Date post: | 17-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | ezra-greer |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 0 times |
1
Getting a Getting a Grip on Grip on GRIPGRIP
Gary SchnitkeyAgricultural Economist
University of Illinois
2
TopicsTopics
1. Illinois versus Iowa experience
2. How GRIP works 3. Risks/Returns4. Situations where it works
3
GRIPGRIP
GRIP (Group Risk Income Plan) is revenue insurance based on county yields– GRIP-NoHR (No Harvest Revenue option)
– much like RA with base price option– GRIP-HR (Harvest Revenue option) –
much like CRC or RA with harvest price option
GRIP is the revenue counterpart to the county-level yield insurance GRP (Group Risk Plan)
4
Group Products Akin Group Products Akin ToTo
Group Akin to Insurance Type GRP APH Yield
GRIP-NoHR IP, RA with Revenue – no base price guarantee
increase
GRIP-HR CRC, RA with Revenue - harvest price guarantee
increase
5
Introduced in I statesIntroduced in I states
IntroducedGRP (Group Risk Plan) 1995GRIP-NoHR 1999 (Group Risk Income Plan -- No
Harvest Revenue option)GRIP-HR 2004 (GRIP -- Harvest Revenue option)
6
Group Product Use, Group Product Use, Corn, IllinoisCorn, Illinois
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005P
Year
Per
cen
t o
f In
sure
d A
cres
GRP
GRIPIowa 2005 Use
GRP – 1.2%GRIP – 3.6%
7
Group Product Use, Group Product Use, Soybeans, IllinoisSoybeans, Illinois
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005P
Year
Per
cen
t o
f In
sure
d A
cres
GRIP
GRP
Iowa 2005 UseGRP – 1.9%GRIP – 4.7%
8
Percent of Iowa Counties Percent of Iowa Counties Receiving GRIP-NoHR Receiving GRIP-NoHR Payments for Payments for CornCorn, 1999 -, 1999 -20042004
---------- Coverage Level ------------Year 90% 85% 80% 75% 70%1999 54% 30% 11% 4% 2%2000 66 22 2 1 02001 72 49 25 11 12002 3 3 3 1
12003 3 0 0 0 02004 82 72 41 16 1
AVG 47% 29% 13% 6% 1%
9
Percent of Iowa Counties Percent of Iowa Counties Receiving GRIP-NoHR Receiving GRIP-NoHR Payments for Payments for SoybeansSoybeans, 1999 , 1999 -2004-2004
---------- Coverage Level ------------Year 90% 85% 80% 75% 70%1999 19% 9% 4% 2% 2%2000 69 57 31 18 62001 46 19 8 4 12002 0 0 0 0 02003 30 15 9 7 52004 95 85 71 51 23
AVG 43% 31% 21% 14% 6%
10
How GRIP WorksHow GRIP Works
Marshall County, Iowa2005 Example
11
Parameters in 2005Parameters in 2005
County: Marshall County, Ia
Crop: CornExpected Yield: 164.3 *Expected Price: $2.38 **
* County specific, set by RMA** Settlement prices during
February (Next year for entire month)
12
Farmer choicesFarmer choicesProtection LevelProtection Level
Choice from within rangeGRP GRIP
Max $579 $587Min $323 $346
Max varies by year, based on formula
Max results in highest premiums and highest payments, when they occur
13
Farmer choicesFarmer choicesCoverage LevelCoverage Level
70% to 90%
Suggestion:Take highest coverage levelChange payment/premium by lowering protection level
14
2005 Per Acre 2005 Per Acre Premiums, Marshall Premiums, Marshall County, Iowa County, Iowa (100% Protection Level, Corn)(100% Protection Level, Corn)
