@article{Choi:92316,
      recid = {92316},
      author = {Choi, Jeong Nam},
      title = {Eine Analyse der Transformationsberatung für die  "kollektive Landwirtschaft" während der ersten  Transformationsphase (1989-1991) am Beispiel  Ostdeutschlands: Lehren für Korea.},
      address = {2009},
      number = {920-2016-72839},
      series = {Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Central and  Eastern Europe},
      pages = {237},
      year = {2009},
      abstract = {This work analyzes the retrospective assessments of East  German farmers
about their experiences during the  transition of collective farms in the German
Democratic  Republic (GDR). This work focuses on how they performed  the
re-organization of their respective farms and on the  role of external advisors in
this process. Consequently  this work is aimed at drawing lessons for transition
of the  North Korean collective farms after unification of Korea  (in particular
for the organization of advisory support)  from these assessments.
A basic task in transition of the  collective farms in the GDR consisted in setting
up basic  institutional and legal conditions. However, the different  positions and
opinions among the individual beneficiaries  concerning the choice of organizational
forms (legal form)  and the distribution of assets caused severe  difficulties
in the transformation process.
The  reconstitution of the private property rights in land was  regarded as a
necessary prerequisite for agricultural  development in East Germany. Although
this process was  realized relatively smoothly due to available land  registers,
about 20% of the former owners had difficulties  in recovering their property
rights. On the other hand the  regulation of the distribution of assets in  collective
farms was introduced relatively late. The  conflicts were thereby deepened
in the process of  privatization of assets.
The rapid introduction of the  market economic system exerted considerable
pressure on  both collective farms and new private (family) farms. They  had to
learn to operate in this new system quickly. Lack of  knowledge concerning
the new market economic system was  substantial. Therefore, advisory support
was much needed at  the beginning of the transformation. The collective  farm
managers needed even more knowledge than the new  private farmers. Public
meetings, discussion forums and  their study tours in West Germany satisfied
these needs. It  was highly valued that the different variations were  explained
in an unbiased and unprejudiced way. A regional  preference made up with respect
to external advisors on  which the agricultural producers finally listened to
when  deciding on the transformation process. The East German  farm managers
preferred East German advisors because the  latter understood their historical
backgrounds well and  paid attention to social aspects. On the other
hand, the  farm managers were reluctant to listen to West German  advisors and
to lose thereby influence on their companies.  While the managers of transformed cooperatives preferred  lawyers and advisors from East Germany, the farm  managers
of business companies relied on West German  advisors.
After the transformation most agricultural  producers suffered from difficulties
like capital shortage,  a reduction of employment, old debts, etc. Meeting  these
difficulties required external support and, above  all, the financial support of the
government.
With the help  of the German experiences about the transition of  collective
farms one can derive important lessons for the  transformation of North Korean
collective farms. Although  the North Korean transformation as well as  the
reunification of Korea are not realized yet, the German  experiences indicate
the measures that should be prepared  for the future transformation of the
North Korean  collective farms and particularly concerning the external  advisory
support.
The reconstitution of the private  property rights in land is necessary to overcome
the  negative effects of the collective agriculture. But beyond  that, success
of agricultural enterprise also depends on  the active role of the farm management
and the social  policy for the farmers.
With respect to the distribution of  assets of the North Korean collective farms,
conflicts will  be inevitable. So the suitable guidelines should be  developed in
detail in order to decrease conflicts between  the concerned persons.
Since the process of transformation  of collective farms calls for considerable
advisory  support, appropriate schemes of advisory activity should be  developed.
The German experiences point to the fact that  these activities should not ignore
the socialist character  of the North Korean agriculture. No specific model for
the  transformation of collective farms should be given  priority. All options
must be offered within the scope of  transformation. The agricultural advisory
system of South  Korea will not be suitable for North Korean large-scale  farm
structure. Therefore, a new system that is suitable  for North Korean situation
should be introduced. At the  same time new consultation facilities must be set
up in  North Korea. The regional and cultural preference of  advisors in Eastern
Germany show, how a quick establishment  of an advisory system in North
Korea will matter. In North  Korea farmers will suffer after the transformation
from  similar difficulties like in Germany. Hence, it is  important to outline
efficient support measures or a  suitable aid program.
The German experiences of collective  farms transition highlight the fact that
advice or support  of the respective partner state should not serve the  purpose
to transfer the agricultural structures of the  stronger partner of the reunification
on a "one to one"  basis. Instead, the available structures, priorities and  the
wishes of the North Korean farmers should be taken into  consideration.},
      url = {http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/92316},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.92316},
}