Sustentabilidade e Mitigação dos Riscos Climáticos e de Mercado na Produção de Soja em Palotina – Oeste do Paraná

Abstract

The paper main topic is risk management in agriculture on Palotina-PR city. Then, this paper aims to analyze whether there is a difference between the cost/benefit of climate risk reduction and cost/benefit of soybean price in Palotina, Paraná, Brazil. It is a qualitative and quantitative research. As the objectives, it is an exploratory and descriptive study and as the procedures, the data were collected from bibliography, official and private documents. Price and productivity were collected from official documents. Climate and future market data were collected from private companies. The climate data were analyzed based on the releases content. The methodology to analyze de future market data was the same as the B3. Options were analyzed as Black & Scholes model. Also, this paper developed the Leismann & Bortoluzzi index to analyze the protections cost/benefit. Then, to compare the mitigation cost on both situations, there were used the t student test to compare the average. The limitations were about the data period, only 22 years and it is only for one city. Also, the Black & Scholes model does not consider subjective variables. Results show that the use of the Option market, which has occurred in more than half of the cases under study, is noteworthy. Climate insurance was used in 9.52% of cases and future markets in 21.43%. As far as cost/benefit is concerned, the only non-viable protection is that of financed options, however it should be noted that the decision to contract protection or not depends exclusively on the producer's risk aversion. In the sequence, the cost/benefit index of price protections (self-financed hedge, financed hedge, selffinanced options and financed options) were compared with the climate insurance index in order to test if there was a statistical difference between them. All tests allowed to infer that the indices are statistically different. This study concluded that climate and price insurance are excellent tools for rural enterprise risk management, and there was significant evidence to infer that the protections are feasible. Or rather, that the farmer is exposed to both types of risk and that the forms of mitigation are satisfactory in both cases. With this, it is suggested that the farmer equips himself with as many tools as possible to effectively manage his activity.