Mode of production in Iranian rural communities

Mode of production in Iranian rural communities
Dr. Hossein Shirzad


Before proceeding to discuss on the modes of production in Iran and its changes during the last three decades, it is necessary to clarify certain basic concepts. By mode of production we mean that complex made up of forces of production (i.e. technical roles, resources, and labor tools and labor power) and the social relation of production.
Production is a process by which men with their labor – power and instruments of labor transform the object of labor i.e. land, in order to reap some material or economic return. Modes of production consist of the object of labor and the instruments, but the process itself requires.
Participation of men who are brought together in terms of a specific set of social relations. These social relations are principally defined in terms of social product in theoretical terms, thus a mode of production equals the combination of social relations of production and the level of development of the productive forces.
With regard to above mentioned theoretical view point, the applied definition of mode of production witch can be used to explain the rural structure of Iran is presented as follow:
Mode of production is consisted of all legal and custom procedures in providing and combining productive factors such as the level of technology, labor organization, specific social relations in order to producers one or verities of crops which could be presented to market the main and institutional factors witch could affect the structure and the type of mode of production are summarized as follow:
1) Size of unit, commercial value of land, financial resources of the entrepreneur, water resources, type of agricultural product, degree of technological rationalization, position of the agricultural labors, division of labor, relation of agricultural unit to the market.
2) Management, decision making in the agricultural unit regarding the optimum use of the means of production, formal juridical ownership.
3) The position of agricultural units in relation to the village, the region and the state.
4) The socio-economic and political factors affecting the establishment of these agricultural units.
5) The relations of production this refers to both the relation holding between people in the productive process and to the property relations.

By taking into consideration the above factors we can distinguish at least four main forms of agricultural enterprise in Iran.
a) The peasant family farm,
b) Agricultural units based on cooperative activities,
c) Agricultural units based on capitalist farming, the latter category includes commercial farmers, agro- businesses and farm corporations,
d) Share cropping and tenancy agreement.

- Peasant family farm
By peasant family farm we meant a multi – dimensional social organization. The family provides almost all the labor required on the farm. The division of labor is closely related to the family structure and is based on sex and age differentiation. Farming and livestock rearing are the main sources of income, although some of the peasant economy and credit typically is not available for peasant. The father of family oversees the working of the farm, in the context of a highly, patriarchal relationship, the role of the women in the economic life of the family is very substantial. Along with the nutrition and sustenance activities (including preparation of meals, baking bread, preparation of dairy products) which are highly differentiated and performed by the females, all the women are involved in different stage of growing rice, tea, cereals, cotton and other cash crops. In spite of the fact that rural women always played an active role in the economic life of the peasant farming, they are never reported as economically active. They have no control over finance or the household s budget and they are allowed only to exchange minor commodities, which they produce at home with the peddler. Other males and females of the family have a special function in running the economic affairs of peasant family farm.
According to the latest agricultural census, total agricultural holding sum up to…………… units throughout the country ,……..unit out of total holdings are cultivate the lands in a form of corporations such as agro businesses, farm corporations, production cooperatives, moshaa cooperatives, and etc. ……… units are expiated by public organization such as agricultural service centers, agricultural school and so on. The other ………… holdings are belonged to the…………peasant families. Approximately…… holding unit belong to the peasant families are cultivated privately, .units are farmed with more than 2 peasant families.

- Agricultural units based on cooperatives affairs
These systems of land exploitation are consisting of at least three major systems. The first one has its roots from the pre- agrarian reforms structure which is known as Boneh or Haraseh , Darkar, Sahra and so on. Now we are again back to this system in order to understand what have occurred after the revolution.

