INTRODUCTION

Agriculture has been a crucial sector in many developing countries across the world for its
perceived ability to contribute significantly to achieve developmental objectives such as
economic growth, employment generation, food security, poverty reduction, and environmental
sustainability. Increasing the productive capacity of agriculture through higher productivity has
been the main policy agenda in many developing economies. India is not an exception where
agriculture provides employment to millions of people in the rural areas, and hence the growth
and development of this sector assumes important among the policy makers. With almost little
scope for further expansion in arable lands, there is a need to increase yields to technically
maximum possible levels through appropriate investment in basic infrastructure, human
development, and research and extension services (Chaves, 2006; Zepeda, 2006; Mathura et al,
2006).
There has been a consistent decline in growth of the agriculture sector since 1990 onwards
as compared to 1980s. It was 4 per cent per annum during the 1980s on an average, which came
down to 3.2 per cent during 1990s and 2 per cent in the last five years. Growth in real value of
food grain production has been an abysmal -3 per cent during the 1990s and - 5 per cent during
1999-2000 to 2002-03, with minor improvements estimated during 2003-04 (Mathura et al,
2006). While there has been decline in overall agricultural, there are considerable
interregional variations across the country. With regard to the period 1993 to 2003, the state-wise
analysis shows wide variations in growth from 28 per cent to -19 per cent taking the first three
years and last three years, viz, 1993-96 and 2000-03.
Farmers face floods, drought, pests, disease, and a plethora of other natural disasters. Crop
insurance as a risk management tool is being widely adopted both in developing and developed
countries. Agricultural crop insurance has assumed much importance with large scale damage
caused due to pest attacks, crop diseases and vagaries of weather. The objective here is to
provide insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of failure of any of
the notified crop as a result of natural calamities, pests and diseases. The list of crops being
covered for insurance differs from state to state. Generally quite a few Kharif and Rabi season
crops are covered. These crops are insured at the community/block/gram panchayat levels.
Agriculture insurance schemes are of immense help to farmers, providing them with financial
security.
 Developed countries have a variety of government-supported, agriculture-related insurance
services. But, in India, farmers generally rely on informal arrangements like diversifying crops,
favouring traditional practices over modern techniques, and entering into share-cropping
carrangements. Such arrangements, however, are not totally gainful in mitigating the risks as
efficiently as formal arrangements. Therefore, crop insurance as one of the means of reducing the
agricultural risks, indemnifies the losses arising from natural calamities like drought, flood,
storm and pests and diseases. Crop insurance brings in security and stability in farm income.

Crop insurance protects farmers‟ investment in crop production and thus improves their risk
bearing capacity. It facilitates adoption of improved technologies and encourages higher
investment resulting in higher agricultural production. Further, it spreads the crop losses that occur
due to uncontrollable natural factors, over space and time and helps farmers make more
investments in agriculture. Realizing the importance of potential contribution of crop insurance in
agricultural sector, the present paper aimed at (i) critically review the various crop insurance
schemes in Tamil Nadu state and (ii) work out the instability index for important crops.
 Definition

Crop insurance is purchased by agricultural producers, including farmers, ranchers, and

others to protect themselves against either the loss of their crops due to natural disasters, such as
hail, drought, and floods, or the loss of revenue due to declines in the prices of agricultural
commodities.

The two general categories of crop insurance are called crop-yield insurance and
croprevenue insurance.

Crop-yield insurance:

There are two main classes of crop-yield insurance

Crop-hail insurance

It is generally available from private insurers (in countries with private sectors) because
hail is a narrow peril that occurs in a limited place and its accumulated losses tend not to
overwhelm the capital reserves of private insurers. In early 1820s, crop-hail insurance were
available to farmers in France an):d Germany. That is among the earliest forms of hail insurance
from an actuarial perspective. It is possible to implement the hail risk into financial instruments
since the risk is isolated.

Multi-peril crop insurance (MPCI

Coverage in this type of insurance is not limited to just one risk. Usually multi-peril crop
insurance offers hail, excessive rain and drought in a combined package. Sometimes,
additionalrisks such as insect or bacteria-related diseases are also offered. The problem with the
multi-peril crop insurance is the possibility of a large scale event. The Risk Management Agency
(RMA) is active in calculating the premiums based on individual risk factors since 1996.
Crop-revenue insurance: Crop-yield times the crop price gives the crop-revenues. Based on
farmer's revenues, crop-revenue insurance is based on deviation from the mean revenue. RMA
uses the futures prices on harvest-times listed in the commodity exchange markets, to determined
the prices. Combining the future price with farmer's average production gives the estimated
revenue of the farmer. Accessing the futures market offers enables revenue protection even
before the crop planted. There is a single guarantee for a certain number of dollars. The policy
pays an indemnity if the combination of the actual yield and the cash settlement price in the
futures market is less than the guarantee. In the United States, the program is called Crop
Revenue Coverage. Crop-revenue insurance covers the decline in price that occurs during the
crop's growing season. It does not cover declines that may occur from one growing season.

Objective:

Provide a sustainable and feasible model for Private Insurance Companies to offer Crop
Insurance Schemes to the Rural Sector.

Importance of insurance for farmers:

Commercialization of agricultural products has increased in India. The fluctuation in the

price of the products has affected the income of the farmers significantly. Insurance of crop
production provides a relief to the farmers when the crop is damaged by attack of pests, flood,
drought or any other mean.

Synthesis:

Initially, the need is to segregate risks into preventable and unpreventable ones. Only the
unpreventable risks would be insured. For example, damage caused to crops due to floods,
drought, lightning, etc. The initial target market would be states or regions with moderate or low
risk of natural calamities. Insurance would be channeled through Farmers’ Co-operatives and
Farming Clubs. Selection of a homogenous agro-climatic area is essential to have uniform
premium rates for specific regions.
Features of Crop Insurance:

The sum insured generally equals the value of the threshold yield of the insured crop.

A farmer can get an insurance for an amount greater than the value of the threshold yield
by paying premiums at commercial rates

In case a farmer takes a loan for his crops, the sum insured is at least equal to the amount
of crop loan advanced

Insurance charges for loanee farmers are in addition to the loan charges

While all loanee farmers are automatically covered under the scheme, non-loanee
farmers need to approach the nearest banks within the stipulated time

Crop loans disbursed through Kisan Credit Cards are also eligible for this scheme In case of damages caused
by widespread calamities, claims are settled on area approach basis. Any insured crop in a notified area
recording a yield which is lower than the guaranteed yield (calculated on the basis of crop estimation surveys
by the state government) automatically becomes eligible for an insurance claim.

However, in case of areas notified for experimentation of individual loss assessment, the
farmer needs to intimate the crop loss within 48 hours to the local revenue or agriculture
department.
Need for Crop Insurance:

Crop insurance is one alternative to manage risk in yield loss by the farmers. It is the
mechanism to reduce the impact of income loss on the farmer (family and farming). Crop
insurance is a means of protecting farmers against the variations in yield resulting from
uncertainty of practically all natural factors beyond their control such as rainfall (drought or
excess rainfall), flood, hails, other weather variables (temperature, sunlight, wind), pest
infestation, etc. Crop insurance is a financial mechanism to minimize the impact of loss in farm
income by factoring in a large number of uncertainties which affect the crop yields. As such it is a
risk management alternative where production risk is transferred to another party at a cost
called premium. The weather based crop insurance uses weather parameters as proxy for crop
yield in compensating the cultivators for deemed crop losses

It provides a good alternative both to farmers and government. Farmers get on actuarially fair
insurance with swift payments at little administrative costs to the government. Rainfall insurance is
a specific form of weather insurance. As such weather insurance is not yield insurance while
crop insurance is. In both the cases cultivators pass risk in yield to another party for a premium.
The insurance need for agriculture, therefore, can not be over emphasized as it is a highly risky
economic activity because of its dependence on weather conditions. To design and implement an
appropriate insurance programmer for agriculture is therefore very complex and challenging
task. There are two approaches to crop insurance, namely, individual approach where yield loss
on individual farms forms the basis for indemnity payment, and homogeneous area approach
where a homogeneous crop area is taken as a unit for assessment of yield and payment of
indemnity. In both the cases reliable and dependable yield data for past 8-10 years are needed for
fixing premium on actuarially sound basis. Homogeneous area approach has the advantage of
availability of data on yield variations.
Data and Methodology:

This study is based on an analysis of data on Area, production and productivity of selected
crops which was taken from publications of Seasonal Crop Report of Tamil Nadu. Risk revealed
by instability index of area , production and productivity of selected crops is presented in Tables.

Further, the study used the data on area, yield and production for nine major crops viz.
paddy, Sorghum, maize, groundnut, chills, banana, cotton and sugarcane, total pulses for the
period 1980-81 to 2004-05. Instability index in area, production and yield for district level are
calculated for five periods. The Districts have a diversified cropping pattern in different regions
depending upon agro-climatic conditions and hence all the important crops were selected for the
present study.

