Globalnews.kz continues to seek and post most interesting publications regarding Kazakhstan and its history. Below is a diligent abridged exposition of a complex research conducted by a group of international experts, namely CAROL KERVEN, SARAH ROBINSON and ROY BEHNKE from UK.
In the early decades of the 20th century, a profound transformation swept over the northern realms of Kazakhstan, then under the stern governance of Tsarist Russia. This vast land, rich in verdant steppes and bountiful grasslands, had long been coveted as fertile ground for new agricultural ventures. From 1896 to 1916, a wave of over a million settler families from European Russia descended upon these lands, primarily targeting regions renowned for their lush pastures, areas that had traditionally served as the summer grazing grounds for the Kazakh nomads. The transient, nomadic utilization of these steppes was perceived by the colonizers as an impediment to their agrarian ambitions, with grazing herds occupying vast tracts of land potential for cultivation. This colonial settlement policy brought considerable hardship upon the Kazakh people, severely limiting their access to essential pastures.
Despite the seismic shift of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, the plight of the Kazakh nomads and semi-nomads under Russian rule saw little immediate change, with Russian settlers continuing their southward expansion. By 1924, Kazakhstan found itself formally integrated into the nascent Soviet Union. A census conducted in 1926, on the eve of collectivization, revealed that while summer migrations still involved 65% of the Kazakh population, the practice of long-distance, multi-season migrations had dwindled to a mere 7-8%. During this period, there was a noticeable increase in haymaking activities, cattle rearing, and the number of entirely sedentary households, a stark departure from the nomadic traditions of old.
Amidst this backdrop, some Russian administrators posited that the nomadic pastoral lifestyle was an environmental adaptation, sustainable as long as the natural landscape remained unchanged. However, by the 1930s, Soviet scholars began to argue that nomadic societies had already developed class structures prior to the Bolshevik upheaval, with tribal leaders, or bailar, being depicted as feudal lords, and nomadism itself criticized for its perceived inefficiency.
The precarious nature of socio-economic strata in this era was poignantly captured by Hudson in 1938. He noted that the loss of a few cattle could plunge a poor or middle-class Kazak into complete dependency on the affluent herd owners. This vulnerability was echoed in earlier observations by Radlov in 1893, who remarked on the dire circumstances of Kazaks who lost their animals to drought or harsh winters, leaving them no recourse but to work for sustenance under wealthier patrons. Grodekov, writing in 1889, highlighted a similar dynamic within tribes, where the impoverished would migrate alongside the affluent for protection, remunerating their benefactors with labor.
The advent of Communist rule heralded the establishment of collective farms, known as kolkhozy, from 1924. These communes, centered around semi-settled villages and governed by the bailar, were tasked with managing livestock, migratory movements, and water resources. This period marked the onset of a rigorous campaign for enforced settlement and livestock expropriation, encapsulated in Stalin’s drive for collectivization. Starting in 1928, and escalating through the infamous era of «Stalin’s Terror,» the Soviet regime systematically confiscated livestock from Kazakh families, resulting in a catastrophic decline in livestock numbers and a horrific famine from 1931 to 1934.
The process of collectivization was further intensified through «dekulakization,» the forced removal of ostensibly affluent, exploitative peasants, or kulaks, from villages. This policy targeted not only the kulaks but also the Kazakh bailar who had amassed wealth under the Russian administration, now denounced by the settled ex-nomads. The radical methods employed for collectivizing pastoral regions and enforcing sedentarization had far-reaching consequences for the Kazakh pastoralists, including severe fodder shortages in collective farms and a dramatic crash in livestock numbers in the early 1930s. This tumultuous period in Kazakh history, marked by profound societal and environmental upheavals, remains a testament to the resilience and adaptability of its people in the face of overwhelming change.
The forced settlement of Kazakh nomads in the 1920s led to a collapse in their traditional social structures vital for seasonal livestock migrations (Kindler, 2018). However, by the 1930s, Soviet leaders, recognizing the disastrous consequences of restricting nomadic movements and confining livestock to collective farms, began to reinstate nomadic methods for large-scale animal rearing in the steppes, a strategy they had previously dismissed (ibid).
