Natalie A. Graff, Bart L. Fischer, Henry L. Bryant, David P. Anderson
{"title":"年度饲料生产者的双重用途保险:比较风险管理方案","authors":"Natalie A. Graff, Bart L. Fischer, Henry L. Bryant, David P. Anderson","doi":"10.1108/afr-08-2022-0096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to evaluate the Dual Use (DU) Option – a crop insurance policy created by the 2018 Farm Bill – relative to other policies available to dual-purpose annual forage producers. The new policy combines existing rainfall-based policies for annual forage crops and multi-peril policies for grain, allowing coverage for multiple crop uses on the same acres during the same growing season.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses a simulation model to examine crop insurance choices for a typical Texas dual-purpose wheat farm. The certainty equivalent (CE) of wealth is used to rank choices within and between three insurance plans and to analyze the effects of those choices over a range of producer risk aversion levels and for three cases of yield expectations.FindingsThe DU Option is more preferred as risk aversion increases, but it is not universally preferred. Therefore, while the policy can be a viable risk management tool, certain restrictions may be limiting its effectiveness.Practical implicationsThe findings of this paper can help explain farm-level decision making related to dual-purpose annual forage crop insurance program choices.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the literature by documenting a new crop insurance program made available in the 2018 Farm Bill and provides insights into producers' possible choices by evaluating extensive scenarios.","PeriodicalId":46748,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Finance Review","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dual use insurance for annual forage producers: comparing risk management alternatives\",\"authors\":\"Natalie A. Graff, Bart L. Fischer, Henry L. Bryant, David P. Anderson\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/afr-08-2022-0096\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to evaluate the Dual Use (DU) Option – a crop insurance policy created by the 2018 Farm Bill – relative to other policies available to dual-purpose annual forage producers. The new policy combines existing rainfall-based policies for annual forage crops and multi-peril policies for grain, allowing coverage for multiple crop uses on the same acres during the same growing season.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses a simulation model to examine crop insurance choices for a typical Texas dual-purpose wheat farm. The certainty equivalent (CE) of wealth is used to rank choices within and between three insurance plans and to analyze the effects of those choices over a range of producer risk aversion levels and for three cases of yield expectations.FindingsThe DU Option is more preferred as risk aversion increases, but it is not universally preferred. Therefore, while the policy can be a viable risk management tool, certain restrictions may be limiting its effectiveness.Practical implicationsThe findings of this paper can help explain farm-level decision making related to dual-purpose annual forage crop insurance program choices.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the literature by documenting a new crop insurance program made available in the 2018 Farm Bill and provides insights into producers' possible choices by evaluating extensive scenarios.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Agricultural Finance Review\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Agricultural Finance Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/afr-08-2022-0096\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agricultural Finance Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/afr-08-2022-0096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS & POLICY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dual use insurance for annual forage producers: comparing risk management alternatives
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to evaluate the Dual Use (DU) Option – a crop insurance policy created by the 2018 Farm Bill – relative to other policies available to dual-purpose annual forage producers. The new policy combines existing rainfall-based policies for annual forage crops and multi-peril policies for grain, allowing coverage for multiple crop uses on the same acres during the same growing season.Design/methodology/approachThe paper uses a simulation model to examine crop insurance choices for a typical Texas dual-purpose wheat farm. The certainty equivalent (CE) of wealth is used to rank choices within and between three insurance plans and to analyze the effects of those choices over a range of producer risk aversion levels and for three cases of yield expectations.FindingsThe DU Option is more preferred as risk aversion increases, but it is not universally preferred. Therefore, while the policy can be a viable risk management tool, certain restrictions may be limiting its effectiveness.Practical implicationsThe findings of this paper can help explain farm-level decision making related to dual-purpose annual forage crop insurance program choices.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the literature by documenting a new crop insurance program made available in the 2018 Farm Bill and provides insights into producers' possible choices by evaluating extensive scenarios.
期刊介绍:
Agricultural Finance Review provides a rigorous forum for the publication of theory and empirical work related solely to issues in agricultural and agribusiness finance. Contributions come from academic and industry experts across the world and address a wide range of topics including: Agricultural finance, Agricultural policy related to agricultural finance and risk issues, Agricultural lending and credit issues, Farm credit, Businesses and financial risks affecting agriculture and agribusiness, Agricultural policies affecting farm or agribusiness risks and profitability, Risk management strategies including the use of futures and options, Rural credit in developing economies, Microfinance and microcredit applied to agriculture and rural development, Financial efficiency, Agriculture insurance and reinsurance. Agricultural Finance Review is committed to research addressing (1) factors affecting or influencing the financing of agriculture and agribusiness in both developed and developing nations; (2) the broadest aspect of risk assessment and risk management strategies affecting agriculture; and (3) government policies affecting farm profitability, liquidity, and access to credit.