As a result of population movements, flight and displacement during and after the Second World War, more than four million people arrived in the Soviet Occupation Zone (SBZ), which later became the GDR. Around three-quarters of all refugees initially settled in rural areas due to the more favourable living and working conditions there. Here, land reform created around 210,000 new farming holdings, each with an average size of eight hectares. The term ‘new farmer’ became established – without any official definition – as early as 1945 to describe all landholders with holdings of more than five hectares. Over 90,000 of these farms were run by so-called ‘resettlers’.^[1] The establishment of new farmer holdings was the focal point of state efforts to promote integration and implement socialist reforms.

Specific bodies and institutions that had coordinated integration and support measures for refugees and displaced persons were disbanded as early as 1948. From this point onwards, the resettlers became virtually invisible in official records, making it difficult to distinguish between long-established (new) farmers and ‘resettler new farmers’.

In September 1945, land reform regulations were adopted in the federal states. On the basis of these, all large landowners with more than 100 hectares of agricultural land, active National Socialists, and those deemed to have profited from the Nazi regime – whether actually or allegedly – were expropriated without compensation. The collective term ‘land reform’ refers to a large-scale redistribution of land ownership, as well as of property, livestock and equipment.^[2] The aim was to dismantle the old socio-economic structures (particularly forms of manorial agriculture), to ensure the population’s food supply and to facilitate the integration of refugees. The circumstances varied from region to region: whilst Mecklenburg, Brandenburg and Saxony-Anhalt had been home to large estates with extensive tracts of land, medium-sized farms had predominated in Thuringia and Saxony. The proportion of land expropriated differed accordingly (Mecklenburg: 33 per cent, Brandenburg: 28 per cent, Saxony-Anhalt: 22 per cent, Saxony: 11 per cent, Thuringia: 6 per cent).^[3]

By the summer of 1948, the land reform had largely been completed.^[4] Of the approximately 3.3 million hectares of land, around 2.2 million hectares were reallocated to individual owners; a third of them were refugees and displaced persons. The new landowners received a deed guaranteeing them debt-free land ownership. Contrary to popular belief, the land was not given away for free, but had to be purchased by means of a loan. The land could not be sold, given away or leased, nor could it be encumbered or amalgamated with other plots.

By mid-1949, more than a tenth of all new farmers had already given up their farms. From 1951 onwards, a new farm could only be abandoned for strictly defined reasons and with authorisation; in doing so, the owners forfeited all (property) rights. In certain cases (e.g. criminal offences or ‘fleeing the republic’), the plot could be revoked. By 30 June 1953, of the 210,276 new farmer plots, around 170,000 were still occupied.^[5]

The main reason for farms ceasing operations was their lack of profitability: a scarcity of resources – that is, a lack of machinery, farm equipment, livestock and seed, as well as a lack of agricultural knowledge – prevented them from being run successfully. Refugees amongst the new farmers, in particular, suffered from heavy financial burdens despite preferential loans, as they generally had to purchase all their farm equipment from scratch. Furthermore, the starting conditions resulting from the land reform differed greatly between long-established farmers and ‘resettled new farmers’, for example in terms of soil quality and the allocation of farm equipment, which had serious consequences for years to come.^[6] Only 15 per cent of all new farms were able to operate efficiently.^[7]

A major problem over many years was the lack of housing, as well as a shortage of farm buildings such as stables and storage rooms. The makeshift accommodation, often set up in former manors and castles or their outbuildings, was in a poor state of repair, and living conditions were dire. Accommodation with the existing population frequently led to conflicts due to the forced cramped conditions of living and working together.

