Agriculture is a sector of the country's economy, which not only produces the most necessary products for humans, but is also a kind of catalyst indicating the economic development of the state. A high share of the agricultural sector in a country's GDP is usually characteristic of developing and industrially backward countries. The share of agriculture in Liberia's GDP is 76.9%, in Ethiopia - 44.9%, in Guinea-Bissau - 62%.

In economically developed countries, the share of the agricultural industry in GDP is several percent. But this does not mean that these countries are experiencing food problems. Quite the contrary, modern technologies, used in agriculture developed countries, allow you to get excellent results with relatively small investments.

IN Russian Federation Agriculture accounts for just over 4% in the structure of gross value added. At the end of 2014, the volume of agricultural production amounted to 4,225.6 billion rubles. Today, more than 4.54 million people work in the country’s agricultural complex, which is 6.7% of all Russian workers.

2014 was one of the most successful years for Russian farmers. recent history. A record harvest of vegetables was obtained - 15.5 million tons. In addition, for the second time, after the breakup Soviet Union managed to harvest grain crops, more than 100 million tons. Last year this figure was 105.3 million tons, which is almost 14% more than in 2013 and 9% more than the target State program"Development of agriculture and regulation of markets for agricultural products, raw materials and food for 2013 - 2020."

The structure of Russian agriculture includes two main segments: crop production and livestock production. Moreover, their share in cash turnover is almost the same - crop products make up 51%, livestock products - 49%. In addition, there are three main categories of farms:

• Agricultural organizations;
• Households;
• Farms.

The main share of production falls on agricultural organizations and households, but recently there has been a rapid growth of farms. Compared to 2000, the turnover of farms in the Russian Federation has increased almost 20 times. And in 2014 it amounted to 422.7 billion rubles.

In the field of crop production, agricultural organizations and households have equal indicators of cash turnover, but in livestock farming, agricultural organizations have an advantage, which is achieved by reducing the share of farms.

At the end of 2014, agricultural enterprises had good financial performance. Of the 4,800 enterprises in the agricultural sector, 3,800 organizations ended the reporting year with a profit. In percentage terms, this amounted to 80.7%. The total profit received amounted to 249.7 billion rubles. This amount is almost twice as much as in 2013.

If we evaluate the activities of agricultural enterprises using sustainability coefficients, then here too we see a picture close to ideal. So the current liquidity ratio, which is the ratio of the actual value of assets held by organizations current assets to the most urgent obligations of organizations, the industry average is 180.1 with an ideal value of 200. The autonomy coefficient, which indicates the share own funds, in the total value of the organization’s sources of funds is 44.2%, with an ideal value of 50%.

Crop production

Today, the Russian Federation contains about 10% of all arable land in the world. The total sown area of ​​fields in Russia is 78,525 thousand hectares. At the same time, compared to 1992, the total area of ​​arable land in Russia decreased by 32%.

70.4% of all arable land is owned by agricultural organizations. In numerical equivalent, this amounts to 55,285 thousand hectares. Farms account for 19,727 thousand hectares, which is 25.1% of the total. National farms own only 3,513 thousand hectares, which in percentage terms is equal to 4.5%.

All agricultural crops grown in Russia are divided into the following categories:

• Cereals and legumes (wheat, rye, barley, oats, corn, millet, buckwheat, rice, sorghum, triticale);
• Industrial crops (fiber flax, sugar beet);
• Oilseeds (sunflower, soybean, mustard, rapeseed);
• Vegetables (cabbage, cucumbers, tomatoes, beets, carrots, onions, garlic, zucchini, eggplant, etc.);
• Potato
• Forage crops (forage root crops, corn for feed, annual and perennial grasses)

The largest sown areas in 2014 were allocated to grain and leguminous crops. In percentage terms, the area sown with these crops was 58.8%. In second place in terms of crop area are fodder crops - 21.8%, and the third place is closed by oilseeds, their share in the total amounted to 14.2%.

If we consider statistics by category of farms, the trend here persists only for agricultural organizations and farms. The share of sown grain and leguminous crops was 58.18% and 66%, respectively. In the national economy, cereal crops accounted for only 16.6% of the sown areas. And the leader in sowing was potatoes, accounting for more than 71% of all arable land in the national economy.

The main areas of crop production in Russia are the Volga region, the North Caucasus, the Urals and Western Siberia. About 4/5 of all arable land in the country is located here. If we consider the percentage of enterprises engaged in the field of crop production to the total number of agricultural enterprises, then for federal districts there will be the following data:

• Southern Federal District - 67.1%
• Far Eastern Federal District - 61.9%
• North Caucasus Federal District - 53.2%
• Central Federal District - 50.7%
• Volga Federal District - 48.3%
• Crimean Federal District - 45.9%
• Siberian Federal District - 42.7%
• Ural Federal District - 41.5%
• Northwestern Federal District - 37.4%

Among the regions, the highest percentage of crop-growing enterprises to the total number is in the Jewish Autonomous Region - 80.2%, while the main regions for growing crops have an average ratio of 70%.

• Krasnodar region - 71.9%
• Amur region - 71.7%
• Primorsky Krai - 71.5%
• Stavropol Territory - 69%
• Volgograd region - 68.6%
• Rostov region - 68.4%

Growing grain and leguminous crops plays a leading role not only in crop production in the Russian Federation, but also in the entire agro-industrial complex of the country. Wheat and meslin (a mixture of wheat and rye in proportions of 2 to 1) are the main agricultural products exported by Russia. In addition, grain crops such as wheat, rye, barley, corn, and rice are commodities and are traded on commodity exchanges.

At the end of 2014, grain and leguminous crops were sown on a total area of ​​46,220 thousand hectares. The total harvest amounted to 105,315 thousand tons. The average yield per hectare was 24.1 centners.

The most important grain crop is wheat. Every year the world consumes about 700 million tons of wheat. EU countries consume the most wheat - about 120 million tons, China is in second place - about 100 million tons, and India is in third place - about 75 million tons.

Russia is one of the top five wheat producers in the world. In 2014, 59,711 thousand tons of this cereal were grown in Russia. This is the third indicator in the world after China and India. The average wheat yield in 2014 was 25 centners per hectare. This is the highest figure in recent history. Even in 2008, when a record harvest was harvested, the yield per hectare was 24.5 centners.

The second most important cereal for the Russian Federation is barley. It is used in large quantities in the brewing industry and in the production of pearl barley and barley. More than 70% of barley is used for feed purposes.

In 2014, 20,444 thousand tons of barley were grown in the Russian Federation, the average yield per hectare was 22.7 centners.

Corn is the most consumed grain in the world. In recent years, about 950 million tons of corn have been used in the world. The main producer is the United States of America, which accounts for about 1/3 of the world's corn. There are 6 species of this plant in total, but only one is cultivated - sweet corn.

At the end of 2014, Russia collected 11,332 thousand tons of corn for grain and 21,600 thousand tons for feed purposes. The yield of this cereal was 43.6 centners per hectare.

Rice is the most fertile grain. Its average yield is about 60 centners per hectare. The world consumes about 480 million tons of rice annually, and the main consumers are the countries of Southeast Asia. China is in the lead, the Chinese consume about 220 million tons of rice per year, India is in second place, by a significant margin, about 140 million tons, and Indonesia is in third place, about 70 million tons.

