著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

京都大学学術出版会

巻号頁・発行日

1997-12

---

1999年度 日本農業経済学会学術賞

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

京都大学大学院農学研究科生物資源経済学専攻

雑誌

生物資源経済研究 (ISSN:13418947)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.17, pp.39-76, 2012-03-22

---

As a result of the Nazi-enforced migration policy at the beginning of WWII, Volksdeutsche (ethnic Germans) farmers from Bessarabia, Volhynia, and Galicia as well as Baltic states resettled in the villages of the annexed Polish areas such as Warthegau and Dazig-Westpreussen, after the native Polish peasants had been deported to the Government General. In Japan, the details of this policy, called Heim ins Reich (back to the Reich), are still not very well understood, except those dealing with the phases of the Holocaust. The purpose of this paper is to describe the experience of the resettlement of the “ethnic German” farmers; it could provide a fresh perspective on this wartime settlement policy, further bringing out its historical continuity to land reform in Postwar East Germany. (1) It is important to note that the targets of the Nazi settlement policy were not the Reichsdeutsche (imperial German) but the Volksdeutsche. Through a racial screening conducted by the Schutzstaffel (SS) before entering annexed Poland, it was found that the SS staff disliked and strongly opposed the concept of consanguineous marriage, while insisting that the ethnic norms were not applied as strictly as expected, as it resulted in criticism for a Nazi local party leader who was representing the resettlers and the complaints raised by them; here, we can observe a discrepancy between them with regard to their understanding of Nazi racial ideology. (2) The action program was designed to simultaneously accomplish both settlement and deportation and was executed systematically and quickly -in only half a day- under the command of the SS organs by mobilizing Nazi activists, including assistant staff members from Nazi women societies, county officials, and local community leaders of native resident ethnic Germans (called "native Germans" in this paper). Further, in the allocation of land and housing, the SS allocated multiple small Polish farms to a German resettler's family with the aim of building an independent family farm with a size of more than 15 ha. (3) After the resettlement, there was heightened "ethnic" conflict within the local community, especially between the German resettlers and the native Germans. Such conflict was in contradiction with the Nazi concept of Volksgemeinschaft (national community). The native Germans remained almost as poor as they were before the settlement policy, like the Polish peasants, and this convinced them that they were not treated favorably by the Nazi, because they perceived the non-allocation of additional farmland to them as unfair. Moreover, they used a different language when communicating among themselves, and their lack of fluency in the German language made communication between the resettlers and the natives difficult. For example, the Bessarabia usually spoke the Schwabisch (Swabia) dialect, whereas the natives were more familiar with Polish. (4) As far as farming after resettlement was concerned, the most serious problem for resettlers was how to control Polish servants, both agricultural and domestic. The military conscription of husbands and sons resulted in the shortage of agricultural labor, which forced the farmer's wives to employ Polish labor. Therefore, they suffered extreme physical pain and mental trauma, brought about by the increased passive resistance by the Polish labor. Despite a good harvest in 1942, overall, it had become tougher for resettlers to carry out farming since 1943. (5) The collapse of the Third Reich led to the deportation of the ethnic Germans from the polish settlement and to their migration to Germany as refugee groups. Through land reform in Postwar East Germany, some of them acquired farmland and became newly involved in farming. Interestingly, there were many cases wherein they acquired farms abandoned by other new farmers around the second half of the 1940s, possibly with the help of the old ethnic German's network. Thus, using their connection with their native villages, they intended to resettle in several areas in an attempt to adapt to the strict agricultural policy of Postwar East Germany.

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

京都大学大学院農学研究科生物資源経済学専攻

雑誌

生物資源経済研究 (ISSN:13418947)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.21, pp.73-98, 2016-03-25

---

Recent studies have focused on the "silent" agricultural revolution that occurred in rural West German society during the postwar period. The purpose of this paper is to provide a new framework by reviewing these recent studies in three research fields: (1) German rural social history, (2) the history of German agricultural policy, and (3) the ecological aspects of the land consolidation program ("Flurbereinigung"). First, social historical studies revealed that the mass influx of refugees from the former eastern territories of Germany heavily influenced rural society and caused a radical change in the local political culture and the "habitus" of rural residents. However, the pathways to rural modernization demonstrated regional diversity. Second, historical studies on the German agricultural policy revealed the following: (1) how people under occupation experienced the postwar food crisis; (2) the transition from a national agricultural policy to the European common agricultural policy in the 1950s; and (3) how farmers revolted against the agricultural structure policy in the European Economic Community (EEC), known as the "Mansholt-Plan" (1968–1972). Third, we examined the postwar land consolidation program, with a focus on the discourse on the ecological elements of the rural landscape. We found conflicts between the "euphoria" of technological innovation and the social desire of making a new home village ("Heimat").

