The Comment of the expert. While the state compensates losses, nobody will insure crops

To conversation on financial and economic consequences of a drought-2010 have wished to be connected and workers of the insurance companies. The present drought, by our estimations, does not carry such menacing character what to it is given by numerous mass-media. Independent experts work in fields of many regions captured by a drought - about catastrophic losses practically anywhere speeches do not go. In some regions really there are serious problems, but they - only an occasion. Information campaign which is now developed against a drought, can be connected with other problem: the low prices for agricultural products and impossibility to extinguish credit debts. Speaking about considerable losses of a crop, landowners try to stimulate, on the one hand, a rise in prices, with another - to achieve from the Government of certain indulgences on current debts, understanding that otherwise they are expected by a financial collapse. As to indemnification of losses which inevitably will as a result of a present drought in a normal situation in it the insurance companies should be engaged. However in Russia the tool of insurance of a crop is not developed. For today in the country it is insured about 10 % of areas under crops. These are the official data. Actually even worse if to take into consideration the widely adopted fictitious insurance. In regions of the insured economy - units. Why so it is not enough of them? Yes because the stimulus for insurance of risks at agricultural manufacturers is not present. To hope for that agricultural manufacturers begin to insure voluntary a crop - a Utopia. On insurance always try to save. Management of risks in domestic agricultural manufacture practically is not developed also budgets on insurance if they in general are put, - are minimum. The rare economy at planning of the annual budget considers article of expenses for insurance. Though these expenses average 1,5 - 2,5 % from a total cost of actives of agricultural manufacturers. In comparison with scales of possible losses are small sums. The reputation of some unfair insurers also has certain influence on the agroinsurance market. However about blasting of trust of landowners to the insurance tool as to that while to speak early. Certainly, the information in a press about concrete problems with some companies casts a shade on all market. But if all insurers only also were engaged in that possibilities not to pay on insured events in agrarian and industrial complex searched, the insurance institute already would die. But the basic problem of small use by agricultural manufacturers of insurance tools sees in other. When year after year there is a practice of indemnification of a damage from budgets of different levels or prolongation of credit and leasing payments to the suffered economy, landowners simply do not see sense in insurance policy purchase. Every year the state lets know to landowners that support in a case of natural cataclysms will be. Such practice is in the direct contradiction with insurance. If the state has occupied more a hard line in respect of rendering, the help to agricultural manufacturers in emergency situations, and also has entered practice of the made insurance, i.e. access granting to budgetary or preferential credit resources only to those agricultural manufacturers who has insured the risks, at allocation of corresponding state support on insurance, it would give powerful stimulus to development of culture of insurance of a crop in Russia. The made insurance is applied in many western countries and as shows their experiment, it promotes more rational expenditure of budgetary funds.

 

< Prev		Next >