The developmental system is ... Characterization of the developmental system

A mining system is a landowner’s land cultivation system in Russia in the second half of the 19th century - the beginning of the 20th century with peasants' inventory and labor for renting land, money or bread loans, for forest materials, injuries, etc. Usefulness and shareholding were varieties of the mining system. The meaning of the word "mining" in the explanatory dictionary is the work of peasants on the land of the landowner in payment for land rent after the abolition of serfdom.

Shareholder

Publishing is a type of land lease , where the rent is paid to the owner with a share of the crop. It is characteristic mainly in the pre-capitalist and undeveloped capitalist forms of exploitation of small producers. In the conditions of the formation of capitalism, it was a form of transition from the feudal way of leasing land to the capitalist one. The shareholding is still preserved in some countries as a relic of feudalism (USA, Italy, South-West of France, Spain). In many eastern states, it occupies a leading position as a form of rental relations.

Use

Uspolshchina - a form of shareholding in which the rent for land intended for the owner is half the harvest. This method of farming was extremely common, especially in chernozem regions in southern Russia.

Performance system characteristic

The types of developmental system are extremely diverse. There were so-called ten-day earnings, hired workers, and processing circles (one tithe of winter and one tithe of spring) - in this case, the peasants are hired to cultivate the land with their own inventory. Sometimes the peasants borrowed bread or money, obliging them to work it out with interest. This type reflects a characteristic feature: the development system is a semi-serf form of farming, bearing a usurious, bonded nature of hiring.

Sometimes peasants worked "for injuries" (they took upon themselves the obligation to work out the fine established by law for injuries), they worked simply "out of honor" - for treats, almost for nothing, so as not to lose another opportunity for landlords to earn money. Finally, mining practices were widespread.

What is a developmental system in history?

In the two post-reform decades, the landlord economy was undergoing a transition to capitalist forms of land ownership instead of feudal. The old mining system replaced the old one - the one the essence of which was that the neighboring peasants began to cultivate landlord land with their inventory and leased it.

The difference with serfdom here was that the peasant now entered into a contractual relationship with the landowner, and he was already a free man. Market laws of supply and demand began to operate. However, the developmental system also had its drawbacks. Since the landowner was actually a monopolist, he often dictated to the peasants any conditions, which gave the new system an enslaving character. The developmental system is a consequence of the low land of the peasants after the reform carried out in 1861, as well as the pressure of the landowner latifundia.

Work remuneration

The data taken from various sources indicate that in bonded and developmental employment , wages are always lower when compared with capitalist “free” employment. Natural rents are most strongly developed in the poorest peasant groups, and these are forced rents of a peasant who cannot resist his transformation into a wage agricultural worker.

Wealthy peasants tend to rent land for money. The tenant seeks to make money for the lease, thereby reducing the cost of land use. The average payment for processing by the peasants with their inventory of one tithe of bread was 6 rubles. (data from 1883-1891 in the chernozem zone). Free labor was estimated as follows: 6 rubles. 19 kopecks only for foot labor, excluding the work of the horse (paid separately at least 4 rubles. 50 kopecks).

Prevalence of the developmental system

Landowners were greatly benefited by renting "detachable" peasant plots. Therefore, in the central chernozem strip, where the segments made up a significant part of the land, the mining system was most widely used. In addition, the peasant economy in these places was mainly agricultural, due to limited fishing opportunities.

In the industrial provinces of the non-black soil and in the south of Russia, in the first two decades after the reform, there was a transition to a capitalist economic system, hired labor and more advanced agricultural technology were used. An example of this type of entrepreneurship is the economy of A.N. Engelhardt, described in "Letters from the Village".

The table below refers to the 80s of the 19th century (data by N. F. Aniensky), which reflects the ratio of developmental and capitalist forms of management.

From the table it can be concluded that already in the 80s of the 19th century in Russia as a whole, the capitalist system of farming was much more common than the development system. Workings of the first type (when the peasants did the work with their inventory) were replaced by workings of the second type (the poor peasant could use the landowner's inventory). The evolution of housekeeping consisted precisely in the transition, first to the development of the second type, then to the use of capitalist hiring. During the crisis years there was a "rollback", and then it began to prevail again. Historians note its survivability, because the developmental system is one that continued to exist until the beginning of the 20th century.

Disadvantages of the development system

Such a method of farming could exist if it was more profitable for the landowner to hire a bonded peasant than a civilian employee. It delayed technological progress, because when using backward farming methods, conservation of a low level of agricultural technology occurred. The consequence of this was low labor productivity, because the yield on landowner farms using the development system was lower, even than on peasant plots.

Workouts led to the ruin and impoverishment of the peasants, especially the middle class, which was most drawn into this system of management. Not surprisingly, this method of cultivating the land has lost its meaning over time, giving way to more modern, capitalist forms.