IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v100y2018i1p91-114..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Crop Insurance Premium Subsidies on Crop Acreage

Author

Listed:
  • Jisang Yu
  • Aaron Smith
  • Daniel A Sumner

Abstract

Crop insurance premium subsidies affect patterns of crop acreage for two reasons. First, holding insurance coverage constant, premium subsidies directly increase expected profit, which encourages more acreage of insured crops (direct profit effect). Second, premium subsidies encourage farms to increase crop insurance coverage. With more insurance coverage, farms obtain more subsidies, and farm revenue becomes less variable as indemnities offset revenue shortfalls, so acreage of insured crops likely increases (indirect coverage effect). By exploiting exogenous policy changes and using approximately 180,000 county-crop-year observations, we estimate the sum of these two effects of premium subsidies on the pattern of U.S. acreage across seven major field crops. We estimate that a 10% increase in the premium subsidy causes a 0.43% increase in the acreage of a crop in a county holding the premium subsidy of its competing crop constant. Taking into account the small share of premium subsidies in expected crop revenue, this subsidy impact is analogous to an own-subsidy acreage elasticity of 1.24, which exceeds own-price acreage elasticity estimates in the literature. One explanation for the larger acreage response to premium subsidies is that insurance causes an indirect coverage effect in addition to a direct profit effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Jisang Yu & Aaron Smith & Daniel A Sumner, 2018. "Effects of Crop Insurance Premium Subsidies on Crop Acreage," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(1), pages 91-114.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:100:y:2018:i:1:p:91-114.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aax058
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:100:y:2018:i:1:p:91-114.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.