Статья 'Архитектурно-планировочная организация крестьянских (фермерских) хозяйств в условиях социально-экономических преобразований в России: современные тенденции и перспективы развития фермерских хозяйств' - журнал 'Архитектура и дизайн' - NotaBene.ru
по
Journal Menu
> Issues > Rubrics > About journal > Authors > About the Journal > Requirements for publication > Peer-review process > Article retraction > Ethics > Online First Pre-Publication > Copyright & Licensing Policy > Digital archiving policy > Open Access Policy > Article Processing Charge > Article Identification Policy > Plagiarism check policy > Publication policy > Editorial board
Journals in science databases
About the Journal

MAIN PAGE > Back to contents
Architecture and design
Reference:

Architectural and planning organization of peasant (farmer) farms in the conditions of socio-economic transformations in Russia: current trends and prospects for the development of farms

Bubenchikov Eduard Aleksandrovich

Master's degree, Department of Building Design and Real Estate Expertise, Siberian Federal University. Leading Engineer, Krasnoyarsk CHPP-3 construction project.

663180, Russia, Krasnoyarskii krai, g. Krasnoyarsk, ul. Gagarina, 19, Of. 203

ediks2016@mail.ru

DOI:

10.7256/2585-7789.2022.1.38026

EDN:

BJGYCQ

Received:

09-05-2022


Published:

29-06-2022


Abstract: The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as: the development of farms, the organization of the production environment, the formation of the architectural and planning structure, the influence of socio-economic legal conditions of the region and the peculiarities of the country on the planning structure of the farm, emerging trends in rural architecture. These aspects are now most relevant due to the complexity of rural production, the social stratification of the rural population, the establishment of market relations, new socio-economic requirements for architectural objects and new aesthetic requirements for the design of buildings and structures. The novelty of the research lies in the use of an environmental approach to solving urban planning and architectural problems of organizing a farmer's habitat. The main conclusions of the study are the formation of types of planning structures of the farm. Based on the conducted research, a scheme of planning structures of farms has been formed, the dependencies between the production and residential area of the farmer have been determined. The architectural and planning organization of peasant (farmer) farms in the structure of the district, region and industrial zones is determined. The sustainable direction of the rural environment has been determined at the present time. Also an important conclusion of the work is to determine the influence of the world order on the planning organization of farms.


Keywords:

Multiculturalism of agriculture, Farming, Architectural and planning structure, Types of planning structures, Socio-economic conditions, Architectural organization of the environment, Farm layout, Farmer, Spatial organization, Zoning

This article is automatically translated. You can find original text of the article here.

1.      Introduction

 

Socio-economic changes in Russia, the country's transition to the route of a market economy are more concerned with the life of the farming population and rural life in general. It was the villagers who experienced the consequences of experiments in the agricultural sector of Soviet Russia, which were carried out during the period from 1917 to 1990. By the end of the eighties of the XX century, the agricultural sector of the country had reached the stage of collapse, which in fact led to a shortage of food in the largest state in the world by acreage [1]. Russia, which until 1917 supplied grain, meat and other foodstuffs to European countries, by the nineties of the XX century was buying agricultural food in Canada, the USA and other Western countries [1,2].

            For 80 years, architects have been trying to create optimal working and living conditions for a rural resident. The resolutions of the party and the government (Lenin's cooperative plan, Stalin's plan for the transformation of nature, N.S. Khrushchev's "corn" company, the raising of virgin and fallow lands, the enlargement of villages, and others) aimed at improving rural production and bringing the standard of living of rural people to the level of the urban population did not help in achieving the intended goals.

Over the years, the socio-economic situation in the agricultural sector of the country's economy has changed significantly – agricultural production has become multi-layered, private ownership of land has been recognized, purchase and sale has been allowed. This soon made it possible to improve the economic indicators of agriculture in our country, an example is the record harvests of recent years, despite the reduction in the output of the agricultural sector in 2021 by 1.3% for the first time since 2012 [3].

