S-Space Graduate School of International Studies (국제대학원) Dept. of International Studies (국제학과) 국제지역연구 국제지역연구 vol.05 (1996)
현대 베트남 대도시내 농촌 지역의 토지이용과 생산시스템 - 하노이 시 싸 다이모의 사례
Land Use and Production Systems in a Rural Area within a Big City in Contemporary Vietnam: A Case of Xa Dai Mo in Hanoi City
- 전경수; 한도현
- Issue Date
- 서울대학교 지역종합연구소
- 지역연구, Vol.05 No.3, pp. 103-144
- This paper studies changes of land use and production systems in rural Vietnam with reference to the Renovation (Doi Moi) Policy. Most studies of rural Vietnam have dealt with agriculture only. In contrast, this paper deals with handicraft as well. Theoretically, the perspective of this paper, which emphasizes the role of common people in the Renovation Policy, is closely related to the everyday forms of resistance theory.
The data for this paper were collected by the authors" in-depth interviews and participant observations which were conducted twice in February 1993 and February 1994. In addition, official data of the local administration were used. The place the authors did the fieldwork is Xa Dai Mo, a rural part of Greater Hanoi. Xa is often translated into commune or village, which the authors believe fosters misunderstanding. Xa means subcounty, the smallest and lowest echelon of the Vietnamese administration in rural areas.
Many scholars have paid attention to the Renovation Policy in order to understand contemporary Vietnamese society. Most of them have tried to understand the Renovation Policy from the governmental - party - policy or from the international environment - the collapse of the Soviet Union and transformation of Eastern European Countries. But this paper emphasizes the internal factors of the Renovation Policy. According to the authors, the Renovation Policy started informally among the common people long before the official announcement of it in 1986.
People"s demand for the Renovation Policy began to appear from the beginning of the collectivization of agriculture beyond the Labor Exchange Group (To Doi Cong). The Labor Exchange Group was composed of about 15 households. The organization was built and developed according to the people"s experiences. But the cooperatives of the village level which is quite smaller than that of the Xa level were built in two or three years after the Labor Exchange Group was introduced. Though farmers were reluctant to collectivize at first, finally they participated as a result of the propaganda and persuasion of the Communist Party. With the end of the anti-American War, the problems of collective farms came to be clearly exposed and the "agrarian crisis" became apparent. Farmers" dissatisfaction with cooperatives was expressed by their answers to the authors" questions too. According to the farmers, their living during the collective period was the worst from French colonialism through the 1990"s,
Therefore, in 1979, the party decided to give farmers more autonomy in production. A new system - the Contract System - was introduced. Under the new system, land remains collectively owned, but farming is done individually on subdivided plots. At the same time, the size of cooperatives has been made larger. Cooperativization at the Xa level began. This experience is in contrast to those of other socialist countries. In other socialist countries, the expansion of farmers" autonomy has entailed the dismantling of cooperatives. Therefore, the changes in rural Vietnam cannot be understood just from the experiences of other socialist countries or in a unidirectional way.
The handicraft cooperative in the Xa has had different experiences from agricultural cooperatives. It was transformed into a new organization in 1993, which is quite long after the change of agricultural cooperative. In transforming the handicraft cooperative, the cooperative members, not the party, took the initiative. All the members came together and discussed problems of the handicraft cooperative. Finally, they decided to make it smaller and to heavily cut welfare costs. The rationalization for this resulted from debate among the cooperative members, not by the government.
In conclusion, this paper criticizes the simplistic understanding about the Renovation Polic