- Email: [email protected]
Collective farms which work?
purpose of the book. Still. in its current form the volume is entertaining if not annoying for its neglect of pragmatic food-policy-making guidelines. I am patiently looking forward to Sanderson’s follow-up exploration of the impact of internationalization of Mexican agriculture combined with pragmatic and detailed proposals for food-policy shaping and implementation.
Frank Melssner inter-American Development Bank Washington, DC, USA ‘For an analysis of these programmes see James Au&n and Gustav0 Esteva, Food Poky m Mex/co. the Search for Se/fSufficiency, Cornell Unlverslty Press, Ithaca, NY, USA, 1987, and my extensive review of the book under the title ‘SAM and his children’, Food PO/ICY, Vol 12, No 4. November 1987, pp 391-397
Insights into socialist agriculture in Hungary COLLECTIVE
FARMS
WHICH
WORK?
by Nigel Swain Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1985, 235 pp, f25.00 This book,
published
m the series
of of the British NASEES,’ casts doubt on the success of Hungarian socialized farming. In the very beginning the author categorically states that ‘Coland the lective farms can work, Hungarian experience shows one way how’, but ends by saying that ‘The book has been about Hungarian producer co-operatives as. .an economic success. but a social and pohtical failure. at least in the sense that these units have failed to create a workplace environment with intrmsically socurhst features (p 1X1)‘. Hungarian specialists themselves often critically qualify the success of their agriculture, but they mostly point to production costs and the insufficient adaptation to the world food market. Sociological aspects have also drawn attention in Hungary, but discussions tend to stop where Nigel Swain puts the main emphasis of his investigation. The frankness with which Hungarians discuss the problems of their agriculture, in conversation and in print, is unique m countries of the Soviet orbit. The author exploits this abundance of sources, together with his own research in the country. in a comprehensive and meticulous way of high scholarly standard. His commitment to sociahst ideals does not prevent him
Smwt trrd East Ewopem
Studies
FOOD POLICY May 1988
from always making a clear distinction between his emotional research interest and the scholarly presentation of facts and conclusions based on the latter. In the rather long introduction, Swain defines his terms of research and presentation. In particular, he juxtaposes ‘family labour’ of the tradihousehold in tional peasant Chayanov’s term) to ‘socialist wage capitallabour’ large-scale, of cooperative product intensive How the change from one to the other was brought about in Hungary from lY46 to lY6X is carefully outlined in the first chapter. The second chapter deals with the complementary roles of labour-intensive household plot production and capital-intensive largescale farming - a symbiosis for which Hungarian agrarian policy has become famous. This first part is a reliable factual record and valuable as such.
Part III presents readers with Insights to the topic which they may have suspected, but which have not thus far been so convincingly researched and presented. The two chapters deal with the limited autonomy from state and Party authorities of cooperative farm management and its almost total independence from the volition of its subordinates on the farm. The material interests of farm managers in part contradict those of the farm workforce. The suspicion ‘that management perceives its bonuses (rather than co-operative funds generally) as being threatened by the tax [on average income rises above a fixed percentage per year] and manipulates labour inputs as a form of self-interested. evasive action’ to the detriment of the mass of farm workers, IS made very plausible by the author. He is aware. however. that the intentionality of such hehaviour cannot be proven and that, subjectively, ‘the interests of farm management and the farm are seen as one and the same’ by those on top (p 179). The value of the analysis consists in its not merely depicting the organizational structure with its formal democratic institutions, but in the largely successful effort to show how these work - or rather, do not work in practice.
iIn.
Tiresome reading Chapter 3. on the composition of the labour force, contains too much data and is tiresome to read. mainly because the data are not particularly illuminating. In contrast. Chapter 4. on the social characteristics of cooperative farm managers, contains an interesting analysis of this ‘class-like’ group. They are professional managers with few connections to the previous peasant society. who now have almost wholly replaced the older leaders of peasant origin. This chapter forms the basis for Part III. the centrepiece of the book.
Minor criticism A few points of criticism may be raised. (1) The comparisons with Soviet and Chinese conditions lack precision and were quite often already outdated at the time of writing, let alone in the lY8Os period. (2) The dividing line between ‘family labour’ and ‘socialist wage labour’ is not always as clear in real life as it seems in theory. A full-time technical operator whose wife performs seasonal unskilled work on the large farm and also tends the household plot would be a case in point. (3) The picture of the final process of collectivization in 19X-60 seems rather euphemistic, perhaps under the influence of Hungarian sources. (4) In discussing the issue of the abortive ‘Complex Brigades’ (pp 163-167). the author should have made it clear that in being intended to be ‘autonomous multi-
223
purpose work teams’. they differed from the subunits which went under the same name on Soviet farms. Yet such and other minor points do not obscure the value of the book as a whole. It contains much carefully researched information which is hardly available elsewhere. The reader (and the reviewer) is confronted with a neu approach to the problems of socialized agriculture and with a wealth of
thoughts worth pondering over. whether or not they share the author’s emotional commitment. K.-E. Wadekin Bierlingen Federal Republic of Germany
‘NatIonal Assoclatlon for Sovtet and East European
Studies.
