•
Federation of Agricultural, Forestry and Similar Workers
This body, created in 1920 as the National Federation of Agricultural
Workers*, is the oldest of the three and embraces all the occupations subject
to agricultural legislation: lumberjack, vine-grower, farm labourer, employees
working for agricultural co-operatives, credit organisations, mutual benefit
societies, etc. In rural circles its influence would appear to be powerful
indeed, to judge from the figures for elections to chambers of agriculture
in February 1964; the lists put forward by the federation usually obtained
more than half the votes cast, and in many départements received as many
as 60 to 65 per cent.
The federation is represented on official committees and councils created
within the Ministry of Agriculture. It is also represented on planning bodies,
and on the Economic and Social Council, where it has one seat. In the
départements, its representatives have seats in the chambers of agriculture.
1
On the origins of this federation, see ILO: The Representation and Organisation of
Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 124.
138
France
Except in the Economic and Social Council and in the chambers of agriculture, where they have a vote, the representatives of the federation have a
purely advisory role.
In the main, the federation's members are full-time agricultural workers,
although there are quite a few seasonal ones too. Tenants and share-croppers,
who are organised in a "social section" within FNSEA, in theory are not
members of the federation. However, it seems that since 1959, when the
Movement to Defend the Farmer (MODEF) was launched, a number have
belonged to the federation.
The federation says that the following are the activities to which it attaches
the greatest importance :
— negotiation for the conclusion of national, "departmental" or local
agreements, usually in the form of collective agreements, the contents of
which will be specified later;
— application and constant improvement of these agreements;
— claims for better social security benefits, family allowances, compensation
for occupational injury, etc. ;
— claims for more and better vocational training, with help from, and subject
to the supervision of, the workers' trade union organisations.
The federation also wants agricultural wage earners to be covered by the
general social security scheme (this is something which it says the other federations do not claim), while constantly striving to improve the lot of the agricultural wage earner within what is known in France as the Mutualité sociale,
in which latter scheme he is—so the federation declares—kept against his
wishes.1
The federation has for several years now been making considerable efforts
in connexion with the training of trade unionists, in view of the increasingly
complex problems with which the unions are at present faced. The federation's
activists have been playing an increasing part in a growing number of economic
and social institutions and bodies, such as joint boards, agricultural social
security and mutual benefit funds, supplementary retirement benefit funds,
chambers of agriculture, agricultural extension bodies, works councils, philanthropic movements, and the like.
1
The agricultural Mutualité sociale goes back to the mutual benefit societies set up in
the nineteenth century. These were recognised by the Act of 4 July 1900, and subjected to
the Act of 21 March 1884, on occupational unions. But, as is stressed in a study undertaken
under the direction of P. Moreau, "it was the Act of 15 December 1922, which extended the
Act of 9 April 1898 to agriculture, which for the first time introduced the idea of social
protection into agriculture, by rendering an employer responsible for occupational injuries
suffered by his employees". Since then, the process has been supplemented by various
enactments which have extended the mutual benefit society principle to old-age pensions,
to maternity, sickness and disability insurance, and to family allowances. For further
details, consult Le régime de protection sociale agricole, Notes et études documentaires,
No. 3293 (Paris, 24 May 1966).
139
Agricultural organisations and development
Clearly, such participation demands both theoretical instruction and
practical training. To this end, the federation has set up a workers' education
institute which enjoys a ministerial subsidy, as part of the "collective promotion" scheme. This institute, which is exceedingly busy, organises national,
regional and "departmental" courses lasting fifty hours (one week).
Among the obstacles it has encountered, the federation mentions that
agricultural mechanisation and the use of new techniques, coupled with the
fact that agricultural wage earners are paid less than others, have led to a sharp
drop in agricultural manpower. The result is a growing dispersion of wage"
earners, balanced to some extent by a counter-trend now becoming apparent:
a constant increase in the staff of agricultural organisations such as co-operatives, mutual benefit societies, agricultural credit funds, and the like. These
people enjoy stable employment; they are, on the average, younger than in
other branches of agriculture, and are relatively concentrated in their places
of work. Hence the federation is making considerable efforts to win them
over and to make suitable changes in its internal structure with this in view.
Relations with employers' associations are mostly maintained within bodies
of three different kinds:
— "departmental" joint labour committees, consulted by the prefect with a
view to enacting labour regulations (in the absence of collective agreements);
— the national committee or the regional or "departmental" committees for
settlement of collective disputes (these act like joint tribunals);
— the joint boards, convened at the request of the parties concerned to discuss
collective agreements. Their role is defined by the Act of 11 February 1950.
They meet at the "departmental" or "interdepartmental" level when
discussing matters of concern to farms, and nationally, regionally or
"departmentally" when such matters concern agricultural organisations.
Among the results achieved by bargaining, the federation mentions the
signature of nation-wide collective agreements for workers in dairy, storage
and supply co-operatives and regional and "departmental" agreements dealing
with multi-crop and stock-raising farms, and with special crops.
According to the federation, these agreements contain clauses not provided
for by the legislation in force when our inquiry was launched, for example:
— supplementary retirement benefits;
— a fourth week of paid holiday;
— contributions to social security schemes based on the wage as provided
for in the agreement, and not on the contractual figure;
— payment for public holidays on which no work is done;
— travel allowances;
— bonuses for unhealthy work;
— trade union delegates ;
140
France
— staff delegates proportional to the size of the staff in undertakings where
the staff does not reach the statutory minimum;
— setting-up of social welfare boards;
— preventive medical attention and the definition of certain occupational
health rules;
— pay for apprentices.
Furthermore, in all the collective agreements signed by the federation, it
has succeeded in obtaining a classification of posts such that women generally
appear in the same categories as men.
An index is assigned to each category. For the same occupational skills,
this index changes with the départements, as in fact does the value of the
"wage-point", usually set at one-hundredth of the minimum guaranteed agricultural wage. By this means a skilled wage earner gets a higher wage than
an unskilled one. In the poorer départements, where collective agreements
do not exist, the wage, no matter what the worker's qualifications may be, is
the minimum guaranteed agricultural wage.
As regards security of employment, the federation stresses that in almost
every case the agreements entered into embody the provisions of prefectorial
Orders enacted by virtue of the Order dated 7 July 1945 \ and this despite
the reticence displayed by the employers' organisations.
As regards social security, the workers' organisations have repeatedly
joined forces. The result has been profound changes tending to bring social
security arrangements into line with the general social security system applied
in industry and commerce. According to the federation, the agricultural
workers have profited from substantial improvements introduced by the
Ministry of Agriculture. However, to achieve parity, they still have to ensure
that contributions are based on actual wages, and that entitlement to benefits
begins from 60 hours of work during the quarter preceding the issue of a
medical certificate (the general system), instead of from 100 eight-hour days
of work during the two preceding quarters (as in the agricultural system).
Illiteracy is virtually non-existent in the French countryside, and the federation reports no activity in connexion therewith. On the other hand, in the
1
By virtue of this Order "any wage earner who enjoys security of employment and is
guaranteed by his employer an indeterminate period of employment, lasting at least one
year (200 hours of work per month at least) shall be considered as permanent. This guarantee
of employment as defined above shall apply to the first year of employment and persists until
the worker leaves (no matter for what reason). It shall be renewed, either by written agreement between the parties, or by tacit consent on each anniversary of the date of recruitment.
However, a break in the employment contract, caused by the worker's voluntary departure
or by his dismissal for serious misconduct, shall not cause him to be considered as nonpermanent." The Order likewise lays down that "the wage of a non-permanent worker shall
be 10 per cent higher than that of a permanent worker".
141
Agricultural organisations and development
field of rural hygiene, which in France leaves a good deal to be desired, it has
never—it states—been asked to take part in the work of the committees
set up to tackle this problem in the communes and départements.
Nationally, the federation has from the outset belonged to the General
Confederation of Labour (CGT). Internationally, it belongs to the Trades
Union International of Agricultural, Forestry arid Plantation Workers,
the agricultural branch of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU).
•
General Federation of Agriculture
The General Federation of Agriculture (FGA) is made up of two organisations: the Federation of Land Workers (founded in 1936) and the Federation
of Agricultural Organisation Technicians and Employees (founded in 1945).
These two bodies, which had maintained a connexion for many years, merged
their activities in February 1962.
Like the preceding federation, the FGA seems to be exceedingly influential
in the French countryside. Its membership has been growing at a rate of
more than 20 per cent per annum since 1962.
Members of the FGA sit on all bodies where provision is made for agricultural
wage earners to be represented, notably: (a) in the high-level councils existing
within the Ministry of Agriculture ; (è) in the Economic and Social Council,
where it holds two seats, one on behalf of farm labourers, the other on behalf
of agricultural employees, technicians and managers; (c) in the chambers of
agriculture, where its elected members represent something like 40 per cent
of elected wage earners; (d) in the Agricultural Committee of the Plan Commissariat and in the working parties of this committee; and (e) in the Agricultural Accounts Committee, where it occupies the only seat allotted to agricultural wage earners. Nationally, it also takes part in the activities of the General
Confederation of Agriculture, in which all the various agricultural organisations—covering co-operatives, mutual benefit societies and occupational
organisations—are represented.
At the European level, the FGA is represented on all the social and economic advisory bodies of the Common Market, except the Economic and
Social Committee, since the French agricultural delegation no longer includes
a representative of the agricultural wage earners.
The FGA farm-workers' unions are largely made up of workers permanently
employed, but also embrace a steadily growing number of seasonal workers.
The federation undertakes negotiations on all problems of concern to
agricultural wage earners, either with employers and general agricultural
142
France
organisations, or with the authorities. But its particular interests and aims
are the following:
— bargaining in all matters concerning employment: wages, working hours
and working week, conditions of employment, and so on ;
— a constant improvement in social guarantees: insurances, retirement pensions, supplementary retirement pensions, unemployment insurance, and
insurance against occupational injury. Here again, the purpose of the
FGA is to obtain equality with wage earners in industry and commerce;
— an increase in the resources available for vocational training; in this field
needs are steadily increasing and projects are numerous, but it is no easy
matter to get anything specific done;
— the economic development of agriculture by economic and social reform,
so as to make farming profitable and to improve the lot of all who make
their living off the land, be they wage earners or small farmers.
The FGA says that it has always opposed all forms of capitalist development and their consequences. In working for the above ends, it endeavours
to secure recognition of wage earners' trade unions at all levels, together with
their participation in decisions of economic or social importance. It promotes
the co-operative movement in all its forms as a means of economic development
and as a means of improving the standard of living of the agricultural worker.
It lists the difficulties it encounters in the following order of importance :
— Employers and authorities alike are reluctant to give full recognition to
wage earners' trade unions. These latter are, indeed, consulted in connexion with matters of social importance, but experience great difficulty in
undertaking discussions with employers on conditions of work and wages,
at the "departmental" and national levels. Besides which, these unions
do not seem to carry as much weight with the authorities as other agricultural organisations and, generally speaking, employers turn a deaf ear
to grievances expressed at the place of work.
— The agricultural wage earner, and especially the farm labourer, lives an
isolated life. Inadequately trained, he is often overworked on farms too
small to afford a proper labour force. He is inclined to feel helplessly
dependent on his traditional surroundings.
— The authorities frequently consider that agricultural work is somehow less
intense than work in industry and trade, whence the disparities which
still exist in social welfare legislation.
The FGA unions discuss these matters with employers in joint or mixed
committees, mentioned above in connexion with the CGT. In this respect
the FGA observes that despite the existence of organs of this kind, there
is no legislation governing representation on joint bodies in the stricter sense
of the word. Certainly, the legislation enacted in 1950 does provide a number
143
Agricultural organisations and development
of provisions subsequently reviewed or extended, to ensure free discussion of
pay and conditions of work. But such clauses are exhortatory only; they
lay much weight on conciliation, and provide for procedures which may
prove wearisomely long. The FGA feels that joint or mixed bodies would
be of greater use if there were some means of forcing employers to negotiate
on all problems of pay and working conditions. The federation is of the
opinion that the reason why there are no collective agreements in all branches
of agriculture and in all parts on France is that the legislation in force provides
for so many exceptions and is over-tolerant of delay.
As its achievements, the federation quotes the following, in order of importance:
— an increase in the number of collective agreements concerning conditions
of work and supplementary retirement benefits;
— a considerable increase in the average wage;
— parity for retirement pensions;
— signature of a national agreement for the general payment of supplementary retirement benefits in agriculture and arrangements for compensation
between the funds paying such benefits;
— the waging of a campaign by all the trade union organisations in favour
of more vocational training.
In addition, thanks to its National Agricultural Wage Earners' Training
and Study Centre, the FGA has for the last six years been providing more than
5,000 man-days of training every year, for the benefit of the officers and activists
of its organisations.
Nationally, the FGA and its organisations have belonged to the French
Democratic Confederation of Labour since its creation.
This confederation belongs to the World Confederation of Labour (WCL),
while the FGA itself, internationally, is a member of the International Federation of Agricultural Wage Earners' Unions (itself attached to the WCL).
•
The National Force Ouvrière Federation for Agriculture and Related Branches
This organisation, created in 1947 after breaking away from the CGT,
is, like the two organisations just discussed, represented in an advisory capacity
in the official bodies mentioned above.
Its membership, with few exceptions, consists of wage earners permanently
employed, and is multiplying at the rate of 8 to 10 per cent per annum. The
federation claims to enjoy the support of the majority of wage earners, but
the exact weight it carries cannot be precisely assessed in the absence of definite
figures for membership.
144
France
The federation declares that it is chiefly concerned with the following
matters:
— collective agreements;
— security of employment;
— working hours and the working week;
— health and hygiene, and housing;
— reduction of unemployment;
— reduction in retirement age;
— abolition of the minimum agricultural wage and parity with the "interoccupational guaranteed minimum wage" or SMIG, as it is referred to in
France;
— parity with industry as regards social benefits.
Furthermore, the federation is active in organising national, regional, and
"departmental" study sessions. In 1965, it organised five national sessions,
attended by 214 persons, four regional sessions with 900 participants, and
20 "departmental" sessions attended by 526 people.
The Ministry of Agriculture supports these activities by means of subsidies
granted to all organisations (workers' or employers') by virtue of clause 3 of
the Act dated 31 July 1959. Thus, in 1963, and on the basis of a contribution
of 4 million francs, the Government approved the training of 35,000 trainees
(for all organisations) as against 15,000 in 1962.1
The federation likewise ensures the vocational training of agricultural
wage earners, and to this end has since 1961 run a National Vocational Training
Centre in the west of France, where training is given to tractor drivers and
agricultural machinery repair specialists. A second centre is now being
organised in the Mediterranean area.
The chief difficulties mentioned by the federation are as follows. Employers
are intolerant of, and indeed are inclined to dismiss, organised wage earners.
Secondly, the workers themselves are very scattered. Thirdly, there is little
security of employment. Nevertheless, the federation claims to have secured,
through negotiation, various improvements, including:
— reduction in working hours;
— higher pay and better housing;
— improvements in the agricultural mutual benefits system (which is still
inferior to the social security benefits system, as has been pointed out by
the other two federations as well);
— improvements in the field of workers' education, by means of special leave
for the training of trade union officials;
1
See L'enseignement agricole en France, Notes et études documentaires, No. 3152 (Paris,
January 1965), p. 32.
145
Agricultural organisations and development
— collective social security agreements providing for supplementary retirement
benefits;
— improvements in paid holidays.
The federation belongs to the Force Ouvrière Labour Confederation, itself
a member of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).
It is also a member of the International Federation of Plantation, Agricultural
and Allied Workers (IFPAAW).
Chambers of agriculture
In each département in France there is a chamber of agriculture which
advises the authorities and represents the occupational interests of the local
farmers and peasants.
Although they were originally founded a fair number of years ago, the
chambers of agriculture have played an active part in French agriculture for
a comparatively short time. They go back, in fact, to 20 March 1851, when
an Act was promulgated to reorganise agricultural shows (cornices agricoles).
These latter were empowered to elect the members of "departmental" chambers of agriculture which, as local advisory bodies, were supposed to advise
the authorities in connexion with legislative, economic and statistical questions
involving agricultural interests. But the coup d'état of 2 December 1851
postponed the elections and set up district chambers appointed by the authorities ; and then the vacillating Third Republic, which resurrected the chambers
of agriculture by virtue of the Act of 25 October 1919, was unable to overcome
the opposition of the Ministry of Agriculture and of the National Confederation
of Agricultural Associations. This explains why the chambers of agriculture
appear on the scene so late. After all, chambers of commerce, as an institution,
were already centuries old.1
Only with the Act dated 3 January 1924 was a charter enacted for the chambers of agriculture. However, money for elections was lacking, and it was not
until 1927 that the charter could take effect. The chambers then worked
normally for fourteen years or so, until 2 December 1940, when the Corporative
Organisation of Agriculture Act did away with them.
After the war, the 1924 Act was put into effect again by the provisional
government2, but since the prefect's authorisation was required before public
or private agricultural associations could begin work again8, the chambers
had to wait until 17 November 1949, when the Ministry of Agriculture wrote
1
Chambers of commerce were officially recognised in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, but had existed ever since the Renaissance.
" Ordinance dated 12 October 1944, Journal officiel, 13 October 1944, No. 97, p. 923.
8
ibid., clause 2.
146
France
to the prefects to say that there was no reason why the chambers of agriculture
should not start up once more. At present, there are 90 such chambers in
France, and their chairmen together make up a body known as the Permanent
Assembly of the Chairmen of Chambers of Agriculture.
Under clause 504 of the Rural Code, embodied in the 1924 Act, "chambers
of agriculture shall be recognised as public establishments and may in this
capacity acquire, receive, possess, dispose, borrow, and take legal procedings".1
Their members are elected, roughly in the proportion of four out of five, by
three electoral colleges numbering, all in all, 3.9 million men and women, who
represent: (a) farmers and the adult members of their families; (b) agricultural
wage earners; and (c) owners who do not themselves farm. The total membership of 3.9 million may be broken down thus: 34 per cent, owner-farmers;
18 per cent, tenants and share-croppers; 30 per cent, adult family-members
of these first two classes; 10 per cent, agricultural wage earners; and 7.6 per
cent, owners who do not themselves farm. Furthermore, one-fifth of the
members are the delegates of "departmental" agricultural bodies. In 1963)
59,000 such bodies (syndicates, co-operatives and mutual benefit societies,
were entered on the electoral lists. In general, the chambers are elected by
some 45 per cent of the registered electors; this percentage exceeds the highest
known percentages on the occasion of occupational elections.
The chambers are limited to one per département, and are frequently
grouped at the regional level. They play a double part. Firstly, they provide
advice. Secondly, they take the initiative in economic and social matters.
As advisory bodies able to speak for the French peasantry, they "provide the
prefect and the Government with such information and advice as may be
requested in connexion with matters agricultural".2 In practice, their representatives are regularly consulted by the "departmental" prefects, and they meet
in plenary session twice a year in Paris to give their views on the Government's
agricultural policy.
In social and economic matters, "the chambers of agriculture can create
or subsidise any establishment, institution or service of use to agriculture,
and any collective undertaking of interest for agricultural purposes, within
their area." s They can, too, participate in the creation of limited liability
companies or subscribe to the capital thereof, and they can belong to agricultural associations, co-operatives or unions, or to any association pursuing
agricultural ends.
1
See Les chambres d'agriculture dans le Code rural (Paris, Permanent Assembly of the
Chairmen of Chambers of Agriculture, 1965), p. 9.
2
Rural Code, clause 506.
* ibid., clause 507.
147
Agricultural organisations and development
In this capacity, and thanks to their financial resources (the average budget
per chamber has increased from 150,000 francs a year in 1939 to some 720,000
francs in 1964) \ they are active in all sorts of ways. Here we shall merely
mention some of their more outstanding activities :
— the foundation of so-called "houses of agriculture", in which administrators, technicians and experts work under the same roof. In this manner,
there is a saving in time and money for the peasant called upon to visit
the local town to seek advice or to get something done.
— the building of silos, laboratories and vocational training schools financed
by long-term loans from the Agricultural Credit Fund (Crédit agricole) :
for example, the harbour silos at Rouen, Saint-Malo and Colmar, the
Meuse and Upper Rhine Training Colleges, and the Espiguette Estate
Laboratory on the Mediterranean coast, run by the Chamber of Agriculture
of the Gard, with technical help from the National Institute of Agronomic
Research.
— the creation of technical and economic extension services throughout the
land. As a recent publication puts it:
Action on these lines has developed at a dizzy speed. At present, most chambers
of agriculture have their extension services. An employee of the chamber is
available to cantonal groups of farmers and peasants. The cost of this activity
amounts to some 3,000 million old French francs. The chambers employ some
2,000 extension workers. Generally speaking, these people are more often liaison
officers than technical specialists, but at the peasants' request they now deal with
economic as well as with technical problems. Whence a second aspect of these
activities—the Rural Management and Farm Economics Centres. Some of these
are run by the chambers themselves, while others merely enjoy the assistance of
engineers paid for by the chambers. The chambers themselves shoulder some
30 per cent of the cost of such activities2.
Since 1954, moreover, certain advisers have been doing their best to facilitate
the regrouping of isolated plots through friendly exchanges before a final
consolidation of holdings. In this connexion, the chambers have set up estate
services, with qualified officials to help the peasants to deal with problems arising
from the amalgamation of plots,consolidation of holdings, or land expropriation.
It will thus be clearly seen that since the chambers were resurrected from
oblivion after the Second World War, their influence has grown considerably. Indeed, it is likely to grow still further; certain responsibilities hitherto
shouldered by the authorities (particularly extension work) will, it seems,
shortly be made over to them.
1
The chambers are financed by an addition to the contribution or land tax payable on
estates not built on. Hence it is the owners of agricultural estates who pay the contributions.
These amount, on the average, to 50 centimes per acre (1964).
2
Les chambres d'agriculture, Notes et études documentaires, No. 3195 (Paris, 28 May
1965), p. 27.
148
Federal Republic of Germany
Federal Republic of Germany
Reorganised from top to bottom since the end of the Second World War,
agriculture in the Federal Republic of Germany has succeeded (thanks partly
to the efforts of Dr. Andreas Hermes) in building up powerful organisations
once again without lapsing into the dispersion and the political and religious
dissension which marked the period prior to the advent of Nazism. The
strong cohesion achieved today within these new organisations and the practical
way in which they have shared out their tasks have placed German agriculture
on a more business-like footing than ever before, as borne out by all the
economic and social trends.
A central agricultural committee, composed of the Federation of Chambers
of Agriculture, the German Peasants' Association, the German Agricultural
Society and the Federation of Raiffeisen Co-operatives, does the co-ordinating
work rendered necessary by the federal structure of the country.
General organisations
•
German Agricultural Society
The German Agricultural Society (Deutsche Landwirtschafts-Gesellschaft),
with about 20,000 members, was founded in 1885 by Max Eyth, who modelled
it upon the British Royal Agricultural Society. This society, which is a member
of the German Central Agricultural Committee, has made a remarkable contribution towards the country's agricultural prosperity; for more than 80 years
it has expanded continually through its 15 specialised sections, which cover
all kinds of activities from organising agricultural competitions to verifying
the quality of inputs and awarding quality labels. Here is a list of the activities
of some of the chief sections, by way of example :
— the agricultural methods and work section handles questions relating to
conditions of work and the interdependence between methods and productivity;
— the rural population section deals with matters pertaining to workers'
health and the demands made upon it by modern farming; it strives to
improve rural education and vocational training, and the health and
social position of farmers;
— the marketing section and the management section study the various influences and factors that come into play in determining the prices of agricultural produce. The results of their studies, based on accountancy data,
are evaluated at conferences and meetings organised by the society and
subsequently circulated to farmers;
149
Agricultural organisations and development
— the task of the trade section is to explain to the farmer the interplay of
forces on the market and help him to improve his circumstances by facilitating the marketing of his produce through advertising and through the
quality testing of dairy produce, pork-meat and bakery products, and agricultural produce in general, particularly where destined for export. The
trade section collaborates closely with the society in the development of
the market for German agricultural produce ;
— the peasant women's section gives advice to women and helps them to
work more efficiently. It carries out tests of household implements and
appliances as part of the series of tests organised by the society, and helps
to plan cultural, social and educational activities.
Some of the tasks carried out by the society are officially entrusted to it
by the Government, such as the checking of farm machinery and tractors, for
which the sum of DM 890,000 was earmarked in the federal budget for 1962.
The society is also responsible for the enforcement of the Stock-breeding Act
as concerns the verification of stud books and supervision of the testing of
dairy produce.1
The German Agricultural Society is independent both politically and
financially. From the legal standpoint it is a registered public utility association with its headquarters at Frankfurt-am-Main. Internationally, it is a
member of the European Confederation of Agriculture.
• German Peasants' Association
The German Peasants' Association (Deutscher Bauernverband) is the only
body in the Federal Republic representing farmers from the economic policy
standpoint. It groups together the peasants' associations in the different Länder
to which the farmers belong directly or which, in their turn, group together
the agricultural district associations of which the farmers are members.
A work-sharing arrangement has been reached with the other major farmers'
associations, including in particular the Federation of Chambers of Agriculture,
Federation of Raiffeisen Co-operatives, and German Agricultural Society.
The German Peasants' Association has the task ofrepresenting the interests of
German agriculture in the economic policy sphere (agrarian policy, markets,
taxes, the law, communications, social issues, structure, culture and health).
The German Peasants' Association was founded in the autumn of 1946,
initially in the form of a working community of regional peasants' associations,
as the occupation authorities had banned the forming of central organisations.
'Pierre Belin and Maurice Hasson: L'agriculture en République fédérale d'Allemagne,
Notes et études documentaires, No 3226 (Paris, October 1965), p. 24.
150
Federal Republic of Germany
It was the first body to bring together, for the representation of their interests,
all the agricultural and economic organisations which until 1933 had been
split up into many small groups.
In the economic field, the association strives to keep farm produce prices
stable by making known its demands to the political and administrative
authorities. The German Peasants' Association has proposed or had a hand
in the drafting of a whole series of laws which are now on the statute book.
Mention may be made, inter alia, of the Marketing Act, the Agricultural Act
of 1955, the Act of 30 June 1965 respecting adjustment to the European
Economic Community \ the Act respecting aid to old persons in agriculture,
and the Act respecting the taxing of farms. The same thing happens at
the level of the Länder, where the regional organisations help to further the
development of agriculture by making similar proposals for laws or drawing
up codes of practice. The German Peasants' Association's role here is purely
advisory; unlike the chambers of agriculture, which have certain official
functions to perform, it has no responsibility for enforcing the measures
approved by the governmental authorities.
As regards relations with the trade unions, the association does not appear
to deal with them directly; collective bargaining is in fact conducted by the
member organisations of the Central Confederation of Agricultural and Forestry Employers' Associations; it is to be noted, however, that the latter
confederation is affiliated as such to the German Peasants' Association.
In the field of vocational training and welfare activities, on the other hand,
the association does intervene directly, and often; it and its regional associations in the Länder run people's high schools which as a rule offer continuation
courses to young people aged 20 and over or provide adult education facilities.
In addition, the German Peasants' Association and its regional associations
frequently take the initiative in order to stimulate governmental action in
particular areas by founding schools, hospitals, and so on. The regional
associations also undertake the training of village welfare workers and the
engagement of works welfare officers. The German Peasant Women's Association (Deutsche Landfrauenverband) concerns itself more particularly with
the improvement of housing conditions. Special encouragement is given to
the training of countrywomen at the regional level through courses and information visits.
The German Peasants' Association is represented on the many committees of the Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Forestry to which
various tasks are assigned in relation to the agrarian economy. In addition,
1
For more details on the Acts of 1955 and 1965 see OECD: Agricultural Policies in 1966,
op. cit., pp. 262-264.
151
Agricultural organisations and development
its regional associations are represented, along with the employers and the
workers, on the rural improvement councils which concern themselves with the
regional development of the Länder. These councils are statutory bodies
which collaborate in the drawing-up of local and often also regional development plans, especially where these are declared compulsory.
According to the association, there is at present no legislative or other
obstacle to hinder the development of its many activities.
The German Peasants' Association is affiliated, at the international level,
to the European Confederation of Agriculture, the International Federation
of Agricultural Producers (IFAP), and the Committee of Agricultural
Organisations (COPA) in the European Economic Community.
Employers' organisations
•
Central Confederation of Agricultural and Forestry Employers' Associations
As pointed out above, the German Peasants' Association does not intervene
in collective bargaining with the trade unions, which is the preserve of the
members of one of its affiliated organisations: the Central Confederation of
Agricultural and Forestry Employers' Associations (Gesamtverband der landund forstwirtschaftlichen Arbeitgeberverbände).
The confederation, founded in 1948, concerns itself with promoting and
defending the common interests of its members and collaborates on their
behalf with their social partners in agriculture in the social insurance institutions where it is represented. There is close co-operation between its representatives and those of the Horticultural, Agricultural and Forestry Union
on the Joint Advisory Committee to the Commission of the European Economic Community on the Social Problems of Agricultural Workers.
Nevertheless, this organisation, which in a sense may be said to be the
industrial relations section of the German Peasants' Association, does not
itself engage in wage negotiations \ but leaves this to its thirteen regional
employers' associations. These are the only authorities in the Federal Republic
competent to negotiate on such matters with the representatives of the workers'
organisations. The confederation confines its role to co-ordinating these
negotiations which take place at the regional level.
As for the other spheres (vocational training, agricultural price policy,
etc.) in which employers' associations are generally active in other countries,
the confederation leaves them to the German Peasants' Association and other
1
152
Under the terms of clause 2 of its regulations.
Federal Republic of Germany
competent bodies such as the chambers of agriculture and the German Agricultural Society.
At the national level, the Central Confederation of Agricultural and Forestry Employers' Associations has been a member of the National Confederation of Employers' Associations (Cologne) since 1949. At the international
level it is affiliated to the International Organisation of Employers.
Agricultural workers' unions
•
Horticultural, Agricultural and Forestry Union
The only representative organisation of agricultural workers in the Federal
Republic of Germany which concludes collective agreements in all the Länder
and represents their interests vis-à-yis the Government and the legislature is the
Horticultural, Agricultural and Forestry Union (Gewerkschaft Gartenbau,
Land- und Forstwirtschaft).
The union was re-formed in 1949 as a federal organisation. Its predecessors, including the German Agricultural Workers' Union, founded in 1909,
had been disbanded by the national socialist régime on 2 May 1933. As it
is the only union of its kind, its membership now includes workers who until
1933 belonged to a variety of different unions depending on their trade, political
views or religious faith.
The union has 77,000 paid-up members, but its influence extends much
further, since its claims are also backed by non-member workers.
Membership of the union is open to permanent full-time workers, but
not to seasonal workers, tenants or share-croppers. There used to be in
north-west Germany a small peasants' and tenant farmers' association whose
membership consisted largely of Heuerlinge1, but today it has practically
ceased to exist.
The main tasks of the union are as follows:
— the conclusion of collective agreements governing wages, hours of work
and other conditions of employment;
— lobbying Parliament with respect to the social security regulations;
— bringing pressure to bear upon the employers, the Federal Government
and the governments of the Länder with respect to job security and the
creation of employment opportunities for workers who lose their jobs in
agriculture or forestry as a result of rationalisation measures;
1
A special category of tenant farmers found mainly in Westphalia. The union points
out that there is virtually no share-cropping in the Federal Republic of Germany today.
153
Agricultural organisations and development
— participation in regional projects for the industrialisation of rural areas;
— active participation in schemes to encourage farmers, forestry workers and
gardeners to build their own homes ;
— bringing pressure to bear upon the employers to improve inadequate
job-tied accommodation ;
— encouraging the activities of an association founded in co-operation with
the employers and the authorities whose main task is to organise weekly
courses offering horticultural, agricultural and forestry workers training
and advanced training in civics;
— participation in the agencies run by the German Confederation of Trade
Unions through which horticultural, agricultural and forestry workers,
like other workers, can enjoy cut-price holiday travel facilities;
— safeguarding and promoting all the economic, occupational, social and
spiritual interests of its members, with the exception of those pertaining
to party politics and religion.
In addition it is incumbent upon it:
— to promote democracy and co-management in the economy and in administration, and equality of rights for all workers in the economy, the State
and society;
— to protect workers (particularly women and children) ;
— to promote vocational training and cultural activities for members;
— to help to select shop stewards and staff representatives, and to support
them in their activities;
— to provide legal assistance in the event of labour disputes and the filing of
claims in respect of social insurance or welfare matters ;
— to offer help to individuals.
There is no legislative obstacle to prevent the union from developing
further. Among the difficulties arising out of the social and economic structure,
mention may be made of the fact that its members are scattered over a wide
area.
As concerns relations with the employers, the union states that there are
no nation-wide official bodies in the agricultural sector on which representatives of the employers and the trade unions can come together, with the exception of the autonomous bodies responsible for administering the social
insurance schemes and the chambers of agriculture.
In all branches of social insurance, which was restored to administrative
autonomy by law about 1950, the employers and the workers do in fact
co-operate on an equal footing on the bodies set up for the purpose. In the
case of the occupational accident insurance funds, however, the proportion
of seats allocated to the workers is limited to one-third. The union considers
that, thanks to the workers' collaboration in the work of the autonomous
154
Federal Republic of Germany
bodies for the administration of the social insurance schemes, the interests of
insured persons are adequately safeguarded.
In the chambers of agriculture the collaboration afforded by the workers
likewise guarantees, in the view of the union, that their interests will be taken
into account in all spheres falling within the competence of these chambers,
particularly that of vocational training. The chambers of agriculture were
reorganised after the last war under laws passed in the different Länder.
Where they exist (some Länder have none), one-third of the seats on their joint
bodies are reserved for the workers.
In addition, at the level of the European Economic Community, there is
a joint advisory committee on the social problems of agricultural workers,
with seventeen representatives of the employers' organisations and an equal
number of representatives of the trade unions. This committee was set up in 1963
in pursuance of a decision by the Commission of the EEC, and is attached to
the Community's General Directorate for Social Affairs. The union considers
that the committee is doing a good job in the present circumstances. Since
its appointment the committee has in fact taken a stand on social policy issues
of importance to agricultural workers. This has afforded it an opportunity
to lay down progressive principles in respect of wages, hours of work and vocational training upon which the policy of the Commission of the EEC is very
largely based.
The union also has a seat on the Advisory Committee to the Federal
Government, which reviews the agricultural situation in a "Green Report"
submitted yearly to Parliament. Representatives of the union also sit on the
managing or supervisory boards of various internal settlement schemes in so
far as they are concerned with the building of housing for agricultural workers.
In this field the union has procured the earmarking of a yearly sum of DM
25 million for the "Green Plan". This makes it possible to grant subsidies
averaging DM 7,500 to agricultural workers with homes under construction.
In all the institutions and on all the bodies we have mentioned, the union's
representatives play an active part in the taking of decisions and exercise their
right to vote.
Referring to the successes achieved thanks to its intervention, the union
states that it succeeded in quintupling agricultural workers' wages between
1949 and 1966. Increases of the same order have also been secured for other
categories of workers not within its area of competence.
The union considers that job security in agriculture today is largely assured
due to the state of the employment market. Prior to the economic boom and
the shortage of manpower which it brought about, the union had played an
active part in assuring agricultural workers of security in their employment
by securing the introduction of an employment scheme operated by the labour
155
Agricultural organisations and development
administrative authorities. Resettlement courses were arranged where necessary.
As regards social security, it has been possible, thanks to the pressure
brought to bear by the union upon Parliament, to do away with much of the
discrimination to which agricultural and forestry workers were formerly
subjected as far as social legislation was concerned.
Finally, the union claims to have contributed in three ways towards the
improvement of health in rural areas. First of all it has been possible, thanks
to its influence, to effect marked improvements in the regulations concerning
accident prevention, and the statutory accident insurance benefits have likewise
been substantially improved following its intervention. Secondly, after strong
and persistent lobbying, the union has managed to persuade the agricultural
sickness funds to carry out special surveys on health in the countryside, which
have furnished them with valuable information on which to base the measures
that need to be taken. Lastly, it is thanks to the union that the employment of
children in agriculture is now almost entirely prohibited, this being an important
prerequisite for the improvement of health.
The union has been affiliated to the German Confederation of Trade Unions
since the latter was founded in 1949. The German Confederation of Trade
Unions is in its turn affiliated to the International Confederation of Free Trade
Unions (ICFTU). The union also belongs to the International Federation
of Plantation, Agricultural and Allied Workers (IFPAAW).
Chambers of agriculture
•
Federation of Chambers of Agriculture
On account of the country's federal structure the German chambers of
agriculture have a special role to play vis-à-vis the ministries of agriculture
of the Länder and the peasants themselves. The federal Ministry of Agriculture does not in fact have any field services of its own ; contacts at the local
level are the responsibility of the regional ministries, whose task it is to enforce
—to a certain extent at their own discretion—the laws passed by the federal
Parliament. However, since apart from certain routine functions such as
the redistribution of land, the maintenance of a water supply and the administration of forests that are national property, the regional ministries are primarily
concerned with administrative supervision and with ensuring that the law is
observed, the bulk of the technical side of the functions normally incumbent
upon the public authorities is delegated to the chambers of agriculture, which
thus form the veritable link between them and the farmers.
156
Federal Republic of Germany
The first chamber of agriculture was founded by the Hanseatic town of
Bremen in 1849. But the boom period for the founding of such occupational
bodies was initiated in 1894, with the promulgation of the Prussian Chambers
of Agriculture Act, and came to an end in 1927 in all the states of the Reich
with the promulgation of an Act respecting the chambers of agriculture of
the Hanseatic town of Hamburg. The largest number of chambers registered
was 38, including those in the Saar and Danzig (14 in Prussia, affiliated to the
Prussian Central Chamber of Agriculture, 8 district peasant chambers in
Bavaria, grouped into peasant chambers of the state of Bavaria, and one chamber of agriculture in each of the other 16 states).
These chambers of agriculture were dissolved in 1933 by the national
socialist régime when it founded the Reichsnährstand. After the Nazi collapse
in 1945 they began to reappear in the Länder of the Federal Republic. Today
there are 13 chambers of agriculture spread over 8 of the 11 Länder of the
Republic1 ; there are none in West Berlin nor in the Länder of BadenWürttemberg and Bavaria, where their functions are performed by the competent ministries.
With only a few exceptions, the functions of the chambers of agriculture
are confined to general surveillance of the activities of the public administrative
bodies and encouragement to agriculture; generally speaking, administrative
competence has been transferred to the ministries of agriculture of the Länder,
which are also officially responsible for law enforcement.
As a rule it is not the task of the chambers of agriculture to defend the
interests of agriculture in regard to economic and social policy, though this
does not by any means preclude their being consulted on such matters.
Their specific task consists—within the framework of the law, and on their
own responsibility—in encouraging, in their own special field, agriculture and
connected occupational activities, bearing in mind the interests of the community.
Within the context of these general terms of reference, the German chambers
of agriculture have the following tasks to perform:
— stimulating agricultural production by appropriate ways and means and
improving it in quantity and quality to meet the requirements of the market;
— regulating and organising practical vocational training and further training;
— furthering the development of farming methods and the construction of
farm buildings and seeking ways to make the work less arduous;
1
The Länder of Bremen, Hamburg, Hessen (two chambers), Lower Saxony (two chambers), North Rhine-Westphalia (two chambers), Rhineland Palatinate (three chambers), Saar
and Schleswig-Holstein.
157
Agricultural organisations and development
— concerning themselves with the provision of decent accommodation for
agricultural labourers and with the building of apartments, houses and
hostels for workers in this category;
— helping exiles and refugees with an agricultural background in their attempts
to acquire further training and resume work in agriculture;
— collaborating, in an advisory capacity, in the planning of measures for the
improvement in quality and standardisation of products and the enforcement of the laws on marketing and on the classification of market produce;
— as concerns agricultural produce, supplying information on the market
and on prices and participating in the activities of price registration committees at trade fairs and markets, particularly cattle markets ;
— encouraging the activities of agricultural occupational associations and of
the co-operative movement in agriculture;
— issuing guidelines on farm book-keeping and auditing and authorising the
opening of agricultural accountancy offices;
— appointing and swearing in agricultural experts;
— drawing up attestations with respect to seeds and granting and verifying
certificates of quality and origin;
— assisting the authorities and the courts by the furnishing of expert valuations
and by the appointment of experts, and nominating honorary judges to
sit in agricultural courts, which are competent to deal, inter alia, with
matters relating to succession, farm leases and the sale of real estate;
— establishing and operating specialised schools of agriculture, stockbreeding advisory services, veterinary services, research centres, experimental
and farming instruction centres and vine-growing, forestry and plant
protection centres;
— publishing periodicals (weekly farming magazines) and series of publications.
It should be added that in principle chambers of agriculture are not allowed
to have a financial stake in any commercial undertaking nor to engage in
competition with private undertakings. Their role is therefore at the same
time wider as regards the number of activities they carry on and more restricted
as concerns its financial implications than that of the chambers of agriculture
in France, for example.
From a legal standpoint the chambers of agriculture of the Federal Republic
are autonomous public corporations, membership of which is compulsory for
all persons whose occupation is connected with agriculture. They have what
is known as "the power to issue regulations", i.e. the statutory power to issue
binding regulations on organisation and management, contributions, tax
collection and other tasks within their own sphere of activity (tasks which
have to be carried out by law and tasks voluntarily undertaken for the encouragement of agriculture).
158
Federal Republic of Germany
In addition, the chambers of agriculture are authorised, on the one hand, to
draw up their own rules for their internal functioning and, on the other hand,
to play the role of employers and appoint officials or retire them when they
reach pensionable age.1 The chambers of agriculture have an official seal
and should be looked upon as authorities directly responsible for public administration.
Elections to chambers of agriculture are by direct and secret ballot and
by a simple majority (only the chambers of agriculture in Rhineland Palatinate
and the Saar have instituted a system of proportional representation), with
equal voting rights for all those engaged in agriculture.
The right to vote is held not only by German nationals but also by the
nationals of member States of the European Economic Community. These
latter have been entitled to vote for some time now, on condition that they
are not less than 21 years of age (20 in the Saar), have resided for a prescribed
length of time within the area of jurisdiction of the chamber of agriculture,
and own a farm or are in continuous employment as agricultural workers as
their main activity. Persons entitled to vote who are 25 years of age or over
are eligible for election.
Sometimes would-be candidates are required to
have lived for a year within the area of jurisdiction of the chamber.
As a rule there are no special electoral boards or committees or nomination
boards. Those with an agricultural occupation and entitled to vote elect the
members of their chamber, separate electoral rolls being established for the
owner-farmers' group (which also includes members of their families working
full time) and the employees' group. The body competent to take decisions
in respect of all important matters, particularly the adoption or amendment
of the statutes and rules and the election of the committee, is the general
assembly.
The allocation of seats takes place after the elections. As a general rule,
one-third of the seats are assigned to the workers. There are no governmental supervisory officials or superintendents, but the governmental supervisory authority is entitled to be represented at all general assemblies and at
all committee meetings, to make observations, to ask to consult the books
and other documents and to request information. It should be added that
in principle the supervisory authority reviews the decisions and measures
taken by the chambers of agriculture solely to verify whether they are lawful
and does not concern itself with their economic or political implications.
Some Länder, however, consider that it is also in order for them to examine
the economic and social import of these decisions.
1
Some chambers do in fact have a very large staff; the chamber of agriculture in North
Rhine-Westphalia, for instance, had 1,000 employees in 1965, including 260 agronomists.
See Belin and Hasson, op. cit., p. 22.
1S9
Agricultural organisations and development
As far as co-operation between the chambers of agriculture and the public
authorities is concerned, it should be pointed out that under the terms of
administrative law they are "auxiliary agencies" of the State. As a general
rule, the laws governing the chambers contain provisions whereby they are
required to assist the authorities and the competent courts of law in regard to
matters pertaining to agriculture, mainly by furnishing expert valuations,
appointing experts and nominating honorary judges for these courts.
In addition, by virtue of the same provisions, the chambers of agriculture
are entitled to be granted a hearing and to make proposals in respect of all
matters within their competence while the preparatory work is being done
with a view to legislation or administrative action. They are entitled to aid
from the authorities, to whom they must offer assistance in their turn, and they
are information bureaux within the meaning of the law.
The official status of auxiliary agencies of the State conferred upon the
chambers of agriculture is made clear by these provisions. But we have also
seen that there exists a clear line of demarcation between the peasants' associations, which are concerned with economic policy, on the one hand and the
employers' associations, whose sphere is social policy, and the trade unions
on the other. This division of functions among the various agricultural
organisations does not however prevent chambers of agriculture from being
called upon to give advice, for instance on economic policy issues.
The chambers of agriculture are entitled to subsidies from the Federal
Government, the Länder, the districts and the communes for the performance
of their functions. Official subsidies account for from 15 to 60 per cent of
their total income. The disparities in the size of the official subsidies are
due partly to differences in the way in which functions are assigned and partly
to agreements as to the nature and amount of these subsidies reached between
the ministries of agriculture of the various Länder of the Federal Republic
and their chambers of agriculture.
In addition to these subsidies, the chambers receive income in respect of
various kinds of services rendered and revenue from land tax paid by farmers.
For example, the 1963 budget of the Chamber of Agriculture of the Rhineland
—about DM 24 million—was made up of DM 14 million in State subsidies,
DM 4.1 million by way of income for services rendered, DM 5.1 million derived
from land tax paid by farmers at the rate of 3.5 per cent per DM 1,000 of
cadastral value (lower than the market value), the remainder being derived,
inter alia, from federal government subsidies.1
The chambers of agriculture of the Federal Republic all belong to a free
federation (Verband der Landwirtschqftskammern) with the following organs:
1
160
Belin and Hasson, op. cit., p. 22.
Italy
an assembly of members known as the Chairmen's Conference and a committee
of six members, one of whom acts as chief administrator. According to its
regulations the aim of the federation is to co-ordinate the activities of the chambers and assume responsibility for carrying out tasks of concern to several
regions in the interests of agricultural self-management.
The Federation of Chambers of Agriculture is affiliated at the national
level to the German Central Agricultural Committee. At the international
level it is a member of the Co-ordinating Committee for European Chambers
of Agriculture and the European Confederation of Agriculture.
Italy
General organisations
•
National Confederation of Direct Farmers and Peasants
We may mention first, among the general Italian agricultural organisations the National Confederation of Direct Farmers and Peasants (Confederazione Nationale dei Coltivatori Diretti—Conacoltivatori). This was
founded in the years 1944-45, and its statutes were revised on 13 April 1956.
The organisation works in close co-operation with the Italian Christian
Democrat Party, and its members are persons who themselves work the land,
whether they be owner-operators, tenants, share-croppers, settlers, or those to
whom the agrarian reform organisations have allotted land. The organisation
has 91 provincial federations with more than 14,000 sections in the communes.
Through its organs both national and provincial, it takes part in bipartite
and tripartite consultations concerning the conclusion of collective agreements,
working conditions, the protection of agricultural prices, economic planning,
etc., and thus takes an active interest in everything likely to promote the
economic and social well-being of Italian agriculture.
The confederation has nearly 3.5 million members, who between them work
an area of some 33 million acres. In its statutes, the confederation, besides
undertaking to defend the rights and improve the well-being of all persons
actually engaged in agriculture, especially those who work the land themselves,
states that it will:
— promote the creation and development of direct working of the land by
those who own it, improve their lot in life and increase production, and to
this end push for the enactment of suitable legislation;
— help long-term and life tenants, and similar persons, in defending their
interests and in becoming full owners of their land;
161
Agricultural organisations and development
— assist the peasant directly working the land in obtaining a contract offering
maximum security of tenure and an income commensurate with the labour
and capital he has invested;
— assist the small owner who has profited from the land reform (assegnatori)
in his relations with the land distribution agencies, and defend the interests
of the independent agricultural worker;
— protect the interests of tenants and share-croppers, if appropriate by
regulation of the contractual relationships which, based on the rights of
labour and respect for the person, will provide such persons with social
security and a higher standard of living;
— offer courses in agriculture and domestic science to the female countrydweller, to help her to make her contribution to the cause of increased
production and to make her more effective in working the family plot;
to this end the confederation has set up a nation-wide network embracing
8,600 peasant women's associations;
— provide young people with a suitable technical, vocational, economic and
union training, so as to turn them into responsible farmers and champions of the confederation among the peasantry;
— promote and co-ordinate any action tending to improve the technical
and economic levels of agriculture and stock-raising, by recourse to
improved agricultural techniques, the proper marketing of produce, agricultural credits, and so on;
— encourage the creation and foster the development of co-operatives for
the use, processing and sale of produce (collective dairies, collective
wine-cellars, fruit shops, and the like) for the common purchase of tools
and implements for domestic and agricultural use, for the joint use of cattle
and machinery, for the acquisition and common management of land, for
the offer of credits, etc. ;
— encourage all forms of social protection for its members. As stated in a
booklet published in 1964 \ "the persons who run Conacoltivatori, the
general secretary of which is chairman of the National Sickness Mutual
Benefit Funds Federation created by them (there are at present 7,719
communal mutual benefit societies, together with intercommunal and local
ones, and 92 provincial societies which are together responsible for 1,722,500
families) are particularly concerned with social questions."
— encourage an extension and improvement of vocational training. With
financial help from the authorities (the Ministries of Agriculture and Labour,
and sundry government agencies), the confederation in 1962 organised
1
p. 41.
162
See L 'agriculture italienne, Notes et études documentaires, No. 3111 (Paris, July 1964),
Italy
10,800 training courses for 393,000 trainees. In addition, it has its own
National Institute of Agricultural Vocational Training (INIPA) and a
network of 2,300 "P" youth clubs (Provare, Produrre, Progredire : test,
produce, advance). These clubs have, all in all, some 42,500 members.
Lastly, the confederation publishes several journals to disseminate its
teachings and push its claims: // Coltivatore (a weekly with regional editions),
Coltivatori Diretti—Bolletino mensile per ì dirigenti (a monthly for agricultural
leaders), Gioventù dei Campi (a weekly for the young peasant), and Donne
Rurale (a fortnightly journal for peasant women).
The confederation does not say whether it belongs to any international
body, but since it represents the Christian Democrat movement in the Italian
countryside, we may reasonably conclude that it has links, direct or indirect,
with the European movements of similar persuasion.
• Italian Federation of Agrarian Consortia
Among the Italian agricultural organisations of a general kind we may
also include the big co-operative body known as the Federazione Italiana dei
Consorzi Agrari.
Founded in 1892, its statutes were revised in 1948, in accordance with
Legislative Decree No. 1235 (7 May 1948). At the provincial level, it had
92 agrarian consortia, i.e. one per province, which are exclusively responsible
for the collective supply of the means of production and for organising the
collection of certain agricultural produce. These consortia are intended to
help "in increasing and improving agricultural production and to associate
themselves with social and cultural action taken on behalf of the peasantry".
They have a vast network of local agencies, and pursue the following aims,
as defined in the decree creating them:
— to produce, acquire and sell fertilisers and manure, pesticides, tools,
produce, machinery, livestock, implements, and, in general, everything which
might be useful to the peasant or to agriculture in general;
— to undertake, encourage and facilitate the harvesting, transport, preparation
for. sale, and sale of agricultural produce and all agricultural ancillary
products, acting to this end either as intermediaries or as agents ;
— to undertake the voluntary collection, use, preparation for sale and collective
marketing of agricultural produce;
— to lease machinery and tools to the peasantry;
— to undertake themselves, or on behalf of others, agrarian credit operations
against the mortgage of existing crops, and to offer loans to such peasants
as join the voluntary system for collection, use, preparation for sale and
collective marketing of produce;
163
Agricultural organisations and development
— to undertake study and research and to set up agricultural research stations,
and in general to do anything which might improve agricultural production
and the skills of the farmer;
— to work hand-in-hand with bodies pursuing similar aims, and to promote
the creation of such bodies. ;
— on behalf of, and in the interest of the State, to make arrangements for the
stockage, maintenance and distribution of articles and produce of all
kinds.
To cope with all these multifarious tasks, the federation runs a whole series
of companies responsible for the industrial transformation and marketing
of produce. Through its subsidiary, Fedexport, it exports the fruit and vegetables produced by its members.
Thefiguresquoted by its director-general in a report submitted in July 1961
to the Conference on Agriculture and the Rural World (held in Rome) will
give some idea of the wide range of this organisation's activities.
— annual value "of produce subject to special administration, operations
entrusted by the State to Feder consorzi" : some 250,000 million lire in 1960;
— value of property and technical equipment supplied to peasants during the
same period: 250,000 million lire;
— credits in kind: 175,000 million lire;
— estimated value of property and equipment belonging to the federation and
consortia: 300,000 million lire.1
It should be mentioned that all these activities, which involve agricultural
co-operation and credit of the classical kind, are over and above those undertaken by traditional bodies (co-operatives and credit banks) and by the new
organs set up by agrarian reform legislation, such as the co-operatives of the
National Federation of Agricultural Co-operatives2 and the Cassa del Mezzogiorno set up in 1950 to study and finance development schemes in southern
Italy.
1
See L'agriculture italienne, op. cit., p. 30.
* The land reform co-operatives, some 800 strong, were specially set up by the land reform
agencies to meet the needs of the areas in which reform was to proceed. Throughout the
country, according to the Department of Co-operation of the Ministry of Labour, there
were, on 31 December 1962, 5,602 agricultural co-operatives, of which 3,548 were in the
north, 513 in the centre, 660 in the south, and 881 in the islands. L'agriculture italienne,
op. cit., p. 31.
164
Italy
Employers' organisations
• General Confederation of Italian Agriculture
Founded on 14 January 1945, but based on already existing organisations,
this body (Confederazione Generale dell'Agricoltura Italiana) primarily represents the Italian agricultural producer (owners, tenants, share-croppers, etc.)
although under the statutes the man who owns and works his own land is not
necessarily excluded.
The confederation is made up of a host of national federations, embracing
owners and farmers cultivating their land; owners who lease land to tenants;
and small-holders, owners, share-croppers, long-term tenants, etc., who
normally work their plots themselves. But the bulk of its battalions comes
from the medium-sized and big estates; the farmer or peasant who works his
own land without employing labour is usually a member of a national confederation such as those described above.
The General Confederation of Italian Agriculture represents some 810,000
farms and plots which together cover an area of roughly 33 million acres.
It is represented on the national, provincial and communal organs responsible
for employment and vocational training, on those national and provincial
bodies which manage social security and associated schemes, and in the organisations which have to devise economic and social development plans.
The confederation negotiates collective labour agreements governing
tenancy (including tenancies with rent payable in kind) and share-cropping,
and to this end is prominently represented in bipartite and tripartite consultations. In addition, it has a say in devising policies designed to improve
conditions of life for the agricultural labourer and to increase farm yields. It
takes the view that much of the improvement recently observed in the standard
of life of agricultural wage earners, including tenants and share-croppers
(an improvement the pace of which is likely to quicken) is attributable to close
and constant bargaining between employers' and workers' organisations.
As regards relations with agricultural workers' unions, the confederation
negotiates standard nation-wide agreements laying down general rules for
working hours, the weekly rest period, holidays, social security, work permits,
care for the sick and infirm, validity of individual employment contracts,
interruption of employment, allowances payable to workers should employment
relations cease, and so on. These nation-wide provisions are embodied,
mutatis mutandis, in collective labour agreements negotiated by the provincial
peasants' unions which are members of the confederation. The collective
agreements, too, specify rates of pay for the work done by labourers, skilled
workers and specialists (the three classes existing today), whether such persons
165
Agricultural organisations and development
be permanently or temporarily employed. The same kind of agreement holds
good for the managers and employees of agricultural undertakings.
Other collective agreements, most of them of a regional kind, deal with
specific kinds of agricultural work. This is more particularly the case with
agreements affecting workers employed for harvesting and winnowing, the
upkeep of paddy-fields, the rice harvest, the harvesting of jasmine, oranges or
lemons, olives, and the like. It has been estimated that there are six national
standard agreements (including that relating to the sliding wage scale and the
agreement on equal pay for male and female labour), together with some 300
provincial collective agreements dealing with the contractual employment and
wages of permanent or temporary farm labourers, managers and employees
of agricultural undertakings, and of workers employed on sundry agricultural
tasks, most of them of a seasonal kind.
It may not be amiss to quote what the confederation thinks of this policy:
The employer can hardly be said to derive much advantage from bargaining on
wages and working conditions; whenever a collective agreement is signed—the facts
are so clear as to be hardly worth mentioning—the agricultural employer loses more
than he wins. This is the price he pays (conscious as he is of the need to ensure that
in wages and social security the agricultural worker shall be more or less the equal
of his brother in factory or office) for the progress made by the working class. Only
thus can agriculture maintain the labour force it requires.
As regards the price of agricultural produce, the confederation tries to
influence the appropriate organs and circles with a view to ensuring that the
farmer or peasant gets a satisfactory reward for the work done and the capital
invested. To this end it makes official approaches, either to Parliament and
its legislative commissions, or through the National Economics and Labour
Council, or through other bodies.
Prices are maintained by stock-piling produce, whereby the supply can be
satisfactorily controlled. To this end, the confederation carries on a campaign
to persuade the peasant to build up his stocks rather than to dispose of his
produce for a song in an attempt to meet his commitments.
The confederation is consulted by the Ministry of Agriculture whenever
action is being envisaged to keep prices up. Such consultations are held when
circumstances demand, or when the confederation is being represented on
advisory bodies set up for some special purpose. The confederation is itself
represented in the National Economics and Labour Council, a body which
advises the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate; it can initiate legislation
and has a say in the enactment of economic and social laws, according to legal
principles and within legal limits.
A standing agricultural committee has been set up within this council.
Like the Social Affairs Committee, it plays an effective part in forwarding
166
Italy
pleas and applications from peasants and farmers in defending the prices of
their produce.
Official bodies and the representatives of Italian agriculture work together
in yet another field, that of planning. The Economic and Social Development
Plan, 1966-70, provides that peasants and farmers may sit on committees which
are responsible at the regional level for ensuring that effective collaboration
exists between public bodies, the regional organs of Government, and the
organisations concerned with economic and union affairs, on matters
connected with economic development and action to be taken regionally by
the authorities.
As to the joint settlement of disputes, the confederation declares that since
Italy has not yet instituted a legal system for occupational organisations—as
called for in the Constitution 1—there are no joint bodies for collective bargaining. In fact, however, for the last twenty years or so, such bargaining
has taken place with a frequency worthy of mention, thanks to meetings
between employers' and workers' representatives, and their results have proved
highly satisfactory. The collective agreements negotiated in this way are
usually accepted and applied. In a strictly legal sense, they are binding on the
farmers, peasants and associated workers who belong to the bodies involved
in the negotiations.
As regards conditions of work, the confederation co-operates with the
authorities and specialised bodies in ensuring that occupational health and
» safety rules are fully observed; in fact, it was represented in the organs which
drew up the rules in question. Similarly as regards the improvement of rural
housing, the confederation carries on a propaganda campaign to stir the peasant
into taking full advantage of the facilities available under Italian law for the
construction or improvement of peasants' homes and farm buildings.
The confederation takes an interest, too, in vocational training. It is
represented in ministerial committees and plays an active part through the
centres and institutes specially created by it. For instance, the National Institute
for Agricultural Vocational Training (ENAPRA) was set up in 1959 to provide
both initial and advanced training for those responsible for farm management.
Another centre—the National Institute for the Vocational Training of the
Young Farmer—was also set up in 1959. Lastly, the National Institute for
Technical and Economic Assistance to Farmers was set up in 1962 to accelerate
agricultural progress by technical and economic assistance to individual or
collective agricultural undertakings, and by programmes for modernisation
of cropping systems and farm organisation.
1
Article 39 of the Constitution enacted on 27 December 1947 recognises freedom of
association. But no legislation has been enacted to give effect to this. So the unions invoke
articles 36 to 39 of the Civil Code, concerning associations not officially recognised by decree.
167
Agricultural organisations and development
The Italian farmers' and peasants' wishes regarding vocational training
are referred to the authorities, either directly or on the occasion of national
meetings attended by representatives of the teaching profession. The latest
such meetings to be organised by the confederation or by ENAPRA took
place in Bologna in May 1960 and Latina in January 1966; the first discussed
"Education and Agriculture" and the second "Agriculture and the Vocational
Training Institute", namely, the institute which runs two- or three-year courses
in farming.
For similar purposes, the confederation organises group travel, particularly
for the younger farmers and peasants, so that they can have first-hand knowledge of agricultural methods and development in other countries (France,
Federal Republic of Germany, Israel, Netherlands, United States, etc.).
The General Confederation of Italian Agriculture is a member of the
European Confederation of Agriculture and the International Federation of
Agricultural Producers (IFAP), and participates in the work of the Committee
of Agricultural Organisations (COPA) of the European Economic Community.
Agricultural workers' unions
These were reorganised throughout at the end of the Second World War,
and became part of the Italian General Confederation of Labour (CGIL).
But the Catholic members, followed by the republicans and social democrats,
dropped out, the former to set up the Italian Confederation of Workers'
Unions (CISL), and the other to found the Italian Labour Union (UIL).
These three workers' organisations are spread throughout the country
and maintain separate "federations" for agriculture, industry, trade, tertiary
activities, and public and semi-public activities.
The agricultural unions are the following:
— National Federation of Agricultural Day-Labourers, Wage Earners, Technicians and Employees, affiliated to the Italian General Confederation of
Labour (communist and socialist);
— Italian Federation of Agricultural Wage Earners and Day-Labourers,
affiliated to the Italian Confederation of Workers' Unions (Christian democrat);
— Italian Union of Agricultural Wage Earners and Day-Labourers and the
Italian Union of Farmers and Direct Cultivators, affiliated to the Italian
Labour Union (social democrat).
168
Italy
•
National Federation of Agricultural Day-Labourers,
Wage Earners, Technicians and Employees
This body (Federazione Nazionale Braccianti, Salariati, Technici, Impiegati
Agricoli, or Federbraccianti for short) was created on 26 July 1948. It derives
from the Federtena Nazionale, set up in 1901 and essentially an organisation
for agricultural day-labourers and wage earners. The federation consists
of seasonal workers, wage earners, settlers in the south, share-croppers,
agricultural technicians and employees, nurserymen, workers in forestry and
horticulture, and workers in land clearance and irrigation consortia. Settlers,
workers in forestry, horticulture and nurseries, wage earners employed by
the land clearance and irrigation consortia, and agricultural technicians and
employees have their occupational unions which are affiliated to the Federbraccianti.
The Federbraccianti, through the Italian General Confederation of Labour,
is represented on the National Economics and Labour Council, in the agricultural development organisations, on the regional economic planning boards,
and in institutions responsible for employment and social welfare.
It does, however, take the view that the workers are very much underrepresented in all these bodies, and says that in the event their presence there
tends to be mainly for purposes of consultation.
In 1966, there were 553,170 paid-up members, divided as follows: wage
earners permanently employed, 98,500; day-labourers, 408,940 (of whom
180,408 were females); horticulturists and nurserymen, 8,100; workers employed
by land clearance consortia, 1,200; technicians and employees, 7,130; small
share-croppers, 29,300.
In 1966, there were already some 1.5 million workers waiting to be organised
(according to the Statistics Institute). Other official sources put the figure
at about 1.75 million.