There were 15 original composite Districts in the year 1980-81 that have been later
subdivided into as many as 29 Districts. For purpose of analysis, later data relating to subdivided
newer administrative Districts were merged with the corresponding composite Districts to make
the data comparable over years. Only five administrative Districts Erode, Coimbatore,
Pudukkottai, Kanniyakumari and Nilgiris have remained without sub divisions. Erstwhile
individual composite Districts were considered for the analysis.
BENEFITS OF CROP INSURANCE

Crop Insurance helps the farmer by reducing his income fluctuation. It enhances access to
low cost organized credit. It also encourages farmers to adopt progressive farming practices and
higher technology. From the Insurer’s point of view crop insurance is a huge opportunity in rural
India. It will help insurance companies to shift from a mandatory business to a desired business
Crop insurance can be a critical instrument of development in the field of crop production. It will
have a multiplier effect on the economy.

The Road Ahead:

Crop insurance will offer a platform for linking Microfinance to Crop Insurance. It
provides an opening for a sustainable Public-Private Partnership. Eventually insurance
companies can encompass cross selling of other financial products. Non-Annualized and Group
Insurance are innovative ways of providing insurance. If the Government permits we can link
general insurance to life insurance and offer a hybrid product.
 INDIAN AGRICULTURE: DEPENDENCE ON RAINFALL

Indian agriculture is heavily dependent on rainfall which largely occurs during monsoon
season of about two and half months. The abnormal behavior of monsoon may cause natural
disasters such as scarcity conditions or drought, floods, cyclones, etc. Nearly two thirds of the
cropped acreage is vulnerable to drought in different degrees. On an average 12 million hectares
of crop area is affected annually by these calamities severely impacting the yields and total
agricultural production.

About two thirds of the cultivated area has no irrigation. Even large part of irrigated area
does not get adequate water supply for intensive cropping (double cropping). In rained areas
sowing of kharif crops commences with the onset of monsoons and the delay in the onset of
monsoons delays sowing with its adverse impact on yield. Further the growth of crops and
realization of output are determined by the quantum of rainfall and its distribution during the
monsoon season. Even sowing of rabbi crops is determined by the soil moisture retained from the
rains especially during the later part of the monsoon season. Rainfall pattern affects the
irrigated crops also. Rainfall during flowering period washes the pollens adversely affecting the
crop yield. Excess rainfall may adversely affect the yield realization. Heavy rains may submerge
the growing crops in the early stages and may cause lodging in the later stages of crop growth. In
the catchments heavy rains may cause floods in the plains. The floods disrupt the sowing
schedule and damage the standing crops resulting in reduced yield or even total loss of crops and
farm income in addition to loss of property. Other weather variables that affect yield include
sunlight, temperature, wind, hails. In fact since time immemorial weather has been the major
adversary that the farmers are not able to control.

It has been established that 50 per cent of the variations in crop yield is due to variations in
rainfall.In any climatic zone crop yield among the farms varies with the soil, topography, tillage
operations and use of four complementary inputs, namely, seed, fertilizer, pesticides and
irrigation (soil moisture). Seed is the index of productivity which may be realized with the proper
tillage practices, irrigation and fertilizer use. Pesticides use avoids the loss in yield because of
pests and diseases.
 Not only quantum of these inputs but also their quality, and timings and method of use
affect the yield realization. These four dimensions of complementary inputs vary for the
individual farms in a year and for a farm over the years. In other words given the soil and
topography two sets of factors that affect yield on farms are climatic and managerial. Managerial
factors are in the control of farmers climatic factors are not.The loss of crop yield affects the
farmer and farming in more than one ways. Their inputs including labor get lost. The low yield
of major crops means reduced income and difficulty in arranging the necessities of life as well
as inputs for the next season. The repayment of outstanding loans becomes irregular
sometimes resulting in default. Though conversion of loans or their rescheduling helps the
farmers for eligibility for fresh loans from formal sources it may not solve their liquidity
problems completely. In some cases the farmers are compelled to divest and dispose of some
assets created over past years. Sometimes, they have to resort to costly borrowing from informal
sources.

The capacity of agriculture to hedge itself from vagaries of nature is considered crucial for
development and growth of the sector in particular and economy in general. The natural
calamities can slow the pace and process of development by reducing the food supplies and raw
materials in the short run. Successive failure of crops results in indebtedness of farmers with its
adverse impact on farming and farm economy and consequently the Economy in general.
 RISK AND UNCERTAINTY IN AGRICULTURE

Uncertainty refers to an event the outcome of which is not certain i.e. the outcome may be
one of the many possible outcomes. As such it can not be measured. But certain probability may
be attached to individual outcome. Risk on the other hand refers to the impact of the uncertain
outcome on the quantity or value of some economic variable. The value of the economic variable
may be on either side of the mean value. Repeated events would result different outcomes having a
range of values. Thus risk refers to the variations in value of an economic variable resulting from
the influence of an uncertain event. Since the variations in the value are measurable risk can be
measured.

Agricultural production is an outcome of biological activity which is highly sensitive to

changes in weather. Important weather variables such as temperature, humidity, rainfall, wind
etc. influence the biological process directly or indirectly. For instance, low soil moisture due to
poor precipitation in the pre-sowing period adversely affects seed germination resulting in
reduced plant population. The poor precipitation during growth period results in stunted plant
growth. Heavy rainfall during early growth period causes submersion of plants. Similarly
hailstorms, wind and cyclones damage the standing crops by lodging and uprooting especially the
perennials (trees and shrubs). High humidity may cause outbreak of pests and diseases. All
these result in partial loss in yield and sometimes complete crop failure and hence reduced
income to farmers. In other words, deviations in the Weather variables from the normal
adversely affect the crop yields and hence production and income on individual farms. As
variations in weather are more a regular phenomenon crop yields are not stable. As if all this is
not enough the sword of uncertain agricultural prices always hangs on the farmers’ fate. As a
consequence farm incomes fluctuate violently from year to year. These variations in income are
referred to as risk. The variations in income due to changes in yield are production risk and due
to changes in price marketing risk. As such risk (variations) may be measured in terms of
standard deviation or coefficient of variations for yield, prices and income.
In business risk is treated as a cost. Once in the business one has to bear this cost. Since, risk is
associated with the activity it cannot be eliminated so long the activity is carried out. It,
however, can be managed i.e., can be reduced or minimized but at a certain cost. Risk
management, therefore, implies minimization of income loss either by reducing variations in
output or ensuring certain minimum price or guaranteeing certain level of income. It is a process
of appraising and reducing risk. The ways devised to do so are referred to as risk management
alternatives. These are discussed under the following heads.

a. Avoiding Risk:
Some of the production risks can simply be avoided. For instance, eliminating more risky
enterprises would minimize risk but at the cost of decreased total production (returns). Laggards
always try to avoid risk. They opt for assured though low income enterprises.

b. Preventing Risk:
Many a time some risks could be prevented by taking advance action. For instance, risk of
loss in crop yield due to pest attack could be prevented by following preventive pest control. The
cost of this risk management alternative is the cost of preventive pest control.
c. Sharing Risk:

This alternative of risk management is quite common in India. Important example of risk
sharing is the share lease of land to tenants. The production risks are shared between the landlord
and the tenant in the ratio they share some inputs and the output. The cost of this alternative to
the landowner would be equal to the difference between the net income tenant earns less the cash
rent he would have paid for rental lease.

d. Transferring Risk:
Risk may be transferred from one entity to another. For instance, marketing risk could be
transferred to buyers by way of forward contract. It guarantees to pay an agreed price for the
produce to be realized in future. The cost of this alternative is the difference in value of output at
post harvest/market price less the value realized at the agreed price. Crop insurance is another
example of transferring production risk to another entity i.e., insurance company. In case the
crop prospects are reduced below certain minimum, proportionate indemnity is paid for the
expenditure incurred. The cost of this alternative is the premium paid by the farmer.

e. Spreading Risk:
Risk may be spread over a number of enterprises with varying degree of risk and of
course with varying level of net income. This is known as diversification. Diversification could
be in terms of mixed farming, diversified farming or even mixed cropping. The idea is not to put
all eggs in one basket. It would ensure some income realization from enterprises/crops even in
the event of adverse weather conditions etc. As net returns from combination of different
enterprises/crops would be less than the net returns from the most paying crop (pure) the
difference between the two would be the cost of this alternative.

f. Taking Risk:
Taking risk could be one of the alternatives to manage risk where the management cost is
nil because no attempt is made to reduce risk. The idea is to plan for maximum returns even at
high risk. Innovators and early adopters are the two categories of people who always are willing
to take risk. They go for high return enterprises exposing themselves to high risk.
 Typical Measures against Agriculture Risk Technical measures:

Dykes or embankment to protect from flood, assured irrigation from surface or

groundwater sources, use of pesticides, fertilizer, judicious use of land, crop rotation/mixed
cropping, choice of plant varieties and animal breeds, crop and animal husbandry practices,
genetic modification of crop pattern to adjust to the calamities, etc. Other than these, economic
measures like diversification of farm enterprises and by improvements in marketing and
institutional set-up might also work there. In many countries the state provides aid or relief to the
agricultural sector in the event of a natural catastrophe as a matter of Public Policy. In some
countries this is done on an ad hoc basis while in others there are formal arrangements and even
legislation for this purpose. It is true that globally agricultural production could be significantly
improved adopting such measures but the residual risk from the natural hazards still affecting
agricultural sector enormously. As already mentioned, in the changing climate it might aggravate
further. Moreover, the technical measures sometimes found to be not effective like some of them
might be counter-productive.
 EVOLUTION OF CROP INSURANCE IN INDIA

The question of introduction of crop insurance in India was taken up for examination soon
after independence in 1947. A special study to work out modalities of crop insurance was
commissioned in 1947-48 following an assurance given by the Ministry of Food and Agriculture
to introduce crop and cattle insurance in the country. The first aspect regarding the modalities of
crop insurance considered was whether it should be on Individual Approach or Homogenous
Area Approach. The individual approach seeks to indemnify the farmer to the full extent of the
losses and the premium to be paid by him is determined with reference to his own past yield and
loss experience. As such it necessitates reliable and accurate data of crop yields of individual
farmers for a sufficiently long period for fixation of premium on actuarially sound basis. The
homogenous area approach envisages that in the absence of reliable data of individual farmers
and in view of the moral hazards involved in the individual Approach, a homogenous area would
form the basic unit, instead of an individual farmer. The homogeneous area would comprise of
villages that are homogenous from the point of view of crop production and whose annual
variability of crop productivity would be similar. The study favored homogenous area approach.
Various agro-climatically homogenous areas to be treated as units and the individual farmers in
those area units would pay the same rate of premium and receive the same benefits, irrespective
of differential loss in individual yields. The ministry circulated the scheme for adoption by the
state governments but the states did not accept.

In 1965, the Central Government introduced a Crop Insurance Bill and circulated a model
scheme of crop insurance on compulsory basis to constituent state governments for their views.
The bill provided for the Central Government framing a reinsurance scheme to cover indemnity
obligations of the states. However because of very high financial obligations none of the states
accepted the scheme. On receiving the responses of state governments, the subject was
considered in detail by an Expert Committee headed by the then Chairman Agricultural Price
Commission set up in July 1970 for full examination of the economic, administrative, financial
and actuarial implications of the subject. Different experiments on crop insurance on a limited,
ad hoc and scattered scale started in 1972-73. By now we have the experience of a number
ofproducts including some of weather insurance. In what follows is a brief on the past experience
and availability of different products at present.
 Though, agricultural insurance is largely in the public domain some private efforts
especially in weather insurance have also been there for some time. Their experience is not all
that discouraging. The real challenge is to scale up the distribution and ensure fast claim
settlement. India, thus, has a publicly administered crop insurance scheme since 1972. All the
variants of the scheme introduced from time to time had flaws. Nevertheless India is not alone
where public crop insurance has not been successful. In both developed and developing countries
such insurance schemes have incurred losses without offering an effective product.. Public crop
insurance schemes are available to cultivators as means of reducing the cost associated with crop
failure. The schemes, however, suffers from moral hazards and adverse selection and are very
costly as payment eligibility is determined by crop damage assessment for each individual
farmer. There is a feeling that it is not profitable proposition at all.
 RATIONALE OF CROP INSURANCE

The modern insurance sector can play a major role to solve the problems mentioned
there, and considerably strengthen the financial security of farmers. Agricultural Insurance is a
more efficient instrument and an effective institutionalized mechanism for dealing with the
problem. It helps to streamline the relief efforts and reduces the direct and indirect costs on the
national economy. (Jain, 2004). For a number of reasons demand for crop insurance is increasing
day by day, which can be grouped as;

Evidence is accumulating of connections between climate change, and the increasing

incidence of crop damaging weather events of extreme severity.

Farming is becoming steadily more commercialized, with greater financial investment.

Farmer / investors and their banks frequently examine the feasibility of using a financial
mechanism i.e. insurance, in order to address part of the risk.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) regulations generally forbid will increase

subsidization of agricultural in governments from subsidizing agriculture directly;

however, they permit the insurance premiums. In the case, demand for crop insurance
those economies that wish to implement a policy of permitted subsidization of their
farmers.

Insurance can also assist in managing the on-farm production risks consequent changes in
past management practices. Such changes are increasingly required in order to address
environmental protection and food safety concerns.
Problems associated with Crop Insurance Implementation:

There are some problems of implementing crop insurance at field level. The major ones are
finding the right client, the provider and the product design.

Firstly, without the right group of farmers and approach this might look like a relief to
farmers, which will hamper the objective of the programme.

Secondly, three different channels of providers can work:

1. Full service provision by an NGO/MFI,

2. Full service provision by a mainstream insurance company and

3. Collaboration between the two within a partner-agent model

Many issues influence the selection of the channel of provision for offering crop micro
insurance. These issues include the motivation and goals of the provider, the costs of provision,
human resources and information capabilities, access to clients, access to reinsurance and
support by subsidies and donors.

Another problem is product design. Developing a viable insurance plan begins with the
identification of the risks, deciding upon the method for estimating the loss of crops, setting the
premiums etc. Without the right amount of premium the insurance will neither be viable nor
sustainable for long.

Many countries, including the US, are doing crop insurance. In India, multi-peril crop
insurance, by the name of National Agriculture Insurance Scheme (NAIS), is being
implemented. This is implemented by Agriculture Insurance Company of India, an Indian
government-owned company. The scheme is compulsory for all the farmers who take
agricultural loans from any financial institution. It is voluntary for all other farmers.

Obstacles to implement Crop Insurance in Developing countries:

o Lack of reliable long period data on crop yields and losses

o Wide variety of agricultural practices

o General ignorance and poverty of farmers

o Lack of trained personnel

o Limited financial resources of the countries

o Lack of insurance consciousness amongst farmers

 PAST EXPERIENCE IN CROP INSURANCE

First Ever-Individual Approach Scheme:

In 1972-73, the General Insurance Department of Life Insurance Corporation of India

introduced a Crop Insurance Scheme on H-4 cotton. Later in 1972, general insurance business
was nationalized by an Act of Parliament, and the General Insurance Corporation of India (GIC)
was set up. The new corporation took over the experimental scheme in respect ofH-4 cotton in
Gujarat. The Scheme was based on "Individual Approach". Subsequently the scheme included
groundnut, wheat, potato and gram and was implemented in the states of Gujarat, Maharashtra,
Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and West Bengal. The scheme continued till 1978-79.
However, it covered only 3110 farmers for a premium of Rs.4.54 lakhs against claims of
Rs.37.88 lakhs indicating its non-viability and non-popularity.

Pilot Crop Insurance Scheme (PCIS) - 1979:

The background and experience of the aforesaid experimental schemes for crop
insurance, a study was commissioned by GIC and entrusted to eminent agricultural economist,
Prof. V.M. Dandekar. Based on the recommendations of Prof. Dandekar, a Pilot Crop Insurance
Scheme was introduced by GIC in 1979.
The important features of the scheme were:

The scheme was based on "Area Approach".

1) The scheme covered cereals, millets, oilseeds, cotton, potato and gram.

2) The scheme was available to loanee farmers only and on voluntary basis.

3) The risk was shared between General Insurance Corporation of India and State Governments
in the ratio of 2:1.

4) The maximum sum insured was 100 per cent of the crop loan, which was later increased to
150 per cent.

5) A 50 per cent subsidy was provided for insurance charges payable by small andmarginal
farmers by the State Government and the Government of India on 50:50basis. The PCIS
launched in 1979 continued till 1984-85 and was implemented in 13 states. During this period
it covered 6.27 lakh farmers for total premium of Rs.196.95 lakhs against claims of Rs.157.05
lakhs.
 PRODUCT IN THE MARKET

A number of crop insurance products are available to farmers in different geographical

areas and for different purposes. These include National Agricultural Insurance Scheme,
Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme, Wheat Insurance (Weather & Biomass), Rabi Weather
Insurance, Potato Insurance, Poppy Insurance, Varsha Bima (Rainfall Insurance) for seasonaland
annual crops. Insurance products are also available for plantation crops in specific geographical
areas such as Uttarakhand Seb Bima Yojana (Apple Insurance), Grapes Insurance, Rainfall
Insurance Scheme for Coffee Growers (Coffee Insurance), Bio-Fuel Tree / Plant Insurance,
Pulpwood Tree Insurance, Coconut Insurance, Rubber Insurance and Mango Insurance for
plantation crops in specific geographic area. We present here a brief description of selected field
crop related insurance products, namely, National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS),
Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme (WBCIS), Varsha Bima 2005, Wheat Insurance.

National Agricultural Insurance Scheme:

Keeping in view the demands of States for improving scope and contents of CCIS, a broad-
based National Agricultural Insurance Scheme (NAIS) has been introduced in the country from
Rabi 1999-2000 with the following objectives.

To provide insurance coverage and financial support to the farmers in the event of failure of
any of the notified crop as a result of natural calamities, pests and diseases.

1) To encourage the farmers to adopt progressive farming practices, high value inputs and
higher technology in Agriculture.

2) To help stabilize farm incomes, particularly in disaster years.

3) Some of the improvements incorporated in the new scheme are visible from the following
A) Scope of the Scheme

I) Area Coverage:

The scheme was available to all states and union territories on optional basis. However the
states opting for the scheme were required to take up all the crops identified for coverage in a
given year and shall have to continue for a minimum period of three years before it may quit. For
Rabi 1999 only eight states (Assam, Goa, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh,
Maharashtra and Orissa) and union territory of Pondicherry opted for the scheme. This number
was increased to 17 in Kharif 2000 and to 21 in Kharif 2002. Currently the scheme has been
implemented in 23 states and two union territories. Punjab, Manipur, Nagaland, and Arunachal
Pradesh among states and Chandigarh, Daman & Diu, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Lakshadeep
among union territories have not yet opted for the scheme.

II) Farmers covered:

All farmers including sharecroppers and tenant farmers growing notified crops in notified
areas are eligible for coverage under the scheme. However, it is compulsory for loanee farmers
availing crop loans from financial institutions (PACS, RRBs, and commercial banks). While all
loanee farmers would automatically get compulsorily coverage under NAIS through PACS /
bank branches extending crop loan for insured crops all non-loanee farmers desirous of availing
insurance coverage should contact the nearest bank branch before the stipulated time frame with a
proposal for insurance. They must have a bank account and pay the requisite premium to get
insurance coverage.
III) Risks Covered:

The scheme provides comprehensive risk insurance against yield losses due to no
preventable risks, i.e.

(a) natural fire and lightening,

(b) storm, hailstorm, cyclone, typhoon,\ tempest, hurricane, tornado etc.,

(c) flood, inundation and landslide,

(d) drought, dry spells, and

(e) pests / diseases etc.

However losses arising out of war and nuclear risks, malicious damage and other preventable
risks shall be excluded.

IV) Crops Covered:

The scheme besides food and oilseed crops also covered annual commercial and
Horticultural Crops. The crops in respect of which the past yield data based on Crop Cutting
Experiments (CCEs) are available for past 10 years and the state government agreed to conduct
requisite number of CCEs for estimating the average yield during the proposed season are
covered. The crops to be covered next year will have to be spelt before the close of preceding
year. At present 35 different Kharif and 30 different Rabi season crops are being insured under
NAIS in the country. The crops covered in various states fall under the following groups.

a) Food crops (cereals, millets and pulses): Wheat, paddy, Jowar, Bajra, Maize, Ragi, Korra,
Kodokutki, Green gram, Black gram, Red gram, Horse gram, Moth etc.
b) Oilseeds: Groundnut, Sunflower, Soya bean, Safflower, Sesame, Niger, Caster etc.

c) Annual commercial/horticultural crops: Sugarcane, Cotton, Potato, Onion, Chilly,

Turmeric, Ginger, Coriander, Cumin, Fennel, Fenugreek, Isabgol, Jute, Tapioca, Banana,
Pineapple, etc. However mangoes, apples, grapes and oranges are not yet covered.

V) Unit of Insurance:

The scheme operates on the basis of area approach i.e., defined areas (unit of insurance) for
each notified crop for widespread calamities. The unit area of insurance may be a Gram
Panchayat, Mandal, Hobli, Circle, Phirka, Block, Taluka etc. as decided by the state government.
However, each participating state was required to reach the level of Gra Panchayat as the unit in
a maximum period of three years. The assessment of loss is estimated through CCEs conducted
by the state administration. In case of localized calamities such as hailstorm, landslide, cyclone
and flood the scheme operates on the basis of individual approach. To begin with, NAIS was to b
implemented in limited areas on experimental basis initially and extended in the light of
operational experience gained. The individual farmers would intimate the crop loss within 48
hours to local revenue or agricultural department. The District Revenue administration would
assist implementing agency in assessing the extent of loss.

B) Sum Insured and Premium:

In case of loanee farmers the sum insured would be at least equal to the amount of crop
loan advanced (scale of finance plus insurance charges). The sum insured may extend to the
value of the threshold yield of the insured crop at the option of the insured farmer. For nonloanee
farmers the coverage at normal rates of premium is available up to the value of threshold yield
(at MSP or market price). Both loaned and non-loaner farmers can obtain additional coverage up
to 150 per cent of value of average yield of the notified area by payment of premium at actuarial
rates. A non-loanee farmer would produce a proof of ownership of land. In case of sharecropper /
tenant farmer a proof showing crop sharing/tenancy arrangements would be needed to obtain the
insurance cover.

The threshold yield (TY) or guaranteed yield for a crop in an insurance unit is the moving
average based on past three years average yield in case of Rice and Wheat and five years average
yield in case of other crops, multiplied by the level of indemnity. Three levels of indemnity, viz.,
90, 80 and 60 per cent corresponding to low risk, medium risk and high risk areas would be
available for all crops (cereals, millets, pulses and oilseeds and annual commercial and
horticultural crops) based on coefficient of variation (C.V.) in yield of past 10 years' data.
However, the insured farmers of unit area may opt for higher level of indemnity on payment of
additional premium based on actuarial rates.

The premium payable is fixed for groups of crops on the basis of the nature of yield
variations observed historically. Over time these would be replaced by actuarial rates. The
actuarial rate may include pure risk premium, administrative costs, reserve for unexpected losses,
and allowance for enhanced scale of finance, adverse selection and moral hazards, and profit
margin. Pure risk component would be higher for basic crops than for commercial and
horticultural crops. Transition to the actuarial regime in case of cereals, millets, pulses and
oilseeds would be made in a period of five years. The actuarial rates would be applied at District /
Region / State level at the option of the state / union territory. fixed are given in Table.
SEASONS CROPS PREMIUM RATE
Kharif Bajra and oilseeds othercrop 3.5% of SI or Actuarial rate
(cereals other millets and Whichever is less
pulses). 2.5% of SI or Actuarial rate
Whichever is less
Rabi Wheat othercrop (cereals 1.5% of SI or Actuarial rate
other millets and pulses). Whichever is less
2.0% of SI or Actuarial rate
Whichever is less
Kharif & Rabi Annual Commercial/ Actuarial rate
Horticultural crop

A subsidy of 50 per cent in premium is allowed in respect of small and marginal farmers, to be
shared equally by the Centre and State/Union Territory. The premium subsidy will be phased out
on a sunset basis in a period of three to five years, subject to review of the financial results and
the response of the farmers at the end of the first year of the implementation of the scheme. The
definition of small and marginal farmer would be as defined in the land ceiling legislation of the
concerned state. Normally a cultivator with a land holding of up to 1 hectare (2.5 acres) is
marginal farmer and 1-2 hectares (5 acres) is small.

C) Estimation of Crop Yield, Indemnity and Claim Settlement

The state government or union territory administration would plan and conduct
therequisite number of Crop Cutting Experiments (CCEs) for all notified crops in the notified
insurance units in order to assess the crop yield and maintain a single series of CCEs and
resultant yield estimates, both for crop production estimates and crop insurance. CCEs would be
undertaken per unit area for each crop on a sliding scale as indicated in Table 3. A Technical
Advisory Committee (TAC) comprising of representatives from NSSO, Ministry of
Agriculture(GOI) and Implementing Agency would be constituted to decide the sample size of
CCEs and all other technical matters.
Minimum Number of CCEs for Unit Areas

If the Actual Yield (AY) per hectare of the insured crop for the defined area on the basis of
requisite number of CCEs in the insured season falls short of the specified TY, all the insured
farmers growing that crop in the defined area are deemed to have suffered shortfall in yield (SY).
The scheme seeks to provide coverage against such contingency. Indemnity shall be calculated
as per the following formula:

Indemnity = (SY / TY)*[Sum Insured for the Farmer]

where, SY = TY - AY for the defined area

In case of occurrence of localized perils such as hailstorm, landslide, cyclone and flood where
settlement of claims would be on individual basis, loss assessment and modified indemnity
procedures would be formulated by the implementing agency in coordination with state / UT.
The broad seasonality discipline to be followed is given in Tale 4. It may be modified, if and
where necessary, in consultation with state / UT and the Government of India.

