Summary:Since agricultural production takes place under the open sky and it is largely unprotected, the risk of occurrence of some harmful event (hail, flood, drought, cold, storm, fire, etc.) increases. In addition to natural and climatic factors, financial, market and institutional factors have a strong effect on agricultural production. The crop and fruit insurance is certainly the most effective risk management instrument in crop production in the open air. The aim of the paper is to present an entirely new insurance model that began to apply in 2015 in the United States of America. By its application, each farm ensures its expected total revenue that can be endangered by the effects of both natural and climate, as well as market risks, which are manifested through fluctuations in market prices. This way, all crops on the farm are insured from all kinds of risks under just one insurance policy. Analyzed farm has experienced revenue loss due to drought, therefore it has indemnity right in the amount of € 2,500. Premium cost borne by farmer amounts to € 330.

No abstract

Crop production is largely unprotected and exposed to a great number of production factors. On the other hand, farmers are exposed to fluctuations in the market prices of their products every year, which often has a negative impact on the profits made. There are various risk management measures in plant production, and insurance is certainly one of the most effective instruments. One of the recent insurance models is Whole-Farm Revenue Insurance (WFRP), which is an American insurance model that has been applied since 2015. The essence of WFRP is to ensure that all crops on the farm are secured against production and market risks with only one policy. The aim of the research in this paper is to present WFRP as an entirely new model of revenue insurance on the example of a typical Serbian farm specializing in crop production. The WFRP model works by determining the insured revenue before the start of the production year. If at the end of the production year, for any reason, the realized revenue falls below the level of insured revenue, the farmer is entitled to indemnification. Due to the drought that hit the region where the analyzed farm is located, the yields were reduced, and thus the expected revenue was also reduced, and the farmer was entitled to damages of $5697. On the other hand, it is the farmer’s obligation to pay $373 to the insurer as a risk transfer fee. The authors proved that even such complex insurance models can be applied in countries such as Serbia, where awareness of the importance of insurance of agricultural production is still not developed.

Summary

Sub-lethal doses of herbicides can promote plant growth and have a positive effect on an organism this is called hormesis. The purpose of this study was to test the effects of sub-lethal doses of glyphosate on soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) (1.8, 3.6, 7.2, 36, 180, and 720 g ha−1) and Amaranthus retroflexus L. (7.2, 36, 180, 720, 1440, and 2880 g ha−1). Different biological parameters, such as phytotoxicity, fresh weight, root length, content of photosynthetic pigments, and shikimate concentration, were measured. Glyphosate in doses of 1440 and 2880 g ha−1 destroyed A. retroflexus plants. A fresh weight of A. retroflexus at a dose of 36 g ha−1 was reduced by 76.31%, while for the soybean it was reduced by 19.26%. At the highest dose, the shikimate concentration was 145% in the soybean, while in A. retroflexus, the concentration increased by 58.80% compared to the control plants. All doses of glyphosate were statistically significantly different in terms of chlorophyll a content, while higher doses in A. retroflexus caused chlorophyll b to decrease. The change in the production of carotenoids was not statistically significant. The results showed that sub-lethal amounts of glyphosate did not lead to stimulation of measured parameters of soybean.