The Federbraccianti maintains that it exercises influence over most of the
agricultural workers in the classes mentioned above, and that between 75 and
80 per cent take part in its activities.
Besides its national unions, the federation has 77 provincial federations,
3,300 communal associations, as well as trade union committees in undertakings, and regional boards.
The federation is chiefly concerned with negotiating regional and provincial
collective agreements. These last few years, it has done its best to extend the
system of supplementary contracts. Its major demands are that wages should
be raised, that vocational training should be provided, that working hours
should be cut down, and that social insurance should be more adequate; it
calls, too, for security in employment and the free exercise of trade union rights.
16»
Agricultural organisations and development
In this connexion we should mention provincial and local initiatives designed
to create employment while offering greater stability, through improved agricultural methods and properly planned development programmes. Attempts
are being made, as well, to increase employment by programmes of public
works, irrigation and land clearance.
As regards social security, the federation campaigns for equality of treatment for the agricultural worker, an overhaul of the social insurance system,
improved vocational training, and bigger employers' contributions.
It is striving to ensure that the agricultural worker has a standard of living
compatible with the world in which we live. In 1960, it succeeded in getting
Parliament to approve legislation whereby, between 1961-62 and 1970-71,
200,000 million lire would be allotted to the building of comfortable houses
for day-labourers. In this fashion, the federation is trying, day by day, to
improve the conditions of Ufe and work in the agricultural undertaking and
in the village.
An agreement for the creation of a national agricultural vocational training
centre, which should do much to improve the agricultural workers' skills,
is about to be concluded. In the meanwhile, vocational centres have been
set up during the last few years in several provinces in northern Italy.
As regards agrarian reform, the federation is calling for legislation whereby
there would be a gradual change in the pattern of land holding, based on the
joint management of large farms, and it is trying to promote the creation of
free associations of undertakings which would get together for some particular
production task. Such an aim, it feels, could be achieved by expropriation
of landed property, abolition of the small farm tenancy and share-cropping,
as well as the employment of seasonal and wage labour; in these views, it
takes as its point of departure the principle that the land should belong
to those who till it. These are the basic aims the Federbraccianti is pursuing
whenever it proposes legislative enactments or amendments.
Apart from this, the federation considers that any policy of land reform
must also aim at the expansion of the big undertakings which process and
distribute agricultural produce. There should also, it feels, be a new investment
policy providing for irrigation and soil conservation; towns and cities must be
so organised as to ensure the development of the productive forces in society
and to provide a solution for the problems with which the worker is confronted;
houses, hospitals, schools, roads, and so on, must be built.
Although, in relation to the industrial worker, the agricultural worker is
highly organised, there are many obstacles in the way of any further development of the trade union movement. The Federbraccianti is less active in the
south of Italy. It explains this by the lack of security in employment (average
number of days of employment per annum: about 90) and by the fact that the
170
Italy
employers are guilty of constant breaches of agreements and rules relating
to employment. Workers in this area, it maintains, are still underpaid, and
a woman receives no more than 30 to 40 per cent of the wage stipulated by
agreement. Labourers are still recruited, it seems, in public squares or by team
bosses—quite contrary to the Act of 1949 which obliges employers to go through
a State employment agency. Employers—the federation claims—take advantage of poverty and unemployment.
As regards bargaining with the employers' representatives, the federation
observes that there do exist the joint bodies provided for in provincial agreements to settle problems arising in the application of contracts. But these
bodies, it says, are not very effective, since they are provincial only. Hence
it calls for the creation of communal joint bodies to ensure application of
of agreements in undertakings, to determine skills and to seek employment
possibilities so as to guarantee greater stability. These bodies are not recognised by law, but exist by virtue of mutual agreement between the parties.
The federation is of the opinion that, in agriculture, the legislation governing
appeals against dismissal is not very effective. All in all, it considers that the
legislation designed t o protect the rights of the agricultural worker is not
merely inadequate: it is inoperative. It adds that the official agencies concerned (employment agencies, labour inspection authorities) never do anything
to punish a person guilty of breaches of labour legislation.
Some success has, for all that, been achieved. The federation emphasises
how exceedingly complicated agricultural collective bargaining can be; nevertheless, trade union pressure has been responsible for a rise in wages,
recognition of skill differentials, reduction of the working week to 45 hours
(in some provinces, 42), equal pay for females doing equal work, the application
of social security legislation thanks to the setting-up of provincial funds, and
reaffirmation of trade union rights (grant of permits to trade union officials).
Employment problems are settled by local bargaining (in individual undertakings or in the commune). Little, however, has been achieved so far, either
in private or in public undertakings (such as the Azienda forestale, the Cassa
per il Mezzogiorno, etc.).
As to housing, we have already mentioned the 1960 legislation regarding
the provision of dwellings for day-labourers, under which some thousands
of houses have already been erected. Nevertheless, costs have gone up so
much that the original scheme (to build 80,000 dwellings in ten years) has had
to be drastically cut. What is needed now is money. Various Bills have
been tabled with a view to the allotment of funds.
As regards social security, the Federbraccianti says that these last few
years there have been improvements in family allowances, pensions, and insurance against illness and injury. But despite these improvements, the lot of
171
Agricultural organisations and development
the agricultural worker is still not a very happy one ; whence the present trade
union campaign for a radical overhaul of the whole social security system.
As regards agricultural contracts (governing such activities as tenant
farming, share-renting, share-cropping, etc.), something has been achieved
under Act No. 756, dated 15 September 1964, as a result of which these
workers are economically better off, their rights being in certain respects
augmented. Besides which, Act No. 707 (22 July 1966) lays down that the
sums payable by long-lease tenants and workers on land improvement schemes
shall be reduced, and specifies the circumstances in which exemption may
be granted.
The federation feels that these limited successes, together with what has
been achieved by dint of trade union bargaining, have not yet really cleared
the ground for proper agrarian reform, which demands an unambiguous
affirmation of the workers' rights and presupposes that a state of affairs which
has had its day will be finally done away with. Hence, by negotiation, by
pressing for legislative action, the workers' struggle goes on.
Since its inception, the Federbraccianti has been a member of the Italian
General Confederation of Labour (CGIL). In addition, it belongs to the
Trades Union International of Agricultural, Forestry and Plantation Workers,
itself a member of the World Federation of Trade Unions. The CGIL, too,
belongs to the WFTU.
The Federbraccianti also belongs to the Mediterranean Basin Agricultural
Trade Unions' Association.
• Italian Federation of Agricultural Wage Earners and Day-Labourers
This particular organisation {Federazione Italiana Salariati Braccianti
Agricoli e Maestranze Specializzate—FISBA) was set up on 1 May 1950.1
Its members are seasonal workers as well as workers permanently employed.
In 1966, total membership stood at some 400,000.
About half the members are wage earners who buy a member's ticket and
pay a contribution for a year at a time. The cost of this ticket is decided on
by the executive organs of the CISL and is the same for all Italian agricultural
wage earners. But the Italian agricultural worker (especially in the south
1
FISBA comprises: the Peasant League (Lega contadina), representing the workers'
interest at the level of the commune, the hamlet, and the individual farm; a provincial federation defending these interests in the province (it works by agreement with the various leagues
in the provinces); a national federation which, through its national secretariat, runs FISBA
and represents it against any third party, implementing to this end the decisions taken by
the deliberative organs.
172
Italy
and in the islands) is very poorly paid. Because of this, so the federation
states, FISBA decides on how much the annual contribution shall be, with
an eye to the position in each part of the country. This state of affairs also
affects the total of contributions paid by the organisation to the European
and international confederations.
When FISBA makes a claim, it always does so with an eye to the interests
of the workers as a whole, whether they be trade union members or not. It
is at the same time mindful of the country's interests and of the interests of
agriculture.
The federation is by statute affiliated to its own confederal central office.
Either through its delegates within this latter, or directly, it is represented in
all bodies (national, regional, provincial or local) which by virtue of the law
defend the interests of farming. It is represented, too, in the organisations
responsible for the agricultural workers' social security.
The federation has as members, and directly represents, the agricultural
wage earner alone, namely:
— agricultural wage earners, whether they be permanently or semipermanently employed; obbligati, i.e. wage earners compulsorily engaged;
and day-labourers paid a monthly, daily or hourly wage (their payment
may be to some extent in kind);
— workers specialising in gardening, market gardening and fruit-growing
(nurserymen, gardeners, persons engaged in the packing of fruit); in the
tending of livestock; in wine-making; in activities associated with agriculture (craftsmen, cellarmen, blacksmiths, carpenters, tractor drivers); in
forestry; in the supervision of game reserves (gamekeepers); in the
upkeep of paddy-fields and in the rice harvest; in tenant farming with
the payment of rent in kind; and so on.
By virtue of an agreement for membership of affiliation, the federation
also represents:
— persons employed in the handling of tobacco leaves;
— technical and administrative staff employed on farms and in forestry
undertakings, and persons employed by tobacco producers enjoying a
special concession;
— wage earners employed by undertakings engaged in land clearance, irrigation, or land improvement;
— persons employed by tobacco factories (these are considered as agricultural
workers) ;
— technical and administrative staff employed by the Stock-Breeders' Association, by livestock technical institutes, by stations raising bulls as sires,
by artificial insemination centres, by fowl-breeding centres and by studbook associations and offices.
173
Agricultural organisations and development
The chief purposes of the federation can be set forth as follows :
— in the spirit of the Italian Constitution, to work out agreements, contracts
and collective agreements governing wages, working hours, employment
conditions, and the like, by negotiation between employers and workers;
— to promote and accelerate reforms likely to enhance the part played by
labour in the productive life of the nation (labour being considered more
important than capital), by supporting, and helping to secure the application
of, legislation and trade union action designed to ease the worker's lot;
to encourage the fullest development of social security and to facilitate
the transition from the existing social insurance system (based on the mutual
benefit society*) to full social insurance ;
— to strive for improvements in the life of the agricultural wage earners,
with especial reference to housing, bearing in mind that in accordance
with custom and tradition : (a) in certain parts of the country, and especially
in the stock-breeding areas, the worker enjoys, over and above a cash wage,
the right to housing accommodation on the farm for his family and himself;
(b) in other areas, and especially where conditions are propitious to
the growing of rice and olives, and in certain fruit farms and market
gardens, housing is provided at harvest time ; and (c) in other areas there
is no provision for workers' housing on the farm itself.
Hence the federation strives to ensure that housing for the agricultural
wage earner and his family shall be more comfortable and more hygienic.
To this end, it exerts pressure to ensure that under the first and second
"Green Plans" farmers who build or improve workers' housing should be
eligible for a grant.
As regards the housing of seasonal labour, the federation sets great store
by the provision of decent accommodation, with separate provision for females,
so that there may be no promiscuity; moreover, such accommodation must
conform to the rules of hygiene set forth in the current Code. There is virtually
no longer a problem with regard to the housing of workers engaged on the
upkeep of paddy-fields and the planting and harvesting of rice. But this is
not so with respect to other seasonal workers, such as those engaged in picking
olives, nuts and jasmine.
The federation gave support to Act No. 1676 (30 December 1960), enacted
for the benefit of the workers in areas, and on farms, where the owners provide
no accommodation. This piece of legislation provides for the building of
houses reserved exclusively for the agricultural wage earner who may rent or
buy them. The State pays the building costs, and each may be bought for a
1
See Relazione al 6° Congresso Nazionale della FISBA (Ferrara, 19-21 marzio 1965),
(Rome, CISL, 1965), p. 56.
174
Italy
fixed price, equivalent to 50 per cent of building costs, payment being without
interest and spaced over a period of 25 years. Should the worker so desire,
he may rent his house at 60 per cent of the annual rate for purchase. To
ensure implementation of this Act, Parliament has set aside 200,000 million
lire (20,000 million a year for ten years).
The federation emphasises that in this day and age the worker increasingly
expects to own a little house in town or village, even if the town or village be
far from his place of work. Distance, incidentally, counts for less and less,
partly because lanes and by-roads are being improved, partly because individual
ownership of motor cars, motor cycles and scooters is becoming ever more
widespread.
In those areas where the land reform laws have taken effect (Act No. 230,
dated 12 May 1950, and Act No. 841, dated 21 October 1950), not only has
land been redistributed but better economic and social balance has been
achieved in the areas concerned by sweeping away the barriers to an effective
use of the abundant natural and human resources available. Thus it is that
action of a technical and economic kind has produced effects of profound
social importance.
The federation observes that an intensive complex and
co-ordinated campaign has, within a very short space of time, done away
with the causes of stagnation. It has done so by promoting:
— the transformation of the land acquired (to meet the new provisions calling
for an increase in production);
— the emergence of the conditions conducive to efficient modern agriculture ;
— technical progress, the more necessary in that in the backward areas
agrarian reform affects persons of a new kind, unprepared for an agricultural profession;
— the supply and marketing of agricultural tools and produce.
Incidentally, such legislation does no more than give effect to article 44
of the Constitution, which sets forth the farmer's obligations and lays down
limits for the private ownership of land (which vary according to the agricultural areas and zones into which the country is divided), to ensure a proper
use of the soil and harmony between employers and workers, all in the interests
of productivity, justice, and social progress.
Land has been allotted to "the manual workers in agriculture" who are
not themselves landowners or long-lease tenants, or who work plots too
small to give work to their families. Such allocations have been made individually, and not to associations. Whenever it seemed better, or even necessary, to provide for communal ownership because of the nature of the land
or the crops grown (as with woods, pastures, paddy-fields, etc.), apportionment
of land has been individual and collective at one and the same time : that is
175
Agricultural organisations and development
to say, each individual receives an optimum amount of land, while the property
as a whole still remains an organic whole.
Anybody wishing to buy land has to pay two-thirds of the expropriation
allowance and the cost of any improvements made by the bodies responsible
for land reform, in 30 annual instalments with interest at 2 per cent. During
these 30 years, the land can neither be leased nor sold; should the purchaser
die, the law provides for his succession.
The reform has cost, all in all, 637,750 million lire.
The land reform bodies have acquired some 1,895,360 acres. This area,
broken down, is as follows: landed estates (44,533 cases), 1,047,500 acres;
additional land allotted to supplement plots already owned (68,531 cases),
504,360 acres; plots to be jointly held, 129,090 acres; plots reserved for the
use of the competent institutions, 7,470 acres; making 1,688,420 acres all
in all. The remainder—some 210,000 acres—has been used for the building
of villages and roads, and for the digging of drains and irrigation canals, but
this land has not yet been apportioned, since the work now under way will
necessarily take many years to complete.
The following have profited under the scheme: small owners, themselves
working inadequate plots, 7.4 per cent; small share-croppers, tenants, etc.,
42.8 per cent; agricultural wage earners, 49.8 per cent.
Costs have worked out as follows : land improvement, planting of trees,
irrigation, construction or restoration of houses, construction of roads on
farmsteads or between them, 61.4 per cent; land settlement (construction of
farm-houses, villages and roads, building of aqueducts, laying of electric mains,
and so on), 14.1 per cent; technical assistance, supply of livestock, vocational
instruction, 19.4 per cent; marketing of produce, 3.2 per cent.
The Act in question, promulgated in 1950, had been preceded by serious
unrest, with sit-ins, strikes, and so on—all fostered by the unions. However,
the reforms undertaken, so the federation considers, have had little effect
outside the areas directly concerned. They have not given rise to any fresh
initiatives in the field of production (even in sectors other than agricultural).
Nor have they raised the general standard of living. This, the federation
says, is especially true of inland Sicily, southern Italy (Calabria), and certain
areas in the province of Nuoro, in Sardinia.
The federation considers, too, that these reforms were conceived and
launched at an inauspicious time. In 1950, Italian agriculture was of a selfsufficient, inward-looking kind. The free movement of labour did not exist,
even between one province and another, let alone among the various European
countries. The European Common Market created the free movement of
labour and led to a steady reduction in customs barriers, thereby reducing the
peasant's appetite for land, which had been so characteristic of Italy between
176
Italy
the end of the war and the years 1957-58. The demand for land, in fact,
no longer cuts much ice politically. People no longer think in terms of the
self-sufficient family plot, but of a farm big enough to cope with a market
economy. A plot considered amply big enough a few years ago is just not
big enough any longer. Hence, when an estate becomes vacant today, its
owner having joined the drift to the town, it no longer passes to those who
might be entitled to it, but is used to extend the system of landed estates.
As regards its demands in respect of agrarian legislation, the federation
mentions the stages through which the tenant's contract has passed. Originally,
a contract (which had undergone some slight change due to regional custom
and tradition) was based on the following terms : the owner granted the land
(complete with farm buildings and other fixtures), plus half the "operating
fund" (livestock and farm implements); should the need arise, he advanced
half the "operating fund" for which the tenant was liable for the agricultural
year and without interest, should the tenant be unable to afford it. The
tenant, as a head of a family, would himself provide the labour required to run
the farm. By agreement with the tenant, the owner would manage the farm,
and the income therefrom would be equally shared between them.
The Act of 24 June 1947, known as the Lodo De Gasperi, laid down that
income from the farm would no longer be equally divided between the two
parties; instead, the tenant would get 54 per cent, 3 per cent would be
reinvested in the farm, and the owner would therefore receive 43 per cent.
As we shall shortly see, UIL-Terra states that the tenant now receives
58 per cent.
In addition, this Act laid down that the contract could be denounced only
for valid reasons, i.e. if continuation of the contract was likely to render the
management of the farm impossible, and if the tenant's bad faith and unwillingness to co-operate had been proved to the satisfaction of the courts.
Act No. 756, dated 30 January 1967, declared that the new contracts of
tenancy were null and void, and that the tenant had a pre-emptive right to
the "fund" granted to him in his capacity as tenant paying rent in kind.
In this respect, another body is competent. Within CISL, the point will
most certainly be closely scrutinised by the Federation of Tenants and Direct
Cultivators, the activities of which will be based on the political considerations
outlined above.1
Finally, FISBA is trying to speed up the process of improving the general
education and vocational skills of the agricultural worker by organising
1
As this federation failed to answer the questionnaires sent to it, it has been omitted
from the present survey.
177
Agricultural organisations and development
suitable courses. It is also trying to ensure that the compulsory schooling
given in the countryside is of better quality.1
FISBA is also busy training trade union officials. To this end, it runs basic
training courses (60 of them in 1964), followed by provincial, interprovincial
or inter-regional advanced courses (corsi residenziali). Of these latter, there
were 12 in 1964.2
The federation, by agreement with the other workers' and employers'
organisations, intends to set up a body to handle the question of vocational
training in agriculture. It will be responsible for activities throughout Italy,
and will be known as the National Agricultural Vocational Training Organisation (Ente Nazionale Addestramento Lavorati Agricoli).
Moreover, FISBA has a hand in all technical, economic, trade union and
administrative matters of concern to the agricultural wage earner. Hence
it remains in touch with ministerial bodies, technical and economic organs, and
the public assistance authorities, and endeavours to ensure that the agricultural
wage earner is adequately represented.
The principal barriers to a further development of FISBA are to be found
(in part, if not entirely) in the economic and social structure of Italian agriculture. These difficulties may be summarised as follows:
— predominance of small and medium-sized farms, frequently divided into
sub-plots;
— custom and tradition, especially in Apulia, Calabria and the islands, where
people do not live in the countryside, but in fairly large towns;
— the high proportion of peasants who are virtually, if not entirely, illiterate ;
shortage of specialised workers.
Because of industrial development, the agricultural population of the
country has been shrinking fast (45 per cent in 1960; 25.5 per cent in 1966).
For this reason, as well as for the reasons given above, agricultural labour
has become extremely fluid and unstable. Furthermore, many agricultural
wage earners eke out their income by carrying on some non-agricultural activity
on the side. The resultant picture of the agricultural labour scene is thus
rather asymmetric.
Lastly, FISBA takes the view that the work of development and organisation
is rendered more difficult by the workers' tendency to drift from one part of
the country to another, according to the season or the crop.
Nevertheless, despite all difficulties encountered by trade unionism, the
federation feels that these last few years quite a few successes can be ascribed
1
See / problemi dell'istruzione dell'obligo nell'ambiente rurale (Rome, FISBA-CISL,
1964).
2
Relazione al 6° Congresso Nazionale della FISBA, op. cit., p. 89.
178
Italy
to the trade union movement as a whole (not wishing to take all the credit for
itself), namely:
— the national contract defining conditions of employment for workers in
nurseries;
— the regional contract for Calabria and the provincial contracts for persons
employed in forestry;
— the inter-regional contract for rice-workers;
— the contracts for workers employed in picking olives, oranges, limes and
lemons, jasmine, almonds, and so on;
— the national contract for persons employed in tobacco factories;
— the "national pact" for permanent wage earners.1
Before the Second World War, the Italian agricultural labourer hardly
ever knew what the future had in store for him. It is hardly necessary to
emphasise how great a contribution all these contracts have made to stabilising
and improving agricultural working conditions.
FISBA belongs to the Italian Confederation of Workers' Unions (CISL)
and to the European Landworkers' Federation, itself a member of the
International Federation of Plantation, Agricultural and Allied Workers.
The CISL itself belongs to the International Confederation of Free Trade
Unions (ICFTU).
•
UIL-Terra
This organisation is made up of two federations—the Italian Union of
Agricultural Wage Earners and Day-Labourers (UISBA) and the Italian
Union of Tenants and Direct Farmers (UIMEC), and was created on 5 March
1950. According to official figures, the total membership of UIL memberunions developed as follows between 1963 and 1965:
— 1963: 1,508,373, of whom 502,048 were agricultural workers;
— 1964: 1,511,425, of whom 488,697 were agricultural workers;
— 1965: 1,508,170, of whom 476,905 were agricultural workers.
The UIL affirms that this drop in organised agricultural workers is attributable to the fact that so many have moved into industry. The drop in
over-all membership observable in 1965 was due to the state of the national
economy at that time.
The UIL member-federations do a good deal more than protect the interests
of their card-carrying members. They look after the agricultural labour force
as a whole. There are various indications, such as the elections of trade union
1
Relazione al 6° Congresso Nazionale della FISBA, op. cit., p. 47.
179
Agricultural organisations and development
representatives, which seem to suggest that those who sympathise with the
aims of the UIL without actually being members are actually far more numerous
than the members themselves. This is attributable to the fact that the workers
are scattered over a host of small family farms. Absenteeism, too, is traditional, and the Italian agricultural worker being so much of an individualist,
it is difficult to do very much about it.
As is shown by the existence of separate unions for wage earners and selfemployed workers, UISBA comprises wage earners permanently employed
and day-labourers (seasonal workers), while UIMEC comprises tenants and
share-croppers.
These two unions deal with everything to do with labour: working hours,
wages, holidays, and so on. Bargaining with regard to such matters is carried
on nationally and provincially, and within individual undertakings.
UlL-Terra and, where appropriate, UISBA and UIMEC are represented
in all official bodies, nationally, provincially and regionally. Their representatives may have a vote or just attend in an advisory capacity, depending on the
body concerned.
Employment stability, for which the UIL campaigned for many years,
has now been achieved. The UIL has played a decisive part also in securing
an improvement in the contracts of agricultural workers, with the result,
firstly, that the part retained under share-cropping arrangements has risen
to 58 per cent, and secondly, that bond-service in any shape or form is now a
thing of the past.
The UIL considers that the law constitutes no obstacle to an extension of
trade union activities in Italy. The only problems are that the unions are short
of money and that the workers, as already mentioned, are scattered. No
hostile pressure is exerted on the unions, and the employers' opposition is
limited to a few sporadic outbursts.
Apart from the success achieved in improving agricultural labour contracts,
UlL-Terra can point with justifiable pride to its creation of a busy network of
so-called Young Country-Dwellers' Circles, which undertake the vocational
training and civic education of young people living in the countryside. Such
a circle exists in most agricultural towns and villages. The circles are attached
to a provincial or regional centre which is administratively autonomous but
adheres to the Italian Union of Young Country-Dwellers' Circles. This latter
body has its seat in the UlL-Terra offices in Rome, and its chairman is the
secretary of UIL-Terra.
UlL-Terra has belonged to the International Confederation of Free Trade
Unions (ICFTU) since its foundation.
180
Netherlands
Chambers of agriculture
In Italy, there are no chambers of agriculture of the kind encountered, for
example, in France. The existing chambers of commerce, chambers of
industry and chambers of agriculture do not represent occupational interests.
They restrict themselves to representing, in a general way, the interests of the
provincial economic organs ; they promote the development of these organs
and co-ordinate their activities, in accordance with the general interests of the
nation. Since they are not specifically concerned with farming, they have
been excluded from this survey.
Netherlands
Dutch agriculture, in many respects more efficient than the agriculture
of any other country, has always had the benefit of difficulties as a spur to
efficiency. Handicapped by a lack of mineral resources, the Netherlands
emerged only very late as an industrial power. Traditionally, it had always
depended on trade and agriculture, and ever since the Middle Ages, the Dutch
have had to wage a continuous struggle to maintain and extend a land of which
a high proportion lies below sea level. Dutch history is one long dogged
battle, marked by ups and downs, victory and temporary reverse, against an
endlessly encroaching sea.
Dutch tenacity, both individual and collective, is too well-known a quality
for there to be any need to expatiate on it here. But it may not be amiss to
recall that it is responsible for the extraordinary progress made by the Dutch
co-operative movement. In this study, we have deliberately eschewed any
detailed consideration of the co-operative movement per se ; we may, however,
mention in passing that agricultural co-operation in the Netherlands began
fairly suddenly, in the last twenty years or so of the nineteenth century, and
that during the twentieth it has developed at such a pace that by 1960, 4,000
co-operatives were selling 70 per cent of the milk, 85 per cent of the cheese,
50 per cent of the bacon, and 40 per cent of the eggs produced in this country,
while providing Dutch farmers with more than half the fertilisers and fodder
they utilised. On the average, every Dutch farmer belonged to three
co-operatives. No more than one in ten belonged to none at all. Four out
of ten belonged to three or more.1
1
See E. Abma: "Management Boards and Supervisory Committees in Dutch Farmers'
Co-operatives", Year Book of Agricultural Co-operation, 1963 (Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1963),
pp. 119-130.
181
Agricultural organisations and development
As occurred everywhere else, co-operation preceded unionism in agriculture. It was only towards the end of the nineteenth and at the beginning
of the twentieth centuries that Dutch farmers began to band themselves together
in occupational organisations; the movement began only in 1900 or thereabouts among agricultural labourers. Today, there are six major occupational organisations in Dutch agriculture—three employers' and three workers'
—and in view of their similarity and the common nature of their aims they
can conveniently be treated as two groups.
Employers' organisations
Dutch agricultural employers are banded together in three major organisations: the Royal Committee on Dutch Agriculture (Koninklijk Nederlands
Landbouw Comité), the Dutch Catholic Farmers' and Peasants' Union (Katholieke Nederlandse Boeren en Tuindersbond), and the Dutch Christian Farmers'
and Peasants' Union (Nederlandse Christelijke Boeren en Tuindersbond). The
first of these bodies was set up in 1884, the second in 1896, and the third in
1918. They are federations of provincial unions and their regional groupings.
It is these latter which are empowered to conclude collective agreements
concerning wages and working conditions. But, at the higher level, the three
federations have co-ordinatory duties with the three workers' federations
within a mixed committee set up inside the Social Affairs Department of the
Agricultural Council (Landbouwschap), created in 1955. This joint committee, in which the six federations are represented, draws up "opinions"
which the provincial unions and regional groupings use as a basis for collective
bargaining.
As regards the prices of agricultural produce, the three employers' federations advise the Ministry of Agriculture and the Agricultural Council, who,
in accordance with custom, regularly consult them. The same holds good
of production targets and of Dutch agricultural policy in general.
The three federations, with their provincial and regional organs, are
actively engaged in promoting the interests of the Dutch peasantry. To this
end, they have set up, and they run, elementary, secondary and higher schools
of agriculture and horticulture. They are also concerned with social integration
and cultural progress—matters which intimately affect the family life of the
country-dweller as well as the rural way of life as a whole. Amongst other
things, they issue weekly newspapers and "agricultural social guidebooks".
Furthermore, so as to co-ordinate action undertaken for the welfare of the
peasantry, a Rural Welfare Board was set up in 1954. In it are represented
all the agricultural trade unions, rural housewives' organisations, and the
Ministries of Agriculture and Labour.
182
Netherlands
Like the other Dutch employers' organisations, the three federations are
members of the Management Board for Social Affairs, created in 1945.
They are also members of the Employers' Federation for International
Social Affairs ( Werkgevers Federatie voor internationale arbeidszaken), which
in its turn is a member of the International Organisation of Employers.
Lastly, in matters strictly agricultural, they are active in the Committee of
Agricultural Organisations (COPA) set up in 1958 within the Common Market,
in the European Confederation of Agriculture and the International
Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
Workers' unions
Like the employers, Dutch agricultural workers are banded together in
three organisations: the General Union of Dutch Agricultural Workers
(Algemene Nederlandse Agrarische Bedrijfsbond), with socialist leanings, the
Dutch Catholic Union of Agricultural Employees (Nederlandse Katholieke
Bond van Werknemers in de Agrarische Bedrijven), and the Dutch Christian
Agricultural Union (Nederlandse Christelijke Agrarische Bedrijfsbond) (Protestant). They were created in 1900, 1904 and 1914 respectively. In 1966, the
socialist union had 30,400 members, the Catholic union 20,000, and the
Protestant union 22,000. According to the Protestant union, some 75 per
cent of Dutch farm labourers belong to one or the other of the three. These
are usually persons permanently employed, but the unions have a few seasonal
workers among their members (10 per cent in the socialist union; unspecified
percentage in the other two).
The three unions bargain collectively in connexion with wages, hours of
work, working conditions, insurance, and so on, within the official or unofficial
joint bodies set up for the purpose. The statutes of all these organisations
provide for equal representation of employers and workers, and they enjoy
some degree of autonomy, subject to the general rules laid down by the authorities, or specified by law, for economic activities as a whole. These organisations are exceedingly influential. Their decisions are usually taken by vote.
But the Agricultural Council, although an official body, is not a governmental
one in the strict sense; and although it can decide on rules governing conditions
of work, within the framework of general legislation, its decisions require
final approval by the authorities. The Government can always declare that
a decision taken by the Agricultural Council runs counter to the general interest
and that hence it is null and void. This restriction in no way prevents the
authorities (i.e. the Ministry of Agriculture) from consulting the council
regularly and the agricultural policy pursued by Government and council is
frequently identical.
183
Agricultural organisations and development
The Catholic and Protestant unions are—generally speaking—satisfied
with the way the joint bodies work. However, the socialist union has certain
reservations to make. In its view, the joint bodies dealing with social
insurance and social problems in general work, on the whole, quite well, and
their decisions go far to make life easier for the worker. But the joint
bodies dealing with technical and economic matters, although by no means
useless, are—it claims—much less satisfactory and effective. They are too
slow-moving and conservative, at a time when there is a crying need for urgent
structural changes in agriculture.
Besides being active in the joint bodies, the three unions undertake the
sort of activities which are common to all workers' organisations. They
encourage vocational training (working hand-in-hand with agricultural colleges), train trade union officials, offer legal advice in labour disputes, and so
on. Unhappily, they have provided no very detailed picture of what they
do and what they have achieved, and our description of their activities must
necessarily be incomplete.
All three organisations agree that they are unhampered by the law. But
each of them emphasises a separate difficulty. The socialist union considers
that agricultural expansion is hampered by the fact that there are far too
many small farms, with the result that farmers do not earn enough and farm
labourers are underpaid.1 The Protestant union feels that although agricultural workers are much better off today than they were before the war, the
chief problem is still that of the disparity which exists between wages in
agriculture and in industry; despite all progress over the last 20 years, a farm
labourer gets 20 per cent less than the man on the shop floor. The employers'
organisations agree that this is a problem which will have to be solved, but
point out how precarious are the finances of most farmers. Lastly, the
Catholic union finds the chief problem in the tendency of the agricultural
labour force to dwindle (because of mechanisation and rationalisation); this
leads, of course, to a drop in trade union membership.
Among the improvements brought about by dint of trade union insistence,
these organisations point to working hours (now similar to those worked in
industry), social security (agricultural workers are now on the same footing
as those in industry), and improvements in housing (from which the whole
of the rural population has benefited). The socialist union also says that in
1
Recent estimates reveal that if the farm labourer is to enjoy an income comparable
to that of a factory worker, no farm should be less than 25 to 37 acres in extent; in fact, more
than half the farms have fewer than 25 acres. An attempt is being made to encourage the
creation of bigger units in a programme which in the long run is to deal with some 3.75
million acres, or 65 per cent of the total arable land (so far 335,000 acres have been consolidated and another 600,000 are currently being processed). See United Nations: Planning
for Balanced Social and Economic Development (New York, 1964), p. 64.
184
Sweden
the field of vocational training, school programmes have been adapted to the
requirements of workers' children, and that access to such training has been
made easier for agricultural workers.
Generally speaking, the three organisations agree that since the end of
the Second World War, great progress—technical, economic, cultural and
social—has been made in the Dutch countryside. This is borne out, incidentally, by all other available socio-economic indices.1
The Dutch Catholic Union of Agricultural Employees is a member of the
World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU); the Dutch Christian Agricultural
Union is a member of the National Christian Confederation (Chrislelijk
National Vakverbond), as well as of the International Christian Organisation
of Agricultural Wage Earners. The General Union of Dutch Agricultural
Workers is a member of the Netherlands Federation of Trade Unions (Nederlands Verbond van Vakverenigingen—NW) and of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).
Sweden
Swedish agriculture, which we may rate as "highly advanced" despite its
comparatively minor role in the country's economy (6 per cent of the gross
national product in 1964), provides a characteristic example of the manner
in which socialism is organised in the Nordic countries. Although already
well developed before ihe Second World War, the present agricultural policy
dates from 1947, when its main objectives were defined in an Act of Parliament:
first of all, to improve the economic efficiency of farms by means of a price
policy enabling the average farmer to reach the same standard of income
as industrial workers; subsequently, to promote agricultural rationalisation,
not only from the point of view of management but also as concerns the size
and structure of farms.2 This rationalisation has led to a 35 per cent increase
1
In 1964-65, the Netherlands had the highest yield per acre of wheat, barley and oats
of any country in the world; for rye and maize Dutch production per acre was very slightly
exceeded by the United States and Switzerland. Such high yields are not attributable wholly
to the climate (other European countries with similar soil and similar weather have yields
only half those of the Netherlands) but rather to agricultural planning and to the vast efforts
made since the war in agricultural advisory services; the Dutch had 100 advisers in 1930,
and 1,650 in 1962. This (in relation to their agricultural population) is the highest figure in
Western Europe. See FAO: Production Yearbook, 1965 (Rome, 1966); OECD: Agricultural
Advisory Services in Europe and North America, 1963 (Paris, 1964), pp. 66-69 and Annexes
IV and V.
* At the time, the size of the average or "norm" farm was estimated at between 25 and
50 acres of arable land. These figures were revised in 1965 and the average size is now
considered to be between 50 and 75 acres.
185
Agricultural organisations and development
in productivity in the last ten years. Furthermore, co-operation has developed
to such an extent since the last war that by 1961 agricultural co-operatives
were marketing 80 per cent of the country's production.
With these objectives in view, the general agricultural organisations reach
periodic agreements on price policy with the governmental authorities. These
agreements are established in such a way that any variation in industrial
costs or wages, or in world prices for agricultural products, lead to changes
in the degree of protection established. Agriculture can then adjust to the new
situation. Nevertheless, the Government cannot guarantee that the price
targets will actually be reached by the market. Negotiations are undertaken
on behalf of the Government by the Statens Jordbruksnämnd, an official body
responsible for applying and controlling price policy, and, on behalf of the
farmers, by a delegation of the two big general organisations whose role will
be described below: the Confederation of Farmers' Associations and the
Swedish Farmers' Federation. Agreements reached between the two
parties are transmitted to the Government which, in turn, submits them to
Parliament for approval. Thus, by means of the 1959-65 plan to achieve
parity between agriculture and industry, under which provision was made
for increased protectionism and the rationalisation of farms with State aid,
Swedish agriculture has succeeded, if not in actually catching up with industry,
at least in maintaining one of the highest agricultural standards of living in
Western Europe.
General organisations
• Confederation of Farmers' Associations
This body was founded in 1917 as the National Association of Swedish
Farmers, and reorganised as a federation in 1940. In 1946, as the Sveriges
Lantbruksförbund, it was finally established in the form of a limited liability
corporation.
According to its statutes, the objectives of the confederation consist in
protecting its members' economic interests and the social and economic
interests of Swedish farmers in general. In this respect the confederation
is required to: (a) represent farmers in matters of general interest; (b) collaborate in the work of farmers' co-operative organisations ; (c) maintain permanent co-operation between farmers' co-operative organisations, and between
the latter and the Farmers' Federation; (d) on behalf of its members, direct
work of a financial nature that is important both for the associations and for
agriculture in general.
186
Sweden
Affiliation to the confederation is confined to national farmers' associations
(of a co-operative or social nature), and to members of the country's cooperative organisations (including the Swedish Dairy Association, the Swedish
Farmers' Meat Marketing Association, the Swedish Farmers' Purchasing and
Sales Organisation, the Swedish Egg and Poultry Marketing Association,
the Swedish Forest-Owners' Association, the Association of Swedish Rural
Credit Societies, the General Mortgage Bank of Sweden, and the StockBreeding Association). Through these associations, the confederation covers
the majority of local agricultural organisations and societies of the country.
In 1962 it had over 110,000 members, including the 310,000 farmers and
forest-growers of the country.
Apart from negotiating with the Government in conjunction with the Swedish
Farmers' Federation, the confederation undertakes a number of socioeconomic activities through a network of organisations which it has created
or directs or which function under its aegis.
In the field of vocational training, mention should be made of the cooperative school of Sanga-Säby, which organises winter courses (OctoberApril) for young farmers to enable them to complete their agricultural, forestry
or economic training as well as to improve their knowledge of co-operative
organisation, management, etc. The courses are also followed by persons
wishing to occupy administrative posts in the co-operative movement. Apart
from these regular courses, the school organises seminars and lectures throughout the year.
In the field of scientific research, the confederation and the Swedish Farmers'
Federation have jointly set up the Institute for Research on Agricultural
Economy, an independent body subsidised by the two organisations on a
two-thirds and one-third basis respectively. The institute, which began its
activities in 1950, studies social and economic problems of particular importance
to agriculture and farmers. The results of this research are published periodically in the institute's brochures and bulletins.
Alongside these scientific and educational activities, the confederation runs
many others of an economic, social and cultural nature. For this purpose it
has set up a large limited company: the Läntbruksförbundets Ekonomi AB,
which carries out technical and economic work for the co-operative movement
and for individual farmers, directs financial affairs, is its own publisher,
markets the produce of the farmers and co-operatives, purchases goods needed
by farmers, and carries out a variety of functions through a series of
bodies :
— the foreign affairs secretariat of the financial department deals with matters
concerning foreign trade and international co-operation, and exports
breeding stock;
187
Agricultural organisations and development
— the market department follows market prices and carries out surveys and
studies, the results of which are communicated to the trade press and daily
newspapers of the country;
— the legal department deals with legal problems on behalf of the confederation and, upon request, looks after the individual affairs of societies and
farmers;
— the tax department advises farmers and co-operative societies and helps
them to solve tax problems and answer the legal questions arising from them ;
— the marketing department, which includes a demonstration stand, carries
out research and provides advice on the marketing of agricultural products,
as well as organising publicity campaigns and exhibitions;
— the purchasing department, on behalf of the co-operative organisations,
buys all necessary office material;
— the productivity division helps co-operative societies to carry out research
on the rationalisation of business methods and administrative organisation;
— the accounting office, which has 41 local offices, keeps the farmers' accounts,
draws up their balance sheets and prepares their tax returns;
— the editorial centre publishes textbooks for the agricultural colleges, as
well as reference books and various other publications;
— the studies department organises courses and lectures on the co-operative
movement;
— the correspondence school organises courses on the following subjects:
economics, co-operation, farming and stock-breeding, forestry and pisciculture, domestic science, gardening, etc. It also provides teaching material
for agricultural vocational training schools;
— the press secretariat and film department disseminate information to the
press and produce films, film-strips and slides as teaching aids or for
publicity purposes.
These various activities are backed up by a series of weekly publications,
the most important of which, the Jordbrukamas Föreningsblad (Agricultural
Co-operators' Review), has a circulation of 330,000 copies.
The confederation also runs two other technical bodies, which form the
last link in this remarkable chain of activities : the Lantbruksförbundets Revisions-byra AB, an accountancy office founded in 1946, which gives assistance
in accounting matters, supervises accounts and undertakes economic research
on behalf of co-operative societies; and the Landsbygdens Byggnadsförening
LBF, a society of architects and advisory engineers, founded in 1941, which
provides farmers, rural communities and co-operative societies with advice
and plans for the construction of farm installations and buildings.
At the local level the confederation is in close touch with the Swedish
Farmers' Federation through its network of provincial offices. Through the
188
Sweden
confederation, the farmers form part of the Joint Council of Nordic Farmers'
Organisations, and of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers
(IFAP).
• Swedish Farmers' Federation
The Swedish Farmers' Federation (Riksförbundet Landsbygdens Folk) was
founded in 1929 as an occupational organisation of Swedish farmers, originally
modelled on the industrial workers' unions which had proved their worth in
defending the interests of their members. As a politically independent occupational organisation, the union is required, under its statutes:
— to militate for the constitution of a united front of the country's farmers;
— to represent agriculture and the farming population vis-à-vis the Government and other sectors of society;
— to promote the development of the agricultural co-operative movement
and protect its freedom;
— to study questions of general importance for agriculture;
— t o disseminate information on the agricultural situation through radio,
television and the press ;
— to encourage the cultural aspirations of the farming population;
— to promote international co-operation among farmers.
In 1960, the 2,356 local branches of the federation, grouped into 27 provincial unions, had approximately 192,000 members, i.e. 80 per cent of those
whose income was mainly derived from agriculture and its related industries.
A system of elections at all levels ensures that the federation is run along
strictly democratic lines. Permanent contact between its members is further
provided by the RLF-Tidningen, a weekly publication with a circulation of
190,000 copies.
The federation acts either independently or in conjunction with the Confederation of Farmers' Associations (as in the case of the periodic agreements
on price policy negotiated with the Government).
Apart from the tasks listed above, the federation deals with adult vocational
training and undertakes very important work in providing legal assistance to
farmers affected by expropriation resulting from the construction of roads,
airports, etc. It is equally efficient in making sure that farms and farming
families are adequately insured against the hazards arising out of their occupation.
Lastly, mention should be made of the somewhat special method by which
the federation's activities are financed, reminiscent of the French chambers
of agriculture : in addition to the basic contribution, members pay a tax in
proportion to the size of their farm. Surpluses obtained through this system
189
Agricultural organisations and development
are transferred to the federation's reserve fund for use in occupational activities. The full value of this financial policy is seen if one considers the problems
encountered by unions in other countries due to the inadequacy of their
resources, which is why this system deserves mentioning as an example.
The Swedish Farmers' Federation is a member, through the Confederation
of Agricultural Associations, of the Joint Council of Nordic Farmers' Organisations and of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
Employers' organisations
• Federation of Swedish Employers in Agriculture and Forestry
The Federation of Swedish Employers in Agriculture and Forestry was
founded in 1907 and is the only organisation of agricultural employers in the
country; but, as many agricultural undertakings also have interests in forestry,
it was decided in 1938 that farmers engaged in both agriculture and forestry
could also become members. Even so, it is in the centre and south of Sweden,
where the large agricultural undertakings are mainly concentrated, that the
federation is most active. (In the northern counties, where forests predominate, private forestry undertakings belong, to a large extent, to a small number
of societies which have set up an employers' organisation devoted solely to
these activities.) Members also include the Federation of Horticultural
Employers and a certain number of organisations carrying out activities in
the field of agriculture and forestry.
The activities of the federation are at present shared between four sections:
The agricultural section has 6,500 members, i.e. approximately 3 per cent
of the 200,000 Swedish farmers, which shows the small number of farms with
employed labour (between 20,000 and 30,000 wage earners). Undertakings
in this category nevertheless cover 1.5 million acres, i.e. 17 per cent of the
country's agricultural area.
The forestry section has 1,300 members who farm approximately 3 million
acres of woodland in the central and southern regions of Sweden, where the
federation is the only employers' organisation. It thus includes among its
members not only the large forestry companies but also ordinary timber
growers. The number of workers in this branch is estimated between 10,000
and 12,000.
The horticultural section (Federation of Horticultural Employers) has
600 members employing approximately 3,500 wage earners. This section
covers market gardens, nurseries and orchards and is concerned with promoting
the development of these undertakings and with marketing their produce
throughout the country.
190
Sweden
The general section includes small sawmills, brickworks and carpentry
shops,providing materials for agriculture and forestry, as well as other small
machinery firms, artificial insemination centres, fur farms and some poultry
farms.
The federation maintains special sections for the study of agricultural
mechanisation as well as for research and rationalisation in forestry matters.
Altogether it has 8,600 members employing between 40,000 and 45,000 workers.
According to the federation, these workers have received considerable wage
increases since 1959, amounting to approximately 85-90 per cent. At the
present time the wages of agricultural workers are, on average, equal to
80-85 per cent of industrial wages.
The main task of the federation is to negotiate collective agreements with
the workers' organisations, including the agricultural and forestry workers'
trade unions and those of the supervisory staff and salaried employees in this
sector. The federation also helps to settle labour disputes, looks after its
members' interests from the legal point of view and provides them with
all necessary information concerning their position as employers. The
federation also attaches considerable importance to attempts to rationalise
agricultural and forestry undertakings. On the other hand, the federation
leaves agricultural price policy discussions to the two general organisations
described above, considering that the present level of prices is reasonably
satisfactory.
In other fields such as occupational health and the welfare of workers,
social insurance, vocational training and labour problems, the federation
works in close co-operation with the governmental authorities. With particular
regard to rural housing, it points out that approximately 70 per cent of agricultural workers are provided with housing by their employers. This generally
takes the form of houses for one or two families, each having an average of
two to three rooms and a kitchen. Approximately 90 per cent of the houses
have running water and drainage systems; most have central heating and many
are provided with toilets and bathrooms. The federation is thus actively
engaged in improving the housing conditions of rural workers, for the situation
still leaves much to be desired, even though from the point of view of comfort
the Swedish rural sector has one of the highest standards in Western Europe.
In the federation's opinion, the ease with which employers can engage labour
depends on a satisfactory standard of housing being provided, particularly in
the case of skilled workers such as tractor drivers, mechanics and foremen.
Outside official spheres, the federation collaborates with several organisations
engaged in research into labour costs and methods. It is naturally in close
contact with other employers' associations and particularly with the Swedish
Employers' Confederation.
191
Agricultural organisations and development
The Federation of Swedish Employers does not belong to any national
confederation. It is a member of the International Organisation of Employers.
Workers' unions
• Swedish Agricultural Workers' Union
The Swedish agricultural trade union movement is one of the oldest in
Western Europe. As far back as 1898 workers in Scania created a trade
union in order to obtain higher wages. When this objective was achieved,
the union was dissolved, and not until 1904 did the workers of Scania set up
a new trade union with the help of organised workers in Malmö. The new
union made rapid progress during the next four years and after several
strikes, which in some cases lasted a long time, succeeded in securing collective
agreements on wages and working conditions in some districts. Meanwhile,
in 1906, another trade union had been created by the agricultural workers
of central Sweden, and two years later the two organisations decided to amalgamate and to request admission to the Swedish Confederation of Trade
Unions. The new union, which at that time had approximately 10,000 members, nevertheless gradually declined in influence, since the workers showed
less interest in maintaining the organisation once their conditions of employment had improved. As was noted in the report of a survey carried out by
the ILO in 1928,
Owing to the influence of a strike of municipal workers in Malmö in 1908, and
especially as an effect of a general strike in 1909, [the agricultural workers] left the
union in such numbers that its finance was undermined and further progress
made impossible. The union had to withdraw from the confederation and it was
not until ten years later, in October 1918, that, through the initiative of the confederation, a reconstruction took place, or rather that a new
union of Swedish
farm-workers was created by amalgamation of local unions.1
In its present form, therefore, the Swedish Agricultural Workers' Union
(Svenska Lantarbetareförbundet) dates back to this period. Today the union
has 18,000 paid-up members, i.e. in round figures, 80 per cent of organised
workers. It should be specified that members of the union are recruited not
only from among agricultural and horticultural workers but also from among
those in engaged in related activities: agricultural machinery stations, artificial
insemination centres, poultry farms, fur farms.
Seasonal workers, who are mainly employed in cultivating sugar-beet and,
to a certain extent, in horticulture, generally belong to this union. Forestry
1
192
ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 199.
Sweden
workers have their own organisation: the Swedish Forest Workers' Union.1
The Swedish Union of Agricultural Salaried Employees, for its part, brings
together supervisory staff and salaried employees. Share-cropping does not
exist in Sweden. Tenant farmers do not have an organisation of their own;
they join the small-holders' organisations without, however, belonging to the
union.
The union's main task consists in negotiating and reaching, on behalf of
its members, collective agreements on wages, hours of work, and other conditions of employment.
Agreements signed by the union ensure a certain degree of employment
security by establishing rules on dismissal and providing workers with the
possibility of receiving severance benefits should their undertaking have to
restrict its activities or close down.
Agricultural workers enjoy the same rights as other categories of citizens
in the field of social insurance. In the event of sickness or accident, they
receive medical care and a daily allowance. The union has set up an unemployment insurance fund, half the money for which is provided out of public
funds.
At 67, agricultural workers receive an old-age pension which is the
same for everyone and, in addition, a supplementary pension related to the
number of years' service and annual earnings.
The union has taken part in an official survey on the future of agriculture.
One of the important aims of the survey was to study ways of improving the
agrarian structure, which, in Sweden, means creating larger and more rational
holdings.
Although the union today is not directly concerned with laws on tenant
farming—tenant farmers not being among its members—one of its representatives has participated in an official survey on tenant legislation.
In the opinion of the union, Swedish legislation in no way impedes the
activities of occupational associations. Employers have generally accepted
occupational organisations as representating employees' interests. Admittedly
the increasing rationalisation of agriculture and the consequent decline in the
number of agricultural workers has made it difficult in some regions for trade
union activity to be maintained. The local branches of the union may
encounter considerable difficulty in carrying out their activities as a result of
this shrinkage in the agricultural labour force and in their own membership.
As regards joint bodies, mention should be made of the occupational
committees for agriculture and horticulture, comprising representatives of
1
Since no reply to our questionnaire was received from this union, it has been left out
of this survey.
193
Agricultural organisations and development
undertakings, of employers' organisations and of trade unions, which cooperate to facilitate vocational training and recruitment in these branches.
As regards the prevention of accidents and occupational disease in agriculture
and horticulture, a joint body, which deals with the dissemination of information
on safety in agriculture, brings together representatives of employers, workers
and undertakings in these branches. No legislation governs this joint body.
It was set up by the persons directly concerned, who are responsible for its
financing and who decide its activities.
The union considers that the Horticultural Committee has greatly assisted
the training of workers in this sector. As for the Agricultural Committee, it
was set up too recently for the value of its work to be assessed. In any case
the union does valuable work on the body responsible for information on
safety in agriculture. As a direct result of its activity, legislation has been
adopted whereby all tractors must henceforth be provided with a device that
prevents them from turning over and, in particular, with power take-off
guards. Seats to prevent back injuries are being designed for tractor drivers.
A survey on the health of agricultural workers is also to be undertaken in order
to determine what measures can be adopted in this field.
The union is represented on official bodies dealing with safety measures,
immigration and employment questions, information and publicity on agriculture, problems of agricultural techniques, etc. It took part in an official
survey, now completed, on agricultural policy. Furthermore it is represented
on the State Committee on Entailed Property, which aims to eliminate the
system of entailed property, as well as on the State Office for Machine Testing.
Its representatives have the same rights of co-decision as the other members,
which generally implies the right to vote.
As regards achievements in the field of wages, the union points out that
although the wages of agricultural workers have followed the same pattern
as those of other comparable categories, they are still on average approximately
15 per cent lower than those of industrial workers. Job security is provided
partly through collective agreements, which lay down a period of notice and
protect workers against dismissals not based on objective considerations. The
right to work and the possibility of finding employment are largely ensured
by full employment. In addition there is a redeployment programme for
workers who wish to leave agriculture. Under this programme, such workers
receive a subsistence allowance ranging from 40 per cent to 80 per cent of an
industrial worker's wage throughout the period of training, which may vary
from two weeks to two years according to the occupation chosen.1
1
194
For further details, see OECD: Agricultural Policies in 1966, op. cit., p. 480.
Switzerland
Agricultural workers have similar housing to that of other comparable
categories as regards size and standard. The union has done much to persuade
employers to improve the standard of housing of agricultural workers. The
results may be considered satisfactory.
Social security is the same for all wage earners, including agricultural
workers.
Educational opportunities at all levels are the same for agricultural workers
as for other groups. The Swedish Confederation of Trade Unions has two
schools where agricultural workers can study, and the union also organises
courses. These vocational schools lay particular stress on studies of an occupational and economic nature. The Swedish trade union movement has
furthermore instituted a joint training organisation which is very active in
the field of teaching and training. Illiteracy is practically non-existent in
Sweden.
Lastly, following measures taken by the union, rural health has made
considerable progress. As a result of a policy of supervision and encouragement, measures have been taken to improve supplies of drinking-water and
sanitary installations. The health survey mentioned above also comes within
the framework of this activity.
Since 1930 the union has been affiliated to the Swedish Confederation of
Trade Unions, which is a member of the International Confederation of Free
Trade Unions (ICFTU).
Chambers of agriculture
Until 1 July 1967, Sweden had 25 chambers of agriculture, some of which
were founded about 150 years ago. It was decided on this date to abolish
them and to transfer their activities to the County Agricultural Boards, which
are governmental bodies. The chambers of agriculture have consequently
been left out of the present survey.
Switzerland
Swiss agriculture, in which small and medium-sized holdings predominate,
presents an unusual characteristic in that, its agricultural working class being
very small, it plays only a minor role in the country's socio-economic structure.
As was pointed out in a study published in 1967,
An examination of the agricultural land holding system in Switzerland reveals that
small-holders farm their own land in almost half the total number of farming enterprises, that furthennore 14 per cent rent less than 20 per cent of their land to other
195
Agricultural organisations and development
persons, that 12 per cent rent out from 20 to 50 per cent, and 18 percent more than
50 per cent. Farms worked on a co-ownership basis represent 5 per cent of the
total number, those on a usufruct basis 1 per cent, and those run by farm managers
1 per cent. The dominant element in Switzerland's agriculture is definitely the
small-holding.1
The small-holdings have followed the consolidation process seen in neighbouring countries; whereas in 1905 only 10 per cent of farms had 37 or more
acres, this figure now represents the area of the average farm. This process
has been particularly marked during the last ten years. In 1965, there were
162,244 farms, as against 205,997 in 1955, i.e. a drop of 43,753 or 21.24 per
cent. The drift to the towns, encouraged by the period of full employment
that followed the Second World War, contributed to this trend by reducing
the active agricultural population. A census taken in 1960 revealed that
280,000 persons were employed in the primary sector, as against 355,000 ten
years previously.2 As regards the proportion of farmers to employees, in
1964 there were only 23,619 Swiss agricultural wage earners to 170,000 farmers
(male farmers and male family workers). It is true that Switzerland uses
foreign workers to fill the seasonal labour gap, but only to a small extent;
in 1964 the average number of foreign workers was only 6,204.3
Perhaps because they were so few, Swiss agricultural wage earners took
a long time to organise. In 1920 there were more than 96,000 farm servants
and day-labourers but, according to the reply of the Swiss Federation of Trade
Unions to a survey carried out by the ILO a few years later, no attempt had
been made to form an organisation.4 In 1966, when there remained only
between 19,000 and 20,000, a certain number of them joined a small recently
created union, the Central Union of Farm Servants and Agricultural Workers;
but the activities of this union are on too small a scale for us to consider them
in this survey.
As we shall see below, it is the powerful Swiss Peasants' Union that in all
respects constitutes the backbone of Swiss agriculture, since it covers the entire
1
La situation économique de la Suisse, Part Two: L'agriculture en Suisse, Notes et
études documentaires No. 2313 (Paris, 27 July 1957), p. 6.
2
OECD: Manpower Statistics, 1950-62 (Paris, 1963), p. 106. By 1969 the active agricultural population had dropped to 170,000 (7 per cent of the total active population). The
number of farms had fallen to 150,000, less than two-thirds of which provided the farmer's
main source of income.
8
The vast majority of foreign workers merely supplement the labour force in seasonal
work. According to the latest figures of the Federal Office for Industry and Labour, in
Berne, there were 15,688 foreign workers in August 1966 whereas in February of the same
year there had been only 7,660.
4
196
ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 202.
Switzerland
range of activities which in other countries are usually divided between general,
employers' and workers' organisations.
• Swiss Peasants' Union
In conformity with the federal structure of the country, the organisations
representing the various sectors of the agricultural economy (stock-breeding,
co-operatives, viticulture, agricultural credit, etc.) are grouped in what may
be called employers' associations (that is to say, organisations subject to
private law, legally andfinanciallyindependent of the authorities and responsible for defending the material interests of their members) at two different
levels: (a) at the national level: the Swiss Peasants' Union (USP); (b) at the
cantonal level: the Cantonal Peasants' Unions (also known as chambers of
agriculture or agricultural societies).
The term "employers' association" in Switzerland must therefore be
interpreted in a very wide sense since there are no agricultural associations
dealing exclusively with problems concerning employment relations. These
feature, together with many other problems that are often more important,
on the programme of activities of the Swiss Peasants' Union and of the Cantonal
Peasants' Unions.
Founded on 7 June 1897, the Swiss Peasants' Union had 66 branches and
594,000 members in 1960. It operates on such a vast scale that it may be
considered both as a general organisation and as an employers' association
proper. Its branches fall into five main categories, the scope of which we
shall briefly describe here.1
1. The principal agricultural societies. These are largely devoted to the
study of agricultural problems and to agricultural advisory work and represent
the general interests of farmers, vis-à-vis the competent authorities. Apart
from the Genevese Chamber of Agriculture, which was founded in 1921 and
groups the cantonal organisations for production, marketing, credit and insurance, etc., seven "principal societies" 2 are members of the Swiss Peasants'
Union :
— Swiss Agricultural Society of Zürich, founded in 1863 (approximately
125,000 members in 1963) which groups the German-speaking cantonal
societies and a certain number of specialised associations;
x
For further details, see Jean Meynaud: Les organisations professionnelles en Suisse
(Lausanne, 1963), pp. 69-97.
2
According to Jean Meynaud (op. cit., p. 74) "the term 'principal society' originated in
federal legislation (Federal Order of 27 June 1884 and the Act of 22 December 1893) which
provided that annual subsidies could be granted to the principal agricultural societies and
empowered the executive authorities to draw up a list of these associations according to
197
Agricultural organisations and development
— Federation of Agricultural Societies of French-Speaking Switzerland, in
Lausanne, founded in 1881 (approximately 30,000 members); in addition
to the cantonal societies, the federation was joined in 1959 by the Vaud
Chamber of Agriculture which, as a result of this membership, also belongs
to the Swiss Peasants' Union ;
— Union of Ticino Peasants, at Bellinzona;
— Swiss Society for Alpine Economy, in Berne;
— Federation of Swiss-German Horticultural Societies, in Berne ;
— Federation of Horticultural Societies of French-Speaking Switzerland, at
Marcelin-sur-Morges ;
— Union of Swiss Farmers' Wives, at Brugg.
2. The federations of co-operative purchasing and marketing societies. In
Switzerland there are more than 1,000 co-operatives or agricultural associations,
with a membership of approximately 100,000 in 1960. These originated in
the nineteenth century, between 1860 and 1870, but their real development
took place during the twentieth century. They started off as purchasing
co-operatives, concentrating on buying chemical fertiliser and fodder concentrates but subsequently turned towards the joint sale of their members'
produce1, a trend also observed in France, where the first unions were organised
on the lines of purchasing co-operatives.2 Most of the Swiss organisations are
grouped in six regional federations (Winterthur, Berne, Lucerne, Solothurn,
St. Gallen, Lausanne), which act as central purchasing bodies for their members
and process their products. These six federations are members of the Swiss
Peasants' Union.
3. The federations of stock-breeders' associations. In Switzerland stockbreeding control goes back to 1806, when the Berne Government instituted
the first herd-book of Simmental cattle and organised a cattle show at which
it awarded prizes. It was, however, not until the end of the century that the
present federations controlling the various breeds of cattle were founded:
that for cattle with red markings, in 1891; for cattle with red markings in
eastern Switzerland, in 1898; for cattle with black markings, in 1889; for
Brown Swiss cattle, in 1897; and for Herens cattle, in 1916. These federations
are mainly concerned with keeping herd-books, keeping check of dairy productivity, epizootic control and preventive vaccination, the purchase of breedseveral criteria (difference of language, purpose and sphere of activity). The Swiss Peasants'
Union had not yet been founded and the Confederation, which wished to avoid scattering its
resources too widely, decided to concentrate on the most representative associations."
1
For the origins of the first agricultural consumer co-operatives, see Marcel Boson:
COOP en Suisse (Basle, 1965), pp. 167-171 and passim.
2
Sir John Clapham: The Economic Development of France and Germany 1815-1914,
(Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1921), p. 186.
198
Switzerland
ing bulls and, in general, the co-ordination of technical, sanitary and economic
measures in respect of Swiss stock-breeding. According to the census carried
out in 1953-54, there were at that time 1,893 local associations grouping 70,500
members and belonging to the above-mentioned federations, the first four
of which are all members of the Swiss Peasants' Union.1
Apart from these big federations, the Swiss Peasants' Union also includes
among its members the Swiss Draught-Horse Breeders' Federation, set up in
1909, and the Swiss Federation of Poultry Farmers.
4. The federations of milk producers. Early in the nineteenth century the
milk producers felt the need for a certain degree of independence from those
who actually sold the milk or turned it into cheese. They therefore formed
a number of local societies to protect their produce. The number of these
societies rose from a few hundred prior to 1850 to approximately 5,000 at the
beginning of the Second World War.
In recent years, more than 4,500 local societies, grouped in 15 federations,
were members both of the Swiss Peasants' Union and of the Central Milk
Producers' Union, representing more than 95 per cent of the milk sold on the
market.
As Jean Meynaud points out, although the central union is not
strictly speaking a member of the SPU, the two organisations are on common
ground as concerns their claims on behalf of the milk producers to such an
extent that, until recently, when milk prices were being discussed, the head
of the Federal Department of Public Economy used to receive a delegation
of representatives of the Swiss Peasants' Union and of the Central Milk
Producers' Union.2
5. Apart from the federations mentioned above, the Swiss Peasants' Union
includes a large number of federations at national or cantonal level which
represent the most varied interests of Swiss agriculture; for example the Swiss
Federation of Tobacco Planters' Associations, the Swiss Union of Market
Gardeners and the Vine-Growers' Federation of French-Speaking Switzerland.
