Documents / FOIA release

USSR: Measures of Economic Growth and Development, 1950-80

Central Intelligence Agency · 1982-12-08 · 399 pages · text from the file's own layer

This Joint Committee Print, dated December 8, 1982, gathers studies that the Central Intelligence Agency's Directorate of Intelligence prepared for the Joint Economic Committee of the US Congress. It gives estimates of Soviet gross national product for 1950 to 1980, with indexes of industrial production, agricultural production and consumption, and explains the methods and data behind them. The foreword says official Soviet statistics inflate growth and that the CIA measures offer a more accurate picture. The document contains no UFO material.

  • p. 4 …The volume contains a series of tables estimating the Soviet gross national product and its components…
  • p. 5 …quantified estimates of the value of Soviet gross national product (GNP), its rate of growth, its…
  • p. 6 …The Soviet indices of industrial and agricultural production are based on gross output rather than value…
  • p. 7 …For example, data on the amount of waste included in the gross output data of agricultural…
  • p. 8 …The measure shown represents “net output,” or gross output less products used by agriculture (seed and…
  • p. 9 …compendium on the Soviet eeonomV- “The Real Gross National Product of the U.S.S.R…
  • p. 10 …Contributions of Rush V. Greenslade ________ _________________-________ ____ __ 1x I. Gross National Product of the USSR, 1950—80.-______________________________ 3…
  • p. 12 …Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421 Part I. GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT OF THE USSR, 1950-80 By…
  • p. 14 …Turnover Taxes as a Share of Gross Output in Industry, 1972 6. Subsidies on Agricultural Products…
  • p. 15 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Gross National Product of the Soviet Union in Established Prices, 39 by…
  • p. 16 …of Value Added in Agriculture B-8. Gross Output, Total Material Purchases, and Value Added in…
  • p. 17 …I Soviet Gross National Product in Established Priceskby End Use, I if I970 D-6. I…
  • p. 18 …An International Comparison, 1981 Gross National Product of the USSR: An International Comparison, 1982 Soviet Economic…
  • p. 19 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Gross National Product of the USSR, 1950-80 Introduction This paper presents…
  • p. 20 …Lee, “USSR Gross National Product in Established Prices, 1955-1975,” Jahrbuch der Wirtsc/la/I Osteuropas…
  • p. 27 …GNP for the Soviet Union and of gross domestic product (GDP) for selected OECD countries.” For…
  • p. 34 …Lee, “USSR Gross National Product," p. 413; and Becker, 1969, p. 128. difference between the growth…
  • p. 35 …conducted on a net rather than a gross basis. The enterprise is expected to be managed…
  • p. 41 …the business sector and are included in gross private business investment. The second US account shows…
  • p. 43 …On the other hand, the tax amounts to 30 percent of the gross output of the…
  • p. 44 …Turnover taxes were 30 and 56 percent of the gross outputs of the sugar and other…
  • p. 45 …The capital stock data used in this study are gross of depreciation. Approved for Release: 2019…
  • p. 47 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Table 8 Billion Rubles Gross National Product of the Soviet Union ' in…
  • p. 48 …The row and column sums are determined as each sector’s gross output less, respec- tively…
  • p. 49 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Table 10 Percent 1970 Soviet Gross National Product by End Use W…
  • p. 52 …Therefore, value added is computed as a residual—the difference between gross output and current material…
  • p. 53 …Therefore, if in- dexes of gross output and current inputs are both available, the gross output…
  • p. 56 …Each subbranch index measures the gross output of an I-O sector by summing the physical…
  • p. 57 …The material-input index is less desirable than a double deflation or gross output index, but…
  • p. 58 …2019/07/19 C05210421 Appendix A ' Soviet Gross National Product, 1950-80 This appendix presents the…
  • p. 59 …5 0.5 0.6 0.6 Gross national product 133.6 137.7 145.8…
  • p. 60 …4 ._ §l§5QfI.i2j§§5 1.0 Gross national product 232.3 245.3 254.5…
  • p. 61 …4 1.4 1.4 1.4 Gross national product 383.3 398.2 405.7…
  • p. 62 …0 5.2 3.7 2.7___ Gross national product 5.5 5.9 5.0…
  • p. 63 …8 7.6 5.8 4.0 Gross national product 3.1 5.9 5.2…
  • p. 64 …5.1 4.; 2.9 7.7“ ' Gross national product 5.6 3.8 -1.1…
  • p. 65 …2 3.4 0.8 1 4 Gross national product 3.9 1.9 7.3…
  • p. 66 …9 0.3 2.5 0.3 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 67 …3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 68 …3 0.3 0.3 0.3 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 69 …3 51.2 55.1 58.3 _ Gross national product 34.9 35.9 38.0…
  • p. 71 …7 134.1 135.2 137.1 Gross national product 100.0 103.9 105.9…
  • p. 72 …27.5 24.. ?6i5j_; Gross national product 133.6 137.7 145.8 153.4 160…
  • p. 73 …1 43.7 45.9 s9.7_‘ Gross national product 232.3 245.3 254.5…
  • p. 75 …4.5 1.1 5.9 -3.1 Gross national product 5.5 5.9 5…
  • p. 76 …0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gross national product 3.1 5.9 5.2…
  • p. 77 …0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gross national product 5.6 3.8 -1.1…
  • p. 78 …g 4.3 0.0 0.0 Gross national product 3.9 1.9 7.3…
  • p. 79 …1 28.1 29.1 30.2 Gross national product 741.7 752.2 784.0…
  • p. 80 …9 36.6 31.8 Ww3§’.98W Gross national product 1,083.8 1,124.6…
  • p. 81 …1 46.1 46.9 46.8 Gross national product 1,578.5 1,624.6…
  • p. 82 …3.2 7* 1.4 1.3 Gross national product 3.7 4.0 3.5…
  • p. 83 …1 14.0 13.8 13.5 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 84 …8 13.4 13.3 7 17717 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 85 …4 9.6 8.1 6.9 Gross national product 100.0 100.0 100.0…
