11. “O merakh po razvitiiu uslug po remontu i stroitel’stvu zhilishch, postroek dlia sadovodcheskikh tovarishchestv, garazhei i drugikh stroenii po zakazam naseleniia v 1986–1990 godakh i v period do 2000 goda” (21 May 1985), text in SPP RSFSR, no. 15 (1985), art. 71. The late 1980s were also a time when the Party finally gave its unqualified approval to the “personal subsidiary farm” (lichnoe podsobnoe khoziaistvo) that had for so long endured an equivocal and shifting legal status: see V. Ustiukova, Lichnoe podsobnoe khoziaistvo: Pravovoi rezhim imushchestva (Moscow, 1990), esp. 7–16, and Z. Kalugina, Lichnoe podsobnoe khoziaistvo v SSSR: Sotsial’nye reguliatory i rezul’taty razvitiia (Novosibirsk, 1991), esp. 4–7.
12. “Ob utverzhdenii Tipovogo ustava sadovodcheskogo tovarishchestva” (11 Nov. 1986), SPP RSFSR, no. 18 (1986), art. 132.
13. “O merakh po dal’neishemu razvitiiu kollektivnogo sadovodstva i ogorodnichestva v RSFSR” (5 June 1986), SPP RSFSR, no. 20 (1986), art. 149.
14. “Ob utverzhdenii Tipovogo ustava sadovodcheskogo tovarishchestva” (31 March 1988), SPP RSFSR no. 10 (1988), art. 45.
15. “O sozdanii kompleksnykh torgovo-zakupochnykh punktov v sadovodcheskikh i sadovo-ogorodnykh tovarishchestvakh” (6 Apr. 1989), SPP RSFSR, no. 11 (1989), art. 56.
16. V. S. Zakharov, “Ochered’ na lono prirody,” Nedelia, no. 40 (1988).
17. Sotsial’noe razvitie SSSR: Statisticheskii sbornik (Moscow, 1990), 207.
18. “O pervoocherednykh zadachakh po realizatsii zemel’noi reformy,” in Dachniki: Vash dom, sad i ogorod (a newspaper published in the Moscow region), no. 1 (1991), 3.
19. Simon Clarke et al., “The Russian Dacha and the Myth of the Urban Peasant,” paper posted at <http://www.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/complabstuds/russia/russint.htm>.
20. “O dopolnitel’nykh merakh po razvitiiu lichnykh podsobnykh khoziaistv grazhdan, kollektivnogo sadovodstva i ogorodnichestva,” SPP RSFSR, no. 22 (1987), art. 135.
21. “O dal’neishem razvitii podsobnykh sel’skikh khoziaistv predpriiatii, organizatsii i uchrezhdenii” (14 Oct. 1987), SPP RSFSR, no. 21 (1987), art. 131. Hitches in the implementation of the policy were also mentioned in Ustiukova, Lichnoe podsobnoe khoziaistvo, 3–4; this book went on to note (5–6) that a more precise definition of “nonlabor income” (netrudovoi dokhod) was required.
22. “O pervoocherednykh merakh po obespecheniiu zhitelei g. Moskvy zemel’nymi uchastkami dlia organizatsii kollektivnogo sadovodstva i ogorodnichestva” (22 Feb. 1991), SPP RSFSR, no. 12 (1991), art. 159.
23. See, e.g., the complaints referred to in the resolution of 5 July 1989 “O dopolnitel’nykh merakh po razvitiiu lichnykh podsobnykh khoziaistv grazhdan, kollektivnogo sadovodstva i ogorodnichestva. . . ,” SPP RSFSR, no. 18 (1989), art. 104.
24. Research note contributed by Denis Shaw to “News Notes,” Soviet Geography 32 (1991): 361.
25. Gavriil Popov, interviewed in “Khod konem?” Dachniki: Vash dom, sad i ogorod, no. 1 (1991), 2.
26. V. V. Vagin, “Russkii provintsial’nyi gorod: Kliuchevye elementy zhizneustroistva,” Mir Rossii, no. 4 (1997), 81.
27. The next step, however—from life ownership (vladenie) to unconditional ownership (sobstvennost’)—was considerably more problematic and caused fierce political debates in the Yeltsin-era Duma: see the account in S. K. Wegren, Agriculture and the State in Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia (Pittsburgh, 1998), 160–66.
28. “Ob otvode zemel’nykh uchastkov v Moskovskoi oblasti dlia maloetazhnogo stroitel’stva i sadovodstva dlia zhitelei g. Moskvy i oblasti,” in Dachnoe khoziaistvo: Sbornik normativnykh aktov (Moscow, 1996). A subsequent presidential decree gave renewed support for provision of land to individual builders around the Russian Federation: see “О dopolnitel’nykh merakh po nadeleniiu grazhdan zemel’nymi uchastkami” (23 Apr. 1993), ibid.
29. See Vagin, “Russkii provintsial’nyi gorod,” 72, 86n.
30. Dacha—mini-ferma (Moscow, 1993).
31. Simagin, “Ekonomiko-geograficheskie aspekty,” chap. 2.
32. Iu. Nikiforova, “Mesto pod solntsem na 111-m kilometer,” in Peterburg, supplement to Argumenty i fakty, no. 31 (1997), 2.
33. V. Sergachev, “Dacha: Ot neveroiatnogo do ochevidnogo,” Birzha truda, 17–23 May 1999, 1.
34. R. Struyk and K. Angelici, “The Russian Dacha Phenomenon,” Housing Studies 11 (1996), 233–50.
35. Vagin, “Russkii provintsial’nyi gorod,” 73.
36. Rossiiskaia gazeta, 8 Aug. 1997, 8.
37. A. Simonenko, “Na ogorode vse ravny!” Nevskoe vremia, 15 May 1999.
38. Interesting material on the dacha habit, especially its role in the lives of a small-town intelligentsia marooned in post-Soviet conditions, can be found in A. White, “Social Change in Provincial Russia: The Intelligentsia in a Raion Center,” Europe-Asia Studies 52 (2000): 677–94 (this article takes as its case study a town in Tver’ oblast, four hours by bus from Moscow). Iaroslavl’ is a city known to me where the word “dacha” seems to be used exactly as it is in Moscow (most of the dwellings thus denoted are garden-plot houses in crowded settlements on the far bank of the Volga). The weekly publication that carries small ads in Petrozavodsk also refers to “dachas”: see “Vse”—ezhenedelnik besplatnykh chastnykh ob"iavlenii, at <http://vse.karelia.ru>. And to judge by one other Web page, the term “dacha” has made inroads as far east as Amursk: <http://www.amursk.ru/lschool/dachas.htm>.
39. Vagin, “Russkii provintsial’nyi gorod,” 72. It is telling that the most in-depth of the dacha periodicals in the early 1990s took “Dachniki” as its main title, even though its focus was exclusively the garden-plot dacha (and this point was specifically mentioned in the editorial of the first issue: “Obrashchenie k chitateliu,” Dachniki: Vash dom, sad i ogorod, no. 1 [1990], 2).
40. In 1998 the Center for Citizen Initiatives showed awareness of those less well equipped by pioneering a roof-top gardening scheme in St. Petersburg to help urban residents with no access to dacha plots: see <http://www.fadr.msu.ru/mirrors/www.igc.apc.org/cci/agirof.htm>.
41. Details in this and the next paragraph are taken from Clarke et al., “Russian Dacha.” Fully compatible with Clarke’s conclusions is H.T. Seeth, S. Chachnov, A. Surinov, and J. von Braun, “Russian Poverty: Muddling Through Economic Transition with Garden Plots,” World Development 26 (1998), 1611–23.