IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eis/articl/203rejesus.html

Ex post Moral Hazard in Crop Insurance: Costly State Verification or Falsification?

Author

Listed:
  • R M Rejesus

Abstract

This article examines the extent to which actual crop insurance indemnification behaviour conforms to the theoretical predictions of two ex post moral hazard models ? costly state verification and costly state falsification ? and then explores whether the closely conforming model can indeed help deter ex post moral hazard in the United States (US) crop insurance program. The results suggest that indemnification behaviour in crop insurance is more in line with the costly state verification model. Following the theoretical predictions of the costly state verification model, however, may not be the optimal policy to deter ex post moral hazard since it is possible for insured producers to deceive loss adjusters and for loss magnitudes to not be truthfully verified.

Suggested Citation

  • R M Rejesus, 2003. "Ex post Moral Hazard in Crop Insurance: Costly State Verification or Falsification?," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(2), pages 29-46, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eis:articl:203rejesus
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.economicissues.org.uk/Files/2003/203bExpostMoralHazardinCropInsuranceCostlyStateVerificationorFalsification.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rejesus, R. & Park, S. & Zheng, X. & Goodwin, G., 2018. "How does a Fraud Mitigation Program Influence Insurance Claims filing Behavior? Evidence from the "Spot Check List" Program in U.S. Crop Insurance," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277452, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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:eis:articl:203rejesus. 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: Dan Wheatley (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bsntuuk.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.