Prasetyo A., Samudro B. R., Pratama Y. P., Sistriatmaja M. B. Agricultural policy for Indonesia: Stalin’s state gigantism or Bukharin’s cooperative farming // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2026. V.11. №2. P. 22-47.

EDN: FYGXRA

Annotation

This article considers the systemic failure of Indonesia’s Food Estate Program (2020–2024) through the analytical lens of the 1920s Soviet agrarian debates between Nikolai Bukharin and Joseph Stalin. The study addresses a critical paradox: state agricultural policies continue to fail while Indonesia imports record amounts of rice despite 33 million small farmers. The authors applied a mixed-methods approach and the extended case study to construct an Agricultural Terms of Trade Index to empirically test the Scissors Crisis hypothesis (50 policy documents and fieldwork in three provinces). The key findings are as follows: (1) Food Estate projects scored 4.6/5 based on Stalinist characteristics (gigantism, coercion, ecological disregard), producing only 4,300 tons of rice at a cost of Rp 349 million per ton vs market price of Rp 6 million; (2) Agricultural Terms of Trade worsened by 40% in 2022–2024, making farmers leave the market and increasing rice imports from 444,000 tons (2019) to 3.05 million tons (2024); (3) successful cooperative models demonstrated 2.1–3.1% efficiency and maintained productivity under crisis periods. The study theoretically confirms the applicability of the Bukharinist political economy for the 21st-century agrarian analysis, proving its relevance beyond Soviet historiography, and proposes a three-tier policy roadmap, prioritizing smallholder empowerment, terms-of-trade stabilization, and cooperative industrialization as alternatives to state gigantism and corporate agriculture.

Keywords

Food sovereignty, agricultural policy, terms of trade, cooperatives, Indonesia, Bukharinist critique, land grabbing, peasant studies, food estate, smallholder agriculture, state intervention.  

About the authors

Prasetyo Andri, Lecturer, Department of Development Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Sebelas Maret. Jl. Ir. Sutami, 36, Kentingan, Jebres, Surakarta, Central Java 57126.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Samudro Bhimo Rizky — PhD (Economics), Full Professor, Department of Development Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Sebelas Maret. Jl. Ir. Sutami, 36, Kentingan, Jebres, Surakarta, Central Java 57126.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Pratama Yogi Pasca — PhD (Economics), Associate Professor, Department of Development Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Sebelas Maret. Jl. Ir. Sutami, 36, Kentingan, Jebres, Surakarta, Central Java 57126.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Sistriatmaja Muhammad Bagus, Lecturer, Department of Development Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Sebelas Maret. Jl. Ir. Sutami, 36, Kentingan, Jebres, Surakarta, Central Java 57126.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Elanskaya A. A. Russian agricultural policy in the 21st century: From producer support to consumer support? // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2025. V.10. №3. P. 182-204.

EDN: JVIVTG

Annotation

The article considers the transformation of Russia’s agricultural policy since the beginning of the 21st century. The author applies the OECD methodology to assess structural shifts and make comparisons with other countries. The article shows significant policy changes, although producer support remains its core and market-distorting measures still prevail. However, price support for agricultural producers at the expense of consumers has decreased, while the share of expenditures on general services and consumer support has increased, bringing Russia’s agricultural policy closer to that of developed nations. Although Russia does not provide food assistance as part of its agricultural budget, the state actively stimulates food demand. The author estimates the scale of consumer subsidies aimed at purchasing food products and their role in effective demand for agricultural products. Thus, Russia’s agricultural policy has gradually, albeit slowly, shifted toward greater consumer support.

Keywords

Agricultural policy, export-oriented economy, government program, OECD, producer support, consumer support, support for general services, food assistance, school nutrition programs.

About the author

Alexandra A. Elanskaya, PhD (Geography), Research Fellow, Center for Agrifood Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. Vernadskogo Prosp., 82, Moscow, 119571, Russia. 
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Serova E. V., Nikulin A. M. “Today, in the rural development, the main goal is to change the paradigm” // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2022. V.7. №3. P. 210-236.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2022-7-3-210-236

Annotation

In the interview, the famous economist E. V. Serova talks about the features of the life path of the agrarian scientist and describes the stages of her scientific career — studies at the Faculty of Economics of the Lomonosov Moscow State University, work at the Agrarian Institute headed by the Academician A. A. Nikonov and in the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Government in the early 1990s, and later in the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The interview pays particular attention to the research directions at the Institute for Agrarian Studies and to the development of agrarian education at the Higher School of Economics. Based on the ideas of randomness and regularity in the choice of the scientific profession, on the meaning of controllability and spontaneity of social-economic processes in the course of agrarian reforms, Serova identifies the system features of the strategic transformations of agriculture and rural development in Russia and abroad, which are related not only to economy but also to policy and culture. At the same time, Serova emphasizes the importance of social institutions and historical-cultural patterns of the rural residents’ behavior, on which the efficiency of the state measures in market transformations largely depends. The final part of the interview focuses on the prospects for the development of agrarian science and education, in particular on the need for a new paradigm for the development of rural areas in Russia.