Food and nutrition update FOOD,
HEALTH
AND THE
CONSUMER
by T.R. Gormley,
G. Downey
and
D.
O’Beirne
Elsevier Applied UK, 1987, 317pp,
Science, f34.00
London,
This book is a report of one of three cooperative studies undertaken for the food subprogramme of the Forecasting and Assessment in Science and Technology (FAST) Programme of the Commission of the European Communities.’ The subject matter of the present study - which was based at the Kinsealy Research Centre, An Foras Taltintais (Agricultural Research Institute) in Ireland ~ is ind1cated by the somewhat cumbersome titles of the three main chapters (not given on the content5 page), each of which is approximately 100 pages. Thus, Chapter 1 by Gormley IS entltled ‘Review and assessment of keq nutritional issues and of the criteria currently applied for determining the effects of food of plant, animal and marine origin on human health’; Chapter 2 by Downcy is ‘Review and asscs\inent of food and nutritional policies’; and Chapter .i by O’Bcirnc is ‘Review and assessment of agrlcultur-al production and food processing technologies with respect to their possible impact on human health’. A short final chapter lists 35 conclusions and recommendations. The main strength of the book is undoubtedly its comprchemivc and reasonably up-to-date coverage of research in the field of nutrition in Chapter 1, which cities over X) pap-
224
ers. The reports of new development5 in agricultural and food technology are also useful. but tend to be biased towards the interests of producers rather than consumers. For instance, the negative effects of using antibiotic\ and hormones in animal production, and the possible toxicity of some additives, are rather played down. In contrast, the need for more research on the effects of natural toxicants is given rather more emphasis, which is the usual line of those wishing to deflect criticism of the former, though, as the authors point out. this has tended to be underrated m recent debates on food safety. ‘Microbiooglcal food poisoning’ is excluded as being ‘out51de the arnbit’ of this study. However, the authors recognize it as ‘a major public health problem’, and recommend that it be a subject for separate study.
Poor analysis The overwhelming weakness of the book IS at the level of analysis. particularly when it comes to recommendations for public policy, which presumably should be the major preoccupation of any study contributing to ‘foreca\tlng and a\se\smcnt of science and tcchnolanalysis of the rcogy’. Moreover, search I\ made all the more difficult for the reader by the somewhat disorganized and un\y\tematlc present:ition. with each of the three main chapters (and even sections within chapters) Intruding heavily Into each others’ territory. which ~ apart from anything else ~ makes for \omc tedious repctltlon. For instance, research cited suggest\
that the recommendations of ‘current human nutritional thinking’ (which the authors rather annoyingly abbreviate as CHNT) that we eat more dietary f1bre might not be suitable in all. or even most, cases. because it may have negative effects on the intake of certain nutrients. In fact probably our whole understanding of what comtitutes dietary fibrc is open to question (‘almost a philosophical concept rather than a biological maerial’), with research now being undertaken to asses\ the effects of its different components. However, when ISSWS of food and nutritional po11cy are discussed in other places. it i\ almost as if those uncertamtles do not exist, and ‘current human nutrltional thinking’ is used as the point of departure. without first evaluating the extent to which the specific recommendations of recent reports, such as the recent one on diet and cardiovascular disease published by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy of the UK Department of Health and Social Security. might (or might not) be a reasonable basis for action until we have better data. Similar major controversies are explored for most of the other con\tltuents of our diet, which. of course, should be a major preoccupation for type of review - it makes us realize how much we have yet to learn about nutrition. Like any science at the frontiers of discovery. there i\ bound to be conflicting evidence and unccrtamties However, surely it IS the iob of the nutritional sclcnti\t to weigh the CVIdcncr for and against a particular recommendation. Otherwise. the general public (and the pohtlcian) will end up 111 ;I state of bewilderment, for presenting on a plate c~cuscs Inaction. as well as \copc tar vested interests to exploit such uncrrtamtles to their own advantage. The ultmiate recommendation made in this study ‘to eat in moderation a balanced diet with ;I modost shift toward\ a greater consumption of fruits, vegetables. cereals and marine food\ and a modest reduction in Intake of foods of animal origin‘ - seems almo\t to take us back to \quarc one (and I\ roughly what my father. who left school whrn hc wa\ 11, uwd to say!)
