印度的作物保险:PMFBY对不同作物保险计划的现状

M. Punia, K. Kundu, Vinay Mehla
{"title":"印度的作物保险:PMFBY对不同作物保险计划的现状","authors":"M. Punia, K. Kundu, Vinay Mehla","doi":"10.22271/TPI.2021.V10.I4SB.5976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Crop insurance has been implemented in the country since 1972, yet it has been beset with several problems such as delayed payment of claims, high premium, lack of transparency and delay in conducting crop cutting experiments etc. From these schemes none of them has been able to make a significant impact on farming system; as just 23.50 per cent of farmers were insured in kharif 2016. The existing relief and compensation criteria for farmers against crop loss was adhoc, messy and politicized and was ineffective to bring well-timed and satisfactory relief to affected farmers. This research article examines the cumulative performance of different crop insurance schemes implemented time to time. The claim premium ratio in First Individual Approach Scheme was 8.34, indicating that for every one rupee of premium collected; the scheme paid Rs 8.34 in claims. It shows high out go in the scheme. The benefits of CCIS were highly twisted towards few states and many more failures found in these schemes. Under PMFBY from kharif 2016 to kharif 2017, there has been a significant increase in the number of gross premiums (21 %), claims paid (64 %) and farmers benefitted (29%), respectively. The difference between gross premium and claim paid in the Kharif season has abridged and indicated a divergence in the data on the payout of claims and the profits made by private insurance companies. The new scheme revealed that overall area insured and farmers covered were decreased over the years from Kharif 2016 to Kharif 2018. On the other hand, there has been a significant increase in the number of gross premiums as 45 per cent. The PMFBY has therefore failed to achieve the targets, i.e. increasing the area and the number of farmers insured. The exclusion under the scheme are-risks and losses arising out of war and nuclear risks, malicious damage, theft, grazed and destroyed by domestic and wild animals.","PeriodicalId":23030,"journal":{"name":"The Pharma Innovation Journal","volume":"64 1","pages":"82-86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Crop insurance in India: Status of PMFBY against different crop insurance schemes\",\"authors\":\"M. Punia, K. Kundu, Vinay Mehla\",\"doi\":\"10.22271/TPI.2021.V10.I4SB.5976\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Crop insurance has been implemented in the country since 1972, yet it has been beset with several problems such as delayed payment of claims, high premium, lack of transparency and delay in conducting crop cutting experiments etc. From these schemes none of them has been able to make a significant impact on farming system; as just 23.50 per cent of farmers were insured in kharif 2016. The existing relief and compensation criteria for farmers against crop loss was adhoc, messy and politicized and was ineffective to bring well-timed and satisfactory relief to affected farmers. This research article examines the cumulative performance of different crop insurance schemes implemented time to time. The claim premium ratio in First Individual Approach Scheme was 8.34, indicating that for every one rupee of premium collected; the scheme paid Rs 8.34 in claims. It shows high out go in the scheme. The benefits of CCIS were highly twisted towards few states and many more failures found in these schemes. Under PMFBY from kharif 2016 to kharif 2017, there has been a significant increase in the number of gross premiums (21 %), claims paid (64 %) and farmers benefitted (29%), respectively. The difference between gross premium and claim paid in the Kharif season has abridged and indicated a divergence in the data on the payout of claims and the profits made by private insurance companies. The new scheme revealed that overall area insured and farmers covered were decreased over the years from Kharif 2016 to Kharif 2018. On the other hand, there has been a significant increase in the number of gross premiums as 45 per cent. The PMFBY has therefore failed to achieve the targets, i.e. increasing the area and the number of farmers insured. The exclusion under the scheme are-risks and losses arising out of war and nuclear risks, malicious damage, theft, grazed and destroyed by domestic and wild animals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23030,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Pharma Innovation Journal\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"82-86\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Pharma Innovation Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22271/TPI.2021.V10.I4SB.5976\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Pharma Innovation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22271/TPI.2021.V10.I4SB.5976","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我国从1972年开始实行农作物保险,但一直存在理赔迟延、保费高、透明度低、刈割试验迟延等问题。从这些计划中,没有一个能够对农业系统产生重大影响;2016年上半年,只有23.50%的农民投保。现行的农民粮食损失救济和补偿标准是临时的、混乱的和政治化的,无法给受灾农民带来及时和满意的救济。本文考察了不同时期实施的作物保险计划的累积绩效。首次个人入路计划的索赔保费比率为8.34,表明每收取一卢比的保费;该计划支付了8.34卢比的索赔。它显示了该方案的高输出。CCIS的好处被严重扭曲到少数几个州,在这些计划中发现了更多的失败。根据PMFBY,从2016年哈里夫到2017年哈里夫,毛保费(21%)、支付的索赔(64%)和农民受益(29%)的数量分别大幅增加。在哈里夫季节,毛保费和索赔之间的差额有所缩小,表明关于索赔支付和私营保险公司利润的数据存在分歧。新方案显示,从2016年哈里夫到2018年哈里夫,投保总面积和覆盖的农民数量有所下降。另一方面,毛保费数量大幅增加,达到45%。因此,PMFBY未能实现目标,即增加投保面积和农民人数。不包括战争和核风险、恶意破坏、盗窃、家畜和野生动物的放牧和破坏造成的风险和损失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Crop insurance in India: Status of PMFBY against different crop insurance schemes
Crop insurance has been implemented in the country since 1972, yet it has been beset with several problems such as delayed payment of claims, high premium, lack of transparency and delay in conducting crop cutting experiments etc. From these schemes none of them has been able to make a significant impact on farming system; as just 23.50 per cent of farmers were insured in kharif 2016. The existing relief and compensation criteria for farmers against crop loss was adhoc, messy and politicized and was ineffective to bring well-timed and satisfactory relief to affected farmers. This research article examines the cumulative performance of different crop insurance schemes implemented time to time. The claim premium ratio in First Individual Approach Scheme was 8.34, indicating that for every one rupee of premium collected; the scheme paid Rs 8.34 in claims. It shows high out go in the scheme. The benefits of CCIS were highly twisted towards few states and many more failures found in these schemes. Under PMFBY from kharif 2016 to kharif 2017, there has been a significant increase in the number of gross premiums (21 %), claims paid (64 %) and farmers benefitted (29%), respectively. The difference between gross premium and claim paid in the Kharif season has abridged and indicated a divergence in the data on the payout of claims and the profits made by private insurance companies. The new scheme revealed that overall area insured and farmers covered were decreased over the years from Kharif 2016 to Kharif 2018. On the other hand, there has been a significant increase in the number of gross premiums as 45 per cent. The PMFBY has therefore failed to achieve the targets, i.e. increasing the area and the number of farmers insured. The exclusion under the scheme are-risks and losses arising out of war and nuclear risks, malicious damage, theft, grazed and destroyed by domestic and wild animals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Colored grains: Chemistry, health benefits and processing Pasta: Raw materials, processing and quality improvement Honey crystallization: Mechanism, evaluation and application A comprehensive review on antinutritional factors of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) Pattern of induced estrus during superovulatory programme in Kangayam donor cows
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1