Historical research has focused on the most tumultuous events affecting Kazakh pastoral nomadism in the past century, including the enforced collectivization and subsequent famine in the early 1930s. Yet, from the 1940s to the 1980s, there was a resurgence in nomadic livestock management over long distances (Alimaev and Behnke, 2008; Robinson et al., 2016). At the outset of World War II, the USSR issued a decree to restore migratory grazing, establishing routes and support stations for livestock movement (cited in Alimaev and Behnke, 2008, p. 178). This policy reversal stemmed from multiple factors: the pacification of Kazakh nomads after the harsh collectivization in the 1930s; efficiency analyses favoring grazing over sedentary farming; insights into nomadic knowledge of pasture management; and Soviet technological advancements in livestock breeding, pasture assessment, and scheduling (Asanov and Alimaev, 1990; Zhambakin, 1995). This led to an industrialized form of nomadism, combining modern technology with traditional pastoral skills to utilize Kazakhstan’s variable pastoral resources effectively—a blend of Soviet modernization and Kazakh nomadic tradition, driven by wartime necessities.
For instance, in 1935, the collective farm system adopted otgon pastoralism, allowing limited seasonal migrations within its framework (Werner, 1997). This marked a departure from clan-based movements, with small groups managing state-owned herds along predetermined routes. This transition required new technical inputs and reactivation of traditional herding knowledge through wage labor. The social upheaval of the early 20th century and the 1930s had fragmented Kazakh clans, making large-scale nomadic herding unfeasible for individual families.
By the 1940s, Soviet policy shifted back to nomadic practices, replacing the clan structure with a brigade system in collective farms, dividing labor into specialized groups and providing social services. This new model fostered a rural elite based on administrative control and professional status, replacing the previous social hierarchy based on personal livestock wealth (Olcott, 1981).
Kazakh women’s roles in this era were complex, balancing traditional responsibilities with emerging opportunities in education and employment. Simultaneously, the state encouraged female fertility and provided social support services (McGuire, 2017).
As collective farms expanded, central planners pressured for increased livestock production, leading to intensified farming practices and expansion into arid regions (Asanov and Alimaev, 1990; Gilmanov, 1996). By the mid-1960s, large farm settlements with modern amenities were established, and extensive livestock movement was maintained through the brigade system.
The Soviet approach to livestock migration was meticulously planned based on environmental assessments. However, in the 1960s, attempts to boost production by increasing livestock numbers and reducing mobility led to significant environmental degradation (Asanov and Alimaev, 1990). Overstocking and the conversion of key pastures resulted in vegetation loss, soil degradation, and reliance on less productive semi-arid pastures. Severe degradation was noted especially in sandy areas with dense infrastructure developed by state farms since the 1940s (Dzhanpeisov et al., 1990; Babaev and Kharin, 1991).
The dissolution of the USSR in 1991 triggered the rapid decline of state farms. By the mid-1990s, market losses and economic upheaval led to the privatization of farm assets (World Bank, 1993). The withdrawal of state support, conversion of fodder lands to cash crops, and loss of social benefits forced rural families to adapt to a new reality of independent livestock rearing. The collapse of state farms resulted in surplus rural labor, urban migration, and a demographic shift in rural areas, leading to smaller, more vulnerable livestock herds.
The abandonment of Soviet-era technology and infrastructure further complicated livestock management, and only a few individuals, typically former Soviet farm professionals, were able to capitalize on the chaos by acquiring key assets (Behnke, 2003). This shift had profound impacts on the structure and scale of pastoralism, marking a stark transition from collective
A dramatic example of post-Soviet livestock ownership disparities is evident in the story of a former state mechanic who, seven years after the USSR’s dissolution in 1991, amassed a considerable herd of cattle, sheep, horses, and pigs. He reflected on his grandfather’s past as a wealthy landowner (bai), lost during the 1928 government seizures, and emphasized the need for private land, envisioning a modern form of livestock management that combines traditional practices with commercial strategies (Kerven et al., 1996, field notes).