FOOD POLICY
May
1988
Frank Melssner inter-American Development Bank Washington, DC, USA ‘For an analysis of these programmes see James Au&n and Gustav0 Esteva, Food Poky m Mex/co. the Search for Se/fSufficiency, Cornell Unlverslty Press, Ithaca, NY, USA, 1987, and my extensive review of the book under the title ‘SAM and his children’, Food PO/ICY, Vol 12, No 4. November 1987, pp 391-397
Insights into socialist agriculture in Hungary COLLECTIVE
FARMS
WHICH
WORK?
by Nigel Swain Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1985, 235 pp, f25.00 This book,
published
m the series
of of the British NASEES,’ casts doubt on the success of Hungarian socialized farming. In the very beginning the author categorically states that ‘Coland the lective farms can work, Hungarian experience shows one way how’, but ends by saying that ‘The book has been about Hungarian producer co-operatives as. .an economic success. but a social and pohtical failure. at least in the sense that these units have failed to create a workplace environment with intrmsically socurhst features (p 1X1)‘. Hungarian specialists themselves often critically qualify the success of their agriculture, but they mostly point to production costs and the insufficient adaptation to the world food market. Sociological aspects have also drawn attention in Hungary, but discussions tend to stop where Nigel Swain puts the main emphasis of his investigation. The frankness with which Hungarians discuss the problems of their agriculture, in conversation and in print, is unique m countries of the Soviet orbit. The author exploits this abundance of sources, together with his own research in the country. in a comprehensive and meticulous way of high scholarly standard. His commitment to sociahst ideals does not prevent him
Smwt trrd East Ewopem
Studies
FOOD POLICY May 1988
from always making a clear distinction between his emotional research interest and the scholarly presentation of facts and conclusions based on the latter. In the rather long introduction, Swain defines his terms of research and presentation. In particular, he juxtaposes ‘family labour’ of the tradihousehold in tional peasant Chayanov’s term) to ‘socialist wage capitallabour’ large-scale, of cooperative product intensive How the change from one to the other was brought about in Hungary from lY46 to lY6X is carefully outlined in the first chapter. The second chapter deals with the complementary roles of labour-intensive household plot production and capital-intensive largescale farming - a symbiosis for which Hungarian agrarian policy has become famous. This first part is a reliable factual record and valuable as such.
Part III presents readers with Insights to the topic which they may have suspected, but which have not thus far been so convincingly researched and presented. The two chapters deal with the limited autonomy from state and Party authorities of cooperative farm management and its almost total independence from the volition of its subordinates on the farm. The material interests of farm managers in part contradict those of the farm workforce. The suspicion ‘that management perceives its bonuses (rather than co-operative funds generally) as being threatened by the tax [on average income rises above a fixed percentage per year] and manipulates labour inputs as a form of self-interested. evasive action’ to the detriment of the mass of farm workers, IS made very plausible by the author. He is aware. however. that the intentionality of such hehaviour cannot be proven and that, subjectively, ‘the interests of farm management and the farm are seen as one and the same’ by those on top (p 179). The value of the analysis consists in its not merely depicting the organizational structure with its formal democratic institutions, but in the largely successful effort to show how these work - or rather, do not work in practice.
iIn.
Tiresome reading Chapter 3. on the composition of the labour force, contains too much data and is tiresome to read. mainly because the data are not particularly illuminating. In contrast. Chapter 4. on the social characteristics of cooperative farm managers, contains an interesting analysis of this ‘class-like’ group. They are professional managers with few connections to the previous peasant society. who now have almost wholly replaced the older leaders of peasant origin. This chapter forms the basis for Part III. the centrepiece of the book.
Minor criticism A few points of criticism may be raised. (1) The comparisons with Soviet and Chinese conditions lack precision and were quite often already outdated at the time of writing, let alone in the lY8Os period. (2) The dividing line between ‘family labour’ and ‘socialist wage labour’ is not always as clear in real life as it seems in theory. A full-time technical operator whose wife performs seasonal unskilled work on the large farm and also tends the household plot would be a case in point. (3) The picture of the final process of collectivization in 19X-60 seems rather euphemistic, perhaps under the influence of Hungarian sources. (4) In discussing the issue of the abortive ‘Complex Brigades’ (pp 163-167). the author should have made it clear that in being intended to be ‘autonomous multi-
223
purpose work teams’. they differed from the subunits which went under the same name on Soviet farms. Yet such and other minor points do not obscure the value of the book as a whole. It contains much carefully researched information which is hardly available elsewhere. The reader (and the reviewer) is confronted with a neu approach to the problems of socialized agriculture and with a wealth of
thoughts worth pondering over. whether or not they share the author’s emotional commitment. K.-E. Wadekin Bierlingen Federal Republic of Germany
‘NatIonal Assoclatlon for Sovtet and East European
Studies.
