The Bad Harvest: Crop Insurance Reform Has Become a Good Idea Gone Awry

6 Pages Posted: 18 Apr 2001

See all articles by Jerry R. Skees

Jerry R. Skees

University of Kentucky - College of Agriculture - Department of Agricultural Economics

Abstract

Many agriculture policy analysts have argued that partially subsidized crop insurance would be a more efficient and equitable way to protect farmers from disaster than ad hoc aid. Those arguments led to major crop insurance legislation in 1980, 1994, and 2000, as well as other significant reforms in several farm bills over the past twenty years.

But the current federal crop insurance program is expensive, complex, and inefficient. The process has been captured by a set of stakeholders who have helped compound the scope, costs, and inefficiency of what at one time was a good idea. Benefits from the program are bid into land prices, creating barriers to entry for young farmers. And the subsidies have had unintended and perverse consequences on insurance company behavior. The current program favors the highest risk farmers and regions and has become so heavily subsidized that it may be even more inefficient and inequitable than ad hoc assistance.

Suggested Citation

Skees, Jerry R., The Bad Harvest: Crop Insurance Reform Has Become a Good Idea Gone Awry. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=267248 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.267248

Jerry R. Skees (Contact Author)

University of Kentucky - College of Agriculture - Department of Agricultural Economics ( email )

Rm 310, Agricultural Engineering Bldg.
Lexington, KY 40546
United States
606-257-7262 (Phone)
606-257-7290 (Fax)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
208
Abstract Views
1,680
Rank
265,230
PlumX Metrics