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

京都大学

雑誌

京都大学生物資源経済研究 (ISSN:13418947)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.6, 2000-12

著者

野田 公夫 足立 泰紀 足立 芳宏 伊藤 淳史 大田 伊久雄 岡田 知弘 坂根 嘉弘 白木沢 旭児

出版者

京都大学

雑誌

基盤研究(B)

巻号頁・発行日

2007

---

1930年代日本において、経済的価値を生み出す源として「資源」という言葉がクローズアップされたが、とくに戦争準備の過程に強く規定されたところに大きな特徴があった。農林業は持続性を犠牲にして戦争に総動員されるとともに、工業原料にめぐまれない日本では「あらゆる農産物の軍需資源化」という特異な事態をうんだ。これは、アメリカはもちろん、同じ敗戦国であるドイツとも異なる現象であり、当時の日本経済が巨大寡占企業を生み出しながら就業人口の半ばを農業が占める農業国家であるという奇形的構造をとっていたことの反映であると考えられる。

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

大阪経済大学日本経済史研究所

雑誌

経済史研究 (ISSN:1344803X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.10, pp.147-180, 2006-12-20 (Released:2018-12-01)

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

大阪経済大学日本経済史研究所

雑誌

経済史研究 (ISSN:1344803X)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.3, pp.87-107, 1999-03-30 (Released:2019-03-01)

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

日本農業史学会

雑誌

農業史研究 (ISSN:13475614)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, pp.40-51, 2014 (Released:2017-03-23)

---

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the characteristics of the Nazi food autarky policy and agricultural resource development in the eastward expansion of the Third Reich. Beginning in 1936, an important plank of the Nazi food autarky policy was developing substitutes for imported crops and making them available within Germany's east imperial sphere. We present the case of the Nazi soybean project, based on research by Joachim Drews. While people endeavored to develop new soybean varieties, IG Farben founded a soybean company in Romania and forced the peasants to grow soybeans under contract, which allowed the short-term export of soybeans to Germany. Additionally, we briefly present research produced by Susane Heim on the "Kok-Saghyz" (rubber dandelion) project, which explains how the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, along with the SS, developed its breeding and growing in German-occupied Soviet areas in order to produce a substitute for imported natural rubber. The Nazi food autarky policy, however, was not confined to the resource development of particular crops, but also extended to the agricultural structure reform policy. First, in the annexed Polish areas, such as Warthegau and Dazig-Westpreussen, ethnic Germans farmers from Eastern Europe resettled in the villages immediately after the native Polish peasants had been deported as a result of the Nazi-enforced migration policy at the beginning of WWII. In the allocation of land and housing, the SS distributed a number of small Polish farms to each German re-settler's family. This policy was intended to make the modern independent German family farm. Second, German-occupied Soviet areas such as Ukraine were not merely forced food requisition regions. The Nazi administration sent many German agricultural officials (Landwirtschaftsfuhrer) to these regions as well. They were responsible for controlling the native peasants, but they also became the agents for agricultural reform in 1942: this took the form of a transformation from the kolkhoz (collective farm) into a new mode of organization, the "cultivation cooperative" (Landbaugenossenschaft). Surprisingly, the Nazis additionally intended to mechanize the Russian agriculture through "Ostackerprogramm" (East agricultural program), a program in which many tractors were sent from the Reich into German-occupied Soviet areas. Both in the Polish and Soviet areas, the Nazis "found" a large surplus rural population; they "solved" this problem by sending these people to the Reich as forced agricultural labors. It should be emphasized that the Nazi food autarky policy was more systematic than is usually understood, and was strongly linked with the racial population ideology and agricultural reform planning.

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

京都大学大学院農学研究科生物資源経済学専攻

雑誌

生物資源経済研究 (ISSN:13418947)

巻号頁・発行日

no.21, pp.73-98, 2016

---

Recent studies have focused on the "silent" agricultural revolution that occurred in rural West German society during the postwar period. The purpose of this paper is to provide a new framework by reviewing these recent studies in three research fields: (1) German rural social history, (2) the history of German agricultural policy, and (3) the ecological aspects of the land consolidation program ("Flurbereinigung"). First, social historical studies revealed that the mass influx of refugees from the former eastern territories of Germany heavily influenced rural society and caused a radical change in the local political culture and the "habitus" of rural residents. However, the pathways to rural modernization demonstrated regional diversity. Second, historical studies on the German agricultural policy revealed the following: (1) how people under occupation experienced the postwar food crisis; (2) the transition from a national agricultural policy to the European common agricultural policy in the 1950s; and (3) how farmers revolted against the agricultural structure policy in the European Economic Community (EEC), known as the "Mansholt-Plan" (1968–1972). Third, we examined the postwar land consolidation program, with a focus on the discourse on the ecological elements of the rural landscape. We found conflicts between the "euphoria" of technological innovation and the social desire of making a new home village ("Heimat").

