METHODS OF CALCULATING AGRICULTURAL LABOR PRODUCTIVITY IN USSR

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 14
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 15, 2011
• Sequence Number: 35
• Publication Date: August 30, 1956
• Content Type: REPORT

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
METHODS OF CALCULATING AGRICULTURAL IABOR PRODUCTIVITY IN USSR
Vo pros Ekonomiki No 2
Moscow, 195
Systematic study of labor productivity in all branches of the national
economy and in all enterprises is of great importance. Without a scientific
analysis of labor productivity it is impossible to draw accurate conclusions
characterizing economic progress in the USSR and to show the achievements of
the socialist economy in its economic competition with capitalism. Systematic
study of t-.o change in labor productivity and the factors which affect it is a
necessary prerequisite for the planned distribution of the labor force through-
out the branches of the national economy, ministries, trusts, and enterprises.
The study of labor productivity will also ensure the most efficient organiza-
tion of each branch of production, each enterprise, and each production sector.
The problem of studying labor productivity in the kolkhozes and the sov-
khr8s pas acquired especially great importance at present. The party and th.:
government have always given and are giving a great deal of attention to the
question of a steady increase in labor productivity in agriculture. In accord-
ance with the directives of the 19th Congress of the CPSU, measures for increas-
ing labor productivity in agriculture are included in the system of national
economic planning. Therefore the working out of scientifically sound and
simple methods of measuring labor productivity in the kolkhozes and sovkhozes
is the urgent and primary task of economists and statisticians.
To resolve these tasks the following most important problems involved in
the measurement of labor productivity must first of all be elucidated: what
scale must be used as a basis for measuring the outlays of labor, i.e., for
determining the unit of calculation of the expenditure of labor time; and what
distinguishes labor outlays in a given production branch from labor outlays in
other branches. In addition, the type of workers employed in productive labor
and the methods for calculating the consolidated indexes of labor productivity
in the production of heterogeneous output in a given production branch as a
whole must be determined.
Labor productivity is measured by the quantity of output per unit of labor
outlay. Therefore, one of the basic questions in measuring labor productivity
concerns the units of measure to be used for this purpose. Marx stressed that
the quantity of labor itself is measured by its duration, by labor time; and
labor time, in turn, is measured in the specific units of time, an hour, day,
etc."
In a planned system the distribution of labor among the branches of the
national economy, as well as within branches, is shown in most industries in
the form of quotas for the average number of registered workers and employees.
This requires, first of all, the calculation of indexes showing the average
number of registered workers actually employed. Indexes of the average number
of registered workers constitute the basic scale for measuring labor time dur-
ing the period for which these indexes are calculated. Thus, in the plans and
the statistical reports for industry and construction, labor productivity is
expressed, first of all, in the form of indexes of average output per registered
worker for a specific period (a month, quarter, or year). Labor productivity
in agriculture must also be expressed in the form of indexes of average output
per worker engaged in agricultural production. Otherwise, it would be impossible
to compare correctly the rates of growth of labor productivity in agriculture
with the growth rates in other branches of the national economy.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
Agricultural production is distinguished from industrial production by a
number of factors. Production in agriculture in an overwhelming number of cases
is expressed in a single harvest of agricultural products. In the case of ani-
mal husbandry production, cycles are of different duration in various branches
of the industry so that the calculation of output is possible only for the eco-
nomic year as a whole. Therefore, in agriculture, in contrast with most other
.branches of industry, labor productivity as a rule is calculated only on the
basis of annual output.
The methods of calculating the average number of workers in the sovkhozes
and the MPS are essentially the same as the methods used in industry and in other
branches of the national economy. In the kolkhozes the average annual number of
workers is determined from the data contained in the annual reports of monthly
employment figures. The total of these monthly figures, divided by 12, gives
the average annual number of kolkhoz workers actually employed in the collective
economy of the kolkhozes. Under this method of calculating the average annual
total, the average annual number of days worked per worker is about 250. To
this average annual number of kolkhoz workers is added the average annual number
of those MPS agricultural workers who are paid, not according to labor-days
(trudodni), but at straight monetary piece rates (combine and threshing machine
operators, weighers, etc.), and also the number of workers hired by the kolkhozes.
