Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Risk Implications of Commodity Programs in Farm Bill

AgFax.Com - Your Online Ag News Source


The 2012 Farm Bill currently is being debated, with some prospects that it will be passed this year. Much debate centers on the commodity title and how to reconfigure direct payments, the counter-cyclical price and revenue programs (e.g., target price and ACRE programs), and the standing disaster assistance programs (e.g., SURE).

Predicting what form these programs will take is difficult. At this point, however, it appears that direct payments will not be included and overall budget outlays authorized in the 2012 Farm Bill will be less than in previous Farm Bills. What likely will result is a counter-cyclical revenue program somewhat similar to the current ACRE program. An ACRE-like program will have risk implications. The risk implications are discussed in this post assuming that providing a safety net is a goal of the 2012 Farm Bill.

Crop Insurance Provides Within Year Revenue Protection

To avoid duplicate coverage, considerations should be given to risk protection offered by crop insurance. Crop insurance is a major program providing within year revenue protection. According to the Summary of Business produced by the Risk Management Agency, 265 million acres were insured in 2011. The 265 million acres represents 83 percent of the 319 million acres planted in principal crops reported by NASS for 2011. Farmers tend to buy revenue products where those revenue products are available. For example, revenue products were purchased on 93 percent of the corn acres insured in 2011.

Because crop insurance is widely used, commodity programs within Farm Bill have much less of a role in providing disaster assistance for within year price or yield declines. For example, if a drought similar to that of 1988 occurred in 2012, crop insurance would provide protection on most acres grown in the United States. Thus, crop insurance covers large, within year yield or price losses, reducing the need for covering these losses within the commodity program.

 

Across Year and Multi-Year Revenue Declines Not Protected by Crop Insurance

Crop insurance will not provide protection against revenue declines that occur across years, of which price declines are a prime example. To illustrate, take a corn revenue policy that has a 180 bushel Trend-Adjusted Actual Production History (TA-APH) and the 2012 projected price of $5.68. A choice of the highest coverage level of 85% results in a guarantee of $869. If the farmer gets the same 180 bushel yield in 2012 as the TA-APH yield, the price can decline to $4.83 without the farm receiving an insurance payment ($4.83 = $869 guarantee / 180 bushel yield). Given a decline of the harvest price to $4.83, the projected price for 2013 likely would be near $4.83. If $4.83 is the 2013 projected price and the 2013 yield equals the 2013 TA-APH yield, the harvest price could fall to $4.11 without the farmer receiving a crop insurance payment. A price decrease to a $4.11 harvest price in 2013 is not unrealistic. Two years of trend line or above yields could result in price scenario similar to that given above.

Multiple years of relatively low prices have occurred in the past. To illustrate, Figure 1 shows price histories for corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice; five crops that receive commodity program payments. Each year’s price is stated as the current year price divided by the average of the five previous prices. A ratio below one indicates that that year’s price is below the previous five-year average. As can be seen in Figure 1, all five commodities had two periods where price ratios where below one: 1) in the mid-1980s and 2) in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Both of these periods were times of financial stress in agriculture.

fig1a.jpg
Lost revenue due to low prices during the mid-1980s and late 1990s would not have been covered by crop insurance, because projected prices would have adjusted downward. Not covering these losses suggests a role for Farm Bill commodity programs. Farm Bill commodity programs can cover revenue declines of a multi-year nature due to declining prices or other factors. These have been labeled “shallow losses” because they occur before crop insurance pays, but these shallow losses are what have caused financial stress in the agricultural sector in the past.

One design of a commodity program that provides multi-year protection is to have the guarantee based on historical revenue. Many of the current program proposals base their guarantees on multi-year revenue. The Aggregate Risk and Revenue Program (ARRM) sponsored by Senators Brown, Thune, Durbin, and Lugar uses a five-year Olympic average of revenue where revenue equals harvest price times Crop Reporting District (CRD) yields. The Ag Risk Coverage (ARC) program that was put forward to the Super Committee based its guarantee on an Olympic average of revenue, where revenue is based on the national season average price and farm yield. The Revenue Loss Assistance Program (RLAP) proposed by Senators Conrad, Baucus, and Hoeven bases its guarantee on the Olympic average of five-years of national season average price times a farm’s historical yield.

