Rethinking Premium Subsidies for Agricultural Insurance. Quantitative evidence from 146 index insurance schemes worldwide

While subsidization of index insurance is a common measure to promote financial risk management in agriculture, this form of policy support is highly controversial. Critics fear, among others, potential market distortions and heavy strains on public budgets, and point out alternatives like product bundling. Providing the first quantitative, cross-country evidence, this study analyzes the role of subsidization, loan bundling, and non-loan bundling for the survival of 146 index insurance programs. Using a genetic matching approach and survival analysis, we find that non-loan bundling is statistically significantly associated with higher likeliness of project survival. For premium subsidization and loan bundling no robust relationship with project survival could be found. Combined with qualitative evidence from our database, these findings help to formulate a number of policy suggestions towards improving sustainable agricultural insurance markets.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Food Policy
Published
2026-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2026.103199
Primary Topic
Agricultural risk and resilience
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Rethinking Premium Subsidies for Agricultural Insurance. Quantitative evidence from 146 index insurance schemes worldwide

Lena Kuhn, Ihtiyor Bobojonov, M.P.M. Meuwissen
Food Policy
Agricultural risk and resilience
article

Rethinking Premium Subsidies for Agricultural Insurance. Quantitative evidence from 146 index insurance schemes worldwide

Lena Kuhn, Ihtiyor Bobojonov, M.P.M. Meuwissen
article en

Abstract

While subsidization of index insurance is a common measure to promote financial risk management in agriculture, this form of policy support is highly controversial. Critics fear, among others, potential market distortions and heavy strains on public budgets, and point out alternatives like product bundling. Providing the first quantitative, cross-country evidence, this study analyzes the role of subsidization, loan bundling, and non-loan bundling for the survival of 146 index insurance programs. Using a genetic matching approach and survival analysis, we find that non-loan bundling is statistically significantly associated with higher likeliness of project survival. For premium subsidization and loan bundling no robust relationship with project survival could be found. Combined with qualitative evidence from our database, these findings help to formulate a number of policy suggestions towards improving sustainable agricultural insurance markets.

Food PolicyVol. 144
Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Kiel (DE), Institute of Agricultural Economics (BG), Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (DE), Wageningen University & Research (NL)
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
Agricultural risk and resilience
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Rethinking Premium Subsidies for Agricultural Insurance. Quantitative evidence from 146 index insurance schemes worldwide — Lena Kuhn, Ihtiyor Bobojonov, et al. · Food Policy (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS