Coping with systemic risk in index‐based crop insurance

The implementation of index‐based crop insurance is often impeded by the existence of systemic risk of insured losses. We assess the effectiveness of two strategies for coping with systemic risk: regional diversification and securitization with catastrophe (CAT) bonds. The analysis is conducted in an equilibrium pricing framework which allows the optimal price of the insurance and the number of traded contracts to be determined. We also explore the role of basis risk and risk aversion of market agents. The model is applied to a hypothetical area yield insurance for rice producers in northeast China. If yields in two regions are positively correlated, we find that enlarging the insured area leads to higher insurance premiums. Unless capital market investors are very risk averse, a CAT bond written on an area yield index outperforms regional diversification in terms of certainty equivalents of both farmers and insurers.     

Demand for area crop insurance among litchi producers in northern Vietnam

This study examines the need for crop insurance for litchi production in northern Vietnam and how farmers might participate in such a program. Hypothetical insurance programs were developed which proposed all‐risk coverage based on area yields. This coverage was offered to farmers to determine both their interest in the program and how insurance features and farmer characteristics affected their decision to buy insurance. Farmers were also surveyed regarding their production practices, price and yield expectations, and financial and personal characteristics. Even before considering other program costs and government budget constraints, there is not a strong case for establishing a crop insurance program here. Results indicate that while farmer participation would be significant, crop insurance is not needed to achieve policy goals like raising farmer income or guaranteeing subsistence levels of income. Crop insurance is not needed to promote litchi production, which is already expanding rapidly due to its high profitability relative to other farm enterprises. In their choice of coverages, farmers preferred higher yield guarantee levels and lower indemnity prices. Estimated premiums were quite low when expressed as a percent of expected revenue, and farmers were not responsive to changes in premiums. Econometric analysis indicated that high income farmers were more likely to participate, but other farmer characteristics seemed to matter little. Anecdotal evidence suggested that farmers believed the expected area yields used to set insurance coverage levels were too low. Because litchi productivity varies significantly by tree age and the litchi planted area is expanding rapidly, determining appropriate values for expected area yields and insurance coverage levels appeared to be the biggest challenge in program design. It is hypothesized that additional farmer education about the relationship between area and farm yields and other aspects of area insurance could improve such a program's operation. Published by Elsevier Science B.V.     

A Comparative Evaluation of Yield Risk Reductions with Alternative Crop Insurance Programs in Manitoba

Three crop insurance programs are evaluated in terms of their effectiveness of yield risk reductions for 371 Manitoba farms. The examination is first conducted with a proposed index method, with which the relative yield risk reduction magnitude is calculated and compared for each farm under each alternative program. The generalized stochastic dominance (GSD) methodology is also used to provide an alternative analytical framework in analyzing producers’relative preferences among those alternatives by comparing the net yield distributions generated by each program for each farm. The results suggest that, given an actuarially sound basis, the filly individualized crop insurance (FI) program is the most favorable choice for risk-averse producers. The area coverage and individual indemnity program (IA) is generally the second best option. The full area crop insurance program (FA) is least preferred by risk-averse farmers.     

Producer Experience, Learning by Doing, and Yield Performance

Current crop insurance rating procedures consider only performance for the individual crop in question. Recent farm legislation has given producers considerable planting flexibility and, as a result, many have shifted to new crops. Producers without a production history for the new crop may be offered levels of insurance that do not accurately reflect their expected yields. Likewise, premium rates may not reflect a producer's actual risk for a new crop. We examine the extent to which information about expected yields may be gleaned from a consideration of historical performance on other crops. We also consider the extent to which yield performance exhibits learning by doing such that yields improve with experience. Though the results are mixed, we generally find that yield performance tends to improve with experience. However, when yields are conditioned on historical yield performance for other crops, the importance of experience is diminished significantly. Yield performance is related to a number of farm characteristics. Finally, we examine the extent to which yield variability is correlated across crops for individual farmers. Implications for crop insurance rating practices are discussed. The results demonstrate robust correlation between a farm's historical yield on other crops and a newly produced crop—a factor largely ignored in current crop insurance contracts.     