Management of the Scheme:

In respect of loanee farmers, the banks play the same role as under CCIS. In respect of non-
loanee farmers, banks collect the premium along with the declarations and send it to IA within
the prescribed time limits. However, in areas where IA has requisite infrastructure, a nonloan
farmer has the option to pay premium along with declaration directly to IA within the
timelimits. The selection of the banks would be on the basis of Service Area Approach of the RBI
or at the option of the Banks (where Co-operative Banks have good network).
 Department of Agriculture, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Department of
Cooperation, Revenue Department of the state governments would be actively involved in
smooth implementation of the scheme. The scheme is be implemented in accordance with the
operational modalities as worked out by IA, in consultation with Department of Agriculture and
Cooperation. During each crop season, the agricultural situation is closely monitored in the
implementing state / UT. Department of Agriculture and district administration set up a
District Level Monitoring Committee (DLMC), who would provide fortnightly reports of
agricultural situation with details of area sown, seasonal weather conditions, pest incidence, stage
of crop failure (if any) etc. The operation of the scheme would be reviewed annually, and
modifications as may be required would be introduced. Periodic Appraisal Reports on the
Scheme would be prepared by Ministry of Agriculture, the Government of India or Implementing
Agency. Efforts would be made by IA to obtain appropriate reinsurance cover for the proposed
NAIS in the international Reinsurance market.

Based Weather Crop Insurance Scheme:

Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme (WBCIS) is a unique weather based insurance
product designed to provide insurance protection against losses in crop yield resulting from
adverse weather incidences. In provides payout against adverse rainfall incidence (both deficit
and excess) during Kharif and adverse incidence in weather parameters like frost, heat, relative
humidity, un-seasonal rains etc. during rabi season. As such it is not yield guarantee insurance.
WBCIS has been piloted in the country since Kharif 2003 season. Some of the states where the
scheme is piloted over the years are Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chattisgarh, Gujarat , Haryana,
Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh etc.
I. Reference Unit Area:

Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme (WBCIS) operates on the concept of area approach.
That is, for the purposes of compensation, a ‘Reference Unit Area (RUA)’ is deemed to be a
homogeneous unit of Insurance. The RUA is notified before the commencement of Kharif season
by the State Government and all the insured cultivators of a particular insured crop in that area
are deemed at on par in the assessment of claims. Each RUA is linked to a Reference Weather
Station (RWS), on the basis of which current weather data and the claims would be processed.
Adverse weather incidences during the season entitle the insured a payout, subject to the weather
triggers defined in the ‘Payout Structure’ and the terms and conditions of the scheme.

For Rabi season the weather triggers are broadly fixed to capture the adverse incidence of
weather parameters on yield. Claims arise when there is a certain adverse deviation in actual
weather parameter incidence in RUA as per the weather data measured at RWS. The actual may
be more or less than compared to what has been specified in the Benefit Table leading to crop
losses. In such case all the insured cultivators under a particular crop are deemed to have
suffered the same adverse deviation and become eligible for claim subject to terms and
conditions of the scheme. The claim settlement is automatic process based on weather readings
at the RWS. Insured cultivators are not required to make a claim. In a given RUA the payout
given per unit area is the same for all cultivators under the same RWS. Weather insurance
payouts are assured with in 45 days from the end of insurance period. For traditional crops where
payout is linked to yield estimates claim processing may take more time.
II. Sum Insured:

The amount of insurance protection is broadly the cost of inputs expected to be incurred by
the insured in raising the crop. Sum insured is pre-declared per unit area by AIC at the beginning
of each crop season in consultation with the experts in state government, and it may be different
for different crops in different RUA. Sum insured is further distributed under key weather
parameters used in the insurance in proportion to the relative importance of the weather
parameters. For a loanee the sum insured per crop is calculated by multiplying per unit area
value of inputs with crop specific acreage declared in the loan application form by the loanee
cultivator for the purpose of maximum borrowing limit fixed for him by the lending bank. For the
non-loanee the acreage figure is the expected area sown / planted under the particular crop as
declared in the insurance proposal form.

III. Premium Payable

a. Food Crops and Oil Seeds

SR.NO. CROPS PREMIUM PAYABLE BY THE

INSURED CULTIVATOR
1 Wheat 1.5% of SI or Actuarial rate Whichever
is less
2 Othercrop (cereals 2.0% of SI or Actuarial rate Whichever
other millets and is less
pulses).
b. Annual Commercial or Horticultural Crops

SR.NO. Premium Subsidy & Premium

Slab
1 Up to 2% No Subsidy
2 2-5% 25%, subject to minimum net premium of 2% payable by farmer

3 5-8% 40%, subject to minimum net premium of 3.75% payable by

farmer
4 8% 50%, subject to minimum net premium of 4.8% & max 6%
payable by farmer

IV. Advantages of WBCIS

Weather based crop insurance scheme has many advantages which make it beneficial for
cultivators in their production risk management such as the following.

a) Trigger events like adverse weather can be independently verified and measured.

b) It allows speedy settlement of claims.

c) All farmers can buy WBCIS.

d) Government provides subsidy in premium and hence premium payable is affordable.

e) It provides transparent, fully objective, efficient and direct payouts for adverse weather
incidences.
f) Insured is not required to submit claim form or other documents as proof for loss.

g) Since the weather data decides the compensation the insured is willing to put extra
effort for getting better yield of crop.
Rabi Weather Insurance:

Weather Insurance (Rabi) is a mechanism for providing effective risk management aid to
those individuals and institutions likely to be impacted by adverse weather incidences.

The most important benefits of Weather Index Insurance are:

1) Trigger events like adverse weather events can be independently verified and measured.

2) It allows for speedy settlement of indemnities, as early as a fortnight after the indemnity
period.

3) All growers, be it Small /Marginal; Owners or tenants/Sharecroppers can buy the weather
insurance.

Wheat, Mustard, Gram, Potato, Masoor, Barley and Coriander are the major Rabiseason
crops mostly in the states of UP, MP, Maharashtra and Rajasthan. These crops are
extremely vulnerable to weather factors, such as excess rainfall, frost, and fluctuation in
temperature etc. Agriculture Insurance Company of India would compensate the insured,
against the Likelihood of diminished crop output/ yield resulting from: Maximum
Temperature (° C) above the trigger level and / or Deviation in Temperature Range from the
normal above the Trigger value and / or Minimum Temperature (° C) below the trigger level
and / or Minimum Temperature below 4° C resulting frost and / or Rainfall in excess of the
trigger levels (calculated on daily/ weekly/ monthly basis) and / or Bright Sunshine Hour
below the trigger level. The insurance operates during the months of December to April.
However the period is Different for different parameters and crops.
 Claims are automated; and settled on the basis of actual maximum temperature, Minimum
temperature, rainfall and BSH received from the concerned agencies/ institutions as Applicable
to each crop separately. Claims when become payable, are paid at a uniform rate to all the
insured growers in the area (jurisdiction of reference weather station) growing the Insured crop
with in 4-6 weeks after insurance period. Maximum liability is linked to cost of cultivation and
varies from crop to crop.

Insurance Policy:

Wheat insurance policy is a unique technology based insurance product combining crop
vigor / biomass (Normalized Difference Vegetative Index - NDVI) and weather (temperature /
rainfall) parameters. The NDVI component of cover measured at peak vigor stage provides
effective risk management aid to those wheat growers who are likely to be impacted by poor
growth of the crop arising out of non-preventable natural factors. It is insurance against the
likelihood of diminished wheat yield resulting from lower NDVI within the specified taluk
preferably during February and/or high temperature consecutively for specified number of days
above specified levels in 1st and / or 2nd fortnight of March as measured at RWS.

The insurance is linked to biomass triggers. Trigger events could be measured using high
technology standards based in satellite imagery from remote sensing technology which could be
independently verified and measured, and accurate and allows for speedy settlement of
indemnities even before the crop is ready for harvesting.

When the current NDVI falls short of the specified trigger level, the benefits payable to the
insured will be the sum specified corresponding to trigger level and or the maximum temperature
of specified number of days as recorded at RWS is higher than the specified trigger level during
1st and / or 2nd fortnight of March the benefit payable to insured shall be the sum specified
corresponding to trigger level. The premium chargeable is statistically / actuarially calculated
based on the geographical area, the triggers specified and biomass and temperature patterns of the
specified area in the historical periods.
Benefits expected from scheme:

The scheme is expected to

1. Be a critical instrument of development in the field of crop production, providing financial support to the
farmers in the event of crop failure.
2. Encourage farmers to adopt progressive farming practices and higher technology in
Agriculture.

3. Help in maintaining flow of agricultural credit.

4. Provide significant benefits not merely to the insured farmers, but to the entire
community directly and indirectly through spillover and multiplier effects in terms of
maintaining production and employment, generation or market fees, taxes etc. And net
accretion to economic growth.

5. Streamline loss assessment procedures and help in building up huge and accurate
statistical base for crop production.
 Comparison of NAIS and WBGIS

SR.NO. National Agricultural Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme

Insurance Scheme (NAIS) (WBCIS)

1 Practically all risks covered Parametric weather related risks like rainfall,
(drought, excess rainfall, flood, frost, heat (temperature), humidity etc. are
hail, pest infestation, etc.) covered.
However, these parametric weather
Parameters appear to account for majority of
crop losses

2 Easy-to-design if historical Technical challenges in designing weather

yield data up to 10 years’ is Indices and also correlating weather indices
available. with yield losses. Needs up to 25 years’
historical weather data
3 High basis risk {difference Basis risk with regard to weather could be
between the yield of the Area high for rainfall and moderate for others like
(Block / Tehsil) and the frost, heat, humidity etc
individual farmers}.

