Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:22:26.061Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Participation in Multiple-Peril Crop Insurance: Risk Assessments and Risk Preferences of Cranberry Growers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

R. A. Dismukes ,
P. G. Allen  and
B. J. Morzuch
R. A. Dismukes
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
P. G. Allen
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
B. J. Morzuch
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Get access

Abstract

To investigate the poor participation rate of cranberry growers in the multiple-peril crop insurance program, a sample of 15 Massachusetts growers was interviewed. According to their risk preferences, a much greater proportion of growers should have insured, than actually did. A possible solution is to match the distribution used by the insurer closer to that believed by the grower. Adjusting each grower's historical yield series for trend brought the historical and subjective mean yields much closer. However, an aggregate test found the effect of adjustment to be insignificant, implying that the avenue for increased participation lies elsewhere.

Type
Articles
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , October 1989 , pp. 109 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The comments of two anonymous reviewers greatly improved exposition.

References

Anderson, J. R., Dillon, J. L., and Hardaker, J. B. Agricultural Decision Analysis. Iowa State University Press, Ames, 1977.Google Scholar
Arrow, Kenneth J. Essays in the Theory of Risk-Bearing. North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1974.Google Scholar
Bessler, David A. “Aggregated Personalistic Beliefs on Yields of Selected Crops Estimated Using ARIMA Processes.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 62 (1980):666–674.Google Scholar
Dudek, Daniel J. and Allen, P. Geoffrey “Estimating Crop Yield Insurance Rates.” Journal of the Northeastern Agricultural Economics Council 13 (1984):119–127.Google Scholar
Grisley, William and Kellogg, Earl D. “Farmers’ Subjective Probabilities in Northern Thailand: An Elicitation Analysis.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65 (1983):74–82.Google Scholar
Hogarth, Robin M. Judgement and Choice: The Psychology of Decision. John Wiley, New York, 1980.Google Scholar
King, Robert P. and Oamek, George E. “Risk Management by Colorado Dryland Wheat Farmers and the Elimination of Disaster Assistance Program.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 65 (1983):247–255.Google Scholar
King, Robert P. and Robison, Lindon J. “An Interval Approach to Measuring Decision Maker Preferences.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63 (1981):510–520.Google Scholar
Lee, John, Brown, Deborah J., and Lovejoy, Stephen. “Stochastic Efficiency Versus Mean-Variance Criteria as Predictors of Adoption of Reduced Tillage.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 67 (1985):839–845.Google Scholar
Maddala, G. S. Econometrics. McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1977.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. “Choice Among Distributions.” Journal of Economic Theory, 14 (1977a):326–336.Google Scholar
Meyer, J. “Second Degree Stochastic Dominance with Respect to a Function.” International Economic Review 18 (1977b):477–487.Google Scholar
Morzuch, Bernard J., Kneip, J., and Smith, D. An Econometric Approach to Modeling the Effects of Weather and Technology on Cranberry Yields. Research Bulletin Number 683, Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station, Amherst, June 1983.Google Scholar
Pingali, Prabhu L. and Carlson, Gerald A. “Human Capital, Adjustments in Subjective Probabilities and the Demand for Pest Controls.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 67 (1985):853–861.Google Scholar
Pratt, J. “Risk Aversion in the Small and in the Large.” Econometrica 32 (1964):122–136.Google Scholar
Raiffa, H. Decision Analysis. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1968.Google Scholar
Skees, Jerry R. Comparing Objective and Subjective Yield Estimates: An Empirical Study in Western Kentucky. Department of Agricultural Economics Staff Paper No. 198, University of Kentucky, 1986.Google Scholar
Zering, K. D., McCorkle, C. O. Jr., and Moore, C. V. “The Utility of Multiple Peril Crop Insurance for Irrigated, Multiple-Crop Agriculture.” Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 12 (1987):50–59.Google Scholar