著者

野田 公夫 足立 泰紀 足立 芳宏 伊藤 淳史 大田 伊久雄 岡田 知弘 坂根 嘉弘 白木沢 旭児

出版者

京都大学

雑誌

基盤研究(B)

巻号頁・発行日

2010

---

1930 年代の日本では「資源」という言葉が急浮上した。そして「あるもの」ではなく「作ることができるもの」という側面が過剰に強調されただけでなく、人すらその対象に加わえられた(人的資源)。これは、ドイツにもアメリカにもない特異な現象であり、物質的豊かさに恵まれない日本が総力戦体制に立ち向かうための重要なレトリックであった。本研究では、総力戦体制期の農林資源開発に関する、日・独・米三国の比較史的研究をおこなった。

著者

足立 芳宏

出版者

京都大学大学院農学研究科生物資源経済学専攻

雑誌

生物資源経済研究 (ISSN:13418947)

巻号頁・発行日

no.17, pp.39-76, 2012

---

As a result of the Nazi-enforced migration policy at the beginning of WWII, Volksdeutsche (ethnic Germans) farmers from Bessarabia, Volhynia, and Galicia as well as Baltic states resettled in the villages of the annexed Polish areas such as Warthegau and Dazig-Westpreussen, after the native Polish peasants had been deported to the Government General. In Japan, the details of this policy, called Heim ins Reich (back to the Reich), are still not very well understood, except those dealing with the phases of the Holocaust. The purpose of this paper is to describe the experience of the resettlement of the "ethnic German" farmers; it could provide a fresh perspective on this wartime settlement policy, further bringing out its historical continuity to land reform in Postwar East Germany. (1) It is important to note that the targets of the Nazi settlement policy were not the Reichsdeutsche (imperial German) but the Volksdeutsche. Through a racial screening conducted by the Schutzstaffel (SS) before entering annexed Poland, it was found that the SS staff disliked and strongly opposed the concept of consanguineous marriage, while insisting that the ethnic norms were not applied as strictly as expected, as it resulted in criticism for a Nazi local party leader who was representing the resettlers and the complaints raised by them; here, we can observe a discrepancy between them with regard to their understanding of Nazi racial ideology. (2) The action program was designed to simultaneously accomplish both settlement and deportation and was executed systematically and quickly -in only half a day- under the command of the SS organs by mobilizing Nazi activists, including assistant staff members from Nazi women societies, county officials, and local community leaders of native resident ethnic Germans (called "native Germans" in this paper). Further, in the allocation of land and housing, the SS allocated multiple small Polish farms to a German resettler's family with the aim of building an independent family farm with a size of more than 15 ha. (3) After the resettlement, there was heightened "ethnic" conflict within the local community, especially between the German resettlers and the native Germans. Such conflict was in contradiction with the Nazi concept of Volksgemeinschaft (national community). The native Germans remained almost as poor as they were before the settlement policy, like the Polish peasants, and this convinced them that they were not treated favorably by the Nazi, because they perceived the non-allocation of additional farmland to them as unfair. Moreover, they used a different language when communicating among themselves, and their lack of fluency in the German language made communication between the resettlers and the natives difficult. For example, the Bessarabia usually spoke the Schwabisch (Swabia) dialect, whereas the natives were more familiar with Polish. (4) As far as farming after resettlement was concerned, the most serious problem for resettlers was how to control Polish servants, both agricultural and domestic. The military conscription of husbands and sons resulted in the shortage of agricultural labor, which forced the farmer's wives to employ Polish labor. Therefore, they suffered extreme physical pain and mental trauma, brought about by the increased passive resistance by the Polish labor. Despite a good harvest in 1942, overall, it had become tougher for resettlers to carry out farming since 1943. (5) The collapse of the Third Reich led to the deportation of the ethnic Germans from the polish settlement and to their migration to Germany as refugee groups. Through land reform in Postwar East Germany, some of them acquired farmland and became newly involved in farming. Interestingly, there were many cases wherein they acquired farms abandoned by other new farmers around the second half of the 1940s, possibly with the help of the old ethnic German's network. Thus, using their connection with their native villages, they intended to resettle in several areas in an attempt to adapt to the strict agricultural policy of Postwar East Germany.