Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Implications of Commodity Programs and Crop Insurance Policies for Wheat Producers

  • Jeff Luckstead (a1) and Stephen Devadoss (a2)

Abstract

We analyze the effects of Price Loss Coverage (PLC), Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC), individual revenue protection insurance (RP), and Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO) on the RP coverage level, certainty equivalent, and program payments. The model is calibrated to a representative wheat farm in Mitchell County in Kansas to analyze the effects of various policies. The result highlights that when insurance is framed as an investment, cumulative prospect theory predicts farmers’ coverage decisions accurately at 70%. ARC or PLC program increases the RP coverage level to 75%, but PLC and SCO jointly decrease the RP coverage level to 70%.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Implications of Commodity Programs and Crop Insurance Policies for Wheat Producers
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Implications of Commodity Programs and Crop Insurance Policies for Wheat Producers
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Implications of Commodity Programs and Crop Insurance Policies for Wheat Producers
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author. Email: jluckste@uark.edu

References

Hide All
Adhikari, S. “Optimal Coverage Level and Producer Participation in Supplemental Coverage Option in Yield and Revenue Protection Crop Insurance.” Paper presented at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association and Western Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, July 26–28, 2015.
Babcock, B.A.Using Cumulative Prospect Theory to Explain Anomalous Crop Insurance Coverage Choice.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 97, 5(2015):1371–84.
Bocquého, G., Jacquet, F., and Reynaud, A.. “Expected Utility or Prospect Theory Maximisers? Assessing Farmers’ Risk Behaviour from Field-Experiment Data.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 41, 1(2013):135–72.
Campiche, J.Theme Overview: Deciphering Key Provisions of the Agricultural Act of 2014.” Choices 29, 2(2014):14.
Chambers, R.G.Insurability and Moral Hazard in Agricultural Insurance Markets.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71, 3(1989):604–16.
Coble, K.H., and Dismukes, R.. “Distributional and Risk Reduction Effects of Commodity Revenue Program Design.” Review of Agricultural Economics 30, 3(2008):543–53.
Coble, K.H., Knight, T.O., Goodwin, B.K., Miller, M.F., and Rejesus, R.M.. A Comprehensive Review of the RMA APH and COMBO Rating Methodology: Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Risk Management Agency, Technical Report, 2010.
Devadoss, S., and Luckstead, J.. “Effects of the 2014 Farm Bill Policies on Cotton Production.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 50, 2(2018):168–87.
Du, X., Feng, H., and Hennessy, D.A.. “Rationality of Choices in Subsidized Crop Insurance Markets.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 99, 3(2016):732–56.
Environmental Working Group (EWG). 2012 Farm Subsidy Database. EWG, 2012. Internet site: http://farm.ewg.org/ (Accessed August 20, 2015).
Goodwin, B.K., and Smith, V.H.. “An Ex Post Evaluation of the Conservation Reserve, Federal Crop Insurance, and Other Government Programs: Program Participation and Soil Erosion.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 28, 2(2003):201–16.
Hendricks, N.P., and Sumner, D.A.. “The Effects of Policy Expectations on Crop Supply, with an Application to Base Updating.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 96, 3(2014):903–23.
Hungerford, A., O’Donoghue, E., and Motamed, M.. “Risk Reduction and the 2014 Farm Bill.” Paper presented at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association and Western Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA, July 26–28, 2015.
Just, R.E., Calvin, L., and Quiggin, J.. “Adverse Selection in Crop Insurance: Actuarial and Asymmetric Information Incentives.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81, 4(1999):834–49.
Kőszegi, B., and Rabin, M.. “Reference-Dependent Risk Attitudes.” American Economic Review 97, 4(2007):1047–73.
Miranda, M.J.Area-Yield Crop Insurance Reconsidered.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73, 2(1991):233–42.
Saha, A.Expo-Power Utility: A ‘Flexible’ Form for Absolute and Relative Risk Aversion.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75, 4(1993):905–13.
Schnitkey, G., and Zulauf, C.. “Estimated National 2014 ARC-CO and PLC Payments.” FarmDoc Daily 5(2015):143. Urbana-Champaign: Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Smith, V.H., and Goodwin, B.K.. “Crop Insurance, Moral Hazard, and Agricultural Chemical Use.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 78, 2(1996):428–38.
Smith, V.H., and Goodwin, B.K.. “The Environmental Consequences of Subsidized Risk Management and Disaster Assistance Programs.” Annual Review of Resource Economics 5(2013):3560.
Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D.. “Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5, 4(1992):297323.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS). “Feed Grains Database.” Internet site: http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/feed-grains-database.aspx (Accessed September 2, 2015).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency (USDA-FSA). Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) & Price Loss Coverage (PLC): Frequently Asked Questions. USDA-FSA, 2014a. Internet site: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/2014_mtfaqs.pdf (Accessed August 2018).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency (USDA-FSA). 2014 Crop Wheat by Class Schedule of Base County Loan Rates. USDA-FSA, Price Support Division, 2014b. Internet site: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Internet/FSA_File/2014wheatbyclasslr.pdf (Accessed August 20, 2015).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency (USDA-FSA). “ARC/PLC Program.” Internet site: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/arcplc_program/ (Accessed August 20, 2015).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS). Crop Production: 2014 Summary. Washington, DC: USDA-NASS, Technical Report, 2015a.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS). “Quick Stats.” Internet site: http://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/ (Accessed August 20, 2015b).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS). “Quick Stats.” Internet site: https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/ (Accessed 2017).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Risk Management Agency (USDA-RMA). “Summary of Business.” Internet site: http://prodwebnlb.rma.usda.gov/apps/SummaryofBusiness/ (Accessed October 27, 2015).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Risk Management Agency (USDA-RMA). “Actuarial Data Master.” Internet site: ftp://ftp.rma.usda.gov/pub/References/ (Accessed August 20, 2016).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Risk Management Agency (USDA-RMA). “Summary of Business.” Internet site: http://prodwebnlb.rma.usda.gov/apps/SummaryofBusiness/ (Accessed August 27, 2017).
Welch, M., and Knapek, G.. ARC or PLC: An Example for Wheat. College Station: Agricultural and Food Policy Center, AgriLife Extension, Texas A&M University, Grain Marketing Report #01-14, 2014.

Keywords

Implications of Commodity Programs and Crop Insurance Policies for Wheat Producers

  • Jeff Luckstead (a1) and Stephen Devadoss (a2)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed