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

    Southern Grain: Freeze Effects? Corn Planting Slogs Along – AgFax4-19

    Rose On Cotton: Export Sales, Shipments Bear Watching4-18

    Arctic Warming Tied to Our Extreme Weather? Maybe. – DTN4-18

    Do Soybeans Need Nitrogen?4-18

    Is There An Advantage To More Corn Acres in Your Rotation? Yes and No.4-18

    Texas Rice: Garry McCauley Retires After 39 Years and Many Accomplishments4-18

    CBOT Markets Closed on Good Friday4-18

    Keith Good: China’s Secret – Contaminated Farmland; Expect Drought Persistence4-18

    Rice Farmers In Midsouth Looking For A Break In The Weather – AgFax4-18

    Cleveland on Cotton: Nervous Market Nellies; Chinese Plant 20-25% Less4-17

    Grain TV: River Basis Levels See Large Rise4-17

    AgFax Grain Review: Corn Production Moves to Canada; Soybean Cyst Nematodes Unaffected by Cold4-17

    DTN Livestock Close: Meat Futures Take Wide Swings Before Exiting for Holiday4-17

    Doane Cotton Close: Heavy Volatility Continues in Old-Crop Prices4-17

    Chumrau on Wheat: World Supplies Get a Lift, but U.S. Stocks Look Tight4-17

    AFB Grain-Soybean Close: Wheat Higher, Corn Down, Beans Mixed4-17

    AFB Cotton Close: New-Crop Continues to Show Strength4-17

    AFB Rice Close: Across the Board Losses4-17

    DTN Cotton Close: Finishes Mixed Ahead of Long Weekend4-17

    Mississippi: MSU Offers Four Deer Management Workshops This Summer4-17

    Mapping the Farm Bill: Voting Changes in the House of Representatives4-17

    DTN Grain Close: Markets Mixed Ahead of Holiday Weekend4-17

    USDA: Peanut Price Highlights4-17

    Texas: Grain Grading Workshops, Amarillo, May 6-74-17

    Mississippi: State Soybean Value Grew $1B Since 20064-17

    U.S. Drought Outlook: Improvement Expected in Midwest, Central and Southern Great Plains4-17

    Farm Finances Rate an ‘A’ For Now, but Questions Linger — DTN4-17

    DTN Livestock Midday: Sharp Losses Hold in Cattle Trade4-17

    Mississippi: Top of the List for Water Resouces4-17

    DTN Grain Midday: Corn, Soybeans Move Lower4-17

    U.S. Grain Transportation: Upper Mississippi Navigation Improves4-17

    Resistant Palmer Pigweed: What People Need To Know Before It Hits – AgFax4-17

    Chemical Safety Board Plans Meeting in West, Texas — DTN4-17

    West, Texas, Recovers and Rebuilds with Cautious Approach — DTN4-17

    DTN Cotton Open: Trades Slightly Lower Nearby4-17

    U.S. Energy: Oil and Gas Spending Favors Exploration, Development4-17

    Gasoline Prices: Average Jumps 6 Cents4-17

    Propane Stocks: Increase by 0.8M Barrels4-17

    Diesel Prices: Average Down a Penny4-17

    DTN Livestock Open: Meat Contracts to Start Lower4-17

    Victims of Texas Fertilizer Plant Explosion Remembered — DTN4-17

    DTN Grain Open: Higher Start Led by Soybeans4-17

    Keith Good: Beige Book — Observations on Ag Economy4-17

    “Agricultural Adventure” Educate Public on Modern Farming – DTN4-16

    International Buying and Selling a Balancing Act to Get the Best Deal – DTN4-16

    AgFax Rice Review: Recent Rains Won’t Help CA Farmers; Japanese Varieties Grown in U.S.4-16

    Weather Woes Stretch from Iowa to Florida — DTN4-16

    Brazil’s Ports Remain Orderly with Good Luck, Favorable Conditions – DTN4-15

    Texas: Conservation Farming Meeting Weslaco, April 294-15

    Welch on Wheat: Cool Temperatures Hit Drought Stressed Crop4-15

    N.C. State University Leads Research into Kudzu Bug Host Preferences4-15

    Welch on Grain: Corn Planting in Line with 30 Year Average4-15

    Fertilizer Prices on the Rise but Still Lower Than Last Few Years4-15

    USDA: Weekly National Peanut Prices4-15

    Louisiana: Wildlife Field Day, Clinton, May 34-15

    Sign Ups Begin for USDA Disaster Assistance Programs4-15

    AgFax Cotton Review: Now’s a Good Time to Price New-Crop; Rains in Texas but Not Enough4-15

    DTN Fertilizer Trends: Rail Delays Affecting Prices in Upper Midwest4-15

    Crop Progress: 3% of National Corn Crop Planted, Wheat Continues Decline – US-DA4-14

    Louisiana: Glyphosate Resistance Confirmed in Italian Ryegrass4-14

    Livestock: Rancher Raises Horns, Not Pounds for Rodeo Cattle – DTN4-14

    Good on Grain: Corn Consumption Continues to Exceed Projections4-14

    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