Msc

The study entitled ‘Crop insurance schemes in Kerala: A perspective analysis’
was undertaken during 2020-2021. The objectives were to assess the farmers’
perception towards crop insurance schemes in Kerala and compare the perception of
beneficiary and non-beneficiary farmers of crop insurance schemes in Kerala. The
constraints in the disbursement of crop insurance schemes as perceived by farmers and
officials along with suggestions to overcome the constraints were also assessed. The
study was conducted using ex-post facto design, at the three purposively selected
districts of Kerala (vulnerability to recurring natural disasters and associated agricultural
loss) namely, Kottayam, Idukki and Malappuram.
The sample comprised of 60 beneficiary farmers of crop insurance which were
selected using stratified random sampling considering crop insurance as strata
(Restructured State Crop Insurance Scheme of Kerala (RSCIS), Pradhan Mantri Fasal
Bima Yojana (PMFBY) and Restructured Weather Based Crop Insurance Scheme
(RWBCIS)), 60 non-beneficiary farmers of crop insurance and 30 extension officials in
the implementation of state and central insurance schemes.
Perception of farmers towards crop insurance schemes in Kerala was the
dependent variable which was measured using a scale developed by Jyothi (2019).
Through judges rating and relevancy scoring, eight independent variables and four
intervening variables were selected for the study. The statistical tools used were
frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, Chi-square test of significance, MannWhitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis analysis and Garrett ranking.
The distribution of farmers based on their perception towards crop insurance
schemes in Kerala revealed that 69.17 per cent of them had medium perception, 18.33
per cent had low perception and remaining 12.50 per cent had high perception. The
results of intervening variables revealed that majority of the farmers were in the medium
category of awareness about crop insurance schemes in Kerala (79.17%), awareness
about climate change (55.84%), awareness about climate resilient strategies (60.83%)
and human animal conflict management (65.83%).
148
Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the perception of beneficiary farmers
and non-beneficiary farmers in terms of five dimensions. It was found that there existed
a significant difference in their perception with respect to three dimensions namely, risk
management, information seeking behavior and profit maximization.
The perception of beneficiary farmers towards the three crop insurance schemes
(RSCIS, PMFBY and RWBCIS) were compared and it was revealed that their existed a
significant difference between the two central (PMFBY and RWBCIS) and restructured
state crop insurance (RSCIS). The same result was obtained for extension officials.
Based on analysis, 52.50 per cent of the farmers belonged to old age (above 56
years) and 62.50 per cent had education up to secondary/higher secondary school level.
Majority of the farmers belonged to marginal (34.17%) and small (30.83%) category of
land holding with (35.89%) having an annual income around ₹ 50,001 to one lakh.
Majority of the farmers were in the medium category of credit orientation (80.83%),
economic motivation (61.67%), decision making ability (71.67%) and innovation
proneness (65.00%).
Chi square test of significance was performed for testing the association of the
dependent variable with various independent variables and intervening variables. It
revealed that, out of eight independent variables, four variables ‘education’, ‘operational
land holding’, ‘credit orientation’ and ‘decision-making ability’ had significant
association with the farmers’ perception towards crop insurance schemes in Kerala
whereas out of four intervening variables only ‘awareness about crop insurance’ and
‘awareness about climate resilient strategies’ showed significant association with the
dependent variable.
The major constraints identified by farmers through Garrett ranking were, delay
in payment of claim, improper reporting of crop loss, absence of individual approach
and the complicated procedures of insurance policy. Poor publicity and advertising,
delay in claim settlement, lack of awareness about crop insurance schemes were the
major constraints reported by extension officials.
149
Hassle free claim settlement, revised crop loss estimation with individual
approach and conscientisation programmes for farmers regarding various crop insurance
schemes were the major suggestions given by farmers. Collaboration between LSGs in
creating awareness and disbursal of crop insurance, providing advanced forecasting
techniques to disburse timely weather forecast and digital literacy of farmers for e-filling
of crop insurance schemes were the major suggestions given by extension officials.
To conclude, majority of farmers had to medium perception regarding crop
insurance schemes in Kerala. It was revealed that there exists a significant difference in
the perception regarding the central and state crop insurance. Delayed claim settlement
and improper crop loss assessment were the most felt constraints by farmers. The
method of area approach in loss assessment was not acceptable to the farmers. Frequent
popularization of schemes through mass media can influence the awareness and
knowledge of farmers regarding crop insurance and will contribute to the farmers’
enrollment in various crop insurance schemes.