Page 3 - Agriculture in Cambodia

common pool of rice and tools, productive labor was directed primarily to meeting the family's needs, and
the relationship between the agricultural producers and the market or state organizations was very weak.

The third category was classified as the family economy. As in the second category, the group allocated land
to families at the beginning of the season, and farm implements continued to be their private property. In this
third category, however, the family cultivated its

own assigned lot, owned the entire harvest, and sold its surplus directly to state purchasing organizations. In
the solidarity groups of this category, there was no collective effort, except in administrative and
sociocultural matters.

The government credited the solidarity group system with rehabilitating the agricultural sector and
increasing food production. The system's contribution to socialism, however, was less visible and significant.
According to Chhea Song, deputy minister of agriculture, a mere 10 percent of the solidarity groups really
worked collectively in the mid-1980s (seven years after solidarity groups had come into operation). Seventy
percent of the solidarity groups performed only some tasks in common, such as preparing the fields and
planting seeds. Finally, 20 percent of the agricultural workers farmed their land as individuals and
participated in the category of the family economy.

Rice production

In 1987 statistics on rice production were sparse, and they varied depending upon sources. Cambodian
government figures were generally lower than those provided by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) for the period from 1979 to 1985.

Political and technical factors account for the discrepancies. Data collection in the war-torn nation is
difficult because of the lack of trained personnel. Moreover, representatives of international and of foreign
relief organizations are not permitted to travel beyond Phnom Penh, except with special permission, because