Actuarial Fairness of Crop Insurance Rates with Constant Rate Relativities

Increased availability and demand for low-deductible crop insurance policies have increased focus on crop insurance rating methods. Actuarial fairness cannot be achieved if constant multiplicative factors are used to determine how premiums change as coverage levels increase. A comparison of premium rates generated by the factors used by the two most popular crop insurance products with those generated by a standard yield distribution shows that the popular insurance products overcharge for low-deductible policies in most counties. This overpricing may explain why large premium subsidies were required to induce farmers to move from low-deductible to high-deductible policies beginning in 2001.     

Crop Insurance Under Catastrophic Risk

We develop a new insurance model that shows how catastrophic risk affects the nature and existence of a crop insurance market equilibrium. A reservation preference level is used to characterize long-run equilibrium when catastrophic risk makes insurance companies risk responsive. Catastrophic risk is shown to increase premiums, reduce farmer coverage levels and, under some conditions, lead to a complete breakdown of the crop insurance market. Reinsurance can help facilitate an equilibrium and/or increase participation, particularly if the reinsurance is subsidized. The analysis has important implications for the design and management of crop insurance and reinsurance programs.     

Farmer Participation,Entry and Exit Decisions in the Italian Crop Insurance Programme

The factors affecting the demand for agricultural insurance in the USA have been extensively studied over the last two decades. However, the determinants of a farm's entry and exit decisions in the insurance market have received relatively little attention. Turnover in the insurance book of business is an important issue in most private and public crop insurance plans. Moreover, insurance markets in the EU are still largely under‐investigated. We investigate empirically the determinants of crop insurance participation in Italy. We show that the participation rate is high for large firms and that it is negatively correlated with crop diversification, which is itself a form of insurance. High premiums tend to inhibit both entry and exit from the insurance market. Larger and wealthier farms are more likely to adopt insurance and renew coverage over time. We discuss implications of our results for public intervention and the private industry. In particular, we demonstrate that the decision to drop coverage by an insured grower may differ significantly from the corresponding decision to enroll in an insurance programme by an uninsured farmer. To the extent that policymakers want to encourage participation in subsidized crop insurance programmes, education and outreach efforts toward uninsured farmers may differ substantially from those directed toward keeping insured farmers enrolled in the programme. We investigate these differences.     

Evaluating the Potential of Index Insurance Schemes to Reduce Crop Yield Risk in an Arid Region

We evaluate yield risk reduction through weather index, area yield index and farm yield insurance contracts for wheat farms in Kazakhstan by employing data from 1980 to 2002. We use the usual mean variance (MV) approach and also a second‐degree stochastic dominance (SSD) criterion. While MV is not necessarily consistent with the expected utility (EU) theory, SSD results only in a minimum but EU‐consistent benefit from insuring. Differences in the estimation results for both approaches underline the advantage of applying both criteria to analyse the risk‐reducing potential of crop insurance. Bootstrapping results show that none of the analysed insurance schemes provides statistically significant risk reduction for every single farm. In addition, weather‐based index insurance is found to provide less risk reduction than area yield insurance based on the rayon (county) yield. Moreover, rayon yield index insurance can reduce yield risk more effectively for Kazakhstan's wheat producers than farm yield insurance with a low strike yield.     

Area Yield Index Insurance or Farm Yield Crop Insurance? Chinese Perspectives on Farmers' Welfare and Government Subsidy Effectiveness

We evaluate the performance of area yield crop insurance (AYCI) and farm yield crop insurance (FYCI) using farm-level yield data from China, focusing on their effects on farmers' welfare, and their cost-effectiveness in terms of government subsidy. Given a subsidy rate sufficient to generate a politically acceptable participation level, the price advantage of AYCI may no longer offset its higher basis risk, and consequently FYCI may be preferred by farmers. From the government's perspective, AYCI is the cheapest option to maintain reasonable farmer participation in insurance, but is not necessarily the most cost-effective choice. Our findings suggest that, contrary to an assumption that informs many developing country agricultural insurance programmes, AYCI schemes are not necessarily preferred to FYCI. Decisions on the structure of a national agricultural insurance programme should be based on careful consideration of local conditions.     