As a result of this diversified structure, the SPU has become the focal point
of the social and economic aspirations of the entire farming community of the
country. Its role as the representative of the Swiss farmers vis-à-vis the
authorities is consequently of great importance. As a body defending farmers'
interests, the activities it carries out in co-operation with the authorities have
a double objective:
1
For further details, see L'agriculture en Suisse, op. cit., pp. 11-13.
Meynaud, op. cit., pp. 79-80. Professor Meynaud nevertheless points out that the
practice was discontinued in 1962 since the head of the federal department considered
that as the Central Milk Producers' Union was for all practical purposes a member of the
Swiss Peasants' Union, the discussions should take place only with the leaders of the latter
organisation.
s
199
Agricultural organisations and development
(a) Price maintenance for agricultural products. Since agricultural legislation embodies the principle of parity of income between farming and comparable occupations, it goes without saying that the price maintenance policy
(as well as technical measures designed to make farms more profitable) plays
an important part in giving this principle the necessary support. During
recent years the Swiss Peasants' Union has concentrated much effort on securing
price increases. Its action in thisfield(direct action at the level of the administration, or indirect action through Parliament) is always based on objective
criteria (agricultural accounts). In general, price increases, combined with
measures designed to cut production costs, have enabled a number of farmers
to improve their income to a considerable extent.
(b) The fixing of production targets and of general agricultural policy, in
collaboration with official bodies. There is close co-operation in this field,
for the Swiss Peasants' Union is represented on a number of advisory committees and in particular on the Standing Advisory Committee for the Application of the Agriculture Act, which gives its opinion beforehand on agricultural questions connected with the national economy and on measures likely
to facilitate the marketing of the country's produce and to adapt production
to needs.
In its capacity as employers' representative, the Swiss Peasants' Union
deals with problems concerning national and foreign labour. With regard to
the Swiss labour force, it does not intervene in negotiations on wages and
conditions of work, since conditions of employment are laid down in
standard cantonal contracts of employment and it is the cantonal chambers of
agriculture, acting on behalf of the employers, which are responsible for their
negotiation.
Nevertheless, it should be mentioned that in a large number of cantons
agricultural wages are established according to the law of supply and demand,
failing specific conditions in the standard contracts. In this case, the conditions
fixed by agreement for foreign workers, from Spain in particular, tend to apply
also to Swiss labour. In any case, because of the manpower shortage, and
particularly in the industrialised regions, the actual wages paid frequently
exceed contractual rates.
Although the Swiss Peasants' Union no longer deals with this aspect of
relations between employers and workers, it helped to set up the federal
family allowances scheme for small farmers and agricultural wage earners
(including foreigners). Following action by the SPU, this scheme has been
reviewed several times with a view to an increase in benefits. Furthermore,
the SPU has set up an institution to provide material assistance to agricultural
workers who wish to get married but do not have the means to buy a wedding
trousseau or furniture.
200
United Kingdom
As regards the recruiting of foreign labour, conditions of employment—
particularly for Spanish and Portuguese workers—are negotiated by the SPU
with the official emigration agencies of the countries in question.
At the national level, the Swiss Peasants' Union and the Central Union of
Farm Servants and Agricultural Workers have set up a joint committee dealing
mainly with problems such as the social insurance scheme and legislation on
employment contracts, which come under federal law. The policy of the
Swiss Peasants' Union aims at adapting the legislation on social insurance in
such a way as to provide the rural population (particularly in mountain areas)
with benefits that take account of their difficult economic situation.
With regard to the social advancement of the agricultural community, the
Swiss Peasants' Union and its branches, such as the Swiss Association of
Mountain Farmers, have helped to secure the adoption, by the Federal
Chambers, of legislation enabling the Swiss Confederation to grant
interest-free subsidies and loans to farmers wishing to improve their housing
conditions.
Lastly, and with the same aim in view, the Swiss Peasants' Union insists
that consideration be paid to the situation of the agricultural population,
particularly in mountain areas, in the fixing of railway fares (subsidies to
enable private railways to lower their fares, season tickets for school children,
special rates for the transport of agricultural produce, etc.).
As regards other activities such as vocational training and recreational
activities, the Swiss Peasants' Union points out that the former is the sole
responsibility of the authorities. The agricultural organisations are nevertheless consulted on the content of training programmes. As regards recreational activities, the SPU includes among its branches the Association of Swiss
Rural Youth Clubs, which is responsible for the activities of the rural youth
clubs and organises various events.
Since the Swiss Peasants' Union is the only central agricultural organisation
in Switzerland it is not a member of any national federation or confederation.
At the international level it is a member of the European Confederation of
Agriculture (ECA) and of the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
United Kingdom
General organisations
Apart from the National Farmers' Union, which is considered below
among the employers' organisations, two societies deserve mention in view
of their past or present activities in promoting farming interests.
201
Agricultural organisations and development
The oldest, if not the most important, society is the Royal Highland and
Agricultural Society of Scotland, founded in 1784, which played an active
part in improving the social aspect of Scottish agriculture during the first
fifty years of its existence. Since then it has concentrated mainly on agricultural education and on agriculture proper.
The second organisation of this kind, the Royal Agricultural Society of
England, was founded in 1839 as a non-political independent institution in
order to encourage scientists to improve agricultural implements and to find
the best way of farming the land and of raising livestock. The motto of the
RAS is "Practice with Science" and since 1839 it has organised the annual
Royal Show of agricultural machinery and implements and selected cattle
in various parts of the country, including demonstrations of the latest technical
innovations in farming. Since 1963 the Royal Show has become a permanent
institution at Stoneleigh Abbey, Kenilworth (Warwickshire), where it is known
as the National Agricultural Centre.
In addition to maintaining a system of grants, whereby it encourages
agricultural and veterinary research and new inventions, the Royal Agricultural
Society deals actively with the vocational training of farmers. For this
purpose, in co-operation with the Royal Highland and Agricultural Society
of Scotland, it directs studies leading to the National Diploma in Agriculture ;
similarly, in co-operation with the Royal Association of British Dairy Farmers,
it organises courses in dairy farming and awards the National Diploma in
Dairying.
The RAS ensures that farmers keep abreast of developments by publishing
an annual review devoted to agricultural projects and a highly reputed work,
Elements of Agriculture, which was initially written in the nineteenth century
by Dr. William Fream and has subsequently run through 14 editions in the
last 70 years.
Like many British institutions, these societies have a role of their own,
half-academic, half-practical, for which there is no exact equivalent on the
continent. They are a mixture of agricultural shows, teaching establishments
and traditional scientific institutions, reflecting the empirical approach for
which the English are famous. Although inimitable in some ways, they
might well serve as a model for similar organisations in the English-speaking
developing countries.
Employers' organisations
There are three large employers' organisations in the United Kingdom:
the National Farmers' Union of England and Wales (NFU); the National
Farmers' Union of Scotland (NFUS); and the Ulster Farmers' Union (UFU).
202
United Kingdom
• National Farmers' Union of England and Wales
This body, which is the most important of the three employers' organisations, was created in 1908. It is made up solely of active farm owners and
tenant farmers, share-cropping being unknown in the United Kingdom. Its
main activities include the negotiation of wages, hours of work and general
conditions of employment with the unions of agricultural workers. These
negotiations take place on the Statutory Agricultural Wages Board which also
includes a certain number of members appointed by the Ministry of Agriculture.1
The NFU is consulted by the Government each year on all matters pertaining to agriculture, including production policy and price fixing. Together
with the other employers' organisations, it thus plays a very important role
in the field of agricultural policy; the union itself considers that it is sufficiently
important for its demands and opinions to constitute one of the main factors
taken into account by the Government in establishing its policy.
The NFU expresses its satisfaction as regards direct relations with the agricultural workers' unions, and specifies that the negotiations cover a whole series
or problems concerning policy and conditions of work which are outside the
sphere of the Agricultural Wages Board. With regard to some of these
questions—such as piece rates—bargaining tends to take place locally rather
than at the national level.
Normally, questions concerning rural social development are not dealt
with by the NFU. Since schooling and health are taken care of by the State,
and housing is a matter settled by private firms or local authorities, the union
has no cause to deal with them (any more than it deals with leisure activities,
which in the United Kingdom are as varied as they are numerous, at all levels
of society).
On the other hand, the NFU plays an active part in agricultural vocational
training. It launched the National Agricultural Apprenticeship Scheme in
which, in some parts of the country, 20 to 25 per cent of young people going
into farming take part. The union was also instrumental in creating the
Statutory Agricultural Training Board. Its advisory role also enables it to
have a say in the planning of the technical training courses of a network of
agricultural institutions.
1
In England and Wales, wage fixing by joint committees goes back to 1924, when the
Agricultural Wages (Regulation) Act was promulgated, setting up wage committees in each
county and a central board to co-ordinate the activities. These bodies, whose role was
either to fix a flat minimum rate or different rates for the various categories of workers, were
already made up of an equal number of employers and workers, together with a certain number
of outside members appointed by the Ministry of Agriculture. They achieved the same
purpose as collective agreements elsewhere. See ILO: Social Problems in Agriculture,
Studies and Reports, Series K (Agriculture), No. 14 (Geneva, 1938), p. 80.
203
Agricultural organisations and development
The National Farmers' Union is a member of the Confederation of British
Industry and, through the latter, of the International Organisation of Employers. Furthermore it is a founder-member of the International Federation of
Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
• National Farmers' Union of Scotland
Trade unionism in Scottish agriculture goes back to 1886, when the
Ploughmen's Federal Union of Scotland was founded. This union had
branches in most counties but lasted only a decade, until 1896. Not until
1913 was the National Farmers' Union of Scotland created, one year after
the organisation of farm and domestic workers in the Scottish Farm Union.
At the regional level, the National Farmers' Union of Scotland plays a
similar part to that of the National Farmers' Union as regards wages, prices
and vocational training. Wage bargaining takes place on the Scottish Agricultural Wages Board, made up of six members of the NFUS, six workers'
representatives, four outside members and a chairman appointed by the
Government. Unlike the attitude adopted in England and Wales by the
agricultural organisations when the 1924 Act respecting wage committees
was promulgated, Scottish workers were for a long time against this type of
institution because they considered that direct bargaining with the employers'
association would secure them better wages. Nevertheless, when experience
failed to substantiate this expectation, they finally sought government intervention and in July 1937 the Agricultural Wages (Regulations) (Scotland)
Act was passed, modelled largely on the provisions of the English system.
The present board fixes minimum wage rates which largely represent what
the poorest farmer pays to the least efficient worker. In fact, the level of
real wages is considerably higher than the minimum fixed by the board.
In the field of prices, the union represents Scottish agriculture when, in
February each year, the Government makes its Annual Review in order to
fix the guaranteed prices of products and to establish measures of agricultural
support. Since the union has an advisory role, it is impossible to determine—
any more than it was for the NFU—the extent to which it influences the
Government's attitude. Nevertheless the union itself states that since these
consultations began, its opinions have carried considerable weight with the
Government. Moreover, apart from the Annual Review, carried out according
to legislation drafted under union influence, the union is always consulted
by the Government on matters of both long-term policy and less important
legislative provisions concerning agriculture and horticulture. Thus, throughout the year and at all levels, the union is in close and constant contact with the
authorities.
204
United Kingdom
The NFUS also represents farmers' interests in the field of vocational
training; through the union, representatives of agricultural employers have
been appointed to the new Industrial Training Board for Agriculture.
The National Farmers' Union of Scotland does not belong to a national
confederation but carries out all its activities in agreement with the other
two large employers' organisations of the United Kingdom. At the international level it is a member of the International Federation of Agricultural
Producers (IFAP).
•
Ulster Farmers' Union
The Ulster Farmers' Union is the most recent of the three United Kingdom
organisations. Set up in 1918, it is the only organisation of agricultural
employers in Northern Ireland.
Like the other two employers' organisations, the UFU plays an active
part in maintaining the income of its members and consequently keeps a close
watch on the prices of agricultural products. In the United Kingdom these
prices are established on the basis of two factors: (a) the price received by the
farmer when selling the product; (b) a State subsidy representing the difference
between the price received and the cost of production, plus the farmer's profit
margin. In this connexion the union maintains a critical attitude, considering
that the working of the present system is debatable in view of the considerable
variations in production costs and market prices. In order to remedy the
situation as far as possible, it intervenes with its partners in the Annual Review
of agricultural problems undertaken by the Government in respect of the
supply, demand and prices of the main products, such as milk, eggs, meat and
certain crops. The union considers, however, that it has not yet succeeded
in convincing the Government that a "cheap food" policy may not be in the
best interests of the country as a whole. The result is that the United Kingdom
tends to be used as a market for world surplus food stocks at prices which
have a detrimental effect on the farmers' incomes. Nevertheless, the union
considers that, together with its partners, it succeeded in influencing the
Government as regards the best way of achieving the objectives which were
laid down for the United Kingdom National Plan.
In these exchanges of views with the authorities, the UFU, like its two
partners, plays a purely advisory role and, like them, tries to win acceptance
for its opinions through Members of Parliament.
As regards negotiations with representatives of agricultural workers,
Northern Ireland, like England and Wales and Scotland, has an Agricultural
Wages Board, set up in 1939, whichfixesminimum rates for the various regions.
The attitude taken by the union at meetings of this board is that workers should
205
Agricultural organisations and development
receive fair pay for reasonable work since it will be increasingly difficult to
find labour in rural areas as a result of the level of wages now offered in
industry.
The UFU is not directly concerned with improving schooling, health or
housing in rural areas; since these matters are covered by public institutions
and the private sector, it confines itself to making recommendations to the
local authorities. On the other hand it is concerned with the education of
future farmers, and provides prizes at agricultural colleges. Finally, in the
field of leisure activities, the union emphasises that initially the meetings it
organised for its members encouraged social contacts in the agricultural
community, particularly in winter, but that this type of activity has become
outdated due to television and the spread of private transport. This seems
to apply generally in all the highly developed countries.
The Ulster Farmers' Union does not belong to any confederation or national
federation. At the international level, it is a member of the International
Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP).
Agricultural workers' unions
As with the employers' organisations, there are three large trade unions
for the whole of the United Kingdom: the National Union of Agricultural
Workers of England and Wales, the Scottish Agricultural and Forestry Section
of the Transport and General Workers' Union; and the Amalgamated Transport and General Workers' Union of Northern Ireland.
•
National Union of Agricultural Workers of England and Wales
The National Union of Agricultural Workers was created in 1906 as the
Eastern Counties' Agricultural Labourers' and Rural Workers' Union. In
1912 it became the National Agricultural Labourers' and Rural Workers'
Union and finally, in 1920, it took the name by which it is now known. It
now has 135,000 members (in 1925 it had approximately 30,000) but its influence is greater than might be imagined from this figure since the advantages it
secures on the Wages Board cover all workers whether or not they are members
of the union. The vast majority of its members are permanent workers;
there are a few seasonal workers but, as the union emphasises, seasonal
employment and unemployment are not a problem in the United Kingdom.
The NUAW is represented on the national and local committees concerned
with agricultural problems as well as on a certain number of tribunals and
advisory committees. Furthermore, at the time this survey was carried out,
206
United Kingdom
it expected to be represented on the proposed Economic Development Committee for Agriculture. The union considers that its representation carries
more weight than its membership would imply; moreover it is not confined
to a mere advisory role since, when decisions are put to the vote, the union
representative also has the right to vote.
The union plays an active part in the negotiation of collective agreements
on wages and conditions of work in all branches of agricultural activity. It
also deals with unemployment and social security but the latter activities take
place within the framework of claims made by the trade union movement as
a whole rather than at the level of the organisation itself. In thefieldof social
security the agricultural worker has thus acquired parity with the other sectors
of the economy: he pays the same contributions and enjoys the same benefits
as the rest of the working class.
Health, safety and vocational training are three fields in which the union
is particularly active, to such an extent that, although it claims that present
legislation on the matter is the outcome of NU AW action, it is still not satisfied
but on the contrary is seeking to widen the scope of this legislation and ensure
its strict application.
As regards vocational training in particular, the union
forms part of the Social Council and, at the time of the survey, was expecting
to be represented on the new Industrial Training Board for Agriculture.
Furthermore, in agreement with the other organisations, the union is seeking
to bring about improvements of every kind in respect of housing and social
activities for the workers. In 1965, for example, it secured the Government's
amendment of the Act respecting housing for agricultural workers. The
union considers that these workers now enjoy much better housing conditions
than in the past.
Although the NUAW does not intervene directly in the area of land reform
(an area mainly confined to the improvement of uneconomic farms1), it has
long been in favour of public ownership of private holdings, which it considers
the only effective solution to the problem of small uneconomic units. In this
respect it appears that certain measures proposed by the Government reflect
the stand taken by the union; but the latter nevertheless emphasises that its
aims lie rather in changing the whole structure of agriculture than merely in
the redistribution of land ownership.
There is no major obstacle to the union's activities, since all agricultural
workers are covered by the Agricultural Wages Act of 1948 whereby the
present Statutory Agricultural Wages Board was set up. The Board, which is
composed of eight employers' representatives, eight workers' representatives
x
See FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Land Reform,
including Land Settlement, in the United Kingdom, (doc. RU: WLR-C/66/12).
207
Agricultural organisations and development
and five members appointed by the Ministry of Agriculture, deals in particular
with wages, hours of work (including overtime) and public holidays. The
rates it fixes are adopted by a simple majority vote, the role of the Ministry
being confined to appointing its representatives and applying the measures
adopted. It should be noted that there has been legislation on agricultural
wages since 1917 and that, except during the period 1921-23, it has been constantly applied and improved, largely as a result of trade union efforts.
In all other spheres where the union negotiates wages and conditions of
work, the board or committee appointed is a joint voluntary body not bound
by legislative measures, which means that union representatives use the
traditional method of individual pressure to ensure application of the agreements reached.
As regards the results obtained through negotiations, the NUAW stresses
that except during the 1920s it has secured constant improvements in wages,
working hours and conditions of work. Nevertheless the gap between the
agricultural sector and other sectors of the economy is still fairly wide : the
average weekly wage of agricultural workers (£10 10s.) is approximately 70 per
cent of the industrial wage, whereas the 44-hour working week in agriculture
is longer than that in industry by an average of four hours.
Furthermore, although agricultural workers now have four weeks' paid
leave and six days' paid public holidays per year, at the time of this survey
they had not yet secured payment of wages during sick leave and were waiting
for Parliament to approve certain proposals to amend the Agricultural Wages
Act and to commission the Wages Board to introduce the necessary changes.
Lastly, as regards literacy campaigns and workers' education, it is obviously
mainly the second activity which concerns the union since there is very little
illiteracy in Great Britain. The union is an active member of the Workers'
Educational Association; it organises week-end courses and has its own
special schools where agricultural workers can complete the training begun
during their compulsory schooling. In addition it maintains a bursary award
at Ruskin College, Oxford.
The National Union of Agricultural Workers is a member of the Trades
Union Congress and is affiliated to the International Federation of Plantation,
Agricultural and Allied Workers.
•
Scottish Agricultural and Forestry Section,
Transport and General Workers' Union
The Scottish Agricultural and Forestry Section of the Transport and General
Workers' Union, which now numbers 6,000 full-time workers, succeeded the
Scottish Farm Servants' Union, set up in 1912, two years before the First
208
United Kingdom
World War. After an initial period of decline due to the war, its membership
increased from 6,000 in 1916 to 23,000 in 1919, subsequently dropping to
10,000 around 1928, i.e. approximately 15 per cent of agricultural wage earners
at that time. In 1942 it joined the Amalgamated Transport and General
Workers' Union, of which it has become a section. The fact that its membership has returned to the 1916 level in no way implies a loss of influence or
effectiveness but rather reflects the decrease in the agricultural labour force
set in motion by the increasing mechanisation on farms.
The Scottish union plays a similar role to that of the National Union of
Agricultural Workers, described above. Its main activities consist in negotiating (on the basis of a national scale of minimum rates) wages, hours of work,
overtime and conditions of work in general. These negotiations take place
on the Statutory Agricultural Wages Board, the composition of which has
already been described in the section on employers. Outside this official
body, the union maintains that it plays a more or less advisory role on a certain
number of joint committees. Furthermore, it is empowered to inspect its
members' accommodation and to report to the Ministry of Housing when
standards do not comply with those laid down by law. The union also looks
after workers' education and organises courses for its members.
Through its negotiations, the union has succeeded in vastly improving
the lot of Scottish agricultural workers. Whereas, in reply to a survey carried
out in 1928, the union stated that the principal disadvantages of the life of
the Scottish agricultural worker were long hours and the absence of leisure
rather than low wages (the union was then fighting for Saturday afternoons
off)1, today it reports no obstacle of this kind but states, on the contrary,
that it has secured appUcation of minimum wage rates as well as improvements
in working hours and general conditions of employment.
The Scottish Agricultural and Forestry Section is not affiliated to any other
body apart from the Transport and General Workers' Union.
•
The Amalgamated Transport and General Workers'
Union of Northern Ireland
The Amalgamated Transport and General Workers' Union of Northern
Ireland, which dates from 1922 and on which we have Utile information, has
approximately 2,000 agricultural workers, most of whom are permanent. It
plays a similar part to that of the other two organisations considered above,
its main activities being collective bargaining on wages, hours of work and
1
See ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, op. cit., pp. 146-
151.
209
Agricultural organisations and development
general conditions of work on the Agricultural Wages Board mentioned above.
The union considers that this board works quite well in so far as it guarantees
minimum wages to all agricultural workers. The union is moreover satisfied
at having brought about the application in Ulster of all wage increases granted
in Great Britain, whilst nevertheless pointing out that there is still a longstanding gap which it has not yet been able to bridge completely.
Apart from the apathy of the workers which the union considers the
biggest obstacle to its development, no other factor impedes its activities.
The Amalgamated Transport and General Workers' Union of Northern
Ireland has been a member of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions since 1922
but is not affiliated to any other national or international body.
EASTERN EUROPE
Bulgaria
Unlike other countries in Eastern Europe where one of the main reasons
for collectivisation along socialist lines was the concentration of landed property in the hands of a few owners, Bulgaria—a country of small and mediumsized landowners prior to the Second World War—threw itself wholeheartedly
into collectivisation as being the answer to the excessive fragmentation of agriculture, which was to boot overcrowded, short of capital, heavily in debt*
and, above all, a prey to generalised underemployment. This situation was
due, inter alia, to the fact that the area of arable land had increased by only
10 per cent in the 70 years following the fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1878,
whereas the population had more than doubled. This was so notwithstanding
the redistribution of the land from the former domains of the Turks, who had
occupied Bulgaria for five centuries. As a result, in 1946, 44.2 per cent of
holdings did not exceed 7.5 acres, and the fragmentation had been carried to
such lengths that the number of holdings of all categories (i.e. from under
7.5 acres up to 125 acres and over) had risen from 7,982,000 in 1897 to 11,936,000
in 1946, the average size of a holding being between 1.25 and 0.8 acres.2
This was then the situation on the morrow of the Second World War,
when the ratio of agricultural production to industrial production was 3 to 1.
1
Around 1935 the peasant population of Bulgaria was in debt to the tune of 6,000 million
leva at the then prevailing rate of exchange. The average amount owed by each farming
family was 8,500 leva, and the interest rate on loans varied from 50 to 200 per cent. See
K. Kiriakov et al. : La réorganisation socialiste de l'économie rurale en République populaire
de Bulgarie (Sofia, 1965), p. 6.
* ibid., pp. 8-9.
210
Bulgaria
The new régime which came to power in September 1944 was accordingly
faced with the urgent necessity of reorganising the country's agriculture from
top to bottom, and theoretically there were two ways in which it could do so.
One was to collectivise a minimum amount of land, as was being done in
Poland, for example, leaving the majority of farms to carry on individually,
with or without State aid; the other—which the country adopted—consisted
in introducing collective cultivation along lines very similar to those of the
Soviet kolkhoz, supplementing this system by the establishment of State
farms and pools of machinery and tractors.
The choice of the first alternative would have been difficult for several
obvious reasons, and above all because, under a system of private ownership,
the microscopic size of the majority of the holdings and the disintegration of
the land into a plethora of uneconomic plots made it impossible to industrialise
agriculture without wastage on a scale which in any case the country was not
in a position to stand. In 1934 some 550,000 wooden swing-ploughs were
still in use on Bulgarian farm holdings, as against only 53,000 iron ploughs 1
and 3,500 tractors. Moreover, by the end of the Second World War the
agricultural population had been practically ruined on account of the deliveries
made to the Germans; to mention just one figure, the number of sheep had
dropped by 3 million, or by one-third as compared with 1939. Finally, it
was necessary at all costs to help the rural sector to emerge from a state of
economic and social backwardness of which a fairly accurate idea can be
gained from the conclusions of a survey carried out in 1935-36 upon a sample
group of 1,420 families:
The conditions in which a farmer's family has to live are hardly to be envied. An
average family of six has to make do with one or two bedrooms, but there are families
of nine all living in one room. . . . There are not enough beds or bedclothes: 11.22
per cent of these families sleep on the floor. Only 43.58 per cent have a kitchen,
woefully ill-equipped and more often than not with no sink or running water... .a
All this explains why, as early as September 1944, the Bulgarian Government decided to proceed by stages towards a drastic reform of agriculture.
During the first stage, under the Agrarian Reform Act of 9 April 1946, it
1
See Bernard Kayser: La population et l'économie de la République populaire bulgare,
Notes et études documentaires, No. 2787 (Paris, 12 June 1961), p. 24; Kiriakov, op. cit., p. 9.
a
Kiriakov, op. cit., p. 12. The conclusions of this survey may be compared with those
of another carried out before the war in Hungary by Zoltan Ronai, during which an agricultural labourer told him that his main aspiration was to have three meals a day. See M. Cepede
and M. Lengellé: Economie alimentaire du globe (Paris, Librairie de Médicis, 1953), p. 53.
Anybody who fails to take into account this situation—all too frequent, alas, in the Eastern
European countries—can never hope to understand fully the social and economic evolution
of these countries from 1945 onwards.
211
Agricultural organisations and development
carried out a reform of ownership, limiting it to 50 acres (75 in the cerealgrowing region of South Dobroja) and confiscating the surplus land owned
by the few large landowners the country had; in fact only 150,000 acres were
involved, which were added to the landed property owned by the State. The
State thus had at its disposal 750,000 acres, 300,000 of which were distributed
to poor peasants while 400,000 were allotted to the new State farms. In
addition 1.5 million acres of grazing land and meadows were distributed by
the Government to co-operative farms.
The development of these institutions, which differ from the Soviet kolkhoz
in that the land remains the private property of the co-operators, has been
made much easier in Bulgaria by the ancient community traditions of the
peasantry. An example is the zadruga (patriarchal commune), which involved
either the farming of land jointly and indivisibly owned by the community
under the direction of a domakin (chief, elected as a rule from a family with
many branches) ; or the joint raising of flocks of sheep by shepherds.1 Furthermore, attempts were made by peasants as early as the end of the nineteenth
century—without any aid or encouragement from the State—to organise
co-operative farms; their first attempts, at Kochevo in 1899 and later in various
villages in 1921-25, failed for lack of outside help. Nevertheless, in 1940
there existed ten co-operative farms, and despite the difficulties due to the war
their number had risen to 28 by 9 September 1944.
Their development since that date—this time along socialist lines—reflects
the various phases of the Government's policy. In January 1945 George
Dimitrov proclaimed that co-operative tilling of the land had to be organised
in such a way as to provide all the conditions indispensable for the development
of such a form of co-operation.2 These conditions may be summarised as
follows: voluntary membership of the co-operative for peasants; voluntary
collective ownership of production inputs and collective management of the
land, anything contributed by the peasants themselves remaining their own
private property; continuous building-up of the farms' reserves and floating
capital; annual distribution of income in proportion to the labour furnished
and the results achieved by each co-operator; possibility for each co-operator
to have a plot of land and a few head of livestock of his own.
The development of co-operative farms has progressed through the following four stages, as summarised by K. Kiriakov:
The first stage lasted from 9 September 1944 to 1950. Most of the co-operative
farms established were small ones and they attracted the small landowners. The
1
Concerning the organisation of the Bulgarian zadruga. see I. E. Geshov: "Zadrugata
v Zapadna Balgarya rrhe zadruga in western Bulgaria]", Periodichesko Spisanie (Sofia),
Vol. XXI-XXII, 1887, pp. 426-449.
2
Quoted by Kayser, op. cit., p. 25.
212
Bulgaria
larger farmers hesitated, mulling it over, weighing up the pros and cons of collective
farming. The pace of collectivisation during this stage went as follows: 110 cooperative farms were founded before the end of 1944; by the beginning of 1947
their number had risen to 438, covering 44,188 families and 465,000 acres of collectively owned land; by the beginning of 1950 the number of co-operative farms had
reached 1,633, with 175,000 families of peasant co-operators and more than
1.5 million acres of collectively owned land.
The second stage covered the years 1950-56. At the outset it was marked by
collectivisation on a vast scale. The farmers with medium-size holdings in the
plains flocked to join the farms. In 1953 or thereabouts the number of farms was
2,747; their membership accounted for 569,000 families and their land was estimated
at 6.25 million acres, representing 52.3 per cent of the country's farmers and 60.5
per cent of the land under cultivation.
The third stage began in 1956 and was marked by a fresh upsurge. Attempts to
offer material incentives to co-operative farms and their members to increase their
output were largely instrumental in this: the purchase prices of the main items of
agricultural produce were raised, compulsory deliveries of agricultural produce and
payments in kind to the machinery and tractor pools were replaced by purchases
on the basis of a signed contract; retirement pensions were granted to farm cooperative members, etc. All this enabled collectivisation to be completed in 1958.
The fourth stage in the development of the co-operative system began in 1959
with a reshaping of the co-operative farms. Large co-operative estates were created
which occupied an average of 10,000 acres. This redistribution of co-operative land
enabled the farms to add to and improve upon their material and technical equipment,
to specialise, and to concentrate their production. This led to an increase in the
output and the income of co-operators.1
At the end of 1961, according to data published by Bocho Iliev, there
were 945 co-operative farms in Bulgaria farming 11,913,700 acres, or an
average of roughly 12,600 acres per farm, and employing 1,255,000 peasant
families (4,677,000 persons).2
Thus, by making land available to the people, rationalising the work and
organisating a collective effort, Bulgarian agriculture was able to derive the
maximum benefit from its human and technical resources and raise its output
to double the pre-war figure.
Lastly, it should be noted that the management of the co-operative farms
and the short- and long-term planning of their production are handled by the
co-operators themselves, whose general meeting constitutes the supreme
authority "in sole and full charge of the co-operative farming operations".
The general meeting appoints the chairman and the managing council of the
farm, fixes the number of administrative employees and their remuneration,
decides upon the admission of new members and assesses the initial contributions they should make and the rent to be paid them for the land they place
at the disposal of the farm, and approves the production plans drawn up by
1
Kiriakov, op. cit., pp. 29-30.
* See Bocho Iliev: Management Organisation and Labour Payment in Co-operative Farms
(Sofia, 1963), p. 7.
213
Agricultural organisations and development
the managing council. The State intervenes only in an advisory capacity by
supplying the farms with information on the marketing of their produce.
Apart from the co-operative farms, the agricultural structure provides for
machinery and tractor pools arid State farms. The machinery and tractor
pools are responsible for the care and maintenance of the mechanical inputs
placed at the disposal of the co-operative farms, to which they detach brigades
of tractor drivers with all the equipment necessary for farming operations.
In addition, since they are run by the State, they act as intermediaries between
the State and the co-operative farms in all matters connected with any financial,
technical or administrative assistance they might need. The State farms, for
their part, play a pilot role in Bulgarian agriculture, their task consisting not
only in producing top-quality seed and seedlings and pure-bred livestock but
also in trying out new farming techniques. In 1963 there were 85 State farms
in Bulgaria covering a total of 8,745,000 acres and employing 106,000 agricultural labourers and technicians.
• Union of Workers in the Rural Economy
The employees of all three types of organisations belong to a single trade
union of which all wage earners, salaried employees, specialists and managerial
staff in agriculture are members.
This union was founded in 1919 under the name of the Federation of
Wine-Growing, Horticultural and Forestry Workers. In 1944 the federation
became the Union of Agricultural and Forestry Workers, which in its turn
became the Union of Workers in the Rural Economy in 1964. In 1966 the
union had a membership of more than 350,000, more than 327,000 of whom
were paid-up members. Nevertheless, its influence extends far beyond its
paid-up members, since bodies appointed by the union are responsible for
occupational safety and health on co-operative farms and for the education
of the co-operators.
While the bulk of the union's membership consists of permanent employees,
its members also include a substantial number of casual and seasonal workers
employed mainly on work performed with animal traction equipment in the
fields. There are no tenant farmers or share-croppers in Bulgaria.
The union's main activity consists in playing an active part in the country's
political and social life as well as in its economic and cultural development.
It helps to draft standard-setting provisions concerning occupational safety,
living conditions and rest periods for workers, co-operators and salaried
employees, and ensures that they are enforced. It participates in the planning
of projects relating to the rural economy and takes measures with a view to
their implementation. It also assists the planners of the rural economy with
214
Bulgaria
the development and introduction of technological innovations designed to
place Bulgarian agriculture on a par with that of the rest of the world.
In this way it contributes towards the steady rise in the incomes of the
farms and of the workers themselves, keeps a check on occupational safety
and social insurance and helps to simplify the administrative work of agricultural enterprises in general.
Each year the union committees and the rural economic planners conclude
collective labour agreements setting forth the obligations of both parties in
regard to increasing output, occupational safety, social and cultural progress,
physical training, etc. The union also helps to improve the workers' housing
conditions, assists with the education of their children by running kindergartens
and study rooms, and organises cultural recreational activities for a great
many of its members and their children.
In the union's view no obstacle hinders its development. Nevertheless,
there are a few outstanding problems that have not yet been resolved, such as
that of unemployed seasonal workers, which the union proposes to tackle by
comparing Bulgaria's experiences with those of other countries. Apart from
this problem of the seasonal unemployment of part of the agricultural labour
force, which is not yet settled, Bulgaria has succeeded in vanquishing the
social and economic evils of the past—illiteracy, residual unemployment among
small farmers—and today the average standard of living in rural areas ensures
a normal existence for all workers. Furthermore, plots of land are granted
to employees of State farms and co-operative farms for their own use. These
plots, which may be said to constitute a form of auxiliary farming within a
system of collective farming, accounted in 1962 for 8.8 per cent of the arable
land and 20 per cent of the family income of co-operators. Their owners use
them not only to grow extra vegetables and fruit (partly for consumption by
their families and partly for sale) but also to breed stock, which, in 1963,
still constituted a sizeable proportion of the country's total livestock: 28.8 per
cent of the cows, 19.5 per cent of the pigs and 30 per cent of the sheep. Overall, the animal production from these supplementary plots amounted to 31 per
cent of the country's total production in 1963.1
Under the system of socialist democracy and under the Labour Code in
force in Bulgaria, all matters pertaining to wage earners and salaried employees are discussed and settled by agreement between the unions and the Government-appointed managerial staff, who are the "employers".
There are also other organisations which operate among rural workers,
such as the Patriotic Front, the Communist Youth Federation, the Scientific
1
Kiriakov, op. cit., p. 60.
215
Agricultural organisations and development
Technical Federation, the Readers' Federation, and physical training and sports
societies, with which the union often works to implement measures of a social
nature. Such activities are undertaken mainly on the initiative of the union.
The Union of Workers in the Rural Economy is officially represented at
the Ministry of Agriculture, its president and the secretary of its central
committee being members respectively of the Collective Directorate (Collegium)
of the Ministry and the State Farms Council, the most important body in the
country. The union's representatives have a real say in the decisions of these
bodies, since unanimity is required for decisions on all issues.
The union considers that it has achieved results in the following respects:
— The average wages of agricultural workers are at present higher than those
of workers in light industry and other branches of the national economy.
Furthermore, a daily minimum is guaranteed to labourers and technicians
on farms.
— In certain areas of the country, thanks to the development of tobacco,
vegetable and perennial crop growing, and thanks to the establishment of
peripheral undertakings, it has been found possible to provide employment
throughout the year for a large proportion of the seasonal workers.
— For the construction of housing for agricultural workers, the State makes
land available free of charge and extends long-term loans, as well as paying a
cash subsidy for the construction of private dwellings. The face of the
Bulgarian countryside has been drastically changed, and today the peasants
live in decently furnished modern homes. Nearly 600,000 new houses have
been built in the space of twenty years.
— Union members are insured against sickness, accidents and old age, like
all wage earners and salaried employees; they draw pensions (which
increased ninefold between 1956 and 1962) and family allowances, and are
granted assistance in the event of a birth or an illness in the family. The
age of entitlement to an old-age pension is 60 years for men and 55 for
women.
— All wage earners and salaried employees receive free education and may
attend advanced vocational training courses.
— Illiteracy has been eradicated.
— Rural hygiene has improved considerably thanks to the creation of the
State farms. In the place of the old farmyards crowded with livestock and
equipment there stand today modern buildings with gardens, fruit trees
and flowers. In addition, all the villages have at their disposal today the
hygiene and medical care facilities they need. As concerns women and
children in particular, in 1962 Bulgarian villages could boast of 969 maternity hospitals with 2,585 beds, 625 crèches with 15,470 beds and 5,300
kindergartens catering for 230,000 children.
216
Germán Democratic Republic
— There have also been considerable developments in the field of leisure
activities and culture. Whereas before the war there were only 22 cinemas
in rural areas, the figure had risen to 1,631 by 1963, while the number of
spectators had been multiplied by 130. As of the same date there were
4,199 cultural centres, many of them equipped with all kinds of modern
facilities.
The conclusion may therefore be drawn that, thanks to its multiple social,
economic and cultural activities, the union has played a very large part in
the advancement of a peasant population which was formerly very backward,
and in integrating it into the national community as a whole.
Since 1946 the Union of Workers in the Rural Economy has belonged to
the Trade Unions International of Agricultural, Forestry and Plantation
Workers, which is itself affiliated to the World Federation of Trade Unions
(WFTU) and participates actively in its conferences.
German Democratic Republic
In 1946 the German Democratic Republic carried out a drastic reorganisation of its peasant organisations simultaneously with a no less far-reaching
reform of land tenure. As a recent study so aptly describes it:
On the eve of the Second World War, what now constitutes the territory of Eastern
Germany consisted mainly, particularly in the plains to the north, of large estates
belonging to members of the Junker aristocracy around which were crowded a
multitude of small-holdings. The pattern of land ownership at that time was as
follows:
Size of holding
(In hectares1)
Percentage of
total number
of holdings
Percentage of
total area under
cultivation
Under 5
From 5 to 20
From 20 to 50
From 50 to 100
Over 100
57.7
31.7
8.2
1.4
1.0
9.2
31.8
22.4
8.4
28.2
* 1 hectare = 2.471 acres.
Thus more than one-third of the area under cultivation was in the hands of 2.4 per
cent of the landowners, or about 10,000 persons, while more than half the landowners owned fewer than 5 hectares.1
1
Henri Bogdan: La situation économique de l'Allemagne orientale. Notes et études
documentaires, No. 3397 (Paris, June 1967), p. 10.
217
Agricultural organisations and development
Unlike its neighbour, Poland, where individual ownership is still the predominant feature, Eastern Germany has gradually been progressing towards
a general collectivisation of agriculture, making especially rapid strides in
1960, which was a decisive year in this respect. Agricultural production
co-operatives, first established in 1952 and accounting initially for only 3.3
per cent of the area under cultivation, had already appropriated 43.2 per cent
by 1959; a year later their holdings had almost doubled to reach 84.2 per cent,
though since then their progress has been almost imperceptible. In 1965
the 15,139 co-operatives then in existence controlled 85.7 per cent of the area
under cultivation, or 1.7 per cent more than in 1960. The number of workers
belonging to these co-operatives has risen in a similar manner, from 190,185
in 1955 to 878,851 in 1965, or 70 per cent of the country's working agricultural
population.
There are three basic types of agricultural production co-operatives in
Eastern Germany, organised in such a way as to bring about the gradual
absorption of the peasantry into collective farming along lines which resemble
closely those followed in Poland, as we shall see later. In co-operatives of
type I, the peasants farm arable land on a collective basis but keep their own
meadows and grazing land as well as their own house and garden. In the
case of type II, the peasants hand over their meadows and grazing land to the
co-operative and keep only their house and garden. With type III co-operatives, each peasant keeps only his house and a tiny plot of 1.25 acres. At the
end of 1965 there were 8,973 co-operatives of types I and II accounting for
4,253,298 acres, and 6,166 type III co-operatives covering 9,226,684 acres.
Apart from the production co-operatives, mention should be made of the
development of State farms, first created at the beginning of the reform using
some of the land confiscated from war criminals and notorious Nazis. By
the end of 1965 these State farms covered a total of 1,054,237 acres, or slightly
more than the total under private ownership (963,621 acres), representing
only 6.7 per cent of the total area under cultivation, as against 85.7 per cent
for the production co-operative sector.
General organisations
• Farmers' Mutual Aid Association
In order to encompass, first, the activities of reorganisation and, subsequently, those of the co-operative movement, farmers' mutual aid committees
were set up from 1945 onwards. These offered agricultural workers endless
opportunities to co-operate in the solution of the economic and social problems
posed by the transformation of an agricultural system that events had left in
218
German Democratic Republic
a chaotic state. The following year, on 10 May 1946, these committees
(set up first at the village level, then the district level, then the provincial level
and finally the national level) formed the present organisation, known as the
Farmers' Mutual Aid Association (Vereinigung der gegenseitigen Bauernhilfe),
which was itself to amalgamate in 1950 with the Rural Purchasing and Sales
Co-operatives Association to form a single unified body covering the whole
country. The association had started out with 52,000 members in 1946;
by the end of 1947 the number had already grown to 480,000, and though it
has not announced its present membership it may be presumed to amount
to more or less the same figure as that for the production co-operatives and
the State farms.
In its reply to our questionnaire the Farmers' Mutual Aid Association
states that since its foundation it has concerned itself particularly with bringing
the agrarian reform to a successful conclusion and promoting on a national
scale the development of co-operation, from the simplest forms of work in
groups to the banding together of peasants into agricultural producers' cooperatives.
In addition to the work it does on the spot, the association intervenes at
every stage, locally and nationally, in the framing of the country's agricultural
policy. At the national level its representatives help to draw up the Government's agricultural plans, and sit on the National Agricultural Council. At
the provincial and local level they belong to the relevant agricultural councils
and social insurance councils.1 It should be stressed that the association
does not confine itself to a purely advisory role ; it also plays a part in the
taking and implementation of decisions. Its attitude towards the authorities is
shaped by the farmers' congresses held every two years to discuss and approve
all the basic political and economic decisions called for in regard to general
agricultural policy and to the fixing of prices and production targets within
the context of the national economy.
On the other hand, it is the Free Trade Unions Confederation of Eastern
Germany—with which the association collaborates closely at all times—which
is responsible for settling any problems arising in connexion with the wages
or conditions of work of the employees of nationalised farming enterprises.
In the social and cultural field, the association concerns itself, in collaboration with the government authorities, with improving the conditions of life
in rural areas by opening welfare and cultural centres in the villages. In
addition, especially in winter, it organises courses and lectures on political
and technical subjects for the villagers as well as television programmes and
1
Concerning social insurance, see the Ordinance of 26 April 1951, ILO: Legislative
Series, 1951—Ger.D.R. 1.
219
Agricultural organisations and development
study trips. Lastly, as concerns the female rural population, the association
has played a large part, it seems, in securing the enforcement of the laws
respecting the equality of women in employment and vocational training1
as well as in their private and public'life.
The Farmers' Mutual Aid Association makes no mention of affiliation to
any international federation. Within the country it is a member, like all the
parties and all the other organisations for the masses, of the National Front
of the German Democratic Republic.
Hungary
General organisations
After the land reform of 1945, Hungary committed itself whole-heartedly
to the co-operative movement, extending it to such an extent that, quite apart
from its traditional functions, it now covers a whole range of activities which
in Western Europe are often dealt with by general agricultural organisations.
It is for this reason that the Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives has been
classified under this heading in this survey.
• Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives
In addition to the craft co-operatives, which are outside the scope of this
study, the Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives brings together at the
national level the two main categories of co-operatives which today dominate
practically the whole of Hungarian agriculture : the rural consumer co-operatives
(general consumer, purchasing and marketing co-operatives), and the ordinary
agricultural co-operatives (farmers' associations or co-operatives specialising
in a specific branch of production).
As regards retailing and marketing, the present Hungarian co-operative
movement has a long tradition, for as far back as the end of the nineteenth
century, in 1898, a central co-operative known as the Hangya ("ant") was
founded by Count Alexander Karolyi. Branching off from this central
co-operative, and under its control, innumerable small local societies, both
consumer co-operatives and co-operatives for the collection of agricultural
products, sprang up all over the country. Two other important organisations
1
In addition to the provisions in the Constitution, many legislative enactments have
been published dealing with the protection of women in employment, outstanding among
which are the Acts of 19 April 1950, 27 September 1950 and 25 October 1951. See ILO:
Legislative Series, 1950—Ger.D.R. 1 and 4; ibid., 1951—Ger.D.R. 5.
220
Hungary
were subsequently formed : the Co-operative Association of Hungarian Farmers which, before the Second World War, marketed a large part of the
country's agricultural produce1, and the National Central Dairy Co-operative
Society, founded in 1922, which within ten years controlled nearly two-thirds
of the country's dairies.
Immediately after the Second World War, and in the interests of those benefiting under the 1945 land reform, the Hungarian Government encouraged the
forming of new co-operatives which atfirstco-existed alongside such of the old
ones as still remained. As was emphasised in a report submitted to the International Seminar on Co-operation at Budapest in 1963, during the first years
after their foundation (1945-48) the co-operatives of the numerous farmers
served their members in many ways. They took over the joint management
of the flour-mills, distilleries, irrigation equipment, warehouses and silos,
threshing machines and tractors of the large estates that had been divided up
among the peasants; they managed large areas of vineyards, orchards and
pasture lands; they supplied their members with seeds and other means of
production; they assisted their members' productive activities by setting up
workshops t o repair agricultural machinery, by creating poultry farms and
nurseries and by placing farming contracts. They allocated State economic
aid to the new small-holders in the form of cut-price chemical fertiliser, for
example; they also opened shops where their members could buy consumer
goods and sell their agricultural produce.2
It was not until 1949 that it was decided to amalgamate the new agricultural
co-operatives with the old consumer, purchasing and marketing co-operatives
(dairy co-operatives or organisations of the Hangya centre). This amalgamation gave rise to the new type of general agricultural co-operative which was
to replace the different types of pre-war co-operatives. During the same year
the old co-operative centres joined the Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives. Since then, all the farmers' co-operatives, with the exception of the
agricultural production co-operatives and the fishermen's co-operatives, have
been managed and supervised by the Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives.
It should be emphasised that co-operative membership is open to anyone
over the age of 16, provided he is in full possession of his mental faculties.
At the local level, co-operative members hold a general meeting at which
they elect members to the various bodies of the co-operative: the management
1
In 1920, in co-operation with several societies, including the Hangya and the Central
Mutual Credit Society of Hungary, the Co-operative Association of Hungarian Farmers
created a limited company, the Futura, for the marketing and export of agricultural produce.
a
Jénë Szirmai: Les activités des coopératives hongroises de consommation et d'écoulement
pour satisfaire les besoins de la population rurale et accroître la production agricole (paper
submitted to the International Seminar on Co-operation, Budapest, 1963).
221
Agricultural organisations and development
board, the supervisory board and the specialised committees. The management board appoints the chairman and officers.
Local co-operatives come under the management boards of the district
federations, which they elect, and these federations in turn appoint the members of the management boards of the "departmental" federations.
At the highest level, the National Federation is administered by a council
of 60 to 70 members, elected by the Co-operators' Congress which meets
every four years. Each delegate to the congress represents an average of
3,000 to 4,000 members. The council meets up to twice a year between
congresses to consider the report of the activities of the federation.1
In 1966 the number of consumer co-operatives throughout the country
amounted to 593, with a total membership of over 2 million. In most cases
these are regional co-operatives whose activities cover several communes
(generally five or six).
The present ordinary agricultural co-operatives (farmers' associations,
specialised groups or co-operatives for a specific branch of production, winegrowers' co-operatives, etc.) were set up at different times. For example,
the bee-keepers' groups (or co-operatives) were formed in the early 1950s;
the wine-growers' and horticultural co-operatives were established around
1960, when Hungarian agriculture was being collectivised, whilst the traditional
wine-growers' communities go back more than 100 years. There are still
cases today of ordinary agricultural co-operatives being set up when this
form of co-operation appears to offer members the best means of achieving
their economic targets. A certain number of horticultural co-operatives, for
example, has recently been set up in some Hungarian towns. There is expected
to be an increase in the number of ordinary agricultural co-operatives, the
purpose of which is to group people engaged in a specific branch of farming.
In 1966 there were approximately 2,000 of these co-operatives, with a membership of 120,000.
Agricultural co-operatives affiliated to the Federation of Hungarian Cooperatives are mainly involved in the following activities:
(a) Consumer co-operatives. These deal mainly with the retailing of
consumer goods, the hotel industry, and the wholesale purchase of agricultural
produce and by-products. They are engaged in a number of industrial
activities and provide various services. All these activities are directly or
indirectly related to agricultural production and are designed to satisfy the
needs of the rural population. The following points are of particular interest :
— Apart from the food and industrial goods that are generally sold, the
1
For further details, see Roger Kérinec: "La Hongrie adhérente à TACI", Revue des
études coopératives (Paris), 1966, No. 144, pp. 153-163; and André Hirschfeld: "Quelques
aspects du mouvement coopératif en Hongrie", ibid., 1964, No. 137, pp. 245-271.
222
Hungary
consumer co-operative shops also stock all the tools and equipment needed
for horticultural purposes, such as insecticides, seeds, small machines,
equipment of all kinds, etc.
— The wholesale purchase of fruit and vegetables, animal fodder, honey,
medicinal plants, millet, poppies and beans is entrusted to the consumer
co-operatives and their agencies. The co-operative bodies also purchase
considerable quantities of poultry, eggs, smoked meat and other products
which are first bought wholesale by the State.
— Apart from organising the purchasing side, consumer co-operatives have
other means of influencing production. It is they who sell to the owners
of orchards and family holdings the plants, vines, etc., needed to set up
new orchards and vineyards; they also sell chicks (the co-operatives have
their own sitting hens); furthermore they run rabbit-raising centres to
promote the breeding of better strains; they have their own sauerkraut
factories, kilns, etc.
In the services they provide, the consumer co-operatives also take account
of farming needs. For example, they hire out agricultural tools, prepare
spraying mixtures for plant protection and, upon payment of the cost, undertake meat-smoking, spirit-distilling, etc.
The consumer co-operatives are also interested in raising cultural standards
in rural areas. They not only run musical and theatrical groups made up of
musicians, singers, dancers and amateur actors from the region but also
organise vocational training courses, try to arouse interest in books, run rural
clubs and organise exhibitions of furniture, fashion shows, etc., to develop the
taste of the rural population.
(b) Ordinary agricultural co-operatives. The main task of the ordinary
agricultural co-operatives is to assist their members in agricultural matters.
Most of them bring together persons engaged in a specific branch of cropgrowing or stock-breeding, and their activities are therefore usually confined
to the needs of this branch. Some of these co-operatives are corporate bodies
(independent co-operatives), whilst others constitute a specialised group within
a consumer co-operative. As a rule they undertake the following activities:
— the joint purchase of materials used by their members in their particular
branch (selected seeds, young plants, grafts, insecticides, organic and
inorganic fertiliser, breeding stock, various items of equipment, etc) ;
— advisory services and vocational teaching;
— the joint sale of produce;
— the maintenance of the equipment used on a pool basis, and the provision
of the necessary services (generators and machines, vine-harvesting equipment, reservoirs of spraying mixtures, paths, wells, etc.);
— veterinary services in the co-operatives of small livestock breeders.
223
Agricultural organisations and development
Ordinary co-operatives have been set up in the following branches of
agriculture: wine-making and arboriculture; the cultivation of asparagus and
mushrooms; the growing of flowers and ornamental plants; bee-keeping;
poultry-breeding and fattening; rabbit and fur farms; the breeding of
pigeons.
The ordinary agricultural co-operatives organise vocational training courses,
practical exercises and meetings at which experience acquired is exchanged.
The courses on mushroom-growing have reached a nation-wide scale. Beekeepers also organise courses in secondary schools.
Certain co-operatives and groups have the specific aim of spreading
knowledge in a particular branch of agriculture. The young farmers' cooperatives organise elementary courses in secondary schools. Generally they
specialise in a sector of intensive farming (cultivation of vegetables and fruit,
small livestock farming, etc.). Agricultural clubs are organised at schools
under a biology teacher. The Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives and
the "departmental" co-operative federations provide the ordinary agricultural
groups with substantial financial aid.
Price maintenance for agricultural products is ensured by means of production and sales contracts. The consumer co-operatives and the ordinary
agricultural co-operatives make contracts with their members concerning the
production and purchase of their produce. These agreements enable them to
maintain contractual relations with the consumers, in particular with the
wholesale trade, industrial undertakings, etc. In the producers' interests, the
contracts generally lay down minimum prices. The prices vary according to
the state of the market, the quality and particularly the uniformity of the
products, the method of packing, etc.
The Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives represents the interests of the
consumer co-operatives and of the ordinary agricultural co-operatives vis-à-vis
the economic ministries (Ministries of Agriculture, the Food Industry, etc.).
The ministries and other State authorities are required to consult the federation
before taking any measure affecting co-operatives. In fact, this concerns
only measures within the jurisdiction of the authorities, for in all other respects
the activities of the co-operatives are governed by the Federation of Hungarian
Co-operatives.
Co-operatives are represented on the basic trade union organisations, on
the "departmental" trade union bodies (through the "departmental" federations) and on the Central Council of Trade Unions through the Federation
of Hungarian Co-operatives. Decisions affecting employees are taken at all
levels by mutual agreement; the Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives and
the "departmental" co-operative federations seek the advice of the trade unions
before regulating working hours, wages and other conditions of work.
224
Hungary
In Hungary, the authorities respect the autonomy of the co-operatives
and ensure that the latter carry out their activities under the best conditions,
so that if a co-operative affiliated to the Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives
does not develop to the desired extent this is solely because of practical difficulties or lack of technical facilities.
All the consumer co-operatives and ordinary agricultural co-operatives
belong to a "departmental" federation and, through the latter, to the Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives. As a rule, they belong to this federation
from the time of their foundation; in most cases, though, the "departmental"
federation actually helps to set up its future member, providing it with all
necessary assistance. At the present time there is no consumer co-operative
or ordinary agricultural co-operative in Hungary that is not a member of a
"departmental" federation.
The Federation of Hungarian Co-operatives has been a member of the
International Co-operative Alliance since 1966.
Agricultural workers' unions
• Agricultural and Forestry Workers' Trade Union
After expanding rapidly at the beginning of the century1 Hungarian agricultural trade unionism, which was persecuted and practically wiped out by
the Horthy Government, had been reduced to semi-clandestine activity when
the Second World War broke out. Not until the end of the war could it be
re-established. The Agricultural and Forestry Workers' Trade Union
(MEDOSZ) now enlists workers in agricultural and forestry undertakings,
water supply, machinery pools and other agricultural institutions and undertakings in the State sector. It has 270,000 members, which means that 89 per
cent of workers employed in the State sector are members of the union.
In 1945 the agricultural trade union movement was closely linked to the
agrarian reform undertaken in the country. It was at this time that it became
possible to change the land holding system in Hungary, which was dominated
by large estates. In a very short time the land distribution committees
formed at the liberation distributed nearly 5 million acres of arable land to
650,000 needy agricultural workers. Within a few years the first agricultural
producers' co-operatives had been formed and these later played a decisive
role during the collectivisation period.
•In 1919 the Hungarian Union of Agricultural Workers (Magyarországi fòldmunkasok
Országos Szovetsége) had 500,000 members and 1,700 local branches. In 1928 only 10,000
members and 68 branches remained. See ILO: The Representation and Organisation of
Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 155.
225
Agricultural organisations and development
Throughout this eventful time the successors to the former National Union
of Land Workers were faced with the considerable task of organising and
educating hundreds of thousands of agricultural workers—particularly from
1948 onwards, when the first State farms were created as an integral part of the
nationalised agricultural sector, along with farm machinery pools and the
State forestry and water-supply undertakings.
The present union, which was formed in 1952, has continued its predecessors' work and achieved outstanding results in all fields concerning the improvement of the material, cultural and social condition of agricultural workers.
As regards wage policy, the Government, at the union's request, has
increased agricultural wages several times; during the period 1961-66, wages
went up by an annual average of 3 per cent on State farms, 2.8 per cent in
machinery repair stations and 6 per cent in forestry undertakings. The
average monthly wage of workers in the State agricultural sector in 1966 was
1,600 forints, approximately the same as that of industrial workers.
Likewise, union activities led to a considerable improvement in farmers'
housing conditions during the Second Five-Year Plan (1961-65). During this
period 1,256 million forints were spent on the construction of houses and
welfare amenities in the State sector. In addition to these investments, undertakings also have access to a total budget of approximately 1,000 million
forints, in the shape of renovation, maintenance and development funds, half
of which may be spent on building or installing welfare amenities. These large
sums have made it possible to provide workers in State agricultural undertakings with 56,000 beds in comfortably equipped hostels (with libraries, radios,
etc.). As regards forestry, the investment funds have enabled 500-600 enterprise-owned housing units to be built each year, and the workers themselves
build an average of 1,400 units a year from their own resources or with State
aid.
Moreover, in view of working conditions in forestry undertakings, which
involve workers in spending long periods away from home, in 1966 the union
secured the provision of 51 caravans and 400 heated huts, whilst the WaterSupply Service provided 63 caravans and 100 heated huts.
On the State farms the union runs 740 permanent canteens catering for
45,000 workers. The latter pay between 9 and 12 forints for the three daily
meals, i.e. approximately 20 per cent of their wages.
The union also has to its credit the creation of a standard social insurance
system which came into force on 1 July 1966, abolishing the differences that
had hitherto existed between industrial and agricultural workers from the point
of view of social security. It should nevertheless be pointed out that measures
taken before the adoption of the Legislative Decree in question had already
considerably improved social security benefits; for example, whereas in 1949
226
Hungary
the annual value of benefits per worker was 1,156 forints, this figure had risen
to 3,865 forints by 1964. To keep pace with this increase in services provided
under the social security system, the number of doctors and of hospital beds
in Hungary is constantly increasing; between 1961 and 1964 alone, the number
of doctors per 10,000 inhabitants rose from 16.4 to 18.5 and that of hospital
beds from 72,074 to 76,278.
Mention must also be made of a similar development in trade union activities
as regards pension schemes for agricultural workers. The retirement age in
Hungary is 55 for women and 60 for men. Over the last 12 years, pension
rates have changed several times to the workers' advantage. In 1959 there
was a 25 per cent increase in pensions under 800 forints and in widows' pensions
under 400 forints, the amount of which had been fixed in 1954; in 1963 widows'
pensions were increased by a further 20 per cent and then pensions under
1,000 forints were increased to the same extent as from 1 July 1965. At the
same time the ceiling was raised from 700 to 800 forints for widows' pensions
and from 850 to 1,000 forints for married couples' retirement pensions. These
pension increases represent 264 million forints per year.
Hungarian workers are also covered by a system of graduated family
allowances. On the national scale there are 600,000 families receiving family
allowances, including those employed in agriculture; child allowances are paid
for 1.5 million children. During the period 1959-66 the family benefit rates
(in forints) rose as follows :
for 2 children
for 3 children
for 4 children
for 5 children
foi- each additional child
19S9
1966
75
180
260
350
120
300
510
680
850
170
The union is extremely active in the leisure field in organising holidays for
the workers. Between 1961 and 1965 it organised holidays for 57,000 persons.
In addition it helped between 2,000 and 2,500 workers to go abroad in order
to become acquainted with the living and working conditions of agricultural
workers in other socialist countries. The union also organises various seminars
with a view to training the skilled workers required on large agricultural undertakings using modern production methods. By this means approximately
12,000 tractor drivers and 25,000-30,000 skilled workers are trained each year.
Apart from meeting the workers' economic and cultural needs, the union
is also concerned with stepping up production and developing methods likely
to increase the workers' material well-being. In the factories which it covers,
it promotes "socialist work emulation" which, particularly in recent years,
has become a widespread mass movement. In 1966 3,100 teams made up of
227
Agricultural organisations and development
42,545 workers vied for the honorary title of "Socialist Brigade" which in
1965 had been awarded to 2,282 teams made up of 29,495 workers.
A whole range of laws and regulations provides workers with the opportunity of developing their talents in all fields and of contributing towards
national economic development by their ideas and suggestions. In this
respect the innovators' movement, largely organised and run by the unions, is
of special significance. The economic importance of the innovators' movement is revealed by the fact that in the second half of 1965 the workers submitted
2,826 suggestions, 1,100 of which were used, and the State paid 1,129.5 million
forints for innovations suggested by the workers on State farms.
The right of unions to defend the workers' interests is guaranteed in
Hungary by laws and regulations and it is the workers themselves who ensure
their observance. Moreover there is close co-operation between the top
levels of the public administration and the union ; the latter discusses in advance
all important measures concerning the workers, putting their case to the administration.
As regards joint bargaining within undertakings, the workers elect trade
union committees which keep in contact with the leaders of the economy.
These trade union bodies are direct representatives of the workers' interests
and, when necessary, adopt measures on the spot in matters affecting them.
Nevertheless, the union considers that it still has a number of problems
to solve since the rapid development of the economy is constantly presenting
it with new tasks. Both quantitatively and qualitatively it has to do more
and more to meet the increasing needs of the population and to keep the
industry, which is developing at a fast rate, supplied with raw materials.
The union also considers that it must develop relations between workers and
management according to the requirements of modern times, improve still
further the management of agricultural undertakings and, by all possible
means, raise the standard of administration of large-scale agricultural undertakings. Likewise it is trying to develop the system of material incentives, to
increase harvest averages and the output of animal products and to reduce
production costs. In its opinion, the spirit of initiative in the country should
receive even more encouragement, vocational training be further promoted,
and mechanisation intensified in order to accumulate adequate reserves to
enable agricultural efficiency to be improved.
The Hungarian Union of Agricultural Workers is a member of the Trade
Unions International of Agricultural, Forestry and Plantation Workers, which
is affiliated to the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), and represents
the common interests of Hungarian agricultural workers at international
conferences. It is a member of the Executive Committee of the WFTU and
takes part in drawing up its working programme; furthermore, it helps the
228
Poland
work of trade unions in developing countries both by providing material
assistance and by passing on its experience and methods.
Poland
The position in Poland—as in all the people's democracies—has changed
entirely since before the war. At that time, Polish agriculture was organised
on quite different lines, and although agricultural trade unionism was fairly
highly developed (there were some 179,000 trade unionists out of 620,000
wage earners), it was not markedly effective. Here, as in other Eastern
European countries, a trade union wasfirstand foremost designed for challenge
and combat. Agriculture was organised in such a way that a union could
have no voice in farm management.