This study is aimed at considering such aspects of the development of peasant (farm) farms as: the architectural and planning organization of the production environment, the influence of the diversity of regions on the planning scheme, the formation of the planning structure of farms, emerging trends in the planning organization of the rural environment. These aspects are currently relevant due to the rapid pace of changes in world patterns, socio-economic requirements for architectural objects and new aesthetic requirements for farm facilities.

The study of the architectural and planning organization of farms without considering agriculture in the conditions of periodization does not allow us to describe the above aspects of the rural environment that require a comprehensive analysis. Therefore, the methodological basis will be the environmental approach [4] to solving all problems of the organization of the farm habitat, which is based on a critical understanding of the experience of planning, architecture of rural settlements in Russia, the construction of the periodization of farms, as well as the identification of emerging trends in the architecture of farms.

Well-known scientists and architects played an important role in the development of architectural practice of rural environment formation: Avdotin L., Atabaev M., Ashchepkov E., Breslavtsev O., Vinshu I., Geraskin N., Demidova M., Konchukov N., Kudinenko A., Latan N., Lezhaeva I., etc. When preparing the article, the experience of designing and building farm enterprises in Russia and abroad, scientific developments and projects were used [5,6].

           

2.      Object of architectural research

 

            One of the elements of the production environment and a kind of peasant economy is a farm that produces agricultural products not only for its family, but also for sale.

In the total global volume of agricultural production, a significant share is made up of the products of farms. The first peasant (farmer) farms (KFH) in the modern history of Russia, appeared before the collapse of the USSR, in 1990. Despite this, farming in Russia is at the stage of initial development, but has great prospects, and the architecture of farms is one of the most significant parts of the architecture of the agro-industrial complex of the country [1,9].

As of December 2021, according to the results of the annual agricultural micro-census, there were 102.4 thousand farms in our country. The micro-census showed that in five years the number of farm facilities in Russia has decreased by 34.3 thousand units. This adversely affects the overall development of the agricultural agro-complex of Russia [3].

            In Western European countries, the farm has from 20 to 80 hectares of land, in the USA and Canada – from 200 to 250 hectares. In addition, farmers often rent the land closest to them from neighbors who do not use it at this time. World experience shows that the size of farms and the forms of organization of the technological process in them depend on the natural and economic, socio-economic legal conditions of the region and the peculiarities of the country [7,8]

Farms are located both in the structure of rural settlements (most often on their outskirts due to significant land plots) and autonomously in the form of farms. A common form of agricultural organization is one in which several farms combine to form nests of farms or a farming village. In the USA, Canada and England, farms are often located along highways. The house is located by the road, outbuildings are in the depths, and behind them are fields. In our rural environment, farmland is often located at considerable distances from the place of residence of farmers, which causes a lot of inconveniences associated with logistics [10].

Depending on the size of farmland belonging to the farm, they are divided into small (10-20 hectares), medium (40-50 hectares) and large (more than 50 hectares).

Based on the experience studied , the territory of the farm has the following functional zones:

a) a residential building with a recreation area;

b) a private plot with a vegetable garden, a garden and household buildings necessary for a farming family (a summer kitchen, a bathhouse, a cellar, etc.)

c) production zone, which includes all production buildings and structures, as well as farm land – arable land, meadows, pastures, forest, etc.

            Thus, the main architectural task of forming an ensemble of planning and development of a peasant (farmer) economy is the architectural and landscape organization of 3 interconnected groups of agricultural buildings - a residential building, household buildings, industrial buildings and structures.

          As an example, we will give the nomenclature of premises and structures of a peasant (farmer) farm built according to a standard USSR project in 1990 in the Toguchinsky district in the village of "Yurty" [15]. Such an organization of the farming environment is typical, which most clearly reflects the functional zoning of the territory into residential, household and industrial zones. 

1) residential building at the rate of 220 m2 of living space;

2) garden and vegetable garden for the needs of the family – 0.22 ha;

3) complex of household facilities (summer kitchen, shed, cellar, sheds, greenhouse, garage, etc.) – 25-30 m2 per person;

4) production buildings: cowshed for 50 heads – 500 m2; cowshed for calves – 38 m2; bull room - 30 m2; stall – 20 m2; dairy – 18 m2; feed – 30 m2; silos – 45 m2; hayloft – 580 m2; manure storage – 26 m2; liquid collector – 12 m2; biogas plant (2 pcs.) – 20 m2; compost pits (4 pcs.) – 40 m2.

