Wsparcie publiczne dla ubezpieczeń w rolnictwie

A notion of public support has recently gained a great popularity, especially in the context of various kinds of support from the UE Structural Funds for entrepreneurs, farmers and other social groups. However, the interest in public support is not reflected in better understanding of the notion’s meaning. Thus, the attempt to define and explain the notion of public support and principles governing its granting in the area of risk management in agriculture. Good solutions in the area of risk and crisis management are basic tools to ensure sustainable development and a competitive agricultural sector in the Community. Farmers should be prepared in case of negative effects of their choices and also in case of crises caused by natural disasters or other unpredictable events. In the context of the CAP reform, it is important to show new instruments that could help farmers to increase their ability in risk and crisis management. The shape of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) for the coming years 2007-2013 was established by the agreement reached by the Agriculture Ministers of the EU-15 in Luxembourg on 26 June 2003 and agreements of the EU Council dated 22 April 2004. New regulations were shaped in full accordance with the policy of rural areas development followed by the Commission. They are also one of the elements of simplifying started with the communications of the Commission concerning simplifying and improving the legislation within the Common Agricultural Policy. On the other hand, the directive on exclusions will enable granting farmers quicker aid, which is particularly important, for instance, in case of losses caused by unfavourable weather conditions and animal or plant diseases. Both the Commission’s communication and the report of the MEP rapporteur show great delay of this subject in the European Union. A farmer-entrepreneur running his farm after the reform on the competitive free market risks all his property without having, in terms of insurance, even a poor substitute of what an investor or a trader has. If it is a large commercial farm, it is able to cover insurance and risk costs. But millions of European small, very small or even family farms cannot afford to pay for any insurance, not even of their own houses, let alone production. In case of a disaster, it has to count on neighbours’ help or the state support. In some kinds of risk and crises in agriculture, granting the state assistance may be the right way of support. It should always be borne in mind, however, that a Member State is not obliged to grant the state assistance. As a result of this, in case of similar kinds of risk or crises, producers from one Member State or region may obtain support, but producers from other Member States or regions may have no such possibility. Such differences in support may lead to the disturbance of competition. Therefore, similarly to other kinds of state assistance, the necessity of avoiding undesired disturbances of competition should be taken into consideration when accepting the state assistance in risk and crisis management. A requirement of a minimum contribution of producers in losses or cost of such measures, or their equivalents, should be seen in terms of decreasing the threat of disturbance of competition and providing a stimulus to minimise risks. It should be clearly established that regulations concerning state assistance cannot, as such, ensure or replace optimal management in crises. The state assistance may only facilitate it in some circumstances. Risk management in agriculture in Poland is a new field, a poorly-known and rarely used one. Generally speaking, the term is understood as predicting potential losses and gathering means for compensating those losses when they appear. M. Jerzak and his team’s research indicates that Polish farmers most often use a diversification of production in risk management and count on administrative support.