The absence of state intervention in farm privatization led to significant inequalities in the distribution of assets, land, and livestock, creating a new class of affluent livestock owners. This phenomenon was noted in a survey of sheep-owning households in south-central Kazakhstan, where these owners managed to secure leaseholds over former state farm lands, acquiring crucial resources and transportation means for remote grazing and market access (Kerven et al., 2004, 2006; Milner-Gulland et al., 2006). Their success, fueled by increasing urban demand for meat, led to a commercial approach in livestock management and a widening gap between large and small-scale owners (Kerven et al., 2016a).
These large-scale owners often leverage extended kinship networks for resources and labor, maintaining multi-generational family units for flock management. This system mirrors pre-Soviet social structures, where collective efforts among families and kinship networks were vital for sheep husbandry (McGuire, 2013, p. 35).
Initially, big sheep owners employed needy individuals or immigrants as shepherds. However, as their businesses flourished, family members took on supervisory roles, while the owners themselves lived in relative comfort, managing their livestock enterprises semi-absentee (Kerven et al., 2016a). Shepherding remained predominantly a male task, with women and children handling barn duties and animal care.
Despite the significant role of women in domestic and herding tasks, there is limited research on changing gender roles in livestock management. An analysis from southern Kazakhstan highlights the socio-economic implications of women’s domestic labor in herding camps, linking it to broader household strategies like marriage and labor exchange (McGuire, 2017, p. 121).
The revival of livestock farming was stimulated by rising meat prices, investment opportunities, and government policies favoring large-scale pasture leasing. This created a new wealthy class of livestock producers, the modern ‘bailar,’ who combine traditional long-distance migrations with contemporary market strategies (Kerven et al., 2006, 2016a,b). These new bailar, often claiming ancestral ties or embracing market economies, differ from their predecessors in their lack of perceived social obligations and their adoption of modern ranching techniques and technologies (Kerven et al., 2016a).
For a decade post-independence, the Kazakh government focused more on oil and gas development, paying little attention to the evolving livestock sector. This lack of regulation allowed the livestock industry to develop under the influence of local elites, remnants of the Soviet system (Pomfret, 2009; Behnke, 2003; Kerven et al., 2006).
Recent government initiatives seem to favor large-scale livestock owners, overlooking the needs of smaller-scale owners. A substantial subsidy program aimed at intensifying livestock production through improved practices and technology has primarily benefited the largest farmers, exacerbating the divide between different scales of livestock ownership (World Bank, 2019a; Robinson, 2020). Despite the large number of rural households owning livestock, the benefits of these subsidies have been disproportionately skewed towards a small number of registered farms and government enterprises. This stratification is evident in the stark contrast between the average livestock holdings of registered farms and those of the majority of rural households (Robinson, 2020; Kerven et al., 2016b; Robinson et al., 2017).
A World Bank review from 2018 advised Kazakhstan to realign its agricultural subsidies to foster productivity, growth, and environmental sustainability. This recommendation highlighted the environmental benefits of extensive livestock management over increased reliance on cultivated fodder crops and reduced natural grazing. In response, the World Bank and Kazakh government are collaborating on the Kazakhstan Sustainable Livestock Development Project (2020–2024), aiming to shift state support towards smaller and medium-sized cattle farmers and away from large agricultural enterprises. This project specifically targets medium farmers with 10–50 cattle and larger enterprises with thousands of cattle (World Bank, 2019b).
However, there are mixed messages from the government and external agencies. While substantial subsidies and advice are directed at larger herd owners, who often practice seasonal livestock mobility, there’s also an emphasis on intensifying livestock feeding through increased feed crop cultivation. Current policies seem to favor registered farmers with larger flocks and herds, potentially excluding smaller livestock owners from accessing these government incentives.
Reflecting on Kazakhstan’s pastoral history provides insights into potential future trends in livestock management. Key questions include the viability of pastoral mobility, the potential return to mobile livestock management, and the most effective strategies for grazing land management in terms of environmental and human welfare.
The Kazakh government views mostly sedentary village-based livestock farmers as economically unsustainable, with their grazing practices around villages leading to overgrazing post-USSR (Ellis and Lee, 2003; Alimaev et al., 2008; Dara et al., 2020). These small-scale owners often can’t afford to migrate seasonally due to various logistical challenges (Kerven et al., 2004, 2006, 2008, 2016b; Hauck et al., 2016; Ferret, 2018; Robinson, 2020). However, in areas with high demand for livestock products, some small-scale owners have found it viable to continue vertical transhumance. They either group their animals with those of larger owners or hire private shepherds for seasonal grazing (McGuire, 2013; Hauck et al., 2016; Ferret, 2018).