In 2014, rice yields were below the world average, but for Russia the figure of 53.6 centners per hectare is one of the best in post-Soviet history. In total, 1,049 thousand tons of rice were harvested last year.

At the end of the 2014 agricultural year, other grain cereals had the following indicators:

• Rye - 3,281 thousand tons were collected with a yield of 17.7 centners per hectare;
• Oats - 5,274 thousand tons were collected with a yield of 17.1 centners per hectare;
• Millet - 493 thousand tons were collected with a yield of 12.3 centners per hectare;
• Buckwheat - 662 thousand tons were collected with a yield of 9.3 centners per hectare;
• Sorghum - 220 thousand tons were collected with a yield of 12.4 centners per hectare;
• Triticale (a hybrid of wheat and rye) - 654 thousand tons were collected with a yield of 26.4 centners per hectare.

The leaders in grain harvest in 2014 are the southern regions of the country: Krasnodar Territory - 13,161 thousand tons, Rostov Region - 9,363 thousand tons and Stavropol Territory - 8,746 thousand tons.

Oilseeds - as their name implies, are used to obtain various vegetable oils. Three oilseed crops are cultivated in Russia - sunflower, soybean and mustard. In addition, oilseed crops include rapeseed, which is used in the production of biodiesel.

In 2014, oilseeds were sown in Russia on an area of ​​11,204 thousand hectares. The total crop harvest amounted to 13,839 thousand tons, the average yield was 13.4 centners per hectare. Most of the sunflowers were sown and harvested. 6,907 thousand hectares were allocated for this crop, and the harvest amounted to 9,034 thousand tons.

Oilseed or annual sunflower is a type of sunflower that is grown to produce vegetable oil. Sunflower oil is the most popular type of vegetable oil in Russia and Ukraine. These two countries are the world leaders in the production of this product. In total, about 12 million tons are produced worldwide sunflower oil annually and more than 60% of this amount falls on these two countries. Sunflower oil ranks fourth in global consumption, accounting for 8.7% of global production of vegetable oils.

Soybean oil ranks second in the world in terms of production volumes. And in Russia this crop is the second most important oilseed crop after sunflower. Of all the vegetable oil produced in the world, soybean oil makes up 27.7%. In 2014, 2,597 thousand tons of soybeans were grown in the Russian Federation, the average yield was 13.6 centners per hectare. 10 years ago, the volume of soybean cultivation was 8 times lower than today, and the yield was lower on average by 25-30%.

In 2014, the largest mustard harvest was harvested in Russia - 103 thousand tons. This culture is used to prepare mustard oil, which is widely used in medicine, cooking, and perfumery. Compared to others oilseeds, mustard has low yield. In 2014 it amounted to 6.6 centners per hectare.

Rapeseed is a herbaceous plant of the cruciferous family. It gained great popularity after the invention of biofuels. Rapeseed oil is used to produce this energy carrier. In Russia, the volume of rapeseed grown over the past 10 years has increased more than 10 times from 135 thousand tons in 1999 to 1,464 thousand tons in 2014. The yield of this crop last year was 17.6 centners per hectare of winter rapeseed and 12.5 centners per hectare of winter rapeseed. hectare - spring.

2014 was the most productive year for vegetables; a total of 15,458 thousand tons of vegetable crops were harvested. Also this year, a record amount of cabbage, tomatoes, carrots, garlic and pumpkin was harvested. Total number of vegetables collected for each type:

• Cabbage - 3,499 thousand tons;
• Tomatoes - 2,300 thousand tons;
• Onions - 1,994 thousand tons;
• Carrots - 1,662 thousand tons;
• Cucumbers - 1,111 thousand tons;
• Table beets - 1,070 thousand tons;
• Table pumpkin - 713 thousand tons;
• Zucchini - 519 thousand tons;
• Garlic - 256 thousand tons;
• Other vegetables - 979 thousand tons

On average, the yield of vegetable crops in 2014 was 218 centners per hectare.

Feed crops are grown for the needs of livestock farming, and in the Russian Federation this type of crop is sown in large volumes. In 2014, 17,127 thousand hectares were allocated for fodder crops. This is the second indicator after grain crops. Over the past year, about 62,000 thousand tons of various feeds were collected.

Most of the agricultural land was devoted to perennial grasses. In 2014, 10-80 thousand hectares were sown with them. The resulting harvest - 39,133 thousand tons - was used as green fodder - 30,388 thousand tons (77.6%), and 8,745 thousand tons (22.4%) were harvested for hay.

Annual grasses were sown on an area of ​​4,582 thousand hectares. The 2014 harvest - 21,650 thousand tons was distributed as follows: 10.6% was used for hay, and the remaining 89.4%, that is, 19,356 tons were used for the production of haylage - grass dried to a moisture content of 50%, preserved in special hermetic containers. containers.

Sugar beet is the most important industrial crop for Russia. It is one of the world's two major crops used for sugar production. On average, the world produces about 170 million tons of sugar per year. Moreover, about 37% of all sugar is produced from sugar beets. The leaders in growing this crop are China, Ukraine, Russia and France.

In order to produce 1 kg. A little less than 5 kg of sugar is needed. sugar beets. In 2014, 33,513 thousand tons of beets were harvested in Russia. The yield was 370 centners per hectare. It should be noted that this figure is 16.2% lower than last year, when a record yield was recorded.

Another industrial crop, fiber flax, is used to produce natural fiber. Flax fiber is 2 times stronger than cotton and is the basis of the Russian textile industry. In addition, flax seeds are used to produce flaxseed oil. In 2014, 37 thousand tons of fiber flax fiber and 7 thousand tons of seeds of this plant were collected in the Russian Federation.

Potatoes are the most common edible root vegetable in the world. More than 350 million tons of potatoes are grown annually in all countries. The leaders in potato production are China, India, Russia, Ukraine and the USA. On average, every year there are about 50 kg per inhabitant of the earth. this product. And the leader in potato consumption is Belarus - 181 kg. per year per capita.

Potatoes are the most popular crop grown on households. In 2014, 31,501 thousand tons were collected in the Russian Federation, while 80.3% - 25,300 thousand tons were grown on household farms. Last year also marked the highest potato yield, on average it amounted to 150 centners per hectare.

Livestock

Livestock farming is a branch of agriculture that supplies the country's food and light industries with raw materials. The main activity of livestock farming is raising livestock for slaughter. About 260,000 thousand tons of meat are consumed annually in the world. In developed countries, consumption averages 70 - 90 kg. meat per person per year, and in developing countries this figure barely reaches 40 kg. in year. The leader in meat consumption is the United States - about 120 kg. per person per year.

In Russia, meat consumption averages about 70 kg. per person per year. Although Russians prefer pork of all types of meat, the most consumed meat is poultry (mainly chicken). This is primarily due to the high cost of pork.

When it comes to egg consumption, Russia is on the same level as countries such as Germany and Italy. On average, residents of these countries consume about 220-230 eggs per year. But in terms of consumption of milk and dairy products, Russians are significantly inferior to residents of European countries and the United States. In the Russian Federation, the annual consumption of these products is about 220 kg. per year, while in France and Germany, which occupy the first places on the list, the consumption of dairy products is at the level of 425 kg. per person per year.

Livestock farming in Russia is represented by 4 main sectors:

• Cattle breeding - growing large cattle for the purpose of obtaining meat and milk;
• Sheep farming - raising livestock for meat and wool;
• Pig farming;
• Poultry farming is the raising of poultry for meat and eggs.

The bulk of the livestock is raised in large agricultural organizations. Parity is maintained only in cattle breeding. The number of heads of cattle in households and agricultural organizations is approximately the same - 8,672 and 8,521 thousand heads, respectively. At the same time, there are more cows on household farms - 4,026 thousand heads, while agricultural organizations have a livestock of 3,431 thousand heads. In poultry farming, agricultural organizations account for 81% of the livestock, and in pig farming - 79.9%.

Cattle breeding - most important industry Russian livestock farming accounts for 60% of gross turnover. Dairy, meat and meat and dairy breeds of cattle are bred throughout the country. Breeding a particular breed depends on feeding conditions, therefore different regions The Russian Federation raises animals that are most adapted to local conditions.

Dairy cows are bred in areas located in forest and forest-steppe zones. First of all, these are the Northern, Northwestern, Volga-Vyatka and Ural regions. The Vologda region is a region where dairy cattle breeding is most developed; it is not without reason that this region is famous throughout Russia for its dairy products. Dairy farming accounts for more than 70% of all agricultural products in the region.

Meat and meat and dairy breeds of cows are bred in steppe regions and adjacent semi-deserts. The main breeding centers are the Central Black Earth region, the North Caucasus region, the south of the Urals and Siberia.

The total number of cattle at the end of 2014 amounted to 19,293 thousand heads. This is 2.2% less than in 2013 and 3.3% less than in 2012. Since 1990, the number of cattle in Russia has been decreasing; over 25 years, the number of heads has decreased by 2.5 times. This is primarily due to the reluctance to invest in this industry, since they pay off in 8-10 years. For comparison, in poultry farming investments pay off in 1-2 years, and in pig farming in 3-4.

But despite the reduction in livestock, Russia continues to be among the leading countries in this indicator. True, the Russian cattle population is only 5.91% of the Indian one.

Sheep farming is a branch of livestock farming that has become widespread in the mountainous and arid regions of the Russian Federation. The centers of sheep breeding are the North Caucasus and the semi-desert regions of the Southern Urals.

Unlike cattle breeding, breeding of small ruminants in Russia is gradually gaining momentum. Compared to 2000, the number of sheep increased by 10 million heads and at the end of 2014 amounted to 22.246 million heads.

Pig farming is most widespread in the Central Black Earth, Volga-Vyatka and Volga regions of the country. That is, in areas where cereal crop production and the cultivation of fodder crops are developed. The leader in pork production in the Russian Federation is the Belgorod region - about 26% of the total Russian volume is produced here. There are 4 types of pigs bred in Russia:

• Sebaceous;
• Meat;
• Ham;
• Bacon.

The total number of pigs in the Russian Federation at the end of 2014 amounted to 19,575 thousand heads. In total, the world's pig population numbers more than 2 billion heads. About half of the livestock is in the countries of Southeast Asia (China, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar), about 1/3 goes to the EU and CIS countries, and the USA accounts for about 10%.

Poultry farming is the most dynamic growing industry Russian livestock farming. The increase in the number of livestock began at the beginning of the 2000s and over 14 years it increased 1.5 times. Today, poultry meat is the most popular in Russia. And the livestock reaches 529 million heads.

But besides Russia, poultry meat is the most consumed in Australia, North and South America. For example, in the United States, the level of poultry meat consumption is almost 55 kg. per year per person - this is more than 3.5 times the world average consumption.

In addition to meat, poultry farming provides the population with eggs. The average productivity of one laying hen in 2014 was 308 eggs per year. In general, 41.8 billion eggs were produced in Russia over the past year. This performance has been maintained for several years.

Export and import of agricultural products

Compared to 2013, exports of Russian agricultural products increased by 14% and amounted to 19.1 billion US dollars. But, despite such significant growth, the amount of imports in this sector of the economy exceeds the level of exports by more than 2 times. At the end of 2014, exports of agricultural products amounted to $40.9 billion, which is 9.1% less than in the previous year.

The main share of Russian exports consists of crop products. About 2/3 of exports are from grain crops. In 2014, Russia exported more than 22 million tons of wheat. This is the third world indicator after the United States and the European Union.

The overall increase in wheat exports from Russia compared to 2013 increased by 60%. The main grain deliveries were carried out by sea, and the rating of Russian grain exporters is as follows:

• LLC "International Grain Company". The share in exports is 12.79%, the port of shipment is Temryuk.
• Trading house "RIF". Share in exports - 7.78%, ports of shipment - Azov (61.33%), Rostov-on-Don (38.67%).
• Outspan International. Share in exports - 7.24%, ports of shipment - Novorossiysk (51.58%), Azov (26.26%), Rostov-on-Don (13.96%).
• Cargill. Share in exports - 6.96%, ports of shipment - Novorossiysk (66.71%), Rostov-on-Don (21.91%), Tuapse (11.28%).
• Aston company. Share in exports - 5.46%, ports of shipment - Rostov-on-Don (76.38%), Novorossiysk (16.26%).

In addition to grains, Russia exports a large volume of sunflower oil. About 25% of the produced product is exported, that is, about 1 million tons. Russia also exports exclusive goods: black and red caviar, honey, mushrooms, berries.

Among the imported food products the majority are meat and meat products, fruits, vegetables, fish and fish products. The decrease in imports in 2014 was due to sanctions, as well as the import substitution program. True, it is not possible to replace all products with domestic ones, since due to climatic conditions it is impossible to grow them in Russia. Basically, import substitution affected livestock products. In general, imports for this industry were reduced by 10%.

In 2015, it is planned to further reduce food imports. For these purposes, the state commissioned production facilities specializing in the production of products that are not typical for Russia. Now Parmesan cheese is produced in Tatarstan, Camembert and mascarpone cheeses are produced in Altai, and production has been launched in the Sverdlovsk region deli meat- jamona.

Industry development prospects

Despite the excellent harvest in 2014, Russian farmers should not delude themselves. The agricultural sector has always been one of the most difficult to develop, and given the vast territory and varied climatic conditions, a lot of effort remains to be made to improve the agricultural sector in Russia.

First of all, we need to attract investment in the agricultural sector. Now, due to a lack of equipment, a significant part of arable land is not cultivated. In some regions there are only 2 tractors per 100 hectares of arable land. Due to low profitability, livestock farmers are forced to reduce the number of cattle, which leads to an increase in meat imports.

Another factor slowing down the growth of the Russian agro-industrial complex is the high price of fuels and lubricants and problems with transportation. After all, the crop must not only be grown, but also collected, delivered to a storage location and stored. Depending on the type of crop, more than 40% of products spoil during transportation and storage.

