Land reform in two former republics of the Soviet Union: Georgia and Ukraine

Conclusion

This comparative sketch points to differences that warrant further study. Despite the same general patterns of privatisation occurring in both countries in a similar time framework, the situation on the ground appears quite different. The most notable feature is the collaborative way in which land is worked in the Ukraine case in contrast to the more individual and fragmented pattern of agricultural production evident in Georgia. This can, in part, be accounted for by simple demographic factors - households in Nagorna own far more land than in the Patardzevli case.

It is clear too that resistance to privatisation by local and regional officials in the Ukraine case has hindered the pace of implementation. The retention of power by local collective leaders, and of the cooperative infrastructure, has contributed to the maintenance of a cooperative working of the land. In Georgia, on the other hand, the fragmentation of land holdings combined with the destruction of cooperative infrastructure has left villagers with no alternative to farming at the household level. Thus, while most would acknowledge the many problems Ukraine has faced in the reforms, the continuation of a collective working of the land, in often new variants, provides some sort of ongoing security as well as a solid basis for the further development of agricultural production.