Legally, small-scale farmers are restricted to accessing only 12% of pasture area around villages, while registered farms have leased double this amount. Half of the nation’s pastureland, often remote and under state control, remains inaccessible to small-scale owners, increasingly relegating them to overgrazed and less productive areas (Robinson, 2020; Kerven et al., 2016a,b; Robinson et al., 2017). Meanwhile, larger herd owners benefit from economies of scale in long-distance migrations, whereas many former mobile pastoralists have become sedentary due to financial constraints or lifestyle choices, often excluded from government subsidies and credit programs (Robinson and Milner-Gulland, 2003a; Kerven et al., 2004, 2006).
A historical perspective shows that a century ago, Kazakh livestock units owned significantly more animals per unit than today—nearly four times more sheep, twice as many cattle, and notably more goats, horses, and camels. The current distribution of sheep and cattle mirrors 1913 figures, but they are now shared among 1.9 million livestock-owning units, compared to less than half a million a century ago (Kazakh Academy of Sciences, 1980; Kazakhstan National Statistical Agency, 2018). Although the national proportions of sheep and cattle have remained consistent over time, there has been a decline in horses and camels, previously essential for transportation.
There are undoubtedly environmental consequences of these recent recorded changes in land use and livestock management. If the rangelands of Kazakhstan are partly the product of livestock grazing over millennia, can effects be discerned of the most recent changes happening in the last decades? What changes can be anticipated in the near future?
Several kinds of environmental changes in the current and former grazed rangelands have been quite closely monitored since the collapse of state-managed livestock and crop farming in the early 1990s. Firstly, field analyses have been carried out on the several different types of vegetation successions occurring with the rapid and radical changes in land use since 1991. Land on large state farms which was cropped for many decades before the 1990s has been abandoned and is returning to rangeland. In another process, land that was formerly grazed for many decades is now only being lightly grazed or not at all. Secondly, there have been investigations of how land use changes have affected carbon sequestration in plants and soil, mainly due to abandonment of cropping in the former Virgin Lands region of northern Kazakhstan and some return of livestock grazing (Perez-Quezada et al., 2010; Kurganova et al., 2015; Schierhorn et al., 2019). Thirdly, there are studies on the biodiversity implications of the radically altered livestock grazing pressure patterns and crop cessation (Kamp et al., 2009, 2011, 2015, 2016). Together, these changes over the last three decades point to the substantial effects of different livestock grazing intensities on the ecology and sustainability of the Kazakh rangelands for the future.
As rainfed cropping sharply declined with the absence of state support after the end of the USSR, by 2000 about 40% of arable land in Kazakhstan had been withdrawn from cropping over two decades (Kamp et al., 2011; Dara et al., 2020). Some 14.1 Mha of abandoned crop land remains uncultivated (Schierhorn et al., 2019). Over the same period, as has been discussed here, livestock numbers crashed, most of the remaining livestock could not be taken to remote pastures, and instead had to be grazed around villages (Behnke, 2003; Robinson and Milner-Gulland, 2003b; Robinson et al., 2016). This second process has led to a mosaic of heavily grazed and ungrazed or lightly grazed rangeland zones, with consequent ecological impacts.
