농업재해보험이 농산물 생산에 미치는 영향분석

Abstract

2001년 농작물 및 가축재해보험이 도입된 이래 짧은 기간에 자연재해에 대비하고자 대상품목 및 보장범위를 지속적으로 확대하였고 보험가입 규모도 꾸준히 증가하였다. 농업재해보험은 농가가 위험에 대비할 수 있는 환경을 구축한다는 면에서 재해에 대한 실효성 있는 정책으로 성장하면서 정부지원 규모도 크게 증가하였다.

하지만 보험의 가장 큰 역기능인 역선택과 도덕적 해이 문제가 여전히 존재한다. 보험료에 대한 정부지원이 대략 50% 정도이기 때문에 이러한 역기능이 발생할 가능성이 더욱 높다. 일반적인 역기능 이외에도 농업부문에서 특수하게 나타날 수 있는 의도하지 않은 생산에 미치는 영향이 있을 수 있다. 보험료에 대한 정부지원으로 농가 부담이 줄어 적정규모 이상의 재배면적을 결정하거나, 시장 상황, 영농환경을 고려하기보다 정책보험 유무에 따라 품목을 결정할 가능성이 있다.

이 연구는 농업재해보험의 도입으로 인해 특정 품목 생산에 영향을 미치는 지 농가단위에서 분석하여 정책 효과를 구분하고자 하는 연구이다. 더불어 지난 15년 동안의 농업재해보험사업의 성과를 평가하고자 하였다. 농업재해보험사업의 여러 성과 중 농업재해보험사업 목표인 경영안정 효과 측면에 초점을 두었다.

Research Background Since the crop insurance program was first introduced for apple and pear in 2001, ranges of the program have been continuously extended to mitigate damages from unforeseen natural disasters. In line with the extension, a size of that program, represented by the size of insurance premium, also has increased. From the perspective of participants, the program has been said to substantially provide a safety net in favor of producers. Put together, the crop insurance program, in spite of its relatively short history, may be evaluated to contribute for farm management and restoration. A continuous growth of the program is partly owed to the fact that this program enables participants to be prepared in advance against unexpected losses. An increased importance of the program is reflected in terms of size of the relevant budgets; the program’s budget size has been rapidly increased from 16.6 billion KRW (local currency) in 2001 to 270.1 billion KRW in 2014 (approximately by 16 times). The crop insurance program, however, can not be free from critiques. That is, the program could suffer from adverse selection and/or moral hazard, which are said to be common problems in insurance concerns. Subsidizing about 50% of premium, the government might increase the probability of such adverse effects’ being present. Besides, especially in the agricultural sector, possibility of distorting production-decision-making is said to be one of unintended effects. In this aspect, it is imperative to 1) analyze if the expansion of the crop insurance program really leads to production-related distortion and/or any unintended effects stem from introduction of the program, and 2) evaluate the performance of that program throughout past 15 years. Research Methodology This study largely depends on in-depth data analysis. Main data include Farm Household Economy Survey (2008~2012 and 2013), and a variety of data provided by NH Life Insurance, the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, and so on. In addition to data analysis, this study conducts a survey and case studies to supplement and underpin its findings. Especially, the survey, targeting both participants and non-participants, aims to improve the key findings.

Conclusion and Implication of Research Unfortunately, the crop insurance program has not been implemented long enough to allow to distinguish the prior- and post-effects of the program introduction. To address this problem, this study hires rice (introduced in 2009) as a proxy variable for “breaking-point.” Actually, analyzing 2008~2012 data reveals that, following the introduction of crop insurance on rice, participation rates began rising. In this study, a quantitative method is conducted, setting program-participating households as a treatment group, to analyze the program effects. The results, even if not statistically significant, are in favor of the program’s having farm-household income stabilization effects. Future studies are required to address some limitations of this methodology. According to Coefficient of Variations (CV) analysis, it is found that income level, farm size, and income instability affect producers’ decision making on program participation. However, effectiveness and magnitude of program participation vary across commodities and over time. It is to be noted that the income stabilization effect is remarkable out of the livestock sector. A relatively higher income CV among participants (crop sector) is somewhat unexpected, which may be partly because farmers with higher income CV are more induced to join the program. It implies that changing the government-subsidy level and introducing various options are necessary to enhance the program performance. Another key finding in this study is that the crop insurance program has moderate or slight effect on production in terms of production-distortion. Agricultural programs in general may affect producers’ decision making, which can be represented by changes in planted acres. However, an empirical analysis indicates that participation itself does not have significant effect on producer’s decision making at farm level. However, at aggregate or national level, the presence of the program might have different effects on total planted acres. Unlike the crop sector, joining the program has significant effects on production in the livestock sector. For instance, producers joining the insurance program are more likely to enlarge his/her herd size. As is shown, no single common pattern is found between crop and livestock sectors, and even in the crop sector. That is, a deeper investigation regarding program design, option development, and expected effects is in need. Moreover, more attention should be paid to such fields as differentiating the government subsidy rates.

Researchers: Kim Meebok, Rhew Chanhee, and Kim Yunjin Research Period: 2015. 1. ～ 2015. 8. E-mail Address: mbkim@krei.re.kr