Order 209 of the SMAD, issued on 9 September 1947, mandated the construction of a total of 37,000 new farmhouses. These included both residential and farm buildings. However, the Central Administrative Office for Resettlers (ZVU) estimated the actual requirement at 205,000 buildings. In 1951, the ‘resettled new farmers’ alone still required 24,200 dwellings and 27,100 stables.^[8]

State support measures took various forms (interest-free loans, reductions in tax liabilities, educational grants for ‘resettled children’, etc.). The basis for this was the ‘Act on the Further Improvement of the Situation of Former Resettlers’ (enacted in 1950 and implemented by 1953), which distinguished between long-established (new) farmers and “resettled new farmers” and provided for preferential support for those “resettlers” who did not have sufficient draught animals or agricultural equipment.

In 1952, the process of agricultural collectivisation began with the establishment of LPGs.^[9] LPG members received better terms regarding the use of machinery, the allocation of seed, advice and support, and were able to benefit from a reduction in their delivery quotas, tax relief and preferential access to credit. At the end of 1952 and 1953 respectively, new farmers accounted for 78 per cent and 43 per cent of LPG members, before former farm labourers came to make up the majority of members from 1954 onwards (1954: 35 per cent, 1955: 30 per cent).^[10] Whilst membership was initially largely voluntary, from 1960 onwards – during the so-called ‘Socialist Spring’ – individual farms were merged into the LPGs under massive political pressure. For new farmers struggling for their economic survival, this amalgamation was certainly worthwhile and henceforth secured the household’s livelihood. Age, family circumstances and career prospects for the children were decisive criteria for joining. The refugees amongst the new farmers had very differing views on collectivisation: some hoped that the change would enable them to consolidate their status within the village community and farm on a secure footing, whilst others, on the other hand, felt they were facing yet another loss, a second expropriation.

The establishment of new farming settlements in the post-war years helped to ensure that the population had enough to eat and somewhere to live. It also served to help refugees and displaced persons ‘put down roots’. State support programmes fostered loyalty to the state and the party. Integration policies aimed at helping ‘resettlers’ – such as land reform and the provision of loans – were geared towards the desired transformation into an egalitarian socialist society. The ‘new farmer’s holding’ economic model was intended to strengthen the desired alliance between the working class and the now ‘working’ peasants. Traditional village structures were completely dismantled, from the start of land reform right through to the completion of collectivisation.

Land reform and the establishment of new farmers’ settlements should be seen as an attempt to respond effectively to the shortages of the post-war period. However, this economic model – which was evidently conceived from the outset as an interim stage on the path to collectivisation – quickly proved to be unprofitable and therefore unsustainable.^[11]