Although a champion of the socialist line, Poland, like Yugoslavia, has not
nationalised all land. In 1965, out of some 49,721,700 acres devoted to agriculture, State land accounted for 13 per cent of the area farmed; agricultural
co-operatives accounted for 1 per cent, and private owners for 86 per cent.
This explains the apparent weakness of the Polish agricultural trade union
movement, which is concentrated above all in the State farms, for 7 per cent
of the manpower is engaged in socialist farming while 93 per cent are farming
for themselves. In the private sector, the "agricultural circle" in fact does the
jobs which elsewhere are performed by unions and general organisations.
Besides these circles, there are two other organisations which help to meet
the needs of the country-dweller, namely, the Central Union of Agricultural
Production Co-operatives and the Agricultural Federation of Peasants' Mutual
Aid Co-operatives. We shall see below the part they play and what they have
accomplished.
• The Polish Agricultural Workers' Union and the State farms
Since agricultural wage earners are concentrated in the State farms, we shall
not understand the part the unions play unless we grasp what these farms
stand for in the context of the nation's economy.
The Polish State farms were set up in 1945-46, chiefly in the territories
recovered from the Germans (in the north and west), where they represented
some 27 per cent of all land. In 1964, their production accounted for 12 per
cent of total agricultural output.1 But, quite apart from the part they play
1
Witold Lipski: Collective Forms of Farming in Poland, paper submitted at the Seminar
on Land Structure and Co-operatives, Rome, 1966 (Rome, FAO, 1966; mimeographed doc.
RU:TAS/66/l),p.2.
229
Agricultural organisations and development
in national production, these farms, technically speaking, are the vanguard
of that industrialised socialist agriculture to which the country aspires. Thus
it is that some of them, working with various scientific institutions, simultaneously carry on production and research (the research being subsidised by
the State), while others are given over entirely to teaching and extension work,
and are associated with secondary colleges of agriculture. They thus improve
agricultural techniques in the short run while training future managers and
officials in the long run. One of Poland's finest specialists puts the matter
thus 1 :
In order to raise the present level of agricultural production and assure its future
growth it is necessary to have a network of State farms devoted exclusively to scientific
and educational purposes. In Poland, these are seed production and stock-breeding
farms. The State farms account for almost the whole production of improved seeds
in this country. Owing to the high level of such production in the period of 1961-65
it was possible to exchange grain seeds in the whole country every four years and to
provide improved seeds for the whole area under sugar-beet and rape seed. In 1965-70,
seeds are to be exchanged every three years. . . . In animal production a similar role
is played by the stock-breeding farms, which possess livestock of the highest quality
This way of organising stock-breeding and seed production enables the farms to
pursue a uniform breeding policy based on scientific principles and properly to
distribute different varieties of plant and animal breeds in various regions of the
country. The farms obtain financial support from the State and thus the means
of production increase are available to the farmers at a low cost.
In 1964, there were in Poland 6,229 State farms, which employed, all in all,
some 326,800 agricultural workers.2 These farms, created between 1946 and
1955, together make 20 "units", under the General Inspectorate of State
Farms of the Ministry of Agriculture. On behalf of these units, the inspectorate:
— from time to time undertakes bargaining with the Agricultural Workers'
Union, with regard to wages and conditions of employment;
— gives its views on the price of agricultural produce sold by State farms and
makes suggestions to the Ministry of Agriculture about sales prices and
other things to do with sales;
— prepares proposals for the Ministry of Agriculture as regards the economic
circumstances in which State farms can be expected to develop, and collaborates with its various departments ;
1
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: The Experiences of
State Farms in Poland, by T. Rychlik (doc.RU:WLR-C/66/26, Part III, pp. 6-7). This is
borne out by production statistics: wheat production went up from 11.9 quintals per hectare
in 1934-38 to 20.1 in 1961; rye production from 11.2 to 17.1; barley production from 11.8
to 19.9, while the production of oats rose from 11.4 to 18.5. Similarly, sugar production
increased from 32.3 lb. per inhabitant in 1937 to 102.3 in 1960. See Pologne, chiffres et faits
(Warsaw, Editions Polonia, 1962), p. 58. (N.B. 1 quintal = approx. 1 cwt.; 1 hectare
= 2.471 acres).
8
Concise Statistical Yearbook of Poland, 1965 (Warsaw, Polish Central Statistical Agency,
1965), p. 124.
230
Poland
— works hand-in-hand with the Agricultural Workers' Union and with
various State administrative bodies to improve the general standard of
living of workers on State farms.
Having said this, we must add that there is, in Poland, no general organisation representing the State farms. The inspectorate mentioned above is
merely a ministerial organ which keeps an eye on the activities of the "units"
and when circumstances warrant intervenes on behalf of some or all of them.
Hence it acts as a mediator between the State and the Agricultural Workers'
Union. The latter intervenes in varying degrees and in collaboration with the
competent authorities in activities of all sorts and descriptions.
As regards production, it helps to draw up plans and to improve the way
in which State farms are run. These tasks cover everything to do with the
running of a State farm, from the preparation of budget estimates in connexion
with investments to the introduction of technical innovations or the organisation of educational and training courses.
As regards wages, the union approaches the authorities (i.e. the Ministry of
Agriculture) and helps to work out a wages policy. It bargains for the financial incentives offered in exchange for output by undertakings. Collective
agreements, renewable at intervals, define wages, working hours, holidays,
health protection and similar matters. Moreover, the union takes a hand in
supervising the Wages Fund and protects the worker against any breach of the
rules agreed upon.
With regard to occupational health, the union is authorised under existing
legislation to inspect undertakings. To this end it has its own corps of
inspectors who are called upon to seek out all possible sources of industrial
injury and to ensure that the health regulations are duly observed.
The Agricultural Workers' Union deals, too, with housing and collective
equipment. It brings to the notice of the authorities any buildings which
might need restoration or improvement ; it helps to draw up investment plans
for the construction of new houses or collective equipment, and supervises
their putting into eifect. Thanks to these activities, the Polish countryside
is full of things of interest to the community, such as clinics, hospitals, kindergartens, clubs, cultural centres, and the like.
Furthermore, by agreement with the medical authorities, the union organises
the periodical medical examination of workers, preventive health campaigns,
lectures on birth control, and all sorts of activities which affect the welfare
of the country-dweller. In fact, most of the union budgets go on health
problems.
As part of its social welfare activities, the union deals with workers'
holidays too, organising travel (within Poland or abroad) or stays in rest homes.
It does the same for the children; these enjoy kindergartens, playgrounds,
231
Agricultural organisations and development
nurseries, and so on in undertakings, and huge numbers are despatched
annually to specially equipped holiday camps. Within the undertakings, the
union creates libraries, workers' clubs, cinemas and halls where people of note
from public life and from the world behind the footlights can come to offer
entertainment, or edification, as the case may be.
Lastly, a proportion of the union's budget is earmarked for financial assistance, when members require it. A member is entitled to a special allowance
whenever a child is born to him, or whenever a member of his family dies.
Should the need arise, he can apply to the union, which will help him by offering
a loan or by making an outright gift of money.1
Thus the Agricultural Workers' Union is a powerful mass organisation,
the manifold activities of which go far beyond those of most similar organisations. We shall have occasion to revert to this subject, but it will not be amiss
to say here and now that we shall find it difficult to grasp the scope of Polish
agricultural trade unionism unless we know something about the development
of labour law in the people's democracies. This is a subject covered in masterly
fashion in an analysis by Dr. Maria Matey, of the Warsaw Institute of Law;
we shall merely summarise her conclusions. Having made the point that the
share taken by trade unions in drawing up and applying labour law, and the
constantly increasing trade union share in the country's political and social life,
constitute one of the most remarkable phenomena of the last twenty years,
Dr. Matey says that :
(a) In Poland, the unions form a single organisation, covering almost the entire
actively employed population (although membership is neither automatic nor compulsory). They constitute an exceedingly powerful force, which, associated with
the workers' party, assumes responsibility for the running of the State and for the
well-being of the economy. To this end, over and above their traditional role as
protectors of the workers' rights in a narrower sense, the unions are anxious to obtain
formal authorisation to exert influence in various fields, including that of law....
The Central Council of the Polish Trade Unions has for years been issuing orders and
instructions which, as far as labour law is concerned, carry as much authority as
legal enactments and represent a considerable part of current labour legislation.
The Central Council enjoys the right to initiate legislation in the Diet. It itself
draws up (or approves, and frequently rejects) the Bills and draft regulations put
forward by the governmental bodies. After bargaining with the ministries responsible, it is the unions which prepare and conclude the agreements which constitute
so important a part of labour legislation.
(b) Apart from the authority they enjoy in legal matters, the unions play a decisive
part in supervising the application of labour legislation. A special branch of the unions
concerns itself with labour inspection. Similarly, labour disputes are referred to the
unions, which have arbitration boards within the undertaking. Within the undertaking the unions, and their organ the works council, enjoy most extensive rights in
1
For further information, see D. V. Ter-Avanesyan: Some Social and Economic Problems
in Agriculture in USSR, the Polish People's Republic, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic.
Part I (Geneva, ILO; mimeographed doc. D.9.1966) pp. 62-68.
232
Poland
everything to do with the running of the concern. We would merely recall the
"workers' self-government" system (which is directed by the unions), and the rights
enjoyed by the works council as regards the dismissal of workers. These rights
are constantly being extended. With every new legal enactment,
there is an increase
in the powers wielded by the unions within the undertaking.1
These general considerations clearly remain valid, mutatis mutandis, with
regard to agricultural trade unionism properly so called.
Hence it can be said that as regards the movement of the peasantry and
peasant trade unionism from an attitude of outright opposition to full participation, the history of Poland is rich in lessons, even for the highly advanced
countries. It shows, in fact, that the unions can be given a say in governmental decisions, and hence can go beyond the advisory role they are ordinarily
expected to play.
• Central Union of Agricultural Production Co-operatives
Agricultural production co-operatives have at their disposal only 1 per cent
or so of Polish agricultural land. In 1964, they numbered 1,246, mainly
concentrated in the wojewodztwa (provinces) where farming practices have
reached a high level (Bydgoszcz and Poznan). Their 29,200 members then
occupied some 541,880 acres. On the average, each co-operative had 16.5
families, living on some 435 acres.2
According to the scope and thoroughness of the co-operative work done,
these co-operatives fall into one of three classes. In type I co-operatives, the
members merely work the land in common and to this end possess machinery
and tractors, collectively purchased. On the other hand, each member breeds
his own beasts on his individual plot (which may not exceed 2% acres in
extent); his fodder production is supplemented by that of the co-operative.
Output, and the profits derived therefrom, are distributed among the members
in proportion to the land they contribute to the co-operative and the work
they do. Co-operatives of this type frequently develop into co-operatives
of type II, where crops are grown and animals bred in common, although
the members still keep their plots (not more than 1 % acres each), plus a few
breeding animals, the maximum for which is laid down in the rules of the
co-operative. In co-operatives of this kind, profits are shared primarily in
proportion to the amount of work supplied; only between 20 and 40 per
cent of the profits are apportioned (in the form of ground rent) according to
the area of land contributed.
1
Maria Matey: "Les tendances générales du développement du droit du travail en
Pologne", Droit social (Paris), No. 11, November 1966, p. 563. (Our italics).
2
See Lipski, op. cit., p. 4.
233
Agricultural organisations and development
Lastly, in type III co-operatives (which resemble type II), members can
(unless they otherwise decide) keep a plot for themselves and a number of
animals. But the socialist principle that profits shall be apportioned in proportion to the labour done is strictly applied.1
Above all these co-operatives is the Central Union of Agricultural Cooperatives, set up in 1961a to replace the old National Council of Agricultural
Production Co-operatives. The union collaborates directly in the field of
agricultural policy with the Ministry of Agriculture and the other competent
central organisations, although its role is really more of an advisory one.
The union, as the chief co-operative policy-making body, concerns itself
first and foremost with laying down labour standards and general rules to be
observed in distributing profits on the basis of the financial returns of the cooperatives and the labour contributed by their members.
The union also engages in numerous other activities in a variety of fields;
in that of vocational training it collaborates closely with the Central Cooperative Council3, which establishes and subsidises training schools for
future co-operative leaders: chairmen, instructors, book-keepers and group
leaders for co-operatives.
In the field of rural hygiene, the union sees to it that co-operatives improve
the individual and collective living conditions of their members by digging
wells and providing a water supply and all necessary road facilities. All work
of this type receives an 80 per cent subsidy from the State. In addition,
co-operatives have at their disposal dispensaries run and paid for either by
the State or by a special co-operative, the Health Protection Co-operative,
which is a member of the Peasant Mutual Aid Federation, whose functions will
be described below.
Lastly, in the field of housing and cultural activities, the union encourages
its members to build individual private dwellings with the aid of State loans,
to organise workers' clubs and recreational activities (excursions, etc.), and
to build cultural centres. The number of such centres has doubled over the
past three years. Today there is an average, for every 100 co-operatives, of
3 cultural centres, 24 café-clubs, 51 clubrooms and 38 libraries.4
The union refers to two kinds of obstacles encountered by agricultural
production co-operatives in the course of their development. On the one hand,
1
For further information, see Josef Okuniewski: "Collective Forms of the Organisation
of Agricultural Production and Social Changes in Polish Rural Areas", Report of the Study
Group on the Social Aspects of Land Reform and Co-operatives (Jablonna, Warsaw, 10-21 May
1965) (Geneva, United Nations, 1965), pp. 30-31.
2
By virtue of the Co-operatives Act of 17 February 1961.
8
The Central Co-operative Council represents all the co-operative unions in the country,
i.e. nine large organisations with a total membership of some 7 million.
4
See Ter-Avanesyan, op. cit., p. 53.
234
Poland
there was excessive interference by local authorities during the years when
co-operatives were being formed (however, the situation has changed drastically
in this respect since 1956, and it would appear that today co-operatives are
left completely free to run their own affairs), and on the other hand, the
co-operatives, which began to organise themselves and band together in 1949,
found themselves in severe financial straits due to a shortage of funds of their
own, tools and other production inputs. Aid from the Government, in the
form of long-term loans, and the encouragement it has given to vocational
training for co-operators have enabled these difficulties to be progressively
overcome.
Today agricultural production co-operatives benefit from all kinds of
facilities accorded to them by the State, such as the payment of managers'
wages out of public funds, the partialfinancing(up to a specified limit) of their
investments, adequate loans at low rates of interest, the payment of social
insurance contributions for co-operators and exemption from supplementary
taxation (the tax per acre paid by co-operatives is equal to that paid by
medium-sized private farms).
In 1965, in view of the fact that the value of farm premises per acre on
co-operative farms was only half as much as on individual farms, and the
number of livestock on co-operative farms was less than the general average
for farms, the Government took a series of measures to accelerate capital
investment in co-operatives, in the following forms :
— building grants to cover half the expenditure up to 2,000 zlotys per acre,
plus one-third of any expenditure in excess of this figure, up to a limit of
3,300 zlotys per acre ;
— grants for irrigation of cultivated fields amounting to 80 per cent of expenditure.
Another important decision taken in 1965 was that to amend the Co-operators' Pension Act, under which only members of type II and III co-operatives
were entitled to old-age, invalidity and survivors' pensions, members of type I
co-operatives being eligible only for invalidity pensions. Today, as a result
of the 1965 amendment, the latter are entitled to pensions of the same type
as the former, although at a 30 per cent lower rate.1 This measure, along with
the credit concessions referred to above, will undoubtedly help to bring about
in the near future an increase in the number of Polish agricultural production
co-operatives, especially those in the more advanced categories.
1
Ter-Avanesyan, op. cit., p. 52.
235
Agricultural organisations and development
• Agricultural Federation of Peasants' Mutual Aid Co-operatives
The Agricultural Federation of Peasants' Mutual Aid Co-operatives,
founded in 1948, is an association of the supply and marketing co-operatives
formed in all parts of Poland during the years immediately following the
liberation. In 1966 there were more than 2,200 of these societies with a
membership of over 4 million.
Membership of these co-operatives—democratically run on the principle
of "one man, one vote", irrespective of the number of shares owned by a
member—is entirely free and voluntary. Internal democracy from the base
to the summit is ensured by the watch kept by each level on the activities of
the next highest level, starting from the local co-operative, which belongs to a
district union, which in its turn belongs to a provincial union, which itself
belongs to the central federation in Warsaw. The federation, for its part,
exercises vertical supervision from top to bottom, thanks to a corps of inspectors
whose task it is to audit the books and check on the administration of the
societies and unions at the various local and provincial levels.
Peasants' mutual aid co-operatives provide the following services for the
rural population :
— they supply farmers with production inputs and investment goods;
— they conclude contracts with farmers for the delivery of farm produce
and the purchase of produce (more than 50,000 buying and selling agencies);
— they supply the rural population with consumer goods through the intermediary of 55,000 local stores;
— they process farm produce;
— they manufacture ready-mixed fodder and building materials;
— they provide all kinds of services in connexion with agricultural production
and household tasks in rural areas;
— they provide many services in connexion with foreign trade.
The federation, a major buyer of farm produce (it purchases some 65 per
cent of market produce), observes price fluctuations closely and makes proposals thereon to the State or provincial authorities, which are responsible,
under the system in force, for fixing the prices of the principal agricultural
products purchased by the co-operatives. The prices of "free" products—i.e.
those whose sale is a matter to be arranged directly between the seller and the
buyer (e.g. certain vegetables)—are fixed by mutual agreement between the
parties in the light of the market situation.
Thus the federation and its member co-operatives play an essential role
in the development of agricultural production. This is due not only to the
many varied activities in which the co-operatives engage but also to the functions performed by the federation within the context of the national economy
236
Poland
as a whole. Under the co-operative legislation in force, the Peasants' Mutual
Aid Federation is in fact entitled to express its views on all Bills relating to
matters affecting its activities. It is also entitled to submit draft Bills of its
own, which, like the observations or motions it addresses directly to central
official bodies, are discussed with the authorities before being submitted
to the Diet through the Domestic Trade Commission and the Agricultural
Commission. It may not be inopportune to mention here that the members
of the Diet include a large number of active co-operators who exert a strong
influence upon the decisions adopted.
Within the country, all matters relating to the wages and working conditions
of employees of the federation's member co-operatives are settled by means of
agreements concluded with the Trade Union of Commercial and Co-operative
Employees, which has to be consulted before any change is made in the wage
rates. But this union does not confine itself to watching over employees'
interests as concerns wages and remuneration; it also takes a close interest in
occupational safety and health, and plays a leading part in a whole host of
welfare activities.
Outside the strictly economic sphere, peasants' mutual aid co-operatives
likewise engage in a variety of activities of a cultural and social nature, including
the following:
(a) Educational work. Secondary vocational training schools of various
types, which enjoy the same rights as the State schools and prepare their
students for entrance to institutions at a higher level, take care of the education
of the young people in the villages—the children of co-operative members.1
These activities are also of benefit to workers, who are afforded an opportunity
of attending the various vocational training courses organised by the federation.
The extent of the federation's educational activities may be seen clearly
from the following figures, which relate to 1965:
85 schools run by the federation
39 higher-level correspondence courses
14,481 students during the school year 1965-66
7,943 students taking correspondence courses
8 management development centres
344 courses organised at vocational training centres and on the shop floor
12,442 workers trained through attending courses.
1
As Roger Kérinec points out: "A co-operative is open to al), but only its members
benefit from its welfare and educational activities, which are numerous and important (in fact,
there are more than 700,000 Polish peasants out of a total of 3.25 million who are neither
members of a co-operative nor employees of a State undertaking." Roger Kérinec, "La
coopération en Pologne", Revue des études coopératives (Paris), 1964, No. 138, p. 350.
237
Agricultural organisations and development
(b) Collaboration with the female rural population. Thirty per cent of
co-operative members and 37 per cent of co-operative employees are women.
Women participate actively in the work of the bodies responsible for the selfmanagement of co-operatives; they account for more than 20 per cent of the
membership of management committees and 10 per cent ofthat of supervisory
committees. It is the women who attach the greatest importance to the efficient
running of co-operatives both from the commercial standpoint and from that
of the services they render to the population.
All the activities of co-operatives on behalf of peasant women are carried
on at centres known as "modern housewife" centres attached to rural cooperatives. These centres have organised, inter alia :
— repair and hiring facilities, hairdressing salons and sewing workshops;
— services to provide legal advice and advice on diet and even beauty treatment ;
— training courses and lectures on the following subjects : rational nutrition,
education, hygiene, needlework and dress-making, stock-breeding and farming:
— publicity and information services in respect of the latest household appliances, stock-breeding equipment, gardening, seed production and concentrated fodder-mixing methods.
The federation's member co-operatives also collaborate with the rural
housewives' clubs, especially in the field of child care. In this connexion they
help the clubs to organise and run kindergartens and even contribute towards
their financing.
(c) Collaboration with young peasants. Work with young people is mainly
concerned with giving a cultural slant to their leisure activities and developing
the aptitudes required for farming. To meet these needs the co-operatives
organise café-clubs, also known as farmers' clubs. Like the rural co-operatives,
the Ruch State undertaking organises clubs of this type in country areas. They
offer young people pleasant surroundings in which to spend their leisure time
and organise cultural entertainments. They listen to the radio, watch television, organise concerts of recorded music, dances and meetings.
Some of these clubs also have photographic darkrooms, philatelic sections,
and the like. In addition, lectures and demonstrations are arranged on seed
varieties, weed-killers and insecticides. In some clubs, vocational training
courses organised by the so-called "agricultural circles" (farmers' clubs) are
held in the autumn and the winter.
The clubs are organised and run jointly by the rural co-operatives and the
Rural Youth Federation in conjunction with the cultural services of the local
national councils, which help in the provision of cultural activities. In addition
the co-operative movement and the Rural Youth Federation jointly organise
238
Poland
what are known as "co-operative apprenticeship groups", which offer people
in country areas a chance to learn about the role and tasks of the co-operative
movement and carry out a programme of co-operative education for apprentice
farmers.
The rural co-operatives also sponsor school co-operatives in educational
establishments, protect them, offer them financial help with the purchase of
equipment, and assist them with their book-keeping. It is considered that
having thus gained direct experience of a school co-operative and the way
it is run, the young people concerned are more likely later to swell the ranks
of co-operative members.
As far as sport is concerned, the co-operatives have many contacts with the
sports teams run by peasants and help with their training. By arrangement
with these teams, they organise sporting and tourist activities. The teams
also receive financial help from the co-operatives.
Among the other forms of cultural activity organised not just for young
people but for the benefit of the rural population as a whole, mention may be
made of cultural circles and centres and the organisation of group outings to
theatres in the towns. An important role is played by the libraries found in
all rural co-operatives; these contain books, pamphlets and manuals on
co-operation, farming and general subjects. Both members and employees
of co-operatives make extensive use of these libraries.
(d) Activities in the field of rural medical assistance. Since 1955, the
supply and marketing co-operatives have organised health protection cooperatives in rural areas out of reach of the health centres set up by the State.
In 1965 there were already 246 of these co-operatives, which set out to raise
the standard of health of members and their families, provide medical care,
arrange for consultations and engage in many activities in connexion with
hygiene and disease prevention. They build and run health centres and dispensaries, and pay the salaries of their doctors and nursing staff. The medical
care provided is not restricted to the co-operatives' members, but is also
available to other people living in the area, although they pay more for it.
The co-operatives also arrange for free medical care for schoolchildren.
Their financial resources derive from the proportional contributions paid
by members, treatment fees, aid furnished by the federation—mainly for
investment purposes—and, lastly, the funds allocated by the State, which
meet the cost of treatment provided free for patients who are covered by the
social insurance scheme.
Obviously, such a complete network of activities could not be set up
without difficulties being encountered. In its reply to the questionnaire the
federation stresses that the obstacles have been mainly of a technical nature,
and can be attributed to the dynamic progress made by a body which began
239
Agricultural organisations and development
its activities under difficult conditions resulting from the terrible destruction
wreaked by the war and the generally very low level of economic development
reached in the countryside. These difficulties are being resolved through
a steady rise in investment, which has been particularly heavy in recent years,
and which, according to the plans established for the years 1966-70, at present
involves a sum of 13,000 million zlotys, i.e. about as much as was invested
during the whole of the period 1945-65.
In view of the policy followed by the Peasants' Mutual Aid Federation
and the fact that its membership is growing at the rate of 100,000 per year,
which attests to its success, there is every reason to expect that this type of
co-operation will become increasingly popular in the next few years.
Since 1964 the Agricultural Federation of Peasants' Mutual Aid Co-operatives has been a member of the International Co-operative Alliance.
• Central Union of Agricultural Circles
The "agricultural circles" occupy a prominent place in the Polish cooperative movement on account of the importance of the private sector, which
still farms 86 per cent of the land and supplies about 83 per cent of the produce
marketed.
These circles form part of a voluntary peasant organisation the idea of
which was brought to Poland from Western Europe in the 1860s and developed
towards the end of the century, between 1880 and 1890. As pointed out in a
paper published by the FAO, the circles which came into being during the
second half of the nineteenth century
initiated and developed their activities, first of all, in the field which, at that time,
was of a basic importance, i.e. in the field of agricultural education for peasants.
Most often, the post of the circle chairman was held then either by the owner, or holder,
of a nearby landed estate, or else by the parson, who also was an administrator of a
rather large landed estate. Very often, they were the only authorities in the matters of
technical progress and, because of the lack of other instructors, they were fulfilling
the role of the peasants' advisers in farming.1
Between the wars their number rose to around 10,000, and their activities
did not change very much. Only after 1957 did the boom in organisations
of this type really begin, as is testified by a remarkable widening of their range
1
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966 : Agricultural Circles
and the Process of Structural Changes in Private Farms, by Andrzej Romanow (doc. RU:
WLR-C/66/26, Part II, p. 14). See also in this connexion Helena Zembrzuska: Les cercles
agricoles, organisation sociale et économique des paysans en Pologne (Warsaw, Institut
d'éditions de la Centrale agricole des coopératives, 1967).
240
Poland
of activities. The fact was that until 1956 the policy of collectivisation of
rural property had caused people to lose interest in the agricultural circles,
with the result that at the end of 1956 they numbered barely 1,700. Within
the space of a year, however, as a result of the new policy initiated by
Mr. Gomulka, nearly 10,000 new circles made their appearance. By 1966
there were some 33,000, with a membership of 1.7 million peasants1, which
meant that 80 per cent of the villages were involved in this peasant movement
and more than 30 per cent of peasants with farms of more than about an
acre and a quarter were members of agricultural circles.2
Agricultural circles are bodies corporate whose aim is to improve working
and farming conditions through mechanisation of the heavier jobs and through
the introduction of all the implements and methods which are the fruits of
modern agricultural technology.
Unlike the old circles, which were primarily concerned with vocational
training, the present-day circles take a keen interest in production, particularly
since 1959. Before then a gap of about 50 per cent between the price paid
to the producer for his "compulsory deliveries" and the free-market price was
maintained primarily with the intention of financing the country's industrialisation. As a result the peasants had little money available to improve their
methods; in 1957-58 agricultural circles were only able to purchase, with money
scraped together by the peasants, some 1,500 tractors, 2,500 ploughs and 1,800
threshing machines for collective use. Between 1960 and 1965, however,
purchases soared to 35,000 tractors, 50,000 ploughs, 18,000 grain drillers,
7,000 fertiliser distributors, 15,000 reaper-mowers, 20,000 binders, 30,000
threshers and many other agricultural machines.*
This tremendous upsurge in purchases was the result of a decision by the
Government to establish in 1959 an Agricultural Development Fund, which
derives its resources from the difference between the compulsory delivery
price and the free-market price.4 Until 1965 the money collected in this way
was refunded, 70 per cent going to the agricultural circles and 20 per cent to
1
See Lipski, op. cit., p. 8.
* Figures taken from the report of the Central Union of Agricultural Circles (Warsaw,
1965) and from material based on research carried out by the Institute of Agricultural Economics. See Romanow, op. cit., p. 4.
* Romanow, op. cit., pp. 6 and 7.
* Until 1955 compulsory deliveries accounted for 20 per cent of total cereal production,
about 10 per cent of potato production, about 25 per cent of meat production and nearly
10 per cent of milk production. The latter product was exempted from the compulsory
delivery scheme at the end of 1955, and in the following year the percentages required of the
other products were considerably reduced. See Joseph Okuniewski : Transformations ofPolish
Agriculture in Conditions of Industrialisation and Demographic Growth, paper submitted at
the Seminar on Land Structure and Co-operatives, Rome, 1966 (Rome, FAO, 1966)
(mimeographed doc. RU:TAS/66/2), p. 6.
241
Agricultural organisations and development
their district unions to finance the bulk of their investments, the remaining
10 per cent being invested in the farm machinery industry. Since then a further
step forward was taken under the most recent Five-Year Plan (1966-70), which
provided for the money to be refunded in full to the agricultural circles.1
These funds, proportionate to the volume of compulsory deliveries, constitute a form of compulsory savings for the benefit of the community; they
are paid into bank accounts opened for each village and placed at the disposal
of the circle to which they are due. Today they amount to some 4,000 million
zlotys per year. To this are added the contributions paid by members and the
payments they make for the hire of machinery and for other services rendered
by the circles. The funds in question are the collective property of the village
and in consequence cannot be used by individuals nor transferred to the
account of another village.
These funds can be used for a whole series of purposes, including:
(a) The purchase of machinery for collective use. Such purchases afford
an answer to the problem of lack of capital which besets the smaller farms and
prevent wasteful use of machinery; for instance, the average number of hours
a tractor must work in order to recoup the money invested in it within a
reasonable time is 1,000 per year, and in 1964 the circles managed to get an
average of 967 hours' work out of each tractor 8 , thus approaching the theoretical optimum. Machines are hired out not only to circle members but also
to other farmers in the village, but, so as to encourage the latter to join the
circles, the circles allow those of their members who have contributed financially towards the purchase of machinery a 20 per cent rebate on the cost of
its hire. Moreover, since the circles are not all equally prosperous—their
income being in direct proportion to their compulsory deliveries—the weaker
can lend their machines to the stronger and arrange for the latter to do the
work for them. The villages where there is no agricultural circle can transfer
their funds to the local branch of the State machinery centres, which will
organise a machinery pool for the benefit of private farmers (each branch caters
for farms within a radius of about 5 kilometres; in 1966 it was planned to
establish 700 such branches).
(b) Agronomic improvements. Agricultural circles play a major role in
improving the quality of farm produce. They investigate different crop
varieties, experiment with new seed qualities and breeds of livestock and supply
them to peasants, advise them on the use of fertilisers and help them to modernise and mechanise their stock-breeding methods. The circles also have plots
of land for their own use which they utilise for experimental and instructional
1
2
242
See Lipski, op. cit., p. 6.
Ter-Avanesyan, op. cit., p. 57.
Poland
purposes. These plots are farmed jointly by the circle members, who receive
grants from the State for the initial work of bringing them into operation.
(c) Vocational training. Vocational training, which before the war was
handled almost entirely by the agricultural circles, has now acquired a much
broader basis in Poland, and today many institutions—primary and secondary
schools, agricultural colleges, scientific institutes, experiment stations, not to
mention the winter vocational training courses given by 5,000 agronomists,
each of whom takes in hand two or three villages—play their part in ensuring
that the country's needs are met. Even though their own role has become
relatively less important, the agricultural circles still play a part in the training
of Polish peasants as co-organisers of programmes and courses.
(d) Work on behalf of the female rural population. Many villages have
rural housewives' clubs (with a membership of around 500,000 in 1965), which
do a remarkable job in raising the cultural level and improving the social
status of the female population. Among the numerous activities of these
clubs mention must be made of the organisation of dress-making and cookery
classes and courses in home economics and health protection for mothers and
children.
They also organise collective farming ventures in fields such as
poultry farming. At the local level they are managed by committees whose
members sit on the managing committees of the agricultural circles; at the
district and regional levels their activities as a whole are administered respectively by the district council of rural housewives' clubs and the regional council
of agricultural circles.1
The Polish agricultural circles are allowed a fairly free hand in carrying on
all these activities. The purchase of machinery and tractors, the organisation
of the work and the conclusion of contracts for the engagement of the necessary
staff—mainly tractor drivers—are dealt with internally by each circle :
Only the general principles governing the efficient economic andfinancialoperation
of the farmers' clubs [i.e. agricultural circles] are embodied in guidelines prepared
by the Central Union of Agricultural Circles. These guidelines deal with the amortisation of machines, the cost of services, the system of accounting and financial
management, and the supervision of the various farmers' clubs by the higher echelons
of the union organisation. The village agronomist, who is employed by the district
Union of Farmers' Clubs, is the principal adviser to the managements of the farmers'
clubs.2
In addition, co-ordination between the work of the various agricultural
circles and their unions on the one hand and the Government's agricultural
1
Ter-Avanesyan, op. cit., p. 58.
Okuniewski : "Collective Forms of the Organisation of Agricultural Production and
Social Changes in Polish Rural Areas", op. cit., pp. 37-38.
2
243
Agricultural organisations and development
policy on the other is ensured by participation of representatives of the Central
Union of Agricultural Circles on the Ministry of Agriculture commission and
by the direct co-operation of the provincial and district unions of agricultural
circles with the agricultural sections of the people's councils.
Despite the difficulties encountered by the agricultural circles, due to the
fact that the farmers who help to run them without payment are sometimes too
busy with work on their own farms to devote as much time as is needed to the
activities of the circles, the circles are improving their services as the years go
by and are attracting members in increasing numbers. Not only do they help
to broaden the outlook of the peasants and bind up their personal interests
more closely with those of the community, but it is to them that the credit must
largely go for the technological advances recorded in every aspect of Polish
rural life. Even though their example cannot, any more than any other, be
purely and simply transposed to the newly developing countries, it merits
careful attention whenever the problem arises of boosting agricultural development without loss of time and without wastage, with the aim not only of bringing about technological progress but of integrating the peasantry in the national
economy.
USSR
• Trade Union of Agricultural Wage Earners and Salaried Employees
In the USSR there is only one agricultural employees' organisation—the
Trade Union of Agricultural Wage Earners and Salaried Employees (Profsoyuz
rabochikh i sluzhashchikh sel'skogo khozyaistva S SR), founded in Moscow
in June 1919.1 This is the largest trade union in the Soviet Union; at 1 January 1966 it had nearly 14 million members, or about 50 per cent of all agricultural wage earners and salaried employees.2
The union's members comprise permanent wage-earning and salaried
employees of sovkhozes (State farms), undertakings for the repair and maintenance of farm equipment and the construction and operation of irrigation
systems, flour mills and plants for the manufacture of synthetic fodder, silos
and storehouses for the wheat delivered to the State, as well as students and
professors from senior and intermediate-level agricultural colleges, scientists
from scientific research institutes and employees of agricultural administrative
1
For further details as to the origin and functioning of trade unions in the USSR, see,
inter alia, ILO: The Trade Union Situation in the USSR (Geneva, 1960); Patrice Gélard: Les
syndicats soviétiques, Notes et études documentaires, No. 3185 (Paris, 27 April 1965).
2
See M. Sonin and E. Zhiltsov: "Economie Development and Employment in the Soviet
Union", International Labour Review, Vol. 96, No. 1, July 1967, pp. 67-91.
244
USSR
bodies; 91 per cent of the workers employed by and students attending the
estabUshments or organisations covered by the union are members of the
union.
In addition to these wage-earning and salaried employees of State undertakings and bodies, union membership is open to farmers from the kolkhozes
(collective farms), tractor and combine-harvester drivers, vehicle drivers,
mechanics and other skilled workers responsible for the repair and maintenance
of farm equipment, as well as experts working in the kolkhozes.
It should be added that, the farming economy of the Soviet Union being
socialised, tenant farming and share-cropping do not exist in that country and
land is never bought, sold or leased. This explains why there are no tenants
or share-croppers among the union's members.
We should also note that in the Soviet Union every agricultural undertaking,
body or training establishment has its own staff association. Today some
76,000 organisations of this type are affiliated to the union.
It is obvious that, with such a large following and in view of the extensive
rights it enjoys, the union is in a position to exercise a considerable influence
upon the development of agricultural production, take an active part in the
administration of this branch of the economy and secure improvements in
the living conditions of agricultural wage earners and salaried employees, from
the standpoint both of material and cultural amenities and of comfort, health
and hygiene.
In each undertaking the staff association encourages all wage earners and
salaried employees to become members, enhances their cultural level, their
political knowledge and their general standard of education and familiarises
them with the economic problems and development prospects of their branch
of activity; it trains them to be uncompromisingly ruthless in dealing with any
shortcomings in the way their undertaking is run and in the way their own
association operates. It also induces wage earners and salaried employees
to take an active part in the management of their undertaking by giving them
a say in planning and in the utilisation of the resources available ; it regularly
calls meetings at the undertaking level to discuss problems arising in connexion
with the organisation of the work and of production, and sees that the decisions
taken are implemented.
In collaboration with the managers of sovkhozes, silos, forestry undertakings, factories and so on, the staff associations inculcate and develop a
spirit of socialist rivalry among wage earners and salaried employees and
encourage them to fulfil and over-fulfil the State plan, while at the same time
striving to provide them with the working conditions necessary to maintain
a steady increase in productivity and to enable output targets to be met. They
also work for the introduction of new technological processes and of the
245
Agricultural organisations and development
improved methods of operation suggested by innovators; to this end courses are
organised which teach the methods used by the undertaking's star workers.
Again, they support the adoption of suggestions which aim to bring about
more rational working.
In addition, the staff association combats bad management and wastage of
manpower, resources and materials and assists whenever the occasion arises
with the introduction of adequate accounting systems and with the strengthening of discipline in all sectors, in the interests of the State.
The management of each agricultural undertaking signs a collective agreement with the staff association committee, acting on behalf of the wageearning and salaried employees, and ensures that the commitments entered
into therein are carried out within the given time-limits. The collective
agreement sets out the mutual obligations of management and staff as concerns
the fulfilment and over-fulfilment of production plans, the maintenance of a
steady rise in output, and the improvement of the working and living conditions
of the workers. It is accordingly the task of the staff association committee,
helped by the rank-and-file members, to check daily that the clauses of the
agreement are being complied with, to take note of the pronouncements made
by the head of the undertaking, to discuss these at general meetings and to take
the necessary steps to ensure the observance of the commitments entered into in
the collective agreement. Furthermore, if there is a breach of the agreement,
the staff association must propose to the next highest union body in its branch
of activity that proceedings be initiated against the management of the undertaking, either through administrative channels or, if the infringement is deliberate, in the courts.
The terms of reference of a staff association committee are indeed manifold,
and include: checking that output targets and the different levels of pay rates
are properlyfixedand respected,findingout why certain workers fail to achieve
the output targets and taking steps to put matters right, ensuring that the
correct wages are paid on the right date and that wages legislation is observed
by the management, endeavouring every day to improve working conditions
and standards of health and hygiene, making sure that the management instructs workers promptly in methods of work which conform to the safety
regulations and takes all necessary steps to prevent occupational diseases or
employment injuries, and seeing to it that protective clothing is distributed to
the staff as required. Among the other tasks which fall to the association
we must not overlook participation in the settlement of labour disputes,
the conclusion of agreements with the management on the protection of
workers and occupational safety, the enforcement of legislation on hours
of work, the provision of rest periods for wage earners and salaried
employees, the conditions of employment of women and young persons, the
246
USSR
granting of temporary invalidity, pregnancy and maternity allowances, the
initiation of legal proceedings against undertakings with a view to securing
damages, the sending of wage earners and salaried employees to sanatoria and
rest homes, and the improvement of medical care facilities.
The staff association committee is also responsible for the political and
cultural education of the rank-and-file members; it supervises the activities
of the undertaking's clubs, libraries and cinemas, encourages physical culture
and sport, and organises rest cures and extra-curricular activities for children.
The staff association committee wages a constant campaign to improve the
living conditions of wage earners and salaried employees: it sets up the system
whereby the working masses keep watch on the implementation of plans for
the construction of housing and buildings for social use (culture, hygiene, etc.),
and ensures the maintenance of order at the community centres. It must also
press for the better management of canteens, snack bars, stores or shops, and
mobile canteens for tractor drivers and other workers during farming operations or repair work. It must also help to further the activities of consumer
co-operatives and improve their efficiency. It also takes part in the allocation
of space available for rent, gives as much aid as possible to workers building
their own homes, lays out collective vegetable plots and gardens and encourages
workers to have gardens of their own.
Lastly, the staff association committee participates in the sharing-out of
the undertaking fund. This fund is defined in the following terms by section 14
of the regulations governing socialist State production undertakings, approved
by Order of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on 4 October 1965:
Section 14
The profits of the undertaking (or, in the case of undertakings for which the plan
does not provide for profits, the savings resulting from the lowering of the cost price)
shall be shared out in accordance with the balance sheet of income and expenditure
(financial plan) and in conformity with the rules drawn up by the Council of Ministers
of the USSR.
Sums shall be set aside from the profits of the undertaking (or the savings resulting
from the lowering of the cost price) and placed at the disposal of the undertaking
so as to give its staff a greater material interest in the fulfilment of the plan and ensure
that production is profitable. These sums shall constitute a fund (to be known as
the undertaking fund) for the improvement of the conditions of life of the workers
(from a cultural standpoint as well as from that of comfort and hygiene) and the
perfecting of production methods. The percentage of the profits (or of the savings
resulting from the lowering of the cost price) to be set aside, and the procedure to be
followed in setting up and drawing money from this fund, shall be determined for
undertakings in the different branches of the economy by Orders respecting the undertaking fund to be approved by the Council of Ministers of the USSR.
The money from the undertaking fund shall be used for the introduction of new
technological processes, the modernisation of equipment, the extension of production,
the construction of housing and buildings to be used for social purposes (hygiene,
247
Agricultural organisations and development
cultural activities, etc.), the maintenance of dwellings, individual bonuses, improvements in medical and welfare facilities (comfort, hygiene, etc.), the purchase of
medical supplies, the issuance of travel passes to sanatoria and rest homes and the
payment of exceptional allowances to workers.
It shall be prohibited for higher administrative bodies to make any withdrawals
from the undertaking fund or to effect any change in the manner in which the money
it contains is distributed.
Profits from the manufacture of consumer commodities for everyday use and
by-products shall be placed in their entirety at the undertaking's disposal (consumer
commodities fund), and shall be used in such manner as shall be determined by the
Council of Ministers of the USSR.
Housing constructed with money from the undertaking fund and from the
consumer commodity fund shall be entirely inhabited by persons whose names are
on a list approved jointly by the management of the undertaking and the factory or
works union committee and communicated to the Executive Committee of the Soviet
of Workers' Representatives.
The union believes that the need for agrarian reform, or, more specifically,
for a redistribution of land, does not arise, since as a result of the October
Revolution the land has been nationalised and now belongs to the people as
a whole; moreover, the pattern of farming has been transformed through the
replacement of small low-yield peasant farms by large socialised enterprises
with the most modern equipment at their disposal. Hence, according to the
union, no obstacle, and particularly no obstacle of a social or economic nature,
blocks the development of the Trade Union of Agricultural Wage Earners.
As concerns collective bargaining at the national level, it should be pointed
out that in the USSR there are no central joint bodies, due, in the union's
view, to the fact that there are no paradoxical situations likely to give rise to
disputes ; any problems which do arise over the improvemen tof the material
situation of wage earners and salaried employees in general, and of those in
agriculture in particular, are dealt with constructively by the union in conjunction with the undertakings and the State agricultural bodies.
As regards the individual labour disputes which do sometimes arise in
undertakings, there exists a powerful means of bringing union pressure to bear
upon the management of an undertaking in order that the legitimate claims
of the workers may be met : joint labour disputes committees operate in nearly
all undertakings by virtue of provisions approved by the highest authority of
the State: the Supreme Soviet of the USSR.
These bodies are joint committees of management representatives and of
staff association committee members in equal numbers. If agreement is
reached between the parties, the management is required by law to put the
committee's decision into effect without delay. If the management refuses
to do so of its own accord the staff association committee may issue a special
order, which has the force of a court order, and with which the management is
bound to comply.
248
USSR
If a worker is dissatisfied with the ruling given by his staff association
committee, he may take the matter to a people's court, which must examine it
within ten days and pronounce judgment in accordance with the laws in force.
Soviet agricultural workers' unions also engage in many activities outside
the undertaking, thanks to their being represented on various bodies such as the
Ministry of Agriculture of the USSR, the Ministry of Land Improvement and
Irrigation Works, the Agricultural Equipment Association, the Council of
Ministers of the USSR, the State Stockpiling Committee and all agricultural
undertakings and organisations whose range covers the whole of the Soviet
Union, a federated republic, a province, a region or a district: all these are
required, on the instructions of the Government, to invite the Central Committee of Trade Unions of Agricultural and Stockpiling Wage Earners and
Salaried Employees (or its committee at the level of the federated republic,
province, region, district or locality concerned) to attend their meetings so that
decisions may be discussed and adopted jointly; they must take the opinions
of the workers' organisations into account and supply them with full documentation.
In addition, a new range of legislative enactments taking into account
the increasing part played by the trade unions in the development of the State
and of the economy were adopted in 1958 with a view to strengthening even
further their role in production planning and the improvement of the living
and working conditions of wage earners and salaried employees ; these measures
strengthen the unions' hand and confer more extensive rights upon them. In
July 1958, for instance, the Praesidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR
published a decree proclaiming the rights of factory, works and local trade
union committees. Furthermore, the Council of Ministers of the USSR and
the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions have adopted regulations
providing for regular production conferences to be held in industrial undertakings, on building sites and in sovkhozes.
The decree setting forth the rights of trade union committees provides that
the management may not discharge a wage earner or a salaried employee without
the staff association's agreement. Moreover, extensive powers are vested in
the staff association committee to enable it to supervise the activities of the
undertaking; it may take cognisance of reports by the manager and demand
better management.
No housing may be allocated, no worker may be categorised, no scales of
pay for work performed may be drawn up, no production targets may be set
nor bonus systems applied without consultation of the staff association committee. In addition the staff associations are empowered to supervise marketing activities and the activities of the establishments providing food and catering facilities.
249
Agricultural organisations and development
The staff association committee may take the initiative of proposing the
removal from office or disciplining of managerial staff who show a penchant
for bureaucratic routine or who infringe the labour laws. In addition, when
appointments are made to senior posts in undertakings, the views of the
staff association committee must be taken into consideration. Members
of the staff association committee may not be dismissed, nor may disciplinary measures be taken against them, without the agreement of the committee.
In order to encourage wage earners and salaried employees to play a part
themselves in finding solutions to production problems, "production conferences" have been organised in undertakings, large workshops, services and
farms. These conferences must conform to their own set of regulations,
approved by the Council of Ministers and the All-Union Central Council
of Trade Unions of the USSR. The managements of undertakings co-operate
fully in ensuring that these conferences are properly organised and in implementing their decisions, while the staff association committee directs the proceedings and ensures that the decisions are in fact implemented. The conferences discuss basic problems connected with the activities of the undertaking,
improvements in working conditions, and the means whereby wage earners
and salaried employees may enjoy the comforts of modern civilisation. Workers' suggestions adopted at these conferences must to be acted upon by the
management. Hence the conferences serve as an excellent management training
school for the workers taking part in them.
As concerns the successes it has achieved the Trade Union of Agricultural
Wage Earners and Salaried Employees emphasises that the most important
side of its activities is the work it does to bring about improvements in the
material circumstances of wage earners and salaried employees, although
it points out that, while much has already been done in this field, a great deal
more still remains to be done. First and foremost, the wages of agricultural
workers have risen substantially over the past few years; since 1961 they have
gone up by an average of 30 per cent. A scale of guaranteed wages, based
on the rates of pay prevailing in the sovkhozes, has been in operation in all
the kolkhozes in the country since July 1966 ; and according to the plan approved
for the years 1966-70 the earnings of both wage earners and salaried employees
should increase by at least 20 per cent, and those of collective farmers by
from 35 to 40 per cent.
In another field, that of housing, the past two years alone have seen the
provision of some 11 million square yards of living space for workers. Staff
association committees and heads of undertakings offer those wage earners,
salaried employees and collective farmers who are building their own homes
tangible support through the purchase and conveyance to the site of materials
250
USSR
and through help with the actual building work, in accordance with plans
incorporating modern ideas.
Furthermore, each agricultural worker is given for his own use, in addition
to his wages, a plot of land on which he can grow the vegetables and fruit he
needs, and he can also have a few farm animals for his own use—cows, pigs,
sheep, rabbits and poultry—whose feed is supplied to him. We may say that
to a large extent a worker's family is able to feed itself on the produce from
his individual plot. The plots thus made available to collective farmers and
employees in the Soviet Union represent a total area of 20.5 million acresx ;
on these plots 25 million head of cattle (including 6.5 million cows) and
16 million sheep and goats, not to mention the many millions of farmyard
animals, are raised. A substantial percentage of the area involved is farmed by
agricultural workers, who own an equally substantial share of the livestock.
It should also be borne in mind that a worker who lives in his own home
pays no rent, while a worker who lives in a State-owned dwelling does not
spend more than 4 per cent of his wages on his accommodation.2
In the USSR there are 98 senior agricultural colleges and 680 secondary
technical agricultural training colleges; in addition 1,274 mechanised farming
schools have been opened to train specialists in this type of farming and other
senior skilled agricultural staff. As a result, in 1966, the collective farms alone
could avail themselves of the services of 47,000 agronomists, 38,000 stockbreeding experts, 46,000 veterinarians and 44,000 engineers and technicians.3
'This total may be broken down as follows: 12.5 million acres belong to collective
farmers, 11.75 million of which are actually cultivated; 7.25 million acres are held by employees of the sovkhozes and other State undertakings, 6.5 million of which are actually cultivated;
and 750,000 acres are in the hands of wage-earning and salaried employees in other sectors.
Thus, of the 20.5 million acres, 19 million are actually cultivated. See Narodnoe Khozyaistvo
SSSR 1965 [The national economy of the USSR in 1965] (Moscow, 1966), p. 277.
According to information published in connexion with the Third Collective Farmers' Congress,
held in Moscow in November 1969, this area of 20.5 million acres will need to be increased
to cater for the growing number of individual plots required, since henceforth every
collective farmer will be allowed to farm for his own use up to 1.25 acres of land, or about
3,000 square yards more than hitherto. Today it appears that individual plots account
for more than half the egg and vegetable production and more than one-third of the meat
sold on the home market. See Le Monde (Paris), 29 November 1969.
2
To this must be added the fact that electricity, gas and fuel prices are extremely low
in the Soviet Union; in the sovkhozes, for instance, 1 kW of electricity costs 4 kopecks,
gas 16 kopecks per person per month, and it costs 1 rouble 48 kopecks per month to heat an
area of 30 square yards. Collective farms with central heating and gas pay for it out of the
common social fund. Furthermore, Soviet wage earners and salaried employees only have
to pay one type of income tax, from which earnings below 60 roubles per month are exempt,
while for those earning between 60 and 100 roubles the rate of taxation is extremely low:
4.50 roubles for 70 roubles, 5.80 roubles for 80 roubles, 7 roubles for 90 roubles and 8.20
roubles for 100 roubles.
3
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Land Reform and
Organisation of the Peasants into Co-operatives in the USSR (doc. RU:WLR-C/66/49), p. 7.
251
Agricultural organisations and development
Not only is the training provided free of charge, but in addition scholarships
are oifered to pupils and students. Moreover, the children of those attending
vocational training schools or works schools are fed and clothed free of charge.
All wage earners and salaried employees in industry and agriculture benefit
from social security on equal terms. Until 1964 pensions and allowances
were payable to collective farmers out of the kolkhozes' own funds, and there
was no standard system for determining the amount of a pension and the
procedure for its payment. In July 1964 the Supreme Soviet of the USSR
adopted an Act introducing pensions and other benefits for members of
collective farms, thus providing them with a State social security scheme.1
The social insurance budget of the union for 1965 amounted to 521 million
roubles, of which 200 million roubles were paid out in temporary incapacity
benefit; wage earners are entitled to an allowance equal to 90 per cent of their
average earnings when they are ill.
Every wage earner or salaried employee is entitled either to material
aid in the form of sickness benefit or to a pension (if a medical board certifies
that he is disabled). A pregnancy and confinement allowance is paid by the
Social Insurance Fund to women workers for a period of 112 days2, and a
nursing allowance is also payable ; it is this fund too which pays pensions to
retired and disabled workers, the amount of which varies between 30 and 120
roubles per month.
Similarly, the Social Insurance Fund finances the system of passes for
travel to spas and rest homes; wage earners and salaried employees pay only
30 per cent of the cost of a concessionary travel pass themselves, the rest being
borne by their unions out of their social insurance budget. Moreover, a substantial proportion of wage earners and salaried employees are offered free
passes. In the years 1964 and 1965 alone, for instance, the union spenta total
of some 46 million roubles on thermal and other treatment and sent
nearly 700,000 people to spas and rest homes. Out of the same funds it also
pays for children's summer holidays in outer suburban homes (850,000
children enjoyed such holidays in the space of two years, at a cost of more than
18 million roubles).
Furthermore, a whole series of technical measures have been introduced
in the USSR in the field of health and hygiene, and also in the field of law
1
See in this respect: "USSR: Compulsory Pension Insurance for Members of Collective
Farms", International Labour Review, Vol. XC, No. 6, December 1964, pp. 581-583.
"The number of days, fixed at 77 until March 1956, was increased to 112 working
days (56 prior to confinement and 56 afterwards) by the Decree of 26 March 1956. Under
the terms of this decree, if the confinement is abnormal or if two or more children are born
the post-confinement leave must be increased to 70 working days. See L'organisation
kolkhozienne en URSS, Notes et études documentaires, No. 2298 (Paris, 4 June 1957), p. 16.
252
USSR
enforcement, to ensure healthy and danger-free working conditions in agriculture. The creation of such conditions, and the dogged, persistent efforts
to make work less arduous through the introduction of advanced machinery
and the automation of production, are two of the most fundamental principles
of the organisation of agricultural work, as well as being an important pre-requisite for a continuing rise in labour productivity.
Accordingly, in view of the constant concern shown by the Soviet Union
in the improvement of the working conditions of agricultural workers, more
and more funds are being made available for this purpose every year, while
the arrangements for supervision, both by the authorities and by the people
themselves, to ensure observance of the rules and standards for labour protection and safety are becoming increasingly effective.
The task of the trade unions, according to a resolution adopted by the
Thirteenth Congress of Trade Unions of the USSR, is to campaign relentlessly
against violation of labour legislation, to strengthen supervision in respect
of occupational safety and protection against employment injuries and occupational diseases, to assist in bringing about the mechanisation of labourintensive operations and in doing away with the need for laborious physical
effort, as well as in securing the introduction of modern safety methods,
and to devote greater attention to the problems of raising the cultural level.
Trade unions, being the most important organisations for the working
masses, have the right to exercise supervision, on behalf of the State and on
behalf of the people, with a view to the enforcement of labour legislation and
of the internal rules and health standards of undertakings as they relate to
safety. The unions exercise this right through the intermediary of technical
inspectors, together with people's labour protection committees and inspectors
appointed by the staff association committees of agricultural undertakings.
In addition to the help it gives to the organisation of educational facilities
for children of pre-school and school age, the union carries out a great deal of
cultural and educational work among its members and their families, earmarking a substantial proportion of its funds for this purpose. In 1965, for instance,
nearly half the budget was allocated to cultural and sports activities (including
physical culture). It maintains a vast network of cultural and sports organisations in undertakings, complementing the State-operated theatres, cinemas,
libraries, stadia and conference halls in the towns and villages. For example,
it possesses more than 43,000 buildings where educational facilities are provided
for the masses and where those working in the central State farms, in undertakings and in subsidiary and other State farms can spend their leisure time.
It also owns more than 13,000 film projectors.
Lectures and talks are regularly organised on these premises, as well as
debates on scientific, technical and political subjects. Professional artists
253
Agricultural organisations and development
frequently appear there, but at the same time there has been an upsurge in
a wide variety of amateur theatrical activities. Today there are about 40,000
amateur dramatics, choral, dance and stage management groups, in whose
activities nearly 580,000 union members regularly participate. In 1965,
amateur and professional theatrical performers gave tens of thousands of
performances on the club stages, watched by most of the wage-earning and
salaried employees and their families. Many of the union amateur theatrical
groups do not fall far short of the professional troupes as regards their mastery
of their art, which is universally recognised throughout the country. In
addition more than 130,000 children belong to children's musical and other
theatrical groups attached to the clubs.
By developing cultural and educational activities, particularly in the field
of amateur theatricals, and by showingfilmsregularly at meetings of cultural
groups, the union provides its members, especially the younger ones, with
wholesome ways of spending their leisure time. It should be added that nearly
all undertakings and inhabited localities have their own broadcasting equipment, while many of the union members possess television sets and radios,
subscribe to newspapers and magazines and have built up their own libraries,
thus providing themselves with plenty of opportunities to acquire knowledge.
Thanks to this range of activities and to the extension of education, the
Soviet Union, which lately suffered from the festering sore of rural illiteracy,
has now succeeded in eliminating it almost completely; whereas in 1939 only
86.3 per cent of those members of the rural population who were old enough
to read and write could in fact do so, by 1959 the figure had already risen to
98.2 per cent.1
Sport and physical culture have likewise made great headway in a good
number of agricultural undertakings, which provide the necessary equipment.
The workers' organisations have founded in the villages nearly 33,000 physical
culture and sports clubs to which 4.3 million wage earners and salaried employees belong; the union possesses several thousand stadia and playing fields and
a huge quantity of sports equipment, as well as spending more than 8.5 million
roubles a year on developing sport.
The Trade Union of Agricultural Wage Earners and Salaried Employees,
as one of the component parts of the country's trade union movement, belongs
to the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions of the USSR, and carries out
its task in accordance with by-laws approved by its congress, which is its
supreme authority.
1
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Land Reform and
Organisation of the Peasants into Co-operatives in the USSR, op. cit., p. 7.
254
Europe: Conclusions
In the interim period between two congresses, the management of the union
is handled by the central committee, elected by the congress, while for the dayto-day work the plenum of the central committee appoints from among its
members a president, two secretaries and the members of the praesidium of
the central committee.
Locally, the workers' organisations are managed by 14 federated republic
committees, 130 regional and provincial committees and 2,600 district committees appointed by the conferences of their respective local unions ; these
committees remain in office for a period of two years.
The Trade Union of Agricultural Wage Earners and Salaried Employees
belongs to the Trade Unions International of Agricultural, Forestry and Plantation Workers, itself affiliated to the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU).
CONCLUSIONS
Replies to our questionnaire were received from some sixty organisations in
European countries, and although the resulting picture is incomplete, it does
give a reasonable idea of the development of these organisations since the end of
the Second World War.
A scrutiny of the data thus provided reveals a highly positive trend,
inasmuch as these agricultural organisations are extending the range of their
activities and their influence alike. One feature is especially striking, namely,
the increase in the proportion of organised workers in relation to the number
of agricultural workers as a whole.
Compared with the position before the war, and especially to the position
between 1925 and 1928 (see table 3, pp. 82-84), there has been a big expansion
of the trade union movement among agricultural workers; at the same time,
there has been a marked fall in the total number of people employed on the
land. Let us take a look at the figures. In Germany, there were 3.9 million
agricultural wage earners in the 1920s. In 1925, 284,000 of these were organised, i.e. roughly 7 per cent of the whole. In 1966, there were 77,000 organised
workers in the Federal Republic of Germany out of a total of some 250,000,
i.e. roughly 30 per cent. In the 1920s in the United Kingdom, there were some
720,000 agricultural wage earners and salaried employees, of whom 5.5 per
cent (40,000 persons) belonged to trade unions; in 1966, there were 500,000
workers, of whom 143,000 (28.6 per cent) were trade unionists. In the 1920s,
12,833 (3.2 per cent) of the 400,000 Dutch agricultural workers belonged to
trade unions; at present, there are 100,000 workers, of whom 72,400 (72 per
cent) are organised. In 1926, out of some 4 million Italian agricultural workers,
255
Agricultural organisations and development
700,000 were trade unionists (17.5 per cent); there are now 1.43 million out
of a total of 1.5 million (no less than 95 per cent, perhaps one of the highest
rates in Europe). In Austria, there were no more than 49,000 trade unionists
out of some 500,000 workers (less than 10 per cent); today, there are fewer
than 100,000 workers, but half belong to trade unions. Of course, the
dates on which censuses were taken do not always tally with the dates on
which trade union returns were made, and union membershipfiguresfluctuated
considerably before the war; nevertheless, the over-all pattern of development
is perfectly clear.
In the countries of Eastern Europe (the Soviet Union excepted), the Second
World War provided a complete break with the past, with the result that the
trade union movement as it exists today is in no sense comparable with what
existed before the war. The organisations set up immediately after the war
embrace the great majority of the peasantry, and the percentages are thus very
high—between 50 and 90 per cent.
If we take European countries as a whole, we find there are no legislative
obstacles to the extension of trade union activities. Most organisations say
that the greatest obstacle they encounter lies in the fact that agricultural workers
are so scattered; this is the case in Austria, Belgium, France, the Federal
Republic of Germany and Italy. The answers received from the last of these
countries also mention illiteracy, the system of land tenure, and the intractability of the employers towards trade unionists (the latter point is made by the
French organisations as well). In the Eastern European countries the traditional obstacles (the existence of huge estates, illiteracy, and so on) have largely
disappeared since the war, and today the trade unions and other agricultural
organisations keep a closer watch than ever on the development of the countryside. We cannot but deplore the fact that no replies were received from the
Mediterranean countries (France and Italy excepted). This developing region
is one in which numerous obstacles of the traditional kind still exist; hence,
had these obstacles been indicated, we should have had a picture quite different
from that offered by the highly developed countries to the north.
We unfortunately have no figures to show how the membership of general
and employers' organisations compares with the position obtaining before
the war. However, there is every reason to believe that here too progress
has been remarkable.
One important conclusion emerges from our inquiry, and holds good for
both employers' and workers' organisations, especially the latter: namely,
the change in the nature of the trade union movement from one concerned
above all with challenge and opposition, but with limited social and economic
activities, to a movement which although still militant is becoming increasingly
associated with the management of national economies. To an ever increasing
256
Europe: Conclusions
degree, governments are ready to accept these organisations as partners in
round-table discussions. This is a development of some importance. The
fact that an organisation exists does not necessarily mean that it is effective.
It must also be accepted as the mouthpiece of those it represents. If an organisation owes its genesis to negative, hostile ways of thinking rather than to
positive ideas of co-operation, it will never advance from opposition to participation, and in this case, we have a state of affairs in which the parties
concerned are all talking at once without communicating—there is no real
discussion.