Keywords

Economics, agrarian science, agricultural policy, agrarian education, transitional economy, agriculture, rural development.

About the authors

Evgeniya V. Serova, DSc (Economics), Head of the Institute for Agrarian Studies, National Research University Higher School of Economics; Pokrovsky Blvd., 11, Moscow, 109028, Russia.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 
Alexander M. Nikulin, PhD (Economics), Heal of the Center for Agrarian Studies, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration; Head of the Chayanov Research Center, Moscow School of Social and Economic Sciences; Vernadskogo Prosp., 82, Moscow, 119571, Russia.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Gataulina E.A. On the improvement of the All-Russian Agricultural Census  // The Russian Peasant Studies. 2018. V.3. №4. P. 150-167.

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2018-3-4-150-167

Annotation

Under the limited budget resources, there is an urgent task of their effective allocation. Collection and generalization of statistical data is the most important state task for providing a reliable consistent analytical basis for managerial decisions at all levels — from national economy to the enterprise. Censuses are a very expensive statistical method, which explains high demands on conducting them. In particular, they should include such objects, themes and indicators and consider them in such a structure and form that satisfy the information requests of all groups of census data consumers, which, in turn, requires that the groups of beneficiaries are identified and their requests are clear. The article focuses on the ways to increase the practical value of the All-Russian Agricultural Census by comparing its program with the recommendations of the World Agricultural Census of the FAO Round 2020 and the US Agricultural Census. The author argues that the beneficiaries and requests to the All-Russian Agricultural Census were not studied, that is why the Census program, albeit compliant with the FAO recommendations, is similar to the programs of countries with poorly developed statistical systems. The All-Russian Agricultural Census focuses on the structural data (livestock, territories, etc.) every ten years, while agricultural censuses in the developed countries are more frequent, focus on the most requested pricing information, their objects have a cut-off threshold and the tables include a wide range of features of the objects under study. The huge scale of the All-Russian Agricultural Census increases its costs, leads to contradictions with the Rosreestr, and although identifies the severe problem of the unregulated land use does not help to solve it. The author suggests to apply the project approach to the Сensus to change its emphasis from collecting data to the use of its results. 

Keywords

All-Russian Agricultural Census, agricultural policy, census objects, management of agro-industrial complex, improvement of statistical data, project approach.

About the author

Ekaterina A. Gataulina,  PhD (Economics), Senior Researcher, All-Russian Institute for Agrarian Issues and Informatics named after A.A. Nikonov — branch of the Federal Research Center of Agrarian Economy and Social Development of Rural Areas — All-Russian Research Institute of Agricultural Economics. 105064, Moscow, Bolshoi Kharitonievski Per., 21–1.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Il’inykh V.A. The star and death of Siberian grassland farming // Russian Peasant Studies. 2016. V.1. №1. P. 93-121

DOI: 10.22394/2500-1809-2016-1-1-93-121

Annotation

The article considers the attempts to introduce the grassland farming system in Siberia in the context of the Soviet agricultural policy and the ideological and theoretical struggle in the agronomy. In the early xx century in Siberia, there was a threat of the transition from the fallow farming to the three-field system, which could lead to a crisis in the agriculture. By the mid-i920s, the leading specialists of the land authorities and government leaders of the region believed that the crisis could be prevented only by introducing the grassland farming system. At the beginning of the 1930s, this system was given up for it contradicted the task of solving the grain problem. The oblivion of agro-technological bases under the collectivization led to the decrease in soil fertility, thus, in 1937 the grassland farming was introduced in most regions of the country. Its implementation was interrupted by World War 11 and continued in the late 1940s. After the start of the virgin lands development campaign, the grassland farming was declared ineffective and rejected. After the campaign ended, the grassland farming system was not revived—the bid was made for more intensive technologies and chemicals.

Keywords

agricultural policy, farming systems, grassland farming, agricultural engineering, collective-state farms system, Siberia

About the author

Vladimir A. Il’inykh, D. Sc (History), Head of the Department of Agrarian History of the Institute of History of the Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences. 8 Akademika Nikolaeva Str., Novosibirsk, 630090.
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.