5) garage for agricultural machinery – 134 m2;

6) sunny vegetarian – 157.5 m2;

7) wind power plant – 1 pc.;

8) a well or well with a water tower;

9) land – 80 hectares.

Production facilities of a farm should be located at a sanitary distance from a residential building, they should be as mechanized and automated as possible. In order to save territory and construction costs, they try to block production buildings as much as possible in one monoblock.

 

3. Formation of architectural and planning organization of peasant (farm) farms

 

In the circumstances of the transition to a market economy and the multiplicity of ownership forms, the agricultural complex of the country has acquired new features. There are new features of its organization. There is a wide variety of forms of farms. All forms are based on an inseparable combination of agricultural production, residential settlements, systems and facilities of industrial and public services.

Architectural and planning solutions for the organization of farms, for objective and individual reasons, can have a very diverse organization [13, 14]. We will form the most characteristic typological features of the architectural and planning organization of farms:

- A type of architectural and planning organization of a farm, in which the farmer's space is a single blocked volume formed by three components - residential, household and industrial – a "compact" planning scheme (Figure 1, a). This principle of architectural and planning organization most fully reflects the traditions of the Russian farm dwelling and the modern stage of development of the domestic rural environment.

- The type of architectural and planning organization of a farm, as a single territory on which separate buildings and structures have been built (a farmer's house, outbuildings for various household purposes), livestock or other farm production buildings with feed storages and animal husbandry in separate objects - a "cluster" planning scheme (Figure 1, b). This type most often occurs in the process of spontaneous economic activity rather than as a result of planned design decisions.

- A type of architectural and planning organization of a farm in which the farmer's territory consists of two or three separate plots with the location of residential, household and industrial buildings on them, respectively - a "nest" planning scheme (Figure 1, c). Functional areas of a farm can be located at a significant distance from each other and in various spheres, for example, the residential part with household outbuildings should be located in the planning structure of a rural settlement, and the industrial part should be located in the natural landscape, etc.

The first two of the above architectural and planning solutions are most characteristic of small farms, and the third is more typical of medium and, especially, large farms. Let's form a detailed diagram of the types of planning structures of farms in Figure 1.

The initial positions indicated in the scheme determine the stable architectural direction of farms, the main condition of which is the rural environment, on which are located: open agricultural production, closed agricultural and production facilities, residential settlements of various composition, zones of personal subsidiary farming, household premises [16].

 

 

Figure 1 – Types of planning structures of farms (a – compact; b – cluster; c – nest).

 

Studying the experience of placing peasant (farm) farms on farms in the period 1965-1990, it can be considered quite acceptable for modern farmers. The space of such a farm is not constrained by the existing development of the village and rural settlement, and the construction of a farm can be carried out with decent gaps between individual buildings, while carrying out the phased construction of a farmstead, which is more efficient from the standpoint of economy. In addition, the farmstead location of the farm is more convenient from the point of view of filling the territory with various industries that process agricultural products into any product, and also determines the possibilities of a more free compositional planning solution and achieving aesthetic, as well as ecological unity of the architecture of the farm and the existing landscape.

Thus, the process of forming the latest topology of farms introduces adjustments to the functional orientation of rural settlements, causing the need to solve in a new way both the general architectural and construction principles of building rural settlements and the problems of architectural and planning organization of their elements.

The historical development of farming settlements demonstrates that the rural environment functions in inseparable unity with nature and the anthropogenic environment, in which the objects of housing, production, and public services are closely interrelated [16,17]. In this regard, their research and design is a non-trivial task that needs to be solved based on the use of an environmental approach.

 Based on the conducted research, it is possible to divide the architectural organization of the rural environment into several levels, namely:

- the level of territorial organization (district planning, rural settlement schemes, architectural and planning organization of agricultural territory);

- architectural organization (planning and development of settlements);

- at the object level (residential, public, industrial buildings and structures)

- at the level of structural elements of rural environment objects (environment design, workplace organization, etc.).

