Dilorom Tadjibaeva


During the early years of independence (1990s), agricultural and institutional changes in Uzbekistan were made based on the specific characteristics of our country. During transformation, almost nothing has changed in terms of effectivity in regards to transformation of state farms to collective farms still did not make these farms profitable. Only with the formation of dehkan farms (a form of individual farming) after 2004 did agricultural entities started becoming profitable. How can this be explained? Why are these agricultural forms of management more efficient and coincide with the mentality of our population? In this article, using the neo-institutional theory, we have discussed these questions in an attempt to answer these questions by justifying a theoretical point. This theory shows that major issue property rights and transaction costs play main role in the definition of forms of farms management. Statistical analysis of transaction costs and local specifics resulted in a conclusion that the dehkan farming form has significant advantages.

Full Text:



Center for Economic Research. (2009). Economika Uzbekistana [Economy of Uzbekistan]. In Statisticheskiy sbornik [Economic survey data book], (p. 45-75). Tashkent, Uzbekistan: CER.

Chayanov, A. V. (1989). Krestyanskoe khozyaistvo. Izbrannie Trudy [Farm Household. Selected Works]. Moscow, Russia: Economica.

Coase, R. (1993). Firma, rynok i pravo [The firm, the market and the law]. Moscow, Russia: Delo.

Coase, R. (2001). Priroda firmy [Nature of the Firm]. Moscow, Russia: Delo.

Dobrynin, A. & Tarasevich, L. (2004). Economicheskaya theoriya [Economic theory] (3rd ed.). Sankt Petersburg, Russia: Peter.

Eggerson, T. (2001). Economicheskoe povedenie i instituty [Economic behavior and institutions]. Moscow, Russia: Delo.

Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources. (2012, October 22). Pismo v Tashkentskiy Finansoviy institute [Letter to Tashkent Financial Institute from Ministry of Agricultural and Water Resources]. Registered by the Ministry of Agricultural and Water Resources No. 34-2 / 2805. Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

Nesterenko, A. M. (2002). Economica i institutionalnaya theoriya [Economics and Institutional theory]. Moscow, Russia: URSS.

The State Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan on statistics. (2011). Selskoe khozyaystvo Uzbekistana [Agriculture of Uzbekistan]. In Ezhegodniy staticheskiy sbornik [Statistical Yearbook], (p. 19-25, 30-31, 32-41,143-170). Tashkent, Uzbekistan: UzStat.

The State Committee of the Republic of Uzbekistan on statistics. (1991). Uzbekistan v tsifrakh [Uzbekistan in figures]. In Kratkiy Statisticheskiy sbornik [Short Statistical Book], (p. 27-36). Tashkent, Uzbekistan: UzStat.

Timofeev, L. (2001). Tenevaya economika i nalogovye poteri v selskom khozyaistve [Shady economy and tax loss in Agriculture]. Voprosy Economici [Economic Questions], (p.125). Moscow, Russia: RGGU.

Umurzokov, U. P., Toshboev, A. J., & Toshboev, A. A. (2008). Fermer khŭzhaligi ikˌtisodiyoti [Farmer household economy].(p. 40) Tashkent, Uzbekistan: IQTISOD-MOLIYA.

Uzbekistan National News Agency. (1996). Economicheskiy Obzor za 1991-1996 [Economic Survey for 1991-1996]. In Uzbekistan za gody nezavisimosti [Uzbekistan for years of independence], (p. 58-61, 74-75). Tashkent, Uzbekistan: UzA.

Uzbekistan National News Agency. (2011). Osnovnie tendentsii economicheskogo razvitiya Uzbekistana za gody nezavisimosti (1990-2010) I prognoz na 2011-2015 [Major trends of economic and social development of Uzbekistan for years of independence (1990-2010) and forecast for 2011-2015]. In Ezhegodniy statisticheskiy sbornik [Statistical Yearbook], (p. 14-15, 96-99). Tashkent, Uzbekistan: UzA.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Print ISSN 1805-997X, Online ISSN 1805-9961

(c) 2016 Central Bohemia University