A New Approach to Providing an Agricultural Safety Net Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University Presented.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Peanut Provisions of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of Farm Bill Education Conference Kansas City, Missouri May 20-21, 2002 Nathan.
Advertisements

2014 FARM BILL: COMMODITY PROGRAMS Jody Campiche Assistant Professor & Extension Economist Oklahoma State University.
Provisions of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996 (FAIR Act of 1996) Also referred to Freedom to Farm Developed by: Joe L. Outlaw.
A New Approach to Providing an Agricultural Safety Net Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University Presented at.
U.S. Agricultural Policy Joseph W. Glauber U.S. Department of Agriculture Silverado Symposium on Agricultural Policy Reform / Napa, California /January.
Joe Glauber Chief Economist, USDA 5 April 2012 ISSUES SURROUNDING THE 2012 FARM BILL DEBATE.
NAAFP Farm Bill Decision Aid Insurance Tool James W. Richardson Regents Professor and Co-Director of AFPC National Association for Agriculture and Food.
Wesley N. Musser Farm Management Specialist Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics University of Maryland.
BASE REVENUE PROTECTION AND REVENUE COUNTERCYCLICAL PROGRAMS Dwight Aakre, Ron Haugen, Andrew Swenson North Dakota State University Extension Service Fargo,
Allan W. Gray, Purdue University 2002 Farm Bill Decision Time Allan Gray Purdue University.
Allan Gray and Chris Hurt, Purdue University 2002 Farm Bill Decision Time Allan Gray and Chris Hurt Purdue University.
The 2012, 2013, 2014 Farm Bill (The Agricultural Act of 2014) Will Snell – University of KY
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 Title I, Subtitles A and B Commodity Programs for Covered Commodities 2002 Farm Bill Education Conference.
Farm Bill 2014 “Agricultural Act of 2014” Commodity Title Options Crop Insurance Changes for 2015.
University Extension/Department of Economics COMBO: Crop Insurance for 2011 Crop Advantage Series Jan Farm Management Extension Staff.
The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 General Overview Crop Program Changes Dairy Provisions.
U.S. Cotton and Rice Policy Compatibility with WTO Commitments And Other Trade Liberalization Efforts Mechel S. Paggi Center for Agricultural Business,
The 2007 US Farm Bill: Analysis of the USDA proposals Agricultural Trade Policy Analysis DG for Agriculture and Rural Development European Commission.
ECON 337: Agricultural Marketing Chad Hart Associate Professor Lee Schulz Assistant Professor
2014 Farm Bill Cotton Decisions and Implications Don Shurley Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Georgia National Farm Bill.
Econ 339X, Spring 2010 ECON 339X: Agricultural Marketing Chad Hart Assistant Professor/Grain Markets Specialist
The Impacts of Alternative Farm Bill Design on U.S. Agriculture Keith Coble and Barry Barnett.
Global Policies and Risk Management Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development
Policy Developments in U.S. Agriculture Since 1986 Market and Trade Economics Division, ERS/USDA ERS Presentation to the Sixth Mexico/Canada/US Conference.
Carl Zulauf Ag. Economist, Ohio State University Presentation at “Farm Bill Education Conference,” Kansas City, Missouri July 8, 2008 COMMODITY PROGRAM.
Pat Westhoff University of Missouri Farm Bill Education Conference Kansas City,
The Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) Presentation Developed by: Joe Parcell, Assistant Professor and Extension Economist, University of.
The ACRE Decision Bruce A. Babcock Iowa State University Presented at the North Dakota Corn Growers Association Annual Convention. Fargo, ND. February.
University of Illinois Consortium Outreach 2.ARC / PLC 3.Dairy 4.NAP tool.
Legislative Issues, WTO, & U.S. Farm Policy Presented by Chip Conley Democratic Economist House Agriculture Committee.
Proposals for the 2008 Farm Bill Chad Hart Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University May 8, 2007 ISU Extension Specialist Meeting.
Budgetary, Political, and WTO Forces on the Next Farm Bill July 7, 2005 Agricultural Policy Summit “New Directions in Federal Farm Policy: Issues for the.
1996 Farm Bill Titles IAgricultural Market Transition Act Subtitle ATitle, Purpose, and Definitions BProduction Flexibility Contracts CNonrecourse Marketing.
Department of Economics SURE Farm Program North Central Iowa Crop & Land Stewardship Clinic Iowa Falls, Iowa December 30, 2009 Chad Hart Assistant Professor/Grain.
Corn and Soybean Issues for 2006 Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University Presented at.
Department of Economics Risk Management for Crop Production Agricultural Credit School Ames, Iowa June 9, 2009 Chad Hart Assistant Professor/Grain Markets.
Econ 337, Spring 2012 ECON 337: Agricultural Marketing Chad Hart Assistant Professor
ECON 337: Agricultural Marketing Chad Hart Associate Professor Lee Schulz Assistant Professor
Proposals for the 2008 Farm Bill Chad Hart Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University March 9, 2007 Iowa NAMA Meeting Johnston,
Extension and Outreach/Department of Economics Crop Insurance 2013 National Agricultural Credit Conference San Diego, California Apr. 17, 2013 Chad Hart.
Extension and Outreach/Department of Economics Outlook, Farm Bill, and Crop Insurance ISUEO Farm Management In-Service Ames, Iowa May 8, 2012 Chad Hart.
Weaving the Next Agricultural Safety Net Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University Presented.
Econ 339X, Spring 2010 ECON 339X: Agricultural Marketing Chad Hart Assistant Professor/Grain Markets Specialist
Implications of the 2002 U.S. Farm Act for World Agriculture Presented to the Policy Disputes Information Consortium Ninth Agricultural and Food Policy.
Risk-Free Farming? Risk-Return Analysis of Soybean Farming under the 2002 Farm Bill Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa.
Extension and Outreach/Department of Economics Outlook, Farm Bill, and Crop Insurance Ag Credit School Ames, Iowa June 7, 2012 Chad Hart Assistant Professor/Grain.
The 2007 U.S. Farm Bill: Issues and Challenges Won W. Koo Chamber of Commerce Distinguished Professor and Director Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade.
U.S. Farm Policy Choices in 2007 Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University Presented at Outlook Conference 2006.
National Association of Wheat Growers 415 Second St. NE, Suite 300 / Washington DC
ACRE Chad Hart Center for Agricultural and Rural Development
2014 Farm Bill Commodity Programs PLC
The U.S. Farm Bill & the WTO
The Potential Impact of the Doha Round on Grains
Center for Agricultural and Rural Development
The 2007 Farm Bill: More of the Same or a New Path?
The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002
Are we where we want to be with commodity programs?
COMBO: Crop Insurance for 2011
Revenue-Based Income Safety Nets
2014 Commodity Programs and Supplemental Coverage Option
Hart - Ag Credit School June 9, 2008 The 2008 Farm Bill Chad Hart
Associate Professor/Crop Markets Specialist
Farm Bill Global Agriculture Conference Spencer, Iowa
2019 Wisconsin Agricultural Outlook Forum
The 2008 Farm Bill Chad Hart Center for Agricultural and Rural Development Iowa State University October 1, 2007 ISU Farm Management.
Associate Professor/Crop Markets Specialist
The 2014 Farm Bill Iowa Corn Growers and Iowa Institute for Coops
Agricultural Marketing
What’s in the Farm Bill for Me?
Presentation transcript:

