Enhancing agricultural economic resilience (AER) is essential for global food security. As a key policy tool for stabilizing agricultural production, policy-based agricultural insurance lacks rigorous causal evidence on its impact on resilience. In this study, AER is operationalized as a composite index capturing resistance and recovery capacities across pressure, state, and response dimensions. Using 2012–2023 provincial panel data from China (31 provinces × 12 years = 372 observations), we measure AER via the entropy method and identify policy effects using a staggered multi-timepoint difference-in-differences (DID) model. We find that policy-based staple crop insurance significantly increases AER by approximately 2.5 percentage points, primarily by promoting agricultural technological innovation (ATI) and regional industrial structure upgrading (RIS). The improvement effects are more pronounced in central and western regions, non-major staple-crop producing areas, and regions with higher natural risks. Robustness is confirmed via event study, alternative weighting schemes (PCA and equal weighting), and placebo tests. This study provides reliable causal evidence for the resilience-enhancing effect of agricultural insurance and clarifies its internal transmission mechanisms, offering empirical support for the optimization of agricultural risk governance policies. Limitations include the use of provincial-level aggregate data and the lack of analysis of spatial spillover effects between regions. Our findings suggest that differentiated policy implementation can support more sustainable and targeted agricultural risk governance.

Demand for crop insurance to manage climate risks: A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis

Abstract Biopesticides are emerging as a crucial component of sustainable pest management in India; however, their adoption remains limited, despite policy support and growing consumer demand for residue-free produce. This study offers a comprehensive evaluation of the Indian biopesticide sector, examining its market structure, regulatory frameworks, technological advancements, and regional consumption patterns. Using the nationally representative NSS data and econometric analysis, we identify socioeconomic and institutional determinants of farmers’ expenditure on both chemical pesticides and biopesticides across key rice-growing states. The results show that factors such as agricultural training, household size, membership in farmer organizations, access to crop insurance, and expenditure on key inputs significantly influence the adoption of biopesticides, whereas formal education has a limited effect. The analysis also reveals significant regional disparities, with a small number of states accounting for nearly half of the nation’s biopesticide consumption. We discuss how India’s pragmatic regulatory approach, cost-effective domestic manufacturing, and targeted public initiatives provide a scalable model for promoting sustainable crop protection in other developing regions. Policy recommendations focus on streamlining registration, strengthening extension services, supporting private sector participation, and enhancing research on locally adapted, high-efficacy products. By integrating market, regulatory, and behavioural perspectives, this study advances the evidence base for scaling biopesticide use, offering insights relevant to agricultural sustainability and food safety in both India and the wider Global South.

Abstract The heterogeneity of different farmland sizes has been overlooked in the climate adaptation literature, yet it is crucial for identifying effective policy interventions to achieve national-scale climate resilience. Using U.S. Agricultural Census data from 2012, 2017, and 2022 aggregated by farm size groupings within states, we compare the temporal changes in adoption of three water-related climate adaptation practices (cover crops, tile drainage, and irrigation) across small, medium and large farms, individually. Specifically, we provide estimates of the role of multiple government programs and climate changes in shaping heterogeneous climate adaptation behaviors across farm sizes. Applying multilevel models within a Bayesian framework, we show that temporal changes of government programs and climate conditions correlate with temporal changes in adoption differently across farm sizes. For small and medium farms, insurance participation associates positively with adoption of cover crops and irrigation. Among large farms, federal programs correlate negatively with irrigation, while state programs and insurance are positively associated with cover crops. These results suggest the opportunity to enhance cover crops among small and medium operations by improving the distribution of insurance and state programs, where small farms often have low participation. Alternatively, crop insurance, and not climate, might be the major driver of irrigation expansion among smaller farms as a way to increase productivity and reduce premium subsidies. Finally, small farms’ adoption of irrigation and tile drainage shows uncertain or negative correlations with changing and uncertain climate, implying that diseconomies of scale might be limiting their adoption; meanwhile, uncertainty of returns under climate changes is preventing farms of all sizes from growing cover crops, specifically in the West for large and medium farms, and the Eastern regions for small farms. We conclude that encouraging the adoption of water-related climate adaptation practices may require adjusting current federal and local programs toward individualized farm-size policies

