The United States plants more than 170 mil­lion acres of corn and soy­beans a year, more than any coun­try in the world. And the pri­ma­ry mech­a­nism in the US that we use to sub­si­dize agri­cul­ture is actu­al­ly called the Federal Crop Insurance Program. So, the crop insur­ance pro­gram in the US is also the largest such pro­gram glob­al­ly, with over $100 bil­lion in lia­bil­i­ties annu­al­ly. So it’s a very big program.

The way that crop insur­ance works, basi­cal­ly, is it insures farm yields and rev­enues from loss due to say, bad weath­er or low prices. It’s a public/private part­ner­ship, which works where the gov­ern­ment basi­cal­ly sets the pre­mi­um rates, pri­vate com­pa­nies deliv­er it, and then farm­ers pay part of the premium. 

So, the pri­ma­ry goals, his­tor­i­cal­ly, have been to improve, increase max­i­miza­tion of par­tic­i­pa­tion in the pro­gram, but less focus has been on the mod­ern­iza­tion of the rat­ing sys­tem. So I’ll just give you an exam­ple of how it’s sort of crude in some ways.

The gov­ern­ment sets base pre­mi­um rates by region but does­n’t nec­es­sar­i­ly take into account the actu­al soil on the farm. This could be very impor­tant and could involve a lot of work to rework work the rat­ing sys­tem, but could have some impor­tant impli­ca­tions. The fact that the pro­gram has been very suc­cess­ful in max­i­miz­ing par­tic­i­pa­tion, it’s fair to say that far less focus has been on align­ing sus­tain­abil­i­ty goals in the program.

So this rais­es the ques­tion, can we bring big data tools to bear to help align these goals in some way? So, recent­ly we did a study see­ing if we could inte­grate in high-resolution soil data to improve the rat­ing. And so by inte­grat­ing these big data sets togeth­er, we were able to come up with pre­cise field-level esti­mates of risk. It turns out that the rat­ing accu­ra­cy can be dra­mat­i­cal­ly improved by incor­po­rat­ing these data. And so omit­ting them can result in pre­mi­um errors on the order of bil­lions of dol­lars a year.

This is real­ly impor­tant because insur­ance prices can affect incen­tives in much the same way that prices can affect incen­tives in any mar­ket. So get­ting the rates right is poten­tial­ly very impor­tant. In doing a lot of work on this, we found that we could prob­a­bly rebuild the pro­gram, even though it might be some­what dif­fi­cult. But what it might enable is basi­cal­ly facil­i­tat­ing pro­mo­tion of soil health and oth­er things through crop insur­ance incen­tives, reward­ing farm­ers for improv­ing soil qual­i­ty while simul­ta­ne­ous­ly build­ing a stronger program.

If we could do this, though, why would this even mat­ter? Some peo­ple have said that hav­ing these risk man­age­ment pro­grams basi­cal­ly cre­ates dis­in­cen­tives for farm­ers to adapt to say, cli­mate change. The real­i­ty, though, is that hav­ing well-functioning cred­it risk and man­age­ment mar­kets is real­ly actu­al­ly crit­i­cal to enabling invest­ments in tech­nolo­gies to enable farm­ers to adapt.

So indeed, in the US what we found in the high­est pro­duc­tiv­i­ty regions is that we’ve seen increas­es in pro­duc­tiv­i­ty and decreas­es in risk, actu­al­ly, due to the mas­sive gains we’ve seen in biotech­nol­o­gy and man­age­ment and so forth. A lot of that is exact­ly because we have these well-functioning mar­kets to facil­i­tate that. So it’s real­ly important.

But yet despite the fact that the under­ly­ing struc­ture of the crop insur­ance pro­gram, which is the main way we sub­si­dize agri­cul­ture, is still fair­ly low-tech. Think about crop insur­ance as a con­duit to pro­mot­ing sus­tain­abil­i­ty. Some gaps must be bridged, and those gaps are inte­gra­tion of big data tools with smart pol­i­cy designs. 

The oppor­tu­ni­ties here are also not just lim­it­ed to soil health. There’s a vari­ety of areas right now where advanced com­pu­ta­tion­al meth­ods are being brought to bear to improve the func­tion­ing of these types of pro­grams. Everything from inte­grat­ing genet­ic data, to remotely-sensed data, and others. 

So for exam­ple, recent­ly we just did a study where we were able to inte­grate high-resolution genet­ic data with high-resolution large-scale yield data for all of the rice in the US grown in the last four decades. And this enabled us to do genetic-specific insur­ance pric­ing at the actu­al snip lev­el, not just on traits. Amazing advance­ments that ulti­mate­ly could help breed­ers and also improve the program.

This is also being brought to bear in devel­op­ing coun­tries, where we’re help­ing improve and cre­ate risk man­age­ment mar­kets, or we use remotely-sensed satel­lite data to basi­cal­ly struc­ture insur­ance con­tracts for pas­toral­ist live­stock pro­duc­ers. We have a lot of tools these days to do that. I mean, we can rate and price insur­ance from the genet­ic lev­el, at the soil lev­el, and even lit­er­al­ly from space, which is real­ly excit­ing to have these tools to bring to bear. But more can be done, I think, in terms of align­ing the design of these pro­grams to pro­mote some of these goals that we want to reach.

Precision agri­cul­ture and gov­ern­ment pol­i­cy and risk man­age­ment mar­kets, these all have real­ly impor­tant roles to play in both inten­si­fi­ca­tion and con­ser­va­tion in agri­cul­ture. And pol­i­cy in par­tic­u­lar has a very pro­found role in medi­at­ing this intensification/conservation dynam­ic. And advanced ana­lyt­ics sort of in some ways bring to bear the keys to unlock­ing these. 

So my ques­tion to you is what are the oppor­tu­ni­ties to bring data ana­lyt­ics to bear to improve risk man­age­ment and pol­i­cy in your mar­kets? Thank you. 

Further Reference


Joshua Woodard pro­file, Dyson School, Cornell University

2016 Annual Meeting of the New Champions at the World Economic Forum site

Help Support Open Transcripts

If you found this useful or interesting, please consider supporting the project monthly at Patreon or once via Cash App, or even just sharing the link. Thanks.