Discussion: What Have We Learned from the New Suite of Risk Management Programs of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008?

By Lubben, Bradley D.; Novak, James L. | Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, August 2010 | Go to article overview

Discussion: What Have We Learned from the New Suite of Risk Management Programs of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008?


Lubben, Bradley D., Novak, James L., Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics


New revenue-based support programs in the 2008 Farm Bill represent a fundamental shift in farm programs and risk management decision-making. However, complexity, uncertainty, economics, and, arguably, an incomplete analysis of the new Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) program all contributed to low enrollment in the new program in 2009. An effective analysis of ACRE should consider farm programs as part of an integrated risk management portfolio, including crop insurance, marketing, and other risk management tools as opposed to a separate lottery program. Improving this integration could be one of the most significant consequences of the 2008 Farm Bill.

Key Words: farm bill, commodity programs, risk management

JEL Classification: Q18

The 2008 Farm Bill clearly delivered a new, much more complex farm income safety net to producers. On top of the existing price-based support programs (marketing loans, Direct Payments [DPs], and Counter-Cyclical Payments [CCPs]), the federally subsidized crop insurance programs, and the history of ad hoc disaster assistance programs, Congress added two revenuebased support programs: the Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) program and the Supplemental Revenue (SURE) assistance program. Both represent a shift toward revenue in the design of farm income support policy. ACRE focuses on crop-specific revenue instead of price. SURE focuses disaster assistance on whole-farm crop revenue instead of crop-specific quantity and quality losses. Both will impact farm program, crop insurance, marketing, and other risk management decisions in very different ways than traditional federal farm policy.

Contributions of the Presented Papers

The invited papers consider these differences and analyze the impact of the new programs. All of the papers seem to see ACRE as more insurancelike than a historic farm program support mechanism. Barnaby et al. analyzed and addressed ACRE and SURE as being adjunct insurance products. ACRE was characterized as "a put option." Zulauf et al. examine overlaps between insurance and the two programs. Harris comments specifically about the offsets of reductions in DPs and marketing loan protection under ACRE with the SURE program. Historic farm programs (2002 and previous), although designed to reduce income risk, have not generally been analyzed as insurance programs, which brings up a question: is this a fundamental shift in farm and political thinking? Will future farm programs and insurance products finally be linked together in some rational fashion? Barnaby et al. seem to indicate that this will be the case, at least on the insurance side.

Harris did a good job of outlining the political situation surrounding the implementation of the ACRE program and the reasons for southern region lack of participation. Prefarm bill discussions and analysis may have led farmers to hope for more than they got out of the program. It certainly led to a lot of confusion. As presented by Barnaby et al., discussions ranged from program payments triggered by farm-level losses to those triggered by county or state losses to the current law requiring both farm-level and state-level triggers. In the South, current law reducing DP and loan rates under ACRE participation led to less than favorable comparisons of ACRE to the Direct and Counter-Cyclical Program (DCP). This was especially the case for cotton and peanut producers and for the reasons outlined by Harris. Figure 1 provides a relative comparison of the effective price protection provided by ACRE in 2009. The effective price that would trigger ACRE payments is 90% of the ACRE guarantee price (2-year marketing year national average price) assuming no yield deviation from the ACRE benchmark. From cotton and peanut producer perspectives, the new ACRE program offered no better effective price protection than the existing DCP; thus, the cut in the DP and the marketing loan rate meant a penalty for ACRE participants. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Discussion: What Have We Learned from the New Suite of Risk Management Programs of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008?
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.