How Successful Were The Agrarian Reforms of Stolypin 1906 - 1914?

Anther reform which saw reasonable success was the aim to improve agriculture through the consolidation land. This reform would rid Russia of its traditional three-field system and replace it with a new system. This would then create an incentive to work and to do well as success depended on the peasant farmers and not other people like the mirs. Through the new farming method, the larger strips would allow for more modern farming machinery to be developed as peasant farmers and Kulaks would create a consumer demand. One of the successes with this reform was that grin production rose annually from 56 million tons in 1900 to 90 million tons in 1914. This meant that more peasant farmers saw more success after the introduction of this farming method which then directly improved the economy meaning Russia started to depend less on foreign financial aid. Another success which improved was due to the expansions within Siberia which led Russia to becoming the world’s leading cereal exporter. This was not possible before Stolypin’s reforms and therefore, it is obvious that Stolypin’s reforms had a positive effect on Russia. Despite this, there were some failures. He improved harvest were largely due to unusually good weather conditions which created the record harvest in 1913. Also, only 10% of land was consolidated meaning the good harvest were not a direct result of Stolypin’s reforms.

With the aim to improve agriculture, Stolypin brought in the reform which took land away from struggling, poorer farmers and granted the land to those who looked stronger and more likely to be successful. This legislation encouraged more land transfers and the development of larger farms. This enhanced the Kulaks power which improved the economy through a higher rate of production and through the Kulaks ability to demand newer and more modern farming machinery. Also, by giving land to more successful farmers, it would then result in the gaining more power which meant if there was another revolution, Nicholas II believed that the farmers would support him as they wouldn’t want their status to change or for their wealth to decrease. One of success within this reform was that the Kulaks consolidated their land which meant land was more likely to be awarded to them as they were seen to be more likely to succeed. Also, as the Kulaks wealth, they began to ‘buy out’ poorer peasants in order to create a larger, more compact, profitable and, efficient farm. Another success of this reform was a direct effect of the other reforms as kulaks bought out poorer peasants who then moved to urban cities looking for work. This improved the industry as Russia financially able to support itself with enough food for every Russian without everyone being a farmer. However, as a result of the Kulaks ‘buying out’ poorer peasants, many peasants could afford to move to urban cities and often fell into deeper hardship. Within this group, there were also those who were too old or to rooted to seek alternative work which meant the toll rose, along with unemployment rates.

Overall, Stolypin’s reforms aw mixed success due to Stolypins assassination and the outbreak of WW1 as Stolypin himself stated that the reforms would need at least 20 years in order for success to be evident. This meant the focus from improving and modernising Russia moved towards the victory with the war. Despite the short time span, there were small improvements within Russia which were a direct result of Stolypin’s reforms. This also meant that if Stolypins time allocation had taken place then much larger improvements would probably have been made.