Search results

The purpose of this paper is to use simulation analysis to assess farmer choice between crop insurance and supplemental revenue options as proposed during development of the Agricultural Act of 2014.

The certainty equivalent of wealth is used to rank farm choices and assess the effects of supplemental revenue options on the crop insurance plan and coverage level chosen by the producer under a range of farm attributes. The risk-reducing effectiveness of the select programs is also examined through their impact on the farm revenue distribution. The dependence structure of yield and prices is modeled by applying copula techniques on historical data.

Farm program supplemental revenue programs generally have no effect on crop insurance choices. Crop insurance supplemental revenue programs typically reduce crop insurance coverage at high coverage levels. An individual plan of crop insurance combined with a supplemental revenue insurance plan may substitute for incumbent area crop insurance plans.

The analysis provides insights into farmers’ possible choices by focussing on alternative crops and farm attributes and extensive scenarios, using current data, crop insurance plans and programs contained in the 2014 Farm Bill and related bills. The results should be of value to policy officials and producers in regards to the design and use of risk management tools.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the spatial components of producer heterogeneity in crop insurance product selection among US corn producers and identifies neighborhood spillover or agent marketing effects in these decisions.

County‐level insurance and yield data are used to demonstrate that a gradual shift from yield‐based insurance to revenue‐based insurance has spatial patterns. Conventional risk variables such as yield variability, price variability, prevalence of irrigation, other crops, and yield‐price relationships play an important role in this shift and are consistently estimated only when spatial components are included. A spatial random effects model is used to also identify the impact of spatial lag effects, which include neighborhood spillover and agent marketing effects, on the share of corn acres insured with revenue‐based plans vs yield‐based plans.

Theoretically consistent variables associated with risk are found to significantly influence the choice between crop revenue and yield insurance. Non‐linear parameters identify the region‐specific effects from changes in irrigation, yield price correlation, and the prevalence of corn production on insurance decisions. In addition, spatial components such as the decisions made by nearby producers and marketing drives are also found to influence decisions. These results may demonstrate the relative influence of trusted sources, such as nearby producers and insurance agents, on insurance decisions.

Traditional risk variables are consistently estimated by controlling for spatial heterogeneity. This study also reveals the propensity of producers to rely on the opinions of other producers or agents that they know.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the relationships between grain farm and farmer profiles and their respective choices to use forward pricing techniques and revenue protection crop insurance to manage risk.

An e-mail survey of Midwestern grain farmers elicited farmer demographic information, farm profile, risk attitudes and farmer use of forward pricing and revenue protection insurance. Responses regarding use of risk management tools were compiled as choices to use possible bundles of tools to account for simultaneous nature of the decision. Choices to use bundles of tools were used as the independent variable categories in a multinomial logit regression. Regressors were relevant data collected from the survey.

Farm size, using a market advisory service, and being a technology adopter are the most important factors in predicting risk management tool use by grain farmers. Farmers tend to use forward pricing and revenue protection insurance in combination. Large farms are more likely to use forward pricing tools.

Results provide researchers, extension professionals and risk management specialists with a current understanding of how farm and farmer characteristics relate to use of risk management tools. The authors also elaborate on findings to provide guidance for future risk management research.

The survey covered 9 Midwestern states and 648 grain farmers. The survey results update understanding of grain farmers’ risk management practices. The empirical approach treats risk management decisions to use available tools as simultaneous, which recent literature suggests is more appropriate than earlier approaches.

The USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) made several changes to the crop insurance products available to organic growers for the 2014 crop year. Most notably, a 5 percent premium surcharge was removed and organic-specific transitional yields (t-yields) were issued for the first time. The purpose of this paper is to use farm-level organic crop yield data to analyze the impact of these reforms on producer insurance outcomes and compare the insurance options for new organic growers.

This study uses a unique panel data set of organic corn and soybean yields to analyze the impact of organic crop insurance reforms. Actual Production History values and premium rates are calculated for each farm and crop yield sequence. Producer loss ratios and subsidized premium wedges are compared for yield, revenue and area-risk products before and after the instituted reforms.

Results indicate that RMA succeeded in improving the actuarial soundness of the organic insurance program, though further refinement of organic t-yields may be necessary to accurately reflect the yield potential of organic producers and avoid reductions in program participation.

This paper provides insight into the effectiveness of reforms intended to improve the actuarial soundness of organic crop insurance and demonstrates the effect that the reforms are likely to have on new and existing organic farms. Because this analysis uses data collected independently of RMA and includes farms that may or may not have purchased crop insurance, it avoids the self-selection problems that might affect analyses using crop insurance program data.

This study seeks to evaluate the impacts of land rental arrangements on crop insurance and grain marketing decisions.

The analysis is conducted in an Illinois corn‐soybean setting in which optimal marketing and crop insurance decisions are estimated for a risk‐averse producer under typical cash rent and share rent agreements using numerical simulation methods.

