Gifts of the Forest vs. Harvests from the Fields: Which Is More Beneficial for Russia’s Economy?

However, with the development of agrotechnologies, a logical question has emerged: why send people “into the taiga” if valuable plants and mycelium can be grown on controlled plantations and in greenhouses? The answer lies at the intersection of hard economic practicality and ecological balance. At the present stage of market development, these two models do not merely compete; they meet fundamentally different needs of the economy.

For a long time, the balance of power was uneven, but recent years (2024–2026) have clearly delineated industrial crop production and forest harvesting. Statistical data from recent years (2025–2026) demonstrate a clear specialization of each sector.

In mushroom farming, industrial cultivation has made a qualitative leap. The output of protected-ground mushrooms (primarily button mushrooms and oyster mushrooms) consistently exceeds 145–150 thousand tons per year, fully meeting the basic needs of the domestic market and federal retail. At the same time, the commercial segment for wild forest mushrooms (porcini, chanterelles, saffron milk caps) is showing rapid growth in leased areas.

According to the Federal Forestry Agency (Rosleskhoz), volumes of industrial harvesting of mushrooms by official lessees of the forest fund have increased severalfold (on an annualized basis, recorded official volumes have surpassed 260 tons), while total commercial turnover, including purchases from the public, is estimated at 15–20 thousand tons. The gross harvest of berries by agricultural enterprises (strawberries, blueberries) stands at around 29 thousand tons, supported by government measures.

At the same time, experts at Russian Agricultural Bank (Rosselkhozbank) estimate the industrial potential of wild forest berries (cranberries, lingonberries, bilberries) to be significantly higher: for example, in the Siberian Federal District alone, gross harvests are projected to grow to 86 thousand tons. The market for medicinal plant raw materials has a similar structure: about 3.7 thousand tons of standard crops (chamomile, milk thistle) are harvested “from the fields,” while unique endemics and adaptogens (chaga, lemongrass, aralia root) totaling more than 5 thousand tons are supplied exclusively from the forest fund. The main economic argument in favor of preserving forest harvesting is the impossibility—or economic inexpediency—of introducing a number of species into cultivation. Valuable forest mushrooms are mycorrhizal: they can develop only in close symbiosis with the root system of living trees of a specific age. Creating an artificial “bed” for them in a field on an industrial scale is technologically impossible.

As for berries and medicinal herbs, the key factor is the concentration of biologically active substances (BAS). Scientific studies confirm that wild plants developing under the harsh climatic conditions of the taiga zone accumulate significantly more antioxidants, essential oils, and glycosides than their cultivated counterparts. For the pharmaceutical industry and functional food production, forest raw materials remain an unrivaled high–value-added base.

From a macroeconomic perspective, the models have fundamentally different investment cycles, each of which is actively stimulated by the state: Intensive agribusiness (fields) is characterized by high capital expenditures (up to 2–2.5 billion rubles for a large project) and a long payback period (5–6 years). However, the investor gains absolute predictability of volumes and standardized quality.

To support such projects, from 2026 the Ministry of Agriculture of Russia consolidated measures within the federal project “Development of Small Agribusiness,” with a budget of 14.5 billion rubles. Farmers have access to subsidies for establishing and maintaining perennial plantings and nurseries (provided that domestic planting material is used), as well as reimbursement of up to 60% of the costs of modernizing equipment and machinery. Industrial harvesting of wild resources (forest): does not require expenditures on land and land reclamation. In this case, the main investments are directed toward infrastructure: logistics hubs, shock-freezing facilities, and processing plants.

The main economic risk is seasonality (yields may fluctuate by up to 50% year to year). To mitigate these risks, the Ministry of Agriculture provides grants to agricultural consumer cooperatives for the creation and modernization of facilities for harvesting, processing, and storing wild resources, and also subsidizes concessional loans for processors. In addition, through the Ministry for the Development of the Russian Far East and Arctic and the Federal Autonomous Research Institution “Vostokgosplan,” specialized digital platforms are being introduced to legalize the market for purchasing raw materials from the public in the Far East and the Arctic zone. And, of course, it is important to consider the environmental aspect of development in both industries.

Agricultural production minimizes pressure on wildlife, but requires intensive use of land resources and strict control over the use of plant protection products. Forest harvesting, by contrast, is an example of a “green economy.” The regulatory framework, including the updated rules of the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia for harvesting edible forest resources (Article 34 of the Forest Code of the Russian Federation), is aimed at strictly suppressing barbaric methods of collecting raw materials. When scientifically grounded quotas are observed, the forest fund becomes a source of permanent renewable income without damage to the ecosystem.

Industrial agribusiness effectively addresses the task of import substitution in the mass food segment in large urban agglomerations. In turn, the potential of the forest fund provides raw materials for knowledge-intensive industries—pharmaceuticals, the healthy food industry, and other sectors previously oriented toward export raw materials. Balancing these directions addresses the objectives of food security and regional development, which is optimal for the development of Russia’s economy at the present stage.

Author: Assistant, Department of World Economy and World Finance, Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation Anna Vladimirovna Kuznetsova