Food and nutrition update FOOD,
HEALTH
AND THE
CONSUMER
by T.R. Gormley,
G. Downey
and
D.
O’Beirne
Elsevier Applied UK, 1987, 317pp,
Science, f34.00
London,
This book is a report of one of three cooperative studies undertaken for the food subprogramme of the Forecasting and Assessment in Science and Technology (FAST) Programme of the Commission of the European Communities.’ The subject matter of the present study - which was based at the Kinsealy Research Centre, An Foras Taltintais (Agricultural Research Institute) in Ireland ~ is ind1cated by the somewhat cumbersome titles of the three main chapters (not given on the content5 page), each of which is approximately 100 pages. Thus, Chapter 1 by Gormley IS entltled ‘Review and assessment of keq nutritional issues and of the criteria currently applied for determining the effects of food of plant, animal and marine origin on human health’; Chapter 2 by Downcy is ‘Review and asscs\inent of food and nutritional policies’; and Chapter .i by O’Bcirnc is ‘Review and assessment of agrlcultur-al production and food processing technologies with respect to their possible impact on human health’. A short final chapter lists 35 conclusions and recommendations. The main strength of the book is undoubtedly its comprchemivc and reasonably up-to-date coverage of research in the field of nutrition in Chapter 1, which cities over X) pap-
224
ers. The reports of new development5 in agricultural and food technology are also useful. but tend to be biased towards the interests of producers rather than consumers. For instance, the negative effects of using antibiotic\ and hormones in animal production, and the possible toxicity of some additives, are rather played down. In contrast, the need for more research on the effects of natural toxicants is given rather more emphasis, which is the usual line of those wishing to deflect criticism of the former, though, as the authors point out. this has tended to be underrated m recent debates on food safety. ‘Microbiooglcal food poisoning’ is excluded as being ‘out51de the arnbit’ of this study. However, the authors recognize it as ‘a major public health problem’, and recommend that it be a subject for separate study.
Poor analysis The overwhelming weakness of the book IS at the level of analysis. particularly when it comes to recommendations for public policy, which presumably should be the major preoccupation of any study contributing to ‘foreca\tlng and a\se\smcnt of science and tcchnolanalysis of the rcogy’. Moreover, search I\ made all the more difficult for the reader by the somewhat disorganized and un\y\tematlc present:ition. with each of the three main chapters (and even sections within chapters) Intruding heavily Into each others’ territory. which ~ apart from anything else ~ makes for \omc tedious repctltlon. For instance, research cited suggest\
that the recommendations of ‘current human nutritional thinking’ (which the authors rather annoyingly abbreviate as CHNT) that we eat more dietary f1bre might not be suitable in all. or even most, cases. because it may have negative effects on the intake of certain nutrients. In fact probably our whole understanding of what comtitutes dietary fibrc is open to question (‘almost a philosophical concept rather than a biological maerial’), with research now being undertaken to asses\ the effects of its different components. However, when ISSWS of food and nutritional po11cy are discussed in other places. it i\ almost as if those uncertamtles do not exist, and ‘current human nutrltional thinking’ is used as the point of departure. without first evaluating the extent to which the specific recommendations of recent reports, such as the recent one on diet and cardiovascular disease published by the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy of the UK Department of Health and Social Security. might (or might not) be a reasonable basis for action until we have better data. Similar major controversies are explored for most of the other con\tltuents of our diet, which. of course, should be a major preoccupation for type of review - it makes us realize how much we have yet to learn about nutrition. Like any science at the frontiers of discovery. there i\ bound to be conflicting evidence and unccrtamties However, surely it IS the iob of the nutritional sclcnti\t to weigh the CVIdcncr for and against a particular recommendation. Otherwise. the general public (and the pohtlcian) will end up 111 ;I state of bewilderment, for presenting on a plate c~cuscs Inaction. as well as \copc tar vested interests to exploit such uncrrtamtles to their own advantage. The ultmiate recommendation made in this study ‘to eat in moderation a balanced diet with ;I modost shift toward\ a greater consumption of fruits, vegetables. cereals and marine food\ and a modest reduction in Intake of foods of animal origin‘ - seems almo\t to take us back to \quarc one (and I\ roughly what my father. who left school whrn hc wa\ 11, uwd to say!)
FOOD POLICY
May
1988