俄羅斯帝國晚期史托里賓的土地改革：背景、內容、結果（1906~1914）

Pyotr Stolypin’s Agrarian Reform in Late Imperial Russia: Background, Realization and Results (1906~1914)

陳思涵(Sih-Han Chen)

指導教授 ： 彼薩列夫

淡江大學/國際研究學院/歐洲研究所碩士班/碩士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6846/TKU.2014.00234

摘要

1861年的大改革並不符合俄羅斯農民的期望，農民需償還地主高額的賠償金，而分配到的土地又比原有耕地面積小，導致1905年至1907年革命的發生，驅使沙皇政府重新檢討農村改革方案，發展出史托里賓的一系列土地改革。
史托里賓土地改革的目標是去除俄羅斯現代化的障礙。其基本要點是廢除村社組織，實行土地私有制。建立單獨田莊和獨家農場。推行農民移民政策，開拓西伯利亞和中亞荒地。冀望透過土地改革將社會轉型，藉以挽救沙皇政權。
史托里賓的土地改革在俄羅斯歷史上具有重要的地位，面對傳統村社與現代化的衝突，改革雖然完成現代化的目的，沒有考慮到是否與農民傳統思想的牴觸。雖然改革中實現了部份土地私有制，承認農民作為土地所有者的合法權利，又促進農業生產，提高勞動生產率，以致該時期農業經濟高於村社農業經濟，但其改革卻是透過強制性的手段，導致農村中有權勢的富農私有者與貧農之間的對立，社會矛盾的出現。
改革沒有解決農民問題，也沒有挽救沙皇專制政府，對於俄羅斯現代化之路是不完整的，並不符合現代化過程中，本該發展出的政治、社會經濟體制。傳統仍具有優勢，對傳統習慣和緩慢的價值觀改變，改革未能改善農民生活，致使最終仍敵不過農民的革命情緒，連同勞動無產階級一同推翻沙皇政府的統治。

關鍵字

史托里賓 ； 國家土地改革 ； 俄羅斯農民 ； 村社 ； 現代化

並列摘要

The Emancipation Reform of 1861 in Russia did not meet the peasants’ expectation: they were required to pay their landowners huge redemption payments allocation of land. This resulted in many revolutionary upsprings from 1905 to 1907, which had forced the Tsar to reexamine the land reform program and support the agrarian reform initiated by the Prime-minister Pyotr Stolypin.
Pyotr Stolypin’s Agarian Reform was aimed to remove the obstacles to Russian modernization. The fundamental part of it was to abandon rural communities with the allotment land and promote the ownership of private land, which enabled the peasants to establish single and individual farms and the independent farmsteads. By migration policy, the government hoped to transform the society and to consolidate the Tsar’s regime through the land reforms.
Pyotr. Stolypin’s Agarian Reform played an important role in Russian history. At face value, the reform seemed to have achieved its aim to modernization, but it proved to be problematic. Indeed, the reform had facilitated the private landownership, and gave rise to an increase in peasants’ productivity. The agricultural economy at that time had surpassed that of the rural community with the allotment land. Somehow, the authorities could not initiate a reform without repressive measures. This caused the conflicts between the rich peasants and the poor peasants.
Neither did the reform eliminate the problems of peasants. Nor did it save the Tsar’s regime from collapsing. In sum, the modernization was incomplete. While tradition values still dominated in the society, social and economic structure of the society had gone through a transformation. When the social reform failed to improve people’s life, they stood up and overthrew the Tsar.

並列關鍵字

Pyotr Stolypin ； state of agrarian reform ； Russian peasants ； peasant community ； modernization

參考文獻

黃宗昊(2009)，政治經濟學分析架構的三項發展，全球政治評論，第二十五期：151-196。

何萍(2011)，帝俄晚期農民對土地財產權論述之探討，東吳歷史學報，第二十六期：121-182。

Ascher, Abraham (2001), P.A. Stolypin : the Search for Stability in Late Imperial Russia, Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

Blum, Jerome (1971), Lord and Peasant in Russia: from the Ninth to the Nineteenth Century, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Leonard, C. S. (2011), Agrarian Reform in Russia: the Road from Serfdom, New York: Cambridge University Press.