Climate change has us confronting the temporality of agriculture. Agrarian lives are timed lives. These times include biological rhythms of germination and flowering, meteorological rhythms of frost, rain, and heat, market rhythms of delivery windows and seasonal demand, labor rhythms of urgency and waiting, and lived rhythms that leave some bodies more readily aligned with agrarian life. Climate change does not simply place these systems under stress; it desynchronizes them. This desynchronization generates a governance paradox. Precisely when agriculture requires flexibility, it is increasingly disciplined by rigid timetables, contracts that still dictate delivery dates and federally subsidized crop insurance deadlines, even as historical averages lose predictive power. Climate change thus exposes the fiction of temporal stability that has long defined agrarian governance. Drawing on Tsing's “unruly edges,” this paper reframes climate change not as an external shock but as a condition that renders visible the unruliness that has always been present, though often concealed, within agrarian systems. The paper's central intervention is to theorize Haraway's concept of “making kin” as a situated, anticipatory mode of temporal coordination for agrarian arrhythmia. Kin-making is offered as a way of organizing relationships—across households, farms, and species—that can absorb temporal mismatch without demanding a return to a single, controlled rhythm, though its possibilities remain unevenly structured by power, property, and histories of exclusion. Two practices anchor the argument: diversified polycultures and farm–land–labor cooperatives. These practices matter not because they are ecologically resilient or socially just, but because they actively re-time agriculture, redistributing temporal pressure through more reciprocal, yet still constrained, forms of coordination. Finally, drawing on queer phenomenology and chronopolitical critique, the paper argues that climate change brings to the foreground long-standing temporal injustices concerning whose agrarian timelines are treated as normal and worth sustaining—and whose never were.

ABSTRACT Increased frequency of extreme weather events, particularly droughts, threatens grassland farming by destabilizing yields and farms' economic viability. We examine, theoretically and through numerical simulations, how sown plant diversity (natural insurance) influences the attractiveness of indemnity and drought index insurance (formal insurance) in grassland systems across Europe. Our analysis shows that higher sown diversity reduces farmers' willingness to pay for indemnity insurance, suggesting adverse selection. In contrast, drought index insurance remains equally attractive regardless of diversity. These effects hold across different insurance designs and risk preferences. Our findings offer valuable insights for farmers, insurers, and policymakers aiming to build resilient, sustainable agricultural systems.

The Gangetic Plains of India, spanning approximately 357,000 km², constitute one of the most agriculturally productive and hydrologically complex regions in the world. This systematic review synthesises peer-reviewed literature published between 2017 and 2026 to examine the spatio-temporal dynamics of flood and drought cycles, their cascading effects on agricultural displacement, and the resultant agrarian distress across this critical river basin. A structured search of five major academic databases yielded 77 eligible studies, encompassing remote sensing analyses, hydrological modelling, socioeconomic surveys, and policy evaluations. The review reveals an alarming trend: the frequency and intensity of both hydrometeorological extremes have increased significantly over the review period, with flood-affected area expanding at a rate of approximately 0.22 million hectares per year and drought-affected districts increasing by roughly 2.4 per year. These compound hazards have rendered an estimated 4.2 to 8.4 million farm households temporarily or permanently displaced between 2017 and 2025. Agrarian distress indices, including farmer indebtedness, suicide rates, and net crop value realisations, exhibit a consistent deteriorating trajectory across Bihar, eastern Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal. The study identifies critical research gaps in integrated flood–drought modelling, disaggregated gender and caste analyses, and the effectiveness of government intervention schemes including the Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana (PMFBY) and PM-KISAN. Findings emphasise the urgent need for adaptive watershed governance, index-based crop insurance reforms, and climate-resilient agrarian policies to reduce the vulnerability of smallholder farming communities in the face of accelerating climate variability.

Cross-sector collaborations are necessary for transformative food system change. Grain producers are increasingly interested in adopting new soil health practices. However, information is still needed to understand the factors throughout the supply chain affecting adoption. Using data from 25 semi-structured interviews and four podcasts with grain producers, supply chain and government professionals, and researchers, we explore factors that enable and constrain adoption of soil health practices in the US Pacific Northwest with a focus on cover cropping and livestock integration into crop production. Our analysis is framed using an integrated model of the diffusion of innovations and transformational adaptation in agriculture. Results show factors within the institutional, personal, and practical spheres of influence play a role in providing traction or causing friction in the adoption of these soil heath practices and are related to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. We provide considerations for how to support adoption, including addressing crop insurance barriers, developing creative financing options, developing infrastructure to allow separate storage of crops grown with marketable soil health practices, providing opportunities to connect producers to one another and to markets, communicating benefits across the supply chain from producer to final consumer, developing trusted partnerships, and providing proof of concept that these practices can result in positive environmental, economic, and human health benefits. Results demonstrate the importance of a systems and networked approach when building supply chains.

Agriculture remains a cornerstone of the Indian economy, sustaining a substantial proportion of the rural population while contributing significantly to national income and food security. Recognizing the persistent challenges of low farm income, production risks, and structural inefficiencies, the Government of India has implemented a spectrum of agricultural schemes aimed at income enhancement, risk mitigation, and productivity improvement. Notwithstanding these policy efforts, the realization of intended outcomes is critically contingent upon farmers’ awareness, accessibility, and effective utilization of such schemes. The present study critically examines the level of awareness among farmers regarding major government agricultural schemes and evaluates their empirical impact on farmers’ income. The research is grounded in a descriptive and analytical framework, employing both primary and secondary data sources. Primary data were collected through a structured survey administered to a representative sample of farmers, while secondary data were derived from official reports, academic literature, and policy documents. The study encompasses key interventions including direct income support schemes, crop insurance programs, institutional credit facilities, and soil health management initiatives. The analysis reveals that although awareness of certain flagship schemes is relatively high, a pronounced disparity exists between awareness and actual adoption. Empirical findings indicate that farmers who effectively access and utilize these schemes experience measurable improvements in income levels, income stability, and risk resilience. However, factors such as inadequate dissemination of information, administrative complexities, institutional bottlenecks, and limited digital literacy continue to impede optimal participation. The study underscores the necessity for strengthening extension mechanisms, enhancing last-mile delivery systems, and simplifying procedural frameworks to bridge the gap between policy formulation and field-level implementation. It further highlights the importance of targeted awareness campaigns and capacity-building initiatives to ensure inclusive access. The findings offer significant policy implications for improving the efficiency and impact of agricultural schemes, thereby contributing to sustainable agricultural development and long-term income enhancement for farmers.

Production of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) has expanded in Montana and North Dakota due to its ability to thrive in semiarid conditions as well as its use in crop rotations to disrupt disease cycles in small grains and other pulse crops. However, the high degree of susceptibility of this crop to soil-borne and foliar disease is a major production constraint. Avoiding cool soil temperatures by delaying planting is a strategy to reduce potential yield loss to Pythium seed rot and damping off in chickpea, but effects on Ascochyta foliar blight (AB) are unknown. Within the United States, chickpea planting dates are dictated by crop insurance restrictions which have not been updated in many years. A study was conducted at six locations in Montana and North Dakota from 2021 through 2023 to determine how delaying planting affected chickpea seed yield and quality, including test weight and protein. Additionally, we assessed seedling emergence, AB foliar disease, seed size, and seed infection to determine if delayed planting improved disease management. For all site-years in which AB was present, delayed planting by 2-3 weeks resulted in less disease but negatively impacted yield (P < 0.05). Effects of fungicide applications and variety were also examined and did have effects on other metrics but did not significantly impact yield or disease. The results of this research support the current practice of early planting to avoid late-season drought in Montana, North Dakota, and similar semi-arid environments where alternative strategies are available to manage disease.

According to data from the USDA's Risk Management Agency, crop insurance indemnities related to precipitation, hurricanes, excess moisture, and field inundation have totaled approximately $3.65 billion across Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa over the past decade. Of this amount, an estimated $924 million (25.31%) was attributed to losses that occurred in the spring months. Cover crops and conservation tillage have been recommended as best management practices to mitigate financial impacts by reducing nutrient losses from erosion, runoff, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, preventing disease and physical plant damage, and enhancing field access through improved landscape drainage. However, further intensification of field inundation events is projected in these three states as we approach the midcentury, which may lessen the mitigative capacity of these practices. Few studies have tested the resilience of these land management practices to intensifying field inundation. We propose a framework that integrates guiding research questions and field experiments to determine whether the mitigative capacity of cover crops and conservation tillage keeps pace with intensifying field inundation events. We also explore agricultural biologicals, precision agriculture, the introduction of perennial crops, and drainage management as measures to address inefficiencies associated with the mitigative capacity of cover crops and conservation tillage that may be identified during experimentation. This effort expands recommended best management practices and provides stakeholders with more options in an uncertain future due to climate change.

