Javaslat a kárenyhítési hozzájárulás differenciálására az aszálykár és az öntözés figyelembevételével

Tornay Enikő Becsákné, Márta Gaál and Marianna Papp

GAZDÁLKODÁS: Scientific Journal on Agricultural Economics, 2025, vol. 67, issue 02

Abstract: In Hungary, the magnitude of droughts, i.e. the number of notifications, the damaged area, and the value of compensation payments paid, is increasing year by year and is exceptionally high. Drought, which is intensifying due to climate change, also has social, economic, and environmental impacts (e.g., crop yield loss, reduction in agricultural income, reduction in surface and groundwater resources). In order to reduce negative impacts, it is essential and increasingly urgent to introduce preventive strategies and to use drought mitigation tools by farmers. The agricultural risk management system currently differentiates the amount of compensation contributions only at the crop level, thus not encouraging risk mitigation by producers. In the near future, by modifying the risk management system, it is advisable to develop a preventive system that encourages farmers to use water-retaining soil cultivation, develop an appropriate cropping structure, sustainable water management, and efficient and reasonable irrigation, so that less damage mitigation benefits would be paid due to lower drought damage. During our research, we developed a new, differentiated calculation methodology that determines different contribution amounts based on drought risk, damage history, the vulnerability of the selected crop, and irrigation. By differentiating the contributions paid and taking damage prevention interventions into account, the shared responsibility and burden-bearing may become more noticeable and balanced, however, based on the results so far, this does not significantly increase the payments of the farmers studied. Based on the model runs examined, the average increase in additional costs would be the highest for plantations (13–30%), followed by field vegetables (11–28%), and then field crops (4–20%). Significant changes would require a larger increase in the mitigation contribution, and in parallel, it would be important to differentiate the mitigation benefit.

Keywords: Research Research Methods/Statistical Methods; Risk and Uncertainty (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/369021/files/Marianna.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:gazdal:369021

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.369021

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in GAZDÁLKODÁS: Scientific Journal on Agricultural Economics from Karoly Robert University College Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().