The general infographic of the architectural and planning organization of peasant (farm) farms is shown in Figure 2.

 

Figure 2 – Infographic of architectural and planning organization of farms

 

4. Planning of peasant (farm) farms in conditions of multiculturalism of agriculture

 

New socio-economic conditions have led to new trends in district planning and rural settlement, which can be briefly described as a transition from a total hierarchy to a local system. The system that has developed over the decades: "the district center – the central estate of the farm – the branches of the central estate – the brigade settlement – the field camp" with the hierarchy of industrial and social services has changed towards the formation of democratic ties and relations between settlements of different sizes based on equal partnership industrial, trade and cultural relations with relatively equal living conditions [12,19,20].

Over the decades, the principle of the formation of the architectural and planning organization of the settlement has significantly changed - the principle of zoning, which determines the structure of the general plan of the settlement and its elements (residential area, production, community center) and individual structural elements (street, square, manor, house). In the "rural settlement planning" system, the main direction of development is the transition from end-to-end zoning to a dispersed-modular scheme of planning and organization of the rural environment based on smaller planning modules [19]. The prerequisites for this are: the gradual unbundling of existing production nodes, zones and enterprises, the creation of medium-sized and small enterprises in the settlement, which will serve to form production complexes of various sizes and specialization within the settlements [20,21,23].

As a conclusion, we present the overall impact of trends on the topology of farms in the form of a table. To do this, consider three layouts of peasant farms built in Western Siberia with different time intervals:

 

Table – Periodization of farms

Years

General view

Functional and planning scheme

1917- 1965

1. Farming in the village "Yarkovo" of the Cherepanovsky district [15]

Безымянный2

1965- 1990

2. The farm "Elite" in the village "Gorlovo" Iskitimsky district [11]

4 (2)

1990 - present

3. Farming in Toguchinsky district in the village of "Yurty" [15]

6 (1)

5

 

            The table shows that in the "transitional" period from 1917-1965, spatial organization was carried out by expanding personal multidisciplinary subsidiary farms to the level of commodity production, during this period the farms had a compact or cluster planning structure. After the "transition" period, the classical type of farming began to emerge, which is often still used today. It is characterized by the use in architecture of exemplary building techniques, constructive and decorative solutions of peasant farms of the early XX century, with a closed layout of an open courtyard and a multi-yard solution of a production zone, sometimes characterized by free zoning of the territory. At the end of the 90s, a modernization type of farming began to emerge [25], to which the estates correspond, the architectural and planning solution and design solutions of which reflect technological innovations, the introduction of energy-saving systems, alternative energy sources. It is the modernization type that is the sustainable direction of the development of farming in our country [24].

 

5. Conclusion and prospects

 

The development of the architecture of a new generation farm will follow the path of improving its structure, spatial organization and comfort: the tasks of organizing a "growing house", creating a universal flexible space with appropriate equipment are very relevant here; optimizing the ratio of closed, open and semi-open space when planning a farm.

When considering the periodization of farms, the influence of socio-economic legal conditions of the region and the country is noticeable. In the "transitional" period, totalitarianism in the settlement system, total zoning of industrial and public zones, the emergence of interuniverse connections, the use of a compact or cluster architectural and planning scheme can be distinguished. The period of the classical type of farms has a settlement system, as in the previous period, but this period has its own characteristics, namely: the reduction of unpromising settlements, the emergence of specialized production zones and the construction of farms with a "nest" architectural and planning structure. The modernization type of farms is distinguished by the transition from a total hierarchy to local associations for production and other reasons, the complexity of management, the tendency to expand the typology of settlements, the dispersion of zones and objects, as well as construction on individual projects, which allows the use of any type of architectural and planning structure. This type of farming should further increase the degree of freedom of designing the planning elements of a rural settlement and serve as an incentive to create memorable architectural ensembles of development, which will contribute to the development of a variety of structural, spatial organization of the rural environment, will determine a new aesthetic quality of the residential environment of the entire settlement. The material embodiment of architectural and design searches for the image and structure of residential buildings and all other buildings of the residential environment, which will allow both traditional and new architectural and structural systems to be implemented, the search for which continues both abroad and in our country.

