QUAESTIONES GEOGRAPHICAE 33(2) • 2014 AGRARIAN-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF AGRICULTURAL HOLDINGS IN POLAND AND EAST GERMANY: SELECTED ELEMENTS OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 1 2 1 ALEKSANDRA JEZIERSKA-THÖLE , JÖRG JANZEN , ROMAN RUDNICKI 1 Department of Spatial Management and Tourism, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń, Poland 2 Institute of Geographical Sciences, Free University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany Manuscript received: July 31, 2013 Revised version: March 6, 2014 JEZIERSKA-THÖLE A., JANZEN J., RUDNICKI R., 2014. Agrarian-economic structure of agricultural holdings in Poland and East Germany: Selected elements of comparative analysis. Quaestiones Geographicae 33(2), Bogucki Wydawnictwo Nau- kowe, Poznań, pp. 87–101, 4 tables, 8 figs. DOI 10.2478/quageo-2014-0018, ISSN 0137-477X. ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to determine differences in the development of farms in Poland against the agri- culture of East Germany, and to show areas with similar conditions for development. The time range of the research covered the years 2002–2010, i.e. the stage of preparation of Polish agriculture for accession to the European Union, the implementation of pre-accession aid programmes, and the establishment and implementation of the tools of the Com- mon Agricultural Policy. To assess the level of agricultural development, natural, productive and social characteristics were adopted. Spatial variations in the analysed features were based on the variation coefficient (Vz), and the level of agricultural development, on Perkal’s index (Wi). In the analysed period the range of variation and the degree of the spatial dispersion of sub-indices changed, indicating a deepening of the polarisation processes in agriculture. The im- plementation of CAP intensified the process of specialisation and modernisation in agriculture, an example of which is the increase in the average farm size and in agricultural productivity. On the other hand, agricultural production intensified, as exemplified by a decrease in the minimum value in six of the analysed characteristics, which indicates growing disparities. KEY WORDS: agriculture, agrarian structure, crop and animal production, Poland, Germany Aleksandra Jezierska-Thöle, Roman Rudnicki, Department of Spatial Management and Tourism, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Lwowska 1, 87-100 Toruń, Poland; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Jörg Janzen, Institut für Geographische Wissenschaften, Fachrichtung Anthropogeographie, Malteserstr. 74-100, 12249 Berlin, Germany; e-mail: [email protected] Introduction and introducing the principles of environmental protection into farming. The Polish agricultural The integration of Poland with the European economy had to face new challenges of the free Union has created new conditions for the de- agricultural market, which undoubtedly con- velopment of its rural areas and agriculture. By tributed to structural changes in agriculture. The becoming a full member of the EU Poland was adoption of the European model of supporting obliged to implement the Common Agricultur- agriculture resulted in the implementation of di- al Policy (CAP), which aims to increase agri- rect subsidies with accompanying measures as cultural productivity and stabilise agricultural well as other CAP instruments financed by the markets by subsidising agricultural production Guarantee Section of the European Agricultur- 88 AlEkSANDRA JEzIERSkA-THölE, JöRG JANzEN, ROMAN RUDNICkI al Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF). As University in Toruń, funded by the DAAD and a member of the EU, Polish agriculture has im- kAAD. plemented a number of programmes aimed at improving the economy of farms and increasing their competitiveness on the common European Study area, purpose and objectives of food market. the research In the years 2004–2006, the support for Polish agriculture was granted under the direct sub- In order to capture structural changes in Pol- sidies scheme (the single area payment scheme ish agriculture and determine the nature and – SAPS – and complementary national area pay- pace of the development of agriculture, a com- ments) as well as two programmes: the Sectoral parison was made with a neighbouring country, Operational Programme “Restructuring and viz. Germany, which has a high share in the EU modernisation of the food sector and rural de- agricultural production (13.1%). The selection of velopment” and the Rural Development Plan. In East Germany for the comparative analysis was the years 2007–2013 the funding for agricultur- associated with the fact that it has similar natural, al development was obtained under the system political and historic conditions. Arable land in of direct payments