- Traditional units of production
Prior to the implementation of 1960 s land reform, the organization of the agricultural production in the Iranian village was structured at level of group farming units which were known as Boneh, Haraseh, koote,…etc. In each village there were several group of farming units. Usually all of the arable land of a village was organized into units and cultivated cooperatively by a team of peasant.
The Boneh was the key unit of agricultural organization under the traditional share-cropping system. It consisted of a few plots of arable land (irrigated and non-irrigated) and was developed as a cooperative organization for agricultural production in which a team of peasants cultivated the land cooperatively. The size of each Boneh differ from 10-30 ha. Its internal division of labor based upon individual experience and skill in agricultural activities, and the peasant’s share of crops depends upon this division of labor. With implementation of land reform law during the ex-regime, some of these traditional units were dissolved, but in some part of Iran specially in the region where the system of land tenure is based on Moshaa system, some kind of these agricultural units are still working. For example in Khuzestan, Systan, west Azerbaijan and central part of Iran, the traditional agricultural mode of productions is in practice.
Under the act of the first stage of land reform (1961) and by implementation of Islamic land reform laws 1980, the ownership of land was collectively transferred to the peasants in proportion to existing rights of cultivation. Thus the actual title received by each peasant gave him no absolute right to any defined piece of land about merely a share of total land being distributed in his village. In some of provinces where the commercial value of land is not too much, the peasants are not willing to sub-divided the land between themselves. Therefore, the Moshaaa system of land tenure is still common.
As a result such a system of land tenure, the traditional units of production are more prevalence among the peasantry. For example in kuzestan, kote, bonkol, are the traditional units of production. Kote is a unit for an agricultural working group in moshaa land, through which a number of peasants participate in agricultural activities, and in general, one of the peasants directs the group. The administration of the unit of production at the level of the village is carried out by a committee consisting of experienced peasants, who are in charge or kotes the responsibility of the directing peasant is as fallows:

1- Allocation the irrigated and rained land among the kote members by lottery. Allocation of water among the members of kote based on their water rights in relation to their share of communal land or removing the likely disputes by acting as elders. In each village, there are several group farming units. Usually all of the arable land of village is divided among these units through a lottery system. As it has mentioned before, prior to the agrarian reform of 1960 s peasants in group farming used to work collectively and cultivated cooperatively. But after the land reform most of the kote members work separately. Although for summer crops, for example rice, they work collectively. The responsibility of the directing peasant Surkote in relation to the members of the other group is as follows.

2- Participate in allocation of rural water rights to farming group units.

3- Calling on members of the Kote for participation in cleaning the water streams and other group activities.



-Production cooperatives (P.C,s)
The main objective of production cooperatives is to find out the best way for agricultural development through consolidation of peasants fragmented lands, based on introducing the new agricultural methods and machinery and to increase the peasant’s welfare, according to the P.Cs low of 1972, each P.C should undertake joint production and provide irrigation facilities. In order to over come the problems of low productivity, members of P.C, should consolidate their farms, cultivate jointly, adoption communal cropping pattern and using agricultural machinery. The members of the P.C
Get their gross product according to their respective inputs such as land, labor, and capital. The peasant in P.C should produce cooperatively through the production units for example in maroon P.C in behbahan region which comprises six villages with 1962 ha of land, there are 36 farming groups. The members in each group is ranged between 4 to 12 peasants on the based of traditional production units which are known as Kotes. The main criteria for peasants to join each other are kinship or neighboring ties. The entire field crops cultivated in three blocks for each production units and the boundaries of each farm management unit is known to the peasant. All the farming activities such as preparation of seedbed, seeding, irrigation, weeding and similar task are carried out by the members of the production unit in accordance to their experience. The P.Cs are limited on farming activities, orchard and livestock breeding belonging to the peasants are operated individually. The cropping pattern in P.Cs is prepared by the managing director with help of the board of directors. The P.Cs less centrally managed but they get some grants, soft loans, assistance and etc. Some studies which are carried out by the ISSR of Tehran University and consultant engineering companies show that most of these units are run privately. None of the agricultural activities mentioned above are done cooperatively. During the early of revolution 20 of these units were dissolved and 19 P.Cs have been continued to work until now.
The main reason for failure of these P.Cs are reported as poor performance in agricultural activities, the miss management of the managing
Directors, the lack of a sufficient number of well trained farm managers, centrally imposed cropping patterns which resulted in out season planting of crops, etc. from the mid 1980 s with changing in the government policy toward - encourage the cooperative sector of economy, specially with the implementation of first five years plan, the ministry of agriculture set up the department of P.Cs and has started to develop such a units thought the country. The location of the new established P.Cs and others characteristics are shown in table ( ).
The most important services which P.Cs presents to the peasants can be summarized as follow:
1- Supplying the agricultural machine providing
2- The agricultural inputs
3- Marketing the peasants agricultural production
4- Supplying the agricultural credit for the Peasants
5- Investment in construction of irrigation canals, road building provision of drinking water and the establishment of modern system of communication
As most of these P.Cs have recently established, therefore, there has no reliable data concerning their agricultural performance such as yield per ha, labor productivity, water efficiency and so on. It is suggested to carry out a comprehensive survey about the socio-economics consequences of these units. Some preliminary studies show that this P.Cs is forced with the number of constraints which can be summarized as follows:

1- Lack of proper personnel in organization and clarity in their functions at the ahahrestan (as country level) and field level. Most of these units are directly related to agricultural department at the provincial level.
2- Lack of proper planning, monitoring and evaluation of P.Cs activities.
3- Lack of adequate transport facilities.
4- The shortage of salary for specialist and experts.
5- The problems of staffs housing and accommodation.
6- The inadequate supply of sufficient quantities of key inputs.
7- Delay in delivery of these inputs because of transportation facilities.
8- Lack of spare part and farm machinery.
9- Insufficient farm credit to provide on farm financing.


- Moshaa production cooperatives
The moshaa P.Cs have been formed after the revolution. This kind of moshaa P.Cs is medium size and its holding differ from 20 to 60 ha, the number of peasants is engaged in moshaa P.Cs range from 5 to 15 peasants. The basic for land transferring is the customary moshaa system of land tenure. Under the act of Islamic land reform, the ownership of land is collectively transferred to the peasant equally.
Thus the actual title which is received by each peasant would give him no absolute right to any defined piece of land but a merely share of total land being distributed in a moshaa P.Cs. The members of moshaa P.Cs should to work as a group team, cooperatively, on the basis of traditional units of production such as booneh, kote, haraseh,… each moshaa P.Cs has to select one of the experience peasants which is knowns surmoshaa who is responsible for all the moshaa P.Cs affairs outside the unit besides surmoshaa two experience peasants help him in moshaa internal affairs specially farming activities. In the moshaa P.Cs all of the farming resources such as land, water, machinery, and other inputs are belonged to the P.Cs. These units are only concerned with farming activities. The cropping pattern in moshaa P.Cs is prepared by surmoshaa with the assistance of other peasants. These units’ activities are limited only on farming activities. Orchard and livestock breeding belonging to the peasant are operated individually. The seven members committee at the local, regional and central level is responsible for providing the agricultural necessities. The aims and objectives of moshaa P.Cs are stated as follows:

1- Introducing the new agricultural methods and machinery.
2- To increase the per capital income of the peasants.
3- To utilize the maximum manpower in the level of village.
4- To solve the problem of uneconomic or sub- economic holdings and the excessive percolation of holdings.
5- To increase output by the widespread of facilities for farm machinery.
6- To facilitate better investment in agricultural activities. According to the latest data which is revealed by the seven members committee approximately ……moshaa P.Cs have been established since 1980. Some information about these units is presented in table ( ).




The Moshaa P.Cs usually gets some grant, soft loans assistance from the seven member committee. For example in order to provide credit the committee introduces each eligible Moshaa P.Cs to the agricultural bank for long term loan. No comprehensive survey has been carried out concerning the role of Moshaa P.Cs in agricultural development. Nevertheless some case studies are declared of unsuccessful performance of these units due to the following reasons:

1- The lack of land ownership motivation
According to the act of Islamic republic land reform laws, the land is transferred to the members of Moshaa P.Cs collectively. There fore the peasants are not willing to work as a team. From the early establishment of Moshaa every peasant insists to divide the land among themselves. Nearly 80 percent of lands in Moshaa P.Cs are informally sub-divided among the members.
According to a case study in Garmsar region all of the Moshaa P.Cs members are farming individually in some area such as Sabzevar in khurasan province, the Moshaa members are split out to different sub-groups consisted of two or three peasants and farm jointly.

