Deep Roots

[

] 14

The family farm in Europe and Central Asia

Jan Douwe van der Ploeg, Professor of Transition Studies, Wageningen University, the Netherlands;

Adjunct Professor of Rural Sociology, China Agricultural University, Beijing

n Europe and Central Asia, as in most other parts

of the world, the family farm is the most important

land-labour institution. Of the 12.25 million farms

in Europe (EU28), almost 11.9 million (97 per cent) are

classified as family farms. The situation is somewhat

different in Russia and Kazakhstan where most of the

land is controlled by large agro-holdings. Nonetheless,

family farms and household plots produce most of the

food in these two countries. In Russia and the Western

Commonwealth of Independent States countries,

family farms cover 34 per cent of all agricultural land

and produce 62 per cent of all agricultural output. In

Central Asia, as a whole, family farms control 71 per

cent of the land on which they produce 88 per cent of

the total agricultural production.

The current dominance of family farming is the outcome of

long, complex and highly diverse processes of emancipation

that have taken place all over Europe and Central Asia. Some

of these processes are hidden in ancient history, others are

very recent. However, in each and every case the search for

autonomy, the steady improvement of one’s own livelihood

and the pursuit of political rights all played an important role.

Land-labour institutions tie land and labour together in

productive constellations that function according to their

own, specific and inbuilt rules. There are many different

land-labour institutions in today’s world. The family farm

is one of these, and it is a very solid and resilient one. This

is due to three sets of reasons. The first regards the interests

and prospects of the actors involved. The second relates to

society as a whole. The third set of reasons lies in the link-

ages between the interests of the involved actors and the

needs and demands of society at large.

The family farm offers those working and living in it the

possibility to progress their lives and ambitions through

their own work. It gives each generation the chance to

create opportunities for the next one. It allows the family

members to control the labour process and thus triggers

innovativeness. It represents a pleasant place to live and to

raise and socialize children. The family farm is also attractive

because it is not just based on plain economics: the family

is, time and again, the framework that helps to define the

organization and development of production. The needs,

possibilities, limitations, prospects, interests, experiences

and expectations of the family take centre stage.

For society as a whole the family farming sector is an

indispensable and much appreciated phenomenon. Family

farming is much more effective than the other land-labour

institutions in generating employment and incomes. It

substantially strengthens regional economies. It contrib-

utes in an often decisive way to the quality of life in rural

areas. It is a carrier of cultural repertoires. And it often

functions as a social safety net in times of crisis and/or

emerges as an attractive (albeit sometimes hardly acces-

sible) opportunity for young people. In short: at both the

micro and macro level family farming represents a series of

promises. Whether or not these come to fruition depends

on a range of factors: on agricultural and rural policies, the

way markets are structured and the attitudes and buying

habits of the general public.

One strategic feature of family farming is that there is a

direct connection between the emancipation of the farming

family and growth and development at macro level. That

is, the improvement of rural livelihoods (at the level of the

families involved) translates into a growing supply of food,

agricultural products and other rural services. It also trans-

lates into more resilience. Put the other way around: nation

states that want food security and sovereignty need a vibrant

family farming sector. The post-Second World War experi-

ences in Europe and Central Asia are ample proof of this.

Over the last 15 years or so the context in which family

farming is embedded and the nature of the family farm as such

have been changing in ways that increasingly threaten the

family farm and the many virtues it entails. A practical corol-

lary of this is that the operational definition of the family farm

probably needs revising and that the role of family farming

needs to be reconsidered within political circles.

Agriculture as a whole is increasingly suffering from a

squeeze

(output prices are stagnating while input prices

keep increasing), market volatility and rigid regulatory

schemes. Family farming is also suffering harsh competi-

tion from large corporate and megafarms that benefit from

unequal playing fields. Family farms equally suffer from the

tight control exerted by food industries, large retail organiza-

tions and banks (sometimes to the degree that family farms

are pushed out of business). The European Parliament

(notably the Agricultural Commission) is concerned by and

trying to respond to these difficult situations.

Many family farms are actively responding to these threats

in different ways. These include engaging in pluriactivity

(one or more family farm members having an off-farm job)

and multifunctionality (creating new economic opportuni-

ties within the farm). Women often play a decisive role in

these activities. Multifunctionality allows farming families

egional

erspectives