In addition, due to the large territory of Russia, problems with the redistribution of agricultural products very often arise. For example, in the Far East in 2014 a large soybean harvest was harvested, but it is not yet clear what to do with it. After all, there are only two large plants for its processing in the region, and in European part It is not profitable to bring the product to the country, since it is cheaper to bring soybeans here from Brazil.

The problem of highly qualified personnel is still relevant. Low wages and difficult working conditions increase the outflow of workers from this industry. There is also a lack of scientific support for this segment of the economy.

But, despite all the difficulties, the government of the Russian Federation for 2015 set the task for farmers to improve the results of 2014. To provide the country with its own agricultural products, it is necessary to increase the number of cattle by 2.3 million heads, poultry by 11 million heads, and collect 3 million tons of grain more than was collected in 2014.

Read briefly and to the point about the agricultural market on Answr

Stay up to date with all the important events of United Traders - subscribe to our

The census takers did not count domestic animals and the farmers themselves. Photo by RIA Novosti

Over the past decade, the number of people working in agriculture in Russia has decreased. The number of farms during this time fell by almost half. These are the results of the latest agricultural census 2016, which Rosstat reported yesterday. Even more surprising are the census data on agricultural land. Over the past 10 years, almost 20 million hectares have been “lost” somewhere.

As the results of the agricultural census show, over the past 10 years in the Russian Federation the number of almost all types of agricultural organizations has noticeably decreased. Today in Russia there are about 36 thousand agricultural holdings. At the same time, almost every fourth of them does not engage in agricultural activities. 10 years ago there were about 60 thousand large agricultural organizations in the country, but a third of them were not actually involved in agriculture.

Over the same period, the number of peasant farms (peasant farms) decreased even more noticeably. In 2016, their number was estimated at 136 thousand. In 2006, there were much more of them - over 253 thousand. True, if 10 years ago, in fact, half of all peasant farms did not carry out agricultural activities, but today only one in three.

Over the same period in the Russian Federation the number of individual entrepreneurs, employed in the agro-industrial complex (AIC). If 10 years ago there were 32 thousand of them, then today there are already over 38 thousand. The picture is similar with personal subsidiary plots(LPH) citizens. According to the results of the 2016 census, their number increased to 23.5 million, while 10 years ago it was about 22.8 million.

Over the past 10 years, not only the number of agricultural organizations has decreased, but also the number of workers employed in the agricultural sector. If in 2006 about 2.5 million people worked in agricultural holdings, then in 2016 there were only 1.2 million people. The situation is similar in peasant farms. 10 years ago, 470 thousand workers were employed on all farms; today there are less than 300 thousand people.

In addition, over the past 10 years, a serious reorientation has occurred in Russian livestock farming. Today, the domestic agro-industrial complex seems to be more interested in producing a quick and not too expensive product. In particular, as follows from the census data, over the past years, the number of cattle has decreased by 18% on farms of all categories. In total, today there are about 19 million heads of cattle in the country, while in 2006 there were more than 23.5 million. Of the 19 million, less than 8 million are dairy cows. Note that 10 years ago the number of dairy cows was 9.5 million. With such a reduction, it is not very clear how Alexander Tkachev’s department hopes to make up for the milk shortage (see).

For comparison, over the same period, the number of sheep and goats increased by 21%, to 27 million. The main contribution to the increase in production was made by farms, according to census data. Much more significant was the increase in the production of pigs and poultry. Over 10 years, agricultural holdings have actually doubled poultry production (from 244 million to 434 million). The number of pigs in these categories of farms also more than doubled – from 7.9 million in 2006 to 19 million in 2016. As a result, today up to 78% of the poultry produced in the country and 80% of pigs are raised in large agricultural holdings.

“It seems that Rosstat has moved closer to the truth,” Dmitry Rylko, general director of the Institute for Agricultural Market Studies, comments on the census results to NG. Nevertheless, there is still some discrepancy in Rosstat data. For example, Rylko points out that census data on the volume of potato sown areas do not coincide with official data from Rosstat. “It’s about the same, but on a smaller scale – in terms of the number of cows: in private household plots, according to the census, they are about 270 thousand less than official data,” the expert points out.

Indeed, data from Rosstat and the agricultural census often do not coincide. If, according to the census results, there are 19.3 million heads of cattle in the country, then according to official data from Rosstat - 18.7 million. The picture is similar for other categories of livestock farming.

In general, NG experts note, the census showed that significant structural changes have occurred in agriculture over the past 10 years. “And the first thing that catches your eye is the reduction in farms and their numbers compared to 2006. This suggests that there is a process of consolidation, concentration of agricultural production in the hands of stronger economic entities,” admits the professor of the Russian University of Economics them. Plekhanov Ruslan Abramov.

“Roughly speaking, the number of farmers, regardless of the scale of their activities in Russia, has almost halved from 2006 to 2016,” notes Sergei Zvenigorodsky, network development director at Solid Management. And the rapid reduction of peasant farms cannot but cause alarm. “The number of peasant farms depends on the level of lending rates in banks, on the ability to freely sell their products at market prices, from tax policy, from the cost of servicing agricultural machinery. Statistics show that farmers still feel uncomfortable,” the economist emphasizes.

Experts are also concerned about census data on the use of agricultural land. As follows from the results, today the country has over 142 million hectares of farmland of all categories. Moreover, just 10 years ago there were almost 166 million hectares. However, Rosstat notes that during this time the area of ​​unused agricultural land has decreased. According to the results of the 2016 agricultural census, its area does not exceed 17.3 million hectares, while in 2006 it was 40.5 million hectares.

What is noteworthy is that the area under crops even increased over the same period. If 10 years ago the sown area for all categories of farms and crops was about 74.8 million hectares, today it is slightly less than 80 million. Farms were the first to “grow in” with land.

However, in comparison with a more distant period, it turns out that the area of ​​cultivated land in the country has noticeably decreased. In 1990, the total area of ​​cultivated land was 117 million hectares.

“The agricultural census covers all agricultural producers. In theory, it shows how the country's 222 million hectares of farmland are used. And the first conclusion is alarming: in 2006, 165 million hectares of land were assigned to agricultural producers, and in 2016 – 20 million hectares less. At the same time, agricultural organizations abandoned 42 million hectares. Half of this land went to farmers, and the rest? The census does not reveal where this huge area went,” says Vasily Uzun, chief researcher at the Center for Agricultural and Food Policy of the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. “True, there is an encouraging conclusion: the used area of ​​farmland in 2016 remained approximately the same as in 2006 – 125 million hectares. But the sad fact is that this area makes up only 56% of the total area of ​​farmland. For the authorities, this result sounds like a death sentence,” the expert concludes.

In general, it is virtually impossible to understand which agricultural areas are not being used today for one reason or another. There is no single assessment. According to experts, up to 50–60 million hectares may be abandoned in the country.

In what areas is robotization really useful and necessary, and what should people working in agriculture be wary of, the magazine “ Agricultural technology and technology»

We must not forget about the main problem of humanity - overpopulation. Most articles about agriculture begin with forecasts for the growth of the Earth's population - 8.5 billion people by 2030 and 9.7 billion by 2050. Feeding them is really problematic, because the planet's resources are depleted, salvoes of the last green revolution with Norman's new varieties of wheat The Borlaug died out more than 60 years ago, and the population has more than doubled since then.

But still, robots cannot completely replace humans in agriculture. It turns out that labor is so cheap in Russia that even free hardware cannot compete with it. However, automation is still inevitable.

According to Json & Partners Consulting, labor productivity in Russian agriculture lags behind productivity in German agriculture by three times, and yields in our country are 2.5-3 times lower. And this is a consequence not only of technological backwardness, but also of a lack of work ethics - there are always employees who do their work poorly. Only automation can correct the current state of affairs. It is thanks to it that milk yields are growing in Russia and the quality of milk is improving, and poultry and pig farmers have come closer to world production standards and have the opportunity to export their products.

The use of robotic systems in agriculture can increase the efficiency of business processes by an average of 50-70%.

No longer exotic

Many Russian agricultural holdings and processing companies have already automated business processes and started robotizing production, notes Vitaly Sheremet, head of the competency center in the agro-industrial complex of KPMG in Russia and the CIS. However, the implementation of these innovations is not uniform. “Already structured processes, as well as those processes in which such a measure leads to economic efficiency“, states the specialist.

There are many examples of robotization of back offices, accounting, legal and some HR functions, where the cost of labor is quite high and there is a shortage of experts in the market, he continues. “At the same time, robotization of the front office, for example, in the agricultural sector, is an area that, it would seem, fits perfectly with the very idea technological innovation, is of interest, but is still quite theoretical, because the cost of labor in this segment is much lower, and often robotization cases simply do not stand up economic analysis“Explains Vitaly Sheremet. According to him, this is due to the fact that human labor in domestic agriculture is cheaper than the cost of modern equipment.

However, in the future this situation will change. Agriculture is experiencing a serious shortage of both skilled and unskilled workers. Therefore, the trend towards robotization and the reduction in cost of these technologies over time, on the one hand, will solve the problem of staff shortages, and on the other, will create a need for highly qualified personnel, who will be properly rewarded, Sheremet predicts.

The people who will be replaced by robots in agriculture will be the same people as in industry and the service sector. That is, workers who perform monotonous and mechanical work. It is a repetitive sequence of actions that lends itself best to automation. “We are not yet ready to completely replace people on the ground in these areas, but there are already precedents where, in a number of classes of problems, systems such as the same artificial intelligence, which operates with a large volume of data, can produce better solutions in terms of probability than a person.” , says Alexander Kalinin, CEO of SibEDGE. From this point of view, almost all work on a farm can be automated even now, if there is money.

However, there are areas where machines are still very far from humans. The worst thing robots do is creative work and operations where there is no one right answer, and therefore agronomists, engineers, designers and marketers can rest easy. Although there have already been cases when people working in large processing industries, for example, engineers, were forced to retrain or move to other areas, notes Alexander Kalinin. “Often, a professional person costs a company much more than the corresponding software. And the logical solution is to replace it. Yes, there is still a transition period of digitalization, although in complex industries people are already becoming more expensive, and automation is becoming a profitable alternative,” he argues.

All these opportunities have so far bypassed Russia for the most part, because the intensity of investment in the technological modernization of production is forcedly low. The topics of introducing radically new technologies, digitalization, and robotization are especially low. “So, in Russia, production robots are purchased annually 80-200 times (!) less than in China or the USA,” emphasizes Ilya Kuzminov, head of the department at the Institute of Statistical Research and Economics of Knowledge at the Higher School of Economics.

Human labor in the domestic agro-industrial complex is cheaper than the cost of modern equipment.

Only for the big and rich

In Russian agriculture, the automation potential is quite high only in large agricultural organizations. This is mainly due to the financial capabilities of such organizations. The richest of them can be considered meat producers, who also have all necessary equipment for automation. “In livestock farming, the processes of feeding, cleaning livestock, and milking cows can be fully automated, but qualified operators of automated complexes are required. On average, a complex of 200 head of cattle can be serviced by no more than 10 people,” Stepan Zemtsov, a senior researcher at the Laboratory for Research on Entrepreneurship Problems at the Institute of Applied Economic Research (IPEI) of RANEPA, gives an example.

In the realm of large companies and large factories, any reduction in labor usually reduces production costs. In addition, meat processing is a sector of the agro-industrial complex close to industry, where traditionally the need for labor force. “Today, Russia has set a course for maximum robotization of industry. The chosen direction affects more than just business processes, but on the system and development strategy as a whole,” states the General Director of the Management Company “GK” White Frigate"(a group of companies that includes an agricultural complex with poultry production, meat processing and the production of poultry food products) Timur Gasiev.

Now " White Frigate» uses manual labor only to produce boneless group. But as production expands, automation will also be required there. However, the company sees not only the pros, but also the cons of this process.

“According to international analysts, the use of robotic systems in agriculture makes it possible to increase the efficiency of business processes by an average of 50-70% due to reduced fuel consumption and reduced water and electricity losses. But, on the other hand, automation also has disadvantages - these are high implementation costs, the possibility of technical failures, and a lack of qualified personnel to maintain systems,” argues Timur Gasiev. According to him, now manual labor is less expensive, but this applies only to the average volume of production, which is “ White frigate" However, what more company develops the sales market, introduces new brands and types of products, the more relevant budget planning is, taking into account the complete transition to automatic production. In other words, automation of the entire production cycle is a serious investment, and investments are inevitable if the company is focused on high results.

When production is automated, costs and income can be planned very accurately. And even deliver and distribute orders without human intervention. Such systems are already being developed by IT companies. Thus, the SibEDGE company is working on creating a web-based centralized system that can work with the entire fleet of meat processing plant devices. The system is closely integrated with the enterprise's ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) system. It will have a modernized, but at the same time clear interface, which should have a positive effect on the speed of the operator’s work by reducing the number of errors made during operation.

The software will help manufacturers automate the distribution of orders at meat processing plants, and customers will receive fresh meat products in one click.

In crop production, the level of automation is still lower, and it solves specific problems, for example, managing raw materials and saving resources. There are no plans to replace humans with robots yet.

Director of the Krasnokamsk RMZ Dmitry Teplov cites as an example of partial automation the high-speed packer for preparing feed “Senage in Line”. It does not require a machine operator or a tractor driver to operate - it only needs one person to feed the bales, whereas a typical packer requires up to two tractors to operate: one for the bales and a second to act as the power unit for the packer. All this equipment requires up to four people. And productivity will be low - about 25 rolls per hour, because people get tired, make mistakes, and need a break. “Sometimes we encounter mistakes that employees make deliberately. They are in a hurry and put unevenly dried grass into rolls or reduce the packing density of the roll in order to earn more money with piecework wages,” admits Dmitry Teplov. To control such workers, separate digital solutions are being introduced.

The advent of a high-speed packer made it possible to produce up to 80 rolls per hour and provide feed for up to 2 thousand heads in the almost complete absence of people.

Robots do worst at creative work and operations where there is no one right answer.

Winners...

