Search results

The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 directed the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Risk Management Association to investigate a policy targeted to farms and ranches that sell through local food markets. However, there is no available research that quantitatively documents the extent to which local food producers utilize Federal crop insurance.

The authors utilize 2013–2016 USDA Agricultural Resource Management Survey data to compare farms and ranches with sales through local food markets to those with and without Federal crop insurance expenditure, as well as the distribution of Federal crop expenditure, across market channels and scales.

There is a little variation in Federal crop insurance expenditure across market channels, defined as direct-to-consumer only sales, intermediated sales, and a combination of direct-to-consumer and intermediated sales. Rather, the results show that scale is the primary predictor of Federal crop insurance expenditure; larger operations are more likely to have nonzero Federal crop insurance expenses.

This article provides the first national research to document descriptive statistics of the utilization of Federal crop insurance by US farms and ranches that utilize local food market channels.

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.

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.

A tax based on land value is in many ways ideal, but many economists dismiss it by assuming it could not raise enough revenue. Standard sources of data omit much of the potential tax base, and undervalue what they do measure. The purpose of this paper is to present more comprehensive and accurate measures of land rents and values, and several modes of raising revenues from them besides the conventional property tax.

The paper identifies 16 elements of land's taxable capacity that received authorities either trivialize or omit. These 16 elements come in four groups.

In Group A, Elements 1‐4 correct for the downward bias in standard sources. In Group B, Elements 5‐10 broaden the concepts of land and rent beyond the conventional narrow perception, while Elements 11‐12 estimate rents to be gained by abating other kinds of taxes. In Group C, Elements 13‐14 explain how using the land tax, since it has no excess burden, uncaps feasible tax rates. In Group D, Elements 15‐16 define some moot possibilities that may warrant further exploration.

This paper shows how previous estimates of rent and land values have been narrowly limited to a fraction of the whole, thus giving a false impression that the tax capacity is low. The paper adds 14 elements to the traditional narrow “single tax” base, plus two moot elements advanced for future consideration. Any one of these 16 elements indicates a much higher land tax base than economists commonly recognize today. Taken together they are overwhelming, and cast an entirely new light on this subject.

Nobody concerned with political economy can neglect the history of economic doctrines. Structural changes in the economy and society influence economic thinking and, conversely, innovative thought structures and attitudes have almost always forced economic institutions and modes of behaviour to adjust. We learn from the history of economic doctrines how a particular theory emerged and whether, and in which environment, it could take root. We can see how a school evolves out of a common methodological perception and similar techniques of analysis, and how it has to establish itself. The interaction between unresolved problems on the one hand, and the search for better solutions or explanations on the other, leads to a change in paradigma and to the formation of new lines of reasoning. As long as the real world is subject to progress and change scientific search for explanation must out of necessity continue.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the sources and magnitude of variation in accrual adjusted gross farm revenue and farm revenue net of feed purchases on Michigan dairy farms representative of Upper Midwest dairy farms. The paper aims to assess whether adjusted gross revenue‐type insurance instruments meet insurability conditions when applied to dairy farms.

Accrual adjusted dairy farm revenue and revenue net of feed purchased from Michigan dairy farm panel data from 1995 through 2006 were detrended and summarized. Variance decomposition was used to identify sources of variation in adjusted gross revenue and adjusted gross revenue less feed purchases. In‐sample insurance premiums were estimated and Monte Carlo simulations were used to adjust these premiums for out‐of‐sample considerations.

Milk price variation was the largest source of variation while milk production per cow varied little. Farms with smaller herds and those with larger percentages of farm revenue from crop sales had higher relative revenue variability and would trigger a higher frequency of indemnities under a whole farm revenue insurance contract.

Because the data analyzed conclude in 2006, the volatility of the past couple of years is not reflected. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to test the proposed insurance feasibility further with more recent data.

The paper addresses considerations for the development and commercialization of a feasible dairy revenue insurance instrument.

This paper fulfils a need to understand magnitude and source of revenue variation on dairy farms and how insurance might mitigate negative consequences of this variation.

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of agricultural policy reform – specifically the change from market to direct payment support – on income variability of Swiss farming households. In addition, the observed heterogeneity in income risks across farms and time is explained in terms of farm and regional characteristics.

Unbalanced farm‐level panel data of the Swiss farm accountancy network (FADN) are used to construct coefficients of variation of five‐year overlapping time intervals for total household income and gross farm revenues over the period 1992 to 2009. Linear fixed effect models are applied to measure the effect of specialization, off‐farm income, direct payments, farm size, and liquidity on the variability of gross farm revenues and household income in the valley, hill, and mountain regions.

The switch from market‐based support to direct payments has decreased the variability of farm revenues and household income. The strong reliance on direct payments serves as insurance for most farmers and reduces both household income and revenue risk. Off‐farm income can be used by farmers to reduce household income risk but it increases revenue risk in the valley regions. In all of the regions considered, farm size has a positive effect on household income risk and a negative effect on revenue risk. A high degree of specialization increases both gross revenue and household income risk. Potential revenue insurance contracts should specify farmers' off‐farm employment, the degree of specialization, farm size, and regional specific risk profiles.

This paper assesses the complementary effects of specific farm characteristics and risk management strategies with regard to both farm revenue and household income risk. Influences of agricultural policy changes on income risks are also empirically assessed at different spatial scales.