One detailed study (Brinkert et al., 2016) examined the changes in vegetation diversity resulting from these combined processes of spontaneous succession of the abandoned crop land and the loss by the late 20th C of both domestic and wild ungulate grazers, the latter mainly Saiga tatarica antelope. The study compared plant succession and soil conditions in grazed and ungrazed abandoned crop fields and “near-natural” steppe, and found that grazing greatly hastened the return of these abandoned lands to steppe-type vegetation. The authors theorized that due to the effects of “pyric herbivory,” “The interaction between free roaming grazers and fire promotes a moving patch mosaic at the landscape scale that favors biodiversity and pasture quality in grasslands. When grazing ceases completely, one essential component of this old evolutionary disturbance pattern gets lost which might have far-reaching consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem processes” (op. cit. p. 2557–2558). Dara et al. (2019) demonstrated through remote sensing that the decrease in grazing pressure in northern Kazakhstan was associated with increased fire prevalence due to accumulation of dry vegetation, with attendant risks of reduced biodiversity. Brinkert et al. conclude quite firmly that “grazing is mandatory to fully restore the original near-natural steppe vegetation and the underlying processes of pyric herbivory” (op. cit. p. 2,544). Hence, we might reasonably assume that “near-natural pastures” are not pristine but instead are evidence that different degrees of biodiversity result from more or less grazing by large wild and domesticated herbivores over thousands of years. “Natural” is therefore difficult to pinpoint.
Small bird species, some critically endangered on the IUCN Red List, as well as small mammals and insects, have been closely studied in the contemporary Kazakh rangelands; for example, the Black Lark Melanocorypha yeltoniensis (Lameris et al., 2016), White Lark Alauda leucoptera and the Sociable Lapwing Vanellus gregarius (Kamp et al., 2009, 2015). It transpires that the abundance and community composition of certain species varies depending on whether the sites are heavily-grazed, under-grazed, and in more or less proximity to human settlements (Kamp et al., 2015). The conclusion is that “Heterogeneity in grazing levels, including very heavy local grazing, seems to be crucial for species-rich steppe bird and mammal communities (Kamp et al., 2016, p. 2,530).
Studies from 10 years after the abandonment of state grain farms in the northern Kazakhstan steppe region (Perez-Quezada et al., 2010) found that carbon flux components of net ecosystem exchange were greatest in abandoned crop land, followed by “virgin land” which had not been used for crops (but probably would have been grazed by livestock at some point up to the early 20th C) and least for land sown with fodder crops, wheat or barley. Soil organic carbon was highest for the “virgin lands” and “decreased with greater degrees of cultivation” (ibid. p 91).
Grasslands store more carbon than arable soils because a greater part of the organic matter is physically and chemically stabilized (Soussana et al., 2010). Conversion of croplands back to grazing land results in carbon sequestration which may continue for many decades (McLauchlan et al., 2006). Schierhorn et al. (2019) find that since the end of the Soviet Union there was a large reduction in GHG emissions in the former USSR, including in Kazakhstan, much of which is due to carbon sequestration from abandonment of croplands and reduction of livestock. These soils still have carbon fixation potential because abandoned croplands hold less carbon than native grasslands (Causarano et al., 2011), which sequester additional carbon as vegetation succession proceeds (Perez-Quezada et al., 2010).
Ecologists, wildlife scientists and conservationists familiar with the effects of recent land use changes on the Kazakh rangelands have concluded that one of the main issues for the future is the current “undergrazing” of large areas, which affects how the ecosystem functions and increases fire risk. Restoring free-ranging livestock on the Kazakh steppes, coupled with management advice on ecologically sustainable stocking rates and the heterogeneity of grazing patterns, might result in conservation benefits (Kamp et al., 2016). This view is shared between widely disparate disciplines, in for example, the conclusion reached from archaeological research in Kazakhstan, that “As modern ecologists focus on the restoration or rewilding of grasslands through the re-introduction of wild species to increase biodiversity, a secondary discussion should focus on how animal husbandry might also contribute to grassland ecology” (Ventresca Miller et al., 2020b).
Должность получил Ерулан Жамаубаев, сообщает пресс-служба Акорды. Распоряжением главы государства Жамаубаев Ерулан Кенжебекович назначен советником…
Китай объявил о новых, радикальных мерах, направленных на стабилизацию пострадавшего от кризиса сектора недвижимости, разрешив…
Вовлекший в законный оборот похищенные средства Ануарбек Джексенгалиев приговорен к 6 годам и 8 месяцам…
Казахстан и Таджикистан активизируют усилия по увеличению товарооборота между двумя странами с целью доведения его…
В новом учебном году объем государственного образовательного заказа в организациях технического и профессионального образования увеличится…
Слегка потеплеет лишь на западе страны. 18-20 мая казахстанцев ждут дожди и похолодание, сообщили в…