IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ias/cpaper/11-pb6.html

Price Analysis, Risk Assessment, and Insurance for Organic Crops

Author

Abstract

In recent years, the organic sector has grown steadily and significantly. However, little economic research has been performed on risk management in organic agriculture, likely because of the lack of available data. This lack of data may also be why the creation of the current crop insurance policy for organic farmers has been so ad hoc. The Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 recognized organic farming as a "good farming practice," making federal crop insurance coverage available for organic crops, and taking into account the idiosyncrasies of the organic production system. In addition to the production risks covered for conventional producers, organic farmers who sign up for coverage are compensated for production losses from damage due to insects, disease, and/or weeds. However, the incorporation of organic production into the crop insurance rating structure has been limited. Organic producers are charged an arbitrary 5% premium surcharge over conventional crop insurance. The actuarial fairness of this premium is, at least, questionable. In addition, in the case of crop failure, organic farmers receive compensation based on the prices of conventionally produced crops. Thus, price premiums that organic producers are able to obtain in the market are not compensated for under the current insurance policy structure. The Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008, which amends part of the Federal Crop Insurance Act, was written to investigate some of these claims, requiring the U.S. Department of Agriculture to examine the currently offered federal crop insurance coverage for organic crops as described in the organic policy provisions of the Act (Title XII). Such provisions established the need to review, among other things, the underwriting risk and loss experience of organic crops; determine whether significant, consistent, or systematic variations in loss history exist between organic and nonorganic production; and modify the coverage for organic crops in accordance with the results. Here we present the major findings of three analyses we performed on key elements of the insurance of organic crops-prices, yields, and revenue-in an effort to contribute to the design of an organic crop insurance policy that covers organic producers according to their idiosyncratic risks.

Suggested Citation

  • Ariel Singerman & Chad E. Hart & Sergio H. Lence, 2011. "Price Analysis, Risk Assessment, and Insurance for Organic Crops," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 11-pb6, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    • Handle: RePEc:ias:cpaper:11-pb6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/pdf/11pb6.pdf
    File Function: Full Text
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.card.iastate.edu/products/publications/synopsis/?p=1163
    File Function: Online Synopsis
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McBride, William D. & Greene, Catherine R., 2008. "The Profitability of Organic Soybean Production," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6449, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Delate, K. M. & Duffy, Michael & Chase, Craig A. & Holste, A. & Friedrich, H. & Wantate, N, 2003. "An Economic Comparison of Organic and Conventional Grain Crops in a Long-Term Agroecological Research (Ltar) Site in Iowa," Staff General Research Papers Archive 11818, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    3. Klonsky, Karen & Greene, Catherine R., 2005. "Widespread Adoption of Organic Agriculture in the US: Are Market-Driven Policies Enough?," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19382, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Loureiro, Maria L. & McCluskey, Jill J. & Mittelhammer, Ronald C., 2001. "Assessing Consumer Preferences For Organic, Eco-Labeled, And Regular Apples," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-13, December.
    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. Uematsu, Hiroki & Mishra, Ashok K., 2012. "Organic farmers or conventional farmers: Where's the money?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 55-62.
    2. Singerman, Ariel & Hart, Chad E. & Lence, Sergio H., 2012. "Revenue Protection for Organic Producers: Too Much or Too Little?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 37(3), pages 1-20.
    3. Singerman, Ariel & Lence, Sergio H. & Kimble-Evans, Amanda, 2010. "Organic crop prices, or 2x conventional ones?," ISU General Staff Papers 201009090700001112, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Delbridge, Timothy A. & Fernholz, Carmen & King, Robert P. & Lazarus, William, 2013. "A whole-farm profitability analysis of organic and conventional cropping systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 1-10.
    5. McBride, William D. & Greene, Catherine & Foreman, Linda, 2013. "The Structure and Profitability of Organic Field Corn Production," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149671, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & Ada Wossink, 2010. "Why Isn’t More US Farmland Organic?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(2), pages 240-258, June.
    7. Chan, Stephanie & Caldwell, Brian & Rickard, Bradley J., 2010. "An Economic Examination of Alternative Organic Cropping Systems in New York State," EB Series 121652, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    8. McBride, William D. & Greene, Catherine R. & Ali, Mir B. & Foreman, Linda F., 2012. "The Structure and Profitability of Organic Field Crop Production: The Case of Wheat," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 123835, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Dettmann, Rachael L., 2008. "Organic Produce: Who's Eating it? A Demographic Profile of Organic Produce Consumers," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6446, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Kuhar, Ales & Juvancic, L., 2012. "Determinants of purchasing behaviour for organic and integrated fruits and vegetables in Slovenia," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 1-14.
    11. Claudio Siminelli, 2017. "Consumer behaviours and attitudes towards a circular economy: Knowledge and culture as determinants in a four-market analysis," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(1-2), pages 135-169.
    12. Christopher J. Shanahan & Neal H. Hooker & Thomas L. Sporleder, 2008. "The diffusion of organic food products: toward a theory of adoption," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 369-387.
    13. Dimitri, Carolyn & Greene, Catherine R., 2002. "Recent Growth Patterns In The U.S. Organic Foods Market," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33715, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. Eva Tebbe & Korbinian von Blanckenburg, 2018. "Does willingness to pay increase with the number and strictness of sustainability labels?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 41-53, January.
    15. Alfnes, Frode & Steine, Gro, 2005. "None-of-These Bias in Stated Choice Experiments," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24761, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Verbeke, Wim & Ward, Ronald W., 2003. "Importance of EU Label Requirements: An Application of Ordered Probit Models to Belgium Beef Labels," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22077, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Moeltner, Klaus & van Kooten, G. Cornelis, 2003. "Voluntary Environmental Action and Export Destinations: The Case of Forest Certification," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 28(2), pages 1-14.
    18. Christine Boizot-Szantai & Sébastien Lecocq & Stéphan Marette, 2005. "Common Labels and Market Mechanisms," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications (archive only) 05-wp405, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    19. Steven C. Blank & Gary D. Thompson, 2004. "Can/Should/Will A Niche Become the Norm? Organic Agriculture's Short Past and Long Future," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(4), pages 483-503, October.
    20. Funtanilla, Margil & Lyford, Conrad P. & Wang, Chenggang, 2009. "An Evaluation of the Organic Cotton Marketing Opportunity," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49359, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q11 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis; Prices
    • Q12 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ias:cpaper:11-pb6. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caiasus.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.