{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015758371634931056, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0026263952724885093, 'mean_word_length': 5.895927601809955, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Restitution of agricultural land in Estonia: Consequences for landscape development and production

Two prominent features of present-day Estonia are large tracts of formerly productive land laid idle and production buildings of collective farms in ruins. However, in some areas most farmland remains actively used. An investigation of possible ‘landscapes of action’, both for national decision-makers and single landowners, can help with understanding recent transformations. The article examines local responses to the land restitution and agricultural restructuring measures adopted by the Estonian Government in the 1990s and the resulting effects on the cultural landscape and agricultural development. Restitution was politically necessary, but has had a number of unexpected effects on landscape development and agricultural production. Among the negative effects have been new speculative land-use patterns of urban sprawl around the larger cities. However, where large production units could be converted to capitalist enterprises and where agricultural land is good, agricultural production has been maintained. The article demonstrates how individuals and local communities interpret opportunities and obstacles set by personal ambitions, local conditions, and general policies. Case studies of the former collective farms in Sauga, Surju and Tori municipalities show that the proportion of unproductive agricultural land and recent development of ownership structures show marked differences from case to case.