Socio-economic differentiation in the post-communist rural Baltics: the case of three kolkhozes

ABSTRACT

This paper uses longitudinal quantitative data to examine socio-economic differentiation in the rural Baltic areas after decollectivization. It argues that the rural social structure in the post-Soviet Baltics is best determined by two criteria: source of income (income from farming entrepreneurship or income from salaries) and land holdings. Four rural groups are identified: people getting their main income from farming can be differentiated into large landowners engaged in the commercial production of agricultural goods and people with small or medium-sized farms; and people earning their main income from wages can be separated into people with no farming activities and people who are still keeping small or medium-sized farms. The paper also finds that the importance of farming activities in the countryside decreases while importance of wage income tends to increase.

KEYWORDS:

• Baltic states
• socio-economic differentiation
• rural sociology
• post-Soviet
• decollectivization

Acknowledgements

This study is part of the research project “The Decollectivization of Agriculture in the Baltic Countries from a Psychological and Sociological Point of View.” The generous financial support provided by the Academy of Finland is gratefully acknowledged. The author wishes to thank Professor Ilkka Alanen for providing expert knowledge on post-Soviet rural development, as well as Terhi-Anna Wilska, Tiina Silvasti, Markku Lonkila, Martti Siisiäinen, Tapio Litmanen, Pertti Jokivuori, Ilkka Kauppinen and Marja Ylönen for their valuable comments and help in conducting this study.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Due to the limited space of this paper it is impossible to fully present the process and consequences of the rural reforms. For those who are interested, Ruutsoo (2004) has written an exhaustive historical analysis of the Baltic rural transition, while Alanen (2004b) has presented a critique of World Bank’s concept and agricultural transformation in the countries. For the comprehensive comparison of land and privatization reforms in the post-communist space, see Blacksell and Born (2002), Lerman, Csaki, and Feder (2002, 2004), Rozelle and Johan (2004), Swinnen, Buckwell, and Mathijs (1997) among many others.

2. Alanen et al. (2001) suggest a threefold status structure within Soviet collective farms and differentiates between the “closed board,” “middle class,” and “the rest.” Gorton and White (Gorton and White 2003), on the other hand, identify four labor types: farm directors, professional agricultural employees, lower skilled agricultural labor, and non-agricultural workers. Wegren et al. (2006) separate between farm managers, farm specialists, farm workers and retirees.

3. The original selection of the collective farms took place in the early 1990s. Kolkhozes were chosen based on the personal contacts of the researchers, which facilitated the accessibility to the areas and people in the unstable period of transformation.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Rasa Žakevičiūtė

Rasa Žakevičiūtė is a PhD candidate in the Department of Social Sciences and Philosophy, at the University of Jyväskylä in Finland. She is writing her thesis on socio-economic differentiation in rural areas of post-Soviet Lithuania. Her main research interests are in rural sociology, social stratification, demography, and post-Soviet transition.