International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences

search-icon

Public Risk Management Tools in Agriculture in European Union

Open access
This paper examines public risk management tools in the agricultural industry of the European Union, with emphasis on income stabilization mechanisms and responses to climate-induced extreme events. Agricultural risks are categorized into normal, marketable, and catastrophic, each requiring tailored strategies. While normal risks are typically managed at the farm level, marketable and catastrophic risks demand intervention through insurance, mutual funds, and public support. Central to the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), direct payments provide decoupled financial support to farmers, serving as a stabilizing tool against income volatility. Coupled payments target vulnerable sectors to improve competitiveness and sustainability. The analysis integrates policy documents, statistical data, and comparative evaluations to assess the allocation and effectiveness of CAP instruments and the EU Solidarity Fund (EUSF). The increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events necessitate stronger public interventions. The EUSF complements national responses by providing post-disaster financial aid to affected Member States. However, the overreliance on public funds may reduce incentives for private risk management strategies. The findings underline the need for balanced, adaptive risk governance in European agriculture, integrating public instruments with private initiatives to enhance resilience against growing climate challenges.
Boin, A., Ekengren, M., & Rhinard, M. (2013). The EU as a crisis manager: Patterns and prospects. Cambridge University Press.
Ciliberti, S., Frascarelli, A., & Martino, G. (2020). The impact of CAP coupled support on farm income: Evidence from Italian farms. Agricultural Economics.
El Benni, N., & Finger, R. (2013). The effect of agricultural policy changes on income risk in Swiss agriculture. Agricultural Finance Review.
Erjavec, E., & Lovec, M. (2017). Research of European Union's Common Agricultural Policy: disciplinary boundaries and beyond. European Review of Agricultural Economics.
European Commission. (2023). Approved 28 CAP Strategic Plans (2023–2027). Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development.
European Commission. (2017). Risk management schemes in EU agriculture: Dealing with risk and volatility (EU Agricultural Markets Briefs No. 13). Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development.
European Commission. (2018). State aid: Commission authorizes state aid measures for farmers hit by drought in Poland. European Commission.
European Court of Auditors. (2019). Special Report: Farmers’ income stabilisation needs to be improved.
European Parliament. (2020). European Union Solidarity Fund: Helping regions hit by natural disasters.
Hardaker, J. B., Lien, G., Anderson, J. R., & Huirne, R. B. M. (2015). Coping with risk in agriculture: Applied decision analysis. CABI.
Henke, R., Benos, T., & Stilianos, S. (2018). The impact of direct payments on agricultural income in the European Union. European Review of Agricultural Economics.
Matthews, A. (2016). The future of direct payments. In J. Swinnen (Ed.), The political economy of the 2014–2020 Common Agricultural Policy. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.
Meuwissen, M. P. M., van Asseldonk, M. A. P. M., & Huirne, R. B. M. (2008). Income insurance in European agriculture. EuroChoices, 7(1), 26–33.
Pe'er, G., Zinngrebe, Y., Hauck, J., Schindler, S., Dittrich, A., Zingg, S., ... & Lakner, S. (2017). Adding some green to the greening: Improving the EU's ecological focus areas for biodiversity and farmers. Conservation Letters.
Severini, S., & Tantari, A. (2015). The impact of agricultural policy on farm income concentration: The case of regional implementation of the CAP direct payments in Italy. Agricultural Economics.
Manescu, A., Barna, F., Regep, H., Manescu, C., & Cerba, C. (2025). Public Risk Management Tools in Agriculture in European Union. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 15(9), 1155–1164.