MONGABAY.COM
Mongabay.com seeks to raise interest in and appreciation of wild lands and wildlife, while examining the impact of emerging trends in climate, technology, economics, and finance on conservation and development (more)
WEEKLY NEWSLETTER
|
|
Kyrgyzstan
Index
The condition of agriculture in Kyrgyzstan is determined by the state's
continuing control of production, marketing, and prices, as well as by the
republic-wide specialization mandated by the former Soviet Union to
promote interdependence among the republics. Most agricultural production
continues to occur in the state farm and collective farm systems, which
are slowly being privatized. In the early post-Soviet years, government
policy encouraged self-sufficiency in cereal grains to provide food
security. Maintaining such self-sufficiency, however, has entailed
continued government regulation such as compulsory marketing, which in
turn has discouraged the development of diversified farm enterprise. The
main agricultural regions are in the Fergana Valley (Osh and Jalal-Abad
provinces), in the northern Chu and Talas valleys, and in the Ysyk-Köl
basin in the northeast. In the early 1990s, income declined steadily in
both state-run and privatized agricultural enterprises.
Agricultural Land
Kyrgyzstan has about 1.4 million hectares of arable land, which is only
about 7 percent of the nation's total area. More than 70 percent of the
arable area depends on irrigation for its productivity. In the Soviet
period, only about 4 percent of agricultural land was owned privately,
although private plots contributed a much higher percentage of overall
output, especially in fruits and vegetables. In 1994 only an additional 6
percent of agricultural land had passed to some form of private ownership.
The privatization of land was a difficult issue that was contested between
President Akayev and more conservative government officials. The latter
reflected the Soviet-era view that land should be common property
protected and disposed of only by the state. More immediately, these
officials represented the interests of state farm administrators, whose
enterprises suffered greatly from post-Soviet economic shocks and
redistribution of resources.
In 1992 and 1993, the land redistribution program also was hindered by
poor cooperation between the national and local governments and by lack of
clarity in the program outline. Nevertheless, by early 1993 some 165 of
the 470 existing state and collective farms had been reorganized or
privatized into about 17,000 peasant enterprises, cooperatives, or peasant
associations. However, the state retained control over vital agricultural
inputs and market distribution channels, meaning that private land users
often lacked material support and that price controls limited the
profitability of private farms. The privatization program was halted in
early 1993, and a more comprehensive reform program was developed. In
early 1995, the government offered debt relief to state and collective
farms that expedited the availability of land to private farmers.
According to privatization law, state agricultural assets are
distributed according to a share system in which all citizens have the
right to a garden plot, but only individuals in the rural population have
the right to occupy land and other agricultural assets formerly owned by
state and collective farms. Recipients of shares can maintain the property
as part of the collective, transfer it to a cooperative, or establish an
individual farm. In the early 1990s, the former alternative was much more
popular because of the perception that larger units offered greater
security in a time of financial uncertainty. Private ownership of land
remained illegal in 1995, but use rights are guaranteed for forty-nine
years, and use rights can be bought, sold, and used as collateral for
loans. In 1994 a new decree on land reform expanded and clarified the
legal basis for the use and exchange of land and improved the
administration of land privatization, which is the responsibility of the
Ministry of Agriculture and Food.
Agricultural Production
In the post-Soviet years, Kyrgyzstan has continued to emphasize
production of raw materials for industrial processing, a role assigned to
the republic in the Soviet system. An estimated 62 percent of the
population is rural (see Population, this ch.). The chief crops are fodder
crops, wheat, barley, and cotton. Other agricultural products are sugar
beets, tobacco, fruit, vegetables, and silk (see table 13, Appendix). In
1994 the largest crop harvests were of wheat (611,000 tons), barley
(300,000 tons), potatoes (288,000 tons), and tomatoes (160,000 tons).
The chief agricultural use of land is pasturage for livestock, mainly
sheep, goats, and cattle, the tending of which is the traditional vocation
of the Kyrgyz people. An estimated 83 percent of land in agricultural use
is mountainous pastureland. In the 1980s, livestock production accounted
for about 60 percent of the value of the country's agricultural output;
such production included mutton, beef, eggs, milk, wool, and thoroughbred
horses. In 1987, when herds reached their largest numbers, about twice as
much grain was used for animal feed as for human consumption. However, the
prices of and demand for livestock products have dropped significantly in
the 1990s relative to those of crops. For this reason and because
Soviet-era herds had been supported largely by cheap imported grain, in
1994 livestock contributed less than half the total value of Kyrgyzstan's
agricultural earnings. In 1994 the most important livestock products were
cow's milk (750,000 tons), beef and veal (70,000 tons), mutton and lamb
(50,000 tons), eggs (30,600 tons), wool (56,300 tons), pork products
(30,000 tons), and poultry meat (25,000 tons). All of those figures were
below the totals for the previous two years.
Agricultural Trends and Problems
The early 1990s saw many farmers turn from commercial production to
subsistence crops, a trend that hurt the country's export activities
(roughly half of its exports were agricultural in 1990) as well as the
availability of foods within Kyrgyzstan. Experts believe that Kyrgyzstan's
main agricultural problems are inappropriate and slow-moving reforms
(especially land redistribution), intrusive bureaucratic regulations, poor
availability of credit, and delayed payments to farmers for their crops.
More immediately, both water and fertilizers have been in short supply
since the end of the Soviet Union. In addition, Kyrgyzstan's agriculture
uses an average of less than 50 percent of the amount of pesticides used
by agriculture in the Western nations.
In 1994 the agriculture sector was in the fourth and most difficult year
of a major decline that included reduced output, isolation from commercial
markets, decreased earnings, and a deteriorating natural resource base
(see table 6, Appendix). In 1994 total agricultural output dropped by 17
percent, and the decline in marketed and processed output was
substantially greater because of the trend toward subsistence farming.
Production ceased to increase at about the time of the collapse of the
Soviet system, an event that initiated the loss of markets and trading
partners, the loss of transfer payments from Moscow, and a condition of
general monetary instability. The national government did not address
these problems effectively in the first years of independence; in fact,
government marketing quotas, price controls, and trade restrictions
exacerbated the decline. By restricting farmers' marketing and pricing
practices, the government in effect levied a tax on agriculture that
redistributed income to other sectors of society. National reforms in land
tenure, farm organization, and the financial system, together with
privatization of services, were eroded by the continued authority of local
officials to interfere in administration of those reforms.
A key agricultural resource, pastureland, was degraded severely by the
Soviet-era practice of mandating livestock populations too large for
available pasturage on state farms and by post-Soviet transfer of
livestock from inefficient collective and state farms to private ownership
without limiting grazing rights on common pastures. By 1994 over-grazing
had led to serious erosion of much pasture land (see Environmental
Problems, this ch.).
In 1994 a continuing controversy over granting central bank credits to
support farmers during the growing season again made financial support a
dubious proposition. Without such support, planting and fertilization
would be severely limited because farmers in many rural areas lack
financial resources to buy seed and fertilizer. On the other hand, such
credits have always been a threat to the government's overall economic
program. For several reasons, including the state's failure to pay farmers
on time for their crops, the agricultural sector's bank debts increased
rapidly in the early 1990s. This situation was the basis of arguments that
the government could not afford to pay agricultural credits.
Data as of March 1996
|
|