Since the war, there have been various stages in the development of agricultural organisations in Europe. With the introduction of planning, or even
guidelines for planning, in the Western European countries, there has been a
change in the relations traditionally obtaining between the State and the various
branches of the economy. Discussions at the national level are much more
intensive than they used to be. Whereas in former times many problems
were considered locally and with an eye to the immediate future only, nowadays planning demands that a longer view be taken, and that the problem in
question be considered nationally. Before the war, governments in the Eastern
European countries were frequently hostile to agricultural organisations (unless
the latter happened to represent the landed interest) ; here, there has emerged
a type of organisation of a rather different kind, in comparison with those
of Western Europe. However, in the light of the socio-economic data available, there can be no doubt that it has proved effective. In addition, the
proliferation since the war of joint committees (local ones, in which the
unions are represented, and national ones within official bodies, in which both
unions and authorities are represented) has meant that, as a result, the views
advanced by governments, employers and workers diverge less than used to be
the case. As the answers elicited by this inquiry have shown, almost everybody agrees that joint bodies are both timely and effective. Lastly, there has
been an increase in the number of collective agreements and, in certain instances, of nation-wide model conventions. These have markedly reduced the
incidence of labour disputes and brought about an over-all improvement in
conditions of life in the countryside.1
1
Except in Italy, where collective agreements began to multiply from the beginning of
the century, such agreements really became common only during the First World War.
In Germany, the first dated from 1913 (in the Rhineland); but the November 1918 revolution
led to the abrogation of the old regulations applicable to farm workers and opened the door
to a spate of collective agreements from 1919 onwards. In Austria, the first such agreement
was signed in July 1919 (in Lower Austria); others followed in Styria (1921) and the Burgenland (1922). In Denmark, the first convention was signed in 1915, but only in 1918, when
the Union of Danish Land Workers really became important, did collective agreements
begin to emerge all over the country. In the Netherlands, there were a few such agreements
as far back as 1908, but the movement really began only during the last years of the First
257
Agricultural organisations and development
In general, the agricultural organisations in the Western European countries
are represented in an advisory capacity only, although they do sometimes
have a vote (as in the French Economic and Social Council and chambers of
agriculture, or as in the Federal German Agricultural Advisory Committee,
an organ of the Federal Government). In Eastern Europe, agricultural organisations are usually able to vote in official bodies. This represents a remarkable step forward; the agricultural worker is now entitled to have a say in
both the preparation and the application of plans and policies likely to affect
him.
As the links between the agricultural organisations and the authorities
are thus stronger than they used to be, the organisations are now much more
closely involved in the drafting and promulgation of legislation affecting
agriculture and the rural sector. There are numerous examples of this. Thus,
in the Federal Republic of Germany, legislation relating to the process of
adaptation to the European Economic Community's requirements, aid for
the elderly farmer, and the taxation of agricultural undertakings was in
each case proposed or prepared by the German Peasants' Association. In
Austria, legislation was enacted in 1948 concerning employment contracts
and the protection of workers ; much of the credit for this goes to the workers'
trade unions. In Belgium, the agricultural occupational organisations' efforts
have led, among other things, to the creation of the Agricultural Fund and the
Agricultural Investment Fund, and to the establishment of the system whereby
farmers and peasants are taxed according to a contractual system. In Italy,
the Federbraccianti and FISBA are responsible for the 1960 legislation dealing
with the building of houses for agricultural wage earners, and for various
other enactments of rural interest. Lastly, in the Eastern European countries,
a whole corpus of legislation has been enacted over the last twenty years—
legislation which would have been inconceivable without the participation of
rejuvenated agricultural organisations.
World War. In Poland, trade unionism had been forbidden up to 1918; only when the
Republic of Poland came into being were agricultural workers free to join unions and conclude
collective agreements (1919). In Sweden, collective agreements began to emerge from 1904
onwards, but the trade union movement withered after the general strike of 1909, and such
agreements disappeared until 1919. As was emphasised by the ILO in 1933, "the first
pre-requisite for collective settlement of conditions of employment in agriculture is the
existence of agricultural trade unions of a certain size; the spread of collective bargaining in
agriculture is therefore limited to those countries in which the land workers have combined
in associations for the protection of their occupational interests". The employers were then
more or less obliged to follow suit ; in the words of the ILO volume, "it was not until collective
bargaining was introduced into agriculture in the form of contracts between individual
employers and organised workers that the former found it necessary to protect their interests
in this direction by founding real agricultural employers' organisations". ILO: Collective
Agreements in Agriculture, Studies and Reports, Series K (Agriculture), No. 11 (Geneva,
1933), pp. 9, 12, 25-57, and passim.
258
Europe: Conclusions
Clearly, despite all the progress made, disparities, both national and
international, still exist. Thus, as regards social security, the agricultural
organisations want all-round protection, if possible within the national security
system (the reason for this being that agricultural workers are not always on
the same footing as other workers, and hence feel discriminated against).
Whereas in Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands and Sweden, for example, no
distinction is made between the agricultural and any other worker, in France
the agricultural organisations are clamouring for an extension to agricultural wage earners of the general social security system, believing that the
agricultural mutual benefit system is less advantageous than the general
scheme. The same holds good of the Italian organisations, which are demanding that the provident schemes run by mutual benefit societies be thoroughly
overhauled. In Eastern Europe, a similar problem apparently arises here and
there: although in the USSR wage and salary earners in agriculture and
industry are members of the same social security scheme, in Hungary, on the
other hand, a unified system was introduced only in July 1966, to do away
with the discrepancies existing between agricultural and industrial employment
in social security matters.
Disparities, too, exist in three other respects: equality of pay as between
farm and factory worker, working hours, and paid holidays. The trade unions
have long made the official regulation of working hours one of their main
objectives. Before the Second World War, no more than a dozen countries
had enacted regulations in any serious sense; today, the matter is covered by
national legislation in every country.1 In other instances, the practice frequently was simply to abide by local usage. In the former Austro-Hungarian
Empire, for example, Act No. XLV (1907)2, regulating the relationship
between farmers and farm labourers, laid down that the latter must be allowed
sufficient time for night rest, account being taken of local practice and the time
of year. Another piece of legislation (Act No. II, 1898), in force, it seems, as
late as 1932, merely laid down that an agricultural worker's day should last
from sunrise to sunset with a midday rest of one hour; from 15 April to 30
September, there was an additional half-hour break morning and afternoon.3
1
Working hours were not covered by the same legal instruments everywhere. In some
countries, legislation and collective agreements complemented each other. In 1938, general
legislation governed working hours in Czechoslovakia, Italy and Spain; special agricultural
legislation covered the matter in Austria, Germany and Sweden; in Austria, Czechoslovakia,
Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland and Sweden, there
were collective rules and agreements; in England and Ireland minimum wage fixing boards
laid down working hours. See ILO: Social Problems in Agriculture, Studies and Reports,
Series K (Agriculture), No. 14 (Geneva, 1938), p. 34.
a
Bulletin de l'Office international du Travail (Basle), Vol. VI, 1907, p. 294.
8
See "The Present Regulation of Working Hours in Agriculture", International Labour
Review, Vol. XXV, No. 1, January 1932, pp. 90-91.
259
Agricultural organisations and development
In other countries where there was legislation directly applicable to the farm
labourer, a maximum working day was sometimes laid down for certain times
of year (a ten-hour day, for instance, for four months), and it sometimes
happened that thefigurethus given was interpreted as an average for the whole
year. Hence the gap between law and practice was vastly wider than it is
today. As regards paid holidays, the first legislative enactments were promulgated in Finland and the Soviet Union (Labour Code, 1922), then in
Czechoslovakia (1925), Spain (1931) and France (1936). Such holidays
usually depended on custom and collective agreement, sometimes on general
or special legislation, and were exceedingly short.1 In this respect, as with
working hours, the progress made has been remarkable. This will be readily
seen from table 9. True, in some countries the agricultural worker is better
off than in others, but everywhere the position is incomparably better than
before the war.
As regards equality of pay as between the field and the factory floor, the
figures, scanty as they are, are significant. In Eastern Europe, there are
variations. Thus, in Hungary, agricultural wages are roughly equal to those
in industry; they are slightly higher in Bulgaria. In Czechoslovakia, in 1964,
they varied between 68 and 81 per cent of industrial wages. In some countries,
the two are equal, but in the absence of detailed information as to how the
figures are arrived at (whether they take account of prices, productivity,
subsidies, and so on) we cannot say why this is so. In Western Europe, the
data gleaned by the author, plus those assembled by the ILO in 1958 2, show
that between 1958 and 1966 agricultural wages, in relation to those in industry,
increased from 66.3 to 80-85 per cent in Sweden, from 70-80 to 80 per cent in
the Netherlands, and from 58.8 to 70 per cent in the United Kingdom. Interestingly enough, in none of these three countries, highly developed in agricultural matters though they be, have the unions managed to achieve that parity
to which they all aspire and which, for Western economies, may well prove to
be Utopian rather than realistic; for parity depends on the speed with which
a particular branch of activity increases productivity in relation to all the others,
and, bearing in mind both the way in which agriculture is at present organised
and the natural limitations on increases in agricultural productivity, we shall
realise that parity is unlikely to be attained (and if attained, maintained) in
1
Holidays depended on custom in Hungary, Latvia, Switzerland and Yugoslavia; on
collective agreements in Austria, Czechoslovakia, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands,
Norway, Poland and Sweden; on speeial legislatien in Austria, Denmark and Estonia; and
on general legislation in Czechoslovakia, Finland, France, Spain, and the USSR. As was
the case with the working day, legislation in some countries was supplemented by agreements.
See ILO: Social Problems in Agriculture, op. cit., p. 43.
s
ILO: Why Labour Leaves the Land, Studies and Reports, New Series, No. 59 (Geneva,
1960), p. 206.
260
Europe: Conclusions
Table 9. Europe : Reduction of the working day and increase in paid holidays
Average
working
week in
hours
before 1940
Average
working
week in
hours
today
Annual paid
holidays
in working
days for
adult workers
before 1940
Annual paid
holidays in
working days today
Workers
over 18
Workers
under 18
Austria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Czechoslovakia
56.5-58
?
45
45
46
46
3-8
?
7
6
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany (Fed. Rep.)
Eastern Germany
Hungary
Italy
Netherlands
Norway
Poland
Rumania
Spain
Sweden
United Kingdom
USSR
Yugoslavia
56
60»
56
54.5-58
54.5-58
60 s
48
54-60
48
48
48
46
48
48-60*
45
52-60
48
42-48 6
48
48
42.5
45
41
42
6
7
15
2-6
2-6
7
2-6
1-7
6
10-12
?
7
7
7
12
?
12-24
12
14-18
2-4 calendar
weeks
18
18-30
18
15-18
12
12-24
10
12
24
12-30
12-17
7
24
12
2 weeks
14-30
24 1
18
26 a
3-4 calendar
weeks
18
18-30
24
24
18
18-24
10
18
24
12-30
24
?
24
12
2 weeks
21
Country
54
?
58
?
48-50
55-56
48-50
48
?
1
When a wage earner has not worked on a compulsory or optional day of rest, these days are deducted from the
regular entitlement, the rufe being 8 working
days for adolescents and not more than one-third of the total leave
for adults. "Under 16. ' Roughly. 4 48 hours, between the beginning of November and the end of March,
and 60 between April and October, ' State farms only.
Sources: Up to 1940, see ILO: Social Problems In Agricuhnre, op. cit., passim; "The Present Regulation of Working Hours in Agriculture", International Labour Review (Geneva), Vol. XXV, No. 1, January 1932, pp. 79-101.
For the position today: Peter von Blanckenburg: The Position of the Agricultural Hired Worker (Paris, OECD,
1962), passim; ILO: Legislative Series, labour codes, relevant Acts and decrees published between Ì945 and 1967.
the near future. Be that as it may, there has been some reduction in the
previous very pronounced disparities between agricultural and industrial
wages, and for this the workers' unions may rightly claim the credit. The
same applies to the incomes earned by the small and medium farmer, which
are discussed by the general and employers' organisations in talks with the
authorities, under the policies governing prices and agricultural subsidies.
Without going so far as to maintain that all the measures taken in this connexion
are attributable to lobbying by the agricultural organisations, we can certainly
say that in every instance, the authorities have based their decisions on the
claims made, and the information offered, by these organisations.
Generally speaking, all the organisations consulted deal directly or indirectly
according to their importance, with those questions on which the well-being of
the country-dweller and the progress of the countryside depend: health,
housing, vocational training, farm management, cultural and leisure activities,
and so on. Since the end of the war people have come to realise that only if
conditions of work in the countryside can be improved will there be any hope
261
Agricultural organisations and development
of countering the headlong rush to the towns prejudicial to any healthy balance
of population. Of course, the emphasis is not everywhere the same. In Western
Europe, the agricultural organisations are very much concerned with health,
hygiene and housing, and (with the assistance of the authorities) with vocational
training. On the other hand, the use made of leisure time tends to be left very
much to the individual's discretion; this is because of the prodigious increase
in the use of private motor vehicles (and also because so very many households
now have their television set). In Eastern Europe, the influence of the modern
way of life has not yet assumed the same importance; here, the agricultural
organisations do a vast amount of work in the realm of culture and education
and pursue a full range of technical and occupational activities.
The agricultural organisations have always shown great concern over the
training of their activists and officials, and there have been considerable
changes in this sphere during the last twenty years. Before the Second World
War, the training provided by the federations was of a rather academic
kind, designed primarily to make good the shortcomings of the average
country-dweller's education. Primary education has now been considerably expanded and extended, and facilities for technical training are far
more widespread than they used to be. Collective agreements, joint bodies,
discussions at all levels are now, as we have seen, much more common; hence
the need for a new kind of trade union activist and official, able to meet government and employer representatives on an equal footing in discussion of political,
economic and social issues. These issues in themselves have become far more
complex than they used to be, for agriculture has emerged from its traditional
isolation; the process of modernisation has meant the reinforcement of links
with other branches of the economy, with the result that the fortunes of agriculture now depend far more than hitherto on over-all economic development.
Accordingly, the organisations have diversified and stepped up their training
programmes; and the improved quality of these programmes implies that the
agricultural organisations are now much better equipped for negotiation than
was the case before the war.
This is a development to be welcomed, for a wind of change is blowing
through European agriculture. Current economic reforms in the Eastern
countries, the repercussions on agriculture of the European Economic Community and the increases in the incomes of workers outside agriculture are
throwing up numerous problems of adjustment, of reorganisation, and of
vertical and horizontal integration among producers.1 All these problems
will have to be solved by the agricultural organisations, with assistance from
1
On integration, see John Higgs: "Vertical Integration in Western Europe", Monthly
BulletinofAgricultural Economics and Statistics (Rome, FAO), Vol. 15, No. 12, December 1966,
pp. 1-7.
262
Europe: Conclusions
the authorities : the Mansholt Plan already makes some provision for a movement of this kind. A frequent obstacle to national development plans lies
in the vast host of little farms which no longer provide those who work them
with a livelihood comparable with that obtainable from a non-agricultural
occupation; this is especially true of those countries in which, for centuries,
the subdivision of holdings has continued uninterrupted.1 To these difficulties must be added disparities between regions, which exist even within
highly developed countries. In Brittany, for example, agriculture (which is
quite intensive) has to support an active agricultural population amounting to
42 per cent of the total active population of the region (the French national
average is 20 per cent). So high afigureis a sure index of under-development.2
The process of vertical and horizontal integration has made a beginning.
In the Common Market countries, it characterises the change-over from the
individual, small-scale peasant farm to the factory farm, a change-over rendered
all the more necessary in that, with the progressive abolition of customs
barriers, the small, the poor, the weak and the inefficient risk being swamped
by the large, the rich, the powerful and the well organised. Accordingly,
the agricultural organisations, together with the co-operative movement and
national authorities, will have to continue research into ways and means of
bringing the countryside up to date as painlessly as possible, while trying to
avoid widening the gap which already exists between the highly mechanised
factory farm (the most suitable kind for integration) and farming of the traditional kind.
This means, too, that the countryside will have to be made a better place
to live in. To this end, rural planning programmes, similar to those for town
planning, will have to be launched in an endeavour to keep the young people
on the land. Otherwise the drift to the towns will gather momentum and rural
development will be jeopardised by lack of manpower.
In all these fields, and in many others too, the agricultural organisations
have shown what they can do. Although there are, of course, other reasons
for the development of agriculture in Europe, there can be no doubt that the
progress made would never have been achieved without these organisations.
They are successful largely because their activities range so far and wide,
covering both producers' and wage earners' interests, whereas in former times,
in countries where trade union activities were little developed or even actively
persecuted, they merely defended the farmers' interests against encroachment
1
See OECD: Low Incomes in Agriculture, op. cit., passim.
See L. Malassis: "Agriculture et économie bretonnes", Projet (Paris), No. 11, January
1967, pp. 65-82.
2
263
Agricultural organisations and development
by the authorities.1 Employers and workers are today much more evenly
balanced, and this is highly conducive to agricultural development, since the
employer has to step up production if he is at one and the same time to cope
with his workers' wage claims and maintain his standard of living. From
this point of view—contrary to what employers in developing countries are
inclined to believe—the trade union movement is beneficial to a nation's
economy. The same holds good of the employers' organisations, since in a
general sense the aims pursued by agricultural organisations (be they concerned
with subsidies or price maintenance) help to bring about a more equitable
apportionment of a nation's wealth. In this fashion, and by dint of the
technical efforts they have made, the agricultural organisations have turned
a potential market into a real one, and incorporated a class of people frequently
living on a subsistence level (as they are today in the under-developed regions
of the world) into an integral part of an economy based on money. Without
such an extension of the market, industry in Europe would have been hard
put to it to attain present standards of output and productivity. In the highly
developed Europe of today, it is impossible to imagine industry flourishing in
the midst of a wretched, ignorant peasantry.
Lastly, through their continuous discussions with the authorities by virtue
of the fact that they are represented in so many official bodies, and through
their links with the public via the mass media, the agricultural organisations
maintain the nation's interest in the cause of rural development and ensure that
the countryside is not just forgotten, or relegated to the position of a Cinderella
in relation to industry, as occurred all too often at the time of the Industrial
Revolution.
As we have seen in our historical sketch, the results achieved are the fruit
of centuries of dour and bitter struggle. The lengthy history of European
agriculture seems to bear out the belief that where the will exists, there, in
time, an appropriate organ will emerge. Wherever the aspirations of the
peasantry were thwarted by the existence of big landed estates or by legal
prohibitions, for instance, no body developed, or if it did, it emerged only
after some revolutionary upheaval. The fact of the matter is that pressure
from below was at all times there; the peasants did what they could in the
circumstances prevailing. If we observe the struggles of the peasantry and its
responses to the "challenge" (in A. Toynbee's sense of the word), of nature and
other men, we shall come to a conclusion which is more profound than it
1
Proof of this is that most employers' organisations were set up after the agricultural
trade unions had come into being, and especially after the latter had become strong enough
to impose collective agreements. Until then, employers had been content to defend theninterests through general farm organisations. See ILO: Collective Agreements in Agriculture, op. cit., p. 9,12, and passim.
264
Europe: Conclusions
might at first sight appear: that development proceeds when possibilities
and needs to some extent coincide. But even when this occurs, development
demands hard work and heavy sacrifice. Today, the well-to-do peoples in the
developed countries are inclined to forget all that their forefathers sacrificed
for the sake of posterity. They tend to look upon those who are now making
sacrifices in other parts of the world as in some way out-of-line. The fact
of the matter is that there is no easy road to development, and that unless
austerity—indeed sacrifice—be accepted, progress will remain a dream of distant
and uncertain fulfilment.
What has been achieved—as described above in the light of the answers
received to the author's inquiries—at one and the same time evokes both
admiration and criticism. Admiration, because these achievements are the
fruit of long years of fumblings, of trial and error, and because they show us
how many are the ways in which men can come together with a common end
in view. Criticism, because nothing so far achieved, admirable though it
may be, can be considered perfect. In the pursuit of progress, the agricultural
organisations will undoubtedly embark on new courses of action and attain
higher degrees of solidarity and efficacity. And progress itself must be
harnessed to the cause of man, to bring him to an ever fuller state of liberty
and awareness. The celebrated eighteenth-century French writer Montesquieu wrote: "Freedom is that good which enables us to enjoy all others.".1
But how can others exist if work and bread are lacking ? We are now sufficiently
far advanced to perceive that freedom can no longer be conceived of as Pure
Will expressing itself independently of all contingencies. A hungry, ignorant
man cannot be fully free. Hence we may affirm that if freedom consists in
being able to take a decision in full knowledge of the facts, then the agricultural
organisations have made a powerful contribution. It is they, very largely,
which have overcome the neglect of centuries from which the European
peasant had suffered. It is they which have made the farming community
a part of the nation and given it the wherewithal to forge its own destiny. It
is they,finally,which, while showing the peasant how best to cope with nature's
obstacles, have provided him with an instrument with which to face, and triumph
over, those events which are the fruit of human will.
1
Montesquieu: Cahiers (1716-1755) (Paris, Grasset, 1941), p. 112.
265
PART III
LATIN AMERICA
LATIN AMERICA
D
INTRODUCTION
"There is basic agreement among professionals that something is wrong in
Latin America." Despite its facile nature, this statement by two experts on
agrarian matters1 neatly sums up the present situation. Latin America has
reached a turning-point in her history, and her future must depend upon her
ability to free herself from the heavy shackles of her colonial heritage.
Until just after the Second World War, the majority of the countries of
this continent remained unaffected by the pace-quickening trend sparked off
in the western world by the French Revolution and its immediate offspring,
the Industrial Revolution. It is of course true that the majority of the countries
of Latin America became independent between 1810 and 1824, and that a
great many of the constitutions promulgated at that time embodied the
fundamental principles laid down in the French Declaration of Human Rights.
In principle, this ideological influence should have set off social and economic
developments similar to those which, sooner or later, most European countries
experienced. But independence, in Latin America, stood first and foremost
for the breaking of the legal ties which bound the continent to Spain, and in
some cases resulted in the entrenchment of a feudalistic internal structure
which left little room for the normal development to which the masses of
these countries aspired.
This negative trend, albeit accompanied by expansion in certain sectors,
gave rise to a chronic imbalance which has been studied too often for us to
need to dwell on it here. Nevertheless, an outline in broad terms of its
significance for the agricultural sector may not come amiss.
In this sphere, the development of Latin America since independence has
been constantly marked by contrasts and paradoxes. The agricultural
economy has been geared far more to foreign outlets (exports) than to home
1
Peter Dorner and Richard W. Patch: Social Science Issues in Agrarian Change and
National Development of Latin America (Madison, University of Wisconsin, The Land Tenure
Center, February 1966; mimeographed doc. LTC/9), p. 3.
269
Agricultural organisations and development
consumption (development of rural markets). The concentration of ownership and income has increased rather than diminished, while demographic
growth has intensified the pressure upon the land—a phenomenon which is
easily understood if we recall that in the nineteenth century much of the land
belonging to the indigenous population, which could not be taken away from
them under Spanish rule, was bought from its occupants as soon as the constitutions promulgated upon independence declared them to have equal rights.
In fact, with a few rare exceptions, the superseding of traditional customary
law by Roman law was always to the detriment of the former. Moreover,
labour relations, already far from perfect under Spanish rule, went from bad
to worse during this period as a result of the repeal of the laws for the protection
of the Indians and the emergence of new forms of open or concealed serfdom—
the "debtors' peonage" is a classic example.
Notwithstanding the "Indian policies" pursued today (which, if they have
not succeeded in resolving the problem entirely, have at least helped to keep
the situation from getting out of hand), there are times when it is startling to
see how wide the gulf still is which separates the Indian population from that
of European stock, the small peasant from the large landowner, the countryman
from the town-dweller. From the standpoint of culture and way of life,
too, the contrast is striking: on the one hand we have the homespun culture
of the peasants, demeaned and debased by the admixture of a multitude of
alien features, yet often sealed off from progress behind the insurmountable
barriers of language, and reduced, like its economic context, to a state of mere
"subsistence"; on the other hand, in the towns of European origin, there is
a boom in culture of a kind which reflects the major trends from abroad.
Thus the ebullience of the towns has for a long time been offset by the apathetic
inertia of the country-dweller, apparently reconciled to his fate.
However, during the past decade a whole host of new factors, which we
have already noted at the beginning of this book (demographic growth, insufficient agricultural production, urban development, etc.), have emerged to
transform the situation. The rural population is being jolted out of its traditional apathy to such a point that there are grounds for wondering whether
the reforms now being carried out can hold events in check and channel
progress along the lines intended. In this respect, nothing sums up the situation better than the diagnosis made as long ago as 1963 by the United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs :
The contradiction between the present situation of the rural population and
national ideals of democracy and social justice has become more obvious as the
isolation of this population has decreased. The rising rate of natural increase of
the rural populations indicates that the traditional tenure systems and methods of
production cannot be continued without a deterioration in their already intolerable
270
Latin America
levels of living; their accelerating movement into the big cities makes their poverty
more conspicuous and alarming to the better-off groups.
The rural population is beginning to organise and show capabilities for effective
political action. This is true even among the Indians. The nearly spontaneous
movement of the Bolivian Indian peasants following the 1952 revolution, which
dictated the sweeping character of the Bolivian land reform, is the most striking
example. More recently the Cuban peasants have been effectively mobilised in
support of a revolutionary programme. Venezuela has had an important organised
peasant movement since 1959. In Brazil and Chile, peasant organisations held their
first national congresses in 1961 ; the congress in Brazil was attended by 1,500 delegates and 3,000 observers from local peasant leagues and rural workers' unions.
Such movements have not yet been objectively studied, some of them are torn by
leadership struggles linked with national party politics, and the extent to which the
rural population is actively involved in them cannot be determined, but most observers
agree that there is an explosive unrest in large parts of the countryside. Forcible
seizures of land, rural terrorism directed against landowners and against peasant leaders
reported from many areas, suggest that if present opportunities for planned and peaceful agrarian reforms are not seized, the land will be redistributed under pressure of
violence in the countryside.
While the objective of raising agricultural productivity and the objective of
redistributing land in a manner acceptable to the rural population are logically
quite compatible, it appears that under the conditions prevailing in much of Latin
America land reform can be expected to cause a short-term decrease in agricultural
productivity. Even if this is true, the reforms cannot be postponed or evaded; they
are an essential step in the incorporation of the rural population into national life as
full citizens.1
This verdict is upheld by the majority of the experts on Latin America 2 ,
the more so since the present situation results from a century of stagnation
in rural areas, the effects of which have to be assessed in order to understand
not only the deep-seated reasons for the present social unrest but also the role
that might be played by agricultural organisations in improving conditions,
thus bringing modern production methods and ways of life within the reach
of the peasants of Latin America.
OBSTACLES TO DEVELOPMENT
Structural obstacles and their repercussions
It is generally accepted that in the developing countries as a whole, "per
capita food production... is in all probability no greater now than it was
»United Nations: 1963 Report on the World Social Situation (New York, 1963),
pp. 128-129.
2
See, for example, Thomas F. Carroll: "Land Reform as an Explosive Force in Latin
America", in John T. TePaske and Sydney Nettleton Fisher (eds.): Explosive Forces in Latin
America (Ohio State University Press, 1964), pp. 81-125; Gerrit Huizer: "Desarrollo de la
comunidad y grupos de intereses en áreas rurales", América Latina (Rio de Janeiro, Centro
Latino Americano de Pesquisas em Ciencias Sociais), 9th Year, No. 2, April-June 1966,
pp. 41-46.
271
Agricultural organisations and development
30 years ago in 1934-38".1 This is particularly true of Latin America, where
in 1965-66 the per capita food production index fell to 92 per cent of the prewar figure. It explains why, notwithstanding the fairly generalised underconsumption which may be easily seen from the figures given in table 10,
imports of agricultural produce rose by 29 per cent between 1957-59 and
19652, requiring the diversion for this purpose of funds needed for development, and resulting in some cases (Bolivia, Chile, Venezuela) in a deficit in
the agricultural trade balance.3 By the end of 1966 the target of a 5 per cent
yearly increase in agricultural output set in the Charter of the Alliance for
Progress had been reached in only a few countries (El Salvador, Guatemala,
Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela), while the remainder progressed at a slower
pace, or at a rate which was outdistanced by that of the growth in their population.
In the case of Chile, for instance, with an area under cultivation which,
if properly farmed, could have fed a population of 50 million (as against an
actual population of less than 9 million), it was found necessary in 1964 to
import agricultural produce to the tune of US$159 million, the bulk of which,
representing a cost of US$120 million, could have been produced in the
country.4 Despite these imports, there was still not nearly enough food
to go round: annual meat consumption dropped from 121 lb. per head in
1954 to 64 in 1965, while the average daily per capita calorie intake has remained
steady at around 1,700.B Another case—that of Peru, whose agricultural
trade balance shows a surplus—reveals the same trend, which leads to the
assumption that if the needs of the population were really met in full there
would be a deficit instead of the present surplus: while imports of foodstuffs
rose from US$40 to US$134 million between 1950 and 1964, the available supply
per capita per year declined, between 1948-52 and 1962-63, from 211 to 202 lb.
for cereals, from 256.5 to 185.5 lb. for potatoes and from 44 to 37 lb. for meat.6
A similar situation prevails in most of the other Latin American countries,
apart from the more highly developed ones; and it should not be forgotten
that thefiguresgiven are national averages which fall short of actual consumption
1
FAO, Committee on Commodity Problems, 41st Session, Rome, 1967: Inter-Agency
Study of Multilateral Food Aid : Director-General's Progress Report to CCP (mimeographed
doc. CCP 67/13/Rev.l), p. 4.
2
ibid., p. 5.
3
For further details, see FAO: Trade Yearbook 1965 (Rome, 1966), pp. 382-385.
4
Instituto Interamericano de Ciencias Agrícolas de la OEA, Centro Interamericano de
Reforma Agraria: Informe de la reunión internacional de ejecutivos de la reforma agraria y de
la reunión de evaluación y planeamiento del proyecto 206 (Bogotá, 1966), p. 58.
6
ibid., p. 59. The figure of 1,700 calories seems abnormally low compared with the
estimates of the FAO (see table 10), though these may perhaps be too high.
8
"Proyecto de ley de promoción agropecuaria; exposición de motivos", El Peruano
(Lima), 17 October 1966.
272
Latín America
levels for the upper classes but are often far in excess of those for the less
privileged.
The latifundian system of ownership—and its complement, the minifundian
system—are the long-standing causes of a situation that the population explosion of the past twenty years has rendered critical and, indeed, untenable.
The effects of the minifundio-latifundio pattern are obvious: on the one hand,
an excessively large number of people farming plots of land too small to provide
them with a decent standard of living; and on the other, a failure on the part
of the large estates to absorb all the manpower they could, due to their system
of extensive cultivation and in some cases to the very high percentage of land
left lying fallow. A study carried out by the Inter-American Committee for
Agricultural Development (CIDA) in seven Latin American countries reveals
that in six of them (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Ecuador and Guatemala) only 700,000 of the 4.4 million people at present working on the minifundios would be needed, if a normal ratio existed between the size of these
farms and the size of their labour force. The same study points out that if
the land/man ratio of the minifundios were applied to the large estates, the
latter would be able to absorb 25 million more workers.1 Between these two
extremes there certainly lies a happy medium which it should be possible
to attain if crop-growing were intensified and if fallow land were brought under
cultivation, since in the seven countries studied (the six mentioned above plus
Peru) the large estates have under cultivation, on average, only one-sixth of
their land.2
The indices of concentration3 given in table 10 show how serious the
problem had become by 1960 or thereabouts. It will be seen from these figures
that the situation had not changed much since 1950, when it was estimated
that, in Latin America as a whole, latifundios (estates of more than 2,500 acres),
although representing in terms of numbers only 1.5 per cent of all farms,
covered 64.9 per cent of the total area under cultivation, while very small
1
Inter-American Committee for Agricultural Development (CIDA): Land Tenure Conditions and Socio-Economie Development of the Agricultural Sector in Seven Latin American
Countries (Washington, 1966), pp. 29-30. See also, as concerns the possibilities for the
absorption of human resources within the context of agrarian reform, the analysis by Marvin
J. Sternberg in FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Gearing
Agrarian Reform to Employment Objectives, with Particular Reference to Latin America
(doc. WLR/66/8). See also, by the same author: "Agrarian Reform and Employment, with
Special Reference to Latin America", International Labour Review, Vol. 95, Nos. 1-2, JanuaryFebruary 1967, pp. 1-26.
2
Land Tenure Conditions ..., op. cit., pp. 20-23.
8
The index of concentration of rural ownership measures the degree of inequality in land
ownership. The nearer the figure is to 1, the higher the degree of concentration of ownership
in the hands of a few landowners. For the way in which this index is calculated (by means
of the Lorenz Curve), see, for example, A. Piatier: Statistique (Paris, Presses Universitaires
de France, 1962), pp. 281-283.
273
Agricultural organisations and development
holdings (under 50 acres), although accounting for 72.6 per cent of the total
in terms of numbers, occupied only 3.7 per cent of the land.1 The significance
of thesefigureswill be even more readily grasped if we compare concentration
of ownership with the distribution of manpower; in Colombia, for instance,
to mention just one case, small family holdings occupy only 5 per cent of the
land, but employ—or rather, under-employ—60 per cent of the working
agricultural population, whereas the latifundios cover 50 per cent of the land
but provide employment for only 4.2 per cent of the agricultural labour force.
Now let us briefly examine the social and economic repercussions of this
state of affairs. The latifundio and the minifundio are not two isolated,
independent systems; on the contrary, they are bound together by ties of
reciprocal interdependence and one would be inconceivable without the other.
Outside the community-owned lands {ejidos, indigenous villages), the minifundio is often a small enclave surrounded by a large estate, and as such is
governed by clearly defined rules of dependence. Its occupant is akin not to
the European tenant or share-cropper of today, but to those of former times
who were obliged to render all sorts of personal services, as we have seen in
Section A of Part II of the present study. Whether he is an Ecuadorian
huasipunguero, a Chilean inquilino or a Peruvian yanacona, the services he is
called upon to render are more or less the same everywhere and may be
expressed in terms of a specific number of days of work, often unpaid, or
virtually unpaid, in exchange for the right to farm a little patch of ground.
The ties which bind the agricultural worker to the latifundio are thus
very different and far more stringent than those which link an industrial worker
to his factory. The latifundio is an enclosed world which is completely selfsupporting. The agricultural worker finds himself involved in a tight circle
of relationships upon which everything depends—his home, his work, benefits
in kind, food—to such an extent that a mutation in one part of the structure
is likely to bring the whole edifice tumbling down. Whereas a worker in a
town can change his job without having to move house as a result, or decide
to do his shopping elsewhere without this affecting his relationship with his
employer, a worker on a latifundio cannot leave his employer without giving
him back the plot of land and the house that have been provided for him, or,
in some instances, without having paid off his debt to the plantation store.
Likewise, while certain prospects for social advancement, limited though
these may be, are offered to the town-dwelling worker, the agricultural labourer
on a latifundio has practically no chance of changing or improving his situation.
Lastly, unlike the city dweller, who as a rule does not need to look very far
1
Oscar Delgado : Reformas agrarias en la America latina (Mexico City, Fondo de Cultura
Económica, 1965), p. 42.
274
Latin America
for another factory or workshop, the agricultural worker in the latifundio
areas would sometimes have to travel long distances to find another job, and
this would involve travel expenses which would almost certainly be far beyond
his means. Notwithstanding the great migratory flow towards the towns
set in motion in the nineteenth century by the development of communications,
the rural population—and in consequence the demographic pressure upon the
land—has never ceased to grow. Accordingly, compared with that of industry,
the world of the latifundios is acutely lacking in social and geographical
mobility. It is characterised by the stagnation of every kind of human relationship, and faced with this situation the non-organised worker has for a
long time had only two alternatives to choose from: passive acceptance, or
revolt.
It is logical that this concentration of land ownership in the hands of a
few should go hand in hand with a similar concentration of income. Raúl
Prebisch estimated in 1963 that at that time about half the population of Latin
America was earning, on average, the equivalent of only US$120 per year,
and was absorbing only one-fifth of total personal consumption in the continent.1 It is clear from this estimate that the average per capita earnings
shown in table 10 have to be properly interpreted, particularly since they
represent averages for all sectors of the economy. We must therefore bear in
mind that, broadly speaking, the lower the national per capita income, the
more uneven domestic distribution is likely to be, and the further removed
from normal distribution (the Gauss Curve) ; the higher it is, the more normal
will be the distribution; and this criterion itself needs to be modified where
one single sector, absorbing only a tiny proportion of the economically active
population, furnishes the bulk of the national income (as with petroleum in
Venezuela).
Obviously, the effects of poor distribution of the national income are felt
most severely in the sphere of agriculture. A few examples will suffice by way
of confirmation. In Nicaragua, annual family incomes in 1961 ranged from
the equivalent of US$357 for tenant farmers (arrendatarios) to US$31,430
for large agricultural estates (fincas multifamiliares) employing twelve or
more men per year.2 In Mexico around 1964, the indigenous communities,
which represented 10.4 per cent of the country's population, were earning less
than 1 per cent of the national income. The per capita income of the indigel
Raùl Prebisch: Towards a Dynamic Development Policy for Latin America (New York,
United Nations, 1964), p. 3. See also United Nations, ECLA: The Economic Development
of Latin America in the Post-War Period (New York, 1964), Ch. 2.
' See, in this respect, United Nations, ECLA: Las relaciones entre la tenencia de la tierra
y la eficiencia del uso de los recursos agrícolas en Centroamérica, by Sergio Maturana
(Mexico City, 1963; mimeographed).
275
Agricultural organisations and development
Table 10. Socio-economic data for Latin American countries (with special reference
Country
National
per capita
income
in 1965
(USS)
Share of
agriculture in
gross
domestic
product
(1965 or
year stated)
Active
agricultural
population
(% of total
active
population)
Index of per
capita food
production
in 1963-64
(1952-53 to
1956-57
= 100)
19 (1960)
70 (1964)
54 (1960)
28 (1960)
49.6 (1964)
55 (1950)
42 (1953)
70 (1964)
56 (1962)
60 (1961)
69 (1964)
87 (1960)
66 (1961)
54 (1960)
59 (1964)
48 (1964)
52 (1962)
50 (1961)
18.3 (1963)
34.4 (1964)
103
—
107
lOlf
93
—
68
—
—
—
101
—
96
130
—
104
—
93
80
115
(%)
740
17
Argentina
Bolivia
144
23
Brazil
217
29 (1964)
Chile
10
515
32
237
Colombia
Costa Rica
353
31 (1964)
361 (1956-62) —
Cuba
Dominican Republic 212
24 (1964)
Ecuador
183
34
El Salvador
236
32 (1964)
28
281
Guatemala
49 (1962)
Haiti
80
44
Honduras
194
17
Mexico
412
Nicaragua
298
35
24
Panama
425
38
Paraguay
186
Peru
218
20 (1964)
Uruguay
537
16 (1964)
745
8 (1963)
Venezuela
Available
calories,
1963-64
(number of
calories
per capita
per day)
Consumption
of fats
and oils,
1963-64
(grams 1
per capita
per day)
2 660
109.8
2 000
—
2 860
63.9
2 360
56.4
2 070 (1961)
—
2 550
—
—
—
2114(1959)
—
1 970 (1960-63) —
2 050
45.5
2 210
35.7
—
—
2190
—
2 630
72.4
2 325
—
2 240
—
2 580
50.9
2 250
45.8
2 960
—
2 340
60.5
Sources: FAO: Production Yearbook, 1964 (Rome, 1965); The State of Food and Agriculture. 1965 (Rome,
1965); United Nations: Statistical Yearbook, 1962 (New York, 1963); Yearbook of National Accounts
Statistics, 1966 (New York, 1967); Compendium of Social Statistics, 1963 (New York, 1963); Inter-American
Development Bank: Social Progress Trust Fund, Fifth Annual Report, 1965 (Washington, 1966); Centro Latino
Americano de Pesquisas em Ciencias Sociais: Situacäo social da America Latina (Rio de Janeiro, 1965).
nous population amounted to only 8.5 per cent of the national average.1 In
Brazil, a comparison between rural incomes and urban incomes in the northern
and eastern regions reveals that the annual per capita income varies between
the equivalent of US$23 (rural population) and US$96 (urban population)
in the Piaui region, and between US$75 and US$146 (country and town) in
Minas Gérais. 2 The rural income thus ranges from 7 to 28 per cent of the
national income shown in table 10. These figures, which deserve careful
1
Luis Torres Ordófiez: Realidades y proyectos, 16 años de trabajo (Mexico City, Instituto
Nacional Indigenista, 1964), pp. 67-69. Quoted by Gerrit Huizer in "Desarrollo de la
comunidad y grupos de intereses en áreas rurales", op. cit., p. 57.
2
Figures compiled by José Pastore and published by Andrew Pearse: "Agrarian Change
Trends in Latin America", Latin America Research Review (Austin, University of Texas),
Vol. 1, No. 3, 1966, p. 61.
276
Latín America
to their agrarian situation)
Consumption of proteins,
1963-64 (grams »
per capita per day)
Illiteracy
(1960-64)
Total
Animal
proteins
°/oOf
On edu-On
%of
rural
cation health
national
population
population
77.2
56
66.5
79.4
46.1 (1961)
52.9
15
17.6
29.0
20 (1961)
—
—
—
—
8.6
63
39.5
16.4
37.7
16
49.8(1957-59)
49.8 (1961)
58.5
58
19.8(1957-59)
16.4 (1961)
15.2
8.6
—
—
—
58
73
68
47
66
58
94.5 (1961)
61.2
24
—
15
23.7
14.1
61.9 (1961)
25.3
—
40
30.4
56
72 (1950)
80
52.6
29
50
21.7
22
39
9.7
21.7
Percentage
of total
government
expenditure
in 1964-65:
17
12.8
25.2
66 (1950) 7.4
33
13.8
50
16.1
22
28.7
4.2
2.7
2.5
8.0
4.6
7.8
—
—
—
—
—
11.5
41.8
11.6
64
22.1
82 (1950;) 14
10.8
—
21.2
—
23.4
—
80.4
15.6
35.4
22.4
16.3
—
59.5
24*
16.4
—
10.5
—
6.4
2.3
10.9
8.2
11.4
6.2
5.1
8.4
12.9
5.4
6.6
9.5
7.8
Life
expectancy
at birth
(based on
recent data)
Men
Infant
mortality
(deaths
per 1,000
births)
(1964 or
Women year stated)
62.5 68.5
49.7 49.7
39.3 2 45.5 2
55
60
-50.5 8 —
54.6 4 57.0 4
-59 s —
—
-50 s
50.6
-45 3
-423
-50 s
57.6
—
—
—
60.4
—
—
—
60.3
—
53
55
—
—
53
55
67.9 73.1
-60 s —
Index of
concentration of
rural
ownership
60.7
110-140
90 (1960)
111(1961)
84.1
69.8(1963)
0.88 (1960)
0.97(1950)
0.85(1960)
0.94 (1955)
0.89 (1960)
0.89(1955)
0.83 (1945)
—
79.5(1962) 0.90(1950)
0.91 (1954)
94.1
65.7(1965) 0.92(1961)
92.8(1963) 0.96 (1950)
171.6
—
47 (1963) 0.82 (1952)
0.97(1950)
66.3
50.0
0.77(1952)
0.78 (1950)
42.4
100.0
0.97 (1956)
94.8
0.97(1961)
0.84(1961)
47.4
0.96(1956)
51.7
Concentration indices calculated on basis of available cadastral data.
1
1 gram = 0.035 oz. * Figures relating to period 1940-50, * Average for both sexes. ' Figures relating to
period 1949-51. * Percentage of budgetary expenditure only.
study, explain the weakness or, in some cases, the non-existence of a monetary
economy in rural areas and the preponderance of a subsistence economy, with
all that this implies in terms of toil and hardship. In Guatemala it is estimated
that only one-third of the population is able to participate in the monetary
economy.1 In Peru, according to a paper submitted to an Inter-American
Conference for Peasant Leaders organised by the International Federation of
Plantation, Agricultural and Allied Workers (IFPAAW), which is affiliated
to the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), half the
population gets 80 per cent of the goods it needs exclusively by bartering,
1
See, in this respect, the work by Humberto Flores Alvarado: Las migraciones indígenas
internas (Guatemala City, Instituto Indigenista Nacional, 1961).
277
Agricultural organisations and development
while the other half earns the equivalent of US$53 per year.1 We should not
therefore be astonished by the low consumption indices or even by the short
life expectancy figures revealed by table 10, bearing in mind once again that
these are over-all averages and that a breakdown into social groups would
show even lower figures for the most underprivileged classes.
All these factors—dependent relationships, lack of social and geographical
mobility, malnutrition, bartering in order to subsist, etc.—have an obvious
impact upon the capacity of peasants to organise themselves and upon the
nature of their demands. There can be no doubt that an individual earning
less than the minimum he needs to live on and living in a paternalistic environment ceases to react, or does so only in a sporadic and violent manner when
some unexpected event or a worsening of the situation shakes him out of his
apathy. Gerrit Huizer rightly notes how difficult it is to band peasants together
into organisations with any chance of success under a system of marginal
agriculture, and stresses that, generally speaking, it is easier to form organisations among independent farmers whose standard of living is above subsistence level.2 The history of the developed countries abounds in similar examples
to prove—if further proof were necessary—that the elimination of structural
and socio-economic obstacles is an essential pre-requisite for the development
of genuine, effective agricultural organisations.
The technological time lag
The difficulties described above have gradually brought about a huge time
lag in technological progress which Latin America will be able to make up
only at the cost of tremendous financial sacrifices, by carrying out sufficiently
far-reaching reforms, and above all by organising its peasantry properly.
A comparison of certain basic data, rarely attempted hitherto, reveals
clearly the gigantic gap (and there is nothing exaggerated about the word
"gigantic") which separates under-development from development.
In four basicfields3 (the use of fertilisers, mechanisation, technical personnel
and rural co-operatives) which have a direct bearing upon productivity,
nutrition, the general standard of living and the degree of organisation, an
1
Conferencia Interamericana de la FITPASC [IFPAAW] para Dirigentes Campesinos,
Caracas, 14-15 February 1967, doc. No. 1 : Et movimiento sindical campesino y el desarrollo
nacional en América latina, p. 1.
8
Gerrit Huizer: Some Preliminary Generalizations on the Role of Peasant Organizations
in the Process of Agrarian Reform (Mexico City, November 1967; mimeographed), p. 1.
'Other very important problems such as marketing, credit, market organisation, etc.,
should be examined here too, but their scope is so vast that they would require a special study
all to themselves.
278
Latin America
examination of the figures reveals an over-all time lag of about a century as
compared with the developed countries.
With regard to fertilisers, the total consumption for the whole of Latin
America is no higher than that for almost any one of the larger European
countries. In 1962-63 the Latin American continent consumed 481,660 tons
of nitrogenous fertilisers (270,600 of them in Central America), whereas
England alone used 532,500 tons. Consumption of phosphate fertilisers
reached 321,000 tons (106,000 of them in Central America), as against the
369,800 tons consumed in Italy. Lastly, 177,850 tons of potash fertilisers were
consumed (115,850 of them in Central America), this figure being exceeded
even by a small country like Belgium, with 189,250 tons.1 Behind these
figures lies evidence of the effects of extensive farming and its inability to cope
with an alarming food shortage. While it is true that in the case of certain
crops over-all yields have increased in volume, the fact remains that in some
countries the rise in output since before the war has, as already stated, been
too dilatory to keep pace with the rise in the population. If we take wheat,
for instance, except in Mexico and Argentina, yields are still somewhere
between 800 and 1150 lb. per acre, when the use of fertilisers and more extensive
irrigation of the land would make it possible at least to double these figures.
It hardly seems necessary to mention the educative role that agricultural organisations could play in this field, as they have been and still are doing in the
developed countries.
Mechanisation is another of the outstandingly weak points of Latin
American agriculture. At the beginning of the 1960s there were barely
310,000 tractors in the whole continent, as compared with the 338,000 possessed
by Italy alone in 1963. In 1960 Brazil was only just able to muster 63,000
tractors—a figure reached in Switzerland three years later.2 In Colombia
there was even a process of "decapitalisation" : from 20,000 tractors in 1962,
the figure dropped to fewer than 18,200 in 1966, working only 10 per cent of
the land suitable for mechanised farming.3 Hence Latin America is a continent
which is crying out for mechanisation. In this sphere it is lagging only some
thirty years or so behind Europe, and while it is true that Europe became
mechanised as an answer to the exodus from the land (whereas Latin America
has an abundant labour force to draw on), it nevertheless does not appear
possible to increase the productivity of these workers and enable the working
agricultural population to earn a decent income without promoting mechanisation along suitable lines. Admittedly the problem gives no cause for concern
1
For further details see FAO: Production Yearbook, 1965 (Rome, 1966), pp. 299-305.
ibid., pp. 308-309.
3
Jaime Lopera: "El sector agropecuario en cifras", Revista Nacional de Agricultura
(Bogotá), No. 749, October 1967, pp. 24-25.
2
279
Agricultural organisations and development
to the large landowners, who either have already partly mechanised their
farming or have at their disposal sufficient funds or credit facilities to do so if
workers were to become in short supply. It is rather for the family farms,
whose numbers are likely to increase, that the situation might become difficult
if mechanisation were left to chance. The development of group farming
and the setting-up of machinery pools operated by local peasants' organisations
would enable a maximum return to be procured for a minimum of outlay,
and this is no negligible factor bearing in mind the extent to which imports
of machinery weigh heavily upon the trade balances of Latin American countries.
That there is a need to multiply the number of agricultural organisations
at all levels is also made clear by the small number of technical personnel in
the countries of this continent. The data available on the subject are not
very recent (they refer to the period 1957-61), but as the situation has apparently
not changed a great deal since then, and as thefiguresfor that period have been
taken as a basis for more recent reports1, we shall quote them briefly here to
stress the importance of this problem.
In 1957-61 Latin America had about 17,000 agronomists, scattered very
unevenly over the various countries. As will be seen from table 11, the ratio
between agronomists and the total number of those engaged in agricultural
occupations varied greatly, from 1: 355 in Costa Rica to 1:73,333 in Guatemala.
But if Latin America wishes to improve its crop-growing methods, switch
over from extensive farming to intensive farming and increase yields it will
have to increase the number of its technical personnel tenfold. There is no
shortage of institutions for the purpose: forty-four agricultural colleges,
twenty of which were founded between 1945 and 1956, award about 1,300
diplomas every year, and it is estimated that they could double the number
of their students. The obstacles are rather of a social and economic nature.
Alvaro Chaparro and Ralph H. Allee have studied the problem from this angle
and noted the lack of attractiveness—or of prestige, if one prefers—of this
profession. Their analysis leads them to a diagnosis of which the essential
points are as follows:
The factors of rural-urban background, occupations, land tenure, and social
status... make possible the characterisation of an agricultural student in Latin
America as a middle-class boy from a town or city, landless or middle-to-small
owner of land, but generally associated with non-agricultural occupations. This picture
permits understanding of a number of problems or issues associated with scientific
x
See, for example: Agricultural Development in Latin America: Current Status and
Prospects (Washington, Inter-American Development Bank, October 1966), p. 50.
280
Latín America
and technical occupations generally, or with agricultural professions in particular, in
Latin America.
The first issue refers to the role of the middle classes in scientific and technical
development. Neither the higher nor the lower classes provide the human material
for such development. The upper-class youth, who has the educational opportunities
of his choice, is interested in a university career, as it fulfils the educational requirements
for his social prestige and class membership. The rejection of other careers is evidenced
by the fact that, among the sons of landowners, the smallest proportions belong to
large owners of land, traditionally associated in Latin America with high social
status. A similar and corroborating situation was found in a study on the diffusion
of farm practices among large coffee growers in Costa Rica, in which it appears that,
although half of them went to universities and a few to agricultural colleges, higher
education was not associated with higher acceptance of new farm practices. It
was also found in this study that the innovators were generally dynamic men of
enterprise who came from the middle class of the group of large landowners. If
middle classes contribute most of the technicians available, the number of technicians should increase with the growth of urban and rural middle classes. Some evidence
is supplied by the fact that Costa Rica and Uruguay, with the highest relative numbers
of agricultural technicians, are also countries which have more highly developed
educational systems, but also a relatively more developed rural middle class and
broader distribution of agricultural land. The role of middle classes in the scientific
and technical development of Latin America deserves careful study.
A second issue refers to the influence of the landed classes on the supply and
demand of agricultural technicians and scientists. Few sons of hacendados study
agriculture, because they choose professions which give them higher social prestige
and because their needs—as far as management is concerned—are satisfied with a
mayordomo, or overseer, who usually has a low education. Technology is not
needed as the methods of production are of the extensive type of agriculture, with
low productivity but abundant and cheap labour.
It can be safely said that demand for agricultural technicians is stronger at present,
and increasing faster in countries and areas where technology is replacing the traditional methods.l
The same conclusions have been reached by many other experts, including
in particular Baldovinos de la Peña, who compares, for instance, the number
of lawyers in Mexico (60,000) with the small number of students and graduates
in agriculture (4,600 in 1961).2 Lowry Nelson quotes the same figures and
refers in his turn to one consequence of this state of affairs—the "brain drain".
According to the data he gives, about 100 technicians have emigrated from
Bolivia alone in the past few years because of the low level of salaries, whereas
to meet the targets set in its ten-year economic and social development plan
the country would need 800, as against the 138 available.3
1
Alvaro Chaparro and Ralph H. Allee: "Higher Agricultural Education and Social
Change in Latin America", Rural Sociology (Madison, University of Wisconsin), Vol. 25,
March 1960, pp. 20-21.
2
Gabriel Baldovinos de la Peña: "El progreso agrícola de México y los agrónomos
profesionales", Estudios Agrarios (Mexico City), No. 2, January-April 1961, pp. 93-125.
8
Lowry Nelson: Some Social Aspects of Agrarian Reform in Mexico, Bolivia and Venezuela
(Washington, Pan-American Union, 1964; mimeographed doc. UP/Ser.H/VII.17/Rev.2), p. 60.
281
Agricultural organisations and development
Table 11. Latin America : Distribution of agronomists, 1957-61
Country
Argentina
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Haiti
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
Venezuela
Number of
agronomists
2 500
138
4 500
1 700
900
550
104
28
9
222
15
3 600
35
24
5
1500
500
500
Estimated number of
persons engaged in
agricultural occupations
per agronomist
584
4 870
2 727
389
2 248
355
7 712
17 321
73 333
6 550
25 267
1707
8 086
6 500
64 400
1037
364
1548
Sources: First column: Agricultural Development in Latin America : Current Status and Prospects (Washington,
Inter-American Development Bank, 1966), p. 50. Second column : figures calculated on the basis of census
data published by the F A O in its Production
Yearbook,
1965, table 6 A .
T h e figures comprise persons o f both
sexes engaged in agricultural occupations. They should be regarded as approximations, since the population
census year of each country does not coincide exactly with the year in which the number of agronomists was
counted.
Having said this, we must stress that, even if the numbers were multiplied
by ten, and supposing that the brain drain could be halted completely, Latin
America's needs as regards agricultural extension work would be far from
being met. Further development in this field cannot be left entirely to the
technicians and advisers on the staff of the extension services, who are in
too much demand to be able to provide instruction at the local level over a long
period. The local and provincial agricultural organisations also have a part
to play, whether they be leagues or trade unions or organisations of a new
type along the lines, for example, of the Polish agricultural circles. Only
through a close-knit network of organisations of this kind will it be possible
to provide facilities for the dissemination of knowledge at the local level,
without which the transformation of Latin American agriculture will for a
long time yet remain an unattainable dream.
Another imperative pre-requisite for development is an increase in the
number of co-operatives. All of the previously mentioned negative factors
282
Latin America
Table 12. Latin America : Evolution of agricultural co-operatives, 1948-60/61-63
Country
194S
Number of Number of
co-operative » members
489
Argentina
Bolivia
—
1041
Brazil
48
Chile
Colombia
—
6
Costa Rica
Cuba
—
Dominican Republic 1
Ecuador
167
El Salvador
—
4
Guatemala
Haiti
—
Honduras
—
325
Mexico
Nicaragua
3
Panama
Paraguay
35
Peru
Puerto Rico
—
Uruguay
Venezuela
—
Total
84104
—
101 092
4000
—
1655
—
10 390
—
581
—
—
30 097
—
2 535
—
•
2119
234 454
1960-61
Number of
Number of
co-operatives members
1963
Number of
Number of
co-operatives members
1394
95
1833
163
62
12
431 822
4 661
624 214
11511
27159
4124
1407
127
1739
172
90
15
443 242
6 371
406 486
20 800
32 641
4 459
—
—
—
—
7
216
13
10
5
4
838
2
4
72
22
31
75
4 858
476
7 887
1009
682
—
281
60 219
80
9 038
2184
41967
19 500
1 246 814
2
234
18
29
26
16
885
6
8
82
27
29
83
14
61
9 381
5 415
1545
1635
1001
61320
2 400
552
9 274
2 649
42 000
21 150
223
5 009
1 072 605
Sources: 1948: Mario Yuri: "The Progress of Agricultural Co-operation in Latin America", Year Book of Agricultural Co-operation, I960 (Oxford, Blackwell, 1960), p. 205; 1960-61 : "Problems of Latin American Co-operative
Development", Year Book of Agricultural Co-operation, 1963 (Oxford, Blackwell, 1963), p. 206; 1963: SocloEconomtc Development of Co-operatives In Latin America, The Co-operative League of USA (San Juan de Puerto
Rico, 1963), p. 309.
N.B. : It will be noted that the total number of members in 1963 was lower than in 1960-61. This was due to the
decline in numbers in Brazil and the Dominican Republic; there was an increase everywhere else. In view of
the wide variety of sources from which the data in this table were drawn, and in the absence of detailed explanations,
this apparent drop in numbers should be viewed with circumspection.
have a direct impact in this respect and explain the lowness of the figures
reached. This does not imply that progress to date has been negligible:
since 1948 the number of agricultural co-operatives in Latin America has
more than doubled, and their membership has increased more than fivefold.
The rise from 234,000 members in 1948 to 1.2 million in 1960-61 signifies,
having regard to the circumstances, a tremendous effort which must be given
its due. Nevertheless, if we compare the figures in table 12 with those in
table 4 (p. 85), we can see the extent to which there is still room for improvement. Thefigureof 1.2 million is in fact slightly higher than that for Hungary
or Rumania before the war, and is below that for Italy. If we compare it with
that for the rural population of the continent (approximately 108 million
283
Agricultural organisations and development
persons in 1960), it represents an index of penetration of 1.15 per cent. This
slow development, attributable to the peculiar pattern of Latin American
agriculture, is highly regrettable, since co-operatives are just as indispensable
as other agricultural organisations as aids in carrying through agrarian
reforms. As will be seen later, these reforms are already under way in some
countries, and it is to be feared that they will meet with resistance or undermining influences at the local level, due to the lack of organisation of the
peasantry. Foreseeing these difficulties, the Third Report on Progress in Land
Reform stressed as early as 1962 that:
to be effective, land legislation must be supported at the base of strong social opinion
organised in community institutions of one kind or another in rural areas
After
laws have been passed, many illiterate peasants have been ignorant of their new
rights. Even where fairly adequate means of public education have been available,
a lack of strong peasant organisations in rural areas has helped landowners to disregard legislation, or to get around it. The presence of such strong community
organisations, at the local level, on the other hand, has turned the tide in favour of
enforcement.1
Legislative obstacles
In Latin America there are still many obstacles to the exercise of freedom
of association. As will be seen from table 13, in 1969 thirteen Latin American
countries out of nineteen had ratified the Right of Association (Agriculture)
Convention, 1921 (No. 11). Fourteen countries had ratified the Freedom of
Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87),
and fourteen also had ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining
Convention, 1949 (No. 98). Most countries have ratified only one or two
of these three vital instruments on freedom of association; only eight have
ratified all three of them; at the other end of the scale, El Salvador has not
ratified a single one.
Granted that enacting legislation is a long, complicated business in most
countries, it is regrettable that the time which has elapsed since the adoption
by the ILO Conference of Conventions Nos. 11, 89 and 98 has not yet
proved sufficient for some countries to follow in their legislation the spirit
and the letter of these international instruments. Discrepancies still subsist
between their legislation and the provisions of the international Conventions.
The right to organise is guaranteed by the constitutions of all Latin American
countries, and in principle its exercise should not be subject to any restrictions
1
p. 77.
284
United Nations-FAO-ILO: Progress in Land Reform, Third Report (New York, 1962),
Latín America
Table 13. Ratification by Latin American countries of Conventions on freedom of
association and collective bargaining (year of registration)
Country
Right of
Association
(Agriculture)
Convention, 1921
(No. 11)
Freedom of
Association and
Protection of the Right
to Organise Convention,,
1948 (No. 87)
Right to Organise
and Collective
Bargaining
Convention, 1949
(No. 98)
Argentina
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
Venezuela
1936
n.r.
1957
1925
1933
1963
1935
n.r.
1969
n.r.
n.r.
n.r.
1937
1934
n.r.
1968
1945
1933
1944
1960
1965
n.r.
n.r.
n.r.
1960
1952
1956
1967
n.r.
1952
1956
1950
1967
1958
1962
1960
1954
n.r.
1956
n.r.
1952
n.r.
n.r.
1960
1952
1953
1959
n.r.
1952
1956
n.r.
1967
1966
1966
1964
1954
1968
Total ratifications
13
14
14
n.r. = not ratified
other than those that are deemed to be normal in modern countries. But in
practice, in certain countries, provisions not apparently intended to restrict
freedom of association are sometimes used to keep it within certain bounds or
to abolish it altogether as dictated by circumstances. Cases have come before
the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations and the Committee on Freedom of Association which illustrate
this situation, showing how it is possible to interpret in a very broad sense a
provision drafted with a specific and legitimate aim in view, in order to hamper
the application of other provisions which are in no way inconsistent with it,
or how the incorporation of vague and imprecise concepts in a body of laws
can result in the temporary qualification of certain acts as offences in a manner
which varies according to the time and place, and may lead to a departure from
the traditional principle—nulla poena sine lege—of the non-retroactivity of
the law.
285
Agricultural organisations and development
The case of the banana workers of Costa Rica, submitted to the ILO's
Committee on Freedom of Association, is a concrete example of the interpretation that can be given to a principle such as that of the right of ownership,
which is embodied in the legislation of every country in the world. In a
communication transmitted to the ILO on 19 June 1964, the Costa Rican
Workers' Confederation "Rerum Novarum" declared that, during that year and
the year before, the authorities had broken up a number of meetings organised
by trade union leaders on the plantations of the Banana Company, which
operates vast estates in the Pacific banana zone. According to the Costa Rican
Government:
The manager of the Banana Company had decided to prohibit workers from
meeting trade union leaders on company property because persons with extremist
ideas were sowing hatred, confusion and discontent with the intention of disturbing
social peace in the plantations. An appeal having finally been made to the President
of the Republic invoking the constitutional right of ownership which protects the
company, the chief magistrate sent instructions to the local authorities prohibiting
meetings on company property without prior authorisation from the company.1
This decision was apparently based on articles 23 and 44 of the Constitution, which lay down the principle that private property is inviolable, but which,
if interpreted in the extreme sense of constituting a ban on the right of assembly
on plantations, could invalidate article 26, by virtue of which "meetings held
in private premises shall not require previous authorisation", and article 60,
which lays down that "both employers and workers shall have power to form
unions freely, for the sole purpose of obtaining and preserving economic,
social or occupational advantages". 2 Thus three constitutional provisions
conflicted with one another, not as regards the principles they embodied but
in their application, because no limits had been set to them. The principle
of the inviolability of private property should in no case be taken as a pretext
for banning meetings of workers, especially in their own homes, as was the
case with the Banana Company, since the workers were obliged by the force
of circumstances to live on the estate. The need to seek the prior authorisation
of the company for meetings at once placed the union at the mercy of the estate
managers and forced them to make an agonising choice between asking permission and holding the meetings in secret. Moreover, the reason given by
the employer, namely "extremist ideas . . . sowing hatred, confusion and discontent", could be applied, if stretched to the utmost, to trade union demands
1
Reports of the Committee on Freedom of Association set up by the Governing Body
(81st Report): Official Bulletin (Geneva, ILO), Vol. XLVIII, No. 2, April 1965, Supplement,
p. 60.