A New Approach to Providing an Agricultural Safety Net Bruce A. Babcock Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University Presented at 21 st Century Farm Policy: Challenges and Opportunities, Fargo, North Dakota October 30-31, 2005

Expenditures on Current Safety Net

US WTO Proposal Would Require Spending Cuts Should cuts be made in existing programs? –Lower loan rates, effective target prices, proportions of production eligible for support Should we redesign the US safety net to –meet WTO and budget objectives –improve the effectiveness of existing program

Yield Safety Net

Price Safety Net

A Revenue Safety Net?

Does a Yield Safety Net Make Sense? High yield, low price: No payment but cash receipts likely to be down Low yield, high price: Payment received, but it will be excessive because of high market price High yield, high price: No payment needed and no payment received Low yield, low price: Payment received, but no compensation for low price *******

Does a Price Safety Net Make Sense? High yield, low price: Payment received, but payment will be excessive Low yield, high price: No payment received, but cash receipts will likely be down for some farmers High yield, high price: No payment needed and no payment received Low yield, low price: Payment received, but no compensation for low yields *******

Does a Revenue Safety Net Make Sense? High yield, low price: Payment received if revenue is below target revenue Low yield, high price: Payment received if revenue is below target revenue High yield, high price: No payment needed and no payment received Low yield, low price: Payment received, full compensation to target revenue *******

What About a Cost Safety Net? Most production costs are under control of the producer A safety net that compensates a producer for controllable actions would induce behavior oriented towards increasing payoff Same reason why we need a significant deductible in crop insurance

What Value is a 70% Guarantee? Just like an APH yield, the guarantee will be set at the farm level using season- average prices. Value of a 70% guarantee much greater at the farm level than at the county level. Individual guarantee at the 70% level provides about equivalent loan collateral to what producers are obtaining now with crop insurance.

Average payment = $4.00/acre

New Amber and Blue Box Programs Amber Box –Define target county revenue as the product of expected county yield and a target price –Define actual county revenue as the product of county average yield and national season-average price –Payments flow when actual county revenue is less than amber coverage level times target county revenue guarantee –Maximum payments reached when actual county revenue falls below 70% of target county revenue –Payments made on actual farmer-planted acreage

New Amber and Blue Box Programs Blue Box –Payments flow when actual county revenue is less than blue coverage level times target county revenue –Maximum payments reached when actual county revenue falls below the target county revenue times the amber coverage level –Payments made on fixed base acreage

How Much Safety Under U.S. Proposal? Problem: Maximize sum of amber and blue coverage subject to spending limits on amber and blue box under the U.S. proposal –Use 1980 – 2004 data Amber box limit of $7.64 billion Blue Box limit of $5.75 billion Dairy gets $750 million of amber box and $500 million of blue box Sugar gets $300 million of amber box and $250 million of blue box Account for crop specific amber box limits

What Prices to Use? Effective Target Prices for 2002 Farm Bill Wheat - $3.40/buCorn - $2.35/bu Soy -$5.36/buOats - $1.416/bu Peanuts - $0.2295/lbBarley - $2.00/bu Cotton - $0.6573/lbRice - $8.15 Grain sorghum - $2.22/bu

Maximum Safety Levels 85% amber box coverage level for all crops and counties –crop specific limits start binding 95% blue box coverage level –aggregate limit begins to bind

Are these Programs Trade Distorting? Most distorting program is the Green Box program because it pays off on farm-level production. –But there is a 30% deductible Next most distorting program is the Amber Box coverage because it pays off on actual planted acreage –But farmer cannot influence per-acre payments because county average yields are used to determine payment High coverage level of Blue Box may induce planting –But payments based on fixed acreage and county-average yields Money is saved because season-average price is used –Could adopt a recourse loan program for harvest cash flow reasons

Impact of Proposed Programs Provides effective safety net within WTO limits as proposed by the U.S. Consolidates crop insurance, commodity programs, and disaster aid Adopts the target (revenue) that farmers prefer Would be a departure from 70 years of supporting prices