Cuba, agriculture and socialist renewal

• DOI: https://doi.org/10.13169/intejcubastud.12.2.0196
• Pages: 196-227
• Published date: 01 December 2020
• Date: 01 December 2020
• Author: Ingrid Hanon
• Subject Matter: Cuba,agriculture,socialism,self-management,environment,technology,solidarity economy

InternatIonal Journal of Cuban StudIeS 12.2 WInter 2020

ACADEMIC ARTICLE

CUBA, AGRICULTURE AND SOCIALIST

RENEWAL

Ingrid Hanon

PhD Candidate, Auckland University, New Zealand

Ingrid Hanon is a PhD student in sociology at the University of Auckland in New Zealand.

Her research interests lie in the areas of Marxist theory (in particular Marx’s economic

thought and the theory of value), sociology of work, the Cuban Revolution, ecosocialism

and alternatives to capitalism. Two recent articles related to this work include “Agriculture

urbaine et autogestion à Cuba”, Revue internationale de l’économie sociale: Recma, 337, and

“Workers’ participation: the challenge of Cuban socialism”, Socialism and Democracy, 33(1).

Abstract

This paper aims to analyse the trajectory and dynamics of Cuban agriculture since

the Revolution. It examines the main challenges, divergences and contradictions of

its socialist strategy in the agrarian sector, stressing the limits of the industrial and

agricultural models and the forces of production inherited from the capitalist world.

For this purpose, I examine changes and continuities in terms of land management,

crop production, the technological model and agricultural policy. Finally, I look at

Cuban agriculture transformations in the 1990s from a social and solidarity economy

perspective, signalling their contributions to the renewal of Cuban socialism.

Keywords: Cuba, agriculture, socialism, self-management, environment, technology,

solidarity economy

Cuban Agriculture and the Revolution

Following the arrival of the Revolution in 1959, the new government wanted to

undertake a radical political, economic, social and cultural transformation of the

country. Moved by anti-dictatorial goals, the leaders of the Revolution aspired

to achieve political and economic independence for Cuba, reduce poverty and

CUBA, AGRICULTURE AND SOCIALIST RENEWAL 197

IJCS Produced and distributed by Pluto Journals www.plutojournals.com/ijcs/

inequalities, recover national sovereignty and eradicate human exploitation to

create a fairer and more equitable society. Once the Revolution declared its

socialist character in 1961, those aims were extended toward the consolidation

of a participatory democracy, the creation of an autochthonous socialism, the

endorsement of a multi-polar world, the promotion of Third World solidarity

and the construction of the long-awaited Latin-American integration (Guerra

Vilaboy and Maldonado Gallardo 2009: 40–60; Suárez Salazar 2018: 151–4).

In the economic sphere and specifically with regard to the rural sector, the

objective was to drastically transform the agricultural landscape in order to

reduce rural poverty, improve the living conditions of the peasantry and reduce

the extreme concentration of land ownership (Rodriguez 1987: 25; Murphy

1999: 7). Moreover, the Cuban leaders aimed to solve the problems of underde-

velopment by breaking free from the colonial heritage of sugar production and

promoting the industrialisation of the country. In order to achieve those goals,

the government first adopted a policy of agricultural diversification and land

redistribution. However, the country soon returned to sugar for its development

strategy (Bambirra 1974: 156–67).

The Agriculture Sector Before 1959

Prior to the Revolution, the country had a low level of industrialisation, the

economy was dominated by a mono-export and monoculture structure oriented

toward the United States of America’s market, and the vast majority of the agri-

cultural land was controlled by a small number of land-holders of large estates

or latifundios for cattle and sugar production (Rodriguez 1987: 23–5). Its inter-

national trade was mainly dependant on sugar exports, followed by tobacco. In

1958, for instance, sugar and its derivate products represented 81 percent of the

value of the country’s exports and was cultivated on approximately half of

Cuba’s irrigated land (Gutelman 1967: 36–7; Gonzalez 2003: 692, 704).

Moreover, the United States accounted for two-thirds of Cuba’s international

trade and 75 percent of its imports (Mesa-Lago 1994: 15). If Cuba mostly

exported sugar toward the north, the Caribbean island imported a great variety

of products including many of its basic consumption goods (Gonzalez 2003:

693; Benjamin etal. 1987: 9–14).

Sugar production occupied 24.6 percent of the agricultural land and 60 percent

of the crop cultivated lands (Rodriguez 1987: 24; Raymond 2002: 580). Of the

land dedicated to this crop, 51.6 percent was under the control of capital from the

United States. Among the 22 biggest sugar companies, which controlled 70 percent

of the land dedicated to sugar, 13 were from the United States such as the United

Fruit Company and the West Indies Sugar Corporation (Gutelman 1967: 18–19;

198 ACADEMIC ARTICLE – INGRID HANON

InternatIonal Journal of Cuban StudIeS 12.2 WInter 2020

Herrera 2005: 6; Chonchol 1963: 74–5). The penetration of the island by United

States capital took place mainly from the beginning of the twentieth century. By the

end of the 1950s, companies from the United States controlled not only the best

land of the country, but also factories, banks and means of communication and

transportation (Guerra Vilaboy and Maldonado Gallardo 2009: 8–9).

In terms of land distribution, 78.5 percent of the farms had less than 2 cabal-

lerias (27 hectares) and comprised 15 percent of the agricultural land, while 2.8

percent of the farms had more than 30 caballerias (402 hectares) and constituted

57.7 percent of the agricultural land (Chonchol 1963: 74). In addition to this, 70

percent of the farm units were not operated by their owners but rather by admin-

istrators, lessees, sub-lessees, sharecroppers, or other occupants without any own-

ership title (Rodriguez 1987: 24; Chonchol 1963: 73). That is, in terms of

ownership of the land, the inequalities were even greater than in terms of their size,

as 9.4 percent of landowners possessed 73.3 percent of the agricultural land, while

66.1 percent of the landowners possessed only 7.4 percent (Chonchol 1963: 75).

The Cuban peasantry suffered from poverty, marginalisation and social ine-

qualities. Most of the peasant population did not own the land they worked, and

in some cases they had to pay in kind to the owners of the land, which could

account for up to 50 percent of the harvest (Guerra Vilaboy and Maldonado

Gallardo 2009: 5). The rural population also suffered from precarious incomes

and unequal wealth distribution, with 69.6 percent of the farmers receiving only

27.3 percent of the income generated by the rural sector (Rodriguez 1987: 25).

The sugar industry employed approximately one-third of the country’s labour

force during the four-month sugar harvest, and the rest of the year most of those

workers were unemployed or under-employed. Added to this, most of the rural

population suffered from poor housing conditions, limited access to safe water

or sanitation facilities, restricted supply of electricity, constrained access to

healthcare and a low level of literacy (Benjamin etal. 1987: 8; Gonzalez 2003:

692–3). This social context dominated by extreme poverty, inequality and

wealth concentration was radically changed with the arrival of the Revolution in

1959. However, many of the economic patterns of the colonial period and

dependant capitalism would be harder to transform.

First Agrarian Reform and Agricultural Debate

After the Revolution, one the first measures adopted by the new government

was the implementation of the first agrarian reform for the abolition of the lati-

fundio on 17 May 1959. Land concentration by private holders was limited to

30 caballerias (402 hectares), although with some exceptions, and the land cul-

tivated by peasants as tenants, subtenants, sharecroppers and squatters was