Political Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica, dated 7 November 1949, Title IV,
ILO: Legislative Series, 1949—C.R. 3.
286
Latin America
all over the world, since what the worker looks upon as a justified claim is
often regarded by his employer as unlawful presumption. The history of
trade unionism abounds with illustrations of this.
It is worth recalling that when it examined the situation in Costa Rica the
Committee on Freedom of Association expressed the opinion that it would
be extremely useful for the high judicial authorities of the country to have the
opportunity to state their views on the scope of the right of assembly granted
by the National Constitution in situations such as those which had arisen in
the case in question. The Committee went on to recall that on various occasions it had itself drawn the Government's attention to the principles laid down
in the resolution adopted by the ILO Committee on Work on Plantations
(Bandung, 1950) concerning the facilities that should be granted to plantation
workers in trade union matters; the Committee further drew the Government's
attention to the importance attached by the ILO Governing Body to the right
of plantation workers to hold trade union meetings, suggesting in this connexion
that it might be appropriate to adopt clear provisions as to the meaning to be
attached to the terms " public meeting" and "private meeting", and adding
that the right of trade unions to meet freely on their own premises, without
need for prior authorisation and without control by the public authorities,
constituted a fundamental element of freedom of association. Lastly, the
Committee recommended the Governing Body to reiterate to the Government
the principle that facilities should be granted to plantation workers, particularly
having regard to the right to hold trade union meetings, and to point out the
need to take such steps as are necessary to bring about the effective application
of this principle.1
Another case was submitted to the Committee on Freedom of Association
by the employees of the Standard Fruit Company of Honduras. In its complaint the employees' union alleged that during its eighth congress, in May
1963, the President of the Republic had sent a telegram to the departmental
political governor alerting him to the existence of "marked anti-democratic
tendencies" seeking to obtain the inclusion in the executive of the union of
elements "of noted Marxist affiliation". The Head of State had declared in
the communication in question that "since the Constitution of the Republic
prohibits all activity contrary to the democratic spirit of the Honduran
1
See reports of the Committee on Freedom of Association set up by the Governing Body
(81st Report, op. cit., pp. 60-61). More recently, in answer to a direct request by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, the Government
announced that, by means of Administrative Order No. 1772 of 5 September 1967, it had given
expression to the Committee's views as regards the access of trade union officials to the Banana
Company's plantations and the holding of union meetings on these plantations. See International Labour Conference, 53rd Session, Geneva, 1969, Report III(l): Summary of Reports
on Ratified Conventions, p. 121.
287
Agricultural organisations and development
Republic . . . any infiltration of Marxist elements in the ranks of the executive
members will be considered as a practice harmful to the trade union movement,
to worker-employer relations and to relationships between the Government
and the workers' trade union organisations".1 After the telegram was
received a split occurred at the congress and the election was subsequently
declared null and void by the authorities. In its examination of the complaint
presented by the union, the Committee on Freedom of Association expressed
the opinion that "the fact that the authorities should intervene during the
election proceedings of a union, expressing their opinion of the candidates
and the consequences of the election, seriously challenges the principle whereby
the trade union organisations are entitled to elect their representatives in full
freedom".2
An examination of the legislation of Honduras reveals that the constitutional ban on the pursuance of or connivance at activities contrary to the democratic way of life is not only reproduced in Chapter IX of Legislative Decree
No. 101 of 6 June 1955, for the promulgation of an Act respecting employers'
and workers' associations, but is further reinforced, so to speak, in Chapter I
of the same decree by a provision which stipulates that occupational associations must "abstain from any activities of a political or religious nature".3
In addition a number of provisions of the Labour Code (such as section 472,
whereby, if more than one trade union exists, only the union having the largest
number of members shall be retained, or sections 510 (c) and 541 which require
officials of trade unions, and of federations and confederations of trade
unions, to have been employed, at the time of their election, for more than six
months, in the case of the former, or for more than a year, in the case of the
latter, in an activity, occupation or trade covered by the union 4) impose
restrictions incompatible with a number of Articles of Convention No. 87,
ratified by the Government.
It will be noted that the restrictions mentioned can be divided into two
categories: on the one hand, specific limitations which leave no room for
subjective appreciation, such as the sections of the Labour Code to which
reference has been made, and on the other hand vaguely worded limitations
which lend themselves to subjective interpretation as circumstances dictate,
as is the case with the constitutional provision and with those of the legislative
decree cited above. In the absence of any specific and detailed definition of
activities "contrary to the democratic way of life", it is obvious that any
^ L O : Official Bulletin, Vol. XLVn, No. 3, July 1964, Supplement II, pp. 20-21.
» ibid., p. 22.
»ILO: Legislative Series, 1955—Hon. 2.
4
International Labour Conference, 51st Session, Geneva, 1967, Report III (4); Report of
the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, pp. 88-89.
288
Latín America
union claim which calls, for example, for structural reforms may be interpreted
as an attempt to undermine the foundations of society, and hence of the democratic way of life itself. As for the ban on the entry of occupational associations
into the political arena, it makes no allowance for the inevitable overlapping
between economics and politics. A trade union may be prompted to call for
the same reform as a political party, and it may so happen that its leaders are
also members of the party in question. In its turn, a political party may
support a trade union claim because it is influenced by those of its members
who belong to the union. In both cases it would be difficult to make a distinction, as regards the action taken by the union, between what is strictly
within its purview and what goes beyond it to enter the forbidden area of
politics.1
There is always a danger in attempting to qualify the actions and demands
of trade unions along doctrinal lines: that of branding them with political
labels which do not correspond entirely with the aims they have in mind.
Experience has shown that in Latin America it is all too common for social
and economic claims to be over-hastily associated with a particular political
viewpoint, especially where the propagation and expression of this viewpoint
by a party are banned by law, whereas in fact claims of the same nature form
part of a whole series of programmes ranging from reformist socialism to the
most orthodox form of Marxism, passing through the various shades of
Christian democracy. That is why, in the developed countries, the practice
has long been abandoned of banning all political or even religious activity on
the part of occupational associations, whether they be of employers or of
workers. The ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions
1
At its 35th Session (Geneva, June 1952), the International Labour Conference adopted
a resolution concerning the independence of the trade union movement, in which, after
emphasising in paragraphs 1 and 2 the important role of trade unions in economic and social
development, it declared: "(3) To these ends it is essential for the trade union movement in
each country to preserve its freedom and independence so as to be in a position to carry forward its economic and social mission irrespective of political changes; (4) A condition for
such freedom and independence is that trade unions be constituted as to membership without
regard to race, national origin or political affiliations and pursue their trade union objectives
on the basis of the solidarity and economic and social interests of all workers; (5) When trade
unions in accordance with national law and practice of their respective countries and at the
decision of their members decide to establish relations with a political party or to undertake
constitutional political action as a means towards the advancement of their economic and
social objectives, such political relations or actions should not be of such a nature as to
compromise the continuance of the trade union movement or its social and economic functions
irrespective of political changes in the country; (6) Governments in seeking the co-operation
of trade unions to carry out their economic and social policies should recognise that the
value of this co-operation rests to a large extent on the freedom and independence of the
trade union movement as an essential factor in promoting social advancement and should not
attempt to transform the trade union movement into an instrument for the pursuance of
political aims, nor should they attempt to interfere with the normal functions of a trade union
movement because of its freely established relationship with a political party."
289
Agricultural organisations and development
and Recommendations has observed that provisions of general scope, prohibiting occupational organisations from engaging in any political activities, might
raise difficulties by reason of the fact that the interpretation given to them in
practice might change at any moment and restrict considerably the possibility
of action of the organisations.1 In so doing the Committee thought it useful
to make reference to the resolution adopted by the International Labour
Conference at its 35th Session. In the Committee's view it would seem that
States should be able, without going so far as to prohibit in general terms all
political activities by occupational organisations, to entrust to the judicial
authorities the task of repressing abuses which might be committed by organisations which had lost sight of the fact that their fundamental objective
should be "the economic and social advancement" of their members.
Similar provisions to those in force in Honduras are to be found in Guatemala. Under the terms of section 211 (c) of the Labour Code2, the Executive
"may refuse to authorise, register, or grant the status of body corporate to
any industrial association which makes an application for the purpose, if
another association comprising more than three-fourths of the total number
of employees in the undertaking has already been legally recognised therein".3
Furthermore, the labour and social welfare tribunals may order the winding-up
of an industrial association if it is established by the legal proceedings "that
the association intervenes in electoral affairs or party politics, . . . that it
carries on activities antagonistic to the democratic system established by the
Constitution, . . . or that it violates in any other manner the provision laid
down in section 206, in pursuance of which an industrial association is bound
to limit its activities to the furthering and defence of the economic and social
interests common to its members" (section 226 (a)). According to a report
sent by the Guatemalan authorities to the ILO Committee of Experts3, use
has at no time been made of the provisions of section 226 (a) of the Labour
Code, but since it is impossible to state with certainty that a law on the statute
book will not be enforced some day or another, so long as this section of the
Labour Code remains unrepealed it should be looked upon as a virtual obstacle
to the exercise of freedom of association, and an infringement of the principle
laid down in Article 3 of Convention No. 87.
'International Labour Conference, 43rd Session, Geneva, 1959, Report III (4): Report
of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, p. 115,
para. 69.
2
Decree No. 1441 of 5 May 1961, to promulgate the Labour Code, as amended. ILO:
Legislative Series, 1961—Gua.l.
8
See International Labour Conference, 51st Session, Geneva, 1967, Report III (4), op. cit.,
p. 87.
290
Latin America
Another problem posed by the legislation of Guatemala is that of the powers
it confers upon landowners by assimilating them to public officials. Under
the terms of section 154 of the Penal Code, "every owner of a landed estate
and his administrators or legal representatives shall have the same status as
officials of the authorities and shall be bound to pursue, where necessary, and
capture offenders of all kinds and hand them over to the nearest authority.
This provision shall apply to estates for the growing of cereals, coffee, sugarcane and cocoa as well as those for the raising and fattening of livestock."
One can see the temptation offered by this provision to the large landowners,
with the best will in the world, to bring about the initiation of criminal proceedings in respect of labour disputes which would normally be dealt with in
the civil courts.
Other obstacles arise out of the fact that the general provisions relating to
workers' organisations do not necessarily apply to all branches of the economy
—in the present case, to agriculture—or else they confine the range of action
of a trade union within territorial bounds, or stipulate that an agricultural
undertaking must have a minimum number of employees for them to be
allowed t o form a union.
In Nicaragua's Trade Union Regulations, for
instance, section 6 (repealed on 4 October 1966) provided for different treatment for agricultural workers; whereas industrial workers could choose
between four types of union, in agricultural undertakings where over 60 per
cent of the workers were unable to read and write only one works union could
be formed. Moreover, the minimum number of members being stipulated
as twenty-five, comprising at least 60 per cent of the workers in the undertaking, it followed that a union could not be formed in an undertaking with
fewer than forty-two employees.1
In Brazil, one obstacle has been the limitation of the territorial range
of rural trade unions. Under the terms of section 3 of Ministerial Order
No. 355-A of 20 November 1962 (maintained as section 5 of Order No. 71 of
2 February 1965), the scope of a rural trade union was restricted to a single
municipality, an extension being authorised only in exceptional cases, whereas
industrial workers were allowed, by virtue of section 517 of the Consolidated
Labour Laws, to establish trade unions at district, municipal, state, inter-state
and, exceptionally, national level.2
1
International Labour Conference, 49th Session, Geneva, 1965, Report III (4): Report of
the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, p. 43.
a
International Labour Conference, 51st Session, Geneva, 1967, Report III (4), op. cit.,
p. 41. Since then the Government has decided to amend its legislation, publishing for this
purpose Ministerial Order No. 862 of 6 September 1967, which abolishes the restriction limiting the scope of a rural trade union to a single municipality. See idem, 53rd Session, Geneva,
1969, Report III (4): Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions
and Recommendations, p. 40.
291
Agricultural organisations and development
Generally speaking, agricultural trade unions in Latin America are confined
to the plantations in the form of works unions affiliated to a trade union
federation covering the whole of an industry or region. But apart from these
unions there exist a variety of forms of association such as the Brazilian peasant
leagues or the peasant communities and leagues of Guatemala, which are
at times allowed to function openly, although upon occasion the public
authorities may refuse to grant them legal personality. It is also common
for official recognition of trade unions, which by law should be granted within
a specified time limit, to be delayed for a fairly long period; according to a
memorandum from the Latin American Federation of Farmworkers (Federación
Campesina Latinoamericana) dated 8 September 1966, this appears to have
been a frequent occurrence in certain countries, such as Venezuela, where some
organisations have had to wait from six months to a year for official recognition,
although the statutory time limit is thirty days.
In contrast to these examples of restrictive legislation, the case of Chile
presents a picture which is all the more promising in that it is to be hoped that
its example will be emulated by other countries, as they become aware of the
need to associate in carrying out the current agrarian reforms organisations
freed from the shackles and apprehensions at present hampering their development.
Until April 1967 Chilean agricultural trade unionism was governed by the
provisions of Act No. 8811, promulgated twenty years earlier while President
González Videla was in office.1 According to section 2 of this Act, agricultural unions had to be "institutions for mutual collaboration between capital
and labour" whose primary concern was to be "to work for the improvement
of housing in country districts". In consequence, "organisations whose
methods of action are detrimental to discipline and order in employment"
were deemed to be "contrary to the spirit and rules of the law".
Unions formed for these sole purposes were allowed to operate only within
the estate, and were in no circumstances permitted to amalgamate or federate
(sections 9 and 14). Furthermore, even though only about 1,000 of the 14,000
fundos (larges estates) in Chile employed more than twenty agricultural workers,
the Act insisted upon this number before a union could be formed, added to
which these twenty had to be over 18 years of age, have moie than one year's
continuous service and represent at least 40 per cent of the workers on the
estate, and at least ten of them had to be able to read and write (section 16).
If all these conditions were fulfilled, a lengthy and cumbersome procedure
had to be gone through before the union was finally recognised by the
President of the Republic.
1
Act No. 8811 of 8 July 1947 to insert in the Labour Code certain provisions relating to the
formation of unions by agricultural workers. ILO: Legislative Series, 1947—Chile 1.
292
Latin America
Not only was no provision made in the Act for the right to strike, but it
stipulated that a union must be dissolved if its work was paralysed through
deliberate non-attendance by more than 55 per cent of its member workers
(section 46 (2)), while deeming to be an offence punishable by imprisonment
"any act whereby an attempt is made to prevent workers from attending for
work" (section 70). Moreover, unions could submit statements of demands
only once a year, and then not during the sowing and harvesting periods
(section 53), so that in the majority of cases the rotation of crops reduced
to nil this limited right accorded by law.
We can understand on reading these provisions why Chile had only
fourteen officially recognised agricultural unions as at 30 November 1964,
out of the twenty-four formed during the seventeen years the Act had been
in force. Act No. 16625, promulgated on 26 April 19671, has drastically
changed the situation. Its main features, enumerated later in the part dealing
with Chile, show that all the obstacles stemming from the earlier law have
been removed. As a result a large number of unions which until then had
been denied a legal existence have been able automatically to regularise their
situation.
Thanks to this Act, and to the agrarian reform approved on 16 July 1967
by the National Congress, Chile is now among the most advanced countries
in Latin America from a legislative standpoint; it is obvious that in many
cases the adoption of similar measures elsewhere would regularise the situation
of peasant organisations which are at present at variance with the law, and
thereby contribute towards relieving the social tension which fills the rural
sector in most of the countries of that continent. Normalisation of the status
of agricultural organisations—whether they are trade unions, peasant leagues
or one of the many kinds of tenants' and share-croppers' associations—would
also enable them, at least in countries which have already embarked upon
agrarian reform, to progress beyond the stage of pure and simple contestation
and become participants. The isolation of a substantial proportion of Latin
American peasants, the pressures to which they are subjected at the local level
and their lack of representation and participation at the higher levels where
the decisions are taken are facts which are well known to all rural sociologists.
Even if not excluded from exercise of the vote because of illiteracy, political
representation of peasant interests has been rare. The peasant's relation to the
party system and to the local administration is likely to show the following characteristics: the acceptance of self-imposed leaders from among the estate owners or
commercial classes of the small towns, whose influence may be used to secure communal or individual benefits; the location of power and of decision-making outside
1
Diario Oficial de la República de Chile, No. 26730, 29 April 1967, pp. 1-4. ILO: Legislative Series, 1967—Chile 1.
293
Agricultural organisations and development
the peasant locality-group, and the consequent inhibition of the growth of a peasant
leadership with some validity in the larger society; and the absence of concern by
decision-makers at municipal, departmental, and national levels for the peasants'
social and economic interests.1
At the national level, although in the past ten years or so most countries
have opted for methods of economic and social planning, the lack of agricultural organisations is likely to jeopardise the success of these plans, which
depends to a large extent upon genuine participation by the people.
As a rule there is a lack of contact between the planners and the private sector.
In framing a plan it is rare for there to be consultation of the bodies representing
national opinion (parliament, political parties, trade unions, employers' associations,
universities, etc.) or the sectors directly concerned (employers, importers, exporters,
consumers' associations, etc.).2
This state of affairs was criticised by representatives of the trade unions
during the Inter-American Conference of Ministers of Labour held in Colombia
in May 1963. According to them, when they visited the major countries of
the continent they could see no signs of any real effort on the part of governments to encourage participation by trade unions in the framing of national
plans, and it appeared that in some cases attempts were made, on the contrary,
to prevent them from having their say.3
There has admittedly been a slight improvement in the situation since
1963 thanks to growing pressure from the trade union movement in general
and an awakening of governments to the facts. But it can by no means be
said that all the obstacles have been done away with. Their elimination,
and the granting to agricultural organisations of consultative status—similar
to that which such organisations enjoy in Europe—are two essential prerequisites for the speeding-up of the agrarian reforms now under way. Without genuine participation at all levels, Latin America is likely to have difficulty
during the coming decade in maintaining the balance between her various
rates of growth while at the same time overcoming the century-old handicaps
which have hampered her development up to now.
1
Andrew Pearse: Agrarian Change Trends in Latin America, op. cit., p. 66.
United Nations, ECLA, 12th Session, Caracas, 2-13 May 1967: Planning in Latin America (mimeographed doc. E/CN.12/772), p. 20. For a general review of planning see also
United Nations, ECOSOC: Committee for Development Planning, Report on the Second Session, Official Records, 43rd Session, Supplement No. 7 (New York, 1967), pp. 5-32.
•See "Conferencia Interamericana de Ministros de Trabajo sobre la Alianza para el
Progreso", Revista Interamericana de Ciencias Sociales (Washington, Pan-American Union),
Vol. 2, No. 2, 1963, pp. 172-173.
2
294
Latin America
THE PROGRESS AND LIMITS OF LAND REFORM
Notwithstanding the gloomy picture we have been painting, a certain
amount of progress in land reform has nevertheless been made.
Until 1961, only four countries had achieved anything of moment in the
field of land reform—Mexico (1917), Bolivia (1953), Cuba (1959) and Venezuela (1960). A brief experiment (which lasted a bare two years and was
virtually abandoned after the revolution of 1954) was tried in Guatemala.
In fact, land reform on a continental scale did not really begin until the signing
in 1961 of the Charter of Punta del Este, which pointed to the need for such
reform. Thus, Colombia (1962), Nicaragua (1963), Peru and Ecuador (1964)
and Chile (1967) successively promulgated legislation for the structural and
socio-economic transformation of their rural areas. Incidentally, all the
amendments made to the constitutions of Latin American countries (or the
new constitutional instruments adopted) today make provision either for the
expropriation of land in the public interest, or (on occasion) for a maximum
size of holding to be possessed by any one person. Under Chilean law, for
example, nobody may own more than 200 acres, although up to 800 acres
may be tolerated when the land in question is being farmed to the limit of its
capacity. The social function of property is generally recognised, as is the
fact that the latifundian system constitutes an obstacle to agricultural development. We may confidently say that the reason why no land reforms have
been attempted in certain countries is not because there is any loophole in
their respective constitutions, but because of obstacles, both social and political,
which have hitherto prevented the promulgation of the requisite legislation.1
In each particular country, the progress made obviously depends on how
much time has elapsed since the relevant legislation was enacted, and on the
procedures adopted with regard to expropriation of, and compensation for,
land. In Mexico, 91.2 million acres were expropriated between 1916 and
1956, for the benefit of some 1.9 million persons, without financial compensation, except for 170 landowners whose land totalled 551,000 acres.2 In
Bolivia, between 1953 and 1965, a similar procedure resulted in the apportionment of 15.3 million acres among 170,000 peasant families.3 In Cuba,
a maximum limit on property of 993 acres (30 caballerías) in 1959 led to the
apportionment of some 11.1 million acres within eighteen months. A new
1
See Pedro Moral López: Limites legales e institucionales de la reforma agraria (Bogotá,
ICIRA; doc. No. 59).
2
For further details, see Oscar Delgado: Reformas agrarias en la América latina, op. cit.,
pp. 373-402. More recent data show that by 1965,115.8 million acres had been apportioned
among 2.3 million families.
s
Informe de la reunión internacional de ejecutivos de la reforma agraria..., op. cit.,
pp. 49-56.
295
Agricultural organisations and development
law was enacted in 1963, limiting ownership of property to 5 caballerías;
with this, land reform in Cuba may be considered virtually complete. But
the process is still under way in Bolivia and Mexico. In this latter country,
despite the land already turned over to the peasantry, the position is still
such as to justify grave misgivings. The 1960 census revealed that out of
1.4 million estates occupying 420 million acres, 5,564 alone accounted for
228.8 million acres. Thus it was that in 1966, in a paper submitted to the
World Land Reform Conference in Rome, the Mexican Government declared
that in the existing social and economic circumstances obtaining in Mexico,
agriculture was the most acute of all problems facing the country; on its
solution depended the growing welfare of all Mexicans.1
In the three countries we have been discussing, land reform was the direct
result of a revolutionary upheaval. But in the other countries (Colombia,
Chile, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Peru and Venezuela), it springs from a continuous
evolution in their social and economic life which has been comparatively
little affected by changes in government.2 Although land reform is comparatively recent, encouraging results have already been achieved in certain
instances. Thus, in Venezuela, between 1959 and 1965, 6.9 million acres
were distributed among 114,000 families.3 In Ecuador, 18,500 families
received documents entitling them to ownership of 725,000 acres during the
fourteen months following the launching of the land reform movement in
July 1964, while 12,500 persons, precariously holding 120,000 acres, became
confirmed owners.4 In Colombia, after four years of reform (1962-65),
3.33 million acres were apportioned among more than 32,500 families.5
1
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: The Mexican Land
Reform Programme (paper by Mexico) (doc. RU:WLR-C/66/23), p. 2.
8
After this study had been prepared, the Revolutionary Government of Peru enacted
Legislative Decree No. 17716 (24 June 1969), thus launching a fresh movement of land reform.
Henceforward nobody may own more than 375 acres of irrigated land in a coastal area; this
figure may, however, be as much as 500 acres in certain circumstances, when, for example,
an undertaking pays its workers wages more than 10 per cent above the legal minimum and
grants its permanent staff a share in profits of not less than 10 per cent of gross annual profits
(section 28). Stock-breeding farms are limited to 3,750 acres of natural pasture-land, but this
figure may be four times as great if certain conditions are fulfilled (notably as regards staff;
sections 29-34; see above). Expropriated estates will be bought out with an eye to the value
thereof declared by the owner when acquitting himself of rural property tax (1968 figures),
allowance being made for additions or reductions made since 1968 (section 63). Expropriated
land will be distributed among the landless peasants, among agricultural communities, cooperatives, and agricultural associations acknowledged to be working in the public interest
(section 67).
8
Informe de la reunión internacional de ejecutivos de la reforma agraria..., op. cit.,
pp. 77-78.
* ibid., pp. 82-83.
6
Noticias sobre la reforma agraria (Bogotá, Instituto Interamericano de Ciencias Agrícolas
de la OEA, Centro Interamericano de Reforma Agraria (IICA-CIRA)), Voi. Ili, No. 1,
February 1966, pp. 2-3.
296
Latin America
In relation to the stagnation in previous decades, such figures mark a real
step forward. But what is uncertain is whether the reforms in question are
sufficiently fast and comprehensive to solve the problems with reasonable
speed. Estimates made in 1966 show that, every year, between 600,000 and
700,000 rural families would have to benefit from these reform schemes over
the next ten years.1 In fact, thisfigureis far from being attained, and because
of the accumulated lag, the deficit is likely to get bigger year by year. The
reasons for this shortfall are many and various, the most important of them
being that payment for the land expropriated involves each country in a heavy
budgetary commitment, to which must be added the cost of settlement,
agricultural credit, the registration of titles to property, and so on. In relation
to the money set aside for land reform in Latin America (some US$177
million per annum—$150 million contributed by the countries concerned,
and $27 million coming from outside), Thomas F. Carroll estimated in 1966
that every year, something like US$1,350 million to $1,550 million ($400
million to $600 million from outside) would have to be devoted to land
reform.2 If we contemplate the over-all development plans evolved by the
countries concerned, we may well wonder how their budgets can be sound
enough for them to undertake such commitments, and also whether the international monetary situation, especially with regard to the United States, will
stand such an increase in international assistance. However, some solution
will have to be found, either by cutting down the cost of expropriations, or
by doing away with compensation. Otherwise the countries concerned will
find themselves in insoluble difficulties. Victor Giménez Landinez has
observed that only when matters become really critical can the authorities
be expected to take a serious interest in land reform.3 And yet, at the present
level of expenditure, land reform is likely to drag on into the next century.
In Colombia, according to Charles W. Anderson, the Land Reform Institute
(INCORA), with a budget "of US$10 million a year, will need a century to
assist the country's army of landless peasants.4 In Peru, although Act No.
15037 (May 1964) provides that for twenty years 3 per cent of the national
budget shall be devoted to land reform (i.e. a sum of some 900 million soles), this
"FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Issues of Financing
Agrarian Reform: the Latin American Experience, by Thomas F. Carroll (doc. WLR/66/5),
p. 38.
2
ibid., p. 40. As regards money for reform, see also United Nations-FAO-ILO: Progress
in Land Reform, Fourth Report (New York, 1966), Ch. II.
"Víctor Giménez Landinez: Capacitación para la reforma agraria integral (Bogotá,
IICA-CIRA, 1966), p. 35.
4
Charles W. Anderson: Land Reform and Social Change in Colombia (University of
Wisconsin, Land Tenure Center, Discussion Paper No. 4, November 1963), quoted by Gerrit
Huizer, "Desarrollo de la comunidad y grupos de intereses en áreas rurales",
op. cit., p. 46.
297
Agricultural organisations and development
3 per cent was not reached in 1964-65; the budget of ONRA (the body responsible for the reform) has been limited every year to 167 million soles, and in
1965 the total available for expropriation was a mere 99 million soles.1 These
two examples show how extraordinarily difficult it is proving to finance land
reform.
Another problem lies in the fact that the procedures for the apportionment
of land are so slow and complicated. A limit on private property would
speed up reform, but this is not, in most of the countries concerned, the crucial
point. Expropriation of the big estates sometimes comes last on the list, after
expropriation of State lands, lands belonging to the ejidos, and acceptance
of the land voluntarily offered to the authorities carrying out the reform.2
But State lands (tierras nacionales) often lie in tropical areas unsuitable for
agriculture, or in trackless bush or jungle (which severely complicates the work
of land settlement). Besides which, reform is often held up by the introduction
of concepts such as "lands ill-farmed or not in use" ; these the land reform
authorities themselves have difficulty in interpreting, and there is boundless
room for litigation.3 Furthermore, when there is some uncertainty as to
which lands will in the last resort be taken over, owners tend to go slow in
investing in their estates, fearful lest in the long run they will be dispossessed.
The lawyers have taken a step forward in introducing the concept of the
"social function" of property; but this notion, unless supplemented by definite
rules and standards, is likely to remain purely abstract and inapplicable.
Lastly, the third and certainly not the least of the difficulties encountered
lies in the fact that popular support is so often lukewarm. Decided on at
government level, reforms have to be put into practice on the spot, and without
the active assistance of vigorous agricultural organisations they are likely
to grind to a stop.
We have, in fact, something of a vicious circle. Without reform, agricultural organisations are hardly likely to develop as they ought. Such organisations do not exist in the abstract, and their development is heavily dependent
on whether the society in which they have their beingflourishesor wilts. And
1
Enrique Torres Llosa: Avances de la reforma agraria en el Perú (Lima, Oficina Nacional
de Reforma Agraria, 1966), p. 24. On the limitations inherent in the Peruvian land reform,
see CIDA: Tenencia de la tierra y desarrollo socioeconómico del sector agrícola, Perú (Washington, Pan-American Union, 1966), pp. 454-464.
2
This holds good, for example, in the case of Nicaragua. See "Ley de Reforma Agraria", Diario Oficial, No. 85, 19 April 1963, especially section 18.
8
See Ernst Feder: "Algunos obstáculos a la realización de una reforma agraria racional",
Estudios Agrarios (Mexico City), December 1964; Edmundo Flores: "The Economics of Land
Reform", International Labour Review, Vol. 92, No. 1, July 1965, pp. 21-34. For the detailed
study of a particular case, see Joseph R. Thome: Limitaciones de la legislación colombiana
para expropriar o comprar fincas con destino a parcelación (University of Wisconsin, Land
Tenure Center; doc. LTC/14, November 1965).
298
Latin America
the other way round: to be effective, changes in the structure of agriculture
call for the support of the organisations, which will have to help put through
reforms at ground level, as it were. Otherwise, and in view of the shortage
of technicians and experts, these reforms may well founder; they will, at least,
run into trouble. As a result, development will be unequal; there will be
blockages, drops in production, and so on. These things have often been
known to happen, and are frequently invoked as an argument against land
reform. In almost every instance, they are attributable to inadequate organisation on the part of the peasantry. For the time being, land reform programmes are fairly limited in scope, and hence can to some extent do without
these peasants' organisations. But should such programmes become more
ambitious and involve the figures predicted by Carroll (to what extent could
capital amounts of this order be absorbed ? the problem would arise at
once), then their outcome might well be jeopardised. And in view of the
importance of agriculture in Latin America and the intersectorial relationships
resulting therefrom, the whole economic development of the Latin American
countries could well be at risk.
AGRICULTURAL ORGANISATIONS : THE PRESENT SITUATION
The emergence of agricultural organisations in Latin America (employers'
associations, unions, and co-operatives) is a fairly recent phenomenon, which
began to become significant only after the First World War, and then only
rather slowly. This does not, however, apply to national agricultural associations, some of which go back to the nineteenth century.
The rural landowners have never felt the need to set up employers' associations to cope with workers' claims. Such claims were either non-existent,
or were put forward in a haphazard, sporadic way, so that landowners were
never induced to set up any kind of permanent organisation. (This holds
true of industry as well, as a general rule.) If a violent revolt did break out,
usually the landowners simply appealed to the authorities. Even today, there
are no real agricultural employers' associations as understood in Europe.
However, this did not mean that employers did not come together in other
ways for the defence of their common interests. Indeed, there are numerous
societies, frequently specialising in one particular branch of production, such
as stock-breeding, cocoa- or coffee-growing, etc. They are highly influential
in shaping their country's agricultural policy. This applies, for example, to
the societies existing in Bolivia, Colombia, Chile, Mexico, Peru and Uruguay.
In the light of the information elicited by the author's inquiries, we shall
now consider the range of their activities.
299
Agricultural organisations and development
Agricultural and rural associations
Usually—as we shall see below—the agricultural and rural associations
confine themselves to certain well-defined activities in defence of their members,
whom they represent vis-à-vis the authorities. Thus they are chiefly active
in price maintenance, export policy, and the search for new marketing procedures, in promoting agriculture and stock-breeding, in organising fairs for
livestock and agricultural produce, and in providing their members with legal
assistance in case of need.
In Argentina, for example, there are many agricultural organisations of
long experience. Since they failed to supply the information requested of them,
however, we shall be unable to consider their activities in any detail. We may
mention in passing, however, the Argentine Rural Association (Sociedad
Rural Argentina), set up in 1886 by the great landowners. The association
promotes stock-breeding, maintains records of pedigrees, and supervises dairy
production. It can claim credit for having considerably improved the efficiency
of stock-breeding in Argentina. In 1964, it created a foundation of the same
name, on the principle that employers can and should work hand-in-hand
with the State in a big campaign to improve the education and training of
young people so as to raise their social and cultural level.1 The association
is also interested in agricultural labour problems ; since such labour is becoming
more and more technical, while agricultural machinery is becoming increasingly
complicated, people have to be trained in how to use machines and keep them
in repair. The association tries to familiarise country-dwellers with technical
and semi-technical questions of immediate concern to them. It also encourages
research into agricultural production problems by a system of monetary gifts,
scholarships, and grants.
As regards wages and collective agreements, it would seem that until the
last few years most of the associations were content to leave such matters to
individual agricultural undertakings. In Colombia, the Farmers' Association
(Sociedad de Agricultores), created in 1871, says that it has not hitherto had
to tackle negotiations of this kind. Since there are no Colombian employers'
associations, it seems to follow that in each undertaking wage questions are
taken up with the workers themselves, or with the local workers' union, where
one exists.
In Peru, the National Agrarian Association (Sociedad Nacional Agraria),
officially recognised since 1926 2, expresses similar views, but says that it is
1
Jorge Newton (with Lily Sosa de Newton) : Historia de la Sociedad Rural Argentina,
second edition (Buenos Aires, Editorial y Librería Goncourt, 1966), p. 266.
* In fact, the National Agrarian Association is a continuation of the National Agricultural
Association, founded in 1896. The latter in turn carried on from where the old National
Association of Agriculture and Mining (created about a century ago) left off.
300
Latin America
represented on, and is entitled to vote in, the National Minimum Wage
Committee, which from time to time lays down minimum wages for each
district of the country. Besides which, the fact that collective agreements are
arrived at by bargaining between agricultural undertakings and their workers
(or workers' unions) does not prevent this association from being represented
centrally in various bodies responsible for seeing that social welfare legislation
is complied with, such as the Supreme Social Security Council, the Workers'
Retirement Fund Economic Council, and others.
In Chile, the employers' had not yet founded any associations when the
author was engaged in his inquiries. The National Agricultural Association
(Sociedad Nacional de Agricultura), founded in 1838, declares that before
1965 it had never had to conduct negotiations in connexion with wages or
employment conditions. But in that year the workers had begun to put
forward collective claims. Since then, the association has advised its regional
and provincial organs, which themselves engage in such negotiations.
The situation seems to be very much the same in Mexico, where there are
127 regional agricultural unions and fourteen national associations and federations of agricultural producers. Their activities are governed by the Agricultural Associations Act of 19 August 1932. These associations do not deal
with wages questions or collective agreements and have no hand in joint
bargaining between employers and workers.
In Bolivia, on the other hand, there are two associations, the Bolivian Cotton
Association (Sociedad Algodonera Boliviana) and the Sugar-Cane Planters'
Federation (Federación de Cañeros) of Santa Cruz. These take an interest
in wages questions and organise committees representing undertakings to
negotiate collective agreements with the workers' unions within the Legal
Affairs Commission of the Ministry of Peasant Affairs.
In Uruguay there is a whole range of national associations, representing the
interests of the stock-breeders, the growers of rice, beet, vines, etc. The part
they play is essentially technical (as in the case with the Asociación Rural,
founded in 1871 for the promotion of stock-breeding), and occasionally
political, economic or social (as with the Federación Rural, created in 1915,
and made up of regional and departmental bodies). The Uruguayan national
associations usually take a hand in bargaining about wages and conditions
of employment, either directly (by talks with the workers' representatives),
or indirectly (by giving advice to the authorities in connexion with wage fixing
for each branch of agriculture).
With regard to agricultural pricefixingand price maintenance, the position
varies, too, from one country to another. Generally speaking, however, the
agricultural organisations and governmental bodies responsible for such matters
work together fairly closely. The authorities are usually anxious to prevent
301
Agricultural organisations and development
prices for the main agricultural products from falling below a certain level and
from being excessively increased; to this end they subject such prices to a
periodical review. This holds good of rice, sugar, milk and meat in Peru;
wheat in Chile; potatoes, eggs, milk, wheat and flax in Uruguay; and coffee
and cocoa in Colombia and Ecuador. In thisfield,the agricultural associations
play a part of capital importance, if only by giving advice to the competent
authorities. Sometimes, indeed, they have a right of vote, as in Colombia,
where the National Agrarian Association, in its answer to the author's inquiries,
declares that it can vote in the bodies known as Juntas Nacionales Consultivas
de Alimentos (official organs responsible for regulating supply and prices for
each branch of agriculture). It nevertheless stresses that sometimes prices
are laid down by decree, with no consultation of the relevant junta beforehand.
In Chile, where permanent price maintenance exists for wheat only, the National
Agricultural Association rests content with discussing the sums which the
official purchasing organ has to pay to producers. In Uruguay, associations
are divided in their views of the part the Government should play in price
maintenance. Some of them, like the Rural Association, are against any State
intervention, which, they feel, is contrary to freedom of the market. Others
again demand State support in laying down minimum prices, or for the cancellation of purchases which have been followed, suddenly and unforeseeably,
by a rise in prices (with a consequent loss of potential profit by the producers).
The agricultural associations play an important part, too, in general agricultural policy and in the procedure whereby production targets are set. As
a rule, they seem to maintain very close contacts with government departments
and financial organisations (banks, credit agencies, etc.), both public and
private. In Peru, the National Agrarian Association, which represents, very
largely, the interests of the big landowner1, has a say in shaping general
agricultural policy in conjunction with the official bodies, or by giving its
views to the authorities directly. When called upon to shape general policy
in conjunction with official bodies, its delegates take their seats in the official
1
Besides the National Agrarian Association, there is a Sugar-Producers' Board on which
the fourteen largest sugar-planters are represented, and two associations of stock-breeders
from the coastal areas and the Sierra, representing the interests of the big estate-owners.
These associations are very much closed circles, and the small farmer has no access to them.
Even if he had, he would carry no weight in matters of policy. In the National Agrarian Association, for example, only the rich have any chance of election to the board of directors, each
associate commanding a number of votes proportional to the acreage of his estates. As a
recent CEDA study emphasises, the system prevents the small and medium farmer from
securing the representation to which he is entitled. Be that as it may, the association enjoys
State backing, plus subsidies paid by the State (and by all farmers, great and small), since the
subsidies are financed by means of a special levy on the sale of island guano to Peruvian farmers. See Tenencia de la tierra y desarrollo socioeconómico del sector agrícola, Perú, op. cit.,
p. 261. Note that this state of affairs has been changing since the enactment of Legislative
Decree No. 17716 (24 June 1969), by virtue of which fresh land reforms will be undertaken
throughout the country.
302
Latin America
boards called upon to study agricultural problems (land reform, agricultural
planning, rural legislation and promotion, and so on). It is represented, too,
in the National Land Council, the Land Reform Technical Board, the Planning
Advisory Board, the Tax Legislation Review Committee and the National
Committee of the Latin American Free Trade Association (ALALC). The
society's delegates can usually speak and vote in all these bodies (executive
as well as advisory). It is similarly represented in the boards of directors of
various bodies such as the Central Reserve Bank and the Bank for the Promotion of Agriculture and Stock-Breeding, and has a say in shaping the financial
aspects of agricultural policy. In other countries, these associations, although
less powerful, have a similar influence on political decisions. They may be
consulted, as is the case with the Colombian Farmers' Association, or they
may have a vote, as with the Chilean National Agricultural Association, which
is represented in various State organs, such as the Production Promotion
Society (Corporación de Fomento de la Producción), the State Bank, the
Technical Co-operation Department, etc. In Uruguay, the Rural Association
and Rural Federation play a similar part on the Development Plan Board
and in various other bodies such as the Meat Agency, the Wool Agency, and
the National Cold Storage Establishment, which dominate stock-breeding.
Many of these associations have long traditions to look back on and are just
as influential as similar associations in Europe. Hence the Latin American
producer's interests seem to be satisfactorily defended.
The agricultural associations only rarely bother about welfare in the
countryside (the creation of schools and dispensaries, housing improvement,
and so on), these being matters which are usually left to the authorities or to
private enterprise. In Colombia, Mexico, Peru and Uruguay in particular,
they do, it is true, co-operate with official bodies or contribute funds to bring
about improvements officially decided on; they may even urge their member
undertakings to do something for their workers. The associations in other
countries, however, either omitted to answer the relevant questions in the
author's questionnaire, or said quite bluntly that they were not interested in
such matters.
Vocational training is anotherfieldin which the Latin American agricultural
associations, with few exceptions, are not markedly active. Most of the
answers received by the author either reported no activities, or left a blank.
In Mexico, however, the Coffee-Growers' Confederation has induced its
members to grant scholarships for students at the two vocational training
colleges created by the Mexican Coffee Institute. In Uruguay, the Rural
Association and Rural Federation each have a seat on the executive board of
the Labour University, a body which deals with technical training. This
university maintains very close links with the Alliance for Progress and the
303
Agricultural organisations and development
Organisation of American States, which have assisted in the creation of three
training schools dealing with fowl and poultry, vine-growing, and agricultural
machinery.
The Chilean National Agricultural Association is a member of the International Organisation of Employers, but with this exception no association
indicated membership of any international body. Possibly some associations
which failed to answer our questionnaire have such international links. It
does seem, though, that the associations with international ties must be few
in number. This is regrettable, for profit would certainly be derived from an
exchange of views between these associations and those in other continents.
Generally speaking, then, we may say that in the years to come there will
be plenty of room for contributions from the Latin American agricultural
associations in the task of improving agricultural performances in their respective countries.
Chambers of agriculture
As might have been expected, answers from chambers of agriculture were
even fewer. These exist in very few countries, and do not always have the
same responsibilities and interests as those in Europe. The answers from
Chile, Mexico and Colombia were negative. Peru did not answer the relevant
question, and we may perhaps conclude that the National Agrarian Association
has certain attributes of a chamber of agriculture. In Costa Rica, a chamber
does exist, but for want of detailed information we cannot examine its functions
here. However, Bolivia, Ecuador and Uruguay do provide adequate information on the subject of their own chambers.
In Bolivia, the chambers of agriculture are in fact local agricultural associations founded between 1930 and 1950; since 1940 they have belonged to
the Bolivian Rural Association. According to the reply received, they were,
until 1952, extremely active in representing the interests of their members in
production and marketing matters. Since then, they have been little more
than social clubs, and all other activities seem to have been virtually abandoned.
They include no representatives of agricultural trade unions. They do not
co-operate with the authorities, nor do they receive any official assistance.
Thus cut off from their grass-roots, ignored by the seat of power, they seem
likely to wither away in the fairly near future, unless it be decided to rejuvenate
them. To date, the Bolivian Rural Association has joined no other organisation, either regional or international.
Ecuador has two chambers of agriculture; one in Zone I (the Sierra and
the eastern part of the country) and one in Zone II (the coastal strip, where
304
Latin America
the plantations are). They were set up on 10 February 1937, under Decree
No. 24 of that year. A study published by the ILO a few years ago describes
their activities as follows :
They consist of representatives elected by the agricultural centres in the various
provinces. Membership is open to all landowners, tenant farmers, estate managers
or administrators and holders of diplomas in the field of agriculture (subject to
certain conditions) as well as co-operatives, associations, trade unions and other
bodies for agricultural purposes. Among their objectives mention may be made of
the organisation of rural communities and the defence of their interests, particularly
those of peasants and Indians; the forming of agricultural undertakings and the
establishment of agricultural societies, co-operatives, etc., the award of agricultural
study grants; the import of seeds, agricultural machinery and other equipment, and
collaboration in agricultural development in general.1
The trade unions are not represented in the Ecuadorian chambers. As
regards their relations with the authorities, they expect to be asked for their
advice, and to receive encouragement and protection in return. The answer
received does not seem to indicate that they are anxious to play a more active
part in defining national agricultural policy. The two chambers are financed
as follows: that in Zone I receives 5 per cent of the land taxes paid by landowners, while that in Zone II obtains, over and above this percentage, a share
in the tax levied on the export of agricultural produce. Although they work
together, the two chambers remain independent and have hitherto set up no
federation. They belong to no international organisation.
In Uruguay, there are no chambers of agriculture as ordinarily understood. The duties normally undertaken by such bodies are performed by
the Commercial Chamber for National Produce, founded in 1891. It is
chiefly engaged in encouraging, facilitating and supervising trade in wool,
leather, wheat, oil seeds, etc.—the country's principal agricultural products.
To this end, it is active on two fronts. It disseminates price bulletins throughout the country, so that producers may decide on sales in full knowledge of
market conditions. In addition, it supervises production and trade by issuing
certificates which guarantee the origin, the humidity, the weight and the quality
of goods for export (bearing in mind the requirements of the countries ordering
them). Furthermore, it has its own laboratories in which cereals and oil
seeds are subjected to examination.
The chamber has seven committees representing the producers of cereals,
the producers of flour, the cereal exporters, the wool consignees, the manufacturers of farinaceous foods, the wool exporters and the leather exporters. In
each branch there are two representatives, making a total of fourteen for the
1
ILO: Plantation Workers, Studies and Reports, New Series, No. 69 (Geneva, 1966), p.162.
305
Agricultural organisations and development
seven branches. These fourteen meet to select a president and vice-president
for the chamber. As an advisory body, the chamber works in close conjunction
with the authorities and exerts an influence on agricultural policy with regard
to prices, marketing, and the export of produce. It also occupies seats on
the principal bodies concerned with economics and agriculture, whether they
be official or semi-official, such as the Economic Development Co-ordination
Committee, the national agencies for wool, potatoes and cereals, the Foreign
Trade Commission of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Exporters' Union,
and so forth.
Through its seven committees, the chamber is in touch with the representatives of the workers' federations, especially that for wool. In this field, it
acts as an employers' association by concluding collective agreements and
being represented on the joint committees organised by employers and workers.
Its effectiveness is substantiated by the chamber's answer to our questionnaire,
which states, in effect, that in 1965-66 (a period of considerable social tension
and economic crisis), there were neither strikes nor stoppages in any of the
branches of agriculture within which the chamber is active.
The chamber gave no reply to our question as to whether it belonged to
any regional or international federation. This silence, and that of the other
Latin American chambers of agriculture, would seem to show that there is
no Latin American body to co-ordinate their activities. This is much to be
regretted, for chambers of agriculture seem to be very unequally developed
in Latin America (in Bolivia, as we have seen, they appear to be withering
away). Some system for the exchange of views would undoubtedly have a
tonic effect.
Workers' unions and peasant leagues
The background
Agricultural trade unionism in Latin America is a twentieth-century
phenomenon which first became apparent during the 1914-18 war and assumed
serious proportions only after the war of 1939-45, whereas urban trade
unionism goes back to the nineteenth century. Today, we know a good deal
about the influence of European ideas among Latin American industrial
workers. Thus, the French emigrants who fled their country after the Commune in 1871, and the Germans who left Germany in protest at Bismarck's
anti-socialist legislation, were especially influential. A considerable literature
already exists, whereby we can follow the progress made by the ideas of the
"Utopian" and "scientific" socialists from one country to another, the settingup of "resistance societies" (nuclei for the anarcho-syndicalist trade unions of
306
Latín America
the future), and the first strikes to be launched by bodies which were recognisably trade unions.1
On the other hand, until a few years ago nobody had attempted any serious
research into the history of the peasant movements in Latin America. This
was still virtually virgin ground. The historians, like the economists and the
sociologists, have been taken unawares by the sudden, striking upsurge of a
movement which we should understand better if there existed detailed studies
of the origins and present position of peasant organisations throughout the
continent.
We cannot describe here, even in abbreviated form, the birth and development of the peasant movements in the nineteen countries of Latin America.
(Our reason for doing so in the case of Europe was that in our opinion that
continent could serve both as an example and as a warning to the developing
countries.) Firstly, the literature available is notoriously inadequate ; secondly,
at the time this report was drafted, the investigations under way (especially
those undertaken by the ILO and CIDA) had not yet reached a point at
which a summary—however tentative—could safely be attempted. The most
we can do is to recall one or two events which may help the reader to comprehend why the Latin American agricultural workers' organisations have
lagged behind and why they are in their present state.
We should first of all note the wide differences between the dates of the
first attempts at agricultural organisation in the various countries of Latin
America. In that continent there has never been anything comparable to
the 1848 revolutions in Europe (for example) which shook several countries
simultaneously. From time to time, here and there, the peasants would shake
off their torpor; then sink back into despond. This, at any rate, was so until
the period of the Second World War, and we shall observe during that period
the beginnings of a peasant movement in three great countries: Argentina
and Brazil in the south, and Mexico in the north. The movement began in
the southernmost country, Argentina.
In that country, urban trade unionism seems to have begun in 1853, with
the foundation of the Printing Workers' Union in Buenos Aires. But not
until 1912 did the movement extend to the small tenant fanners, who founded
1
The reader may consult with profit the following works on urban trade unionism: Boris
Goldenberg: Los sindicatos en América latina (Hanover, Verlag für Literatur und Zeitgeschehen, 1967); Victor Alba: Le mouvement ouvrier en Amérique latine (Paris, Les Éditions
ouvrières, 1953); Robert J. Alexander: Organised Labor in Latin America (New York, Free
Press, 1965). The first trade unionists were recruited very largely from foreign immigrants
in towns and cities. In Argentina, for example (according to A. Belloni), between 1880 and 1890,
it was rare to find a native in a trade union organisation. As late as 1914, 59 per cent of all
trade unionists had been born outside Argentina (i.e. in Europe). This almost certainly holds
good for many other Latin American countries too. See A. Belloni : Del anarquismo al peronismo
(Buenos Aires, 1960), pp. 8 and 29; and Goldenberg, op. cit., p. 34.
307
Agricultural organisations and development
the Argentine Land Federation (Federación Agraria Argentina) after an
immense strike which paralysed the south of the province of Santa Fe and the
north of the province of Buenos Aires. Thefirstagricultural workers' employment exchanges date from this period. The federation could not, however,
have been very effective, for in 1928 it had no more than 19,000 members.1
In 1937, according to Boris Goldenberg, the agricultural wage earner in the
countryside had been virtually unaffected by trade unionism.2 Since October
1947, workers in agricultural and stock-breeding undertakings have been
represented by the Argentine Rural Workers' and Stevedores' Federation,
which body, in 1965, had some 50,000 members. Its aim is to defend workers'
rights vis-à-vis the employers, especially within the joint bodies set up for
purposes of collective bargaining. The federation derives its funds from
members' contributions, each member paying in 2 per cent of his monthly
wage. With the money thus accumulated, the federation finances the activities
of local unions, runs a clinic for its members, offers legal advice, and has an
office to deal with matters relating to pensions and occupational injury. The
federation is especially proud of the fact that at its insistence, Act No. 13020
was passed obliging employers to recruit their harvest workers through the
unions.
In Brazil, the trade union movement began between 1903 and 1905, with
the creation of the first mutual benefit societies among transport workers and
coal-miners. Only in 1914 did it extend to the agricultural workers, who in
that year founded a small union, the activities of which were planned on a
scale far from ambitious. Later on, two big organisations tried in vain to
absorb it: the General Confederation of Brazilian Workers, set up under the
wing of Luis Carlos Prestes in 1929, and the National Confederation of Labour,
founded in the same year. Shortly thereafter, Prestes' organisation was
outlawed by the Brazilian Government under the Anti-Communism Act of
1927. Figures relating to the membership of the major workers' federations
between 1903 and 1950 (in 1937, under Getulio Vargas, the General Union
of Brazilian Workers had no more than 42,000 persons affiliated to its 82
unions, while the General Union of Federal District Employees had 150,000
in 36 unions) show that very few agricultural workers indeed belonged
to any union. Pioneer work in this field was done by a small union founded
at Campos in 1935. Four other local unions followed—the only ones to be
tolerated by the law until 1960. True, in the meantime, ever since the fall
of President Vargas in 1945, peasant leagues had begun to emerge. Later on,
1
a
388
See ILO: The Representation and Organisation of Agricultural Workers, op. cit., p. 79.
Goldenberg, op. cit., p. 49.
Latin America
we shall consider their activities in some detail down to 1964, when they
were outlawed.
In Mexico, the first agricultural unions appear in 1920, as the outcome of
the peasants' long and bitter struggle against usurpation of communal land
(ejidos) by landowners and private companies ; the process had begun during
the nineteenth century, the 1857 Constitution and the Act of 1876 (which
allowed the occupation of unregistered land) being invoked for the purpose.1
In 1878, the representatives offivestates and of the Federal District protested,
in vain, to the Chamber of Deputies, which had declared itself unable to intervene. A year later, the Congress of Native Villages of the Republic, convened
to consider how the peasant's interests might best be defended, met for the
first time, and was condemned by the entire liberal press.2 This blindness
on the part of the ruling classes, coupled with economic distress (from 1900
onwards, agricultural wages dropped while prices rose as a result of industrial
development), led straight to revolution: having nothing to lose, the people
rebelled in 1910. In 1915 and 1916, i.e. at the height of the revolution, were
founded the first agricultural credit unions, organised on the Raiffeisen system
and managed by the Rural State Loans Fund of Morelos.3
Nevertheless, it was only from 1920 onwards, under President Obregón,
that the Mexican peasantry began to organise, under the protection of the
National Land Party, which was created in that year, and under that of the
Mexican Workers' National Confederation (CROM), founded in 1918; later,
the peasants were to found the rural community leagues which in 1926 would
set up the powerful body known as the National Peasant League (Liga
Nacional Campesino). In January 1930, the National Revolutionary Party
was created (to become, in 1945, the present Institutional Revolutionary
Party). This event helped to speed up enrolment in the leagues, but also,
by absorbing these in part, associated them more closely with official land
policy. The process is far from easy to follow, but we might, perhaps, summarise it as follows. In February 1936, the Mexican Confederation of Labour
(CTM) was formed, to some extent as the result of a division within the ranks
of the CROM. This event played a capital part in inducing the leagues to
join together in 1938 in forming a National Confederation of Peasants
1
For an analysis of this aspect of the situation in the Mexican countryside, see ILO :
Indigenous Peoples. Studies and Reports, New Series, No. 35 (Geneva, 1953), pp. 298-299.
a
See, on this matter, Roberto MacLean y Estenos: "La revolución de 1910 y el problema
agrario de México", Estudios Sociológicos, Vol. II, IX Congreso Nacional de Sociología,
Mexico City, 1958, p. 10. See also a detailed study by Gerrit Huizer: On Peasant Unrest in
Latin America (Washington, Pan-American Union, 1967).
8
For further details, see Carleton Beals: Mexico, an Interpretation (New York, 1923),
p. 110.
309
Agricultural organisations and development
{Confederación Nacional Campesina—CNC).1 That same year, the National
Revolutionary Party decided to turn itself into a kind of Popular Front, and,
calling itself the "Party of the Mexican Revolution", it gathered under its
wing the four groups which supported its policies: the workers, represented
more especially by the Mexican Confederation of Labour; the National Confederation of Peasants; craftsmen, small businessmen and other members
of the lower middle class ; andfinally,the army. In 1942, it was decided that the
latter should no longer be independently represented, but should be represented,
instead, by the small businessmen and other members of the middle classes,
who in their turn would form a National Confederation of Popular Organisations, embracing the small farmer. The party itself was to change its name
yet again, to become, in 1945, the Institutional Revolutionary Party. It is
still in power.
To these peasant organisations we must add the General Union of Mexican
Workers and Peasants, created in 1949. It emerged from a peasants' and
workers' movement founded by Lombardo Toledano after his break with the
CTM. Today, it appears to have some 300,000 members, of whom 70 per
cent are peasants. But the bulk of the peasantry remains enrolled, in some
form or another, in the Institutional Revolutionary Party. Within the CTM,
the party has some 100,000 agricultural workers, 40,000 of whom belong to
the Sugar Industry Workers' Union. The "popular sector" of the party
comprises the National Confederation of Small Owner-Farmers, of which
750,000 peasants are members. However, thisfigureincludes 250,000 peasants
who are ejidatorios at the same time and who also belong to the National
Confederation of Peasants. This latter, in theory, has as members all the
ejidatorios (some 2 million people, according to certain estimates), whom it
controls thanks to machinery comprising 32 peasants' leagues, 512 peasants'
regional committees, and 17,500 local commissariats.
The Institutional Revolutionary Party dominates political life in Mexico.
With its three "sectors" ("popular sector", workers and peasants) represented
in Congress it runs what has often been called a "one-party democracy" and
in theory guarantees the peasants' share in the working-out of the nation's
agricultural policy. Many authors, however, are critical, and question how
far the rank and file really influence their leaders.2 However, if we compare
1
According to some authorities the peasant leagues, in founding the CNC, had as one of
their aims the creation of a counterweight to the increasing political influence of the CTM.
See Gerrit Huizer: Los movimientos campesinos en México (Mexico City, Centro de Investigaciones Agrarias, 1968), pp. 64-66.
2
For instance, Frank R. Brandenburg: The Making of Modern Mexico (Englewood Cliffs,
Prentice-Hall, 1964); Oscar Lewis: "Mexico since Cárdenas", Social Change in Latin
America Today (New York, Harper Brothers, 1960); Peter P. Lord: The Peasantry as an
Emerging Political Factor in Mexico, Bolivia and Venezuela (University of Wisconsin, Land
Tenure Center, May 1965).
310
Latin America
the position in Mexico with that obtaining in some other Latin American
countries, we shall have to acknowledge that the experiences of this country
since the 1920s are something quite unique in the history of Latin American
agriculture.
There are, then, three dates to be remembered: 1912 (Argentina), 1914
(Brazil), and 1920 (Mexico). Although in two instances out of the three, the peasant movements which emerged were short-lived, these dates nevertheless mark
a milestone in the history of the three countries concerned. In other countries,
trade union organisations appeared far later, some of them during the last
war, or indeed during these last few years. This does not, of course, mean
that the peasants concerned were less anxious to organise or had fewer claims
to make. It simply means that they could not surmount the obstacles placed
in their way.
Chile
Chile offers a striking example. Many mutual benefit societies had been
set up since 1850, but the first major urban trade union organisation—the
Chilean Workers' Federation—dates from 1908. In 1921, the agricultural
workers demanded for the first time to be allowed to set up unions. They
were opposed by the National Agricultural Association (SNA), a body run
by the big landed proprietors. Describing this period, Gonzalo Arroyo has
recently recalled* that two schemes were at that time up for discussion. One
called for the foundation of a union in every undertaking, the other for
occupational unions in which workers would be represented by trades. This
latter system found favour with President Alessandri. However, in a letter
to the SNA, he said that agricultural workers would nevertheless have to form
trade unions along lines different from those governing unions formed by
urban workers. Three years later, Congress approved Act No. 4057—a compromise between the two schools of thought—which favoured the works
union rather than the occupational one. Nevertheless, this would have
marked a step forward if it had been applied to agricultural undertakings.
At least, a union on every farm would have enabled the rural worker to speak
out in defence of his rights. But once again, the influence of the SNA prevailed and agricultural workers were not covered by trade union legislation
until 1947, the year of the promulgation of Act No. 8811, whose shortcomings
we have examined above.
1
Father Gonzalo Arroyo, S.J.: "Sindicalismo y promoción campesina", Mensaje (Santiago), Vol. 15, No. 149, June 1966, pp. 244-249. For a general study of the upsurge in Chilean
trade unionism at about this time, see James O. Morris: Elites, Intellectuals and Consensus :
A Study of the Social Question and the Industrial Relations System in Chile (New York,
W. F. Humphrey Press, 1966).
311
Agricultural organisations and development
As we have seen, until 1964 there were no more than fourteen active
works unions officially recognised; all in all, they had 1,174 members. From
1964 onwards, however, the movement gained momentum in the countryside,
backed by various organisations, all of them set up after 1950: the Chilean
Trade Union Association (1953); the Christian Peasants' Union (1960), which
is actually the agricultural branch of the Chilean Trade Union Association;
the National Association of Peasant Organisations, and the Chilean Federation
of Peasants and Natives (1961); the Independent Peasant Movement (1964).
All these organisations pursue similar aims: to promote the setting-up of
trade unions, or embryo pre-trade unions, where such do not exist; to train
trade union officials; to advise the unions in the event of collective disputes
or of claims concerning wages and conditions of employment; to promote
the enactment of legislation on housing, rural health and hygiene, etc., and
to see that existing legislation is duly put into effect; to undertake communal
activities, such as the construction of sports grounds, social centres, and so on.
During recent years the Chilean Federation of Peasants and Natives has
become the rallying-point for Marxists, while the National Peasants' Confederation performs the same office for Christians. This latter body, founded in
1965, is made up of three of the organisations listed above: the Christian
Peasants' Union, the National Association of Peasants' Organisations, and
the Independent Peasant Movement.
Since the legislation in force (Act No. 8811) forbad the creation of federations or confederations and authorised works unions only, these movements,
all organised after 1960, have taken the form of private companies or associations, subject to the Chilean Civil Code. Nevertheless, it is by no means easy
to say just how matters stand today, for apart from the trade unions set up, or
being set up, in accordance with the law, there were many organisations more
or less outside the law at the time the author was conducting his inquiries.1
The following seems to have been the position on 30 July 1966:- 95 unions
were officially recognised, and 205, in process of organisation, had applied for
recognition. It may not be amiss to add that although they did not exist
in the eyes of the law. they were recognised by the Government as trade
unions for the purpose of collective bargaining. This figure of 205, however,
is much less than the total declared by the federations, comprising the trade
union and pre-trade union committees not recognised by the law, some of
them being in process of applying for recognition. In June 1966, there
were thus some 530 trade union organisations (or the rudimentary nuclei of
trade union organisations), apportioned in the following fashion: within the
1
These organisations have certainly been brought within the law since the promulgation
of Act No. 16625, the effects of which we shall shortly consider.
312
Latin America
National Peasants' Confederation, the Christian Peasants' Union comprised
142 trade union organisations (figures for December 1965); the National
Association of Peasants' Organisations, 25 unions and 69 pre-trade union
committees, making 94 organisations in all (figures for June 1966); and the
Independent Peasant Movement, 70 trade unions and 124 pre-trade union
committees, or 194 organisations in all (June 1966). The Chilean Federation
of Peasants and Natives comprised about 100 trade union organisations in
October 1965.