There is a theory that the average annual number of kolkhoz workers employed
in the collectivized econonky c' the kolkhozes must be calculated on the basis of
a fixed standard annual number if workdays per worker (for example, 270 or 290
days). It is impossible to concur with this. In the various industrial enter-
prises, sovkhozes, and kolkhozes the average number of days worked per worker
differs for the same time period. Should identical average norms of working
days be used in calculating the average number of workers and kolkhoz workers,
then the effect of the variation in the utilization of worker and kolkhoz labor
time would not be revealed in studying actual annual labor productivity. Con-
sequently, the calculation of indexes of annual labor productivity in the kolkhozes
would lose all significance.
Despite the fact that the method of calculating the a- mhor nr i-nl-
khoz corkers actually working in the collectivized economy of the kolkhozes
closely approximates the method of calculating the average registered number of
workers of state enterprises, in the kolkhozes (considering that all able-bodied
kolkhoz workers must work on collective farms) it is exjedient in practice to
compute indexes of output per available worker. These indexes, in comparison
with indexes of average output per worker actually working in the kolkhozes,
make it possible to determine the results of utilizing labor reserves for in-
creasing kolkhoz labor productivity. The degree of labor activity of the kcl-
Mrz :orkers in the collectivized economy depends considerably on the develop-
ment of diversified farming. In turn, labor productivity is closely related to
the maximum use of labor reserves during the year.- Therefore, the study of
labor productivity has the greatest significance in connection with the utiliza-
tion of labor reserves in kolkhozes with different industry structures.
In calculating this type of labor productivity index, all available kolkhoz
workers who are obligated to work a minimum number of labor-days, as well as a.l
other kolkhoz workers actually working in the collectivized economy of kolkhozes,
are included. The latter group of kolkhoz workers may be shown in terms of able-
bodied collective farmers by conversion through the average actual number of
labor-days earned per able-bodied kolkhoz member. To the total number of avail-
able kolkhoz workers (assumed to be fully able-bodied) calculated by this method
must be added the MIS agricultural workers and also the workers hired by the
kolkhozes.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
wor}cer employed in the enterprise ,.regardlessiof thetnumberkofghoursoactually
worked oy him during the day. This,
his unit of measurement is also important in
agriculture. In agricultural enterprises, and especially in kolkhozes, the
length of the working day is not fixed in hours and a corres
of labor time is not ponding account kolkh maintained. With the present status of accounting in
ozes and sovkhozes the day of actual work (man-day) is the onl
unit of measuring labor time. The length of the man-da
with the amount y Possible
of daylight (for example ,Y in kflvorzbl varies
during the periods of the hay and grain ' for an entire day iew hours I weather
.ent. weather). Moreover, .'orkdaysinagricultural enterprises, asa rulencare
n longer in summer and shorter in the autumn and winter. The data of selected
kolkhoz worker budgets show that on an annual basis labor time amounts to 8.5-
9.0 hours per actual workday, including time for traveling to and from work
and for breaks (lunch, etc.).,
Some economists feel that in studying labor productivity in kolkhozes,
labor-days instead of mnn-days should be used, and they identify labor-days
with the expenditures of labor time, reduced to terms of simple labor. Such
an identification is incorrect. The term "labor-day" takes into account
qualitative differences in labor and makes commensurable expenditures of labor,
i.e., actual expenditures of labor time, of varying intensity and productivity.
