The Socioeconomic and Cultural Significance of Food Gardening in the Vladimir Region of Russia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE SOCIOECONOMIC AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF FOOD GARDENING IN THE VLADIMIR REGION OF RUSSIA ________________________________________________________ A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri–Columbia ________________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy ________________________________________________________ by LEONID SHARASHKIN Dr. Michael A. Gold, Dissertation Supervisor MAY 2008 The undersigned, appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled THE SOCIOECONOMIC AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF FOOD GARDENING IN THE VLADIMIR REGION OF RUSSIA presented by Leonid Sharashkin, a candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. ________________________________________________________ Dr. Michael A. Gold ________________________________________________________ Dr. Harold E. Garrett ________________________________________________________ Dr. William B. Kurtz ________________________________________________________ Dr. Elizabeth Barham ________________________________________________________ Dr. Mary K. Hendrickson ________________________________________________________ Dr. James S. Rikoon To Anastasia and to millions of Russian gardening families who are perpetuating the ancient tradition of living in union with Mother Earth. “The Earth needs our help. Tenderness and a loving attitude give it strength. The Earth may be large, but it is most sensitive. And it feels the tender caress of even a single human hand. Oh, how it feels and anticipates this touch! “There was a time in Russia when the Earth was deemed to belong to everyone and therefore nobody in particular. So people did not think of it as their own. Then changes came in Russia. They began giving out tiny private plots to people to go with their dachas. “It was no coincidence at all that these plots were extremely small, too small to culti- vate with mechanised equipment. But Russians, yearning for contact with the Earth, took to them with joyous enthusiasm. They went to people both poor and rich. Because nothing can break Man’s connection with the Earth! “After obtaining their little plots of land, people intuitively felt their worth. And mil- lions of pairs of human hands began touching the Earth with love. With their hands, you understand, not with mechanised tools, lots and lots of people touched the ground caress- ingly on these little plots. And the Earth felt this, it felt it very much. It felt the blessing touch of each individual hand upon it. And the Earth found new strength to carry on.” — Vladimir Megré, The Ringing Cedars of Russia ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS When I started researching the outwardly simple question of how and why the majority of Russian families were growing their own food, the project did not seem to promise any big discoveries. Indeed, I already knew that over 50% of Russia’s agricultural output was coming from family garden-plots. That already sounded spectacular enough to overshadow any new findings I might come up with. However, the research did yield many results that — apart from their importance in the academic field — were also deeply transforma- tive for me on both the professional and personal level. I thank my advisors for their guid- ance and support which made this experience and dissertation possible. My sincere gratitude to Dr. Michael A. Gold, my advisor, for his unparalleled support, insightful guidance, trust, patience, and commitment to researching and promoting Earth- friendly agricultural and agroforestry practices. To Dr. Harold E. (“Gene”) Garrett for bringing me to Missouri in 2003, and for his end- less support and encouragement ever since. To Dr. Elizabeth Barham, for her support, sincere interest in my research, and for help- ing me discover the momentous intellectual heritage of the Russian agricultural economist Alexander Chaianov, who has been so thoroughly forgotten back in his home country. To Dr. Mary Hendrickson, Dr. William Kurtz and Dr. Sandy Rikoon for their help, encouragement, and guidance. My gratitude and appreciation to 1,200 families of the Vladimir region of Russia, for tak- ing their time to participate in the survey, and for their beautiful and productive gardens. To Evgenii Polkovnikov and Andrei Kuzmin, directors of the non-profit Independent Agency for Regional Research (NARI) in Vladimir, Russia, and to their staff, for their ii highly professional help with the field part of my research, and to my 22 interviewers for their hard work, timeliness and dedication to get to even the most remote rural interview sites through the snow and cold. My special thanks also go to the Russian entrepreneur and writer Vladimir Megré who, through his unique and insightful books, has illuminated for me the cultural and spiritual significance of connectedness to the Earth in the Russian tradition. This work was funded through the University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this dissertation are those of the author. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . ii LIST OF TABLES . ix LIST OF FIGURES . xiii ABSTRACT . xvi CHAPTER 1. ANCIENT ROOTS, MODERN SHOOTS: RUSSIA’S FAMILY AGRICULTURE . 1 INTRODUCTION . 1 Definition of key terms . 1 Why study household agriculture? . 6 Research objectives and methods . 9 PRIMARY AGRICULTURE: PRESENT PLACE OF HOUSEHOLD GARDENING IN RUSSIA’S ECONOMY . 10 Two agricultures . 10 Key macroeconomic characteristics . 12 Productivity: share of GDP and agricultural output . 12 Use of land resources . 15 Labor: participation in gardening . 27 Other economic characteristics . 32 Subsistence vs. market . 32 Produce sharing networks and food security . 34 Other economic characteristics . 37 Conclusion: household agriculture vs. commercial agriculture . 39 BENEFITS OF HOUSEHOLD FOOD GARDENING . 41 Natural resource, agricultural, and sustainability dimension . 43 Soil conservation . 43 Decreasing chemical pollution . 44 iv Wildlife and biodiversity . 46 Natural resources conservation . 46 The human dimension . 47 Satisfying the psychological need for interaction with plants and nature . 47 Health and physical well-being . 50 Personal self-esteem and independence . 51 Tradition . 52 Hobby and recreation . 53 Social interaction . 53 Community development . 54 Children development and education . 54 Other benefits . 55 THE CULTURAL DIMENSION . 56 Culture and agriculture . 56 Definitions: culture and values . 60 Definition of culture . 61 Definition of values . 65 Cultural values . 65 Spiritual values . 66 A THOUSAND-YEAR WAR ON SUBSISTENCE . 68 Why do history and tradition matter? . 68 Food, freedom and authority . 70 Deep antiquity: before 9th century CE . 73 The enslavement of Slavs: 10th to 19th century . 78 The peasant economy and the agrarian question in the 19th – early 20th centuries 91 The agrarian question: Marxists vs. Chaianov . 93 Agrarian values — the cultural dimension of peasantry . 97 Soviet period: collectivization and persistence of small-scale private gardens . 100 Chaianov’s utopia . 102 Subsidiary plot and dacha cultivation (1920s to present) . 103 Post-Soviet period and to the present . 108 CONCLUSION . 111 v CHAPTER 2. HOUSEHOLD GARDENING IN THE VLADIMIR REGION . 112 RESEARCH PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES . 112 Research purpose . 113 Research objectives . 113 Research questions . 114 Participation in food gardening . 114 Economic dimension . 114 Agricultural dimension . 115 Socio-cultural dimension . 116 RESEARCH APPROACHES . 116 Quantitative vs. qualitative . ..