The Finnish Famine of 1866-1868: Causes, Effects, and Reforms

The Finnish Famine of 1866-1868, known as Suuret nälkävuodet (the Great Hunger Years), was one of the most severe famines in Finnish history, resulting in the death of about 10% of the population. This tragedy highlighted the vulnerability of Finland’s agricultural society and led to reforms aimed at preventing future crises. For those studying for the Finnish citizenship test, understanding the causes, effects, and reforms resulting from the Finnish Famine provides insight into the resilience of Finnish society and the country’s journey toward improved infrastructure and social support systems.

Causes of the Finnish Famine

Several factors contributed to the famine, including adverse weather, agricultural challenges, and limited economic resources.

1. Harsh Weather Conditions: Finland experienced unusually cold and rainy summers in 1866 and 1867, causing widespread crop failure. Early frosts damaged potatoes, a staple crop, and excessive rain prevented grain from ripening. With much of the country’s food supply dependent on local agriculture, the poor harvests triggered immediate food shortages.
2. Dependency on Agriculture: Finland was primarily an agrarian society, and a large portion of the population relied on subsistence farming. Without the infrastructure for food imports or crop diversification, Finland was especially vulnerable to climate fluctuations. The reliance on a limited range of crops left communities without alternatives when the main harvest failed.
3. Economic Limitations and Isolation: At the time, Finland lacked sufficient infrastructure for transportation and trade, making it difficult to bring food from other areas. Roads and railways were limited, isolating communities and slowing relief efforts. The economic dependence on agriculture and the lack of industrial development left the country ill-equipped to handle food shortages.

Effects of the Famine on Finnish Society

The famine had devastating consequences, affecting nearly every aspect of life in Finland. Mortality rates soared, and the social structure faced unprecedented strain.

1. Population Loss and Migration: The famine caused the deaths of approximately 150,000 people, representing around 10% of Finland’s population. The famine was particularly severe in rural areas, where people relied heavily on subsistence farming. Entire families were affected, and many people left their homes in search of food, leading to mass migration within Finland.
2. Economic Disruption: The famine left Finland’s already fragile economy in ruins. Farmers lost livestock, and agricultural fields lay fallow, reducing future harvests. The economic toll lasted for years, with local communities struggling to rebuild after the loss of so many lives and resources. Towns that were hit hardest faced years of economic stagnation.
3. Spread of Disease: Alongside starvation, diseases such as typhus, dysentery, and tuberculosis spread rapidly due to weakened immune systems, poor hygiene, and overcrowding in relief centers. The spread of disease exacerbated the death toll and added to the suffering of those affected by the famine.
4. Psychological and Cultural Impact: The trauma of the famine had a lasting effect on Finnish culture. Generations grew up with stories of the Great Hunger Years, reinforcing values of resilience and self-reliance in Finnish society. The famine experience emphasized the importance of preparedness, resourcefulness, and mutual aid in times of crisis.

Relief Efforts and Government Response

The famine tested the response of both local communities and the Finnish government, leading to a variety of relief efforts, though many were insufficient given the scope of the crisis.

1. Public Kitchens and Relief Programs: To address the famine, the government set up public kitchens in towns and cities, providing meals to those most in need. However, these efforts were overwhelmed by the sheer number of people seeking assistance. Relief centers were often overcrowded, and the food provided was minimal, offering limited relief to the suffering population.
2. Food Imports and Foreign Aid: Attempts were made to import food, but Finland’s limited infrastructure and the expense of foreign aid slowed these efforts. Additionally, Finland’s economic isolation and transportation limitations hindered the timely delivery of food to remote areas. Some international aid arrived, but it was not enough to meet the widespread demand.
3. Labor Programs and Infrastructure Development: The government initiated labor programs where those affected by the famine could work on public infrastructure projects in exchange for food or wages. These projects included building roads, canals, and railways—efforts that contributed to Finland’s long-term development but offered limited immediate relief.

Reforms Following the Famine

The lessons learned from the Finnish Famine led to significant reforms aimed at preventing future food crises and improving the country’s economic resilience.

1. Expansion of Infrastructure: Recognizing the need for better transportation networks, the Finnish government invested in infrastructure development. New roads and railways were built, connecting rural communities to towns and facilitating the transportation of goods across the country. These changes helped reduce Finland’s isolation and improved access to food and supplies.
2. Promotion of Crop Diversification: After the famine, Finnish agricultural policy encouraged the diversification of crops to reduce dependency on a few staples. Potatoes, root vegetables, and hardy grains like rye and oats became more common, making the food supply more resilient to adverse weather. Diversifying crops became an important strategy for protecting future harvests from climate variability.
3. Development of a National Food Reserve: In response to the famine, the government established national food reserves, which stored grain and other essential foods as a safeguard against future crises. These reserves provided a buffer that could be accessed in times of need, ensuring that the population would have access to basic necessities even during poor harvests.
4. Public Health Reforms: The famine underscored the importance of public health infrastructure. Efforts were made to improve sanitation, healthcare, and disease prevention, particularly in rural areas. New policies promoted public health education and better access to medical services, aiming to protect vulnerable communities from the spread of disease in future crises.

The Legacy of the Finnish Famine

The Finnish Famine left a profound impact on Finnish society, affecting not only the lives of those who lived through it but also shaping the nation’s approach to governance, resilience, and social welfare.

1. Emphasis on Self-Reliance and Resilience: The famine reinforced the value of sisu, a Finnish concept of inner strength and perseverance in the face of adversity. The experience taught Finns the importance of self-reliance and adaptability, values that continue to shape Finnish identity and attitudes toward challenges.
2. Increased Government Responsibility: The famine demonstrated the need for a more proactive government role in crisis management. Finland’s government assumed greater responsibility for social welfare and economic resilience, laying the foundation for future social policies that emphasized public health, food security, and social support systems.
3. Cultural Memory and Awareness: The famine remains a significant part of Finland’s cultural memory. Stories of the Great Hunger Years are passed down through generations, serving as a reminder of the hardships that shaped the nation and the resilience of Finnish communities. The legacy of the famine contributes to Finland’s collective awareness of the importance of preparedness and solidarity.

For those studying for the Finnish citizenship test, understanding the Finnish Famine of 1866-1868 provides insight into Finland’s historical challenges and the resilience that has helped the country overcome adversity. The lessons learned from this tragedy are reflected in Finland’s social policies, infrastructure, and cultural values, shaping the nation’s approach to well-being and security.