From
valet ofsthe workoof athakolkhozt the
iIs a n collecctivizedaagriculture,sbutait
is by no means a measure of the expenditure of labor time.
quonestiolaborn bwhy dos the frequentlytPublished statistical data,
yearly, that more output is produced per labor-day in laborthe is increasing
than in the lagging kolkhozes which operate under the same economic eand ^natural
conditions? The answer is that the data reflect an economic law under which
worker productivity increases more rapidly than wages, and as the result of
which the growth of output exceeds the increase in industrial waRAs and cni-
lective farm wage payments in terms of labor-days. T"q actual output per
labor-day is higher in the advanced kolkhozes than in the lagging kolkhozes,
and it increases from year to year. Moreover, indexes of the increase of out-
put per labor-day will generally be lower than the indexes of the increase of
daily labor productivity.
From the above it follows that the indexes of the growth of output per
labor-day are not measures of labor productivity. An analogous situau1 et
in Industry. Thus, for example, if the output per 100 rubles of payment is caxisl-s
culated, then the numeric value of these indexes will also increase from year
to year; however, obviously the use of this increase
method for measuring the
of labor productivity in industry is inadequate.
The number of man-days worked in the kolkhozes at present is computed in
terms of ;,sported data on the total annual number of labor-days and according
to the data of selected kolkhoz workers' budgets relative to the average number
of earned labor-days per man-day by dividing the total number by
of labor-days
average daily labor-day earnings. ement siblePtoaestablishuthe effeofctaofnnuual and
of productivity production workers
on labor productivity. Obviously then, the more fully is labor time utilized,
the higher will be the indexes of the growth of annual labor productivity in
comparison with the indexes of the increase of daily earnings; and in the case
of unchanging utilization of work time, both indexes will coincide.
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
In actual practice, industrial labor productivity statistics include cal-
culations in the form of indexes of total output per man-hour. By comparing
daily and hourly labor productivity the extent of the effect of the average
length of the workday on labor productivity is determined. However, a study
of hourly labor productivity in the kolkhozes and the sovkhozes cannot be organ-
ized at present because calculation of time worked in hours is not made.
In studying kolkhoz labor productivity, the role of the MTS must be con-
sidered because the level of labor productivity attained in the kolkhozes is
the result of the joint productive efforts of the MIS and the kolkho:es.
In economic .literature a theory is often expressed that in studying agri-
cultural labor productivity one must consider MTS output to be solely the pay-
m=nt in kind and the money payment for MTS services. Such a division of k,l-
khx'.)utput is artificial and only complicates the stucv of the problem of labor
productivity in agriculture as a whole. The organization of production and
labor in the kolkhozes.represents in itself a single organic complex. The
labor of MPS workers is supplemented by the labor of kolkhoz workers in all the
processes which are carried on; MPS machines are utilized jointly with kolkhoz
implements; and the role of the MTS is becoming more and more important in the
development of kolkhoz production. In connection with this, the question of
labor productivity must be studied on thebasis of unity of the production process
of MTS and kolkhozes, as well as the ..nified output of kolkhozes. This is very
important in clarifying the operations of the basic factor in the growth of
kolkhoz labor productivity; i.e., labor mechanization.
Also essential are the problems of more clearly defining the composition
of the labor force, which must be taken into account in determining labor pro-
ductivity. Labor productivity indexes in agriculture must be calculated by
those methods of defining the compocition of the labor force and labor outlays
which are used in calculating labor productivity indexes in industry and con-
struction. Of, course, in industry labor productivity indexes are computed in
the form of average output per average annual worker included in the total num-
ber of industrial production workers, and also in the form of the average out-
put per man-day for the same type of labor. Therefore, in kolkhozes, MTS, and
eovkhozes, labor productivity indexes must also be calculated on the basis of
the labor time expended by workers who take part in agricultural production,
i.e., in all branches of crop cultivation, animal husbandry, and the maintenance
of draft animals, as well as in operations of a general nature which relate to
agricultural production.
In relation to this, it must be noted that under the conditions of socialirt
production with its planned control of economy, progressive cooperation of labor,
and mechanized and automatized production, the concept of a group of workers en-
gaged in productive labor must be revised in the direction of broadening it con-
siderably. In the actual computation of production outlays and the'cost of out-
put, both in industry and in all other branches of the economy, total current
labor costs should include not only the wages paid for [direct] labor but also
the wages of all other workers participating in production. Thus, special at-
tention should be given to the question of the expediency of applying the system
of measuring labor productivity on the basis of indexes of average output, cal-
culated for all workers engaged in industrial enterprises, in construction, and
in sovkhozes and kolkhozes whose wages are now included in production cost.
With conversion to the differentiated accounting and study of labor produc-
tivity in individual branches of agriculture, the calculation of labor produc-
tivity indexes per worker annually is inexpedient in the absence of reported
data for calculating the average number of workers in the various branches. The
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
assumed data in such calculations would at best be highly approximative. There-
fore, the study of labor productivity in terms of individual branches of agri-
culture and, even more, in terms of individual agricultural crops and individual
branches of animal husbandry, can be based principally on calculations of labor
time in terms of man-hours.
The following group of questions in the study of labor productivity deals
.with measuring output. Where a single product is being produced, the index of
labor productivity is determined by the quantity of output per unit of labor
time. In studying labor productivity in an enterprise as a whole, or in an in-
dustry, i.e., in the case of heterogeneous output, the question of reducing the
various types of output to a common unit must first be resolved.
The solution of this problem,it is believed, must depend on the goals in-
volved in studying labor productivity. In particular, in examining labor pro-
ductivity in relation to the study of production outlays in the sovkhozes, it
is most expedient to evaluate output in terms of the average unit coat of in-
dividual products, taking as the cost basis either planned cost or the cost of
a specific base period.
Consider the following data, which are characteristic of labor productivity
and production outlays for two specific periods in the production of sugar beets
and wheat (the figures are hypothetical):
First Period
Second Period
Output
(metric
Man-Days
Cost
(rubles
per metric
Output
(metric
Man-Days
Cost
(rubles
per metric
quintals)
Required quintal _ quintals)
Required
quintal)
Sugar beets
24,000
7,200
2.50
30,000
6,000
2.40
Wheat
2,400
1,200
25.00
3,000
900
20.00
Production outlays for beets and wheat amounted to 120,000 rubles in the
first, and 132,000 rubles in the second period. Total production outlays in-
creased 12,000 rubles, or 10 percent. If the cost of production in the second
period had been the same as in the first period, production outlays for the out-
put of the second period would have equaled 150,000 rubles. Consequently the
actual outlays in the second period amounted to 88 percent, i.e., 12 percent
less than the sum which they would have amounted to had the level of the cost
remained unchanged. In other words, the cost of producing sugar beets and wheat
was reduced 12 percent on the average in the second period. The required labor
for the production of beets and wheat amounted to 6,900 man-days in the second
period, i.e., to 1,500 man-days, or 18 percent less than in the first period.
The value of beets and wheat nr,,duced per man-day in the first period (in terms
of first-period costs) was 14 rubles, 29 kopeks, and 21 rubles, 74 kopeks (in
terms of first-period costs) in the second period. This exceeds the daily out-
put in the first period by 52 percent. Thus, the latter index shows the in-
crease in labor productivity for the second period in comparison with the first
period. In analyzing the dependence of the change of production outlays on the
change of labor productivity, this index will be the only correct index of the
increase in labor productivity.
