IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/roafes/v97y2016i4d10.1007_s41130-016-0021-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anything left for animal disease insurance? A choice experiment approach

Author

Listed:
  • Jaakko Heikkilä

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke))

  • Jarkko K. Niemi

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke)
    Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke))

  • Katriina Heinola

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke))

  • Eero Liski

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke))

  • Sami Myyrä

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke))

Abstract

Animal disease insurance plays only a minor role in public activities related to animal diseases in animal production in Europe, and the current situation is likely to persist as long as producers place strong faith on public compensation schemes. In this study, we undertook a farm survey in Finland employing a choice experiment to study the willingness to pay for animal disease insurance products. We found that producers’ willingness to pay for animal disease insurance is relatively low, even if consequential losses are covered. However, attributes of the insurance products which increased the likelihood of the producer wishing to purchase the product in a statistically significant manner were identified. The most important attribute was a low deductible. Using latent class analysis, four classes of producers were identified, those who were (1) not interested, (2) weakly interested or (3) strongly interested in insurance, and additionally, (4) a group who emphasised biosecurity measures but was not willing to purchase insurance. Those primarily interested in insurance were typically young, well-educated producers from large farms, and they already had a good level of biosecurity on their farms. However, the majority of the respondents preferred not to purchase insurance. The analysis suggests that commercial production animal disease insurance may need to be subsidised or otherwise made more attractive to producers, and even so, many producers might consider it unnecessary.

Suggested Citation

  • Jaakko Heikkilä & Jarkko K. Niemi & Katriina Heinola & Eero Liski & Sami Myyrä, 2016. "Anything left for animal disease insurance? A choice experiment approach," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 97(4), pages 237-249, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:roafes:v:97:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s41130-016-0021-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s41130-016-0021-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41130-016-0021-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41130-016-0021-6?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
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin M. Gramig & Richard D. Horan & Christopher A. Wolf, 2008. "Livestock Disease Indemnity Design When Moral Hazard Is Followed by Adverse Selection," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(3), pages 627-641.
    2. Wuyang Hu, 2004. "Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 31(3), pages 389-408, September.
    3. Richard E. Just & Linda Calvin & John Quiggin, 1999. "Adverse Selection in Crop Insurance: Actuarial and Asymmetric Information Incentives," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 81(4), pages 834-849.
    4. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    5. Velandia, Margarita & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Knight, Thomas O. & Sherrick, Bruce J., 2009. "Factors Affecting Farmers' Utilization of Agricultural Risk Management Tools: The Case of Crop Insurance, Forward Contracting, and Spreading Sales," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 41(1), pages 107-123, April.
    6. W. J. Wouter Botzen & Jeroen C. J. M. Van Den Bergh, 2012. "Monetary Valuation Of Insurance Against Flood Risk Under Climate Change," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(3), pages 1005-1026, August.
    7. Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark & Martinsen, Louise & Hasler, Berit & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2011. "Embedding effects in choice experiment valuations of environmental preservation projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1170-1177, April.
    8. Mercade, Lluc & Gil, Jose Maria & Kallas, Zein & Serra, Jordi, 2009. "A choice experiment method to assess vegetables producers’ preferences for crop insurance," 113th Seminar, September 3-6, 2009, Chania, Crete, Greece 58090, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Carlo Cafiero & Fabian Capitanio & Antonio Cioffi & Adele Coppola, 2007. "Risk and Crisis Management in the Reformed European Agricultural Policy," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 55(4), pages 419-441, December.
    10. Nganje, William E. & Hearne, Robert R. & Orth, Michael & Gustafson, Cole R., 2004. "Using Choice Experiments To Elicit Farmers Preferences? For Crop And Health Insurance," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20357, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    12. Evelien Bergrath & Milena Pavlova & Wim Groot, 2014. "Attracting Health Insurance Buyers through Selective Contracting: Results of a Discrete-Choice Experiment among Users of Hospital Services in the Netherlands," Risks, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-25, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Filiptseva, Anna & Filler, Günther & Odening, Martin, 2022. "Compensation Options for Quarantine Costs in Plant Production," 62nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 7-9, 2022 329595, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    2. Filiptseva, Anna & Filler, Günther & Odening, Martin, 2023. "Compensation schemes for plant quarantine pest costs: A case study for Germany," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 1381-1395.