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.

First Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

Comments on the title (Architectural and planning organization of peasant (farmer) farms in the context of socio-economic transformations: current trends and development prospects): a rather complicated and lengthy formulation does not help to remove involuntarily arising questions, in particular, which region of the world did the author study? In addition, it is not entirely clear what kind of socio-economic transformations are we talking about (their own, that is, farms? Obviously not). One thing leads to another: transformations further flow into trends and prospects; the latter are attributed, as far as can be understood, not to them, but to the architectural and planning organization… In a word, a genuine rebus. The determination that penetrates the text from the first lines is somewhat alarming. How, for example, should one react to the following maxim: "The agrarian doctrines of V.I. Lenin, I.V. Stalin, N.S. Khrushchev and L.I. Brezhnev, despite the humanity and nobility of goals, led to the problem of overproduction and, consequently, the decline of agricultural production in the country. (third line)"? Involuntarily, the horrors of the above-mentioned rise in memory, the gray ghost of overproduction rises and reaches out with a bony hand to the children of the modern Volga region. Unfortunately, the author does not cover the "agrarian doctrines" mentioned in passing. Sorry. Then the presentation follows incrementally. "By the end of the eighties of the XX century, the agricultural sector of the country had reached the stage of collapse, which actually led to famine in the largest state in the world in terms of acreage." We are talking about facts and circumstances that are quite well known — however, the ghost of "famine" should not be mentioned in vain. In general, the agrarian history of Russia is quite well studied. The above introduction (which does not use a single reference to sources) leaves in this connection the impression of a slightly feverish run into an unfamiliar area. The following are a few more aphoristic remarks in order to gallop through the economic history of Russia of the twentieth century (obviously for educational purposes). This agrarian introduction culminates in a crescendo of transition to an architectural theme: "This study is aimed at reflecting the issues of the priority direction of the development of farms, which are emphasized by the existing architectural practice: the architectural and planning organization of the production environment, the diversity of regions. These issues are currently relevant due to the rapid pace of change in world patterns, socio-economic requirements for architectural objects and new aesthetic requirements for farming." A short fragment contains the headings of Relevance, Subject, and Research Problems. If you evaluate such a significant paragraph very briefly, it should be noted that it is written very badly. A combination of deliberately confusing formulations with failures in their logical coherence is characteristic (this applies both to the general construction of the fragment and to characteristic phrases; for example, how can "architectural practice" be able to "emphasize" nothing other than "priority areas of farm development", which the study "aims to reflect"?). When formulating claims in a more accepted language, it should be pointed out that there is insufficient disclosure of the designated topics within the given formulations. The immediate continuation of the above fragment is no less sophisticated: "Topological differentiation does not allow us to solve these problems (which ones? Do you mean what was called requirements just above? Rec. But what does top differentiation have to do with it, and what is it about differentiation?), which require comprehensive consideration. Therefore (?!) the methodological basis will be (?!) an environmental approach [4] to solving all problems of organizing the farm habitat, which is based on a critical understanding of the experience of planning and architecture of rural settlements in Russia, as well as on determining emerging trends in the architecture of farms. " In short, the introduction does not meet the requirements for completeness, coherence and accuracy of the terms and formulations used in it. Actually, from what has been said, it is unclear what and by what methods the author is going to study. Style, structure, and content Reading the main text leaves an ambivalent impression. On the one hand (positive), when and since the author touches upon issues of architectural or planning typification (including typological modeling of the planning environment and its structural components), the text "aligns" and acquires meaningfulness. Let's say that at the same time he does not shine with originality and neglects to clarify the authorship of a particular "principle" — but he is still able to summarize valuable project experience. On the other hand (negative), the author regularly seeks to "embrace the baobab", boldly attacking issues of various areas of contiguity — historical, economic, etc.; as a result, the text "prowls" and "gets lost", hesitating about the main — in addition, very obscurely designated — line. A typical fragment in this regard: "New socio-economic conditions have led to new trends in district planning and rural settlement, which can be briefly described as a transition from a total hierarchy (?) to local consistency (?). The system that has developed over the decades (total hierarchy?): "the district center – the central estate of the farm – the branches of the central estate – the brigade settlement – the field camp" with the hierarchy of industrial, social services has changed (changed?) towards (ed.) the formation of democratic ties (how are settlement and district planning systems interconnected, on the one hand, and political, on the other? Rec.) and relations between settlements of different sizes (democratic ties between settlements?) based on equal partnership industrial, trade and cultural relations with relatively equal conditions accommodation ". A similar (given) text cannot be published. Bibliography. The design of the links does not meet the requirements of the editorial board. Conclusions, the interest of the readership In the presented text is not ready for publication. Its revision should include a) a complete revision of the introductory part in accordance with the comments made, b) a major revision of the other text, suggesting its drastic reduction, minimizing side plots with a focus on one, i.e. the central (architectural and planning organization of farms). Conclusion: the work partially meets the requirements for scientific presentation, but both stylistically and structurally requires refinement, and can be recommended for publication if it is successfully carried out.

