IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jageco/v72y2021i2p430-451.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of Livestock Insurance Demand: Experimental Evidence from Chinese Herders

Author

Listed:
  • Pengfei Liu
  • Lingling Hou
  • Dongqing Li
  • Shi Min
  • Yueying Mu

Abstract

We provide the first evidence about insurance preferences among herders in pastoral regions in China. We estimate herders’ preferences for alternative insurance configurations based on a hypothetical and a consequential choice experiment, aiming to minimise hypothetical bias. Our results show that herders prefer the insurance plan in general with demand for livestock insurance increasing when insurance premiums decrease or payouts increase. The hypothetical bias only influences the willingness‐to‐pay estimates through the cost attribute, while the marginal rates of substitution of non‐cost attributes remain largely unchanged. The hypothetical treatment nearly doubles the magnitudes of willingness‐to‐pay estimates for some insurance attributes.

Suggested Citation

  • Pengfei Liu & Lingling Hou & Dongqing Li & Shi Min & Yueying Mu, 2021. "Determinants of Livestock Insurance Demand: Experimental Evidence from Chinese Herders," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 430-451, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jageco:v:72:y:2021:i:2:p:430-451
    DOI: 10.1111/1477-9552.12402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12402
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1477-9552.12402?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Müller, Birgit & Quaas, Martin F. & Frank, Karin & Baumgärtner, Stefan, 2011. "Pitfalls and potential of institutional change: Rain-index insurance and the sustainability of rangeland management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2137-2144, September.
    2. Taro Mieno & Cory G Walters & Lilyan E Fulginiti, 2018. "Input Use under Crop Insurance: The Role of Actual Production History," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(5), pages 1469-1485.
    3. Richard Bennett & Kelvin Balcombe, 2012. "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for a Tuberculosis Cattle Vaccine," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(2), pages 408-424, June.
    4. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    5. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    6. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    7. Jerrod M Penn & Wuyang Hu, 2018. "Understanding Hypothetical Bias: An Enhanced Meta-Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1186-1206.
    8. Jensen, Nathaniel D. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Mude, Andrew G., 2017. "Cash transfers and index insurance: A comparative impact analysis from northern Kenya," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 14-28.
    9. Vincent H. Smith, 2016. "Producer Insurance and Risk Management Options for Smallholder Farmers," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 31(2), pages 271-289.
    10. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840, August.
    11. Kesternich, Iris & Heiss, Florian & McFadden, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2013. "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action: Hypothetical choices and real decisions in Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1313-1324.
    12. Million A. Tadesse & Frode Alfnes & Olaf Erenstein & Stein T. Holden, 2017. "Demand for a labor-based drought insurance scheme in Ethiopia: a stated choice experiment approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(4), pages 501-511, July.
    13. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    14. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
    15. Linda Court Salisbury & Fred M. Feinberg, 2010. "Alleviating the Constant Stochastic Variance Assumption in Decision Research: Theory, Measurement, and Experimental Test," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 1-17, 01-02.
    16. Petri Liesivaara & Sami Myyrä, 2014. "Willingness to pay for agricultural crop insurance in the northern EU," Agricultural Finance Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 74(4), pages 539-554, October.
    17. Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2010. "Scale factors and hypothetical referenda: A clarifying note," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 286-292, May.
    18. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    19. Timothy Haab, 1999. "Nonparticipation or Misspecification? The Impacts of Nonparticipation on Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(4), pages 443-461, December.
    20. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    21. Jisang Yu & Aaron Smith & Daniel A Sumner, 2018. "Effects of Crop Insurance Premium Subsidies on Crop Acreage," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(1), pages 91-114.
    22. Sommarat Chantarat & Andrew G. Mude & Christopher B. Barrett & Michael R. Carter, 2013. "Designing Index-Based Livestock Insurance for Managing Asset Risk in Northern Kenya," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 80(1), pages 205-237, March.
    23. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    24. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    25. Kazianga, Harounan & Udry, Christopher, 2006. "Consumption smoothing? Livestock, insurance and drought in rural Burkina Faso," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 413-446, April.
    26. Lorenzo Casaburi & Jack Willis, 2018. "Time versus State in Insurance: Experimental Evidence from Contract Farming in Kenya," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3778-3813, December.
    27. Patrick S. Ward & Vartika Singh, 2015. "Using Field Experiments to Elicit Risk and Ambiguity Preferences: Behavioural Factors and the Adoption of New Agricultural Technologies in Rural India," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(6), pages 707-724, June.
    28. Ayako Matsuda & Takashi Kurosaki, 2019. "Demand for temperature and rainfall index insurance in India," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(3), pages 353-366, May.
    29. Vroege, Willemijn & Dalhaus, Tobias & Finger, Robert, 2019. "Index insurances for grasslands – A review for Europe and North-America," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 101-111.
    30. John, Felix & Toth, Russell & Frank, Karin & Groeneveld, Jürgen & Müller, Birgit, 2019. "Ecological Vulnerability Through Insurance? Potential Unintended Consequences of Livestock Drought Insurance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 357-368.
    31. Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang, 2019. "Cheap talk efficacy under potential and actual Hypothetical Bias: A meta-analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 22-35.
    32. John Loomis, 2011. "What'S To Know About Hypothetical Bias In Stated Preference Valuation Studies?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 363-370, April.
    33. Liu, Elaine M. & Huang, JiKun, 2013. "Risk preferences and pesticide use by cotton farmers in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 202-215.
    34. Thornton, P.K. & van de Steeg, J. & Notenbaert, A. & Herrero, M., 2009. "The impacts of climate change on livestock and livestock systems in developing countries: A review of what we know and what we need to know," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 113-127, July.
    35. Svenningsen, Lea S. & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "Testing the effect of changes in elicitation format, payment vehicle and bid range on the hypothetical bias for moral goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 17-32.
    36. Ana I. Sanjuán‐López & Helena Resano‐Ezcaray, 2020. "Labels for a Local Food Speciality Product: The Case of Saffron," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 778-797, September.
    37. Rosen, L. & Manor, O. & Engelhard, D. & Zucker, D., 2006. "In defense of the randomized controlled trial for health promotion research," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 96(7), pages 1181-1186.
    38. Chavas, Jean-Paul, 2004. "Risk Analysis in Theory and Practice," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780121706210.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yuyun Hidayat & Sukono & Betty Subartini & Nida Khairunnisa & Aceng Sambas & Titi Purwandari, 2022. "An Estimated Analysis of Willingness to Wait Time to Pay Rice Agricultural Insurance Premiums Using Cox’s Proportional Hazards Model," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(21), pages 1-16, October.
    2. repec:ags:aaea22:335429 is not listed on IDEAS

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    4. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    5. Jerrod M. Penn & Wuyang Hu, 2021. "The Extent of Hypothetical Bias in Willingness to Accept," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 126-141, January.
    6. Jiang, Qi & Penn, Jerrod & Hu, Wuyang, 2022. "Real payment priming to reduce potential hypothetical bias," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    7. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John M., 2016. "Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certaintyAuthor-Name: Beck, Matthew J," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 149-167.
    8. Bartels, Lara & Falk, Thomas & Duche, Vishwambhar & Vollan, Björn, 2022. "Experimental games in transdisciplinary research: The potential importance of individual payments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Pengfei Liu & Xiaohui Tian, 2021. "Downward Hypothetical Bias in the Willingness to Accept Measure for Private Goods: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1679-1699, October.
    10. Quentin Stoeffler & Michael Carter & Catherine Guirkinger & Wouter Gelade, 2022. "The Spillover Impact of Index Insurance on Agricultural Investment by Cotton Farmers in Burkina Faso," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 36(1), pages 114-140.
    11. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    12. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2021. "On Adding-Up as a Validity Criterion for Stated-Preference Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(3), pages 587-601, November.
    13. Helga Fehr-Duda & Robin Schimmelpfennig, 2018. "Wider die Zahlengläubigkeit: Sind Befragungsergebnisse eine gute Grundlage für wirtschaftspolitische Entscheidungen?," ECON - Working Papers 297, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Dec 2018.
    14. Atozou, Baoubadi & Tamini, Lota D. & Bergeronm, Stephane & Doyon, Maurice, 2020. "Factors Explaining the Hypothetical Bias: How to Improve Models for Meta-Analyses," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 45(2), March.
    15. Zawojska, Ewa & Bartczak, Anna & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, 2017. "Disentangling impacts of payment and provision consequentiality and risk attitudes on stated preferences," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258602, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    16. Daniel A. Brent & Lata Gangadharan & Anke Leroux & Paul A. Raschky, 2016. "Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is," Monash Economics Working Papers 42-16, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    17. Zawojska, Ewa & Bartczak, Anna & Czajkowski, Mikołaj, 2019. "Disentangling the effects of policy and payment consequentiality and risk attitudes on stated preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 63-84.
    18. Wei, Xuan & Khachatryan, Hayk, 2023. "How consequential is policy consequentiality? Evidence from online discrete choice experiment with ornamental plants," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    19. Daniel A. Brent & Lata Gangadharan & Anke D. Leroux & Paul A. Raschky, 2022. "Reducing bias in preference elicitation for environmental public goods," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(2), pages 280-308, April.
    20. Jie He & Jérôme Dupras & Franck Ndefo & Thomas Poder, 2020. "Payment and provision consequentiality in voluntary contribution mechanism: separate or joint effects?," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 11-36, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jageco:v:72:y:2021:i:2:p:430-451. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0021-857X .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.