4 Objectivity and transparency is Objectivity and transparency is relatively high.

relatively less.

5 Quality losses are beyond Quality losses to some extent gets reflected
Consideration. through weather index.

6 High loss assessment costs. No loss assessment costs.

7 Delays in claims settlement. Faster claims settlement.

 CROP INSURANCE IN MAHARASHTRA

Maharashtra is one of the leading states in the country in Horticulture Development .The diverse agro-
climatic conditions of the state are very congenial for cultivation of various horticultural crops. The area
under fruit crops which was 2.42 lakh hectare. in 1990 has gone up to 37.88 lakh hectare in 2013-14.
Similarly, the area under various vegetables, spices crops and floriculture has also increased
substantially. This is mainly due to the Government policies like establishment of separate Department
of Horticulture in 1981 and linking horticulture development with Employment Guarantee Scheme in
1990. Creation of various infrastructure facilities like establishment of horticulture nurseries, irrigation
facilities also helped for horticulture development. India‘s crop insurance programme is the world‘s
largest with 25 million farmers insured. Yet 85 million farmer‘s households are not covered. Mango
(Mangifera indica) is the most important fruit of India and is known as ―King of fruits‖. Mango covers
an area of 4946 thousand hectare with a production of 37.12 million tons in the world during the year of
2010 while it covers an area of 2516 thousand hectare with production of 18431.3 thousand MT and
productivity of 7.3 MT per hectare.
 In 2013-2014 the area under mango in Maharashtra was 485 thousand hectare, with production of
1212.50 thousand MT and productivity of 2.5 MT per hectare. Though the productivity of mango in the
state is much low as compared to national average, the state has 1.58 lakh hectares area 69 in Konkan
division under the export quality cultivar ―Alphanso‖. The share of the state in total export of mangoes
from the country is 60- 65 per cent. Besides export, there is good demand for Alphanso, Keshar,
Dashahari etc. varieties in other parts of the country also. Considering the demand for processed
products like pickles, juice etc. there is a scope for establishment of processing units in the state. The
Mango crop is also covered under insurance scheme and in 2014, the 1024 farmers were beneficiaries
for the crop insurance in the Ratnagiri District of Konkan region, therefore to know the status of
beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries of Mango insured farmers,

SOCIO-ECONOMIC BACKGROUND OF RATNAGIRI DISTRICT

This chapter devoted to the socio economic background information of Ratnagiri district which was
selected for the present study. A brief account of the agro-physical and socio-economic conditions
prevailing in the district is given so as to have better understanding of the region and help interpretation of
results and for drawing inferences/conclusions. It is necessary to understand various factors like
topography, location, climate, rainfall, soils, irrigation, marketing, transport and communication facilities
which decide the suitability of a particular enterprise in that area.

Location
Ratnagiri district is a part of Konkan region formed by narrow strip running from North to South along the
Western coast of India. It lies between 16ᴼ 30‘ to 18ᴼ 04‘ North latitude and 73ᴼ 02‘ to 73ᴼ 52‘ East
latitude. The district has a North South length of about 180 km. and the average East-West extension of
about 64 km. except in its extremities which taper to join coastal line. Total geographical area of the district
is 8.16 lakh hectare, which is 2.65 per cent of total geographical area of Maharashtra.

Boundaries
Ratnagiri district is surrounded by Sahyadri hills in the East and beyond the sahyadri hills Satara,Sangli
and Kolhapur districts are located. Arabian Sea in the West, Sindhudurg district in the South and Raigad in
the North.
 Topography
Ratnagiri district could divided in to three geographical zones on the basis of physical features viz., 94 i)
Hilly area of Sahyadri ranges to the East. ii) Plateau surface in the middle part of the district, which is used
for cultivation of cereal crops, like rice and nagli. iii) The coastal plain, where cultivation of coconut and
arecanut gardens are undertaken. Over 85 per cent of the land surface in Ratnagiri district is hilly. From
total geographical area of Ratnagiri district about 69.07 per cent area is arable land but from that only 45.72
per cent area is under cultivation

Soils
The predominant soils of the Ratnagiri district are laterite soils, which vary in colour from bright red to
brownish red owing to the preponderance of hydrated iron oxides. These soils are always acidic and fairly
well supplied with nitrogen, potassium and organic matter. Texture of soil is loamy and the depth varies
from one foot to three feet, soil is porous, non retentive of moisture and are found well over the district.
The soils are found in several grades. The main grades are. 1. Soil, which holds moisture up to some extent,
which is coastal alluvial soil useful for coconut and arecanut orchard. 2. Varkas soils useful for cashewnut,
mango fruits and nagli cultivation. 3. Salty lands locally known as ―Khar‖ or ―Khajan‖ land.

Climate

The climate of the district is generally humid. Being a coastal district, the variation in temperature during
the day and throughout the season is not large. Maximum temperature at the coast rarely goes beyond 35ᴼ
C and in the interior it seldom crosses 40ᴼ C. 95 There are three seasons viz. a) Summer (March to May), b)
Mansoon (June to October) and c) Winter (November to February). The climate of the district is very
humid and the relative humidity seldom goes below 50 per cent.

Land utilization
Land is one of the most important factors of production. The topography of the district makes most of the
part of its land unsuitable for cultivation. Land utilization in Ratnagiri district is given in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1 Pattern of land utilization in Ratnagiri district (2013-14)

table
Sr. No. Land use category Area (00’ ha) Percentages to total geographical area 1. Area under forest 60 0.73
2. Land put to non-agricultural uses 210 2.57 3. Barren and uncultivable land 1980 24.25 4. Cultivable
waste land 1382 16.93 5. Land under miscellaneous tree crops and groves 492 6.02 6. Permanent pastures
and other grazing land 280 3.43 7. Current fallow 510 6.25 8. Other fallow 680 8.33 9. Net area sown 2580
31.60 10. Area sown more than once 335 4.10 11. Gross cropped area 2915 35.70 12. Total geographical
area 8164 100 Source: (Socio-economic Review and District Statistical Abstract of Ratnagiri District,
2013-14).

It is observed from the data presented in Table 3.1 that there is good scope for increasing area under
cultivation by bringing the 96 cultivable waste land under cultivation, which was 16.93 per cent of the total
geographical area in the district. The proportion of area under forest was very low 0.73 per cent of the total
geographical area, which needs to be increased. As a result of high proportion of cultivable waste land as
well as barren and uncultivable land, the proportion of net area sown to total geographical area was only
31.60 per cent.

Cropping pattern

The area under different crops in Ratnagiri district is presented in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Cropping pattern of Ratnagiri district (2013-14)
Sr. No. Crop Area (00’ ha) Percentage to total area sown 1. Rice 811 31.46 2. Other cereal 301 11.68 3.
Total cereals 1112 43.13 4. Total pulses 40 1.55 5. Total food grains(cereals + pulses ) 1152 44.69 6. a)
Mango b) Cashew c) Total fruits d) Total vegetables 75 208 286 11 2.91 8.07 11.10 0.43 7. Total fruits and
vegetables 297 11.52 8. Spices and condiments 9 0.35 9. Total food crops 1458 56.56 10. Total oil seeds 71
2.75 11. Total non- food crops 1455 56.44 12. Gross cropped area 2913 36.00 13. Area cropped more than
once 335 12.99 14. Total area under crops 2578 100

Source: (Socio-economic Review and District Statistical Abstract of Ratnagiri district, 2013-14). 97

It is seen from Table 3.2 that cereal crops dominate the cropping pattern of Ratnagiri district. Among the
cereal crops, rice is a predominating crop during kharif accounting for 811 ha (31.46%) on a limited area,
where water is available, the rice is grown in rabihot weather season, usually the mono cropping of rice is
practiced. The proportion of pulses in the total area is only 1.55 per cent. The spices and condiments are
grown on 9 ha (0.35%), fruits and vegetables are grown on 296 ha (11.52%). Fruit crops mainly consist of
mango and cashew. Looking to the cropping pattern, it was observed that cropping pattern of Ratnagiri
district was directed towards cash crops like mango, cashewnut, coconut, spices and condiments which
results into the higher returns per hectare to the cultivators of this region.

Irrigation

The total cropped area in the district was 2.91 lakh hectare Out of which irrigated area was only 7126
hectare, which is 2.45 per cent of the total cropped area. There is no major irrigation project in the district.
One medium irrigated project viz. Natuwadi Medium Irrigation Project (Tahasil-Khed) is completed with
total command area of 2050 ha. The work of second Medium Minor Irrigation project on Gadnadi, Tal.
Sangameshwar is in progress, which is having command area of 2576 ha The district receives very high
rainfall; however, most of the water runs into the sea due to undulating and hilly terrain. The main source
of irrigation is through MI projects and dug wells. 7126 ha area is irrigated through canal irrigation and by
dug wells. The important crops grown under irrigation are rice, pulses, spices, groundnut, coconut, arecanut
and other vegetables. The 98 main source of irrigation is well irrigation followed by surface irrigation i.e.
Govt. canals, private canals, tanks etc.
Rivers
The major rivers flowing through this district are Savitri, Vashishit, Jagbudi, Shastri, Bav, Muchkundi and
Jaitapur. All the rivers in the district originate from the Sahyadri ranges and have reached their base level
of erosion within a distance of 20 km. All the rivers in the district flow from east to west and merge in the
Arabian Sea. Most of the rivers in the district are not perennial though they are over flooded during
monsoon due to heavy rains.

Rainfall

Rainfall is not uniform in all parts of the district. It increases rapidly from the coast towards the Western
Ghats on the Eastern border of the district. The average rainfall during the year 2011-12 was 4841 mm.
The entire rainfall of the district occurs during the months from June to October. July is the month of
highest rainfall.

Area and population

The total geographical area of the district is 8.16 lakh hectare which is 2.65 per cent of total geographical
area of Maharashtra. According to the 2011 census, the total population of the region was 16.96 lakhs.
Proportion of male population was 46.87 per cent and female was 53.18 per cent in the total population.
The number of females per 1000 males were higher in this district i.e. 1122. The density of population per
sq. km is 207 as against 314 for Maharashtra state. The proportion of rural population was about 88.67 per
cent. According to 2011 census, the total number of workers in the district were 5,75,756, which accounted
for 35.2 per cent to the total population. Agriculture is main occupation of majority of 99 people as 52.42
per cent people are farmers and 8.09 per cent people are agricultural labours. The percentage of literacy
was 74.25 per cent. The density of population is 175 per sq.km.
 CROP INSURANCE IN TAMIL NADU

Implementation of weather insurance plan in Tamil Nadu:

Tamil Nadu has joined 13 other states to run a weather insurance plan on a pilot basis.
The plan is expected to cover around 1 million farmers by the end of the current rabi season. The
pilot, which is being run by AIC in 13 states including Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Bihar,
Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, offers farmers a substitute to the National
Agriculture Insurance Scheme (NAIS).

Initially, five districts - Dharmapuri, Salem, Virudunagar, Ariyalur and Perambalur- will be
covered in Tamil Nadu. The pilot project will run for 2 or 3 seasons for which central and state
governments have provided Rs 2 crore each as subsidy. The premium for Rs 10,000 sum assured
would be Rs 1,095, of which Rs 870 will be contributed by both central and state governments
while farmers will contribute the remaining Rs 225.

The Agriculture Insurance Company of India Limited would implement weather-based crop
insurance during the kharif seasonin virudhunagar and the insurance would be implemented for
food grains, cotton and horticulture crops. All farmers immaterial of whether they avail
themselves of crop loan or not could benefit from the insurance scheme. They should pay the
premiums at nationalised banks, primary agriculture cooperative banks. The compensation for
every acre of paddy, maize and ground nut is Rs. 10,000. While the premium for paddy and
maize is Rs. 276, it is Rs. 386 for ground nut. The compensation for various crops is in the range
of Rs. 5,000 an acre to Rs. 40,000. The premium is in the range of Rs. 138 to Rs. 2,647.

Current issues on crop insurance in Tamil Nadu:

For Dindigul District government has sanctioned Rs.25 lakh to assist farmers in insuring
their crops for 2009-10. Paddy, maize, cotton, millet, groundnut, sugarcane, banana, onion and
all kharif crops, will be insured during this season. Those who wanted to insure their crops could
contact the Primary Agriculture Cooperative Banks and nationalised banks for details. Even
leased farmers can avail the benefits. The State government would pay 50 per cent of the total
premium. Compensation would be given for crop damage owing to flood, cyclone, drought, fire
and lightening and pest attacks.

In case of Nagapattinam District Farmers in the Cauvery delta region have urged the
Government to extend the time limit for paying crop insurance premium to November 30 to
those farmers, who had not secured loans from cooperatives and commercial banks. Thanjavur
District Farmers Association said farmers were entitled to have their crops insured by paying a
premium of two per cent of the total cost of cultivation. As per the national agricultural insurance
scheme, the premium would be deducted from loans of farmers, who got loans from primary
agricultural cooperative banks and commercial banks on or before November 30 every year. But
farmers, who could not get loans or avail themselves of loans from commercial banks or
cooperatives, should have paid the premium before September 30 directly through the respective
PACBs with all particulars including the total extent of the land and expenses incurred towards
cost of cultivation and also large number of farmers did not pay the premium before September
30 since they anticipated that they would get crop loan in time.

The Cauvery Delta farmers, in an appeal to the State Government, have sought extension of
time limit in paying crop insurance premium to November 30. Thanjavur District Farmers
Association, farmers are entitled to avail themselves of crop insurance by paying a premium of 2
per cent of the total cost of cultivation. As per the scheme in vogue, the premium could be
deducted from the loans obtained from primary agricultural cooperative banks and the
commercial banks on or before November 30 every year.

Crop insurance scheme is gaining popularity among farmers in the State. There had been a
gradual increase in the number of farmers covered under the scheme. About 5.5 lakh farmers had
been covered in the last financial year compared to one lakh farmers in 2005, and about three
lakh farmers in 2006. Premium rates for different crops per hectare has been fixed by the
Agricultural Insurance Company of India and paddy, dhal, groundnut, cotton, sugarcane,
turmeric and oilseeds are some of the crops covered. The State Government is meeting 50 per
cent subsidy on premium and for this the State has allocated Rs. 3 crore in 2006-07, Rs. 15 crore
in 2007-08 and Rs. 40 crore in the current financial year.

Apart from this certain diseases associated with the intensity of monsoon showers were also
identified. Possibility of insurance coverage for flowers would also be explored after a discussion
with the higher authorities of State and Central Government.

Instability in Tamil Nadu Agriculture :

Instability in farm production is causing serious shocks to supply and farm income and there
is a growing concern about increased volatility in farm production, prices and farm income. The
study has estimated instability in nine major crops in the state of Tamil Nadu. The increase in
instability in agricultural production is considered adverse for several 27reasons. It raises the risk
involved in farm production and affect farmers income and also the decisions to adopt high
paying technologies and make investments in farming. Instability in production affects price
stability and the consumers, and it increases vulnerability of low income households to the
market. Instability in agricultural and food production is also important for food management and
macroeconomic stability.

This state of Tamil Nadu has a diverse set of crops covered under insurance scheme. Risk
associated with agriculture and various crops was estimated by using instability index as an
indicator of risk as below:

Instability index = Standard deviation of natural logarithm (Yt+1/Yt)

Where, Yt is the crop area / production / yield / farm harvest prices / gross returns in
thecurrent year and, Y t+1 represent the same in the next year. This index is unit free and very
robust and it measures deviations from the underlying trend (log linear in this case). When there
are no deviations from trend, the ratio Yt+1/Yt is constant, and thus standard deviation.
 PRIVATE PARTICIPATION

ICICI Lombard, a national Indian insurance company piloted in 2003 a formal rainfall
insurance scheme for groundnut and castor in semi-arid tropical areas of India. The insurance
policy was developed with the technical assistance of Agricultural and Rural Development
Department of the World Bank and was designed as insurance against deficit rainfall. Similar
products adapted to the specifics of the local environment were also developed and sold in
northern India. Two insurance policies were designed for the two crops. The coverage of both the
policies was for the prime crop season, the Kharif. The policy triggers, phases and payouts try to
maximize the correlation between economic loss and rainfall events. The triggers are set in mm of
accumulated rainfall as measured in local weather stations. If it rainless than 1st trigger level
with in a given period there is a payout per mm of deficient accumulated rain per acre insured.
If the accumulated rainfall is below the 2nd trigger level then there is a maximum lump sum
payout of the insurance. In order to maximize the correlation between rainfall and crop
production Kharif season is divided in to three different phases each with its own trigger and
payout: sowing, flowering and harvest. In addition to deficit rainfall in some areas there is also a
risk of excess rainfall towards the end of Kharif.The policy has additional payout for excess rain
for those areas. The amount of the payout is calibrated to the expected economic loss for the area
(mandal).
 THE FUTURE FOCUS

There are about 100 million farmers in India who work the hardest and yet seem to suffer the
most. Their occupation is fraught with the highest risk as it is totally at the mercy of nature. It
becomes the primary duty of Government to think of the welfare of farmers which would
necessitate thinking of ways and means of reducing the risk in farming. Despite various schemes
launched from time to time in the country agriculture insurance has served very limited purpose.
The coverage in terms of area, number of farmers and value of agricultural output is very small,
payment of indemnity based on area approach miss affected farmers outside the compensated
area, and most of the schemes are not viable. Expanding the coverage of crop insurance would
there for increase government costs considerably. Unless the programme is restructured carefully
to make it viable, the prospects of its future expansion to include and impact more farmers is
remote. Insurance products for the rural areas should be simple in design and presentation so that
THEY ARE EASILY UNDERSTOOD.
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The main focus of this paper is to examine how far the year to year fluctuations in crop
output changed from one period to another period. Accordingly instability in area, production
and yield of important crops has been computed at district level in Tamil Nadu state during
different periods. Instability in crop production is expected to vary over districts. There is lot of
variation in climatic conditions natural resource endowments, the pattern of agricultural growth
and development. The paper has estimated the instability at state level and then has compared it
with district level estimates to find dispersion and compare the change in instability over time,
based on the state level data representing aggregates and district level data representing
disaggregates. The instability index reveals that higher the value higher is the instability in the
particular variable. In the case of occurrence of risk, higher the instability index, higher is the
risk. This index is unit free and very robust and it measures deviations from the underlying trend
(log linear in this case). Instability at State Level Variability in agricultural production consists
of variability in area and yield and their interactions.

