You are here

Organizational-economic bases of functioning of personal peasant farms in Ukraine

The purpose of the article. The aim of the study is to develop theoretical, methodological provisions for the functioning of personal peasant farms.
When writing the research were used tack methods: analysis and synthesis in the evaluation of the level of development of private farms in Ukraine; structural-logic when designing the model structure personal farm.
Private farms of the population is a form of rural households, which results in their functions of self-survival; consumer; providing additional income; employment and self-employment; recreation; the survival of the family.
The role of PF is in the process of emergence of private sector agricultural economy is ambiguous. The characteristic features of the functioning of the owners of PF and members of their families is the freedom of economic activity, independence in making economic decisions and full economic responsibility for results of their work.
The management of PF in rural areas are largely a continuation of the activities which employees are employed in primary production. The physical operation and performance of PF depend on the specific conditions facing their owners.
In determining the socio-economic essence of PF and to assess the prospects of their development the most constructive is the functional approach. Also, it can be argued that the replacement of the leading role of one function to another will define the new nature of PF and will be of particular importance for the development of a differentiated approach to the definition of measures of state support of this activity.
Despite the heterogeneous structure of private farming it combines features of the Patriarchal peasant economy and petty commodity production.
Studies show that most inhabitants of the modern village deems it necessary to have his own farm. Individual households in the village use the provisions and conditions that are unavailable to high-value production. They differ in the intensity of labor, a certain mobility, produce the most labor-intensive products.
PF should be viewed as part of the informal economy, which is characterized by these features: a) orientation on their own resources; use of personal, informal financial services; the lack of government subsidies; minor fixed costs; b) family property in the means of labour, family control, limited pay; C) small scale of operation; small size of production; fixed working hours; personal and informal sources of credit; d) use labor-intensive technologies, family labour; d) the acquired skills of performing technological operations.
Informal, uncontrolled production plays the role of the supplementary sector is inextricably linked with the formal sector. In fact, under the low level of salaries in the agricultural enterprises the right to have additional earnings in the household ensures the reproduction of labor power.
The uniqueness of family farms is the lack of the phenomenon of net profit, and its replacement by the category of labor income when the payment is generated for the year, not the working day.
Summing up the European approach to the understanding of the role of family farms in implementing the principles of sustainable development it becomes clear that this task force became the basis of support for agricultural policy. In the above definitions there are two important points. First, it considers the activity of farms using family labour. Secondly, it limits the family farm household. From a sociological perspective, family farming is associated with family values such as tradition, continuity and commitment.
Proof of the necessity of stimulating the development of private farms in Ukraine is quite high-their role in food security of the country and the sustainable development of rural areas.
So, private farm in its current form is parcelama economy, which is based on the employment of members of rural households and the simplest of tools. The principal feature of the functioning of this form of management is to motivate activities to provide food to all its members. In the implementation of the activities of PF to the problem of providing food passes over the economic efficiency of its production.
The preservation of the PF in its present form contributes to the existing order of taxation, according to which they are not taxed on income of individuals. Paid by owners of PF land tax, because of their insignificant magnitude, does not significantly affect the efficiency of management of this legal form. Such as PF as a specific form of informal agrarian economy is realized by the majority of the rural population and affects their behavior.
Key words: private farms, functions, farm household self-sufficiency.

 

  1. 1. Svynous I.V., Ibatullin M.I. (2015). Rozvytok kooperatyvnyh zv’jazkiv pry vyrobnyctvi i zbutu produkcii' osobystymy seljans'kymy gospodarstvamy.  Innovacijna ekonomika [Development of cooperative ties in the production and sale of products by private peasant farms. Innovative economy]. No 3, pp. 180-184.
    2. Tarasov A.N. Jekonomicheskoe povedenie i jeffektivnost' lichnyh podsobnyh hozjajstv v perehodnoj jekonomike. [Economic behavior and the effectiveness of personal subsidiary plots in the transitional economy ]. URL: http://www.iet.ru/personal/agro/newslet/2_5.htm
    3. Laczka E., Szabo P. Definition of farm in the agricultural statistics of Hungary and the EU. URL: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/documents/ces/sem.44/wp.3.e.pdf.
    4. Botasheva, L.S. Lichnye podsobnye hozjajstva kak faktor obespechenija ustojchivogo razvitija sel'skih territorij regiona.[ Personal subsidiary plots as a factor in ensuring sustainable development of rural areas in the region.]. URL: http://uecs.ru/uecs–27–272010/item/372–2011–04–04–08–35–33.
    5. Kretinin S.V. Karl Kautskij (1854−1938): opyt pereosmyslenija.  Novaja i novejshaja istorija. [Karl Kautsky (1854-1938): the experience of rethinking. New and recent history.]. 1995. No1, pp. 141-160.
    6. Praust R.Je. Issledovanie semejnyh hozjajstv predprinimatel'skogo tipa. Jekonomika sel'skogo hozjajstva Rossii. [Research of family farms of an entrepreneurial type. Economics of Agriculture in Russia.]. 2000. No 9, pp. 7–8.
    7. Chajanov A.V. (1989). Krest'janskoe hazjajstvo. [Peasant farming.]. M.: Jekonomika, 492 p.
    8. Chajanov A.V. (1991). Osnovnye idei i formy organizacii sel'skohozjajstvennoj kooperacii. [Basic ideas and forms of organization of agricultural cooperation.]. M. : Nauka,. 454 p.
    9. FAO (2013) 2014 IYFFFAOConceptNote (ModifiedMay 9, 2013). Available at: http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/ templates/nr/sustainability_pathways/docs/2014_IYFF _FAO_Concept_Note.pdf.
    10. EuropeanCommission (2013). Agriculture and Rural Development Family Farming. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/family-farming/index_en.htm.
    11. Gasson, R. andErrington, E. (1993).TheFarmFamilyBusiness. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
    12. FAMILY FARMING IN EUROPE: CHALLENGES AND PROSPECTS. URL: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ RegData/etudes/note/join/2014/529047/IPOL-AGRI_NT%282014%29529047_EN.pdf
    13. Möllers, J. andBuchenrieder, G. (2011). Effects of Rural Non-farm Employment on Household Welfare and Income Distribution of Small Farms in Croatia. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 50 (3), pp. 217-235.
    14. CounciloftheEuropeanUnion (26 July 2013). Family farming prospect sin th context of globalization, Discussionpaper. 12786/13, AGRI516. URL: http://static.eu2013.lt/uploads/ documents/Programos/Discussion%20docu-ments/Info rmal_AGRI_DP.PDF.
AttachmentSize
PDF icon ishchenkosvynous_2-2017.pdf645.32 KB