    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. Heinola, Katriina, 2016. "Anything left for animal disease insurance? A choice experiment approach," 156th Seminar, October 4, 2016, Wageningen, The Netherlands 249985, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Vigani, Mauro & Khafagy, Amr & Berry, Robert, 2024. "Public spending for agricultural risk management: Land use, regional welfare and intra-subsidy substitution," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    3. Liesivaara, Petri & Myyrä, Sami, 2017. "The demand for public–private crop insurance and government disaster relief," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 19-34.
    4. Enjolras, Geoffroy & Capitanio, Fabian & Adinolfi, Felice, 2012. "The Demand for Crop Insurance: Combined Approaches for France and Italy," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18.
    5. Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas & Lusk, Jayson & Magnier, Alexandre, 2018. "The price of non-genetically modified (non-GM) food," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 38-50.
    6. Liesivaara, Petri & Myyrä, Sami, 2014. "Government policies in changing climate and the demand for crop insurance," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170520, Agricultural Economics Society.
    7. F. G. Santeramo & B. K. Goodwin & F. Adinolfi & F. Capitanio, 2016. "Farmer Participation, Entry and Exit Decisions in the Italian Crop Insurance Programme," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 639-657, September.
    8. Birol, Ekin & Villalba, Eric Rayn & Smale, Melinda, 2009. "Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 521-540, August.
    9. Zack Dorner & Daniel A. Brent & Anke Leroux, 2019. "Preferences for Intrinsically Risky Attributes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 95(4), pages 494-514.
    10. Brendan Markey-Towler, 2018. "A formal psychological theory for evolutionary economics," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 691-725, September.
    11. Ekin Birol & Sukanya Das, 2010. "Valuing the Environment in Developing Countries: Modeling the Impact of Distrust in Public Authorities’ Ability to Deliver on the Citizens’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Environmental Quality," Working Papers 2010-055, Madras School of Economics,Chennai,India.
    12. Azucena Gracia & Ana María Sánchez & Francesc Jurado & Cristina Mallor, 2020. "Making Use of Sustainable Local Plant Genetic Resources: Would Consumers Support the Recovery of a Traditional Purple Carrot?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    13. Kikulwe, Enoch M. & Birol, Ekin & Wesseler, Justus & Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin, 2013. "Benefits, costs, and consumer perceptions of the potential introduction of a fungus-resistant banana in Uganda and policy implications," IFPRI book chapters, in: Falck-Zepeda, Jose Benjamin & Gruère, Guillaume P. & Sithole-Niang, Idah (ed.), Genetically modified crops in Africa: Economic and policy lessons from countries south of the Sahara, chapter 4, pages 99-141, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Daniel McFadden, 2014. "The new science of pleasure: consumer choice behavior and the measurement of well-being," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 2, pages 7-48, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Girma G. Selassie & Yiannis Kountouris, 2010. "Fishing Permit Price and Wetland Conservation: A Choice Experiment on the Value of Improved Environmental Quality of Lake Awassa, Ethiopia," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Frank Ackerman, 2001. "Still dead after all these years: interpreting the failure of general equilibrium theory," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 119-139.
    17. Heiland, Inga & Kohler, Wilhelm, 2022. "Heterogeneous workers, trade, and migration," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    18. Jesús Barreiro‐Hurle & Azucena Gracia & Tiziana De‐Magistris, 2010. "The Effects of Multiple Health and Nutrition Labels on Consumer Food Choices," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 426-443, June.
    19. Hu, Wuyang, 2007. "A Choice Model with Systematic Structures in Decision Weights," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(3), pages 1-14, December.
    20. Dorner, Zach & Brent, Daniel A. & Leroux, Anke, 2016. "Eliciting Risk Preferences for Intrinsic Attributes," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236644, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Insurance; Animal disease; Choice experiment; Questionnaire; Latent class;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies; Actuarial Studies
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:spr:roafes:v:97:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s41130-016-0021-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.