نقش بیمه درآمد در مدیریت ریسک کشاورزان(مطالعه موردی: پنبه کاران شهرستان داراب)

فصلنامه علمی -پژوهشی تحقیقات اقتصاد کشاورزی

مقاله 6، دوره 4، شماره 15، مهر و آبان 1391، صفحه 143-168   

نویسندگان

مهدی فرزین^{* 1}؛ جواد ترکمانی²؛ سید نعمت الله موسوی³

¹کارشناس ارشد اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت

²استاد اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت

³دانشیار اقتصاد کشاورزی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد مرودشت

تاریخ دریافت: 25 آذر 1394،  تاریخ پذیرش: 25 آذر 1394 

چکیده

فعالیت‌های کشاورزی معمولا همراه با ریسک ناشی از نوسانات درآمدی می‌باشد. لذا راهکارهای مدیریتی می‌تواند در جهت کاهش این نوسانات مفید باشد. بیمه‌ی درآمدی با کاهش نوسانات مربوط به قیمت و تولید محصولات کشاورزی، می‌تواند این تغییرات احتمالی را مدیریت نماید. هدف این مطالعه، طراحی الگوی بیمه‌ی درآمد به-منظور کاهش نوسانات درآمدی پنبه‌کاران شهرستان داراب است. اطلاعات مورد نیاز با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی چندمرحله‌ای از نمونه‌ای شامل 50 نفر از پنبه‌کاران شهرستان داراب از طریق تکمیل پرسشنامه جمع‌آوری گردید. به‌منظور پیش‌بینی مقادیر آینده‌ی متغیرهای قیمت، عملکرد و درآمد محصول پنبه از داده‌های سری زمانی منابع مختلف از جمله اتحادیه تعاونی پنبه‌کاران و سازمان جهاد کشاورزی شهرستان داراب جمع‌آوری گردید، استفاده شد. به‌منظور محاسبه‌ی حق بیمه‌ی درآمدی از روش شبیه‌ساز آماری موسوم به Bootstrapping استفاده گردید. نتایج مربوط به محاسبه‌ی حق بیمه‌های درآمدی، با دو فرض اعمال مستقیم و غیرمستقیم رابطه‌ی قیمت و عملکرد مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت و در نهایت مشخص شد که با توجه به منفی بودن ضریب همبستگی بین قیمت و عملکرد، اعمال مستقیم رابطه‌ی قیمت و عملکرد در مقایسه با حالتی که این رابطه به‌طور غیر مستقیم در نظرگرفته می‌شود، باعث کاهش مقادیر حق بیمه‌های درآمدی می‌گردد. با مقایسه‌ی حق بیمه‌های دریافتی فعلی از سوی صندوق بیمه‌ی محصولات کشاورزی شهرستان داراب و مقادیر حق بیمه‌های درآمدی محاسبه شده، برتری طرح بیمه‌ی درآمدی نسبت به طرح بیمه عملکرد در این شهرستان به‌منظور ارائه‌ی یک طرح جامع بیمه محصولات کشاورزی به اثبات رسید. مقادیر حق بیمه درآمدی برای گروه کم درآمد 9/8178 ریال و برای گروه پردرآمد 1/256045 ریال با در نظر گرفتن ضریب بارگذاری 9/. و اعطای یارانه 65 درصد از سوی دولت محاسبه گردید. در پایان پیشنهاداتی در جهت مدیریت مناسب مخاطرات و نحوه صحیح اجرای طرح بیمه‌ی درآمدی در شهرستان ارائه شده است که از مهم‌ترین آنها می‌توان به ایجاد یک تعامل دو طرفه بین کشاورز و بیمه‌گذار و همچنین انتخاب طرح بیمه‌ی درآمدی به‌عنوان راهکار نهایی برای گروه کم‌درآمد اشاره نمود.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها

مدیریت ریسک؛ بیمه درآمد؛ پنبه کاران؛ شهرستان داراب

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Role of Income Insurance on Darab Cotton Tiller’s Risk Management

نویسندگان [English]

M. Farzin¹؛ J. Torkamani²؛ S. N. Mousavi³

چکیده [English]

Agricultural activities have been always faced with production, price and income fluctuations. At the time, attention to management procedures can be very useful in order to reducing these fluctuations. Income insurance with covering risks due to fluctuations in prices and production, able to covered the fluctuations of crop income. The purpose of this study is to design income insurance in order to reducing the income fluctuations of Darab cotton tillers. Required information were collected through questionnaire which was conducted in a sample 50 Darab cotton farmers by a multi stage sampling random method. Furthermore, due to forecasting futures values, time series data that collected from various recourse of cotton tillers cooperative union and agriculture organization was used. For computing the insurance premiums, a statistic simulation method called bootstrapping was used. The results relative to computed income insurance premiums, analyzed with two hypotheses such as direct and indirect relationships between yield and price. Ultimately, it became clear that applying direct relationship between yield and price due to negative correlations of these two variables can cause reduction of income insurance. Comparing the present value with computed income insurance premiums showed the superiority of income insurance scheme. The value of income insurance premiums for poor and rich farmers with assumptions "0.9 loading coefficient and 65% government subsides", computed 0.81789 and 25.60451 dollars respectively. At the end its presented suggestion to aim the appropriate risks management. The most important suggestion is creation a bilateral solidarity between farmer and insurer, Another one is election of income insurance scheme as final policy for poor group.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

risk management, income insurance, cotton tillers, Darab

مراجع

1. Abrishami, H. 2002. Applied Econometrics (new approaches).

Tehran University Press, Tehran.

2. Union of Cotton Growers Cooperative in Darab city. 2010.

Statistics and internal reports, Darab.

3. Agricultural Bank of Darab city. 2010. Farmers insurance

information, insurance trunk, Darab.

4. Torkmani, J. 2001. The effect of crops insurance on risk aversion,

decision-making and agricultural productivity. Proceedings of the

conference meeting three agricultural policy, development and

security, investment, trunk of agricultural crops insurance, pages

71-112.

5. Torkmani, J. 1998. Insurance impact on Farmers technical

efficiency and risk aversion: Application of stochastic frontier

function. Iran Agricultural Sciences, 29 (1): 169-161.

6. Torkmani, J. 2009. Effects of crop insurance to reduce risk and

income inequality of farmers: Case Study in Fars Province.

Agricultural Economics Research. 1 (1): 34-17.

7. Torkmani, J. and Vazirzadeh, S. 2005, Use of option markets in

agricultural crops risk management: case study. Insurance and

Agriculture, 8: 41-21.

8. Torkmani, J. and Vzirzadeh, S. 2007. Nomination of agricultural

products premium: application of non parametric methods.

Agricultural Economics, 1 (1): 100-83.

9. Salami, H., Ghahramanzadeh, M., Hosseini, S.S. and Yazdani, S.

2009. Income insurance Way to reduce production and price

vibrations risk in country poultry industry. Agricultural

Economics, 2 (4): 30-1

10. Agricultural management of Darab city, 2010. Time Series

Database, Darab.

11. Nikuey, A.R. and Torkamani, J. 2004, effect of agricultural

insurance on increasing of crops production: case study in fars

province, insurance and agricultural. 33-57:1.

12. Vazirzadeh, S. 2004. Survey of risk management tools with

emphasis on income insurance. M.sc. thesis of agricultural

economics, faculty of agricultural, Shiraz University. 

13. Yazdani, S. and Kiyani rad, A. 2004. Income insurance: new

pattern in risk management of agricultural crops. Agricultural

economic and development, 12(47): 64-79.

14. Ahsan, S.M., Ali, A.G. and Kurian, N.J. 1982. Toward a theory of

agricultural insurance. American Journal of Agricultural

Economics, 46: 520-529.

