IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lessons of the Transformation of the Agricultural Administration and Associations in East Germany with the Collapse of the Socialist Regime


  • Wolz, Axel


With the collapse of the socialist regime in East Germany in late 1989 and the rising political call for unification in early 1990, a radical and abrupt change of the institutional structure became necessary. The (agricultural) administration had to be totally restructured. This referred not only to substance, functions and tasks, similar to all other transition economies, but also the whole administrative set-up had to be re-established in line with the West German system (territorial re-organization). A new administrative system had to be built up from scratch, while simultaneously the socialist one had to be dismantled in a very short period. However, different to the other transition economies, there had been strong support from the West. Overall, this institutional change seems to have been accomplished successfully. In addition, the organizations representing the agricultural population had to be re-organized. The re-organization of the German Farmers’ Union is of special prominence as both German parts were representing completely different agricultural systems. This is the only important organization at national level where East Germans could stay in decision-making positions after unification which had severe repercussions when shaping transformation policies affecting the agricultural sector during the 1990s.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolz, Axel, 2012. "Lessons of the Transformation of the Agricultural Administration and Associations in East Germany with the Collapse of the Socialist Regime," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126071, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae12:126071

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Yoko Kijima & Keijiro Otsuka & Dick Sserunkuuma, 2008. "Assessing the impact of NERICA on income and poverty in central and western Uganda," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 327-337, May.
    2. Mendola, Mariapia, 2007. "Agricultural technology adoption and poverty reduction: A propensity-score matching analysis for rural Bangladesh," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 372-393, June.
    3. Dimara, Efthalia & Skuras, Dimitris, 2003. "Adoption of agricultural innovations as a two-stage partial observability process," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 28(3), May.
    4. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    5. Sall, S. & Norman, D. & Featherstone, A. M., 2000. "Quantitative assessment of improved rice variety adoption: the farmer's perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 129-144, November.
    6. Gockowski, James & Ndoumbe, Michel, 2004. "The adoption of intensive monocrop horticulture in southern Cameroon," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 195-202, May.
    7. Ransom, J. K. & Paudyal, K. & Adhikari, K., 2003. "Adoption of improved maize varieties in the hills of Nepal," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 299-305, December.
    8. Adekambi, Souleimane Adeyemi & Diagne, Aliou & Simtowe, Franklin & Biaou, Gauthier, 2009. "The Impact of Agricultural Technology Adoption on Poverty: The case of NERICA rice varieties in Benin," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51645, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Saha Atanu & H. Alan Love & Robert Schwart, 1994. "Adoption of Emerging Technologies Under Output Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 836-846.
    10. Fernandez-Cornejo, Jorge & Beach, E. Douglas & Huang, Wen-Yuan, 1994. "The Adoption Of Ipm Techniques By Vegetable Growers In Florida, Michigan And Texas," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(01), July.
    11. Nguezet, Paul Martin Dontsop & Diagne, Aliou & Okoruwa, Victor Olusegun & Ojehomon, Vivian, 0. "Impact of Improved Rice Technology (NERICA varieties) on Income and Poverty among Rice Farming Households in Nigeria: A Local Average Treatment Effect (LATE) Approach," Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, vol. 50.
    12. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    13. Diagne, Aliou, 2010. "Technological change in smallholder agriculture: Bridging the adoption gap by understanding its source," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(1), September.
    14. Seck, Papa A. & Tollens, Eric & Wopereis, Marco C.S. & Diagne, Aliou & Bamba, Ibrahim, 2010. "Rising trends and variability of rice prices: Threats and opportunities for sub-Saharan Africa," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 403-411, October.
    15. Ransom, J.K. & Paudyal, K. & Adhikari, Keshav R., 2003. "Adoption of improved maize varieties in the hills of Nepal," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 29(3), December.
    16. Adesina, Akinwumi A. & Baidu-Forson, Jojo, 1995. "Farmers' perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: evidence from analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, October.
    17. Feder, Gershon & O'Mara, Gerald T, 1981. "Farm Size and the Diffusion of Green Revolution Technology," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(1), pages 59-76, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    transition; agricultural administration; farmers' union; unification; Germany; Institutional and Behavioral Economics; Political Economy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ags:iaae12:126071. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.