These are organisations set up, as it were, by private initiative. But there
are others, recently founded by the Agricultural Development Institute
(Instituto de Desarrollo Agropecuario). With assistance from a team of
officials called "promoters", the institute helps the Chilean peasants to organise
unions or pre-trade union committees. In April 1966, an investigation made in
18 provinces showed that there were 87 trade unions set up in this way,
and 146 pre-trade union committees, making a total of 233 organisations
founded by the institute.
We do not, unfortunately, have any figures for membership (fee-paying
and others), except for the Independent Peasant Movement, which in 1966
had 12,640 organised peasant members, some 2,000 of them being fee-paying.
The Christian Peasants' Union and the Federation of Peasants and Natives
seem to enjoy the support of some 200,000 workers, but we have no exact
figures.1
The Chilean trade unions recruit their members among agricultural workers
of all kinds, including tenants and share-croppers.2 The small owners and
1
After his investigations were completed, the author learnt that the National Peasants'
Confederation had become a services federation. The Chilean peasants now belong to three
major confederations: the "Triumph of the Chilean Peasant", "Freedom", and "Ranquil".
The first was created thanks to the committees of small farmers promoted by the Agricultural
Development Institute. The second was built up from unions belonging to the National
Association of Peasants' Organisations and to the Christian Peasants' Union. The third is
based on unions belonging to the Federation of Peasants and Natives. In August 1968, the
"Triumph of the Peasants" Confederation had 158 communal unions, 20 provincial federations,
and 39,288 members all told; the "Freedom" Confederation had 62 communal unions, 12
provincial federations, and 17,421 members all in all; the "Ranquil" Confederation had 83
communal unions, 14 provincial federations, and 18,253 members. The total therefore was:
303 unions, 46 federations, and 74,962 members. Moreover, we have to add the figures
appertaining to the "Sergeant Candelaria" Federation in Santiago Province, with five unions
originating in the Independent Peasant Movement. It is estimated that there are some 330,000
agricultural wage earners, and that, on the date indicated, there were a little more than 83,000
trade union members. The employers, too, have formed a national confederation which now
has some 53,000 members. See ILO, Regional Meeting on the Role of Agricultural Organisations in Economic and Social Development, Santiago (Chile), 20-28 October 1969: Evolución de las organizaciones agrícolas y su participación en el desarrollo económico-social de
Chile, by Luis Maraimbo, pp. 32-34.
2
These terms are not used in the same sense as in Europe, the persons concerned have
rather different rights and obligations. See Act No. 8811, section 15. ILO: Legislative Series,
1947—Chile 1.
313
Agricultural organisations and development
peasants covered by the land reforms have their own organisations : the small
farmers' boards and land settlement committees (Comités de Asentamiento),
which we shall look at more closely later.
Although these two branches—Marxist and Christian—of Chilean agricultural trade unionism are so young, they have already achieved much.
Firstly, they have provided channels for peasant discontent with regard to
conditions of employment. Thus, the Christian Peasants' Union negotiated
a collective agreement for all workers on forty-five big latifundia in central
Chile1, and the Federation of Peasants and Natives organised a fortnight-long
strike at Colchaga, an area of vast estates :fiftyfarms were affected. Secondly,
despite the disadvantages under which they labour, the union organisations
have displayed much skill in deriving advantage from the special arbitration
and conciliation boards provided for under Act No. 8811. Action by these
boards has on many an occasion helped to bring about an improvement in
working conditions. Lastly, the trade union organisations were highly
influential in the promulgation of two pieces of legislation of enormous
importance in the defence of the workers' interests: the Prohibition of Expulsion
Act (5 April 1966)2, whereby an employer is forbidden to denounce a contract
of employment without good and sufficient reason; and the Farm Division
Act (1966), under which no farm or plot more than 37.5 acres in extent may
be subdivided without authority from the Land Reform Organisation (Corporación de la Reforma Agraria). These two Acts were promulgated to counteract the "reactionary" activities of certain landowners, who cancelled labour
contracts or divided their farms, thus effectively breaking the unions, since
under Act No. 8811 any union has to fulfil certain minimum qualifications
to obtain recognition (represent a certain number of workers of a certain
minimum age and seniority, with a certain percentage of members able to
read and write).
Apart from these trade union activities, we ought to mention two organisations recently set up by the authorities themselves : the small farmers' boards
and the land settlement boards. The small farmers' boards were launched
by the Agricultural Development Institute (1NDAP) to break the isolation
from which the small farmer was suffering and to provide him with a body
to defend his interests. Through these boards, INDAP channels technical
assistance and the credits granted to farmers, and tries to bring the latter
together in activities directed to a common end. In 1965, INDAP had
1
For the activities of the Christian Peasants' Union, see James F. Petras : "Chile's Christian Peasants' Union: Notes and Comments on an Interview with Héctor Alarcón", Newsletter (Madison, University of Wisconsin), No. 23, March-July 1966, pp. 21-29.
2
Act No. 16455 (5 April 1966) "to issue rules for the termination of contracts of employment". ILO: Legislative Series, 1966—Chile 1.
314
Latin America
already founded 1,657 boards, with nearly 55,000 members, infifteenprovinces.1
Activities of this kind receive support from other organisations, which in their
turn have set up small farmers' associations and similar bodies within native
communities (reducciones). Thus, in 1966, the Independent Peasant Movement
had 166 boards with 8,930 members, while the National Association of Peasants'
Organisations had set up 51 boards and 69 similar bodies in native communities,
with 6,000 members in all.
The land settlement boards, which are answerable to the Land Reform
Organisation, are intended to help the peasant in settling down on expropriated land. The process lasts for two years or so, until the land in question
has been finally allotted. These boards are made up of five permanent and
two deputy members, elected by secret ballot at an assembly of heads of
families living on the expropriated estate. Once elected, the board enters
into a contract with the Land Reform Organisation in connexion with the
farming of the land assigned to the peasantry. With regard to the new community thus formed, the board has to concentrate on: (a) the technical organisation of farming, especially by the creation of supply and marketing boards;
and (¿>) organisation of the community's social activities, by promoting
communal organisations, handicrafts, culture, and the like. In November
1965, one year after the first of these boards had been set up, thirty-four such
operations had been undertaken for the benefit of nearly 2,000 peasant families.
Certainly, promulgation of the new trade union law (Act No, 16625, dated
26 April 1967), by sweeping away all the obstacles with which these organisations had to contend under preceding legislation, will foster activities of the
kind described above. No prior authorisation is now required to found a
union ; a union is no longer limited to the workers in a particular undertaking.
Workers in a number of concerns can now come together to set up a single
trade union body. Federations and confederations, previously forbidden, are
now legal; the right to strike is recognised (subject to certain restrictions).
Moreover, the new Act no longer demands, like the former Act, that workers'
claims be submitted only once a year, and never during the sowing season or
at harvest time. Workers may no longer be dismissed because they belong to
a union, nor may employers interfere in trade union affairs. The old Act
had laid down that unions were to concentrate on housing improvements for
the peasantry (Act No. 8811, section 1, paragraph 2); the new one allows
them to pursue the same ends as similar organisations in developed countries :
improvement in working conditions and human relations; the signature of
collective agreements; workers' representation vis-à-vis the employers and
1
According to information received in Santiago in October 1969, there were at that time
2,130 boards with 71,000 members. In the country as a whole, it is estimated that there are
nearly 300,000 small owner-farmers.
315
Agricultural organisations and development
arbitration tribunals; promotion of general education, occupational training,
and trade union instruction among their members ; organisation of co-operatives, stores, libraries, etc., and activities of all kinds relative to education and
the use of leisure; creation or improvement of systems designed to protect the
worker against occupational injury and disease; organisation of technical
assistance centres and offices for the provision of legal advice; participation in
the activities of public or private bodies interested in agricultural matters.
In addition to which, the new Act encourages the setting-up of employers'
associations, thus promoting a healthier balance between employers and those
who work for them.
A detailed perusal of Act No. 16625 would prove—if proof were needed—
that this legislation is in close conformity with the Right of Association (Agriculture) Convention, 1921 (No. 11), ratified by Chile as long ago as 1925.
Chile furnishes a capital example of how vigorous government action can
open up entirely new vistas for trade unions. But official initiatives can never
ensure a co-ordinated upsurge of trade unionism as a whole. This depends
on the workers themselves, on their capacity for organisation, and also, in the
last resort, on the help they can obtain from outside in learning how to
organise themselves. In the trade union movement, as in everything else,
there is much to learn. The aid and advice of organisations in the developed
countries can help to make the period of apprenticeship shorter and less
arduous. We shall have something to say about this later.
Uruguay
Uruguay provides us with a striking example of disparity between what
is feasible and what has actually been accomplished. There is no legislation
which might prove a stumbling-block for the unions, protected as they are by
the principle—enshrined in the Constitution—of freedom of association. But,
as we shall see, although the present state of affairs is by no means bad, it is
not as good as it might be. The answers received by the author seem to show
that Uruguayan agricultural workers' unions are very few in number, and
tenants' and share-croppers' unions seem to be non-existent. The only two
large workers' unions have been formed by the dairy workers: one in the
province of Florida and the other at San José, in the south. There are, too,
a number of general associations, sometimes of a transient kind, among workers
in the rice, sugar-cane, sugar-beet and other industries. In these branches,
no real unions have ever, it would seem, been created.
Trade union organisations and associations have been set up in the course
of the last twenty years. We do not know how many members they have,
this being a jealously guarded secret.
316
Latin America
The unions and associations, as everywhere else, are chiefly occupied in
bargaining about conditions of employment: hours of work, wages, job stability,
social security, rural health and housing, and so on. In this field, the authorities and workers' organisations seem to have the same ends in view, although
the two sides do not, in practice, always pull together. The unions themselves
seem to lack co-ordination. The information acquired by the author leads
him to believe that some few years ago, the dairy workers submitted wage
claims and backed them up by strikes, as a result of which their working
conditions improved. But this had no effect on other agricultural workers.
Other organisations (those of workers in the wool industry, for example)
have in their turn acted in the same fashion, with similar results. Besides which,
there have been spectacular protest movements by the sugar-cane plantation
workers in the north-west of the country; they have, for example, come on
foot, with wives and offspring, all the way to Montevideo (a distance of over
450 miles), to make their claims and give a jolt to public opinion. On the other
hand, in the sugar-beet industry of the south-east, plantations are large,
wealthy and well organised, and it is rare for the workers to parade their
grievances. It follows that there is no co-ordination at national level, the
workers taking action as they see fit, according to circumstances. Within
individual branches of agriculture, this may produce results, at least as far
as wages are concerned, but where land reform and general improvement of
the countryside are the issues at stake, there can obviously be no substitute
for an over-all, co-ordinated policy, applied by major national federations or
confederations.
The Uruguayan authorities are doing their best to improve the lot of the
agricultural worker by enacting suitable legislation and through the organisations created with this in view: on the one hand, the National Labour Institute,
responsible for keeping an eye on employment conditions, and, on the other,
the Children's Council (Consejo del Niño) and the departmental boards, which
keep an eye on the employment of youngsters under 18. According to
the Rural Code of 1946, amended by the Act of 22 December 1965, the Government lays down minimum wages and by decree, at the beginning of every
year, orders such wage increases to be made as may correspond to increases in
the official cost-of-living index. Hence it is by no means surprising that one
of the answers received should emphasise that "the successes achieved with
regard to wages and job security are chiefly due to legislation, and only to a
very minor degree to the few conventions concluded between employers and
workers ; the same holds good of housing and social security."
Thus it is that, thanks to legislation as modern as any enacted in Latin
America, authorities and occupational associations alike pursue closely
similar aims. What is astonishing is the absence of liaison between the two.
317
Agricultural organisations and development
There seems no obvious reason for this absence. If we except the National
Wool Agency (in which government, employers and workers are represented),
the workers are represented in no official body.
Bargaining between employers and workers through joint bodies is an
infrequent phenomenon in Uruguay, apart from the negotiations we have
already mentioned in our comments on the Commercial Chamber for National
Produce.
As regards the other matters we have investigated in this survey (workers'
education, the campaign against illiteracy, legislation to govern tenants'
contracts, and the like), the workers' organisations usually stake their claims
through the political parties of their allegiance. In this respect, it would seem
that the Communist Party is the most influential, for it controls the Wool
Industry Workers' Federation and the Uruguayan Confederation of Labour,
of which the dairy workers' unions are members.
Bolivia
The position in Bolivia is markedly different from that in Uruguay. Since
the revolution of April 1952, which installed Victor Paz Estenssoro as President
of the Republic and ushered in a movement of far-reaching land reforms, the
authorities and the unions have worked hand-in-hand.1 The National Confederation of Agricultural Workers, created at about that time, has some
400,000 fee-paying members, and is a pilot body for land reform. Through
its departmental federations and local unions, it controls, in practice, the whole
of the Bolivian peasantry. Generally speaking, it is true to say that the communities formed out of the estates subjected to agrarian reform constitute
basic trade unions elected by all the workers.
These unions were organised by the peasantry to carry on negotiations
with the authorities concerning the expropriation of land, and the land reforms
undertaken in 1952 leant heavily on them. Thus, between 1952 and 1962,
175,000 new titles to property were issued by the Government. The confederation is endeavouring, within the limits of the resources available, to make the
peasant's lot in every respect an easier one (by building schools, dispensaries,
etc.), with assistance from the local unions.
Its reply to the author's inquiries was succinct: there were, it said, no legal
obstacles to the confederation's activities. In fact, the confederation seems
to work very closely with the authorities, since it joins with them in action to
obtain the grant of fresh titles to property and submits the workers' claims
1
On land reform in Bolivia, see Luis Antezana : Resultados de la reforma agraria en Bolivia
(Cochabamba, 1955); Antonio García: "La reforma agraria y el desarrollo social de Bolivia",
El Trimestre Económico (Mexico City), Voi. XXXI (3), No. 123, July-September 1964.
318
Latín America
concerning wages and conditions of employment for consideration and arbitration by the Ministry of Peasant Affairs (there are no joint organs to settle
labour disputes). There is therefore plenty of room for legislation here. For
the time being, it is the Ministry of Peasant Affairs (in fact, its Legal Affairs
Committee) which weighs up the arguments advanced by the employers and
the confederation, and then gives a ruling. The low level of the peasants'
education and their lack of knowledge of trade union matters (cited by the
federation as the major obstacle facing it) perhaps goes part of the way towards
explaining the somewhat protective attitude of the authorities towards the
peasants.
The confederation has a direct hand infixingcoffee, fruit and wool prices,
which are examined from time to time by the authorities.
In otherfields,however, such as housing and the campaign against illiteracy,
it says that it is not very active, since these are matters coming within the
terms of reference of the Ministry of Peasant Affairs.
The time is certainly not yet ripe to assess the effects of the land reforms
which have been under way in Bolivia since 1952. All observers, however,
agree that they have profoundly affected the attitude of the Indian peoples
towards a national community of which, formerly, they did not feel they formed
part. True, a vast amount remains to be done before the Indian is a Bolivian
like any other. Nevertheless, we now have, instead of stagnation, a situation
in which signs of movement can be detected. A cautious optimism is not
unjustified.
Brazil
Before the advent of the new régime in March 1964, the peasant organisations had experienced an extraordinary surge forward. All the information
available to the author indicates that since that date they have slid back.
At that time there existed (in fact, there still exists) a basic instrument
governing the development of trade unionism in the Brazilian countryside:
the Rural Workers' Statute (March 1963) supplemented by Decrees Nos. 346
(January 1963) and 347 (June 1963).1 Admittedly, other legislation had
already been enacted in 1944, by virtue of which the workers were free to set
up unions, provided that they first obtained authorisation from the Ministry
of Labour. In fact, however, authorisation was very rarely given. In 1960
there were but four active trade unions. This was the position until 1963,
when the Minister of Labour of Joäo Goulart's government made a radical
1
These texts, together with the Rural Workers' Statute, appear in a work by Adriano
Campanhole: Legislaçao do traballio rural e estatuto da terra (Säo Paulo, Editora Atlas,
1965).
319
Agricultural organisations and development
change by authorising the workers to set up unions without let or hindrance.
In June 1963, there were already 120 agricultural unions, which figure had
risen to 1,300 by March 1964. Together, they formed the National Confederation of Agricultural Workers (CONTAG). 1
This, in so brief a period, was quite an achievement. It is not to be
explained away by a reference to the vigour displayed at that time by the
Goulart government. The fact of the matter is that the rural masses had
been roused from their torpor by the peasant leagues, some time before, and
were but awaiting the signal to set up their unions officially. Thus it was
that the encouragement so generously given by the Minister of Labour, Almino
Affonso, encountered fruitful ground.
Much has already been written on the history of the Brazilian peasants'
leagues, and there is no call to go into any detail here.2 The movement was
born in the north-eastern part of the country, admirably studied by Correia
da Andrade, who describes as follows the emergence of the first peasants'
leagues when, after the Second World War, a crisis broke out in the traditional
sugar-growing industry 3 :
The difficult situation in which the agricultural workers in the north-east find
themselves, and which has became more serious since 1950, resulted in these workers
attempting to find a solution for themselves and makes the possibility of a solution
of the agrarian regional problem through colonisation more remote. Colonisation,
as conceived by SUDENE and by the Companhia de Revenda e Colonizaçâo, in
the light of the resources available to these agencies, would (if it succeeded) be a
long-term solution and benefit only a few people, while the great majority of the
workers would continue to vegetate, as is the case today, under inhuman living conditions.
The continuous aggravation of the crisis and the ever-increasing difficulties in
the lives of the rural workers led them to revolt, to despair, as in the already famous
case of the Galiléia sugar-refinery. Like others located in marginal areas, far from
the sugar factories, this plant did not operate in the decade 1931-40, when sugar
prices were low and the owners rented their land to people who planted fruits and
cereals to supply the city of Recife and other north-eastern urban communities. This
particular owner went to live in the city on the proceeds of the rentals, without working
on the property, and visited it only sporadically. An administrator who was in
his confidence collected the annual rentals, supervised the rendering of the cambäo
and of the condiçao and was the intermediary between the absentee owner and those
who worked the land.
1
The confederation still exists, but we have no recent data about its activities. Hence
it is impossible to say whether it has managed to keep all its members.
2
See Francisco Juliäo: ¿Que son la ligas campesinas? (Montevideo, Arca, 1963).
8
See A Terra e o Hörnern no Nordeste (Säo Paulo, Editoria Brasiliense, 1963), pp. 241-245.
The extracts reproduced here also appear in a paper by the CIDA : Land Tenure Conditions and
Socio-Economie Development of the Agricultural Sector, Brazil (Washington, Pan-American
Union, 1966), pp. 321-323. On problems in the north-east, see, too, the classic study by Josué
de Castro: Une zone explosive, le Nordeste du Brésil (Paris, Editions du Seuil, 1965), translated
by Christiane Privat.
320
Latín America
After the war of 1939-45, the high prices of sugar and the construction of highways
resulted in an increase of the potential output of the sugar factories, which were
newly equipped and appropriated the marginal areas. This was at the expense of
the old sugar plantations, which disappeared—the owners became simple suppliers
of cane—and of the tenants, who were evicted from their land so that the sugar-cane
plantations of the factories could expand on to the areas which the workers had
at times worked for decades. We were personally present at the eradication of old
orchards and coffee-fields under the impulse of the merciless thirst for land for cane,
in the municipios of Vicènda and Amaraji (Pernambuco).
Pursued by the owners, the tenants took to the courts, but the suits were lengthy
and they could only with difficulty pay lawyers for long periods of time; and, if they
remained on the land, they were constantly threatened by the guards and the agents
of the owner. Only a few resisted to the end. It was this difficult situation which
caused the tenants of Galiléia to set up, under the direction of the administrator of
the enterprise himself—Zezé of Galiléia—a mutual assistance organisation under the
pompous name of Agricultural and Livestock Society of Pernambuco.
The creation of this organisation irritated the son of the owner, who saw in it a
threat to his patrimony, and he attempted to evict the workers. Led by Zezé of
Galiléia and by Manuel Severino de Oliveira, the workers refused to obey and forced
the owner to bring a suit for eviction against them in Vitoria de Santo Antäo. When
they tried to find a lawyer for their defence, they ended up in the office of Francisco
Juliäo who by only a bare 400 votes succeeded in being elected to the Joaquim
Nabuco Palace (the Parliament of the state of Pernambuco in Recife). He was the
only socialist deputy in the House. He resolved then to defend the workers free of
charge since they could not pay and since as a deputy he earned a fair income from
the state. Taken by surprise, Juliäo did not have a plan to solve the north-eastern
rural problem; but he knew rural life since he was the son of the owner of a sugar
refinery and the brother of farmers in Bom Jardim. As he continued to defend the
Galiléians, Francisco Juliäo observed similar cases throughout the state and saw
that the problem was not legal, but in reality social
Therefore he used his mandate
to fight, in the House and in the press, against the cambäo and the conditions of rent.
He believed that his major mission was to awaken the rural masses to fight, to take
conscience of its force and its needs and to prevent the attempts to solve the
rural problem elaborated at the top by intellectuals and politicians ignorant of the
reality of rural life. In order to give a better structure to the fighting organisations
of the rural workers, he legalised, on 1 January 1955, the society founded by the
Galiléians and which existed until then only defacto. Though it continued under the
same name, it is today known in all Brazil by its much shorter fighting name ligas
camponesas. This name has become so well known that in Paraiba the word compones
identifies the members of the ligas. In order to avoid the eviction of the tenants
from Galiléia, Juliäo presented to the House a bill for the expropriation of the sugar
plant and had it approved and signed by the state governor.
The example of Galiléia acted as a fuse and in 1960 the ligas had already members
in twenty-six municipios in Pernambuco, in the litoral area, the transitional Agreste and
the dry Sertäo and expanded rapidly to Paraiba where large centres were organised in
Santa Rita, in Sapé, Mamanguape, Guarabira, Pirpirituba, Espirito Santo and other
towns of lesser importance. The centre of Sapé is the largest one, since it has 7,000
members. Today the ligas have an influence throughout the north-east region since
there are numerous centres in Piaui and Ceará, where the various municipal associations have formed a federation under the leadership of José Leandro, and in the
Säo Francisco valley in Bahia. In Alagoas, the first centres are being organised in
Vicosa and Atalaia. In some states, the ligas have been able to count on the support
of the governors, as in Piaui and Paraiba—Chagas Rodrigues and Pedro Gondim—
but have encountered serious opposition on the part of the landowners.
321
Agricultural organisations and development
The political changes of March 1964 have completely altered the picture.
Brazil, it seems, has embarked on a period of expectancy, at the end of which
organisations of another kind may emerge, unless the leagues (at present
outlawed) and the unions (decimated) manage to revive. Whatever happens,
it seems certain that sooner or later the Brazilian Government will be obliged
to organise its peasantry on more rational lines, to cope with a degree of underdevelopment which impartial observers say has assumed dramatic proportions *
and in the not too distant future may well give rise to unbearable economic
and social stresses.
Venezuela
In this country, agricultural trade unionism is beginning to reap the
rewards of twenty years of effort under the aegis of the Venezuelan Peasants'
Federation (Federación Campesina de Venezuela), founded in 1947.
The Venezuelan trade union movement goes back to 1935, the year in
which Juan Vicente Gómez, dictator of Venezuela since 1908, died. Until
then the Venezuelan movement, which had received little sympathy from the
dictator and been reduced to a small federation of some 25,000 members,
had lived under the threat of what was euphemistically called "administrative
dissolution". In 1936, an Act dated 16 July was promulgated and this, by
at last offering the trade unions official recognition, marked a complete break
with the past. No fewer than 113 unions applied for recognition, and in
December 1936 most of these attended a congress in Caracas to create the
Venezuelan Confederation of Labour (CTV). It was to have a stormy
existence. In 1944, it was dissolved by the authorities (General Medina
Angarila being President of the Republic), and again in 1949, on the occasion
of a coup d'état by the Army under General Delgado Chabaud, Minister for
War, which latter event opened the door to the dictatorship of Colonel Pérez
Jiménez.
In these years of trial and tempest, the three years of "democratic action"
government (1945-48) represent a sort of oasis, which the agricultural unions
made use of to create the Peasant Federation in June 1947.
1
If we consider such parameters as income per head, food reserves, mortality, etc., indicated in international year books, this expression will seem in no way exaggerated. In Brazil,
as in the other Latin American countries, increases in food production are occurring with too
narrow a margin over population increases for there to be any significant nutritional improvements in the short run. The result, in certain areas, is acute malnutrition, which according
to Dr. Isaltino Costa, causes the premature death of some 300,000 children under 1 year
of age, per year (Le Monde (Paris), 19 September 1967). For further information about this
aspect of the land problem, see J. Waterlow and A. Vergara: Protein Malnutrition in Brazil
(Rome, FAO, 1957).
322
Latin America
The coup d'état led to the exile of President Rómulo Gallegos in November
1948, and trade unionism among the peasantry retreated once more into the
shadows. All the conquests of the previous few years were lost; 226 agricultural unions and 14 sections of the federation were dissolved by governmental order. Their leaders, thrown into prison or condemned to clandestinity,
were able to emerge only after the dictator's fall in January 1958. The
Confederation of Labour was at once reorganised, and a year later (in June
1959) the first peasant congress, convened by the agricultural unions, decided
to resurrect the Peasant Federation.
In ten years of uninterrupted activity, this federation has become one of the
principal motors of the land reform movement launched in 1960. It now has
24 sections (one for each federal "department"), called upon to co-ordinate
and guide the activities of local trade unions, leagues and associations, while
working in co-operation with the bodies officially responsible for land reform.
The presidentx of the federation has explained that the latter is chiefly
active in three separate fields. First of all, it approaches the employers, to
secure higher wages and better conditions of employment. Secondly, it puts
forward claims in connexion with land reform to the authorities responsible,
especially as regards financial matters. Thirdly, it promotes commercial
undertakings and works with them in the purchasing, stock-piling, processing
and sale of agricultural produce, and in acquiring the goods and equipment
needed by its members' farms and holdings.
In the first of these three fields, the federation has managed to secure
contracts of employment for wage earners superior to those laid down in the
official regulations governing employment on the land. This success is due in
part, it feels, to the fact that under the land reform scheme land has been
allotted to 140,000 peasant families, whence a scarcity of agricultural manpower,
whence, in turn, a rise in wages. The federation is also of the opinion that
thanks to its labours there has been a substantial improvement in the housing
erected for agricultural workers.
With regard now to the land reform, the federation has from the outset
played a most important part in planning and carrying out the schemes evolved
by the Government. It has participated in the land reform movement both
directly and indirectly. It has taken part directly thanks to the fact that it
holds seats on the various official bodies responsible for reform: the National
Land Institute, the Executive Board of the Agriculture and Stock-Breeding
Bank, the National Institute for Vocational Training, the National Land Reform
1
Armando González: Función de la Federación Campesina de Venezuela en la reforma
agraria (Caracas, Federación Campesina, 1966).
323
Agricultural organisations and development
Co-ordination and Planning Committee, the National Land Irrigation Commission, ADAGRO (the undertaking responsible for the stock-piling of
agricultural produce), the national production agencies, and, lastly, all the special
committees responsible for drawing up bills and draft regulations concerning
land reform. In their turn, these official land reform bodies are invited to
send representatives to the federation's assemblies, to show how far their
programmes have progressed and to take note of any criticisms or suggestions
offered.
Regionally and locally, the federation is similarly represented in the delegations or branches of all the above-mentioned bodies. Locally, the federation
is in fact completely integrated into the day-to-day workings of land reform,
since officials from the appropriate trade union are enrolled as helpers in the
teams despatched to assist the new agricultural settlements in planning their
activities. This system, the federation feels, has worked very well indeed.
In certain instances, the peasants had displayed a certain hostility towards
the technicians and their methods; thanks to the system, this had been overcome.
It takes part indirectly in land reform by virtue of the activities undertaken
by its National Executive Committee and local and regional organs in everything to do with making the countryside a better place to live in. Thus, the
federation may request the official organs to concede land, to construct roads,
drains, houses, schools, clinics, dispensaries, and so on, and to offer individual
or collective credit. The federation likewise encourages the setting-up of
producers' co-operatives (and servicing and consumers' co-operatives), which
are then supervised to some extent by local trade unions. The latter also keep
an eye on the new land settlements to see that everything is running smoothly,
trying to avoid the resale of plots assigned or their indirect cultivation, abuse
of credit facilities, the destruction or abnormal use of buildings or equipment,
the exhaustion of the soil, and, in a general way, dispersal of energies.
With regard to our thirdfield—tradeand commerce—the federation claims
that its activities constitute a counterweight to the vices and shortcomings ©f
the Venezuelan economy, under which foodstuffs are traditionally imported.
Despite the success of the land reforms (as a result of which Venezuela is now
almost entirely self-sufficient in foodstuffs), the Venezuelan businessman and
merchant seems to have gone in for speculation (encouraged in so doing by
the monopolies or vested interests which have established networks throughout
the country). In this fashion, while the producer gets very little for his produce, the Venezuelan housewife pays dearly for her foodstuffs. This is damaging
to the national economy.
Accordingly, the federation has set up a special committee "for the promotion and management of undertakings". Its aim is to foster the creation of
324
Latín America
new undertakings for the benefit of producers and consumers alike. As part
of this policy, launched three years ago, the federation has already founded
two large concerns, known as SUCAM and INDUCAM. One of them deals
with the purchase of agricultural machinery and equipment, the other with
the industrial production of rice and the marketing of certain crops.
SUCAM set to work in December 1964, with a capital of 1.1 million
bolivars, together with credits and guarantees from the Agricultural Bank
amounting to 14.5 million bolivars, thanks to which it was able to import
780 agricultural machines. These machines were made over to farmers at
their request, by a committee in which the Agricultural Bank, the National
Land Institute, and the federation were represented. Purchasers were granted
90 per cent credit by the Agricultural Bank, and 10 per cent credit by the
National Land Institute. The contracts of sale stipulate that the purchaser
shall devote 25 per cent of the benefit he derives from the difference between
the purchase price of the machine bought from the company and the purchase
price on the open market, to the purchase of SUCAM shares. The aim of
this clause was to compel the peasant to invest a proportion of his financial
benefit.
At the end of the first year, the SUCAM balance-sheet showed that all
concerned had done extremely well. A total of some 5 million bolivars had
been saved in relation to current market prices. Indeed, SUCAM had
helped to stabilise the latter, despite a devaluation of the bolivar (the United
States dollar, formerly worth 3.35 bolivars, was now worth 4.50).
INDUCAM has built a factory, with a capacity of some 1,200 tons a month,
for the processing of rice. This was possible thanks to a credit of 1.9 million
bolivars from the Agricultural Bank. The factory is linked to a marketing
centre created by INDUCAM in Caracas, which markets the wheat, oil-plants
and fruit produced by the new land settlements, as well as the rice turned out
by the factory. By means of such concerns, and others it intends to found
(the relevant plans are already far advanced), the federation is obviously
trying to co-ordinate the multiple operations involved in any well-organised
land reform programme—apportionment of land, credit, production, and
marketing. Although the road ahead will be long and difficult, the federation
will probably succeed in doing what it set out to do, backed up as it is by the
authorities and the 3,600 trade unions, leagues and associations on which it
rests. It has been estimated that some 800,000 people belong to the Venezuelan
agricultural trade union organisations, i.e. about 52 per cent of all rural
inhabitants over the age of 10.1
1
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966:- The Role of Peasant
Organisations in Land Reform and Related Community Development Programmes with Special
Reference to Latin American Countries (doc. WLR/66/4), p. 7.
325
Agricultural organisations and development
More recently, in 1967, the federation launched enterprises of a new kind—
"peasant markets" (mercados campesinos), the declared aim of which is to
introduce the land reform into the towns. Two such concerns are already
operating (one in Caracas and the other in Valencia). They enable the fanner
to sell directly to the consumer, thus by-passing the middle-men. After surmounting certain initial difficulties, the two concerns are now proving highly
satisfactory to producer and consumer alike. Producers' profits have gone
up, and consumers pay less for their foodstuffs. Besides which, these concerns
act as "control" markets against monopolies and vested interests, speculation
by which they do something to check. As regards the peasant himself, his
income rises and he can more easily plan production with an eye to market
requirements.1
In addition to which, the Peasants' Federation has shown great perspicacity
in tackling the problem of the part which trade unions ought to play. Fully
realising that in a developing agriculture the unions must be active on many
fronts at the same time (since technical services and trained personnel are in
short supply), it has set up six vocational training schools for trade union
officials, so that the latter may acquire the requisite technical knowledge,
administrative training, and familiarity with trade union principles. In 1966,
eight more training schools of this kind were planned, together with a high-level
college at which the brightest pupils from the training schools could be given
specialised tuition in such disciplines as planning, agricultural economics,
rural management and trade union administration.
Thus, in a relatively brief period, the Venezuelan Peasants' Federation has
grown in remarkable fashion, and become an indispensable cog in Venezuelan
land reform schemes. It would be gratifying to be able to say the same about
other South American countries with which our inquiries were concerned.
Unhappily, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru have not provided the information
which would have enabled us to describe the current situation of peasant
trade unionism in those countries.
This silence is regrettable, for land reform movements have recently been
launched in each of these three countries. Hearsay evidence leads the author
to believe that they have been less successful than Venezuela in enrolling the
peasant organisations in this cause. In Peru, for example, the National
Federation of Peasants, created in 1960, is chiefly representative of the small
farmer; at the time of our inquiries, this was the only organisation officially
1
See ILO, Regional Meeting on the Role of Agricultural Organisations in Economic
and Social Development, Santiago (Chile), 20-28 October 1969: Esquema histórico de
la Federación Campesina de Venezuela y sus funciones, by Armando González, p. 19.
326
Latin America
recognised as representative by the land reform authorities \ despite the existence of two other organisations of equal importance: the Peruvian Peasants'
Confederation and the Federation of Sugar Industry Workers.
Colombia
Here, the National Land Federation (FANAL), created in 1945, had by
1967 351 rural trade unions and 296 communal councils (juntas de acción
communal), representing, in all, more than 65,000 peasants and farm workers.
It had taken a prominent part in drafting the land reform legislation. This
latter provides that the President of the Republic shall appoint a rural workers'
representative to sit on the management committee of the Colombian Land
Reform Institute (INCORA)2, the name of the person concerned being chosen
from a list submitted by the Confederation of Colombian Workers and the
Union of Colombian Workers. In this fashion, FANAL is represented within
the management committee of INCORA and thus helps to guide land reform
operations. Thanks to its insistence, some 250,000 acres of formerly nonproductive land have been brought within the scope of the reform and apportioned among more than 13,000 families. In some instances, indeed, FANAL
has stepped in to stop the expulsion of hundreds of families from land they
were farming, by using all its influence to ensure that the land in question was
bought out and offered to those living off it. FANAL is also exceedingly
active in the co-operative movement and in the training of trade union officials.
Its co-operative activities began with the creation of thefirstrural credit unions.
FANAL then took part in founding the National Co-operative Union
(UCONAL), and in 1964, in co-operation with this latter body, it founded the
National Agrarian Co-operative Union (UCOPAN), which today runs twenty
co-operatives, either general or specialist, covering every branch of agriculture.
As regards the training of co-operative members and trade union leaders, it
has already organised over 100 regional or national courses, with assistance
from bodies both public and private (sixteen of them in 1966), and with 300
pupils. At its last congress (1967), attended by 3,000 local delegates, a whole
series of proposals were adopted to speed up land reform. FANAL has also
called for amendments to existing legislation. One of them presses for a
reduction in the period at the end of which unfarmed or badly farmed land
automatically comes within the purview of the land reform scheme. Another
1
Tenencia de la tierra y el desarrollo socioeconómico del sector agricola, Perú, op. cit.,
p. 262.
a
Decree No. 3177 (lóDecember 1961). See ¿a nueva legislación agraria (Bogotá, Ministerio
de Agricultura, 1962), p. 107. By Act No. 1 (26 January 1968) agricultural workers are now
entitled to two representatives instead of one.
327
Agricultural organisations and development
demands that payment for land expropriated should be in State bonds and not
in cash, so that the nation's budget may not be ruined by the cost of land reform.
The congress was also in favour of a strengthening of the ties binding FANAL
and INCORA, and for better co-ordination between official organs (especially
at the local level). It may well be that as a result of these recommendations,
FANALand its agricultural organisations will shortly be given a more important
part to play in putting Colombian land reform schemes into practice.1
Nicaragua
The position is unfortunately more confused in the little countries of
Central America, where agricultural trade unionism, too often and too sorely
tried by constant changes of régime, has barely begun to move forward.
In Nicaragua, where a land reform movement was launched in 1963, the
law calls for agricultural workers to be represented in the executive board of
the Land Institute. But since this country failed to reply to the author's
questionnaire, we cannot say exactly how much progress agricultural trade
unionism has made. We do know, however, thanks to observations made by
an expert on the spot, that trade unionism began to spread throughout the
countryside from 1963 onwards, and that a peasants' national confederation
was founded after a conference held in Managua, in September 1965, by 534
representatives of organisations, from 12 different districts.
Honduras
The available data seem to show that since 1965 there has been a trend for
the small peasantry to enrol in the National Peasants' Association. Since
June 1965, peasants' associations have increased in number from twelve to
forty-four, while their membership has risen from 8,000 to 22,000. The
National Land Institute is well aware that land reforms would go through
1
For further information about the FANAL congress, see Conclusiones del IV Congreso
Nacional Campesino (Bogotá, Editorial Visión, 1967). According to information obtained in
October 1969, FANAL works closely with the authorities in the National Peasant Organisation Campaign, launched by the government in 1967 (Degree No. 755 dated 2 May 1967).
The aim of the campaign is to organise the peasantry into users' associations (asociaciones de
usuarios) to make use of the facilities provided by the State: credit, technical assistance,
marketing, etc., in connexion with the land reform. These associations will be responsible
for management of these facilities, and the authorities, in co-operation with FANAL and
UCONAL, run training courses for future association officials. In October 1969, 700,000
peasants had joined the campaign, while FANAL and UCONAL had already organised
sixteen courses for 650 peasants. See ILO, Regional Meeting on the Role of Agricultural
Organisations in Economic and Social Development, Santiago (Chile), 20-28 October 1969:
Campana nacional de organización campesina, by Mario Suárez M.
328
Latin America
much more quickly if the agricultural organisations and unions were to cooperate closely. However, in 1966, according to the workers' union of the
Tela Railroad Company (one of the biggest unions, founded in 1954; it has
some 9,000 members) the law still made no provision for their representation
in the executive organs of the institute. Incidentally, it would seem that the
Honduran peasant is suspicious of any kind of organisation. The same union
emphasises this, indicating that the difficulties encountered are attributable
to the peasant's lack of confidence. "He has", it writes, "been so frequently
been taken in that he no longer believes in anything."
Guatemala
This indifference is mainly due to the numerous bitter disappointments
suffered by the workers' movements in the Central American countries. All
too often a youthful workers' movement has gone under, following a change
in the régime. The Guatemalan workers' movement has a history as stormy
as, or perhaps stormier than, any other in Central America. In 1931, the
agricultural workers h a d barely begun to organise when all they had achieved,
in town and countryside, was totally destroyed by the advent of Jorge Ubico
at the seat of power; his dictatorship was to last for fourteen long years.
When he fell in 1944, the town workers at once reorganised the Confederation
of Guatemalan Workers. The law remaining severe with regard to the agricultural workers, the latter were no better off than they had been before.
Certainly, compared with the years which had gone before, the period 1944 to
1952 can be considered a liberal one, for, despite a Presidential Decree dated
27 August 1945, forbidding agricultural trade unionism, two organisations
were tolerated on plantations belonging to the United Fruit Company. Moreover, things started to improve. Thus, the Labour Code, enacted on 8 February 1947, recognised the existence of agricultural trade unions, but demanded
that no union should have less than fifty members (this restriction was lifted
sixteen months later by Decree No. 526, dated 5 July 1948). The unions then
began to multiply very fast; no more than eleven had been recognised in
January 1948 (three of them on fincas nacionales1), while there were no less
than forty-six in August 1949, with between 10,000 and 12,000 members.
In May 1950, the National Confederation of Guatemalan Peasants was
created. Between 1952 and 1954, the peasant movement received powerful
1
The fincas nacionales, national domains, are made up of the 115 big coffee plantations
created by German immigrants between 1860 and 1870. In 1935-36, they produced about
64 per cent of all the coffee produced in the country. They were expropriated during the war.
Under Decree No. 1653 (January 1967), the National Land Transformation Institute is to
take them over and eventually transfer them to the workers.
329
Agricultural organisations and development
encouragement from the government of Colonel Arbenz. In 1954, there were
1,541 trade union organisations, and the National Confederation of Guatemalan Peasants represented some 256,000 agricultural workers and small
peasants. There were, in addition, a host of "peasant communities", in the
form of private companies, set up on behalf of the small farmer (tenants and
share-croppers). These "peasant communities" helped the peasant to grow
a greater variety of crops, to found co-operatives, and to stand up for his
rights.
The land reforms undertaken by President Arbenz in 1952 involved
the creation of numerous local land committees (some 1,500 or so were
working in 1953). These helped in the apportionment of land, and nearly
100,000 families profited therefrom. But, once again, when the Arbenz
government was overthrown, all that had been achieved was undone: land
was restored to its previous owners, and the trade unions were wound up.
Only in 1958, with the rise to power of Idígoras Fuentes, were the unions to
re-appear. Little by little, the movement re-emerged, and in 1961, the Autonomous Trade Union Federation of Guatemala (FASGUA), the Federation
of Workers of Guatemala (FTG),.and the Trade Union Council of Guatemala
(CSG)—all of them created about this time—supported the convening of a
conference of peasants and agricultural workers. This conference submitted
a number of claims to Congress, dealing with such things as freedom of association, the grant of land to the peasants, and the increase of agricultural wages.
During these years, agricultural organisations proliferated (the present
Guatemalan Peasants' Federation dates from 1961), and in addition associations of new kinds sprang up among the peasantry. We refer, of course, to
the peasant leagues and "native communities". These latter differ from the
old "peasant communities" in that they are concerned with the problems
peculiar to the native peoples. It is the leagues, in which the native peasantry
and the ladinos are represented, which have really taken over from the communities. According to the information assembled, these organisations have
not yet been officially recognised; they exist defacto, but not de jure, and we
cannot yet say whether or not they are called upon to play a part of any
importance in national land reform schemes.
The Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, in May 1967, announced that
there were 71 officially recognised trade unions, and estimated that each had
a membership of some 100 people. The federations, on the other hand, reckon
that membership is twice thisfigure,and by adding unrecognised organisations,
co-operatives, leagues, communities and a few pre-trade union committees,
they reach a grand total of 164 organisations for May 1967. If this be so,
and if each organisation has an average of 200 members, then we may assume
that the peasants and agricultural workers at present enrolled in trade unions,
330
Latin America
co-operatives and communities number some 32,000 persons, i.e. roughly
5 per cent of the actively employed agricultural population.
The organisations set up by the Guatemalan peasants and agricultural
workers (and this is the case, too, in a good many other Latin American
countries) are still far too young for us to be able to decide how effective they
are. A lot will depend on how far they can consolidate the positions they
have acquired (and frankly, they rest for the time being on precarious foundations), and on what official attitudes are towards them. It is more important
than ever that the peasantry be enlisted in schemes of reform if agriculture is
to be made competitive. This is true of most of the countries considered in
the foregoing pages.
CONCLUSIONS
From our review, certain conclusions can be drawn.
First and foremost, the landowners, and especially the great planters and
ranchers, have powerful associations to defend their interests, and have had
ever since the nineteenth century. But they have not always made use of
them to speed up the technical, social and economic development of their
agricultural workers. Despite technical progress in agricultural methods and
marketing, the workers have consistently lagged behind, to such a degree that
there is no point on dwelling on the matter here. Suffice it to say that the
whole of Latin America will have to change over from extensive to intensive
agriculture, while balancing and diversifying production. Techniques will
have to be improved, and the latifundian system (the source of all rural ills)
will have to yield to more up-to-date methods of land tenure (family holdings,
co-operatives, or new forms of communal management, already envisaged in
some of the land reform schemes now under way).
The employers' associations could well benefit from European experience
by organising joint technical meetings with the European employers' associations. Indeed, some intercontinental pairing system might even be devised:
a number of European associations would form a liaison committee, which,
having considered the Latin American problems in conjunction with leaders
of the Latin American employers' associations, would then consider what
could be done to accelerate development in Latin America, in the light of the
experience acquired in Europe. Something on these lines could perhaps form
a part of technical co-operation schemes. Various experiments could be
launched, with an eye to the needs of the Latin American countries. Such a
practice would, in addition, offer continuity in the exchange of information in
a way which ordinary meetings cannot rival. The same reasoning holds
331
Agricultural organisations and development
good of chambers of agriculture ; they, too, could certainly derive much profit
from studying the development of the chambers in Austria, France, and the
Federal Republic of Germany. It might be thought that such co-operation
is unnecessary, if the Latin American organisations feel that they provide
adequate protection for their members' interests. This is true, if we assume
that these interests will always remain the same and that organisations will
remain content with doing what they traditionally do. But if, on the contrary, we
assume that the current land reform schemes will shortly impose a multiplication
of activities in every direction, while making radical changes in the interests of
organisations as traditionally understood, we shall be compelled to admit that
the employers' associations will undergo far-reaching changes as and when
they come up against the problems arising from modernisation of the countryside. Hitherto, they have been chiefly concerned to get support from the
authorities and to facilitate the sale of their members' produce. But clearly
it will be very much in their own interests to multiply their activities in all
directions, in view of the need to develop a rural world in which modernisation
will have to start virtually from zero. Of course, the fact that the existing
organisations are represented, in an advisory capacity or with the right to vote,
in various official bodies represents a step in the right direction. But this cannot
in itself replace all that such organisations could be doing on the spot to buttress
agrarian reform understood in its very widest sense.
The surge forward of the organisations of agricultural workers and small
farmers shows how keenly the Latin American peasant aspires to progress.
The Latin American peasant is often thought of as being essentially passive
and apathetic. But this is hard to reconcile with the vigorous efforts now being
made by so many peasants' organisations to obtain that status in society
which they rightly consider is their due.
The future of the peasant movement (as embodied in trade unions, leagues,
or communities of small farmers) appears at the present time to be closely
bound up with the fate of the land reform movements launched since the
Second World War, and more especially since 1960. Most of the obstacles
now being encountered are attributable to the way agriculture in Latin America
is organised. Hence the development of the movement very largely depends
on the success of land reform. The converse is also true: reform can be
successful only if there is an increase in the vigour and extension of the agricultural organisations.1 Certainly, this close relationship between reform and
the mass organisations which must support it does not seem to have been always
'See United Nations-FAO-ILO: Progress in Land Reform, Fifth Report (New York,
1970), and especially Ch. IV, drafted by the ILO.
332
Latin America
understood. All too often, a glance at the legislation enacted these last few
years shows that while the idea of workers' representation at some higher
level is accepted, there is still marked reluctance to enrol the mass organisations
in the task of putting reform schemes into effect. Stress is too often laid on
co-operatives alone. These, certainly, play an essential part in the economic
development of the countryside; they are, however, but one movement among
many others, the place of which they cannot hope to take.
But certain countries have not hesitated to show their confidence in the
trade unions, and the evidence is there to prove how important is the part
the latter can play in land reform. We have seen in Venezuela, for example,
that the unions have been associated with land reform schemes and that the
peasants' natural suspicion has consequently been overcome. Once this suspicion has been dispelled, a trade union can undertake all sorts of tasks in
the interests of the community. It can, for example, help the authorities decide
to whom land should go; it can supervise the proper use and repayment of
credits; it can promote technical development by popularising new farming
procedures and the use of fertilisers ; it can set up, and supervise the workings of,
centres holding agricultural machinery and heavy equipment; it can lend a
hand in campaigns waged to teach the peasants to read and write, by helping
to build schools and vocational training institutes ; it can give its members legal
aid; it can help them to set up producers' and marketing co-operatives; and
it can acquaint the peasantry with the simple rules of hygiene, nutrition, and
so on. In short, a trade union can, and indeed must, be a centre for the dissemination of progress in all its meanings.
Nevertheless, we may well wonder whether the Latin American trade
union organisations and the small farmers' movements will be able to tackle
tasks of this kind. Everything depends on the status granted them by the
authorities, on the help they are likely to receive, and on the elimination of the
structural and socio-economic obstacles which until now have put a brake
on their development.
As regards legal status, we have already seen the barriers which in certain
countries hinder the growth of trade unionism. Unless these countries bring
law and practice up to date by bringing them into harmony with the international conventions and recommendations evolved by the ILO, it is not
easy to see how these barriers can be surmounted. The question, however,
is exceedingly complicated. Hence it might not be unhelpful if a comparative
study were made of existing national legislation (with, possibly, support from
the ILO). Moreover, those in charge of the bodies responsible for agrarian
reform ought to meet and exchange impressions. They might be well advised
as a result to review their ideas on the part to be played by agricultural organisations in the economic and social development of the countryside.
333
Agricultural organisations and development
Lastly, if they are to tackle their tasks effectively, all the workers' organisations, whatever their nature, should enjoy effective continental aid. It is
obvious that the leaders of such associations are better at submitting grievances
than at doing something about them. To want a co-operative is all very well,
but one has to know how to manage it, and the same applies to all operations
which the Latin American organisations will be invited to undertake. Their
tasks will be many and arduous, the technical personnel available few and far
between. Hence it will be necessary to set up regional centres for the training
of trade union agricultural instructors, perhaps with some assistance from
those international organisations (the United Nations, ILO, FAO, WHO and
UNESCO) which have an interest in the over-all development of the countryside. Perhaps such a project might be undertaken as part of the activities
of the United Nations Development Programme. The great trade union
federations (regional or national) of the developed countries could lend a hand
as well. When making this proposal, the author has in mind an experiment
successfully undertaken in Venezuela in 1962, and then cut short for reasons
which remain obscure. The idea was to spread technical enlightenment among
those who had profited from the land reform. Instruction was given in three
or four training centres for peasant leaders, under the auspices of the Venezuelan Peasants' Federation, the Ministry of Agriculture, the National Land
Institute, and the Agricultural Bank. Technical training was given to 412
peasants, hand-picked from the new land settlements set up under the reform
movement; they had to undertake in exchange to pass on the knowledge thus
acquired to the heads of 30 families in the settlement from which they came.
All in all, 260 persons took these courses. Their knowledge was passed on
to the heads of 8,657 families in 142 land settlements. The outcome needs
no comment: productivity per acre increased by 78.7 per cent, while many a
farmer who had been unable to repay his debts to the Agricultural Bank was
able to get out of the red.1
This experiment was, of course, a technical one only. It does, however,
show what can be done if sufficient energy is displayed. It also shows how
the agricultural trade union movement might go beyond the stage at which it
merely serves to put forwards claims and grievances, and take an active part
in agricultural development. But if such a movement is to become continentwide, then people's outlooks and attitudes will have to change throughout
society. A vigorous spirit of initiative will have to spread from top to bottom.
Absentee landlordism and peasant suspicion (legitimate though this latter
may be) will have to disappear. In every country, therefore, reform will
1
For further information, see Victor Giménez Landinez: Capacitación para la reforma
agraria integral, op. cit., pp. 39 et seq.
334
Latin America
have to be considered, not as a concession grudgingly offered to the poor, but
as a far-reaching operation designed to bring about a radical change in ways
of life and methods of production throughout society.
Only if this change in attitude takes place will the Latin American continent
be able to make one nation of its peoples, to be sure that its economic progress
has passed the point of no return, and to embark finally on the path leading
to a balanced economic and social development.
335
PART IV
AFRICA
AFRICA
D
INTRODUCTION
The geographical discoveries made by Europeans in Africa during the
nineteenth century have not yet been paralleled by comparable discoveries
concerning the peoples and economies of that continent; indeed, in some
respects it would be accurate to say that not even a start has been made.
Africa, in fact, must be discovered anew by Africans and Europeans alike :
by Africans, because they are anxious to reconcile twentieth-century development and African tradition, and by Europeans, because more than a century
of European domination has left its mark. During the colonial period, the
problems of Africa were considered essentially in relation to the interests and
needs of the colonial Powers, while academic investigators assumed that the
civilisation of Europe was equally suitable for all other continents throughout
the world. This is not to imply that the role and usefulness of the comparative
analysis of different civilisations should be under-rated (on the contrary, to
examine them in the same light of inquiry shows up their affinities and contrasts), but simply that any kind of comparative analysis must be based on a
profound knowledge of the subject in question if it is to be of any value and lead
to fruitful results.
Historically speaking, the European has only rarely been able to see African
culture for what it really is. In the nineteenth century, sociology, anthropology and ethnology were still embryonic disciplines. Furthermore, the societies
south of the Sahara had left no written records through which their culture
might have been revealed. This being the position, it is not surprising that,
despite the vast amount of work carried out by students of Africa, the man in
the street has often taken a highly simplified view of the continent. Jacques
Maquet put the matter neatly when he said :
In Africa, the colonists thought that the European way of life—"civilisation"
without any qualifying adjective—existed in a cultural desert. European law was
confronted not with another legal system but simply with savage customs; monogamy
339
Agricultural organisations and development
replaced not another form of marriage but immoral concubinage; and Christianity
was faced, not with other religions, but with ridiculous superstitions.1
Not everybody shared these beliefs, of course. Nevertheless, the judgment
on the whole is true. Whence the juxtaposition, in Africa, of colonial governments and native administrations, of commercial plantation agriculture and
subsistence agriculture in the native villages, of European-style towns and native
towns and villages. For several generations, two worlds, two ways of life
existed side-by-side, one claiming to be a model for the other, although in
fact interpénétration was never very deep.
Thus, when the epoch of colonialism was succeeded by the technical
assistance era, for the first few years of the new period the only models offered
for imitation by Africans were European ones ; some of them had been tried
and found to work, others were frankly quite unsuitable for local conditions
and needs. Perhaps the most striking case concerns educational systems, which
were simply transposed in toto, textbooks and curricula, from Europe to Africa.
Less striking, but no less important, is the example afforded by the co-operative
movement. This, too, was based on European models, and proved quite
unsuitable; it was incompatible with local customs and traditions, and indeed
demanded more than Africans could give. In all fields—rural and industrial
development, health and education—mistakes often fraught with the direst consequences were made, simply because the people concerned were, perhaps
inevitably, insufficiently familiar with the environment into which "development" was to be introduced.
Much has been done during the last few years in theoretical and applied
research. But numerous problems still remain, and there is a wide gulf between what is known and what must be known if the development of Africa
is to be facilitated. In rural development, for example, the more one reflects
on the problems involved, the clearer it becomes that much remains to be done,
and perhaps undone, from the search for methods whereby customs and traditions which constitute an obstacle to progress might be changed, to the adaptation of agricultural techniques to African soils and climates. In this connexion,
René Dumont has shrewdly observed that, whereas agricultural research
(empirical first of all, and then scientific) into the problems characteristic of the
temperate countries is centuries old, research into the problems of the African
countries (especially the tropical countries) goes back no more than forty or
fifty years; indeed, such research is hardly more than a superficial literary
description of African agricultural systems. A tropical environment, too, is
1
p. 11.
340
Jacques Maquet : Africanité traditionnelle et moderne (Paris, Présence africaine, 1967),
Africa
very easy to ruin; it poses difficult problems quite unlike these facing a temperate environment. Hence, although progress has undeniably been made in
recent years, there are many problems which cannot be considered as having
been correctly solved.1
The same holds good for the sociological aspects. Despite an already
abundant literature, based on research undertaken with fresh ideas in mind,
there are many sociological problems which demand close and careful investigation, especially in connexion with questions such as the use that might be made
of traditional patterns to promote economic and social development, the
resistance encountered by development, the points where a development
campaign might conceivably take root—in fact, the whole short- and longterm strategy required to transform the African countryside.
It will be readily understood, therefore, that we cannot, in a volume like
the present, offer simple formulae to cover the many problems of a continent
in which several kinds of rural civilisation—each of which deserves a volume
to itself—coexist. The division frequently made between North Africa (the
land of the Arab, the land of Islam) and Africa south of the Sahara (the home
of the Negro peoples) is undoubtedly useful from some points of view, but is
quite inadequate when we start to think of developmental problems. There
are, for instance, numerous subdivisions within each of these two cultural
groups. If we assume with Denise Paulme that south of the Sahara there are
ten civilisations, wefindthat the first three—those of the Bushmen, Hottentots
and Pygmies, based on itinerant stock-raising, hunting, and the gathering of
fruit, berries, and so on—raise problems quite different from those encountered
when we are dealing with the Bantu farmers and cattle-breeders of southern
Africa or with the Congolese peasants and hunters of the equatorial regions.2
We shall not attempt therefore to give separate consideration to the problems
peculiar to pastoral or agricultural societies, to savannah or forest, to tropical
or subtropical areas; not of course because we under-estimate their importance
and gravity, but simply because, in a restricted survey such as ours, we must
limit ourselves to problems common to all regions, leaving to other investigators
the task of undertaking those specialised inquiries which the individual ways
of life concerned so richly merit.
1
Dumont, René: African Agricultural Development: Reflexions on the Major Lines of
Advance and the Barriers to Progress (United Nations, Economic Commission for Africa,
1965), p. 5.
2
Denise Paulme: Civilisations africaines (Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1953),
passim.
341
Agricultural organisations and development
Table 14. Socio-economic data for African countries
National
per capita
income (1965
or year
shown) USS
Country
(a)
Algeria
Cameroon
Central African
Republic
Chad
Congo (Brazzaville)
Congo (Kinshasa)
Dahomey
Ethiopia
Gabon
Gambia
Ghana
Guinea
Ivory Coast
Kenya
Liberia
Libya
Madagascar
Malawi
Mali
Mauritania
Mauritius
Morocco
Niger
Nigeria
Rwanda
Senegal
Somalia
Sudan
Tanzania
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda
United Arab
Republic
Upper Volta
Zambia
Share of
agriculture
in gross
domestic
product
(%)
(W
Active
agricultural
population
(% of total
active
population)
(c)
Illiteracy (%)
Males
Females
Total
W)
Infant mortality (number
of deaths of
children under
1 year old per
1,000 births)
Life
expectancy
at birth
(fi)
(/)
195 (1964) 21 (1958) 82.1 (1954)
104 (1963) —
—
87.7
96.9
92.3 (1954)
—
—
—
101*
180
49*
33
123
60 (1963)
—
—
—
200
165*
35*
30*
180*
37*
—
—
141 (1958)
66 (1964)
55 (1958)
42
333 (1963)
69 (1958)
245
83 (1958)
188(1964)
77
148 (1964)
636
83 (1958)
38
57 (1958)
106
215
174
78
63
38 (1958)
149
48 (1958)
90
64
82
179
77
28 (1959) 86.4 (55-57)
—
—
65 (1963) —
84.1 (1963)
—
—
—
58 (1960)
—
—
—
86.4 (1964)
—
38 (1965) —
28 (1964) 80.9 (1962)
25 (1959) 35.7 (1964)
—
47 (1963)
—
—
—
—
—
—
25 (1965) 37.9 (1962)
32 (1965) 56.3 (1960)
96.9 (1960)
—
59 (1963) —
—
—
—
—
—
—
54
55
49
22
59
(1964) 85.8 (1956)
(1965) —
(1964) —
(1965) 68.1 (1956)
(1965) —
96 (1958) 25 (1961) 56.6 (1960)
35 (1958) —
—
10 (1965) —
174
—
—
—
—
—
—
144.3*
110.5*
38.8*
37.3*
—
—
90.7
98.1
94.8 (60-61)
229*
32*
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
178*
220*
138*
37.5*
35.8*
35*
40-45
86.1
77
59.2
95.8
98.6
73
—
—
—
—
—
—
91.1
87.1
66.5
93.5
27.5
78.1
98.5
49.4
94
99.7
—
—
—
—
(1962)
(1954)
(1953)
(1945)
—
—
38.4
86.2
99.1
88.5
(1962)
(1960)
(1960)
(52-53)
—
—
—
—
71
—
—
—
—
—
250*
26*
—
—
69.5
149*
200*
162.9
60.2
49.6*
—
37.5
—
89.6
98.9
94.4 (1961)
—
—
—
—
—
93.6*
190*
127*
110*
160*
40*
37.5*
35*
49*
35*
79
97.3
88 (1956)
_
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
84.3 (1956)
—
92.9*
—
37*
—
68.1
91.4
80.5 (1960)
—
—
—
174.3*
31.6*
46.8
70.3
58.6 (1963)
—
—
Sources: Column (a) United Nations: Yearbook of National Accounts Statistics, 1966, p. 730; (6) ibid., pp. 693-694; (e) ILO: Year
Book of Labour Statistics. 1967. pp. 42-58; W) UNESCO: Statistical Yearbook, 1964, pp. 36-37; (e) and (J) data supplied by the
United Nations Research Institute for Social Development. * Estimated.
342
Africa
CUSTOMARY LAW AND THE DEVELOPMENT
OF FARMING SYSTEMS
Communal farming, governed by customary law, is still carried on extensively
in Africa, especially south of the Sahara. Although it exists on a fairly considerable scale in North Africa too, it is not so important there since Moslem
jurisprudence has introduced the principle of private property, with all the
refinements so familiar to Europeans: owner-operatorship, tenancy and sharecropping. Roman law, too, has left its imprint, and although the native
customary law of the pre-Islamic period is still prevalent here and there (an
example is the Berber jmâa, governing the communal use of pasture land and
routes covered by migrant herds), its influence is much less felt than is the case
in southern Africa.1
Customary law, infinitely variable in its local applications, nevertheless
presents one easily recognisable feature common to most of the countries
south of the Sahara, especially western Africa. Whereas under Roman law,
individualism is the rule, here the land is communally owned; it constitutes an
indivisible entity, belonging to the extended family, tribe or clan which cleared
it, and its use is administered by the village authorities according to the needs
of the members. As a rule, the "master of the land" re-apportions the plots
every year among the families concerned, bearing in mind the needs of each
of them and also how much land must be brought under the plough, set aside
for common pasture land, or left lying fallow. Land cannot, in principle, be
either bought or sold, since not only does it constitute the common possession
of the society concerned but it also provides a pillar for the social and religious
organisation of the community.
We must, clearly, beware of generalisations. But we may confidently apply
to all societies ruled by customary law the following definition by G. Dalton,
which excellently characterises the way in which life in the African countryside
is organised:
Specifically, these primitive social economies are so organised that the allocation
of labour and land, work organisation within production processes, and the disposition of goods and services—in short, production and distribution—are expressions
underlying kinship organisation, tribal affiliation, and religious and moral duty.
There is no separate economic system to be analysed independently of social organisation. Labour, land, services and goods produced are allotted, exchanged,
or
appropriated through transactional modes of reciprocity and distribution.2
1
For an examination of land tenure in North Africa, see Jacques Berque: Etude
d'histoire rurale maghrébine (Tangier and Fez, Editions internationales, 1938), and Contribution à l'étude des contrats nord-africains (Beni-Meskine) (Algiers, Typo-litho et J. Carbonel,
1936).