The relation between labor productivity and production outlays on the whole
may be expressed by the following equation: S = Tpq, where S is the total pro-
duction outlay, T is the labor input (in man-days), p is daily labor productivity
(output) in physical terms, and q is the unit cost of production. These production
STAT
=
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
outlays for some types of products may be calculated by the equation: S ^ Tpq,
and the change of production outlays in the second period, relative to the first
period, may be expressed by the following equation:
SS2 _ ?T2p2g2
? Sl E Tlplgl
The above index of the change of production outlays is derived from indexes
of: (1) the change of labor input, (2) the change in labor productivity, and
(3) the change of the average cost of individual products. In measuring the out-
put of the periods being compared in terms of constant prices (i.e., in terms of
the average cost of the first period, which in the given case is alone correct)
the indexes are as follows:
T2plg1
Tlplgl
?T2p2gl
E Tlplgl
tT2p2g2
E T2p2g1
Consequently, the index of production outlays will equal:
E T2p2g2 = ET2plg1 X ET2p2g1 x ?T2p2g2
? Tlplgl ?Tlplgl E T2p1g1 f+T2p2g1
Substituting in this equation the data from the above example, we obtain
the following relationship:
132,000 6,900 x 14.29 6,900 x 21.74 6,900 xL- 2 '!~o-o
x x 6,900 _
120,000 8,4oo x 14.29 6,900 x 14.29 6,900 x 150,000
6,9oo
98,601 x 150 000 x 132,000 = 0.821 x 1.521 x 0.880 = 1.099
-120,03 95,601 150,000
In other words, because labor productivity increases to 1 1/2 times the
former level, 18 percent less labor was expended on the output of the second
period, as a result of which there was a saving of 21,435 rubles; and in ad-
dition, as the result of the 12-percent cost reduction, 18,000 rubles was saved.
Outlays on second-period output on the whole were 110 percent of actual outlays
on first-period output, because with constant costs and no change in labor pro-
ductivity, production outlays would have been equal to 150,000 rubles. This
amounts to 125 percent of the cost of output.
In individual cases other methods of measuring heterogeneous agricultural
output may be used. For exav:.le, the total output of fodder crops may be ex-
pressed in fodder units. Obviously, it is most expedient to produce those fod-
der crops, which under given conditions will yield the greatest num'er of fodder
units, with the least labor outlay. This ensures the highest labor productivity.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
However, methods of measuring heterogeneous output in terms of either
money cost or fodder value are applicable in the solution of partial -
prob
lems, i.e., in studying production outlays and conditions for the most ad-
vantageous fodder production. In studying labor productivity with the pur-
pose of determining its role in the development of the national economy, it
is necessary to base measurement of output on other methods. In this case
it would be most accurate to take as the common measure of the heterogeneous
output those value units which would reflect to the greatest degree the re-
lationships of socially necessary labor input per unit for each product,
i.e., the cost value unit (stoimostnyye otsenki edinitsy).
Wholesale prices and cost estimates which remain unchanged over a long
period are used in industry and construction for the above purpose. This
makes prices and costs comparable for a number of years and for different
regions. In calculating the gross output of agriculture, the so-called
"average commodity prices" (srednetovarnyye tseny),are employed. These are
calculated on the basis of the actual selling prices of kolkhozes and sov-
khozes, i.e., the prices at which agricultural products were distributed on
the domestic market in 1951.
However, the constant prices of 1951 did not even reflect the actual
relative costs of farm commodities in 1951 itself. . During the last few years,
conditions affecting the sale of agricultural products changed significantly,
so that the new prices approximate more closely actual cost relationships.
Therefore, the constant prices for 1951 are already unsuitable for measure-
ment purposes and must be replaced by others wnich are more appropriate under
existing conditions of agricultural production.
With the present condition of kolkhoz accounting and reporting, the method
of calculating labor productivity indexes in the agricultural kolkhozes is com-
plicated. The application of the method in practice may be shown by an example
from kolkhozes in one of the southern oblasts of the USSR for 1952 and 1953.
Gross Output of Oblast Kolkhozes in 1951 Prices
(million rubles)
Crop cultivation 12 1M
3,068 3,428
Animal husbandry
726 990
Total
3,794 4,418
According to annual reports in the kolkhozes of the Oblast, the following
labor-days were recorded;
Total for all branches
(excluding labor-days
credited to pregnant
kolkhoz women and other
labor-day credits not
No of Labor-Days
(in millions) Labor-Days (% of total)
952 1953 1352
. 1353
related to operations, 204.5 215.8 100.0 1
00.0
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
o
~f L
ab
o
r- aya
in m
ill
io
ns
?
