| Ways to Advance the Agricultural Insurance Policy Amid Changes in Agricultural Conditions | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Kim, Meebok | ||
| Views | 73347 | Publication Date | 2020.02.18 |
| Original | |||
|
Background of Research The agricultural insurance program is a government policy that protects farmers against farm management risk through insurance. Recently, extreme weather conditions such as extreme drought and abnormally high temperatures have become frequent, and the scale of natural disasters has increased. Also, due to the full-time farming fostering policy, large-sized farms have become more vulnerable to natural disasters. As production in greenhouse crops and livestock has increased, external factors such as pests and animal diseases that affect the quality of farm products have become significant risks as well. Also, the agricultural market is increasingly affected by external factors such as rapid market changes and market opening. In order to mitigate these risks, the insurance policy, out of farm safety net policies, has been gradually expanded. As the agricultural insurance program has grown remarkably, it is likely to become an essential means of agricultural policy in the future. It is time to enhance policy convergence after examining the overall agricultural insurance policy to prepare for changes in internal and external conditions in the agricultural sector. Research Methodology This study used the literature review, surveys, and econometric analysis. Also, we reviewed academic research papers on various agricultural insurance programs. The questionnaire survey was conducted by e-mail and telephone targeting 1,102 farmers (KREI local correspondents). The econometric model was used to analyze farmers’ perception of crop insurance and the existence of inefficiency in farmers’ safety insurance. Findings First, the crop insurance program needs to increase the coverage rate for efficient management. Second, for the farmer and agricultural worker insurance program, its coverage needs to be differentiated. The farmer insurance needs to eliminate social inefficiency coming from over-insurance. The agricultural worker insurance needs to broaden coverage. Third, the livestock insurance program needs to alleviate the unbalanced coverage, which is mainly concentrating on high-risk livestock. Also, it has to remove blind spots for disaster compensation, improve the underwriting system to prevent moral hazards, and examine the introduction of a national reinsurance program concerning contagious animal diseases. Fourth, the agricultural machinery insurance program needs to increase the coverage of farm-owned machinery. Based on the above tasks, the specific development plans of three stages—introduction, growth, and maturity— are as follows: In the introduction stage, first, it is necessary to give more discounts to low-risk farmers and to provide a lower subsidy rate to high-risk farmers compared to average risk farmers to alleviate adverse selection. Also, product-specific improvements are needed to mitigate the gap in the coverage among livestock groups in the livestock insurance program. Second, the product types of the farmer insurance program should be minimized. Since there is no significant difference in the level of coverage for each product in general types, some general types of farmer insurance should be re-examined. In the growth stage, first, it is required to examine— or consider—the introduction of the catastrophic crop insurance (CAT) as a component of the crop insurance program. As the purpose of the natural disaster countermeasure program is to save the livelihood, the amount of compensation is low. Thus, it is pretty limited to offset the loss incurred from natural disasters. On the other hand, the CAT can overcome this limitation and make it easier for farmers to buy insurance. Second, it is necessary to subdivide the regional unit that is the basis for rating premium to reflect local characteristics more specifically. Third, policy combination is needed to expand farmers’ responsibility for risk management. Fourth, it is necessary to introduce a national reinsurance program in the livestock insurance program. Fifth, farmers should be mandatorily covered for the agricultural machinery insurance program. Finally, the loss appraisal system needs to be revised. In the maturation stage, first, it is required to reflect pest damage compensation and quality evaluation concerning products with low insurance coverage and to develop various insurance products such as price insurance or revenue insurance programs on the condition that farmers provide income data. Second, the different rates of subsidy should be applied. Currently, crop insurance subsidies are not differentiated, so large-sized farms receive more subsidies in proportion to the amount of liability. Regardless of farm size, the crop insurance program should play a significant role as a component of the risk management policy for all farms. For this, it is required to examine the introduction of differential subsidy rating and subsidy ceiling. Third, in order to expand the coverage of agricultural workers who may not be well protected against disasters, the government should consider introducing a mandatory insurance program for these workers in the short run and an industrial compensation insurance program for all farmers in the long run. Fourth, it is necessary to introduce a regular review system for crop insurance premium rates. If premium rates are improperly calculated, the insured will leave the insurance program, and this will impair the effectiveness of the crop insurance policy due to low coverage. Therefore, it is necessary to review the method of premium rating periodically and to ensure that stable premium rates are maintained. Fifth, it is necessary to develop a decision-making program that can support farmers' decision-making for participating in the crop insurance program. Sixth, it is necessary to examine whether to include contagious animal disease compensations in livestock insurance in the medium to long-term. The government compensates livestock farms for the direct loss of livestock disposal in the event of contagious animal diseases. However, livestock farmers are still exposed to risk as there is not a sufficient compensation system for indirect loss of livestock disposal. Researchers: Kim Meebok, Kim Taehoo, Ha Inhye Research period: 2019. 1. ~ 2019. 10. E-mail address: mbkim@krei.re.kr |
|||