Agricultural Collectivisation and Its Impact (Edexcel A-Level History): Revision Notes
Agricultural Collectivisation and Its Impact
Introduction
Between 1928 and 1941, Soviet agriculture underwent a dramatic transformation known as collectivisation. This process involved combining small individual farms into much larger collective farms, typically housing between 20 and 150 families. Crucially, the state took ownership of all farmland and agricultural resources, ending private ownership of land. This policy represented one of the most significant and devastating changes of the Stalin era, fundamentally reshaping rural life and causing immense suffering whilst enabling rapid industrialisation.
Collectivisation was not merely an agricultural policy—it represented a fundamental restructuring of rural society that affected tens of millions of people. The scale and speed of this transformation had no historical precedent and would have profound consequences for the Soviet Union's development.
The causes of collectivisation
Collectivisation resulted from a combination of ideological beliefs, economic problems and political calculations. Understanding these different motivations helps explain why Stalin pursued such a radical policy.
Communist ideology
Communist theory provided the fundamental justification for collectivisation. Private property was seen as one of the cornerstones of capitalism and a major cause of inequality in society. During the NEP period, peasants with large farms had prospered whilst those with small plots struggled, creating exactly the kind of class divisions that communists opposed.
The Bolsheviks were deeply suspicious of peasant farming. Historically, Russian peasants had always desired to own the land they worked, reflecting an individualistic profit motive that seemed closer to capitalist than socialist values. By forcing peasants to work on collective farms, communist leaders hoped to demonstrate the superiority of socialist methods and convert peasants to genuine communist believers.
Additionally, communists believed that large-scale farming would prove far more efficient than small farms. They argued that expertise, equipment and resources could be shared across larger units, increasing overall production. In theory, collectivisation would create a fairer, more efficient society whilst winning peasant support by abolishing private property and promoting shared resources.
The failure of the NEP
By 1928, clear signs indicated that the New Economic Policy (NEP) was failing to meet the Soviet Union's needs. Whilst the NEP had initially boosted agricultural production, output in 1927 and 1928 fell below 1926 levels.
This decline occurred because there was limited market demand for additional agricultural goods. In 1926, increased production had caused prices to fall as farmers produced more food than Soviet consumers wanted to buy. Consequently, in 1927 farmers deliberately reduced production to push grain prices higher. Right-wing communists called this the grain procurement crisis – food supplies decreased, causing shortages in cities whilst farmers enjoyed higher profits.
Left-wing communists interpreted this situation very differently, labelling it the Kulak grain strike. They claimed that kulaks (wealthy farmers) were deliberately putting their own profits ahead of the Soviet Union's need to industrialise. Radical communists viewed this as the re-emergence of class war, with rich capitalist peasants intentionally sabotaging the construction of socialism.
These economic problems and the perceived threat of kulak opposition convinced many communists that the NEP had run its course and needed replacing with a more radical policy that would deal with the kulaks and restore economic growth.
The leadership struggle
Stalin also had important political motivations for ending the NEP and introducing collectivisation. At the end of 1927, Stalin and Bukharin had defeated and expelled Zinoviev, Kamenev and Trotsky (known as the United Opposition) from the Communist Party. These defeated leaders had advocated radical left-wing policies including collectivisation and rapid industrialisation. Their expulsion left the party's left wing, a significant minority, without leadership.
By moving leftward himself, Stalin hoped to retain his existing supporters whilst attracting followers of the United Opposition, thereby gaining more support than Bukharin. This strategy proved successful. As Stalin adopted increasingly radical policies, he won majority support in the Central Committee and established himself as the undisputed leader of the Communist Party.
Political ambition therefore played a crucial role alongside ideological and economic factors.
Introducing collectivisation
Collectivisation was not implemented all at once but developed through distinct phases as Stalin grew bolder and more confident.
