Une résistible collectivisation : l'agriculture au Nord Viêt-Nam, 1959-1988
Institution:
Paris 7Disciplines:
Directors:
Abstract EN:
La reforme agraire de 1956 et la reconnaissance des mecanismes de marche permettent le redressement agricole, ce dont l'etat et la paysannerie tireront avantage. Mais tres tot, les autorites manifestent leur desir d'impulser la tansformation socialiste des campagnes. Les vives resistances que le projet rencontre ausein de la paysannerie les conduisent a ordonner par decret et sans preparatifs la "collectivisation forcee". Des lors, des le premier plan quinquennal 1961-1965, des signes patents du rejet de la greffe apparaissent : stragnation de la taille des cooperatives, autonomisation des equipes de production, apparition precoce des formules de contractualisation de la production au niveau des familles, incapacite de l'etat a controler l'economie familiale. Les nouvelles contraintes apparues durant la guerre americaine 1966-1972 poussent l'encadrement de base a recourir a des mesures "heterodoxes" afin de garantir la survie des communautes villageoises : l'autonomisation generalisee des equipes de production, l'extension illegale des lopins prives et le drainage par l'economie familiale des autres facteurs collectifs de production, la contractualisation de certaines activites agricoles avec les foyers paysans. Mais apres le retour a la paix, la perte de controle de l'etat sur l'economie rurale s'accentue, poussant les dirigeants a opter pour un nouveau modele, la grande agriculture socialiste, caracterisee par la creation de cooperatives-communes et de structures d'encadrement au niveau des districts. La regression importante de l'economie agricole que cela provoque contraint le pouvoir a apporter des premieres retouches au modele d'organisation de l'agriculture, en particulier la reconnaissance des contrats de production avec les foyers qui impliquent le repartage des terres. Mais le redressement de l'economie agricole permis par cette formule contractuelle intermediaire est momentane. En effet, a partir de 1985, l'agriculture socialiste se bloque, obligeant l'etat a partir de 1988 a entamer une reelle politique de reforme rurale.
Abstract FR:
The state and the farmers were to benefit from the agrarian reform of 1956 and from the admittance of the market mechanism, which allowed the agricultural recovery. But soon, the authorities wished to launch a socialist transformation of the country. As they met strong resistance among the farmers, they chose to order by decree and without any preparation the "forced collectivization". And immediately after the first five-year plan (1961-1965), signs of dovious rejection appeared : stagnation of the size of the cooperatives, independence of the production teams, early appearance of contractual forms of production at a family level, inability from the state to control the family econonomy. The new constraints which appeared during the 1966-1972 war forced the first level executives to use heterodox measures in order to organize the survival of the village communities : overspread independence of the production teams, illegal development of the private land and attraction by the family economy of the other collective production factors. Nevertheless, after the return to peace, there was an increasing lack of control from the state over the rural economy. This compelled the leaders to choose a new model, the great socialiste agriculture, characterized by the creation of cooperatives and heading structures at a district level. The important decline of the agricultural economy which resulted led the authorities to first modify the model, especially by admitting production contracts with farmer families, which implied a new share of the land. However, the recovery of the rural economy allowed by this measure was only temporary. From 1985, the socialist agriculture got stuck. And as soon as 1988, this compelled the state to launch a real policy of rural reformation.