Agricultural credit plays a vital role in supporting India’s rural economy and improving the livelihoods of small and marginal farmers. Although institutional credit to agriculture has increased substantially in recent years, equitable and effective access remains a persistent challenge. This paper adopts a systematic review approach based on 15 peer-reviewed studies published between 2021 and 2025 to examine the constraints affecting agricultural credit access in India. The review identifies five major categories of constraints: institutional/policy, economic, social/demographic, knowledge/behavioral, and structural/systemic. Key issues include gaps in policy implementation, stringent collateral requirements, bureaucratic delays, farmer indebtedness, disparities across social groups, limited financial literacy, and the continued dependence on informal lenders. The findings indicate that while initiatives such as Kisan Credit Cards, Joint Liability Groups, digital lending platforms, Farmer Producer Organizations, and crop insurance schemes offer partial solutions, a comprehensive and integrated approach is necessary. Strengthening last-mile delivery, simplifying procedures, enhancing awareness, and leveraging technology are critical for achieving inclusive and sustainable agricultural finance in India.

Recently, external shocks have greatly affected our food systems. Geopolitical crises, extreme weather and pandemics have caused substantial volatility in food production and prices, thereby threatening food security around the globe. Therefore, resilience-enhancing strategies play a crucial role in the sustainability transition of the food system (Meuwissen et al., 2019). Within these strategies, sustainable finance tools enable farmers and other food supply chain actors to sustain their businesses in times of such crises and adapt to changing climatic and market conditions. We here contribute examples of improved resilience measurement and management at different stages of food supply chains.This special issue aims to provide a better understanding of how financial and policy mechanisms enhance the resilience of food systems. Its intent is to assemble evidence on the factors that foster resilience across agricultural production, farm finance and food supply chains. Doing so requires understanding both how components of food systems respond to external shocks, such as climate variability, pandemics and other supply chain disruptions and how farm and food policies shape those responses. While merely scraping the surface of this broad theme, the contributions in this special issue address complementary dimensions of resilience research, including the measurement of supply chain resilience (Tack et al., 2026), drivers of farm economy resilience (Borisova et al., 2026; Lu et al., 2026; Ifft, 2026) and the role of consumer-focused support programs in strengthening local food systems (Dsouza et al., 2026).Tack et al. (2026) address a foundational challenge in the emerging resilience literature: how resilience can be credibly measured at different scales. They develop supply chain resilience metrics that integrate weather shocks with trade flow data to generate country- and commodity-level indicators that capture the capacity of agricultural trade networks to absorb and adapt to disruptions.Promoting a resilient farm economy is equally crucial for maintaining food supply. Borisova et al. (2026) examine how drought shocks affect farm profitability and evaluate the extent to which the federal crop insurance program mitigates such losses. Building on this perspective, Lu et al. (2026) show that spatial price basis risk can deter crop insurance participation. Together, these studies demonstrate the importance of aligning financial risk management instruments with on-the-ground market realities. Ifft (2026) complements this work by exploring how environmental regulations and associated externalities are capitalized into farmland values – perhaps the most important financial asset in agriculture.Finally, Dsouza et al. (2026) broaden the lens beyond farm-level mechanisms to study how local food voucher programs can benefit both consumers and producers. Their findings suggest that safety-net policies targeting household food access can also enhance producer stability and community-level resilience. In doing so, this paper complements the preceding farm- and market-level analyses in the issue by demonstrating that resilience-enhancing policies can operate simultaneously through consumer welfare, producer demand stability and local market institutions.In summary, the papers in this special issue illustrate the multifaceted relationship between agricultural finance and food system resilience: spanning issues of measurement, risk management, policy design and local market institutions. The research in this issue analyzes these issues from the perspective of farm finance, federal insurance policy, environmental regulation and global supply chains. By doing so, the issue contributes new tools and evidence to strengthen the capacity of food systems to withstand and adapt to future shocks.

Pakistan’s agricultural sector is increasingly vulnerable to climate change–induced shocks, posing serious risks to farm incomes and rural livelihoods. Although crop insurance has been promoted as a key risk-mitigation instrument, and several public and private schemes have been introduced—particularly in Punjab—farmer participation remains strikingly low. This study provides one of the first systematic assessments of farm households’ perceptions of climate-related risks, their awareness of crop insurance, and the coping mechanisms they adopt in response to climatic shocks. The analysis draws on primary survey data from 324 farmers across 27 mouzas (villages) in the districts of Bahawalpur, Gujrat, and Faisalabad. Descriptive findings reveal a pronounced perception–adoption gap: while 84% of respondents view climate hazards as a major threat to agriculture, only 21% are aware of crop insurance schemes, and fewer than 3% have ever purchased coverage. In the absence of formal insurance, farmers predominantly rely on informal credit networks, valued for their accessibility, flexibility, and trust-based nature. Econometric estimates using logit and probit models indicate that education and financial inclusion significantly increase the likelihood of insurance awareness, underscoring the central role of financial literacy in shaping adaptation decisions. Overall, the results highlight a substantial disconnect between farming communities and formal risk-management institutions in Pakistan. The study emphasizes the need for localized awareness campaigns, simplified enrolment procedures, credible institutional delivery mechanisms, and innovative public–private partnerships to position crop insurance as an effective resilience-building tool in Pakistan’s climate-vulnerable agricultural sector.