CoverageLevel GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HR70% $3.96 $2.96 $5.5175% 4.80 4.24 7.2280% 6.17 6.90 10.5885% 6.89 10.00
13.8590% 8.60 15.92 20.25
15
Per Acre Guarantees,Per Acre Guarantees,90% Coverage Level90% Coverage Level
GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HRType Yield Revenue Revenue Coverage level .90 .90
.90x Expected yield 164.3 164.3 164.3x Price xxx $2.38 $2.38 @ Guarantee 147.9 bu $352 $352 @@
@ Higher of expected or harvest price@@ Will be higher when harvest price > expected
price
16
Payment examplePayment example“Typical” Year“Typical” Year
Actual yield = 170 bu. Harvest price = $2.00 Guarantees on previous slide (90% cov level)
Shortfall = (Guarantee – Actual)/Guarantee when Guarantee > Actual GRP: .000 (147.9 guarantee < 170 actual) GRIP-NoHR: ($352 - (170*2)) / $352 = .034 GRIP-HR: ($352 - (170*2)) / $352 = .034
17
Payments (Max Protection Payments (Max Protection Level, 90% Coverage Level, 90% Coverage Level)Level)
GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HR
Prot. level $579 $587 $587X shortfall .000 .034 .034X price factor xxx xxx
1.00 *Payment $0 $20 $20
* Higher of (harvest price / expected price) or 1
18
Payment examplePayment example“Drought” Year“Drought” Year
Actual yield = 130 bu. Harvest price = $3.00
Shortfall = (Guarantee – Actual)/Guarantee when Guarantee > Actual GRP: (147.9 – 130) / 147.8 = .121 GRIP-NoHR: .000 Guarantee < actual
($390) GRIP-HR: ($443 - (130x3)) / $443
= .120
19
Per Acre Guarantees, Per Acre Guarantees, RevisedRevised90% Coverage Level90% Coverage Level
GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HRType Yield Revenue Revenue Coverage level .90 .90 .90x Expected yield 164.3 164.3 164.3x Price xxx $2.38 $3.00 @ Guarantee 147.9 bu $352 $443 @@
@ Higher of expected or harvest price@@ Will be higher when harvest price > expected
price
20
Payments (Max Protection Payments (Max Protection Level, 90% Coverage Level, 90% Coverage Level)Level)
GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HRProt level $579 $587 $587X shortfall .121 .000 .120X price factor xxx xxx 1.26
@Payment $70 $0 $89
@ Higher of (harvest price / expected price) or 1(3.00 harvest price / 2.38 expected price) = 1.26
21
GRP Shortfalls, Marshall GRP Shortfalls, Marshall County, Iowa, Corn (90% County, Iowa, Corn (90% coverage level)coverage level)
Expected Final GRPYear Yield Yield Shortfall
(90%)1995 131.1 133.7 01996 133.2 139.4 01997 133.2 136.4 01998 135.3 144.5 01999 136.5 153.8 02000 137.6 144.0 02001 146.7 150.5 02002 146.7 181.8 02003 150.1 175.9 02004 158.4 183.2 0
22
Marshall County, Corn Marshall County, Corn YieldsYields
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Year
Bu
. p
er
Acre
19771988
1993
23
GRIP Shortfalls, Marshall GRIP Shortfalls, Marshall County, Iowa, Corn (90% County, Iowa, Corn (90% coverage level)coverage level)
Expected Harvest GRIPYear Price Price Shortfall (90%)1999 2.40 1.96 02000 2.54 2.11 .0342001 2.45 2.05 .0462002 2.30 2.43 02003 2.38 2.37 02004 2.93 1.99 .127
Shortfalls the same for GRIP-NoHR and GRIP-HR.
