Family farms in the аgro-industrial production of the Russian Federation: the institutional aspect
Family farms represent a business pattern of mixed agricultural production, and are a determining subject of food security in the current conditions of the Russian economy. The specifics of agro-industrial production (videlicet, heavy dependence on natural factors) determine the difference between theoretical approaches to defining the essence of farming, its place in the institutional structure of agricultural production. Economic literature does not fully cover the analysis of the institutional bases and the mechanisms of family farms functioning. The research is focused on the analysis of a family farm as an institution of the system of agricultural production and the identification of the institutional foundations for its development in the Russian economy. It is found that the personification of family members' relations determines the formation of a small economy with following determining characteristics: commitment to traditions, localization of transactions, high degree of flexibility and stability, social orientation of investments, propensity for innovation. The basic rules and mechanisms of family farm functioning are determined based on the methodology of institutional design. The major factors (videlicet, legal system governing the agro-industrial production, including the land code; specification and protection of property rights; obstacles to entering the factor markets, distribution of their products, credit markets; price disparity; public policies model, et cetera, environmental conditions) and methods (excessive labor intensity of family members (mostly unpaid labor because of the inability to hire workers due to low income and an underdeveloped local labor market), reduced capital costs due to the relatively low earning capacity, emphasis on the efficient use of land resources, ecology, secondary employment outside agro-industrial production in order to ensure optimal use of the human capital of the family) and the implementation of the family farm business model. The paper presents the author's interpretation of the definition of the family farm, which is identified as a self-developing mobile form of family organization of labor in the system of agro-industrial production in order to realize the entrepreneurial ability of rural producers and maximize the income through the production of eco-friendly products in line with the current needs of the population. The study also reveals demand for improving the institutional environment of family farms: implementation of the effective agricultural state policy and formation of inclusive business models.
Keywords
агроиндустриальное производство,
семейная ферма,
институт,
неформальные институты,
«инклюзивный бизнес»,
институциональная среда,
Agro-industrial production,
Family farms,
Institution,
Informal institutions,
"Inclusive business" institutional environmentAuthors
Veretennikova Natalia V. | Tomsk State University | nveret@yadex.ru |
Kuranova Nina A. | Tyumen State University | na.kuranova@yandex.ru |
Всего: 2
References
Башмачников В. Подрезанные крылья российского фермерства. М.: ООО «Престиж-пресс», 2015. 416 с.
О крестьянском (фермерском) хозяйстве: Федеральный закон от 11.06.2003. №74-ФЗ, ст. 1 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://base.garant.ru/12131264/1/#block_100 (дата обращения: 13.04.2015).
Кривошеев А.В. Приоритетные направления обеспечения эффективности функционирования крестьянских (фермерских) хозяйств (на материалах Тамбовской области): автореф. дис.. канд. экон. наук. Мичуринск, 2014. 20 с.
Положение дел в продовольствии и сельском хозяйстве. Инновации в семейных фермерских хозяйствах. ФАО. Рим. 2015. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.fao.org/publications/sofa/2014/ru/ (access date: 23.04.1015).
Алтухов И., Девяткина Л. Совершенствование правового статуса фермерских хозяйств в России // Экономика сельского хозяйства России. 2014. № 12. С. 26-31.
Commons J.R. Institutional Economics // American Economic Review, 1931. Vol. 21. Р. 648657.
Норт Д. Институты и экономический рост: историческое введение // THESIS. 1993. Т. 1, вып. 2. С. 69-91.
Hodgson G.M. What are institution? // Journal of economic issues. 2006. Vol. XI, №1. Р. 1-25.
What do we really know about the number and distribution of farms and family farms in the world? Background paper for The State of Food and Agriculture Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2014 [Electronic resource]. URL:www.fao.org/economic/esa/ (access date: 23.04.2015).
Чаянов А.В. Избранные труды. М.: Колос, 1993. 574 с.
Бьюкенен Д. Избранные труды. М.: Таурус Альфа, 1997. 560 с.
Bromiley P., Cummings L. Transaction costs in organizations with trust // Research on Negotiation in Organizations. 1996. Vol. 5. Р. 219-247.
Норт Д. Институты, институциональные изменения и функционирование экономики. М.: Фонд экономической книги «Начала», 1997. 180 с.
Iyengar S.S., Lepper M.R. When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing? // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2000. Vol. 79, № 6 [Electronic resource] URL: https://faculty.washington.edu/jdb/345/345%20Articles/ Iyengar%20%26%20Lepper% 20 (2000). pdfG. (access date: 10.11.2015).
Тамбовцев В.Л. Фактор культуры в экономике: методология анализа. Институциональная трансформация экономики: российский вектор новой индустриализации: материалы IV Междунар. науч. конф.: в 2 ч. /отв. ред. Е.А. Капогузов, Г.М. Самошилова. Омск: Изд-во Ом. гос. ун-та, 2015. Ч. 1. С. 24-29.
Hoggart R. La culture du pauvre. Etude sur la style de vie des classes populaires en An-gleterre. Paris: Ed. De Minuit, 1970. 424 p.
Хлопин А.Д. Феномен двоемыслия: Запад и Россия (особенности ролевого поведения) // Обществ. науки и современность. 1994. № 3. С. 51-56.
Тамбовцев В.Л. Управленческое решение как экономическое благо //Общественные науки и современность. 2013. № 1. С. 160-168.
Touraine А. Critique de la moderniffi. Paris: Fayard, 1992 [Electronic source]. URL:http://www.persee.fr/doc/homso_0018-4306_1993_num _107_1_3331 (access date: 16.11.2015).
Крестьянское хозяйство: Избранные труды / редкол.: Л.И. Абалкин (пред.) [и др.]. М.: Экономика, 1989. 492 с.
Павлушкина О.И., Черная А.Е. Проблемы формирования институциональной структуры аграрной экономики России // Никоновские чтения. 2006.№ 11 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n /problemy-formirovaniya-institutsionalnoy-struktury-agrarnoy-ekono-miki-rossii (дата обращения: 13.11.2015).
Barrett C., Bellemare M., Hou J. Reconsidering conventional explanations of the inverse productivity-size relationship. World Development. 2010. № 38(1). Р. 88-97.
Rapsomanikis G. The economic lives of smallholder farmers. Rome, FA0.2014 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.fao.org/publications/sofa/ru/?utm_source= faohomepage&utm_ medium= web&utm_campaign=featurebar (access date: 10.11.2015).
Участие бизнеса в решении проблемы бедности. United NationsDevelopment Programme UNDP Regional Bureau for Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States. 2008 [Электронный ресурс]. URL: http://europeandcis.undp.org/ (дата обращения: 13.11.2015).