Emergency measures, 1928
In July 1928, Stalin effectively ended the NEP. To combat what he termed the Kulak grain strike, Stalin ordered the Red Army and the Cheka (secret police) to requisition (forcibly seize) grain from peasants. The government would then use this requisitioned grain to feed urban workers and sell abroad to raise money for industrialisation.
Introducing requisitioning marked the end of the NEP, which had been based on free trade and taxation rather than forced seizure. In cities, Stalin reintroduced rationing, another feature of the earlier War Communism period.
Whilst rationing and requisitioning did not necessarily indicate that full collectivisation was beginning, they clearly signalled the NEP's demise.
Dekulakisation
Peasants responded to requisitioning with violent resistance. Requisitioning had been the most hated aspect of War Communism, and peasants resisted by hiding or even destroying grain. Stalin claimed this resistance represented an attack on socialism by capitalist kulaks. He therefore launched the liquidation of the kulaks as a class, known as dekulakisation.
The Brutal Reality of Dekulakisation
In theory, this policy meant taking farms and equipment from the wealthiest peasants. In practice, however, it meant mass deportations and killings of all peasants who resisted government policies. Approximately 1.5 million peasants were sent to labour camps during the dekulakisation campaign. This brutal policy eliminated the most experienced and successful farmers, with devastating consequences for agricultural productivity.
Full-scale collectivisation
Collectivisation was formally introduced in late 1929. Farms were forcibly merged, and equipment was seized from wealthier peasants and redistributed to poorer peasants. Peasants working on collective farms were allowed to keep a small amount of grain for their own consumption. The remainder was used to feed urban workers or sold abroad to fund industrialisation.
Between 1929 and 1930, there was an intense drive to ensure all farms were collectivised. However, this created such chaos that Stalin temporarily halted collectivisation in 1930. The campaign resumed in 1931. By 1941, almost all Soviet farms had been collectivised, with the percentage of collectivised peasant holdings rising from approximately 25% in 1930 to nearly 100% by 1941.
The temporary halt in 1930 demonstrated that even Stalin recognised the chaos his policies were creating. However, rather than fundamentally rethinking the policy, he merely slowed its pace before resuming with renewed vigour.
The consequences of collectivisation, 1929–34
Collectivisation had devastating immediate consequences for Soviet agriculture, though it did enable the government to extract more resources for industrialisation.
Destruction of Soviet farming
Peasants responded to requisitioning and collectivisation by destroying their crops, animals and machinery. Many peasants preferred to destroy their farms rather than surrender them to the government. Between 1928 and 1934, Stalin's policies led to the destruction of:
- 17 million horses
- 26 million cattle
- 11 million pigs
- 60 million sheep and goats
This scale of destruction was catastrophic. To put it in perspective, these numbers represented approximately half of the Soviet Union's livestock. The loss was so severe that it took decades for animal numbers to recover to pre-collectivisation levels.
Simultaneously, grain production decreased dramatically. From 73.3 million tons in 1928, production fell to 71.7 million tons in 1929, rose temporarily to 83.5 million tons in 1930, then declined to around 67-69 million tons for 1931-1934.
This reduction in agricultural production resulted from two main factors. First, the execution or deportation of kulaks removed the most experienced and successful farmers from the land. Second, the absence of financial incentives meant farmers could no longer make profits, removing motivation to work efficiently or productively.
Famine
Collectivisation led to a catastrophic famine in Ukraine between 1932 and 1933. Ukrainian farmers were unable to meet government targets for farm production. Moreover, resistance to collectivisation had been fiercest in Ukraine. Stalin punished them by seizing their grain and livestock, deliberately creating a famine.
The Ukrainian Famine: A Deliberate Atrocity
This government-created famine resulted in 5 million deaths. Stalin refused to accept international offers of aid to help the starving farmers. He deliberately used the famine as a weapon to destroy Ukrainian resistance to collectivisation, making this one of the worst atrocities of his rule.