Variation in area under a crop occurs mainly in response to distribution, timeliness and
variations in rainfall and other climatic factors, expected prices and availability of crop specific
inputs. All these factors also affect the variations in yield. Further, yield is also affected by
outbreak of diseases, pests, and other natural or man-made hazards like floods, droughts and fire
and many other factors. Different events may affect area and yield in the same, opposite or
different way.

Instability in area, production and yield of Paddy, Sorghum, Maize, Sugarcane, Cotton,
Groundnut, Chillies, Banana and total pulses experienced at the state level in Tamil Nadu during
1980-2005 has been presented in Table 12. Instability index for area under paddy has shown an
increase during 1990-05 whereas Sorghum showed a stable in area under Cultivation. For
instance, the instability index for paddy is worked out to 0.138, 0.237 and 0.150 respectively for
area, production and yield during the period 1980-2005.
 RECOMMENDATION

Insurance must be provided to farmers as a mandatory social security measure in order to

secure their livelihoods. Insurance schemes could therefore be extended to not just perennial,
but also biennial and seasonal crops. The schemes could cover organic farmers in addition
to those adopting modern farming techniques and practices. Offering insurance schemes
based on other factors, such as weather or rainfall. An example cited, revealed that
weather based index insurance products could be successful in India, among farmers as
well as State Government. Payout from insurance based on a weather index could
effectively reduce the farmers value atrisk (VAR) rather than compensating for a single
crop loss only. The farmer's VAR would therefore be an effective measure of his overall
vulnerability, covering his exposure to income shocks such as a wedding, a disease, or a big
drought. A member however cautioned that such models may suffer from aggregation, as
rainfall details for instance, may not available in a disaggregated format.

Some other suggestions offered were as follows:

 Promote group insurance mechanism, linking premium with bank loans, and proper
monitoring to improve effective operation of insurance schemes.

 Ensure effective network amongst bank and other credit institutions in farm insurance for
maximum coverage and reach.

 Introduce broad based schemes that cover varied sectors such as crops, livestock and
cover other risks specific to rural localities in an integrated manner.

 Strengthen rural insurance development funds, scientific actuarial techniques, and

insurance regulatory mechanisms.

 Introduce the concept of price support to cover all primary production including
agriculture crops, fruits, non-timber production etc. which are all subject to annual
variation of prices and yield.
 CONCLUSION

The study found that the instability in area, production and productivity of crops over the
period in the state. The instability in area, production and yield of major crops varies across
regions and periods. The instability is much higher in crops like sugarcane and cotton when
compared to food grains and other crops. The lower instability in food grains might be due to the
technological breakthrough in agricultural production. Development of varieties resistant to pest
and disease, development of watersheds in rain fed areas, expanding the area under irrigation are
the major factors to be considered for reducing the instability in production and yield. There is
also an urgent need for large scale promotion of stabilization measures like crop insurance to
face the consequences of yield and production variability. Crop insurance in future though is
likely to be largely demand driven, the efforts of the government to support and finance
insurance products and/or facilitate congenial environment as meaningful risk management tool
would further enhance the potential and credibility of crop insurance. Comprehensive insurance
schemes should be based on farmers needs. These schemes must then be promoted among
farmers and steps taken to ensure that farmers were acquainted with the benefits of insurance as
well as the features of different schemes, so that they could chose an option most suited to them.
 REFERENCE

WEBLIOGRAPHY:

www.nabrd.in
www.indg.in/agriculture
www.indiaagronet.com

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Economic Times Times of India
In this chapter, we shall present a brief review of existing literature on crop insurance. In this studies we
come across various explanation about the pattern and structure of crop insurance, individual crop
insurance, area yield crop insurance, problems of crop insurance (moral hazard, adverse selection, and
high administrative cost), estimation of moral hazard and adverse 41 selection problem, in crop insurance,
optimal area yield insurance and designs of optimal area yield crop insurance, subsidized crop insurance
and conceptual explanation of crop insurance

Indian crop insurance system has been analyzed in several studies by various economists with intention of
giving appropriate protection from agricultural risk to the farmer.
According to Dandekar (1976) the agriculture is at the mercy of the vagaries of monsoon and this is the
main source of income of majority of India’s population. Since various natural calamities hurting
agriculture are beyond the control of the farmers, Dandekar (1976) has pointed out that the crop insurance
is a vital technique to protect the farmers from crop loss. For this purpose he has recommended to
introduce individual crop insurance in Indian agriculture but this insurance policy suffers from various
problems such as moral hazard problem, adverse selection problem, and high administrative cost.
Therefore, further, to overcome the problems of individual approach crop insurance policy he has
recommended another crop insurance policy such as area approach crop insurance. The area approach
crop insurance policy eliminates the moral hazard problem and reduces the scope or effectiveness of
adverse selection problem and also reduces the administrative cost. He has pointed out that in the area
approach scheme the area should be homogeneous either on the basis of the payment of premium,
received indemnity, in relation to crop risk or in relation to agro-climatic conditions such as soil, Varity
of the seeds used, farming practice. He proposes that the principal actuarial aspect of the crop insurance
scheme varies year-to-year in crop yield and it depends on the terms and conditions on which 42
indemnity becomes payable and determines the rate of premium. He suggested that less risk areas should
be charged “slightly higher, but only slightly, higher premium than warranted” to subsidies more risk
areas. He also argued in favour of direct subsidy in high-risk areas for small and marginal farmers.

Kalavakonda and Mahul (2005) analyzed the activity of crop insurance of India’s second largest driest
state Karnataka and pointed out the weakness in product design, implementation challenges and
operational problems. From the analysis they have found that the running crop insurance scheme failure
to attain both of its explicit (risk management) or implicit (safety net and containment of both the central
and share governments’ contingent liability) hypothesis, as a result the insured coverage acreage and
number of insured farmer and also the financial activities were not satisfactory. Therefore, they provide a
crop insurance design on the basis of cost effective risk management technique. Finally, they provide new
ideas to improve the crop 45 insurance scheme and sketch the alternative-crop insurance scheme on the
basis of an area –yield approach.
 Executive summary

When you buy home or car insurance, you expect to collect only when there’s a disaster – a tornado, a
hailstorm or a collision. If there was a policy that paid out year after year, you only had to pay less than
half of the premium and you’d actually make money from buying it, you’d jump at it – but the insurer
would be foolish.

That’s the deal more than a million farmers – including big, rich agribusinesses – are getting through
the federal crop insurance program. And the insurer is the American taxpayer.

Crop insurance has largely replaced the ad hoc relief programs authorized by Congress in response to
disasters. Crop insurance has come under attack for its increasing cost, environmental impacts and
secrecy, but the farm lobby, the crop insurance industry and their political patrons argue that despite its
flaws, crop insurance is cheaper and less likely to lead to environmental harm than disaster programs.

The facts tell a very different story. Crop insurance actually costs billions of dollars more than disaster
payments.

EWG analysed crop insurance and disaster payment data and reviewed scientific and economic studies
of the two approaches to farm assistance. We found:

 From 1999 to 2008, in the six years Congress authorized large ad hoc disaster relief programs,
farmers got about $15 billion in disaster payments, but more than $26 billion in crop insurance
pay-outs. Crop insurance pay-outs exceeded disaster payments in all of these years except 2005.
After subtracting farmers’ share of the premiums and adding administrative costs, the net cost to
taxpayers of crop insurance was almost $20 billion, nearly a third larger than disaster payments.
 Farmers had to lose more than 35 percent of their crop before qualifying for a disaster payment.
Some crop insurance policies pay if farmers lose as little as 15 percent of their crop or revenue.
Disaster programs paid out at a fraction of the actual market price for the crop – between 1990
and 2008, from 42 to 65 percent. But crop insurance policies pay out at the full market price, set
when the policy is bought. For some policies the pay-out price can actually increase over the
course of the growing season.

 Compared to disaster payments, crop insurance exacerbates rather than reduces incentives for
farmers to grow on marginal and environmentally sensitive land. Situations that encourage
harmful planting are more prevalent with crop insurance than they ever were with ad hoc
disaster payments or standing disaster programs.
Crop insurance is not really insurance, but income support masquerading as disaster
relief. Policymakers must cut through the myths spread by its champions and return crop insurance to a
safety net that taxpayers and the environment can afford.