The role of crop insurance and new risk management tools for agriculture is evolving at an almost dizzying pace. One needs only to examine recent postings on the Risk Management Agency's website to see how expansive this is. Moreover, throughout the world we are witness to a host of new programs available in both developed and developing countries that are largely based on the U.S. experience. It is necessary that academics first recognize the scope of issues facing production and market risks in agriculture and then respond with new and creative ways to address the problems. To these needs, the Crop Insurance and Risk Management Workshop—the provenance of the papers in this volume—was designed to bring academics with research and extension responsibilities together with industry to explore this ever-changing landscape and discuss research and outreach of mutual interest.

This article focuses on innovation in weather insurance designed to fit the special circumstances of the poor in lower income countries where rural and agricultural financial markets are largely underdeveloped. Index insurance is an innovation that circumvents many of the fundamental problems that hamper the development of insurance for weather risks in lower income countries. With index insurance, payments are made based upon an objective and independent index that serves as a proxy for significant losses to crops, livestock, or other property. For example, the index can be based upon extreme rainfall measures that create either drought or flooding. Weather stations or even satellite imagery coupled with computer models can be used to create reliable “indexes” as the basis of payments. This article reviews this innovation by providing the background for its development and the motivation for using the innovation for the poor.

Environmental and natural resource economists could be more effectively engaged in great research on exciting issues in environmental and natural resource management. After identifying possible obstacles to improved research, the article focuses on opportunities and obstacles associated with obtaining funding from the National Science Foundation. Opportunities abound, both ongoing and in the future, for interdisciplinary work involving environmental and natural resource economists. Keys to exploiting these opportunities for funding include a willingness to face rejection, build teams, contact program officers with specific questions, write detailed research designs, and prepare proposals that promise to go beyond narrow incremental advances.

Many states have crop insurance extension programs. This activity has been stimulated with the availability of funds to support extension from the Risk Management Agency (RMA) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Several new RMA programs were established under the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000. The Targeted States Program is quite important for the Northeast. This program serves states that were traditionally underserved by crop insurance. It is available in all 12 northeastern states, plus Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming. The Targeted States Program funds one program in each state. A total of $4.5 million in funding is available each year. Amounts for state programs range from $157,000 in Rhode Island to $754,000 in Pennsylvania, which is a considerable amount of funding.

Two double-limit tobit models are used to identify significant risk factors that most affect farm-raised catfish losses from weather-related events and from disease outbreaks. Results of the weather loss model indicate that the variables for operator education level, number of ponds, pond water depth, production management strategy, past experience with severe losses from low oxygen levels from off-farm power outages, past experience with severe losses from diseases, and being in the South are statistically significant. Results of the disease loss model indicate that the variables for operator experience and pond water depth are significant. Development of models explaining weather and disease losses through observable variables provides a better understanding of the interrelation between the loss perils and explanatory variables so management strategies can be developed to mitigate losses from identified risk factors.

Using trout producer survey data and the contingent valuation method, we estimate willingness to pay for a potential insurance policy. The survey was conducted in 2005 across the United States; 268 producers completed the survey instrument, resulting in a response rate of 81 percent. Design of the contingent valuation method takes into account two coverage levels and four premium rates. Using standard willingness-to-pay techniques, we assess the premium rate that producers with varying practices and regions are willing to pay for two different coverage levels of insurance. In general, trout producers appear willing to pay premium rates of 2 to 11 percent for these coverage levels.

The vast majority of crop and revenue insurance policies sold in the United States are singlecrop policies that insure against low yields or revenues for each crop grown on the farm. But, increasingly, producer income is based more on the value of crops that have been converted into a value-added product such as ethanol. Moreover, the recent increases in energy and commodity price levels and volatilities emphasize the importance of risk management to ethanol investors. This paper uses an insurance approach to outline a risk management tool which mimics the gross margin level of a typical corn-based ethanol plant. The gross margin, premium, and indemnity levels are calculated on a per bushel basis to enable producers/investors to utilize the product based on their ownership share in the production facility. The fair premium rates are shown to be quite sensitive with respect to corn and energy price levels and volatilities.

This paper introduces a web-based computer program designed to evaluate weather risk management and weather insurance in the United States. The paper outlines the economics of weather risk in terms of agricultural production and household well-being; defines weather risk in terms of intensity, duration, and frequency; and illustrates the computer program use by comparing heat and precipitation risks at Ardmore, Oklahoma, and Ithaca, New York.

This article examines the flexibility of the Johnson system of distributions by assessing its performance in terms of modeling crop yields for the purpose of setting actuarially fair crop insurance premiums. Using data from corn farms in Illinois coupled with Monte Carlo simulation procedures, we found that average crop insurance premiums computed on the basis of the Johnson system provide reasonably accurate estimates even when the data are normal or come from a non-normal distribution other than the Johnson system (i.e., a beta). These results suggest that there is potential for using the Johnson system to rate previously uninsured crops that do not have historical insurance performance data upon which to base premium calculations.

This paper examines the factors influencing farmer participation in crop insurance schemes, but unlike previous studies that focus on total demand, participation is disaggregated into entrants and those exiting. Modeling entry and exit decisions separately illustrates that the effect of a given variable is often muted by aggregation. In addition, the approach in this paper distinguishes between price and yield variables rather than total returns and is consequently able to demonstrate that price variables are particularly important for farmers considering enrolling in crop insurance, while yield variables and other risk management opportunities are more important for farmers who have been in the program but are deciding to exit. The result suggests that moral hazard is reduced significantly by calculating the coverage yield level for an individual producer on the basis of a moving average of past yields for that farmer. While yield and its variance are particularly influential in the participation decision for farmers currently enrolled, its significant impact on the insurance decision for all farmers highlights the importance of crop insurance as a potential adaptation strategy to weather events.

This article examines farmers’ preferences for various risk management information sources. Our results suggest that information from risk management experts, in-depth materials studied on their own, and popular press outlets tend to be preferred and are ranked highly by producers. Using a regression model to investigate farmer/farm attributes that affect preference for a particular risk management information source, we find that younger farmers with college education, higher leverage, assets greater than $1 million, risk-loving attitudes, and who have used professional services (marketing consultants) tend to prefer information from risk management experts, the Internet, and marketing clubs/other producers. On the other hand, producers who prefer self-study of educational materials and popular press information sources tend to be younger, with lower leverage levels, and have used fewer professional services.

A primary change to crop insurance contained in the USDA's Farm Bill proposal is supplemental deductible coverage (SDC). SDC would allow farmers who purchase individual crop insurance coverage to purchase area-wide coverage in the amount of the individual policy deductible. This supplemental area-wide coverage would be similar to the existing Group Risk Plan policy, but with an accelerated indemnity schedule. Analysis indicates that SDC increases farmer certainty equivalents. The largest benefits are realized by farmers with high yield potential in counties with greater systemic risk. In general, optimal individual policy coverage levels modestly decrease when SDC is taken.