THE DAIRY FARMING DEVELOPMENT IN THE ARCTIC ZONE OF THE REPUBLICS OF KARELIA AND KOMI, ARKHANGELSK REGION: OPPORTUNITIES AND FORMS OF SUPPORT

The Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation is a region with special business support conditions. In 2020, it included the municipal districts of the republics of Karelia, Komi and the Arkhangelsk region, where dairy farming was a traditional activity. Since early 1990s, agriculture in these areas has been in a deep crisis and unable to overcome it. The analysis revealed a close relationship between the reduction in the number of cows and the decrease in the area of cultivated arable land in municipal districts. The number of cows decreased by 25 times in 3 regions, by 15 times in 5 regions, the areas under crops in all categories of farms — by 36 and 15 times, respectively. The shallow contour of the fields, the spread of agricultural land across the territory, the lack of a developed transport infrastructure in the Arctic zone do not allow realizing economies of scale and reducing costs through large investment projects, such as mega-complexes with a conveyor type of production being built in the central and Southern regions of Russia. Automation of production processes, digitalization of management increase productivity and quality, reduce resource intensity and operating costs. Mastering digital technologies for monitoring, modeling and control in operational management and planning increase the efficiency of using agro-climatic and natural potential, reduce production and investment risks. The regional specifics of fodder and milk production in the Northern regions determines the expediency of preferential support for the innovative development of dairy farming in small and medium-sized enterprises, family farms, which makes it necessary to improve the forms of state support for investments.

1. Paptsov A. G., Ushachev I. G., Altukhov A. I. Export of aic products of Russia: trends and development. Moscow, Ltd “Self Polygraphist”, 2020, 256 p. (In Russian).
2. Semenova E. Export of livestock and crop production. AIC: economics, management, 2021, no. 3, pp. 70—76. DOI: 10.33305/213-70. (In Russian).
3. Altukhov A. I. Modern problems of spatial development of agriculture of the country and possible approaches to their decision. Economics of Agriculture of Russia, 2021, no. 11, pp. 2—12. DOI: 10.32651/2111-2. (In Russian).
4. Ivanov V. A. Features ensuring food security for the population of the North and Arctic of Russia. Arktika: ekologiya i ekonomika. [Arctic: Ecology and Economy], 2021, vol. 11, no. 4, ðð. 596—606. DOI: 10.25283/2223-4594-2021-4-596-606. (In Russian).
5. Smirnova V. V. Impact of state support on the development of agriculture and rural areas in the European North of Russia. Arktika: ekologiya i ekonomika. [Arctic: Ecology and Economy], 2021, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 135—145. DOI: 10.25283/2223-4594-2001-1-135-145. (In Russian).
6. Results of livestock accounting for 01.01.1991 in the Republic of Karelia. Statistical book. Karelian Republican Department of Statistics. Petrozavodsk, 1991, 27 p. (In Russian).
7. Agro-industrial complex of the Komi Republic for the years of the 12th five-year plan. Komi Republic Department of Statistics. Syktyvkar, 1991, 125 p. (In Russian).
8. Gintov V. V. Economic feasibility of dairy cattle breeding in the farms of the Arkhangelsk region. AIC: economics, management, 2021, no. 4, pp. 75—80. DOI: 10.33305/214-75. (In Russian).
9. State (National) Report “On the state and use of land in the Russian Federation in 2020”. Moscow, 2021, 197 p. (In Russian).
10. Land Fund of the RSFSR. Goskomstat. Moscow, 1991, 118 p. (In Russian).
11. Preliminary results of the actual harvest for 1991. Statistical book. Komi Republic Department of Statistics. Syktyvkar, 1992, 78 p. (In Russian).
12. Markov I. S. The problem of dairy cattle breeding in the regions of the Far North of the European part of the USSR (issues of biology, breeding, feeding, maintenance). Leningrad, Leningrad Agricultural Inst., 1965, 54 p. (In Russian).
13. Bashmachnikov V. F. On the methodology of identifying the success factors of family farms in order to assess the prospects for their development. Topical issues of the modern economy, 2021, no. 7, pp. 392—404. DOI: 10.34755/IROK.2021.91.91.014. (In Russian).
14. Hogeveen H. et al. Motivations of Dutch farmers to invest in an automatic milking system or a conventional milking parlour. Automatic milking: A better understanding. [S. l.], 2004, pp. 56—61.
15. Salfer J. A., Minegishi K., Lazarus W., Berning E., Endres M. I. Finances and re-turns for robotic dairies. J. of Dairy Science, 2017, no. 100 (9), pp. 7739—7749. Available at: http://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-11976.
16. De Koning C. Automatic milking—common practice on dairy farms. The First North American Conference on Precision Dairy Management, 2010. Available at: http://precisiondairy.com/proceedings/s3dekoning.pdf.
17. Hansen B. G., Stræte E. P. Dairy farmers job satisfaction and the influence of automatic milking systems. NJAS: Wageningen J. of Life Sciences, 2020, vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 1—13. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2020.100328.
18. Ushachev I., Kolesnikov A. Development of digital technologies in agriculture is as an integral part of agrarian policy. AIC: economics, management, 2020, no. 10, pp. 4—16. DOI: 10.33305/2010-4. (In Russian).