 Risk Management Considerators for Camelina and CarinataMatthew A. Diersen and Sumaiya Saleh No 209277, Economics Staff Papers from South Dakota State University, Department of Economics Abstract: Relatively new crops pose a challenge to growers and agribusinesses. While they would explore returns from new crops, adoption may mean giving up risk management tools inherent with growing established crops. The oilseed crops camelina and carinata are discussed in the context of the ability to insure them in South Dakota. Camelina (Camelina sativa) is currently insurable in portions of Montana and North Dakota. While carinata (Brassica carinata) is not insurable with a stand-alone policy, coverage was available in Montana and North Dakota in 2015 under the canola policy as a rapeseed type. Processor contracts are often a necessary condition for insuring these crops. The trade-offs of existing coverage and potential changes are examined for camelina and carinata from the perspective of a grower outside the existing coverage areas. In the absence of standard coverage, growers may choose to self-insure, obtain single-peril coverage (e.g., hail), or seek Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) coverage. Written agreements for camelina are not available, but NAP coverage may be feasible. For carinata, growers may explore written agreements for coverage under a canola policy. Keywords: Farm Management; Risk and Uncertainty (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:sdsusp:209277 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in Economics Staff Papers from South Dakota State University, Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.