Automation in agriculture helps reduce costs and increase labor efficiency, which is especially important when fewer people are willing to devote their lives to agriculture. In addition, in developed countries, farmers are aging rapidly. For example, over the past thirty years, the average age of an American farmer has risen from an already considerable 50.5 years to 58.3 years. That is, almost all of them are pensioners. At the same time, over the past 10 years, the number American farms fell by 200 thousand - to 2 million. “Today in the world, one farmer on average provides 155 people with products; as digital technologies in agriculture develop, this figure will increase to 255,” says Dmitry Teplov. In practice, this will mean job losses.

“Based on our practice in large industrial companies, on average, robotic process automation technology allows us to replace two full-time workers on a routine process,” estimates Sergei Yudovsky, managing partner of CRII (Center for Robotization and Artificial Intelligence).

Often it is the age of farmers that forces them to resort to automation, since working on a farm is difficult for an elderly person. That's why Japanese farmers fell in love with the Yamaha RMAX unmanned helicopter for spraying, because the average age of a farmer in Japan is 66 years old - it's already difficult to spray on your own.

But there is an alternative point of view on the technological revolution in the agricultural sector. In Russia, gas and electricity are still not available everywhere, let alone the Internet, and secretaries help many farmers use the banal Skype, so it is more correct to talk not about robotization, but about updating farms. “The slow growth of labor productivity in Russian agriculture against the background of, again, a slow reduction in the number of jobs in the industry is taking place. But the factor of introducing new technologies is far from the most important,” says Ilya Kuzminov from the Higher School of Economics. According to him, some successful enterprises are gradually increasing their technical equipment, acquiring quite traditional production equipment and machines that have existed on the world market for decades and are based on old technologies (for example, milking machines and tractors). Secondly, business processes are optimized. “In other words, reliable enterprises are forced to restore order in production, eliminate losses of raw materials, damage to equipment, and theft. Hopeless, least efficient enterprises continue to die off, especially intensively in regions of the North and East of the country that are unfavorable for agriculture. And this process has been going on for more than 25 years,” the expert notes.
However, when comparing the costs of a human employee and a robot employee, some features need to be taken into account, but if we take it at a minimum, then the equivalent wages is the annual license of the robot, and the equivalent of training is the cost of development, explains Sergey Yudovsky. In both respects, the robot is cheaper and, most importantly, performs routine processes more accurately than a human.
“If we consider the offers of large vendors of such technologies, the cheapest license will cost about 150 thousand rubles per year, and with this license it will be possible to launch completely different robots performing completely different processes. It is hardly possible in modern realities to imagine an employee who has all the necessary skills and is willing to work around the clock for 12.5 thousand rubles per month, including taxes and social contributions,” Sergei Yudovsky quotes calculations.

You will need to pay a larger amount to set up the system, but the payback period is several months, especially if we are talking about major process, which employs dozens of full-time employees.

Considering that combine operators now earn hundreds of thousands of rubles per season, and machine operators are sought in neighboring regions, soon all agricultural holdings will understand the benefits of automation, experts say. None of them are used to and will not work for 12.5 thousand, and certainly will not work 24/7, as does robotic equipment for sowing and harvesting, as well as drones for monitoring crops.

Today in the world, on average, one farmer provides food for 155 people, and with the development of digital technologies in agriculture, this figure will increase to 255.

...and the losers

The losers, as always, are ordinary villagers. Moreover, education may not save them from unemployment. Robots are replacing milkmaids, and new technology requires fewer mechanics, but no one knows exactly how many of them lost their jobs, because there is no specific data on the structure of employment in agriculture in statistics. What is known is that jobs are being lost very quickly. “In general, in 2015 in Russia, according to the All-Russian Agricultural Census, there were about 1 million workers (0.8 million permanent) employed in agricultural production in large and medium-sized agricultural organizations. For comparison, in 2006 there were 2.3 million, that is, the number of employees of agricultural enterprises decreased by 2.3 times, including as a result of certain processes of mechanization and automation,” Stepan Zemtsov from RANEPA gives an example.

According to him, 58% of people employed in the agricultural sector can be replaced by robots. Since automation of production is most likely in large agricultural enterprises, which constantly employ no more than 0.8 million people, then in the future, by 2030, about 460 thousand people will lose their jobs. But the majority of rural residents do not work even without this, not only in the agro-industrial complex, but even just in the countryside.

“Currently in Russia there are about 16.2 million rural residents of working age, of which 14.8 million people are employed, while no more than 4.2 million people are employed in agriculture, forestry and fisheries, that is, only 28.3% “, - Stepan Zemtsov cites the data. In recent years, the employment of rural residents in agriculture has been falling very quickly: back in 2006, more than 45% of them worked in the agricultural sector. For this reason alone, most rural residents are not concerned about automation processes in agriculture - they simply do not concern them.

Considering the strong technological lag of the Russian agro-industrial complex, highly qualified specialists with a strong higher education will feel best. “There will inevitably be further polarization of the salaries of such specialists, but rather for reasons of an economic rather than technological nature,” predicts Ilya Kuzminov. — Modern successful agricultural holdings require talented, outstanding personal qualities specialists for almost any money, and there are very few such specialists.”

As a result, mediocre specialists with higher agricultural education will work at not very successful agricultural enterprises, often earning no more than low-skilled workers at the same enterprises, he believes. The only reward for higher education for them will be freedom from the need for hard physical labor.

At present, there is no need to talk about the strong impact of automation on the number of jobs - there is less and less work without robots. “The parallelism of the processes of technological modernization and the outflow of population from the countryside should not be misleading: there may be no cause-and-effect relationship between them. The rural population will move to cities despite the emergence of new jobs in rural areas. The scenario of forced migration from rural areas due to the automation of jobs in agriculture is extremely unlikely. Moreover, according to statistics, agricultural activity has not been the main source of employment for the rural population for a long time,” sums up Ilya Kuzminov.

I made the following graph:

Author's text for this data:
The presented table was collected from many sources - including from the collections "The RSFSR for 50 years" (an assessment of the dynamics of agricultural production before 1940, the share of people employed in agriculture in 1940), "The National Economy of the RSFSR in 1987" (the dynamics of agricultural production in 1940 - 85), "National economy of the RSFSR in 1990" (dynamics of agricultural production in the second half of the 80s), "Russian statistical yearbook 1994" (number of people employed in agriculture in 1970 - 1990) , data from the official website of Rosstat on the dynamics of agricultural production in 1990 - 2012, the recently published collection "Economic activity of the population of Russia (based on the results of sample studies). 2012" (employment dynamics in 2003 - 2012).

I estimated the number of people employed in agriculture in 1913 based on the share of people employed in the population, similar to 1940 (40.5%), and the share of agriculture in the total number of people employed at 75%. It is possible that the real number of people employed in agriculture in 1913 was lower; in this case, it is necessary to lower the assessment of productivity dynamics over the new century of Russian history.

To ensure comparability of data, the number of employees also includes persons in the sectors “Fishing and fish farming” and “Forestry”.

Main conclusions:

1. The dynamics of labor productivity in agriculture over the past 100 years have been clearly unsatisfactory. Until the middle of the century, it was restrained by the consequences of military and civil upheavals (1914 - 1921), the costs of collectivization (1929 - 1933) and the Great Patriotic War. Labor productivity increased relatively quickly (by 7% per year) in 1951 - 1970, after which the stagnation of the 70s set in (productivity growth over the decade was less than 4%). In the 80s, the situation improved somewhat, agricultural productivity for 1981 - 1989. increased by a third, but since 1990 another decline began. In general, for 1914 - 1990. The average annual growth in labor productivity in agriculture was 3%.

2. In 1990 - 1998 Labor productivity in agriculture decreased by more than a third, but since 1999 it began to recover quite quickly, reaching the 1989 level in 2006. In general, for 1991 - 2012. average annual productivity growth was 2.2%.

3. However, both Soviet and Russian rates of growth of labor productivity in agriculture are inferior integral indicators countries of the "Golden Billion", although better than the global dynamics. The number of people employed in agriculture in Russia is excessive and by 2030 should be reduced to a level of no more than 3 million people.

My additions and comments to this data:
The estimate of the number of people employed in agriculture for 1913 does not seem correct to me. The number of employees cannot coincide with the number of people themselves peasant farms- it must inevitably be at least twice as large and the desired figure will be in the range from 54 million people to 150 million, i.e. to the size of the entire rural population of Russia at that time. It is simply impossible to establish an exact figure due to the pre-industrial type of agriculture before the revolution. It also seems to me incorrect to include in this number people employed in the fishing and forestry sectors of Russia.

As for the number of people employed in agriculture, which is so pleasing to the hearts and minds of liberals and putirasts, from 10 million people in 1990 to 5.2 million in 2012, I will first draw their attention to the decrease since 1990 in the volume of all production agricultural products. It fell by 1/3 compared to 1990. You can find out more about these numbers. In my opinion, only idiots can rejoice at a 50% decrease in the number of employees with a 33% decrease in production volume. So they rejoice at this and are even proud.

I also draw attention to the fact that the number and share of rural residents in the Russian Federation has not changed since 1990, which means in this situation we have approximately 5 million completely extra people of working age from rural areas, who are also not particularly needed in the city, where, as a result of the rule of liberals, millions of unemployed people have formed and there are millions of guest workers with whom our compatriots are forced to compete for jobs.

Now a little about the reasons for the reduction in the number of people employed in the agricultural sector of the Russian Federation. The main reason is the destruction of Russian dairy and meat livestock farming over these 20 years. To see this, just look at this plate again:

What is the difference between livestock farming and grain farming? The fact is that livestock farming requires many more people than grain farming. I sowed the grain in the spring and harvested it in the summer. Then sleep and rest. With livestock farming, everything is much more complicated and labor-intensive. Need employment all year round. We need field farmers, milkmaids, veterinarians, and livestock specialists. We need a huge production of green feed for dairy farming, and for this we again need people. You also need feed grain - approximately 2/3 of all needs.

Thus, by killing their livestock farming, the liberals left millions of Russians without work, destroyed food security and Russian independence, reduced

Russian agriculture is demonstrating undoubted success, but at the same time, many old problems remain and new ones are emerging. The number of people employed in agricultural production is declining - over the past ten years their number has decreased by 45%. This is 1.4 million people. Is it good or bad? Why the problem of fair distribution is not being solved state aid among agricultural producers? Why do farms and private households produce half of the food in the country, but receive less than 10% of subsidies from the state budget? The director of the All-Russian Research Institute of Agrarian Problems and Informatics, academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexander PETRIKOV spoke openly about the unresolved issues of agricultural production in Russia, with whom the publisher of the portal “Peasant Vedomosti”, presenter of the “Agrarian Policy” program of the Public Television of Russia, associate professor of the Timiryazev Academy Igor ABAKUMOV met.

— Alexander Vasilievich. There is a joke that agrarian problems begin with the very name of your institute...

— Yes, Igor Borisovich, this joke is really quite widespread in the expert community, even one high-ranking boss once said: “Now I know where the problems in our agriculture come from,” to which I replied: “Imagine that our institute was called the All-Russian Institute of Agrarian Success." Where there is success, science and experts have nothing to do.

— I think that such a name for the institute would be in demand now - Institute of Agrarian Success. We have success everywhere, but for some reason they don’t talk very actively about money. All the money, I heard, goes to large holdings - is this true or not?

— Well, if we leave the irony about the name of our institute and about the successes in agriculture, then we really know that economic growth in rural areas has already become a stable phenomenon, which almost everyone talks about. But it would be even greater if our agricultural budget - federal and regional - was distributed more efficiently.

— What did the population census show in this sense? Now its results are being summed up.

— The All-Russian Agricultural Census, which took place in 2016, was the second in history new Russia and brought many unexpected results. In particular, if we talk about budget distribution, all census participants (agricultural organizations, individual entrepreneurs) were asked whether they received subsidies and subsidies from the state federal or regional budget in 2015. And the distribution of answers is as follows: 75% of representatives of large farms, but not small enterprises, answered this question positively...

— That is, 75% are satisfied with life?

— Yes, but I still want to note that 25% did not receive subsidies or subsidies. And if we take microenterprises, then this percentage is 56%, and if we take farmers and individual entrepreneurs, then it is 34%. That is, we see that the census confirmed, in fact, in quantitative terms, the long-known fact that in our agriculture, small and medium-sized businesses are supported by the state to about 2 times less than large ones.

— Did I understand correctly that this very small and medium-sized business produces approximately half of the food?

- Yes it is. And lately we have seen several initiatives by the government, which has tightened control over the targeted and effective distribution of state budget funds and has become concerned with the question of how to bring money to the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. But let me ask, what is being done inside the subjects? How does this money end up in peasant accounts? So I think this is the second most main question, which will have to be resolved.

— Alexander Vasilyevich, this year it’s 40 years that I’ve been practicing rural theme in journalism. Both 40 years and the last 25 years after the reform, conversations have been most intense about how to bring money to the peasants. At what stage do they start going somewhere in the wrong direction? I’m not saying that they are being stolen, I’m not saying that - I’m just saying that they start going somewhere else, they don’t reach the peasant. For this, in fact, Rosselkhozbank was formed in 1991-1992, if I remember correctly. First there was Agroprombank, then Rosselkhozbank, then it disappeared somewhere, then again Rosselkhozbank was formed again specifically to bring money to the peasants, because large banks do not reach the villages. Why does all this need to be carried out through the regional administration? Why not right away?

- Yes, indeed... I think that the problem of resource distribution in general in Russia - not only budgetary ones, but the distribution problem in general - worries us more than the problem of production efficiency. This, Igor Borisovich, happened before us and will happen after us. But speaking again without irony...

— It’s impossible without irony, Alexander Vasilyevich.

- ...the uneven distribution of the budget - I will say now, perhaps an unpopular idea that does not cause your approval - was partly due to the distribution in favor of big business, when we had to urgently solve the problem of the country's food independence, in a relatively short period of time, in 10 years, to fill the market with domestic food, and large farms solved this problem. But now we are talking about something else. Now other tasks are being put forward. The task is to produce higher quality food, the task economic growth in agriculture, not on the purchase of foreign technologies, as was the case in the last 15-20 years ago, but on domestic technologies, so that the products are significantly cheaper and of better quality. These problems must be solved not only by large farms, but also by small and medium-sized businesses. And it is necessary to think about the redistribution of resources.

And I would like to draw your attention to one more aspect. Yes, indeed, we have a two-stage funding process. Why can’t it be immediately from the federal budget, say, from Federal Treasury transfer money to the accounts of peasant farms and agricultural organizations? Our budget system is structured this way. Our regions have their own budgetary capabilities, and they should also participate in co-financing agriculture. Actually, this is how the agricultural budget is structured in all countries with a federal structure - take, for example, in Europe: there is an EU agricultural budget, which is formed in Brussels, there is an agricultural budget at the level of EU countries, and, for example, in countries with a federal structure ( in Germany) there is an agricultural budget of the lands. But when they talk about the European experience, they forget one thing: as for production subsidies, all distribution rules are formed in the budget, and no EU country can change them.

I think that we also need to build a budget in such a way that production subsidies, on which production volumes directly depend, and the rules for distributing this money are formed in Moscow, and the regions do not interfere in this process. In our country, the final rules for subsidizing and subsidizing agriculture are written not in Orlikov Lane, but in each subject of the Russian Federation.

— I will remind our readers: Orlikov Lane is where the Ministry of Agriculture is located.

— Since budgeting rules are not written by the central government, but each region adds its own conditions and criteria for receiving this money, there is a lot of abuse. I think that a reform of the budgeting of our industry is necessary so that the final rules for the distribution of subsidies are determined here, in Moscow.

- And addresses, Alexander Vasilyevich.

- And addresses.

- The farmers are all known, they are all registered - you can transfer money directly from Moscow to their accounts.

— It must be said that the Ministry of Agriculture actually maintains a register of budget recipients, but it is only a departmental resource, this budget. Here it will be necessary to think about certain systems of public control over this register.

And I must say that you still shouldn’t confuse the two goals agricultural policy. I have already said that over the last 10-15 years we had to solve in a short time the problem of the country’s food independence, that is, fill the market with domestic food, primarily the market of large cities, the interregional market. We have generally successfully solved this problem.

— It must be clearly said that agricultural holdings solved this problem.

- Agricultural holdings. But at the same time, we have missed the social aspects of our agricultural policy. I will give you the figure that the census showed. The census showed that, for example, over the past 10 years total number employed in agricultural organizations, in farms decreased by 45% - 1 million 400 thousand workers were withdrawn from agriculture, and we continue to cultivate the same area (125 million hectares of agricultural land), the same sown area (about 78 million hectares ). So, they have come... The release of so many agricultural workers is a price to pay for efficiency. Plus, of course, little money is spent on social amenities.

- In my opinion, there is no spending at all now, Alexander Vasilyevich.

— No, approximately 5% of all state program resources are spent.

— How much was announced?

— This is less than the program passport, unfortunately. Everything is underfunded, only 5% of the state program resources are allocated. Naturally, this is not enough.

— The law on agricultural development defines what an agricultural producer is.

— Yes, a very original definition of this concept was given. If in Europe an agricultural producer and a budget recipient, respectively, is considered to be any farm that has more than, for example, 2 hectares of land under cultivation, then we have a different criterion - it is necessary that in the total income of agricultural organizations or farm there was 70% of income from agriculture and only 30% from other activities. What does this lead to? We can engage in agricultural activities on a large scale, but if you do not maintain the proportion, you are not considered an agricultural producer, and accordingly you do not have the right to subsidies and subsidies. I think that this criterion needs to be revised, it is necessary, in any case, to be reduced by 50%, and maybe even abandon this rule and provide support to those who have, say, more than 2 hectares of land under cultivation, as in Europe, or we have. This issue can be discussed.

— In the United States, they adopted the following criterion - I know this with complete certainty: if you produce products worth at least 1 thousand dollars a year, then you already have the right to a subsidy, you are already a farmer. Even if you are a weekend farmer, like our 600 people.

- Yes. As a result, we artificially slow down the diversification of agriculture, because for an economy to be sustainable, it must not only depend on agricultural income, which, as we know, often depends on the weather, especially here, but also on other types of activities. But in America, Igor Borisovich, there is another rule: for each type of subsidy there are restrictions on the maximum amount of funds received from the American budget. There, if your income exceeds 900 thousand dollars (translated into our money, this is 54 million rubles), you will not receive a cent from the budget in support. We do not have such restrictions, so large farms with large areas of land under cultivation receive the majority of subsidies. I think we'll get there. In order to achieve a more even distribution of budget funds and improve access to these funds for the majority of agricultural producers, we will have to move to limits on the allocation of money from the budget.

Again, I repeat: with regard to production subsidies, there is a need for federal, clear, non-interpretable criteria for the distribution of money established in federal legislation and regulations of the Ministry of Agriculture, a ban on regions to interfere in the rewriting of these criteria, a public register of budget recipients, which must, of course, be marked “for official use”, because we do not have this kind of public registers from which it would be known how much money each person receives. Let's say, in social protection.

“But at least at the level of the farming community this needs to be discussed.

— And registers of all those who applied for subsidies should be kept, and the reasons for refusing to receive subsidies should be recorded in this register. And with the right for agricultural producers to go to court if they believe that their right has been violated. Then we will move on to a more efficient and socially equitable distribution of funds. I repeat, I do not want to be recorded as a harsh critic of the current system. This system is partly forced. It was necessary to increase production volumes in a short time, we were forced - we did this consciously - to distribute funds in favor of large farms.

— What’s typical is that no one was against it. But when these large farms and holdings began to become too large, it was already necessary to limit them in some way.

— When they start working for export, that’s a different story.

- This is a completely different business. This is not filling the domestic market, this is filling the market in Abu Dhabi somewhere. Alexander Vasilievich, what else did the 2016 census show?

— I would also draw your attention to the social aspects that we have already begun to talk about. In particular, there were questions about the average age of those employed in agriculture.

— Is the village aging?

— It must be said that we have data from the population census on the rural population as a whole, but as for those employed in agriculture, the census is the only source from which this information can be obtained. And I must say that we see that over 10 years, say, among men from 18 to 29 years old - these are young workers, their share has decreased; on the contrary, the proportion of workers 60 years of age or older has increased.

— Salaries are not growing, apparently.

— Including among women. This, of course, is an unfavorable trend, and it is necessary to think about new programs to attract young workers to the countryside. Even I know that in large farms this problem is very significant.

— What other problems did the census show?

— I would also name one more problem - this is the problem of innovation in agriculture. It must be said that for the first time in 2016, these questions were included in the census forms, and we should generally be concerned about these numbers.

— That is, computerization, robotization, facilitation of manual labor, do I understand correctly?

— Not only such innovations from the digital economy class. I'm talking about the basics.

- Seeds?

- For example, the share of acreage sown with elite seeds - in agricultural organizations it is 7.7%, over 10 years it has increased by only 3 percentage points, and among farmers - 4.6%, decreased by 2%. This is a very good indicator.

— Thank you very much, Alexander Vasilievich. We talked about the results of the rural population census, the agrarian census. The results, on the one hand, are comforting ( rural population we still have), and on the other hand, they offend our farmers, offend those who produce half of all food in agricultural loans, subsidies and subsidies.