Upload
international-food-policy-research-institute-south-asia-office
View
28
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Agricultural insurance for small holder farmers in developing countries: What do we know?
Bidisha Barooah, Jo Puri, Bharat Kaushish, Ombeline de Bock, Jesse D’Anjou and Tatiana Goetghebuer
Why Agricultural Insurance?
• A possible way to break the vicious poverty cycle
• Does (can) it work?–Informal risk
mitigation–Other instruments
of risk mitigation
• What do we know about the state and quality evidence in this field?
• Where are the opportunities and challenges for researchers?
• What are the areas of interest for policy makers?
Objectives of this scoping study
Scope of our study• Impact evaluation studies and
systematic reviews• ‘Real’ products • LMICs• 1996-2015• Assessment of quality
/inputs
Systematic SearchManual search
Papers identified through manual search (e.g. snowball
searching, specialist websites)
Electronic searchPapers identified through electronic searching on electronic databases
10203 references
702 references identified
9501 references identified
5095 references excluded (screened for duplicates and
relevant title)
5108references
identified in total
Abstract screening
4866 references excluded (out of scope and/or inclusion criteria)
241 references
remain
102 acquisition of
reports10 reports not obtained
139 references excluded (131 based
on exclusion criteria, 6 duplicates, 2 no English version)
59included papers
Number of studies by intervention/product type
8c. Other Services, please specify
8b. Advice on risk management and extension services
8a. Financial literacy/ product training
7. Other Products (Specify)
6. Innovative/Improved product
5. Bundled Product
4. Social Protection Schemes
3. Agricultural Technology/Inputs
2. Informal risk mitigating financial instruments
1e. Direct Subsidy/Grant/Transfer
1d. Formal agricultural risk-related savi..
1c. Formal agricultural risk-related credit
1b. Index Insurance
1a. Formal Yield/Indemnity Insurance
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Number of studies by outputs/outcomes
Take
up/D
emand
Adequ
acy o
f pro
duct
Use of p
rodu
ct
Renewal
Change
in fo
rmal
loans
Change
in fo
od co
nsumpti
on
Change
in pr
oducti
ve as
sets/
lives
tock
Diversi
ficati
on of
crops
Change
in pr
oducti
vity
Change
in in
come
Change
in ot
her fi
nancia
l risk
mitig
ating
instr
uments
Educa
tion
Female
farm
ers
Cost-effe
ctive
ness
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Results I
• 32 studies are RCTs• Risk of bias• Other quasi-experimental methods do
better
Results II• 6 studies on insurance and food
securityCountry Variable Results Gendered
impactsEthiopia Reduced meals
(binary)Significant reduction
No
Ghana Self-reported reduced meals (binary)
Significant reduction
No
Mexico Consumption expenditure including food
Significant increase
No
Colombia Food consumption expenditure
No impact No
Senegal/Burkina Faso
Food insecurity index/ Meat and onions in diet
Significant increase
But uptake lower among women
India Qualitative input Unclear No
Discussion• Uptake of insurance is low• Median uptake of index insurance
33%, despite ‘encouragement design’Possible reasons for low uptake (ref: ILO)
• Liquidity constraints • Trust• Poor insurance
understanding/financial literacy
• Other risk coping strategies
• Behavioral factors
Very little discussion on
adequacy of the product
Conclusion
• IE of agricultural insurance on women has been not been studied much
• “Edge of MDE”• For credible gender effects sample
size need to double- costs four times
Thank you