Starting from May 11, 2020, Kazakhstan is learning to live in the new, even more dire circumstances. With that, it is already clear that, even though the oil&gas and the mining industries will remain the systemically important ones, nonetheless, they have already stoped playing the role of the drivers in the national economy. Therefore, Akorda will have to search for new ones. And agriculture or, to be more precise, the agricultural complex, may become one of such drivers.

Before the start of the current crisis, Kazakhstan had been actively conducting several discussions related to agriculture. What is important, both the state representatives such as the Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Kazakhstan and several business-communities as well as a large number of entrepreneurs had participated in them.

However, judging by the information in the press and on the Internet, they had primarily been discussing the problems related to the current state policy including such very sensitive issues as the support of the industry’s individual sectors. And this, in our opinion, is unfortunate since it inadvertently preservers the current troubles. And for a long time at that.

The thing is that, in our opinion, the country has got at least three principal problems to solve.

First, there is the problem of introducing private ownership of farmlands or, as a temporary measure, of at least including them into the the land-renting right market turnover. 

Second, there is a problem of determining the main development directions of at least two main sub-industries, in other words, grain-growing and livestock farming.

Third, there is the problem of selecting the main model of economy management (if not the the entire country then for at least individual regions) as part of the sector’s state support policy.

We believe that such a sensitive issue as the introduction of private ownership of farmlands in Kazakhstan will not be resolved for at least next two generations. Since the people that can be called latifundists of large landowners are the main opponents of such a possibility. These are the people who, over the years of independence, had gained official or unofficial control (by seizing, stealing, buying – underline as appropriate) of the large parcels of land measured by tens of thousands and thousands hectares that previously belonged to the sovkhzes and kolkhozes. 

However, having gained control of the land, many a newly born latifundists did not manage to organise a normal business on their land. With that, none of them is going to part with their assets. It is these people (that the country has enough of – several thousands persons we believe) that, during the past years, have been able to suppress (with the help of the seemingly spontaneous public protests, among other things) all the not so assertive attempts of the state to change something in this sphere.

Of course, the authorities are trying to change something, among other things, by establishing external monitoring of the usage of farmlands and increasing their taxing when the lands are used inappropriately. However, we doubt the efficiency of these efforts. Simply because the state agencies involved in solving this problem, starting from the industry-related agencies and ending with the local authorities of all levels, are existing under the influence (if not the direct control) of the latifundists. Moreover, quite often the attempts of officials to install some order, de-facto, serve as the acts of redivision of property or help providing  a reason to conduct it. 

As a result, the business operating in the sphere of agriculture and the related sectors is experiencing problems. And note that these problems are bigger and more serious than a casual observer would think.

For this reason, the inclusion of farmlands in the market turnover is the issue whose resolution has ripen and overripen a long time ago; however, it is also the issue that is not going to be resolved.

The answer to the question why is obvious.

There is no doubt that President of the Republic of Kazakhstan Kossym-Jomart Tokayev will continue the practice of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan that boils down to the principle “don’t trouble troubles until troubles trouble you”. For local latifundists control not just the large parcels of land but, de-facto, the population residing on the controlled or bordering territory which is particularly sensitive when we are talking about the places located far from the capital and major regions. And latifundists also usually serve as whether the leaders of their own clans or the clients of bigger entities.

In other words, it is the people that are capable of organising if not a coup d’etat for the purpose of overthrowing the current authorities then a tough resistance to any (repeat, any) attempt to “steal from them”. And it’s irrelevant who is going to attempt it – the state, the society or the private investors.

Under these circumstances, the only rational way to solve the problem lies in the gradual inclusion of farmlands into the turnover starting with creating a market of land-renting right. How to do it is a subject for a separate discussion. However, it looks like the repetition of the previous Soviet practices of how to solve this problem, in other words, the involuntary collectivisation is no threat for Kazakhstan. And, apart from the market relations, the world hasn’t come up with any new way of dealing with this problem yet.

As for the issues of determining the main development directions for at least two main subindustries, in other words, grain-growing and livestock faming and choosing the main model of economy management for at least individual regions as part of the state’s policy of supporting the sector, they are being discussed albeit, in our opinion, not very correctly.

However, this incorrectness is objective and unavoidable since the current discussions do not serve as a dialogue between the entrepreneurs and their communities with the state as such but represent a debate with individual state agencies and the officials chairing them; the officials who have their own business-interests or are connected to the people from among the latifundists.