24
GRP Shortfalls, Marshall County, GRP Shortfalls, Marshall County, Iowa, Soybeans (90% coverage Iowa, Soybeans (90% coverage level)level)
Expected Final GRPYear Yield Yield Shortfall
(90%)1995 45.2 50.6 01996 46.6 49.2 01997 46.6 50.4 01998 47.7 51.6 01999 51.8 50.3 02000 52.6 45.2 .0452001 53.4 49.7 02002 52.5 53.5 02003 53.1 31.7 .3362004 53.6 51.6 0
25
GRIP Shortfalls, Marshall GRIP Shortfalls, Marshall County, Iowa, Corn (90% County, Iowa, Corn (90% coverage level)coverage level)
Expected Harvest GRIPYear Price Price Shortfall (90%)1999 4.95 4.85 02000 5.36 4.72 .1292001 4.59 4.37 .0132002 4.53 5.45 02003 5.23 7.32 .0582004 7.27 5.26 .183
Shortfalls the same for GRIP-NoHR and GRIP-HR.
26
Risk/returnsRisk/returns www.farmdoc.uiuc.edu/cropins/index.htwww.farmdoc.uiuc.edu/cropins/index.html ml
27
Crop Insurance Crop Insurance Evaluator:Evaluator:
For an example farm in each county for corn and soybeans shows the following for different insurance product:
Frequency of payments Premiums Average payments Net costs Ability to prevent disasters
28
Marshall County, Marshall County, CornCorn
“Average” farm for county 159 bu. APH yield, average
variability Evaluations shown for 2005
year Evaluations based on
maximum protection level
29
Frequency of payments
Example of tables from Evaluator
30
1% VAR1% VAR
A 1% VaR of $200 means that 1% of the time revenue will be below $200
Measure of risk reduction
Want VaRs to be as high as possible
31
1% VaR from Evaluator1% VaR from Evaluator$ per acre, Corn$ per acre, Corn
Level APH CRC GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HR65% 203 21275% 221 231 198 205
20485% 243 247 205 216 21790% 213 223 226
Group products lower risk less than Individual products
Low coverage Individual not as “good” as high coverage Group
32
Net CostsNet Costs
Average payments over time minus premium
High levels indicate high costs, negative levels mean expect more insurance payments than premium over time
33
Net Costs from Net Costs from EvaluatorEvaluator$ per acre, Corn$ per acre, Corn
Level APH CRC GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HR65% 1.45 2.2675% 1.74 2.04 .78 -3.94 -
4.6585% 3.76 4.77 -4.65 -12.50 -17.8790% -9.77 -17.13 -26.47
Individual products have higher costs than Group products
34
Marshall County, Marshall County, SoybeansSoybeans
“Average” farm for county 50 bu. APH yield, average
variability Evaluations shown for 2005
year Evaluations based on
maximum protection level
35
1% VaR from Evaluator1% VaR from Evaluator$ per acre, Soybeans$ per acre, Soybeans
Level APH CRC GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HR65% 166 17475% 183 192 159 162 16485% 203 207 165 173 17590% 168 179 180
Group products lower risk less than Individual products Low coverage Individual not as “good” as high
coverage Group
36
Net Costs from Net Costs from EvaluatorEvaluator$ per acre, Soybeans$ per acre, Soybeans
Level APH CRC GRP GRIP-NoHR GRIP-HR65% .57 1.0675% .81 .93 -.56 -2.66 -
2.6885% 1.48 2.89 -3.18 -7.96 -8.9590% -5.31 -10.52 -12.60
Individual products have higher costs than Group products
37
Risk/Returns Risk/Returns SummarySummary Group products cost less than
individual products. Over time, group products may average more in payments than paid in premiums
Group products reduce risk less than individual farm products
38
Situations Where Group Situations Where Group Products Work:Products Work:
Farm-yields either:1. Closely follow county-yields (i.e.,
large farm), or2. Are above county-yields
Farm has low APH Farm is in relatively strong
financial position Tend to work best in “good”
producing counties
39
Situations Where Group Situations Where Group Products Do Not Work as Products Do Not Work as Well:Well: Highly leveraged farms
Farms where re-planting occurs often
Hail is a major concern
Farms with high-risk farmland
40
SummarySummary
GRIP does fit certain situations
Represent another option in the risk management tool kit