Yields to Use in Revenue Guarantee

Debate centers on what yields to use in the guarantee. The choice is between farm yields and more aggregate acreage, such as county and CRD yields. To keep programs at similar costs, a program that uses farm yields will have lower coverage levels than a program that uses county of CRD yields, all else being equal. For example, ARRM which uses CRD yields has a 90% coverage level. ARC which uses farm yields has an 87% guarantee and RLAP which uses farm yields has an 88% coverage level. Lower coverage levels for farm levels are needed because farm yields are more variable than county or CRD yields.

Commodity programs with farm yields will have a portion of their payments devoted to farm specific yield losses, hence the need for lower coverage levels. Commodity programs with county or CRD yields will tend to pay when there are widespread revenue losses due to lower yields or price declines. Commodity programs using county of CRD yields will pay less often than commodity programs that are based on farm yields; however, commodity program based on county and CRD yields will tend to make larger payments in years in which payments are made. County and CRD yield based programs would make larger payments in the mid-1980 and late 1990s than farm yield based programs.

Summary

Commodity based programs can provide protection in cases in which revenue declines across several years, a situation that is not covered by crop insurance. Guarantees based on historical revenue will cover these losses. Yields used in guarantees will impact risks covered. Use of farm yields in guarantees will cause the program to cover more farm-specific revenue shortfalls, some of which will not be multi-year in nature. Use of county or CRD yields in guarantees will cause the program to cover more widespread events, such as multi-year price declines.

Tags: , ,


Leave a Reply

Name and Email Address are required fields. Your email will not be published or shared with third parties.

Sunbelt Ag News

    DTN Livestock Midday: Live Cattle Futures Slip1-29

    U.S. Grain Transportation: Corn Inspections Highest Since October1-29

    DTN Grain Midday: Wheat Trade Turns Higher1-29

    North Carolina: Cotton Variety Performance Data Available1-29

    Texas Pecans: Trade Slow as Harvest Winds Down1-29

    Western Region Pecans: Light Deliveries, Harvest Nearly Done1-29

    DTN Cotton Open: Grower Sales Quicken1-29

    U.S. Energy: Market Balances Seen in Changing Futures Price Spreads1-29

    Gasoline Prices: Average Declines Again1-29

    Propane Stocks: Down 1.9M Barrels1-29

    Diesel Prices: Average Drops 7 Cents1-29

    DTN Livestock Open: Futures to Start with Mixed Prices1-29

    DTN Grain Open: Markets Start on Defensive1-29

    Keith Good: Farm Banks See Spike in Demand for Loans, Survey Finds1-29

    North Carolina: Feb. 4 Meeting Looks At Crop Mix, Marketing Decisions For 20151-28

    Grain TV: Strong Ethanol Production on DDG Sales1-28

    DTN Livestock Close: Cattle Futures Find Support1-28

    Doane Cotton Close: Defies Negative Outside Markets1-28

    Biodiesel: Policy Incentives Necessary for Profitability1-28

    AgFax Peanut Review: Georgia Young Peanut Farmer Award; Possible Cure Found for Allergies1-28

    DTN Cotton Close: More Good Than Bad1-28

    DTN Fertilizer Trends: Fewer Pre-Purchases Than Normal1-28

    Ag Lenders’ Sentiment – Latest National Survey From K-State – (Audio)1-28

    Drones – The Next Big Tool in Agriculture1-28

    AgFax Rice Review: Govt. Action Requested Over Iraq Trade; Japan May Increase U.S. Imports1-28