1
George Dalton: "The Development of Subsistence and Peasant Economies in Africa",
International Social Science Journal (Paris, UNESCO), Vol. XVI, No. 3, 1964. For land
343
Agricultural organisations and development
This very general picture does show us how subsistence agriculture (the
fruit of such customs and procedures) has provided a remarkable degree of
continuity for African societies—a continuity which has lasted down to the
present day. Despite erosion deriving from contacts with European society,
and despite constant reforms introduced by governments or resulting from
changes in custom, this system has managed to preserve all the strong points
of African society, notably family and tribal solidarity and social cohesion.
Moreover, despite all its drawbacks (which we shall look into later) this continuity has proved an excellent defence against a phenomenon which has made
its appearance in all other continents subjected to colonial domination: the
reduction of the peasantry to a landless proletariat. Except in North Africa,
where the European penetration was followed by extensive confiscation of land
in densely populated areas (in Tunisia, for instance, European companies held
no less than one-third of the land settled) with the result that towards the end
of the nineteenth century the North African peasantry was rapidly becoming
a proletariat, elsewhere the land held by Europeans or reserved for them (the
best land, of course) represented a smallish percentage only of the total available: in French West and Equatorial Africa a mere 0.5 per cent, the same in
Uganda, in Rwanda-Urundi 2 per cent, in Tanganyika 0.9 per cent, in Kenya
7 per cent, in the Belgian Congo 9 per cent, in Northern Rhodesia 3 per cent,
in Nyasaland 5 per cent, in South-West Africa 5 per cent, and in Bechuanaland
6 per cent. Only in Southern Rhodesia (49 per cent) and the Union of South
Africa (89 per cent) were high percentages registered.1 Thus, except in the last
two countries, the application of the "vacant lands" theory, under which all
land apparently unoccupied or unused belonged by rights to the occupying
Power, had in practice a somewhat limited application. The White settlers
were influenced by factors such as climate and the nature of the soil, and thus left
traditional African societies largely untouched, which is why native customs
and traditions were maintained intact at a time when contact with the White
man was bad for the African rather than good for him. True, in the plantation
areas a proletariat did spring up which varied in numbers from one country
to another. This phenomenon can be seen from the data, relating to 1955,
which appear in table 15. Unhappily no more recent statistics are available.
usage in common law systems, see also Guy-Adjété Kouassignan: L'homme et la terre —
droits fonciers coutumiers et droits de propriété en Afrique occidentale (Paris, Office de la
recherche scientifique et technique d'outre-mer, 1966).
1
For further information, see Lord Hailey: An African Survey (London, Oxford University Press, 1957), p. 687. It may perhaps not be irrelevant to mention in passing the close
connexion between the high proportion of land occupied by White settlers in the Union of
South Africa and Rhodesia and the problems thrown up today by the policies these two
countries are pursuing vis-à-vis the native African.
344
Africa
Table 15.
Africa south of the Sahara: Active popul ation and agricultural wage earners,
1955
Country
Belgian Congo
French Equatorial Africa
French West Africa
Madagascar
Mozambique
Population
actively
employed
(males and
females)
Total wage
earners
Agricultural
wage earners
(a)
(*)
(«)
3140 500
1 166 250
4 666 000
1 194 000
1 507 500
1206 043
154 754
372 500
247 562
542 746
300 791
39 945
73 600
96 693
117 912
Percentage of agricultural
wage earners in relation to
Total
Total
number of population
wage
actively
earners
employed
W)
(<0
24.9
25.8
19.8
39.1
21.7
9.6
3.4
1.6
8.1
7.8
Sources: Columns (a), (i) and (e): ILO: African Labour Survey, Studies and Reports, New Series, No. 48
(Geneva, 1958), pp. 666-667. The figures given for agricultural wage earners in French Equatorial and West
Africa, and Madagascar (column (c)) probably include a few foreign workers. Thefiguresfor the Belgian Congo
and Mozambique are, however, strictly limited to native labour.
Examination of these figures shows that the rural African population has
been little affected by modern agriculture and that the plantations, which
account for the bulk of wage earning labour, cannot be compared with the
vast latifundia of Latin America, which have pushed their tentacles into every
nook and cranny of the countryside, to such a point that they embrace the bulk
of the peasantry, including the small independent farmers. The latifundiominifundio complex, with all its implications, is quite unknown in the independent African countries south of the Sahara. And this means that the
African countryside, being less affected and tainted by connexions with the
outside world, has to a large degree kept its cultural integrity. Mutatis
mutandis, the African village can be compared only with the Mexican ejido or
the Inca ayllu, which maintain elaborate internal relationships and are virtually
closed to the outside world. This is the strength of the African village, but also
its weakness : the enduring traditions make adaptation to the requirements of
"development" that much more difficult.
Customary law, where it survives in an unadulterated form, tends to preserve a social pattern rigidly barred against progress. The resultant agricultural
system is characterised by the inalienability of land, its annual re-allotment and
its under-utilisation, together with itinerant grazing in certain areas. The
result is a definite absence of dynamism which throws up many difficult problems. The pyramid structure of the village, with everybody's place being
allotted according to age and sex, and with the young people being subordinate
to the old, is a formidable obstacle. True, these traditional social patterns have
345
Agricultural organisations and development
undergone sizable modifications here and there, either because of population
pressure, or because contacts with a monetary economy have given rise to
newly felt requirements and upset the traditional social stability. In some
areas, land is no longer returned to the family pool on the death of the person
farming it, to be distributed afresh; it is taken over by another individual or
i ndividuals. This, of course, is nearer to the European conception of property ;
but it can lead to repeated subdivision, and when that happens we find a
multitude of tiny, uneconomic plots, a situation the more serious in that the
subdivision has not been accompanied by any improvement in ways of tilling
the soil.
The mortgaging of land is another phenomenon characteristic of areas in
which traditional patterns are being eroded by the power of money. By
temporarily ceding a piece of land in exchange for a cash payment, the peasant
can cope with taxes, dowries, marriage ceremonies, unforeseen contingencies,
and so on. But the land thus mortgaged will have to be redeemed sooner or
later, and since land is usually inalienable, temporary occupation gives the
new occupant no incentive to make any improvements thereon, since the cost
will not be made good to him. Although this state of affairs may last for years,
as long as the borrower is unable to buy his land back, such a system offers
more drawbacks than advantages. The new occupier does not know how long
he will keep the land, and, unlike the European tenant, he has no guarantee
that any improvements he may make will be duly paid for. The original owner
is in debt, and often enough has too little land remaining to meet the needs of his
family. True, pending such time as a real market for land develops, the system
does make for some mobility in land—a mobility of which the more dynamic
savers take advantage. The system must, however, be considered rather as
a transition towards other systems, such as tenant farming and share-cropping,
better adapted to the demands of progress. In some African countries south
of the Sahara, we find developed communities, as in Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal
and the Sudan, which practise the purest kind of share-cropping.1 In Gambia,
the custom during colonial times (and in all likelihood there has been little
change since then) was to have a system whereby "strange" farmers who came
every year from the Casamance valley in Senegal to grow groundnuts were
accommodated, and given a plot of land, in exchange for a number of days of
work (usually four a week) done on the owners' lands.2
1
As regards, for instance, the abusa system in Ghana, see P. Hill: The Gold Coast Cocoa
Farmer (London, Oxford University Press, 1956), pp. 8-24; as regards the isha kole system
in Nigeria, see R. Galleti, K. D. S. Baldwin and I. O. Dina: Nigerian Cocoa Farmers (London,
Oxford University Press, 1956), pp. 117-118.
a
See J. H. Palmer: Notes on Strange Farmers (Bathurst, Government Printer, 1946),
passim; Government of the United Kingdom, Colonial Office: Report on the Gambia for the
Years 1952 and 1953 (London, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1954), p. 21.
346
Africa
There is yet another complication, namely, the means whereby land is
transmitted. For instance, in the Sine area of Senegal, inhabited by the Serer,
the lamanats—individual fiefs traditionally granted by the Boor (king) of Sine
to wealthy (and usually free) peasants—are transmitted through the mother's
line; the oldest nephew on the mother's side becomes lamane in his turn. On
the other hand, inalienable rights of usufruct, conceded by the lamane to the
heads of families inhabiting his fief, against the payment of a due, are transmitted through the father's line, to the younger or older brother, or through
the mother's line, to the eldest nephew. Here again, the land so handed down
is inalienable. We thus have a rigid structure allowing of no individual or
arbitrary modification, the occupier being merely the possessor of a right.
At the most, he can lend, loan or mortgage the land in accordance with traditional rules. But he cannot finally dispose of it nor may he alter the rules
whereby the land is inherited.1
The position can be even more complicated, and the following example
should suffice to show how formidable are the difficulties likely to be encountered when modernisation of the land system is contemplated. Among the
Bamileke of Cameroon, the inalienable patrimony of land, managed by the
head of the family, is divided up on his death between his chief heir on the one
hand, and his younger brothers and other children on the other, in accordance
with principles which guarantee a right of occupation. But in the long run
this right becomes increasingly difficult to administer, since the system also
makes allowance for the rights of usufruct inherited by the womenfolk. The
implications of the resulting complexities and obstacles for agricultural development are vividly brought out in Gabriel Gosselin's description of how land is
used and inherited among the Bamileke:
Although handed down patrilineally, land is not used only by the menfolk. At
the time of her marriage, a wife receives from her husband a plot of land for her food
crops. The husband retains an overriding right on that plot—namely, a right of
tenure without usufruct. Under this right, he may plant trees and keep the produce
of any tree cultivation (including, consequently, the coffee or cocoa harvest). The
wife receives only a right to make use of the plot but this is a permanent right and may
be bequeathed matrilineally: the wife passes on her right to cultivate to one of her
daughters or to one of the daughters of her sisters.
Thus it can happen that a part or sometimes even the whole of the land of a head
of a family may come into the hands of persons who are vaguely related to him
matrilineally but who have become socially and economically strangers to him.
At each marriage and in each generation the landed property may remain intact but
the rights of a growing number of women to cultivate it reduce bit by bit its productive potential. The head of the family may only plant trees or grow tree crops,
1
For further information about the Serer, see Jean-Claude Reverdy's exhaustive monograph Une société rurale au Sénégal — les structures foncières familiales et villageoises des
Serer (Aix-en-Provence, Centre africain des sciences humaines appliquées, 1968).
347
Agricultural organisations and development
and these plantations are at the mercy of the crops grown on the same soil by women
who are strangers to his own immediate family. These women, whose rights may
go back over many generations, sometimes live far away from the land which they
till. On their side, the wives of the existing head of the family may go out to cultivate
elsewhere the plots of land constituting their own inheritance. As a result, there is a
wide scattering of plots cultivated by the same woman, as well as a considerable
breaking-up of a family's land. This highly complex system of land rights is the
source of many disputes which are all the more acrimonious because land is scarce.1
But in other areas, such as southern Dahomey, women may inherit movable
property only, rights over land being reserved for males (none the less, the
womenfolk play an important part, in Dahomey as elsewhere, in growing
foodstuffs and marketing produce). It will be seen, then, that the position is
not everywhere the same. If we may venture a generalisation, we might say
that the more complicated customary law is, the harder it will be, from every
point of view, to "modernise" the countryside.
Now we come up against the one basic question : what should replace the
traditional patterns ? Should it be private ownership as understood in the
Western world ? Or collective farming as practised in Eastern Europe ? Or
a compromise between the two, taking account of the peculiarities of Africa ?
These questions are by no means easy to answer. Similarly the reference to
compromise patterns (although it effectively precludes the exportation of
ready-made models from either East or West) does not solve the problem, for
what would such intermediate systems actually consist of? For the time
being, the countries themselves are apparently tending to adopt co-operative
systems as part of a series of reforms launched or directed by the authorities,
with the latter trying not only to improve agricultural methods but also to
introduce the principles and procedures of a market economy. Whether such
attempts succeed or not depends very largely on the resistance encountered
from local society, on society's ability to assimilate progress and to ensure that
everybody has a share therein—for where the village elders have kept their
power and prestige intact they tend, very naturally, to demand the lion's share
of any benefits attributable to economic development. Should we, therefore,
bank on them, and risk their abusing their authority to strengthen their own
position and paralyse the social evolution which must proceed hand-in-hand
with technical change; or should we, on the contrary, back the young people,
and risk a state of affairs in which their opposition to their seniors (already
latent or indeed manifest in many places) would speed up the disintegration
of traditional society ? For there can be no certainty that the socio-economic
1
Gabriel Gosselin: Développement et tradition dans les sociétés rurales africaines, Studies
and Reports, New Series, No. 76 (Geneva, ILO, 1970), Ch. 2: "Le crédit mutuel en pays
bamiléké", pp. 64-65.
348
Africa
pattern which will take the place of traditional society will represent a change
for the better. To all these questions there can be no common answer. If
we take the two extremes, and imagine the change-over from traditional communal farming to individual ownership on European lines, we shall have to
remember that sooner or later this will involve abandonment of polygamy for
monogamy, of the tribe or clan for the small family unit, of dependency for
economic independence. Each such change will break old links and habits
and demand new ones which must bring about new attitudes and a new
solidarity. And, as Gabriel Gosselin remarks, and rightly so, there is a
qualitative hiatus between traditional solidarity and the solidarity which exists
in the modern world1; the one by no means necessarily leads to the other.
Generally speaking, it seems likely that a tendency will develop almost
everywhere for the adoption of a simple form of peasant co-operative, linked
in some way or other to the traditional system of land holding. This is
especially so in the countries where the principle of private ownership is least
developed; here, any redistribution of land, with its accompanying granting of
individual rights of occupancy, would give rise to numerous problems, and
would take far longer to effect than a land survey in a country where property
is already consolidated. We should do well to take heed of D. Christodoulou's words of warning if we are going to encourage individual land tenure :
African farmers operating under customary tenures imbued with different values
cannot be abruptly detached from their social milieu and plunged unprepared into
individual farm operation divorced from the give and take and communal help to
which they have been accustomed, on the basis of a minute holding, primitive technology, unequipped and with no capital resources, with no understanding of modern
agriculture, with the expectation that "the eye of the owner will change sand into
gold" quite unaided. The most likely result will be poor performance, loss of his
land to speculators, and indebtedness.2
This may well remind us of a warning issued by FAO some nine years ago :
the surest way of depriving a peasant of his land is to give him a title to the land
while making the latter freely negotiable.3 This, in fact, is exactly what has
happened whenever a monetary economy, with all the new demands it brings
in its train, has led traditional societies to lease, sell or otherwise divest themselves of their land. Latin America is a case in point. The Government of
Spain had ruled that the resguardos—land farmed by the Indians—was to be
inalienable, the aim being specifically to prevent the Spanish settlers from
1
Gosselin, op. cit., p. 84.
FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Basic Agrarian Structural
Issues in the Adjustment of African Customary Tenures to the Needs of Agricultural Development, by D. Christodoulou (doc. RU: WLR/66/Q, p. 8.
8
See the report by the FAO working party on land tenure systems in Africa, in FAO
Africa Survey (Rome, 1961), Part I, Ch. 5.
2
349
Agricultural organisations and development
buying out or otherwise appropriating the land. The system, which worked
well in some areas and less well in others, was abolished when the Latin
American countries broke away from Spain, the pretext being that the Indians
were just as much entitled as the Creoles to do what they liked with their property. The result was that the Indian, having sold his land and spent the proceeds, was forced to return and work for the new owner. Thus, instead of
improving the Indian's lot, the new legislation merely made matters worse.
The indivisibility of land is a safeguard against the power of the minority;
wherever it has been abolished, the Latin American experience has been
repeated: the poor peasant who enjoyed a secure right of usufruct has become
a much poorer member of the proletariat. Although less affected than other
continents by this phenomenon, Africa has not escaped unscathed. In North
Africa, for instance, the French legislation enacted on 26 July 1873 and
23 April 1897 allowed the buying and selling of titles to land hitherto indivisibly held. The results were catastrophic. In Algeria:
Many almost destitute small owners who now held an authentic title-deed which
they could easily sell were tempted by the prospect of easy money, and sold their land.
Strangers to the use of money (previously rare in north-west Africa), they usually lost
no time in running through their capital, after which they were
compelled either to
work as hired labourers on the farms or tofleeto the towns.1
During the 1950s exactly the same problem arose in Tunisia. According
to R. G. A. Kool:
In certain parts, once the fellah had secured his official title-deed, he at once took
the opportunity to sell this property to a wealthy fellah from some
other area. Until
then, not having had a title-deed, he had not been free to sell.2
African governments are aware of this problem. They realise that a
hasty modernisation of the traditional agricultural pattern is fraught with
danger, and they are trying, in their legislation and development programmes,
to harmonise tradition and progress. In many parts of the continent, attempts
are being made to bring about a more efficient exploitation of the land through
land reforms and land settlement schemes (usually co-operative in character),
as counter-measures to the inefficient use, and occasionally unwarranted
abandonment, of the land. Thus, while introducing no abrupt changes in
land tenure systems governed by customary law, recent legislative enactments
provide for some expropriation measures in the public interest, within schemes
for land reform and land settlement.
1
Pierre Bourdieu: "La société traditionnelle — attitude à l'égard du temps et conduite
économique", Sociologie du travail (Paris, Editions du Seuil), No. 1, January-March 1963,
p. 34.
2
R . G. A. Kool: L'agriculture tunisienne — analyse d'une économie en voie de modernisation (Wageningen, H. Veenman & Zonen NV, 1963), p. 150.
350
Africa
A few examples should suffice to show the present trend among the African
countries. In Cameroon, under Decree No. 64-8/COR (30 January 1964),
certain lands traditionally held on customary tenure (with the exception of
land with regard to which rights have been duly established) can be taken over
by the State under land reform schemes.1 Furthermore, by virtue of the Act
dated 3 July 1963, the Government can expropriate surplus communally held
land and distribute it to communities which are short of land, so as to ensure
a better balance between manpower and resources.2 In Upper Volta, current
legislation empowers the Government "to reserve to the State a part of the
lands forming the object of special planning, and to declare as State property
lands which are under-populated or which are distant from centres of population".8 In Senegal, under the Agrarian Reform Act dated 17 June 1964,
the State becomes the "holder" of all non-registered land. Such land, which
forms part of the "national domain", represents a sizable proportion of the
cultivated area of the country. Marguerite Camboulives says that the reform
has a threefold effect. Firstly, since the State takes over from the landowner,
the notables can no longer act as custodians, as it were, of the peasantry, and
the traditional peasant dues are done away with. Secondly, provided the
people occupying the land cultivate it themselves, their right to use the land
is confirmed. Lastly, the reform creates "areas which are allotted to particular rural communities. This should conduce to the proper running of agricultural co-operatives. These areas are managed by rural councils, made up
of electors from the areas concerned (active chiefly in agriculture), of representatives of the State, and of representatives of the co-operatives."4 A similar
process is under way in Tanzania, which has "declared all former freehold
land to be State land and treats former freehold owners as long-term leaseholders
who should conform to certain land use stipulations that the State may think
fit to make." 6 In Madagascar, the State may take possession of unexploited
or derelict land irrespective of the principle that private property is inviolable.6
This is equivalent to emphasising that the ownership of land carries with it
certain social and economic responsibilities. This notion is being reflected
1
Frank M. Mifsud: Customary Land Law in Africa, Legislative Series, No. 7 (Rome,
FAO, 1967), p. 50.
* Adopted on the advice of FAO. See A. C. Bessis: Rapport au gouvernement du Cameroun sur les problèmes de la réforme foncière au Cameroun oriental, Expanded Programme of
Technical Assistance, Report 1872 (Rome, FAO, 1964).
' Mifsud, op. cit., p. 51.
•Marguerite Camboulives: L'organisation coopérative au Sénégal (Paris, Editions
A. Pedone, 1967), p. 161.
' FAO, World Land Reform Conference: Basic Agrarian Structural Issues . .. (D. Christodoulou), op. cit., p 8.
• Mifsud, op. cit., pp. 49-50.
351
Agricultural organisations and development
to an ever increasing degree in legislative enactments. The tendency to subject
the ownership of land to modern ways of thinking is even more apparent in
North Africa, where major agrarian reform schemes have been launched
during recent years. In the countries where the private ownership of land
predominated, this has been respected, but structural changes have been
imposed (as in Tunisia and Morocco) or a form of workers' management
has been introduced (as in Algeria).
In Tunisia, irrigation plans (as in the Medjerdah valley in particular) are
accompanied by legislation to limit the size of individual holdings and to
expropriate the excess, and to consolidate holdings excessively fragmented
under succession rights over the years. In addition, Act No. 64-28 (4 June
1964) provides for the transition from communal to co-operative tenure. 1
The occupants of such land—most of them are cattle-grazing nomads or seminomads—have lived through an experience which has proved, unfortunately,
somewhat unhappy. When the Government first took up the problem of
communally held land, it decided, by virtue of the Act dated 23 September 1957,
to give official recognition to existing rights of ownership, whilst at the same
time setting up joint regional councils (consisting of tribal representatives and
government officials) to define the areas appertaining to the various tribes.
Although this was inalienable land, it was decided that persons undertaking
to farm it should be granted individual rights of ownership. But, as has been
very pertinently observed:
The system did not work well. The procedures for individualisation were complicated and expensive. Powerful chiefs could use them to control large areas of
land at the expense of their subordinates. Others received too little land to subsist
on and soon sold their titles and moved on to find casual labour on some development
project. Credit and technical services were insufficient to ensure the kind of development which the individualisation provisions were intended to promote.2
The 1964 Act introduced the idea of co-operative development, while
reserving the possibility of allotting leased land to tenants. It is thus an
attempt to cope with the difficulties inherent in any change-over from a traditional to a modern system of land tenure and to overcome the problems
outlined above, which arise whenever systems of individual tenure are introduced into societies which hardly know the use of money.
In Morocco, in accordance with the aims pursued under the Three-Year
Plan covering 1965-67, the authorities are trying to recuperate the collective
1
Mifsud, op. cit., pp. 55 and 60.
United Nations-FAO-ILO: Progress in Land Reform, Fourth Report (New York, 1966),
p. 58, para. 269.
8
352
Africa
lands known as habous or guish for the purposes of land reform. These lands,
plus those belonging to the State, will constitute a pool of land such that it
should be possible to organise a system of family plots within a general system
whereby direct access to ownership would be bound up with an undertaking
to develop the land in question.1 The reform is bound to have a profound
effect on customary law, since anybody who wants a plot of land will not only
have to yield his agricultural land, and his rights thereto, to the State, but also
to renounce all rights to the land of the community of which he is a member.
This renunciation will hold good of his descendants not yet qualifying as heirs.2
To forestall any further break-up of the plots so awarded, it has been decided
that they shall be indivisible; they may be neither seized nor yielded, except
by or to the State, and will be transmissible to a single heir whose responsibility it will be to compensate all others for any rights they may have forfeited.
In Algeria and the United Arab Republic, the problems arising from the
breaking-up of holdings under a land reform programme have been very
differently settled. Both these countries have set about the matter in an original way. Since October 1962, Algeria has been setting up self-managed
undertakings, after eight years of strife which had dire consequences for the
country-dweller. Immediately after independence, the country took over
7.5 million acres of land traditionally reserved for foreign settlers (the longestablished native sector took up some 10 million acres), while refraining from
launching an operation of land redistribution; in any case, because specialists
and administrators were in short supply such an operation would have been
impossible, and had it been carried out would sooner or later have affected
agricultural exports—the country's economic mainstay.
In the United Arab Republic, on the other hand, after the change of régime
in 1952 (and especially from 1954 onwards) a land reform programme on
classical lines was launched. It was designed to produce small family holdings without the drawbacks inherent in excessive subdivision. Those who gain
under the reform have to abide by certain rules: they must belong to the local
co-operative, and the same crop must be grown on each of the individual
plots, the crop chosen being dependent on the region. In this fashion, operations are rationalised and a form of joint farming practised, without anything being done to affect the private ownership of land.3
1
See FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966:1: La réforme des
structures agraires et l'investissement régional; II: Structure foncière et réforme agraire
(doc. RU : WLR-C/66/48), p. 7.
a
ibid., p. 9.
8
For further details, see FAO, World Land Reform Conference, Rome, June-July 1966:
Agrarian Reform in the United Arab Republic, by A. H. E. Nasharty (doc. RU : WLRC/66/17).
353
Agricultural organisations and development
When Libya became independent, an additional problem arose: namely,
what to do with the land of former settlers. The following are the principal
ends pursued by the land settlement schemes embodied in Act No. 4 (1963):
— to cultivate the farms formerly belonging to the Entex so as to make them
going concerns;
— to promote individual land holding instead of communal ownership, on the
tribal lands not within the purview of the Ente, by putting small-holders on
all land suitable for individual farming;
— to plough, improve and apportion State lands;
— to give the small-holder the help he requires;
— to organise agricultural co-operatives for those benefiting from the preceding four operations.2
Clearly, then, each North African country has tried to settle its agrarian
problems in its own way. In fact, reform has been made much easier by the
predominance of Moslem law over customary law, and hence of private ownership over traditional communal ownership. The big problem remains that of
Africa south of the Sahara, where, as we have seen, customary law is so complicated and so all-embracing that any attempt to combine tradition and the
way of life of the twentieth century, whilst at the same time improving the
standard of living of all concerned, will necessarily have to be both bold and
original.
SUBSISTENCE AGRICULTURE AND ITS EFFECTS
ON FOOD SUPPLIES
These various attempts at agricultural development result for the most part
from Africa's need to modernise her traditional agriculture, which still accounts
for the greater part of the continent's output and provides work for the majority
of the employed population. Perhaps more than any other continent of the
developing world, Africa is still profoundly dependent on subsistence agriculture. We might expect subsistence agriculture to play its due role
with a fair amount of efficiency, that is to say, to provide food for the
rural population while producing ever greater marketable surpluses for the
1
A public body responsible for land settlement during the Italian occupation.
United Nations-FAO-ILO: Progress in Land Reform, Fourth Report, op. cit. For the
present position with regard to land settlement programmes, see FAO, World Land Reform
Conference, Rome, June-July 1966: Land Settlement Programme in Libya, by Hamid AlJawhary (doc. RU : WLR-C/66/28).
8
354
Africa
towns and cities.1 Yet, although famine is not now a scourge in Africa,
African agriculture is not managing to cope with the increased demands of
development. In comparison with export agriculture, which brings in the
foreign currency required to buy equipment for economic development,
subsistence agriculture (which ought to play a complementary role) has still
not awoken from the torpor of centuries. Clearly, if it were brought up to
date, the advantages for the economy of the African countries would be
enormous; instead of having to spend valuable foreign currency on imported
foodstuffs, they would be able to purchase more of the goods which Africa
needs and does not yet produce. At the same time, if agricultural output were
greater and more varied, the food shortages and the malnutrition so pitifully
in evidence in many African countries could be avoided. Nor is space wanting.
A United Nations survey 2 shows that subsistence farming in tropical Africa,
towards 1950, occupied on the average between 65 and 75 per cent of all cultivated land; and K. C. Abercrombie examined a group of countries in which
subsistence agriculture represented between 41 and 92 per cent of the total
value of agricultural output (see table 16). Although the statistical validity
of these figures is uncertain, they do graphically show the magnitude of the
problem.
Despite the importance of subsistence agriculture, or perhaps because of
its characteristics, the situation is far from satisfactory, the more so in that,
since 1945, the speedy growth of population and the expansion of towns and
cities have thoroughly upset the balance—already precarious—which existed
before the war. From year to year the gulf between what the towns require
and what the peasantry can supply is steadily widening:
The modern African town has grown beyond the capacity of its hinterland to
support it without radical reform. One result of this trend has been that much of
the food required to feed the city is being imported, although agriculture is Africa's
chief economic activity.8
According to preliminary figures prepared by FAO in 1967, in relation to
an average of 100 for the five years 1952-56 the food production index per
1
The expression "subsistence agriculture" is used here to describe a state of affairs in
which three-quarters or more of agricultural produce is eaten by those who produce it. The
lower this proportion, the more closely does subsistence agriculture approach market agriculture. Clearly, in subsistence agriculture of the purest kind, the whole output would be
eaten by the peasants. But this occurs only when people live completely isolated lives—a
situation which is becoming rarer and rarer, even in tropical Africa.
8
United Nations: Enlargement of the Exchange Economy in Tropical Africa (New York,
1954), pp. 8-13.
» United Nations: 1967 Report on the World Social Situation (New York, 1969), p. 154.
355
Agricultural organisations and development
Table 16. Africa : Estimated percentage of subsistence production in the total value
of agricultural output
Country
Period
Percentage
Cameroon
Ethiopia
Former French Equatorial Africa
Former French West Africa
Guinea
Kenya
Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland
Nyasaland
Northern Rhodesia
Southern Rhodesia
Tanganyika
Uganda
Union of South Africa
1956
1954
1956
1956
1956
1955-59
1954-58
1954-58
1954-58
1954-58
1956-59
1955-59
—
69 1
82 s
77 o.«
55 a
75 3
60*
86«
89'
92 s
79
o
59 s
4 1 ">8
75»
1
Stock-breeding not included. * Including forests. * Including forests and fishing. * Traditional undertakings
only. * Including forests, fishing and hunting. ' African undertakings only. 7 African Trust Land only.
• Including fishing. • African reserves only.
N.B. Besides the differences pointed out in the notes above, there are variations in the concepts on which the
estimates are based, according to the country concerned. Hence these figures merely provide a rough idea of
the value of produce produced by subsistence agriculture. They should not be used for the purpose of international comparisons.
Source: K. C. Abercrombie: "The Transition from Subsistence to Market Agriculture in Africa South of the
Sahara", Monthly Bulletin of Agricultural Economics and Statistics (Rome, FAO), Vol. 10, No. 2, February 1961.
capita had fallen to 97 in 19661, whereas agricultural imports had gone up by
nearly 50 per cent since 1955. Africa, which before the war had been a net
exporter of cereals, has gradually become a net importer. In 1966, all records
were broken when 2.58 million tons of wheat and flour were imported for a
mere 150,000 tons exported. If to African imports we add those of the Near
East (including the United Arab Republic), which amounted to 4.52 million
tons of wheat, we get the figure of 7.1 million tons of imports, as against a
mere 560,000 tons before the war (280,000 tons for Africa and about as much
again for the Near East). These figures show how exceedingly serious the
problem is.
What is more, even if Africa could contemplate a steady increase in her
cereal imports (which is by no means sure, as it may well be that one day or
other Western Europe and the United States will be unable to cope with the
developing countries' requirements), the continent's food problems would
not thereby be overcome. The African lacks protein; he suffers from vitamin
deficiencies and in general is badly undernourished. Urgent action is needed
1
356
FAO: The State of Food and Agriculture, 1967 (Rome, 1967), p. 12.
Africa
to ensure a greater variety of food crops, a proper use of available resources
and the conquest of the numerous taboos which dictate (especially with regard
to children1) what people shall eat. Nor is agriculture, in the strict sense of
cultivation of the soil, alone in being so backward; the same holds good of
stock-breeding, from both the theoretical and the practical aspects. Not
that cattle are in short supply. The trouble is that they are a source of prestige
rather than of meat; the words "negative wealth" are often used in relation to
African cattle, and not without justification. In forested areas, and especially
in tropical parts where sleeping sickness, carried by the tsetse fly, is rampant
(this applies to some 5 million square miles), the surroundings are of course
unpropitious. But in the savannah zoneflocksand herds abound, so much so
that there is often more meat on the hoof per head of population than in
Western Europe. Thus, as will be readily seen from table 17, Niger in 1961
had more than one ox and more than two sheep or goats per head, whereas in
France (for example) there was but one ox or cow for every two people, one
sheep for five, and one goat for forty. Yet, while the Frenchman consumes an
average of 176 lb. of meat a year, the Nigerian eats no more than 11 lb. A
pedigree French milch cow gives perhaps as much as 50 to 55 pints of milk a
day, whereas an African cow offers no more than two to three, and then only
during a period of lactation limited to five or six months. Nor is prestige the
only reason why so little meat is eaten. H. Dupin and his colleagues, for
example, suggest that in many areas lack of purchasing power may play an
important part. To slaughter an ox means that on that particular day there
must be several dozen families willing to pay for meat, and this rarely occurs
1
See WHO: Malnutrition and Disease, Freedom from Hunger Campaign Basic Study,
No. 12 (Geneva, 1963). This study very appositely points out that "Failure to use the available resources may be due to a lack of adequate knowledge of what children should and can
eat, and especially of the fact that the growing child has a relatively greater need for the
scarce protein items in the family diet than the wage earner or the respected elder for whom
they are usually reserved. The distribution of food within the family is a potent factor in the
nutritional deprivation of children; the belief that only adults should eat meat or other 'rich'
or 'heavy' foods is not restricted to the poverty-stricken or illiterate peasant family, but is
also found in many educated communities anxious to do their best for the child, and with
the means to do so. In many regions the idea of buying or preparing food specially for the
child is totally unfamiliar. Traditional aversions to, prohibitions on, or beliefs about the use
of some foods (either separately or in combination with others) all limit the range of choice
of foods which might be used to provide some protein for the child." Moreover—and here
we come up against the problem of urbanisation in Africa, "Where the traditional way of life
is breaking down, new dangers threaten the child's nutritional health. Old practices which
guaranteed the infant a prolonged period of breast-feeding are being abandoned, but with no
compensatory improvement in the methods of feeding the weanling. The belief that certain
protein foods such as fish and eggs are harmful to young children probably did not matter
much as long as the child was breast-fed for two years, but when the mother begins to wean
the child early so that she can go out to work these beliefs can become dangerous. In
many regions the drift towards the towns of rural families deprives the family of the familiar
selection of home-grown foods, while ignorance and poverty prevent the purchase of possible
replacements." (op. cit., p. 26.)
357
Agricultural organisations and development
in regions where the people are few and far between and themselves produce
almost all they eat.1 In 1961 or thereabouts, the average annual consumption
of meat in western Africa stood at roughly 12 lb. per head; the figures varied
from country to country (in Niger, consumption was a mere 2.2 lb. ; in Liberia
and Senegal, 28.6 lb.). In eastern and central Africa, the general average was
some 25.5 lb., the lower limit being 6.6 lb. in Mozambique and the upper limit
61 lb. in Southern Rhodesia.2 In North Africa, the position is more satisfactory; here people consume, on the average, twice as much meat as in Black
Africa (28.6 lb. per person per year in the United Arab Republic, for example,
in 1963-64). However, we may safely estimate that on average the African
eats only between one-tenth and one-fifth of the meat a European consumes.
The grave protein deficiency which results could be made good if people ate
more fish. Unhappily, however, the level of fish consumption is the same as,
or even lower than, that of meat, and as one moves inland from the coast, so
fish consumption falls off rapidly. In Togo, for example, we find the Watchi
eating 39 lb. offish a year; the Ewe eats 22.6; the Kabre eats a little over 10 oz.
and the Moba a mere 7 oz.s The phenomenon is easily explained if we remember how hard it is in these parts to keep fish fresh. Accordingly, the
interpretation of national averages must be approached with care, and this
holds good of table 14; it must never be forgotten that an average for any
under-developed area conceals extremes much further apart than is the case in
a developed region. Nevertheless, taking the wider view, a comparative study
of national averages for European and African countries is a useful way to
gam an over-all impression of the problem. The few figures assembled by
FAO in Africa show that, generally speaking, the African's diet contains at least
as much in the way of cereals as the European's—and sometimes more—but
far less in the way of starches, vegetables, meat and fats.4 Moreover, the
African food supplies are subject to considerable fluctuation in the course of
a year (because of seasonal shortages due to bad harvests and poor arrangements for the storage of perishable goods). If rain is slow in coming, or if
there should be a drought, the peasant of western Africa may find himself in
real difficulties owing to pre-harvest shortages. This especially applies in
the savannah zone of western Africa (northern Ghana, northern Nigeria,
1
H. Dupin, J. Toury, R. Giorgi, and J. Gros: Etude des aliments de l'Ouest africain
envisagée sous l'angle de l'apport en protides (Dakar, Orana, 1962; mimeographed), p. 3.
s
See FAO Africa Survey, op. cit., p. 28. Since offal, fowl and game are excluded from
these figures, the amounts actually available may be slightly underestimated.
8
Dupin et al., op. cit., p. 8. For the problems involved in the improvement of stockbreeding, see René Dumont: African Agricultural Development: Reflexions en the Major
Lines of Advance and the Barriers to Progress, op. cit., Part IV.
1
FAO: The State of Food and Agriculture, 1966 (Rome, 1966), Annex 8A.
358
Africa
Table 17.
West Africa: Head of cattle, 1961 estimates (in thousands)
Country
Dahomey
Guinea
Ivory Coast
Mali
Mauritania
Niger
Senegal
Togo
Upper Volta
1
Oxen and cows
Sheep and goats
300
600 1
1500
300
750
950
3100
1350
3 500
1600
12000
5000
7000
1000
130
650
1800
3000
Population
2 050
3000
3 300
4300
1000
3000
3100
1600
4000
Plus another 400,000 pigs.
Source: H. Dupin, J. Toury, R. Giorgi, and J. Gros: Etude des aliments de l'Ouest africain..., op. cit., p. 2.
Upper Togo). East Africa suffers rather from severe famines, as in Nyasaland
(1959), Somalia (1955-60) and Kenya (I960).1
Short supply and limited variety result in all kinds of vitamin deficiencies,
quite apart from the protein/calory deficiency which affects the health of so
many Africans. Kwashiorkor and athrepsia—which affect the weaned infant
—and vitamin deficiencies which strike at people of any age (xerophthalmia
and keratomalacia due to lack of vitamin A, beriberi due to lack of thiamine)
are scourges which will one day be overcome thanks to the production of more
and better food crops. For the time being, the position does not seem to have
changed greatly since 1962, when FAO estimated that calory requirements
were met to within 70 and 140 per cent, according to the area, while pointing
out that children's calory rations usually did not exceed 60 to 70 per cent of
actual requirements. In certain parts, children were also suffering from the
protein deficiency which causes kwashiorkor; in Uganda, 6 to 11 per cent of
all small children, and in Nigeria, 2 to 9 per cent, were suffering from this
terrible sickness early in the 1960s.2
Over and above sickness due to malnutrition we find sickness attributable
to inhospitable and unhealthy surroundings. The tropical African climate,
so much harder to stand than that of the temperate regions of the world, is a
1
FAO Africa Survey, op. cit., p. 33.
ibid., pp. 29 and 34. Diseases due to protein deficiency, plus diseases due to infection, give rise to extremely high infant mortality rates. United Nations data show that
in most African countries the rate for infants under 5 stands at roughly 50 per cent. See
United Nations: 1967 Report on the World Social Situation, op. cit., p. 157.
2
359
Agricultural organisations and development
real and powerful obstacle to development. If we compare the position in the
African countryside today with the position obtaining in Europe in the nineteenth century, before Pasteur's discoveries, it will be clear that, from the purely
economic angle, Europe then was far better off than is Africa today. The
diseases rife in town and countryside were either curable, or fatal in the not
too distant future (tetanus, rabies, intestinal infections, typhus, typhoid fever,
tuberculosis), apart from certain specific areas in southern Europe where undulant fever and malaria were endemic. The economic consequences of these
diseases were limited both in time and in space. The position in Africa today
is totally different. Here we find endemic diseases which weaken, mutilate
and drag on for years ; such diseases affect vast numbers of persons and constitute
a formidable obstacle to economic progress. In some cases, whole populations suffer from diseases such as onchocerciasis, bilharziasis and trypanosomiasis. In places, onchocerciasis (a disease of the eyes which often causes
blindness) reaches terrifying proportions. Thus, a survey carried out in
230 villages in the Niger Basin has shown that over 80 per cent of the people
are suffering from this disease, as many as 16 per cent, in some villages, being
blind.1 Bilharziasis, which of course is a most debilitating disease, affects
some 14 million people, most of them children under 15, in the United
Arab Republic.
The reason why we have laid such stress on these two diseases is that they
are intimately bound up with local natural conditions; more precisely, with
the local water supply and irrigation methods. As WHO very pertinently
observes, the numerous schemes now under way for the development of
water resources, and especially those undertaken in Africa, make the onchocerciasis problem even worse. As regards the areas where bilharziasis is
endemic, irrigation may make people richer but it also helps the disease to
spread.2 This phenomenon is similar to what happened in western Africa
early this century, when new roads and railway lines helped to spread sleeping
sickness, carried by the tsetse fly.3
1
WHO: The Work of WHO, 1966 (Geneva, 1967), p. 18.
•ibid., pp. 18-19, 138.
"Hailey, op. cit., pp. 1124-1125. Interdisciplinary research, if applied in the projects
quoted by WHO, would certainly have averted a disaster of this kind, which, incidentally,
also occurs in the agronomic field. In a recent work, John C. de Wilde quotes several cases
of plans which failed because projects were inadequately prepared, and, while acknowledging
that things have improved in recent years, he adds (and with some justice), "Yet there are
still too many cases where attempts to modernise agriculture, involving rather heavy expenditures on machinery, fertilisers and insecticides, are being started with little or no prior
study of important variations in soils and micro-climate which may significantly affect the
outcome." John C. de Wilde et al. : Experiences with Agricultural Development in Tropical
Africa (Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1967), Vol. I, p. 29.
360
Africa
These few remarks on the persistence of diseases linked with the surroundings and on the way in which irrigation helps to spread them show that
any development in African agriculture will demand closely co-ordinated action
in threefields—thoseof food, hygiene and technical progress. By producing
more and better foodstuffs, people will be better equipped to resist disease due
to shortcomings in their diet; but unless action is taken to purify water supplies,
irrigation schemes are likely to increase the incidence of infectious disease.
In all thesefields,it is clear that the African agricultural organisations can and
must play a part of capital importance.
In the general conclusions which bring this report to a close, the points
made above are duly summarised. It can be said, however, here and now,
that an interdisciplinary approach to the study of rural problems may be
needed even more urgently in Africa than in other parts of the developing
world. Such an approach will call for an "agonising re-appraisal" of the
methods adopted, by governments and technical assistance agencies alike.
But without it, any balanced agricultural development will be difficult to
attain.
THE MODERNISATION OF TRADITIONAL AGRICULTURE
Since independence, the African countries have been making strenuous
efforts to modernise their land system. Land reform schemes are under way
everywhere in North Africa. South of the Sahara, governments are in process
of launching new land settlement schemes and co-operative projects of all kinds,
all of which will entail changes in hallowed traditions and ways of life. For
many years now, the co-operative movement has been considered the best
means of making improvements in the countryside. We shall concentrate on
this aspect in the following pages, since other kinds of reform have already
been amply documented.1 Although in our inquiry we have been chiefly
dealing with organisations other than co-operatives, we cannot ignore the cooperative movement when discussing the problems of African development.
The present position with regard to the co-operative movement is in fact
the outcome of a train of events set in motion, towards the end of the nineteenth century, by the colonial Powers—a train of events based on certain
assumptions, and one which has manifested itself in a wide variety of ways.
1
The reader may with advantage consult (besides the classical works on the matter)
the papers submitted by the African countries at the World Land Reform Conference (Rome,
June-July 1966). Some of these have already been quoted above. As regards plans for land
settlement, land registration and the industrialisation of the rural sector, see also John C. de
Wilde, op. cit.
361
Agricultural organisations and development
The assumption was that Africa was by tradition a continent given over to a
communal way of life. Hence it was readily assumed that it would have no
great difficulty in taking over co-operative systems evolved in Europe. There
was a great deal of similarity, it was felt, between the solidarity displayed by
the members of European co-operatives and mutual benefit societies and the
solidarity characteristic of the traditional African way of life, the latter being
in fact no more than a simplified version of the former.
This assumption was not only over-optimistic but also quite unfounded,
as we shall shortly see; but it led the colonial Powers to introduce all kinds of
co-operative systems and mutual benefit societies into Africa, from the simplest
to the most complex. Let us take France, as just one example. As early
as 1893, French legislation gave recognition to native provident societies jis
"private companies of recognised public usefulness". Their primary aim was
to store grain when the harvest was good, so that the seed might be sown and
the people fed during lean years. The system was improved in 1910 with the
creation of provident societies. At first, people were free to join or not as
they pleased; later (1915) membership became compulsory. The aim of these
bodies was to meet people's needs with regard to credit, the collection, processing and sale of produce, the creation of schools and health services, communications, and so on.
These bodies were subject to official administrative trusteeship, their
executive organs being presided over by the local representatives of the
governors. They were supported by a whole series of official, semi-official
and private bodies set up with the aim of inciting the peasantry, freely or under
supervision, to improve their farming methods and to raise their standard of
living from every point of view.
Among the bodies which were subject to a fair degree of supervision,
mention should be made of the Service of Peasant Economy (Service du paysannat) set up in Algeria in 1936, and the Council of Peasant Economy (Conseil
du paysannat), created in Morocco in 1944. The first of these worked through
the Secteurs d'amélioration rurale (SAR), the second through the Secteurs
de modernisation du paysannat (SMP). In both, the peasant was initiated
into modern farming techniques and also had to honour a number of
obligations. The SAR farmers, for example, had to follow a pre-arranged
crop programme, employ only family labour, and sell their harvests
to the native providejit society, less that part of it required for domestic
consumption.1
1
For further information about SARs and SMPs, see Margaret Digby: Co-operatives
and Land Use, Agricultural Development Paper, No. 61 (Rome, FAO, 1957), pp. 82-86.
362
Africa
The Rural Development Mutual Benefit Societies (Sociétés mutuelles de
développement rural—SMDR) created in French West Africa in 1955 formed
a kind of transition stage between administrative trusteeship and co-operative
self-management; they were in fact designed to evolve little by little into cooperatives. At least two-thirds of the members of their councils were elected
administrators, and the aim was that, in time, management responsibility
should pass to the peasants' representatives. However, it seems (according
to Yves Goussault) that certain clauses (appointment of a director by the
Government, ex-officio right of technicians, general counsellors and certain
tribal chiefs to participate in the councils' work) proved fatal to the SMDRs,
which thanks to their financial independence speedily became instruments of
political pressure, with or without the agreement of the administrative
authority. 1
The development of bodies in which membership was optional varied
considerably. The co-operative movement, for example, made hardly any
impact on the rural native. In North Africa, according to Jacques Marsan,
"the co-operative movement grew exclusively among the European farming
community. Traditional agriculture remained untouched. Jn fact, the
authorities never tried to encourage co-operation among the indigenous peasantry, which remained subject without restriction to the system of provident associations." 2 As regards Black Africa, the same author observes that attempts
have frequently been made to translate to Africa the techniques of free organisation as devised and successfully used by European peasants and workers.
"But no matter who promoted or took part in such schemes—Europeans or
Africans—most of these attempts proved a failure." 2 Something, however,
will remain of the work done by the national credit associations created from
] 949 onwards in Black Africa and Madagascar in an attempt to discover a form
of organisation more consonant with African rural needs and potentialities.
The mutual benefit societies set up as part of this movement proved quite
successful wherever commercial agriculture had already taken firm roots.
This was the case in the coffee and cocoa plantation areas in Cameroon, Togo
and the Ivory Coast, and also in those parts of Dahomey where cotton, tobacco,
and castor-oil plants are grown. In other countries, the mutual benefit credit
movement has encountered numerous difficulties which may be attributed to
the low standard of living and lack of technical skills of the local people.
Admittedly, these experiments have been begun too recently for us yet to
expect any notable results.
1
Yves Goussault: L'animation rurale dans les pays de l'Afrique francophone (Geneva,
ILO, 1970), p. 3.
* Jacques Marsan: Le crédit mutualiste dans l'agriculture africaine, Notes et études documentaires, No. 3073 (Paris, 16 March 1964), p. 4.
363
Agricultural organisations and development
Since independence, and despite the difficulties caused by the departure of
European administrators, the African countries have pursued very similar
policies, often bound up with plans for "integrated" agricultural development
(settlement combined with credit and marketing operations, etc.). It is likely
that such schemes will prove reasonably successful in areas where a monetary
economy is already established or being introduced.1 There can be no doubt
that on the modern plantation, the administration of credit and the collection
and marketing of produce are facilitated by the fact that the plantation is
already organised with the market in view. This accounts for the immediate
success of the first mutual benefit credit co-operatives set up in 1955 in the
coffee- and cocoa-growing areas of Cameroon. The unions of co-operatives
for the processing and marketing of produce, created from 1947 onwards
(COBAFRUIT in the Ivory Coast, UNIBACAM and UCCAO in Cameroon
for bananas and Arabica coffee) have been equally successful. Albert Meister
has shown that the position in eastern Africa is much the same; collection and
marketing co-operatives have been set up in all the areas where produce is
grown on a large scale for export.2 Meister's observations bear out what
Paul Trappe said at the same time: "It is remarkable how in the Englishspeaking countries the co-operatives deal almost exclusively with the marketing
of produce." 3 John C. de Wilde expresses a similar view, emphasising the
dangers of an excessive proliferation of activities within co-operatives:
The functions that co-operatives have generally shown a capacity to handle are
the buying, bulking, grading, storage and simple processing of farm products.
Once they handle such operations with some success there is always a strong temptation to take on functions which involve excessively complicated management or which
can be discharged with equal or greater efficiency by others. In Tanzania, for example,
it seems to us that the Victoria Federation of Co-operative Unions, which undoubtedly
has a record of impressive accomplishments in some respects, had rapidly assumed
a crushing responsibility for a wide variety of tasks including the management of
ginneries, rice mills, sisal factories, the purchase and sale of fertilisers, the administration of credit, the operation of a largefleetof tractors, etc. Such rapid expansion can
easily produce inefficiency. Moreover, it can produce a bureaucracy with a quasiindependent management which is no longer responsive to the rank-and-file members
and from which the latter feel alienated. This danger may become particularly
1
For the development of co-operative policies after independence, see especially Lucien
Schmandt: "Panorama de l'action coopérative dans les pays d'expression française d'Afrique
et de Madagascar", Revue des études coopératives (Paris), No. 124, 1961, pp. 23-36; "Cooperation in French-Speaking African Countries", Year Book of Agricultural Co-operation,
1963, op. cit., pp. 207-215.
2
See Albert Meister: Le développement économique de l'Afrique orientale (Paris, Presses
Universitaires de France, 1966), Ch. III.
3
Paul Trappe: Les coopératives en Afrique au sud du Sahara (Berne, 1965), p. 6. See
also Paul Trappe: Die Entwicklungsfunktion des Genossenschaftswesens am Beispiel ostafrikanischer Stämme, Soziologische Texte, No. 31 (Neuwied-am-Rhein, Verlag Hermann Luchterhand, 1966).
364
Africa
acute with the development of a pyramidal organisational structure of several layers
including not only primary
societies and unions, but also regional and national
federations of unions.1
In fact, in both eastern and western Africa, the development of the cooperative movement concerns only a tiny proportion of the total population.
In Cameroon, thefigureis 1 per cent; in Guinea, 2.4 per cent; in Kenya, 3 per
cent; in Uganda, 4 per cent; in Tanganyika and Senegal, 5 per cent; in Mali,
8 per cent. In the other countries thefigurestands at 1 per cent or thereabouts.2
Thesefiguresshow the extent to which the modern co-operative movement has
so far affected the African countryside. In fact, the movement remains limited
to commercial agriculture, which has made little or no impact on subsistence
agriculture of the traditional kind. What, then, are the obstacles to modernisation in this branch of agriculture, to which the great majority of Africans
belong ?
These obstacles fall into two main categories. Some are inherent in the
nature of African society; others arise because attempts are made to introduce into African society systems which do not fit.
We have already briefly described the main features of the traditional system
of land usage in Africa, and the social, economic and religious implications of
this system must now be our point of departure if we wish to understand how
the African reacts to Western forms of co-operation. The co-operative
movement as it exists today presupposes three things in particular: freedom
to choose whether one wishes to join or not, the sharing of risks and profits,
and internal democracy. None of these three fundamental principles is
characteristic of traditional African society, and this fact constitutes the basic
obstacle to the introduction of the co-operative system. In Europe, a young
person reaching the age of 21 becomes legally and morally responsible
for his decisions; in Africa, he remains for ever subject to a complicated
hierarchy of age and rank, and in so far as this is true he may not join a cooperative of his own free will. Because a father decides for his son, and an old
man for a younger one, it is difficult to introduce the principle "one man,
one vote". Lastly, the system of land and crop apportionment often runs
counter to an equal distribution of risks and profits.
During recent years many authors (amongst them Jean-Claude Reverdy,
M. M. Cusenier, Gabriel Gosselin, Pierre Bourdieu, Jean-Marie Texier,
L. V. Thomas and Marguerite Camboulives) have investigated the problems
arising from attempts to introduce modified co-operative systems which would
1
de Wilde, op. cit., pp. 216-217.
See Henri Desroches: "Coopératismes africains — jalons inductifs d'une recherche
comparée", Archives internationales de sociologie de la coopération (Paris), No. 16, 1964,
p. 141.
2
365
Agricultural organisations and development
encounter less resistance than systems of the classical European kind. The
approach differs somewhat from author to author, but all agree as to where the
principal obstacles lie because they crop up time and again in every analysis.
A major difficulty, which all thesTauthors vigorously stress, is the way in
which, in African society, a man's role in life and the obligations he assumes
vary with his age. Jean-Claude Reverdy investigated these matters among
the Serer people of Senegal early in the 1960s. He writes:
Be he young or old, the son must always respect and obey his father. He can
do nothing of any moment—join a co-operative, buy seed, fertilisers, equipment—
without first formally approaching his father for permission
In the society
under investigation, there seems to be no place for relationships of the co-operative
type
It seems impossible at the present time to apply the principle "one man,
one vote". It would not only be quite unacceptable; it would not even be understood. A member of a co-operative, unless very old and highly respected, could cast
a vote only if allowed to do so by his father or elder brother. He could certainly
never vote against the person who had invited him to express his views.1
In a more recent publication, the same author considers what has been
achieved by a co-operative set up in Serer country:
In the native village, any attempt to set up an organisation of a co-operative kind
(with all it implies in the way of novel social relations) encounters formidable difficulties. The two basic principles of the co-operative movement, "one for all and all
for one" and "one man, one vote", have hardly any meaning for the villager.
Certainly, he knows what solidarity means, but he interprets it in a different way.
Solidarity exists only within certain well-defined social patterns, and only between
people who are related, or are of the same age, for example. The idea that all are
born equal runs counter to all traditional teachings. Indeed, it is the direct negation
of a stable situation deriving from the fact that the living are responsible to the spirits
of their ancestors. Thus, far from having completely upset the established order in
the village, the model of social relationships offered by the co-operative has been
understood in a different sense by the villagers, and modified until it resembles the
things with which they are familiar. It has, in fact, been divested of its original
content. Apart from the fact that sales to the co-operative have increased, almost
nothing has really happened in the village since the co-operative was founded—at
any rate nothing which could be interpreted as the first fruits of development.2
In a thesis on the Serer peasants, M. M. Cusenier comes to similar conclusions :
Joining a co-operative implies a personal decision. It bears no resemblance to
the process whereby a man enters traditional society. A man is a member of a
certain age-group, of a certain clan; he does not himself elect to become a member.
'Jean-Claude Reverdy: Approche sociologique du milieu serer (Aix-en-Provence, Centre
africain des sciences humaines appliquées, 1963), p. 10.
* Jean-Claude Reverdy: Une société rurale au Sénégal — les structures foncières familiales
et villageoises des Serer, op. cit., p. 94.
366
Africa
Nor does he decide when such momentous events in his life as circumcision, or marriage, will take place. The group takes all the requisite decisions for him. Membership of the group is a source of strength, and this he deeply appreciates. But that he
himself could somehow contribute to that strength passes his comprehension. The
co-operator,
however, is aware that his own group's strength derives from collective
action.1
L. V. Thomas offers similar observations on the concept of the vote, as
understood in the West: "Such a thing is inconceivable in an assembly in
which not everybody is entitled to speak, in which not all voices are equal, and
in which, traditionally, all decisions are jointly and unanimously taken in the
shade of the palaver tree."2
As the young men depends on his elders, so does the family bow to its
head. This has its effects on membership of a co-operative. Sometimes it is
the head of the clan or extended family, and he alone, who joins a co-operative.
The way in which the land is worked and the harvest apportioned within the
community means that any benefits accruing from the obligations undertaken by the head on behalf of the clan largely accrue to him. Gabriel Gosselin, in his study of the Bisa country in Upper Volta3, observes that in the village
"concession"*, the head of the concession alone joins the co-operative founded
by SATEC 6, and that neither his younger brothers (if belonging to the same
concession), nor the women, nor the young people are themselves individual
members of the co-operative. Because the traditions governing work in the
fields and the apportionment of harvests within the group remain unchanged
when the head joins the co-operative, the head keeps his privileged position
within the extended family, and uses it to decide how profits from the sale of
produce shall be shared. There is something to be said for these practices,
but they have their drawbacks too. As regards the advantages, Gabriel Gosselin refers to technical improvements introduced by co-operatives, increased
crop yields and higher incomes, with the result that the head of the family
or clan is more easily able to meet the needs of those who are dependent on him
(for the payment of taxes, dowries, and so on). On the other hand, the cooperative by no means upsets the old economic and social order; on the contrary, it consolidates it by reinforcing the position of the head of the concession
in so far as he becomes as it were the fulcrum of two socio-economic systems :
1
M. M. Cusenier: Les paysans serer et l'option coopérative (Ph.D. thesis) (Dakar, 1964),
p. 18.
1
L . V. Thomas: Le socialisme en Afrique (Paris, Le Livre africain, 1966), Vol. I, p. 140.
* Gosselin, op. cit., Ch. I, pp. 19-44.
4
The "concession" is a fanning unit within the village, employing the members of a
fraction of a clan or persons in a certain line of descent, and embracing sometimes one,
but more often several, extended families. Gosselin, op. cit., Ch. I, Part 2.
6
Technical Assistance and Co-operation Company Responsible for Rural Development.
367
Agricultural organisations and development
not only is he the privileged head of the traditional social system within the
concession, but also, at the same time, he wields even more authority by
reason of the fact that he is the only one to play any part at all in the
modern monetary system which the co-operative represents. The juxtaposition
of the two systems, far from introducing a democratic ferment into the
community, makes its members feel even less secure and even more dependent
on the head. Gabriel Gosselin makes the point very clearly:
By the very fact of coming into a developing commercial circuit, the head of a
concession is no longer automatically, as he formerly was, the manager of the collective interests. In a subsistence economy, he could not but be at the pinnacle of a
pyramid in a circuit starting from and returning to the basic workers. Neither the
work nor the produce could be fundamentally diverted from its social purpose. In
a monetary economy, on the other hand, protection of the collective interests is no
longer entrusted to a system but to a person, with all the risks that such a situation
entails. The satisfaction of the various needs of the dependants now becomes subject
to the goodwill of the head of the concession or even of the head of the extended
family unit. Some heads may go on accomplishing their traditional task with the
new means at their disposal. There are, however, others who may be tempted to use
them for personal ends, and the temptation to do so is a strong o n e . . . .
The sense of being dependent grows among the young people with the growing
personal economic role of the heads of concessions. Perceiving—albeit imperfectly
and indeed unconsciously—how much their situation is becoming increasingly
dependent on the goodwill of a single person, they suffer from an increased sense of
insecurity. Nothing better explains their desire to emigrate to the Ivory Coast or
to Ghana to earn money and to marry upon their return. This is also the essential
reason for a growing reluctance to take part in collective forms of work. As has
already been shown, it is to all interest and purposes only the elders who benefit from
this kind of work.1
It might be thought that this state of affairs exists in Black Africa only,
and that in North Africa, where Moslem law predominates, it would be easier
to take advantage of a tradition of solidarity to develop a co-operative movement. However, in a study of traditional ways of life in North Africa, with
especial reference to Algeria, Pierre Bourdieu observes a difference in kind
between :
mutual assistance, as a duty incumbent on persons linked by ties of blood (real or
imaginary)—a duty encouraged by tradition—and co-operation, as collective labour
with some abstract aim in view. As regards mutual assistance, the community exists
already before undertaking any particular task (although in the performance of that
task it may experience a heightening of its sense of solidarity). In co-operation,
the group is brought together by the common hope of gain, and its solidarity may exist
merely by virtue of a contract; it may, therefore, cease to exist once the task has been
performed and the contract ceases to be binding. Hence it is entirely wrong to consider that their traditions of solidarity render the Algerian peasantry particularly
receptive to systems of a co-operative or collectivist kind.2
1
2
368
Gosselin, op. cit., pp. 39 and 40.
Bourdieu, op. cit., p. 31.
Africa
The examples given seem to show, in short, that misapprehensions concerning a supposed^imilarity between traditional and co-operative solidarity.
are attributable to. the Jact that__tb? word co-operation is interpreted in top
wide a sense. It may be thought that man, as a social being, is committed by
his very nature to practise some form of co-operation, and that any kind of
mutual aid—whether obligatory or voluntary—constitutes co-operation. In
this sense, certain kinds of mutual assistance practised in Africa may be interpreted as being equivalent to "co-operatives by age-groups", to "district
co-operatives", or to "co-operative ways of ensuring that essential but disagreeable tasks are carried out", to quote B. Guttmann. 1 But if we take this
line, we shall ipso facto have given up the attempt to understand why co-opera- ;
tives on modern Westernlines encounter such resistance in traditional societies, [
for this attitude presupposes that Western "co-operation" is merely a prolongation, an advanced form, of something already existing in African society.
If, on the other hand, we realise that co-operation, in the modern meaning
of the word, is a recent Western concept which, while taking advantage of
certain co-operative instincts inherent in human nature, demands the acceptance of certain rules (acceptance of a majority vote, a sharing of risks, etc.)—
rules which are not necessarily grounded in human nature and which may often j
run counter to it—then we shall understand that there is a qualitative difference /
between mutual aid of the traditional sort and modern co-operation.
There is a certain element of risk inherent in any attempt to associate these
two concepts, especially in stable, highly cohesive societies. In such circumstances, the mixture of new and old may in fact consolidate, rather than
change, traditional social and economic relationships. After a lengthy inquiry
into traditional community institutions, Jean-Marie Texier emphasises the
dangers of utilising traditional and modern machinery simultaneously:
It has been maintained that the best way of tackling the problem is to combine
the two ways of organising labour—the collective and the individual, the communal
and the co-operative—until such time as, by a kind of internal sabotage, the growth
of education and the development of a wage-earning class have undermined the traditional binding links within the community. This process, it might be thought, going
hand-in-hand with the emergence of distinctive social classes, would inevitably lead
to the emancipation of those who, in the traditional community, have no voice—the
young men, the young couples, the women—thus creating conditions more conducive
to the introduction of modern ways of organising society founded on social relationships of an entirely different order. There is clearly little room for manoeuvre, but
even so these tactics do entail a danger, namely, that the expected development may
proceed more slowly than the strengthening of the traditional way of life. If this
happens, there is a risk that the younger generations, forced to wait for the benefits
' B . Guttmann: Das Recht der Dschgga (Munich, 1926), pp. 341, 347 and 348.
369
Agricultural organisations and development
of modernisation, may want to seize for themselves the advantages kept by the generations which have preceded them, thus perpetuating (until a violent change occurs) the
very state of affairs we were so anxious to abolish.1
The reason why these obstacles have sometimes been overlooked in experiments undertaken in Africa is that one of two things had to be done.
Either co-operatives had to be set up within a market agriculture (a relatively
easy task), or els
Preview of large file truncated