Second Peer Review

Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential.
The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.

The reviewed article examines current trends and promising directions in the development of architectural and planning organization of peasant (farm) farms in Russia. The authors of the article note that the methodological basis of the study is the "environmental approach" to solving the problems of organizing the farm habitat, which is based on a critical understanding of the experience of planning, architecture of rural settlements in Russia, building a periodization of farms, as well as identifying emerging trends in the architecture of farms. The relevance of the research is due to the need to generalize the experience of designing and building enterprises and farms in Russia and abroad in order to improve the architectural and planning organization of peasant (farm) farms in Russia. The elements of the increment of scientific knowledge include the conclusion that it is necessary to solve the urgent task of organizing a "growing house", creating a universal flexible space with appropriate equipment; optimizing the ratio of closed, open and semi-open space when planning a farm. In the article, the authors have identified the following structural sections: Introduction, Object of architectural research, Formation of architectural and planning organization of peasant (farm) farms, Planning of peasant (farm) farms in conditions of multicultural agriculture, Conclusion and prospects, Bibliography. The authors cite the most characteristic typological features of the architectural and planning organization of farms: "compact", "cluster" and "nest" planning schemes. It is noteworthy that the process of forming the latest topology of farms introduces adjustments to the functional orientation of rural settlements, causing the need to solve in a new way both the general architectural and construction principles of building rural settlements and the problems of the architectural and planning organization of their elements. The authors propose to divide the architectural organization of the rural environment into several levels: the level of territorial organization; architectural organization; at the object level; at the level of structural elements of rural environment objects. The bibliographic list includes 25 names of sources – scientific articles published in 2009-2021 in domestic and foreign periodicals, as well as scientific monographs, to which the text contains targeted links indicating the presence of an appeal to opponents in the publication. The reviewed article is not without flaws and controversial points. Firstly, it is difficult to agree with the opinion given by the authors of the article that "the agrarian doctrines of V. I. Lenin, I. V. Stalin, N. S. Khrushchev and L. I. Brezhnev, despite the humanity and nobility of goals, led to the problem of overproduction." Secondly, the fourth paragraph in the article, according to the reviewer, needs to be edited and the phrases clarified: "... the directions of development of farms, which are emphasized by the existing architectural practice ...", "these issues are relevant today ...". Thirdly, the author rightly notes that "World experience shows that the size of farms and the forms of organization of the technological process in them depend on the natural and economic, socio-economic legal conditions of the region and the characteristics of the country," however, he does not provide justification for choosing as an example the nomenclature of premises and structures specifically peasant (farmer) farms in the village of "Yurty" in the Toguchinsky district of the Novosibirsk region, the topic of the article is relevant, the material corresponds to the subject of the magazine "Architecture and Design", may arouse interest among potential readers, but requires improvement.
Link to this article

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.


Other our sites:
Official Website of NOTA BENE / Aurora Group s.r.o.