2- Transferring the poor and marginal lands
One of the important constraint which is facing the moshaa P.Cs are the transferring the arid, Idle, degraded and scrub lands to the peasants as the table ( ) indicates nearly 60 percent of lands are not suitable for agricultural activities. These lands are needed some reclamation, land leveling and other infrastructural activities. The newly established P.Cs with economically poor peasants is not able to afford such an activities. Therefore, the yield per ha is low in comparison to the other systems of land exploitation. Some recent survey show that the peasants leave the Moshaa and search for non agricultural jobs in the cities.

3-Capital
The Moshaa P.Cs is faced with the shortage of the capital investment during the past ten years 56 billion rials have been invested in the Moshaa P.Cs. The average loan is received by each Moshaa P.Cs during the last ten years is estimated 5965000rials. This amount of investment is insufficient for infrastructural activities. This is one of the major reasons for Moshaa P.Cs not to be successful in relation to agricultural development.

3- Problem of management
The department responsible for supporting such a unit in the eve of revolution was an independent and autonomous organization. But during the midst of 1980 it has joined the ministry of agriculture and is a division dealing with the problems of land disputes.
This committee at the central, provincial and local level has faced with serious manage mental and functional problems. These problems could be summarized as follow:
1-3- Shortage of technical staff at the expert level
2-3- Lack of adequate transport facilities
3-3- The inadequate supply of sufficient quantities of key inputs, to support the Moshaa P.Cs
4-3- Insufficient farm credit to provide on farm machinery

- Farm corporations (F.C, S)
According to the F.C, S laws higher incomes were the foremost inducement of F.C, S movement with large scale agricultural units. However, the use of modern agricultural equipment is possible and is necessary in certain economical circumstances. The scale of operation envisaged for the F.C, S would accommodate a corresponding inventory of massive machineries. Prior to the revolution 89 F.C, S was set up, but due to many technical and socioeconomic problems most of them dissolved in early revolution. Some of the general characteristics of these F.C,s showed in table ( ).



The problems and consequences of F.C,s can be summarized as follow:
1) The management issues
The corporations are run paternalistically with the corporation officials’ ideas being imposed upon local people. The peasant has no role in running the corporation. The peasants are not involved in the daily work of corporation, in spite of the fact that involving them in the planning in the agricultural activities and other jobs would increase the likelihood of success. It also would help to insure that peasants’ needs would be considered in the planning of corporation affairs and would increase the peasants’ commitment to decisions. Thus, none of the peasants expect a small minority on the board of directors have any idea about running the daily work of corporation. One of the negative effects of this lacke of awareness is the increased in distrust and pessimism among the peasants towards the administrative board. The urban bureaucrats believe that as the peasants are illiterate. They have no right to be involved in planning thus corporation officials impose their plan on the local people. Also lack of communication and contact between the managing director and the board of directors on the one hand – other peasants on the other hand.
The corporation officials are often technically incompetent in agriculture as well as lacking understanding of the socio –economic life of the peasantry. The point is that the school of agriculture are poorly qualified to run the corporation affairs because corporation affaires are not limited solely to agricultural activities. According to a survey more than 60 percent of managing directors in 36 corporations never had any especial course on management.
All of the corporations managerial personel are employed by the public sector and their promotion in hierarchical lines of the bureaucracy depends on the decision of officials in the department of corporations in Tehran. In short, the problems of management can be summarized as follow:
a) The dependence upon the ability and integrity of a single manager, which resulting management constraints for large corporations.
b) The lack of financial incentives for the public management staff members who are fixed salaries.
c) The lack of satisfactory alternative avenues for the entrepreneurial and managerial talent of the peasants.
d) Centrally imposed cropping patterns which result in out of season planting of crops.
e) The penetration of the bureaucratic system into rural areas was accompanied by a growth of corruption in the villages.

2) Social & economic issues
theoretically the main objectives for the formation of corporation was to increase the shareholders incomes through the amalgamation of small farms, the use of farm machinery, the introduction of scientific methods of agricultural etc. but in practice, the system of exploitation converted to the pre- land reform structure through the re-introduction of the share-cropping system. Also for the first time in the Iranian history the boundary of village as a complete and integrated social and economic unit was broken & the corporation converted the ownership of land into ownerships of shares. The peasants had no right to sell their land, but only could dispose of their share.