IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/apecpp/v44y2022i3p1204-1221.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The sector‐level safety net provided by the current mix of farm programs

Author

Listed:
  • Patrick Westhoff
  • Marc Rosenbohm
  • Youngjune Kim
  • Benjamin Brown

Abstract

Current farm policy includes a diverse set of programs intended to provide a financial safety net for producers of grains, oilseeds, and cotton. These programs make payments contingent on national market prices and yields at the farm or county level. A review of data for the 2014–2020 period demonstrates the successes and limitations of crop insurance, agriculture risk coverage and price loss coverage at offsetting reductions in national net market revenues for particular crops. Forward‐looking stochastic analysis confirms these programs protect against different types of risks but provide support levels that can vary greatly across commodities and time.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrick Westhoff & Marc Rosenbohm & Youngjune Kim & Benjamin Brown, 2022. "The sector‐level safety net provided by the current mix of farm programs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(3), pages 1204-1221, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:apecpp:v:44:y:2022:i:3:p:1204-1221
    DOI: 10.1002/aepp.13273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13273
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/aepp.13273?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Westcott, Paul C. & Young, C. Edwin & Price, J. Michael, 2002. "The 2002 Farm Act: Provisions And Implications For Commodity Markets," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33745, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Jeremy G. Weber & Nigel Key, 2012. "How much Do Decoupled Payments Affect Production? An Instrumental Variable Approach with Panel Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 52-66.
    3. Barry K. Goodwin & Ashok K. Mishra, 2006. "Are “Decoupled” Farm Program Payments Really Decoupled? An Empirical Evaluation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 73-89.
    4. David A. Hennessy, 1998. "The Production Effects of Agricultural Income Support Policies under Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 46-57.
    5. Erik J. O'Donoghue & James B. Whitaker, 2010. "Do Direct Payments Distort Producers' Decisions? An Examination of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(1), pages 170-193.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kehinde Oluseyi Olagunju & Myles Patton & Siyi Feng, 2020. "Estimating the Impact of Decoupled Payments on Farm Production in Northern Ireland: An Instrumental Variable Fixed Effect Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Thompson, Wyatt & Gerlt, Scott & Dewbre, Joe H. & Effland, Anne B., 2020. "Rescuing the Decoupling Literature from Incomparable Chaos," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304366, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Moro, Daniele & Sckokai, Paolo, 2013. "The impact of decoupled payments on farm choices: Conceptual and methodological challenges," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 28-38.
    4. Andrius Kazukauskas & Carol Newman & Johannes Sauer, 2014. "The impact of decoupled subsidies on productivity in agriculture: a cross-country analysis using microdata," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 327-336, May.
    5. O’Toole, Conor & Hennessy, Thia, 2015. "Do decoupled payments affect investment financing constraints? Evidence from Irish agriculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 67-75.
    6. Marian Rizov & Jan Pokrivcak & Pavel Ciaian, 2013. "CAP Subsidies and Productivity of the EU Farms," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(3), pages 537-557, September.
    7. Barrett E. Kirwan & Michael J. Roberts, 2016. "Who Really Benefits from Agricultural Subsidies? Evidence from Field-level Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1095-1113.
    8. Andreas Wagener & Juliane Zenker, 2021. "Decoupled but Not Neutral: The Effects of Counter‐Cyclical Cash Transfers on Investment and Incomes in Rural Thailand†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1637-1660, October.
    9. Demirdöğen, Alper & Olhan, Emine & Chavas, Jean-Paul, 2016. "Food vs. fiber: An analysis of agricultural support policy in Turkey," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-8.
    10. Robert G. Chambers & Daniel C. Voica, 2017. "“Decoupled” Farm Program Payments are Really Decoupled: The Theory," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 99(3), pages 773-782, April.
    11. Yang Zou & Qingbin Wang, 2012. "Impacts of direct government payments on US agriculture: evidence from 1960‐2010 data," China Agricultural Economic Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 4(2), pages 188-199, May.
    12. Wagener, Andreas & Zenker, Juliane, 2018. "Decoupled but not neutral: The effects of stochastic transfers on investment and incomes in rural Thailand," TVSEP Working Papers wp-008, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute of Development and Agricultural Economics, Project TVSEP.
    13. Just, David R. & Kropp, Jaclyn D., 2009. "Production Incentives from Static Decoupling: Entry, Exit and Use Exclusion Restrictions," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49158, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Zein Kallas & Teresa Serra & Jos頠 M. Gil, 2012. "Effects of policy instruments on farm investments and production decisions in the Spanish COP sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(30), pages 3877-3886, October.
    15. Viaggi, Davide & Raggi, Meri & Gomez y Paloma, Sergio, 2011. "Farm-household investment behaviour and the CAP decoupling: Methodological issues in assessing policy impacts," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 127-145, January.
    16. Maria Espinosa & Kamel Louhichi & Angel Perni & Pavel Ciaian, 2020. "EU‐Wide Impacts of the 2013 CAP Direct Payments Reform: A Farm‐Level Analysis," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(4), pages 695-715, December.
    17. Boussios, David & Castillo, Marcelo J. & Brewer, Brady E., 2018. "Impact of Counter-Cyclical Payments on Cash Rental Rates," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274116, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Mary, Sebastien & Santini, Fabien & Boulanger, Pierre, 2013. "An Ex-Ante Assessment of CAP Income Stabilisation Payments using a Farm Household Model," 87th Annual Conference, April 8-10, 2013, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 158860, Agricultural Economics Society.
    19. Cooper, Joseph C., 2008. "A Revenue-Based Alternative to the Counter-Cyclical Payment Program," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6197, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    20. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2009. "How Coupled Are Decoupled Farm Payments? A Review of the Evidence," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(1), pages 1-24, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:apecpp:v:44:y:2022:i:3:p:1204-1221. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2040-5804 .

    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.