horticulture, people risk, risk management instruments, subjective probabilities
Horticultural farms in Germany face substantial business risks. However, fruit farms often struggle to implement appropriate risk management processes, and the risk management literature widely has ignored this farm type. The aim of the study was to improve the assessment of risks by farmers and the choice of suitable risk management instruments. Therefore, a risk management process based on subjective probabilities and suitable for small and medium-sized farms was developed, considering the specific needs of family run businesses. An online survey was conducted to achieve a comprehensive view of the risk perception and risk management practices of German fruit producers. Price and production risks are the most relevant risk categories for fruit farmers. However, among single risk sources, those in the people risk category were seen as the most important. Results show significant interactions among risk categories and a significant correlation between loss experience and the rating of risk categories. The assumption that risk averse farmers generally rate risks higher than risk neutral or risk seeking farmers cannot be confirmed. Diversification seems to be the most important risk management instrument for many fruit producers, especially diversification of marketing channels, farm income, and production activities. Further research should focus on the apparent inconsistency between the satisfaction with instruments reported by farmers and the actual implementation of many of them (e.g., hail insurance and anti-hail net). Furthermore, there is a need for research, to develop decision models considering the interactions of risks and risk management instruments, loss experience and risk seeking attitudes.
D81, Q12, Q14
10 - 22
Please Cite this Article published as:

Annkatrin PORSCH, Markus GANDORFER, Vera BITSCH (2018) Risk Management Of German Fruit Producers. Review of Agricultural and Applied Economics. Advance online publication. doi: 10.15414/raae.2018.21.01.10-22
▼ direct download link| view online in fullscreen ▲