and the Rural Development both Poland and Germany accounts for more than Programme (RDP), which consists of a series of half of the country’s surface area (Poland 59.7%, measures, partly continued from the previous Germany 52%). Poland and the eastern Länder of programming period (Rudnicki 2010). Those Germany belonged to the ‘eastern bloc’ states, in measures were included in four priorities: Im- different ways implementing the socialist mod- provement of the competitiveness of agriculture el of agriculture which aimed to enlarge the area and forestry, Improvement of the environment of ‘socialised’ farms as cooperatives and state and rural areas, Improvement of the quality of farms. In the former German Democratic Repub- life in rural areas, and Diversification of the rural lic (GDR) this objective was achieved, as 94.5% of economy (Obszary … 2009). agricultural land was in the socialised sector. The Following the direction of the CAP reform, the private sector accounted for a mere 5.5%. Poland Polish Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Devel- was the only country among the eastern bloc opment developed the Strategy for Agricultural states (besides the former Yugoslavia) in which Development (SAD) for the period of 2007–2013. 78% of land was kept in private ownership. Af- It defined the main problems and opportunities ter 1989, both Poland and the former GDR went for the development of Polish agriculture. The through a political transformation which evoked prioritised measure was “to improve the efficien- profound changes in the structure of agriculture. cy and profitability of farms by their modernis- There appeared new processes of privatisation of ing and changing agricultural structures” (Strate- state and cooperative farms, so far unheard of in gia ... 2005: 3). According to the strategy, farmers’ the economic history of Europe (Hoffman 1993). participation in the market of agricultural prod- The unification of Germany into a single state, ucts should also be strengthened. part of the Socio-Economic and Monetary Union, Given the above strategic goals and objectives which took place in July 1990, launched a series of the structural changes in Polish agriculture re- of measures to improve the economy of the agri- sulting from both the CAP and SAD, the research cultural sector, including the adoption of a new was conducted on the processes occurring in privatisation law and the introduction of the fi- agricultural holdings: their agrarian, social, eco- nancing system under the EU’s agricultural pol- nomic and production structure. The main aim icy (Brem 2001). In Poland, the implementation of the study was to determine the quantitative, of the Common Agricultural Policy only began qualitative and spatial nature as well as the direc- with the country’s accession to the EU in 2004. tion of change. This article also covers the results The core of the research problem is, therefore, of field studies carried out in rural areas of East a complete and accurate study of differences in Germany by students and researchers of the Free the spatial structure of farms. University in Berlin and Nicolaus Copernicus AGRARIAN-ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF AGRICUlTURAl HOlDINGS IN POlAND AND EAST GERMANY 89 Table 1. Characteristics adopted for the analysis of 2. A group of production features – expressing spatial differences in agricultural development in 2002–2010 potential crop and livestock production as well as the organisational and production ca- Sym- Characteristic bol pacity, and 3. A group of social characteristics – expressing X1 Share of agricultural land in total area (%) Share of arable land in total agricultural land the labour force potential in agriculture. X 2 (%) The choice of the indicators and research area X3 Cereal yields in dt/ha led to the delimitation of common processes in X Potato yields in dt/ha 4 agriculture and to identification of new measures X Oilseed yields in dt ha 5 designed to compensate for differences in devel- X Sugar beet yields in dt/ha 6 opment (Table 1). Cattle – livestock units per 100 ha of agricultur- X 7 al land The above features are stimulants. Then, us- ing Perkal’s method, a synthetic indicator of the X8 Pigs per 100 ha of agricultural land level of agricultural development was calculated. X9 Sheep per 100 ha of agricultural land The use of Perkal’s synthetic measure allowed ar- X10 Average size of farms in ha Number of workers on farms of 100 ha of ranging regions by a synthetic indicator, which X 11 agricultural land is a function of many variables. This method Source: own calculations based on Jasiulewicz (1998) and Rudnicki consisted of two phases: normalisation of indi- (2010) vidual measurements taken for testing and the The time horizon of the study includes the calculation of the synthetic indicator of the