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. 26 …the shifting of industrial produc- tion toward Siberia, which leads to longer shipping distances to reach…
  • p. 51 …may cost much more to construct in Siberia than in the Ukraine because of greater transportation…
  • p. 268 …European Russia, Ukraine, the “Volga Valley,” Western Siberia and Altay kray, and Northern and Central Kazakhstan…
  • p. 306 …Kok- chetav and Northern Kazakhstan are equated with Omsk in Western Siberia; all other Kazakhstan ob…
Approved for Release: 2019/07/19 C05210421
index of discounts proposed by Arcadius Kahan. "
This results in discounts of official statistics that
resemble the discounts implied by the comparisons in
Table 4 of official and estimated output statistics. The
index of discounts is also consistent with the belief of
another writer that pre-1954 crop statistics are under-
stated and that the years 1954-57 require smaller
discounts than subsequent years.“ As Table 5 shows,
with the exception of 1956, discounts derived in this
manner are smaller for 1954-57 than for most other
years in the series.
Kahan uses a 6 percent discount for 1954, 7 percent
for 1955 and 1957, and l0 percent for 1956, 1958,
and 1959. These discounts suggest drier conditions in
1954, 1955, and 1957 than in 1956, 1958, and 1959,
and are supported by a recent Soviet article on
comparative precipitation levels in the major grain
areas of the USSR." The article lists the incidence of
dry years in five major grain areas: European Russia,
Ukraine, the “Volga Valley,” Western Siberia and
Altay kray, and Northern and Central Kazakhstan.
During the l95Qs,over §O percent of area sown to
grain was in the European USSR, the Ukraine, and
parts of the Volga Valley. In all three major regions,
1954 and 1957 are listed as “dry years”; 1955 is listed
as dry in the Volga Valley. On the other hand, 1956,
1958, and 1959 are lis_ted as wet in two of the three
major-grain areas of the 1950s, indicating the need for
larger waste allowances.
The second factor in the grain discount is the adjust-
ment for crop size. Grain crops that are larger than
average strain Soviet capacity to harvest, transport,
clean, and dry the grain, especially when a large crop-
coincides with rainy weather at harvest time. We
assume waste is larger under these conditions than
when small harvests and dry weather coincide, as in
1975. To adjust the discount for crop size, we derive
°‘ See Kahan’s article “Soviet Statistics of Agricultural Output,”
Soviet Agricultural and Peasant Affairs, (Roy Laird, ed.), Univer-
sity of Kansas Press, Lawrence, Kansas, 1963.
”" Luba O. Richter, “Commentary” (on Arcadius Kahan’s article),
Ibid, p. 165.
" Yu. L. Rauner, Izvestiya akademii nauk SSSR, no. 6, 1976, pp.
37-54.
the percentage difference between the actual crop as
reported in Soviet sources, and the crop that would
have resulted under average conditions.“
We use half of this percentage difference to adjust the
weather-related discount. In this manner we account
for that portion of the grain crop lost because of
inadequate harvesting and processing capacity. In
1973, for example 2.0 percent is added to the weather-
related discount to account for these losses. In 1975,
on the other hand, the crop was small enough to be
handled by existing capacity. In addition, the weather
was dry. Thus, 1.2 percent is subtracted from the
weather-related discount to account for minimum
losses in that year. Table 5 shows the composition of
the grain discount.
VI. Deductions for Seed and Livestock Feed
To measure agricultural output available for sale and
home consumption, gross agricultural production
should be reduced by the quantities of output used for
seeding crops, feeding livestock, and for hatching
poultry. The C-IA index makes deductions for grain,
potatoes, vegetables, and whole milk fed to livestock,
eggs used for hatching, and quantities of grain and
potatoes used for seed. Sunflower seed used for seed is
not deducted because, according to seed norms, less
than l percent of the crop is used for seed. Appendix
C reports the methodological details and source refer-
ences for these estimates. ln the following discussion
of seed and feed use, we are concerned with the
implications of the estimates and their reliability.
The trends in feed and seed use as a share of gross
output are shown in table 6. Annual averages are used
instead of data for individual years to smooth the
year-to-year fluctuations in harvest size. The table
shows seed use declining as a share of gross crop
"‘ Grain crops that would have resulted under average conditions
(trend) are derived by first subtracting the moisture discount from
gross grain output and dividing by sown area to derive "clean"
yields. These yield figures are regressed against time to derive clean
yields that would have been obtained under average conditions.
Clean yields are multiplied by sown area and by l.l l to derive an
“average” gross harvest with a normal waste content of l l percent.
269
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 above. 399 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.