Mechanisation
Collectivisation was accompanied by mechanisation efforts. The government established machine tractor stations across the country, which allowed farms to hire tractors. The 75,000 tractors provided had limited impact on Soviet farming. At best, they merely compensated for the horses lost during collectivisation, rather than genuinely improving productivity.
The promise of mechanisation was used to justify collectivisation, with propaganda claiming that modern machinery would revolutionise Soviet agriculture. In reality, the number of tractors was insufficient to replace the millions of horses destroyed, and many collective farms lacked the expertise to maintain and operate the machinery effectively.
Grain procurement
Despite the destruction and suffering, collectivisation did achieve one of Stalin's key objectives: it allowed the government to procure far more grain than under the NEP. In 1928, the government had procured 10.8 million tons of grain from peasants. By 1933, this had risen to 22.6 million tons.
Grain exports also increased substantially, rising from less than 1 million tons in 1928 to 4.7 million tons in 1930 and 5 million tons in 1931. This exported grain generated vital foreign currency to pay for imported machinery and expertise for industrialisation, though at a terrible human cost.
This reveals Stalin's priorities: he was willing to accept massive human suffering and agricultural destruction as long as the state could extract enough grain to fund industrialisation. The government took more grain whilst overall production fell, meaning less food was available for the Soviet population.
Long-term consequences of collectivisation
Collectivisation created long-term problems that Stalin and his successors never fully resolved. The policy fundamentally damaged Soviet agriculture for decades.
Agriculture, 1934–41
Soviet agriculture recovered slowly from the disruption of collectivisation. Grain harvests regularly fell short of levels achieved during the best years of the NEP. Although there was a record harvest in 1937, grain production declined again from 1938 to 1940.
Collective Farms Were Less Productive Than Private Farms
These low harvests resulted partly from the fact that collective farms were less productive than private farms. On average, private farms produced around 410 kilograms of grain per hectare, whereas collective farms produced only about 320 kilograms per hectare. Prior to the Second World War, collective farms were demonstrably less productive than farms under the NEP.
Private farming continued on a small scale until 1941, with around seven per cent of farmers remaining independent of the collective system. Despite their small numbers, these private farms made a major contribution to Soviet agriculture, producing double the amount of meat and milk produced by state farms. This highlights the inefficiency of collectivised agriculture.
Agriculture during the Second World War
The failings of the collective system became glaringly obvious during the Second World War. Collective farming was consistently unable to meet the needs of Soviet citizens and the Red Army. During the war:
- The Soviet government relied on US imports to provide almost a fifth of the calories consumed by the Red Army
- Harvests declined from a pre-war high of 95.5 million tonnes to just 46.8 million tonnes in 1945
- Bread rations fell by 40 per cent
- Potato rations fell by 80 per cent
The Failure of Collectivised Agriculture
These statistics demonstrate that collectivisation had created a fundamentally weak agricultural system that could not sustain the Soviet Union during its greatest crisis. The policy that Stalin had claimed would create efficiency and plenty had instead created dependence and scarcity.
Remember!
Key Points to Remember:
-
Collectivisation combined small farms into large collective farms of 20-150 families, with the state taking ownership of all land and resources.
-
Three main causes drove collectivisation: communist ideology against private property, the failure of the NEP (particularly the grain procurement crisis), and Stalin's political manoeuvring in the leadership struggle.
-
Implementation occurred in phases: emergency measures and requisitioning (1928), dekulakisation targeting kulaks (around 1.5 million sent to labour camps), and full-scale collectivisation from late 1929.
-
Immediate consequences (1929-34) were devastating: destruction of 26 million cattle, 17 million horses and other livestock; declining grain production; and the Ukrainian famine killing 5 million people.
-
Long-term impact: collective farms proved less productive than private farms (320 vs 410 kg per hectare), and Soviet agriculture remained weak throughout Stalin's rule and failed to feed the population adequately during WWII.