  • p. 86 …31.7 65.3______s.9 g Gross national product 34.9 35.9 38.0…
  • p. 87 …9 98.2 103.1 89.1 Gross national product 60.6 64.0 66.4…
  • p. 88 …8 110.4 93.7 81.8 Gross national product 100.0 103.9 105.9…
  • p. 89 …Subtracting the deflated material pur- chases from the deflated gross output produces value added in constant…
  • p. 90 …The ratio of material inputs (gross output less NMP) to gross output declined slowly in this…
Approved for Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421
harvesting. The “bunker weight” ’°
yield of the crop
(that is,‘ the grain as it weighed directly after combin-
ing before preliminary cleaning and drying and before
handling and transportation losses occur), is usually
below the biological yield. Similarly, the clean, dry,
standard-weight portion of the crop is usually less
than the bunker weight. In 1954, the bunker weight
concept was adopted for official grain output statis-
tics. However, bunker weight statistics for the 1955-
58 period and output data for 1950-54 restated in
bunker weight were not published until December
1958.“ In addition, in 1958 the Central Statistical
Administration published instructions for estimating
the grain crop. These instructions were never publicly
disseminated, but are believed to represent an alter- ._
ation in the bunker weight measuring system adopted
only four years earlier.
Published yield statistics suggest that bunker weight
grain output statistics before and after 1958 are
inconsistent. During 1958-62, the average yield of
grain is reported to have increased to 10.9 centners
per hectare——an increase in average annual yields of
27 percent over 1954-57. Although grain output in
pre-1958 statistics probably was understated by offi-
cial manipulation of the data, the jump in yields that
occurred in 1958 appears to be at least partly due to a
change in statistical methodology that was never
explained."
To test the consistency of official grain statistics
before and after 1958, official production data for
1950-62 were compared with output data estimated
from weather data, seeding and harvesting reports,
procurement data, statements by Soviet officials, and
the like.” The comparison in table 4 of estimated and
” Soviet statistical handbooks use the term “gross harvest” (valovoy
sbor). Statistical handbooks prior to 1963 contained the phrase
“barn yield” (ambarniy urozhay) in parenthesis, but later issues
omit the reference to barn yield.
‘° The USSR never published details of the conversion of biological
yield data to bunker weight for pre-1954 data. One Soviet publica-
tion stated that annual reports of farms were the basis for
recalculating yields. Farms had collected bunker weight data for
1950-54 and earlier. (N.N. Zhivilin, Sovremennaya organizatsiya
statistiki zemledeliya, Moscow, 1960, p. 102.)
“ For a complete discussion of the 1958 change in grain statistics,
see CIA/RR ER 64-33, Production 0fGrain in the USSR,
October, 1964, p. 19-22.
" Ibid., p. l5-17.
actual crops in 1950-1962 shows that for 1950-54,
estimated production is equal to or larger than offi-
cially reported output. After 1958, however, official
production exceeds our estimates by a large margin.
The comparison Suggests that either 1950-54 grain
output statistics are deliberately understated or that
statistics following 1958 are exaggerated."
Our grain balance calculations, which begin in detail
in 1960, indicate that grain output as shown in official
statistics for 1960-62 are reasonably consistent with
the sum of grain uses estimated on a bunker weight
basis.“ We tend to accept the hypothesis, therefore,
that grain statistics for 1950-54 (bunker weight) are
deliberately understated. We attempt to compensate
for this understatement by making no deduction from
official data for waste and losses in 1950-54. For
other years a weather-related discount is used to
eliminate excess moisture and waste. These estimates
and a full discussion of grain waste are in section V,
below.
The treatment of corn in official Soviet grain statistics
has also changed. Before 1955, immature corn (in the
milky-waxy stage of ripeness) was included in statis-
tics for grain. Between 1955 and 1962, Soviet statisti-
cal handbooks reporvted totals for grain output with
and without immature corn." Since then, farms have
accounted separately for fully ripe corn and corn in
the milky-waxy stage of ripeness. Even so, corn
statistics are still not entirely consistent with the
bunker weight measure for other grain crops. Ripe
corn is converted to grain according to the average
yield of grain from the cobs as measured by threshing
of samples and is expressed in terms of a standard
“ The differences in 1955 and 1957 are small but the change in sign
from negative to positive indicates some change in reporting or a
sudden improvement in agrotechnology. The comparatively large
discrepancy in 1956 is attributed to excessive postharvest losses
resulting from inadequate transportation and storage facilities in
the new lands areas to handle the bumper crop produced there.
“ CIA/A (ER) 75-68 The Soviet Grain Balance, I960-73 Septem-
ber 1975, p. 24.
" To make this calculation total corn output was stated in terms of
dry corn equivalent. From this total, output of fully ripe corn was
subtracted. The remainder was the dry corn equivalent of immature
corn. This figure was subtracted from total grain output to derive
total output excluding immature corn. The grain equivalent of
immature corn was apparently not a component of total grain
output prior to 1954 (Narkhoz, I962 p. 268).
264
Approved for Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421

Not linked to a story yet.

About this file

FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is under it. 399 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.