:....-1 3
1952
1953
Crop cultivation
104.9
103.7
51.3
48.1
Animal husbandry
50.2
55.6
24.5
25.8
Care of draft animals
9.2
10.0
4.5
Miscellaneous work not
distributed by branches
of the economy
6.2
5.9
According to data from kolkhoz workers' budgets, kolkhoz workers earned
1.85 labor-days per man-day worked in 1952, and in 1953 they earned 1.95'labor-
days. Existing data for past years for the same Oblast show that the average
daily labor-day earning by individual branches of the economy amounted to the
following: plant cultivation, 107 percent of the average daily earnings for
the kolkhoz economy; animal husbandry, 90 percent; draft animal care, 95
percent; and miscellaneous work not distributed by branches, 97 percent.
Based on these percentages, the average daily labor-day earning accord-
ing to individual types of the operations arq as follows:
1952
1 53
For the collective farm as a whole
1.85
,
1.95
Crop cultivation
1.98
2.09
Animal husbandry
1.67
1.76
Care of draft arimals
1.76
1.85
Miscellaneous work not distributed
by branches of the economy
On the basis of the data for the total number of labor-days by branches
of the economy and data for the average labor-day earning per man-day, the
number of man-days by branches may be computed.
No of Man-Days Worked by Kolkhoz Workers (in millions)
1952
a
In all branches
110.5
110.7
Crop cultivation
53.0
49.6
Animal husbandry
30.1
31.6
Care of draft animals
5.2
5.4
Miscellaneous work not distributed
by branches of the economy
. Labor inputs for draft animal care and for miscellaneous work are allo-
cated among the branches of thu economy in proportion to the number of labor-
days earned in each branch, on the assumption that the volume of completed
work by branches is reflected in the number of labor-days.. Consequently, of
the 12,3 million man-days spent in 1952 in work for the care of draft animals
and miscellaneous York, 51 percent.or 6.3'million mah-days must be added to
53 million man-days earned in animal husbandry; in the given case that
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
imale' is attributed to animal :s -urn :Ear the care or draft an-
pei~ded.on care of draft animals-end niscellaneous,operations,2481percent ord5.9 ex-
million man-dn a. ;;1; i: ;..1,1c,,;zto to ero;, cultivation; and 30 percent or 3.7 mil-
lion man-doyc ua,nc c_Llocsstr. to urJ.ra). ~.;u;b.lry. A^'a rociil.tthe 1'cllowing
expenditure Of 1a,;or tin,e'oI kolkhot uorkars in agriculture is obtained:
Labor Time L
(million man-days)
abor
of t
Time
otal
19 1 2
1953 252
1953
crop cultivation
59.3?,?
55.5 53.7
50.1
Animal husbandry
33.7
35.3 ? 30.5
31.9
Total
93.0
90.8 84.2
82.0
The following number (in thousands) of kolkhoz workers, including old people
and children, were employed on the farms each month:
1952
1953
January
310.2
328.7
February
331.8
347.2
March
402.5
422.2
April
468.4
506.3
May
511.7
521.2
June
560.6
567.7
July
579.8
609.8
August
566.0
572.7'
September
512.9
522.9
October
469.0
486.9
November
425.1
412.9
December
365.0
355.2
Average for year
458.6
471.1
The kolkhoz workers engaged in agriculture must be separated from the cal-
culated number of average yearly kolkhoz workers. To do this, it must be assumed
that the kolkhoz workers work the same number of days in both agricultural and
nonagricultural branches. Calculations for 1952 show that for all kolkhoz or?r-
ations 241 man-days' per average annual [sic] kolkhoz worker were spent
110.5 million
( 5Ssthouand)' and in 1953, 235 man-days per 'average annual kolkhoz worker
110.7 million million
4-71.1 housand Consequently, there were 385,900 people ( 0) engaged
241
in agriculture in 1952, while in 1953 there were 386,400 people (9c.8 million)
gaged in agriculture. 235 en-
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
In addition to the kolkhoz workers, including tractor drivers and other trac-
tor brigade workers whose labor is paid according to the number of labor-days
earned by them, there are combine operators, weighers, and other MI'S workers work-
int, in the kolkhozes who receive money wages from the MPS on a piece-rate basis.
There is also a relatively small number of hired workers who receive money wages
and wages in kind. According to the annual reports of the MPS, 3,700 persons
worked in the oblast in 1952, and 6,700 combine operators and other MPS workers
in 1953. In 1952 these workers worked 749,000 man-days; and in 1953, they worked
1,339,000 man-days. In 1952 hired productior? workers were paie 2,828,000 rubled,
while in 1953 they were paid 3,247,000 rubles.
Assuming tentatively that the average wages of hired workers in the kol-
khoze; are the same as the wages of sovkhoz workers, and considering that, accord-
ing to annual reports of the sovkhozes of the given oblast, daily earnings of
workers amounted to 19 rubles in 1952 and 20 rubles in 1953, we find that hired
kolkhoz workers earned 149,000 man-days in 1952 and 162,000 man-days in 1953.
Assuming that both the hired workers and the kolkhoz members worked an average
of 241 days in 1952 and 235 days in 1953, we find that the total number of hired
workers in the kolkhozes, including workers in the nonagricultural branches,
amounted to 618 persons in 1952 and 689 in 1953.
Expenditures of hired labor in kolkhoz agricultural production are deter-
mined according to proportion of labor expenditure in agriculture of the kolk-
hoz workers themselves.
Man-day expenditures of hired labor in the kolkhoz agricultural production
were as follows:
1952 1953
Crop cultivation
80,013
81,162
Animal husbandry
45,445
51,678
Total
125,458
132,840
Average annual number
of hired workers in
agriculture
521
565
The results of all of the above calculation can be summarized in the follow-
ing table:
Total L an? Ja;; s' Worked in
Agriculture (millions)
I-ITS workers paid at
monetary piece-rates
0.7
1.3
Hired workers
0.1
0.1
Total
93.8
92.2
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
Total Men-nays 4!orke i tri Crop
Cultivation (mi111 1--ins
1952 1953
59.3 55.5
11k11l Man-Days !forked in Ao-
ir:ial Husbandry (millioc:
1952 1953
Kolkhoz workers
Hired workers
Total
.1v~rage Annual Pfo oC S1Grl:e!
in Agriculture in fi,l i:na. c:
(1,000)
Kolkhoz workers
385.9
3>'? .'
NIPS workers at monetary piece
rates
3.7
Hired workers
0.5
no;
Total
390.1
39).7
The final calculation of labor productivity indexes in agriculture is shown
in the following table:
Gross output in comparable 1951
prices (million rubles)
Crop cultivation
Animal husbandry
Average annual number of workers
112
136
average annual [sic] worker (rubles) 9,726 11,222
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
1953 of 1952
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
1952 1953 19
3
($ of 1
L
Labor input (million man-days)
9521
6Yl 56.9
60.1
Animal h
usbandry ry
95
al 93.8 92.2 98
Output per man-day (rubles)
Crop cultivation 51.0 60.2
Animal husbandry 21.5 28.0 118
All agriculture 40.4 47 9 130
119 ncertainty resultThofe
iesinheinrent in
involved
MI5 data on the number of workers and labor time expended.
Agricultural production, of course, depends on natural conditions: climate,
soil, and weather. In bad years the harvest of agricultural crops is smaller
than in good years, given the same organizational and production conditions.
Productivity of agricultural labor," said Marx, "is related to the conditions
of nature, and depending on the productivity cf the latter, the same amount of
labor is represented by a greater or smaller quantity of output, of use value."
In relation to the productivity of nature, labor productivity is expressed
first by yield of agricultural crops per so a hectare or by productivity of livestock. Edonomy of labor or, on the contrary, an increase intheamounthofd
labor expended per unit of agricultural output, also thereby depends on the pro-
ductivity of nature.
The amount of labor expended in agriculture is determined not only by volume
of output, but also by the size of the cultivated area sown to specific crops,
as well as the amount and nature of the agricultural work required to produce each
crop. Ther 'ire, in planning labor in each kolkhoz and each scvkhoz, or accord-sown dividualrcrops mustsfiand rsttbe sovkhozes
also ythe averagealabor input
per hectare sown to each crop, depending on the amount and nature of the agri-
cultural work undertaken on each crop, as well as the techniques for carrying out
this work.
Let us suppose that according to the plan established on the basis of the
e
one xisting level of labor productivity, the necessary labor for the production of etric daysmwould quintal of
equals 0.25
this 2.5
according to the plan. Moreover, in the event of a.significant deviation of ac-
tual yield from planned yield, for example a 50-percent overfulfillment of the
yield plan, the harvest plan would also be exceeded by 50 percent. However, it
does not follow from this that labor outlays must also increase 50 percent.
There is an analogous situation in the productivity of animal husbandry.
Productivity of labor there depends not only ou organizational and production con-
ditions (the zootechnical measures and mechanization), but also on the pedigree
of the livestock and the fodder base, which condition the productivity of live-
stock (the milk yield, the wool clip, the weight of the animals, the egg yield,
etc.). Therefore, in studying the productivity of animal husbandr as in the
planning of labor productivity, it is necessary to proceed from the indexes of
average labor outlay for the maintenance of productive livestock, and also from
the indexes of livestock productivity.
- 12 -
STAT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3
It is generally known that in the internal economic planning of the agri-
cultural enterprises (in the sovkhozes and kolkhozes having proper economic
organization) calculations of labor requirements are based primarily on in-
dexes of average labor outlay per unit of agricultural work, per hectare sown
to each cultivated crop, per head of individual types of productive livestock.
It is believed that such a system of computing labor productivity in agriculture
should be widely adopted in practice in the?futuie. Without it, it is impossi-
ble to study such important questions as the effect of agricultural mechaniza-
tion,. agronomical and zootechnological measures which have been adopted, and the
economic efficiency of individual machines and their specific complements on the
productivity of labor.
The methods of computing general indexes of labor productivity in the kolk-
hozes and sovkhozes, discussed in this article, have already had practical appli-
cation in the work of the Central Statistical Administration USSR. However, these
methods are inapplicable in studying labor productivity either in individual kolk-
hozes and sovkhozes or in the various organizational and productive groups. For
such a study it would be necessary to organize an appropriate system of original
production and labor time accounts in every kolkhoz, sovkhoz, and MIS, which at
present is not practicable. However, in studying labor productivity in groups of
kolkhozes and sovkhozes operating under varied organizational and economic con-
ditions and engaged in different types of production, the selective method must
be widely adopted.
The program of selective surveys must be,adapted not only for obtaining in-
dexes which characterize the level of and changes in labor productivity in the
basic branches of agriculture and agriculture as a whole, but also for obtaining
the above-mentioned, partial indexes of labor productivity for individual products,
labor outlays on crops, types of livestock, and for operations. Thus, such a
system of indexes of selective surveys is required as would make it passible to
determine the effect of the most important factors of labor productivity in agri-
culture. It would make it possible to begin a direct, general survey of labor
productivity in agriculture in the very near future. The practical experience
obtained as the result of such surveys would serve as a basis for the gradual in-
troduction of labor productivity accounting in all kolkhozes and eovkhozes.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/07/15: CIA-RDP80-00809A000700260035-3