• Arnd Bauerkämper: The New Farmers in the Soviet Occupation Zone/GDR 1945–1952. Land reform and politically induced change in rural society. In: Richard Bessel, Ralph Jessen (eds.): The Limits of Dictatorship. State and Society in the GDR. Göttingen 1996, pp. 108–136.
• Arnd Bauerkämper: ‘The Feigned Integration: The Effects of Land Reform and Refugee Resettlement on the Occupational Integration of Displaced Persons into Agriculture in Germany, 1945–1960’. In: Dierk Hoffmann, Michael Schwartz (eds.): Successful Integration? Specific Features and Comparisons of the Integration of Displaced Persons in the Soviet Occupation Zone/GDR. Munich 1999, pp. 193–214.
• Arnd Bauerkämper (ed.): ‘Junker Land in Peasant Hands’? Implementation, Impact and Significance of Land Reform in the Soviet Occupation Zone. Stuttgart 1996 (Historische Mitteilungen, Supplement 20).
• Arnd Bauerkämper: From Land Reform to Collectivisation. On the Transformation of Rural Society in the Soviet Occupation Zone of Germany and the GDR, 1945–1952. In: Hartmut Kaelble, Jürgen Kocka, Hartmut Zwahr (eds.): Social History of the GDR. Stuttgart 1994, pp. 119–143.
• Matthias Kramer: Agriculture in the Soviet Occupation Zone. Developments in the Years 1945–1955. Part 1: Text. Edited by the Federal Ministry for Pan-German Affairs. Bonn 1957 (Bonn Reports from Central and Eastern Germany).
• Wolfgang Meinicke: Land Reform and the Displaced Persons in the Soviet Occupation Zone. In: Arnd Bauerkämper: ‘Junkerland in Bauernhand’? Implementation, Impact and Significance of Land Reform in the Soviet Occupation Zone. Stuttgart 1996 (Historische Mitteilungen, Supplement 20), pp. 133–151.
• Sebastian Pries: New Farmers’ Ownership in the Former GDR. Frankfurt am Main et al. 1994 (European University Publications: Series 2, Law 1581).
• Jens Schöne: The Socialist Village. Land Reform and Collectivisation in the Soviet Occupation Zone and the GDR. Leipzig 2008 (Publications of the Saxon State Commissioner for the Stasi Archives 8).
• Michael Schwartz: ‘From Resettler to Citizen’. Totalitarian and Subversive Elements in the Language Policy of the Soviet Occupation Zone/GDR. In: Dierk Hoffmann, Marita Krauss, Michael Schwartz (eds.): Displaced Persons in Germany. Interdisciplinary Findings and Research Perspectives. Munich 2000 (Series of the *Vierteljahreshefte für Zeitgeschichte*, special issue), pp. 135–166.
• Michael Schwartz: Displaced Persons and ‘Resettlement Policy’. Integration Conflicts in Post-War German Societies and Assimilation Strategies in the Soviet Occupation Zone/GDR 1945–1961. Munich 2004 (Sources and Accounts of Contemporary History 61).
• Ulrich Wieler: Building out of Necessity. Architecture and Urban Planning in Thuringia 1945–1949. Cologne et al. 2011 (Publication of the Historical Commission for Thuringia, Kleine Reihe 31).
• Manfred Wille (ed.): The Displaced Persons in the Soviet Occupation Zone/GDR. 3 vols. Wiesbaden 1996–2003 (Studies by the Centre for Research on East Central Europe at the University of Dortmund 19/1–3).

[1] The term ‘resettlers’ was introduced as early as 1945 at the instigation of the Soviet Military Administration (SMAD). On the language policy regulations and the ideological connotations of the terms ‘resettlers’, ‘refugees’, ‘displaced persons’ and ‘new citizens’, see Schwartz: ‘From Resettler to Citizen’. In: Hoffmann, Krauss, Schwartz (eds.): Displaced Persons in Germany, pp. 135–166.

[2] For a fundamental discussion of this, see Bauerkämper (ed.): “Junkerland in Bauernhand”? and Schöne: Das sozialistische Dorf.

[3] Kramer: Agriculture in the Soviet Occupation Zone, p. 16. The figures are rounded.

[4] For details of the commissions involved, their composition and the individual steps leading up to the allocation of land, see Schöne: *The Socialist Village*, pp. 64 ff., and Bauerkämper: *The New Farmers in the Soviet Occupation Zone/GDR 1945–1952*. In: Bessel, Jessen (eds.): The Limits of Dictatorship, pp. 114 ff.

[5] Pries: ‘New Farmers’ Property in the Former GDR’, p. 69.

[6] Meinicke: ‘Land Reform and the Displaced Persons in the Soviet Occupation Zone’. In: Bauerkämper (ed.): ‘Junker Land in Peasant Hands?’, pp. 141, 143.

[7] Bauerkämper: ‘The Feigned Integration’. In: Hoffmann, Schwartz (eds.): ‘Successful Integration?’, p. 203.

[8] Bauerkämper: From Land Reform to Collectivisation. In: Kaelble, Kocka, Zwahr (eds.): Social History of the GDR, p. 147.

[9] Schöne: The Socialist Village, pp. 101ff.

[10] Kramer: Agriculture in the Socialist Occupation Zone, p. 52.

[11] Schöne: The Socialist Village, pp. 42ff., 47f., 101ff.

Ira Spieker: New Farmers. In: Online Encyclopaedia on the Culture and History of Germans in Eastern Europe, 2012. URL: ome-lexikon.uni-oldenburg.de/p32863 (accessed 3 June 2015).