PREMIUM RATEMAKING IN AN ALL RISK CROP INSURANCE PROGRAM1

Fluctuation in farm incomes resulting from variation in crop yield is one of the most significant features in agriculture. Crop insurance is a feasible method by which the farmer can protect his income and his investment from the disastrous effects of crop losses due to natural hazards. This study has attempted to cover two parts. First, it has examined the most important-factors influencing crop yields in connection with the premium rate scheme (i.e. the long-run average yield and the level of coverage). These factors include resource inputs, technology, weather, and stochastic variable. Second, it has developed a refined method of approximating the premium rate. The data used in testing normality were based on the Manitoba Crop Insurance Corporation's annual yield survey covering the years 1916 to 1964. The test shows that none of the annual yield distributions within the area surveyed was normally distributed, revealing that a cartful and exact delineation of a crop risk area is necessary. The findings also show that the cyclical pattern of weather and the upward trend in crop production due to technology were evidently important for the adjustment of the level of coverage and premium rate over time. Additional research relating the effects of weather and technology on crop yields would help to establish a more realistic insurance program. Other aspects should not be overlooked. These include (a) other possible levels besides the existing level of coverage and (b) a livestock or a combined crop-livestock insurance program along with the crop insurance program. The purpose of these additional aspects is to provide farmers with a fuller measure of protection.     

Designing Optimal Crop Revenue Insurance

When the indemnity schedule is contingent on the farmer's price and individual yield, an optimal crop revenue insurance contract depends only on the farmer's gross revenue. However, this design is not efficient if, as is the case with available contracts, the coverage function is based on imperfect estimators of individual yield and/or price. The producer's degree of prudence and the extent of basis risks have important influences on the optimal indemnity schedule. In this broader context, optimal protection is not provided by available U.S. crop insurance contracts and may include combinations of revenue insurance, yield insurance, futures, and options contracts.     

Risk preferences of commodity crop producers and specialty crop producers: An application of prospect theory

Producers’ decisions, such as crop insurance, contract agreement, and technology adoption, involve considerable risk and uncertainty. Particularly, specialty crop production is more vulnerable to risk and requires more intensive management than commodity crop production, while risk mitigation tools for specialty crop production are comparatively limited. We apply Prospect Theory (PT) to analyze risk preferences of U.S. producers, and further compare the preference differences between commodity crop and specialty crop producers. Reference dependent, diminishing sensitivity, loss aversion, and probability weighting, as well as certain farm characteristics and producer demographics, are found to have a significant impact on grower risk attitudes. In addition, we do not observe significant differences in the base PT estimates between commodity crop and specialty crop producers. However, the relationships between risk behavior and individual characteristics vary between the two types of producers, which shed lights on the development of agricultural policies and provide implications for the design of contract and insurance.     

Factors Influencing Farmers' Crop Insurance Decisions

Farmers' decisions to purchase crop insurance and their choices among alternative products are analyzed using a two-stage estimation procedure. The influences of risk perceptions, competing risk management options, as well structural and demographic differences are evaluated. The likelihood for crop insurance usage is found to be higher for larger, older, less tenured, more highly leveraged farms, and by those with higher perceived yield risks. The marginal effects of size, age, perceived yield risk, perceived importance of risk management activities, and other structural and demographic variables are identified in terms of their influences on choices among alternative crop insurance products.     

Aggregation in Area-Yield Crop Insurance: The Linear Additive Model

Previous analyses of area yield crop insurance have used a linear additive model (LAM) to express the relationship between individual and area yield. However, the theoretical foundations of the LAM are unknown. This shortcoming is addressed by establishing two conditions linking microvariables and LAM parameters. The conditions relate to the interaction of risks in individual technologies and the extent of aggregation. If systemic and individual risks are additive in individual yields, and if the law of large numbers hold, then the LAM obtains. This article also shows how departures from these conditions affect the results derived from a LAM analysis.     