15. Atwood, J.A., Watts, M.J. and Baquet, A.E. 1997. Income

protection, Department of Agricultural Economics and

Economics. Staff Paper 97-9. Montana State University:

Bozeman, Montana.

16. Bakker, E.J. 1990. Demand for rainfall insurance in the semi-aid

tropics in the India, Resource Management Program, 4:101-105.

17. Bielza, M. Conte, C.G., Gallego, F.J., Stroblmair, J., Catenaro, R.

and Dittmann C. 2009. Risk management and agricultural

insurance schemes in Europe. JRC Reference Reports, European

commission, Belgium, No. 51982.

18. Coble, H.K., Heifner, R.G. and Zuniga, M. 2000. Implication of

crop insurance and revenue insurance for producer hedging.

Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 25(2): 423-452.

19. Edwards, W. 2009. Crop Revenue Insurance, Iowa State

University of Science and Technology, University Extention, A:

1-5.

20. Hardaker, J.B., huirne, R.B.M. and Anderson, J.R. 2004. Coping

with Risk in Agricultural, CAB International, New York.

21. Hardaker, J.B., Pandey, S. and Patten, L.H. 1991. Farm planning

under uncertainty. Review of Marketing and Agricultural

Economics. 59: 9-22.

22. Hoag, D.L.K. and Parsons, J. 2010. Risk navigator SRM: An

applied risk management tool. Journal of Probability and

Statistics, 1(2):152-183.

23. Hull, J.C. 2000. Options, Futures, and other Derivatives, Prentice

– Hall International, Inc.

24. McKinnon, R.I. 1976. Futures markets, buffer stocks, and income

stability for primary producers. Journal of Political Economy, 75:

844-861.

25. Moschini, G. and Hennessy, D.A. 1999. Uncertainty, risk

aversion and risk management for agricultural producers, Stuff

paper, New York, No. 319.

26. Roberts, M.C., Goodwin, B.K. and Coble, K. 1998. Measurement

of price risk in revenue insurance: Implication of distributional

assumption, paper presented at the AAEA summer meetings in

Salt Lake City.

27. Robison, L.J. and Barry, P.J. 1987. The Competitive Firm’s

Response to Risk, New York, Macmillan.

28. Skees, J.R., Black, J.R. and Barnett, B.J. 1997. Designing and

rating an area-yield crop insurance contracts. American Journal of

Agricultural Economics, 79: 430-438.

29. Torkamani, J. 2005. Using a whole-farm modeling approach to

assess prospective technologies under uncertainty. Agricultural

Systems, 85: 138-154.

30. Torkamani, J. and Hardaker, J.B. 1996. A study of economic

efficiency of Iranian farmers: An application of stochastic

programming. Agricultural Economics, 14(2): 73-83.

31. Turvey, C.G. 1992. Contingent claim pricing models implied by

agricultural stabilization and insurance policies. Canadian Journal

of Agricultural Economics, 40: 183-198.

32. Turvey, C.G. and Zaho, J. 1999. Parametric and non-parametric

crop yield distribution and their effects on all-risk crop insurance

perimum. Working paper WP99/05, Department of Agricultural

Economics and Business, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.

33. Williams, N.E., N.M.Tiapo, and W.W. Wilson. 2001. Crop

insurance under quality uncertainty. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the western agricultural economics association, Logan,

Utah, July 9-11.

34. Zanini, C.F., Sherrick, B.J., Schnitkey, G.D. and Irwin, S.H.

2001. Crop insurance valuation under alternative yield

distribution. Paper presented at the NCR-134 Conference on

applied commodity price analysis, forecasting, and market

management.

35. Zulaf, C., Schnitkey, G. and Langemeier, M. 2010. Average crop

revenue election, crop insurance, and supplemental revenue

assistance: interactions and overlap for Illinois and Kansas farm

program crops. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics,

42(3): 501–515.