Results indicate that the availability of crop insurance impacts the intensity of use of put options under both cash and share rent arrangements. Similar to previous work in this area, revenue insurance is found to cause a substitution away from marketing using put options, while yield insurance is complementary to price risk management alternatives. However, while insurance and marketing play a role under both types of land tenure arrangements, shifting from a cash rent to a share rent agreement provides a relatively greater degree of risk reduction.

The results suggest that additional research is needed to explain trends in land rental contracts. Crop insurance and other federal programs may provide incentives to switch from share leases to cash rent arrangements. Changes to the design of these programs could facilitate risk management for producers more efficiently.

The unique contribution of this study is the comparison of insurance and marketing decisions under both cash rent and share rent agreements for crop land.

Regional differences in crop insurance uptake have persisted over time. To partly explain this phenomenon, the purpose of this paper is to propose and evaluate a budget constraint (heuristic) effect within the standard expected utility theory (EUT) framework through simulation methods.

Within the EUT framework, a standard simulation model is used to gain insights into farm insurance decisions when a budget constraint is in effect. The budget constraint is modeled as it has been revealed through the data on farmers’ insurance expenditures. In the simulation analysis, certainty equivalent values are used to rank farm options subject to the revealed budget constraint.

A budget constraint effect within the EUT framework stands out in explaining the observed regional differences. The proposed explanation is consistent with the historical trends on the ratio of crop insurance expenditure to expected crop value, higher premium rates in regions with lower crop insurance uptake, and the limited turnout for the 2014 Farm Bill’s supplemental area-based crop insurance products. Farmers’ crop insurance choices are found to be mostly constrained-optimal.

This appears to be the first study taking the revealed preferences approach to farmers’ crop insurance choices in a simulation analysis. Some policy implications are drawn and future research avenues are suggested. The findings should be of considerable value to policymakers, academics, bankers, and producers in regard to the design and use of risk management tools.

The article examines the impact of policy change on enterprise unit subsidies that took place in 2009 on the quantity demanded for crop insurance.

The analysis covers corn, soybeans, and wheat that are grown in six economic regions and uses various measures of purchasing such as acres insured, unit structure, coverage levels, as well as crop hail use as proxies for the quantity demanded.

The analysis first employs time series econometric tools to analyze whether the time path of the share of enterprise units within buyup acres is influenced by the policy change in enterprise unit subsidies. It then comparatively examines the insurance experience between 2008 (right before the change) and 2015 (well after the change).

For corn, soybean, and wheat, the analysis establishes that the time path of the share of enterprise units within buyup coverage acres is statistically and economically influenced by the intervention. The analysis further quantifies the intervention's immediate and long-term impacts and finds that farmers' unit choices are highly responsive (elastic) to subsidy rates in those units.

Between 2008 and 2015, the insurance experience generally indicates that the share of enterprise units within buyup coverage surged, the share of acres under catastrophic coverage declined, and the share acres in high coverage levels increased. Meanwhile, growers have increasingly utilized crop-hail policies.

This appears to be the first study (1) quantifying the sensitivity of farmers' unit choices with respect to subsidy rates in those units and finding that such choices are actually highly responsive (elastic), and (2) pointing out the interaction between MPCI and crop-hail products and offering insights as to their combined use. The findings should be of considerable value to policymakers, academics, bankers, and producers in regards to the design and use of risk management tools.

Returns to a model farm are simulated to assess the impact of marketing and insurance risk management tools as measured by mean net returns and returns at 5% value‐at‐risk (VaR). Results indicate that revenue insurance strategies and strategies involving a combination of price and yield protection provide substantial downside revenue protection, while mean net returns only modestly differ from the benchmark harvest sale strategy when considering all years between 1986 and 2000.

Since 1980, the principal form of crop loss assistance in the United States has been provided through the Federal Crop Insurance Program. The Federal Crop Insurance Act of 1980 was intended to replace disaster programs with a subsidized insurance program that farmers could depend on in the event of crop losses. Crop insurance was seen as preferable to disaster assistance because it was less costly and hence could be provided to more producers, was less likely to encourage moral hazard, and less likely to encourage producers to plant crops on marginal lands. Despite substantial growth in the program, the crop insurance program has failed to replace other disaster programs as the sole form of assistance. Over the past 20 years, producers received an estimated $15 billion in supplemental disaster payments in addition to $22 billion in crop insurance indemnities.

This study evaluates the impacts on gross revenue distributions of the use of alternative crop insurance products across different coverage levels and across locations with differing yield risks. Results are presented in terms of net costs, values‐at‐risk, and certainty equivalent returns associated with five types of multi‐peril crop insurance across different coverage levels. Findings show that the group policies often result in average payments exceeding their premium costs. Individual revenue products reduce risk in the tails more than group policies, but result in greater reductions in mean revenues. Rankings based on certainty equivalent returns and low frequency VaRs generally favor revenue products. As expected, crop insurance is associated with greater relative risk reduction in locations with greater underlying yield variability.