Author
Abstract
This paper explores how women and men in commodity producer family farms that emerged during the post-socialist transition in Hungary negotiated gendered and entrepreneurial identities within the emergent gender regime balancing between three entangled and conflicting processes related to globalization, retraditionalisation and state socialist legacies. During this period, the agricultural production structure polarized between units with rapid land concentration and intensified commodity production and small-scale subsistence farmers. Gender dynamics showed to have had great importance for how farms could position themselves on the capital accumulation trajectory. The study is based on a selection from fifty life-history interviews carried out with farm families on the commodification trajectory during the post-socialist transition in rural Hungary between 2000 and 2004 (the years prior to Hungary joining the EU), among which a number of farm families were revisited after three years of the first occasion. Four major types of family farms were identified based on how they (un)done the gender entrepreneurship nexus while reconciling production and care: traditional family farm, semi-equal partnerships in joint farms, feminized one-woman farm, masculinized one-man farm. Semi-equal partnerships in joint farms moved towards different directions over time: farms with separate spheres adjusting to care, masculinization, woman-led joint farm with care mission out-sourced, and farms with dual crises of care and enterprise. The demands for reproducing family farms under globalized market pressure assumed the mobilization of family labour. Women’s inputs were of great importance, while their responsibility to organise care prevailed, putting extra pressure on their health and work burden.
Suggested Citation
Ildikó Asztalos Morell, 2022.
"Gender and entrepreneurship in the formation of family farms during the postsocialist transformation in Hungary,"
Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 369-389, September.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:cdebxx:v:30:y:2022:i:3:p:369-389
DOI: 10.1080/25739638.2022.2138005
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cdebxx:v:30:y:2022:i:3:p:369-389. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cdeb .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.