Moral hazard: the effect of insurance on risk and efficiency

While there is a large body of literature investigating the effect of crop and livestock insurance on input and yield, limited attention has been paid to the effect of insurance on efficiency. This article investigates how insurance affects technical efficiency and whether insurance alters the utilized input quantity to a riskier bundle using the Norwegian salmon farming industry as a case. The results illustrate that insurance has an enhancing effect on production and efficiency and changes the utilized input mix—a well‐insured farmer uses more feed and less capital and labor than a less‐insured farmer. When linking this to each input's risk profile, the results indicate that insurance will induce the use of the risk‐increasing factor (feed) and reduce the use of the risk‐decreasing factors (labor and capital)—thereby increasing production risk and indicating moral hazard.     

MALLEE WHEAT FARMERS' DEMAND FOR CROP AND RAINFALL INSURANCE

Producers' demand for a crop insurance program with indemnities based on their actual yields and a rainfall insurance program with indemnities based on area rainfall is analysed. Actuarial costs of these hypothetical programs are estimated. Tobit procedures are used to analyse factors influencing the amount which farmers would be willing to pay for the alternative insurance programs. Factors related to the absolute size of risk and capacity to bear risk, as well as personal characteristics and risk attitudes of producers, have effects on the demand for insurance as hypothesised. Problems of adverse selection are associated with the area yield-based program, while both crop and rainfall insurance programs may involve some moral hazard. Producer participation in either program would be limited.     

Is There a Viable Market for Area-Based Crop Insurance?

The performance of area yield insurance and farm-level multiple peril crop insurance is analyzed for cotton and soybean production in Georgia and South Carolina. The analysis improves on many previous studies by utilizing actual farm-level yield data and by comparing the two types of insurance products not only for actuarially fair premium rates but also for actual unsubsidized and subsidized premium rates. Results suggest that, even in heterogeneous production regions, area yield insurance may be a viable alternative to farm-level insurance when premium rates for farm-level insurance contain large positive wedges.     

Constrained Efficient Contracts for Area Yield Crop Insurance

With area yield crop insurance, indemnification occurs when area yield falls below a yield trigger that is chosen by the producer. The maximum value for this yield trigger is generally restricted (e.g., 80% of the long term area average yield). The impact of this trigger constraint on the optimal design of an area yield insurance contract is examined. Within the constrained efficient contract, indemnities consist of both a lump sum payment and a payment that is proportional to the yield shortfall. Because lump sum payments may not be feasible to implement, efficiency-enhancing modifications to standard contracts are also proposed.     

An Evaluation of the Actuarial structure of manitoba crop Insurance Program and its Implications

Very little research has been done in evaluating the basic principles and assumptions of the actuarial structure for premium ratemaking in crop insurance programs. Therefore, the objectives of this study are: (a) to examine the Pearson probability distribution of actual crop yields as compared with an application of normal-curve theory to crop yields as compared with an application of normal-curve theory to crop yield distributions and in turn to crop insurance ratemaking which was suggested by Botts and Boles in 1958 [1]; (b) to evaluate the pure premium rates derived from estimated Pearson probability distributions for wheat yields in 14 crop districts of the province of Manitoba; and to establish an experience rating system for the crop insurance program based upon the estimated Pearson distribution of actual crop yields on the individual farm.     

AN ANALYSIS OF WILLINGNESS-TO-PAY FOR CROP INSURANCE*

In this paper a method for estimating a producer's willingness-to-pay for crop insurance is presented. The method includes formulae to capture the impact of crop insurance on the producer's expected income and variance of income. These impacts are evaluated in the context of a model of producer welfare which features both price and yield uncertainty, as well as risk aversion on the part of the producer. The method is applied to the Australian wheat industry and estimates of willingness-to-pay are shown to be relatively sensitive to the levels of coverage and yield variability.