    Oklahoma: Seramas — Little Chickens Source of Big Fun1-28

    Ag Fuel Costs Likely to Dip, Chemicals to Rise in 2015 — DTN1-28

    Seed Companies Expected to Hold Line on Price Increases — DTN1-28

    Soybeans: Higher Protein Levels Mean Better Quality, Better Prices – DTN1-27

    Crop Insurance: Most Corn Farmers Opting for PLC – DTN1-27

    AFB Grain-Soybean Close: Strong Dollar Continues to Weigh Down Prices1-27

    AFB Cotton Close: Futures Continue Recovery1-27

    AFB Rice Close: Prices Swing Higher1-27

    Soybean Rust Turns Up In Louisiana On Kudzu1-27

    Florida: AgSave Summit Meetings, Feb. 231-27

    Crop Insurance: Difference in Expected Program Payments1-27

    Feral Hogs: North Carolina Hunter Scores Record Kill1-27

    Soybeans: East Coast Winter Weather Is No Match for Biodiesel1-27

    Cotton: Industry Recognizes Utah Researcher For Cotton Genome Efforts1-27

    Reviewing the Pace of Corn and Soybean Exports1-27

    Crop Insurance: Costs, Other Issues Turning Growers Off to SCO — DTN1-27

    Attention Weed Zombies – There’s a Robot Killin’ Machine in Your Future1-26

    Mid-South Ag, Environmental Law Conference, Memphis, April 171-26

    Louisiana Soybeans Lead Nation in Average Yields1-26

    Wilbur-Ellis Shifts Operation from California to Colorado1-26

    Farming: Singing About It1-26

    Livestock: Genomic Testing Makes Young Bulls a Safer Buy – DTN1-26

    Trucking Industry Faces Critical Shortage of Drivers — DTN1-26

    USDA Clears Way for BASF’s Herbicide Engenia1-26

    FMC, Emerge Application Solutions Collaborate on 3Rive 3D Technology1-26

    DTN Fertilizer Outlook: Slow Demand Holds Prices Down1-26

    Flint on Crops: Can I Grow Conventional Cotton Profitably?1-26

    California Almonds: Dormant Sprays Not Reducing Lower Limb Dieback1-25

    Shurley On Cotton: NCC Planting Intentions Could Sway Market1-25

    Rose On Cotton: Profitability In ’15? The “Ifs” Must Line Up Right.1-24

    Rice Market: Seen a Soybean Rally Lately? Some Farmers Look for Alternative Crop.1-23

    Corn: Resistant Rootworm Webinars Discuss Strategies1-23

    Cleveland on Cotton: World Plantings Need Reduction. How Much?1-23

    Farmland Values Could Stay High with Investor Interest – DTN1-23

    Livestock Manure Management Could Face Stricter Regulations – DTN1-23

    Soybeans: Tighten Belts to Survive Market Downturn – DTN1-23

    Texas Ag Forum, Austin, Feb. 201-23

    Welch on Wheat: Conditions Deteriorating but Still Mostly Positive1-23

    Louisiana Rice: Stored Insect Pest Management Workshop, Crowley, Feb. 251-23

    USDA: Peanut Price Highlights1-23

    Welch on Grain: Corn Export Sales Hit Marketing Year High1-23

    Sunbelt Ag Events

    Rice News

     

    About Us

    AgFax.Com covers agricultural trends and production topics, with an emphasis on news about cotton, rice, peanuts, corn, soybeans, wheat and tree crops, including almonds, pecans, walnuts and pistachios.

      

    This site also serves as the on-line presence of electronic crop and pest reports published by AgFax Media LLC (formerly Looking South Communications).

        

    Click here to subscribe to our free reports.

      

    We provide early warnings and confirmations about pests, diseases and other factors that influence yield. Our goal is to quickly provide farmers and crop advisors with information needed to make better and more profitable decisions.

         

    Our free weekly crop and pest advisories include:

    • AgFax Midsouth Cotton, covering cotton production and news in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee and Missouri.

    • AgFax Southeast Cotton, covering cotton production and news in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Virginia.

    • AgFax Southwest Cotton (new for 2013!), covering cotton production and news in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and New Mexico.

    • AgFax West (formerly MiteFax: SJV Cotton), covering California cotton, alfalfa, tomatoes and other non-permanent crops in California's Central Valley.

    • AgFax Rice covering rice production and news in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri and Texas.

    • AgFax Peanuts, covering peanut production in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

    • AgFax Southern Grain: covering soybeans, corn, milo and small grains in Southern states.

    • AgFax Almonds, covering almonds, pistachios, walnuts and other tree crops in California's Central Valley.

    • AgCom 101, providing guidance to ag professionals involved in social media.

    Our newsletters are sponsored by the following companies: FMC Corporation Chemtura Dow AgroSciences.

          

    Mission statement:

    Make it as easy as possible for our community of readers to find and/or receive needed information.

              

    Contact Information:

    AgFax Media. LLC

    142 Westlake Drive Brandon, MS 39047

    601-992-9488 Office 601-992-3503 Fax

    Owen Taylor Debra L. Ferguson Laurie Courtney

          

    Circulation Questions?

    Contact Laurie Courtney