Via journal online., Agriculture is inherently a risky enterprise because of its dependence on rainfall. To mitigate
risks, farmers diversify crops and enterprises, maintain stabilization account or resort to the sale of assets. Crop insurance is a complementary institutional mechanism that aids farmers to cope with risks better.Considering the importance of crop insurance in risk mitigation, this paper using data from a large-scale farmers’ survey we identify the factors that influence farmers’ decision to buy crop insurance and subsequently assess its impact on farm income, production expenses and productive investments in agriculture. Farmers’ adoption of crop insurance is low— 4.80% kharif season and 3.17% in the rabi season mainly on account of lack of awareness about insurance products. Nevertheless, the probability of adoption of insurance is higher for those who experience higher crop loss and have some formal training in agriculture. The subsidy on premium also positively influences crop insurance uptake decisions. On the other hand, the factors like the lower social status, tenant farming and exposure to deficit-rainfall in the previous year are negatively associated with the decision to insure. The results on the impact of insurance are not conclusive to prove that insured farmer subsumes higher risks compared to the uninsured.
Brown, Brendan (author), Nuberg, Ian (author), Llewellyn, Rick (author), and School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, The University of Adelaide
CSIRO Agriculture
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2018
Published:
Elsevier
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 16 Document Number: D10460
10 pages., Via online journal., Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a knowledge-intensive set of practices which requires substantial access to functional agricultural extension services to enable utilisation. Despite this importance, the perspectives of those providing extension services to smallholder farmers have not been fully investigated. To address this, we qualitatively explore the perspectives of agricultural extension providers across six African countries to understand why uptake of CA has been limited, as well as the institutional changes that may be required to facilitate greater utilisation. Across the diversity of geographical, political and institutional contexts between countries, we find multiple commonalities in the constrained utilisation of CA by smallholder farmers, highlighting the difficulties non-mechanised subsistence farmers face in transitioning to market-oriented farming systems such as CA. The primary constraint relates to the economic viability of market-oriented farming where farmers remain in low input and low output systems with limited exit points. The assumed exit point used by CA programs appears to have led to a culture of financial expectancy and reflects a continuation of top-down extension approaches with inadequate modification of CA to the contextual realities of subsistence farmers. If African agricultural systems are to be sustainably intensified, we find a need for greater flexibility within extension systems in the pursuit of sustainable intensification. If extension systems are to persist with CA, it will need to be promoted through more transitional pathways that disaggregate the CA package, and with that there is a need for the provision of a mandate to, and necessary funding for, more participatory extension services.
Fortmann, L. (author / University of California Dept of Forestry and Natural Resources.) and University of California Dept of Forestry and Natural Resources.
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1985
Published:
UK
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 52 Document Number: C00597