Global climate change poses increasing challenges to agricultural production and global food security by intensifying temperature and precipitation variability and increasing the frequency of extreme weather events. While several studies have examined farmers’ perceptions of climate change in the United States, limited empirical evidence exists for the Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia (Delmarva) Peninsula. This study assessed farmers’ perceptions of climate change in the Delmarva region and identified key factors influencing these perceptions, as well as adaptation strategies employed to address climate-related risks. Primary data were collected through a structured survey administered to farmers across the Delmarva Peninsula, while secondary data consisted of historical temperature and precipitation records obtained from meteorological stations in the region. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize farmer perceptions and adaptation practices, and a logit regression model was applied to examine socioeconomic and experiential factors influencing perceptions of climate change. Analysis of climate data revealed notable variability in temperature and rainfall patterns, with the warmest temperatures occurring during June, July, and August and peak rainfall generally observed between May and September. Survey results showed that a large majority of respondents (88.2%) perceived that climate change is occurring. Logit model results indicated that farmers’ age, education level, acceptance of climate change adaptation practices, and observed changes in climate over the past 5–10 years positively influenced perceptions of climate change. Adaptation strategies included selective crop choices, avoiding cultivation in flood-prone areas, adoption of soil conservation practices, and the use of crop insurance.

Purpose Traditional crop insurance has low adoption in developing countries due to operational inefficiencies and poor systemic risk information, limiting insurers’ diversification and farmer utility. In Brazil, less than 15% of cropland is insured. This study investigates whether integrating actuarial modeling with remote sensing can support an alternative area-yield insurance framework that improves risk management, farmer value, and scalability in data-scarce agricultural systems. Design/methodology/approach Remote sensing, yield modeling, and actuarial simulation were integrated to compare spatial aggregation strategies for area-yield insurance. A 10-year soybean yield time series was reconstructed for one million hectares using satellite vegetation indices and an empirical model. Farms were grouped through spatiotemporal clustering and compared with county aggregation. Insurance contracts were optimized using a constant relative risk aversion framework, simulating willingness to pay, premiums, indemnities, and income outcomes. Findings Clustering farms based on spatiotemporal yield patterns reduced systemic risk and outperformed county aggregation. Utility-based simulations showed cluster-structured insurance increased producer utility by 39% relative to administrative boundaries and substantially improved outcomes compared to no insurance. Clustering also enhanced indemnity distribution and risk correlation while maintaining similar premium loads, demonstrating a viable pathway to expand agricultural insurance adoption in developing countries such as Brazil. Originality/value This study introduces a data-driven spatial aggregation approach replacing administrative units with clusters derived from remote sensing yield correlations. By reconstructing long-term field-scale productivity in a data-scarce environment, it demonstrates how Earth observation can operationalize actuarial insurance design. Integrating spatiotemporal clustering with expected utility optimization provides new evidence on aggregation effects on basis risk, indemnities, and insurer margins, informing scalable insurance solutions.

This study assesses the financial impact of climate-induced extreme weather events on smallholder crop farmers and agricultural insurance firms in Lagos State, Nigeria. Statistical methods employed include descriptive statistics (frequencies, means, percentages), cross-tabulation, Likert-scale analysis, and simple linear regression to assess the relationship between claims and firm solvency. Using a descriptive and inferential statistical analysis of data from a survey of 180 smallholder farmers and 40 staff from four general insurance companies, the study found that severe storms were the most frequent extreme weather event, confirmed by 65.0% of respondents. Storms were also the most financially damaging, causing an average crop loss of ₦87,544.44 per farmer. The overall uptake of agricultural insurance among farmers was found to be 52.8%, with a gender disparity showing male farmers had a higher purchase rate (59.0%) than female farmers (47.4%). Affordability of premiums was identified as the most significant barrier to accessibility, with the lowest mean score (2.94) on a Likert scale. Insurance firms were found to offer a variety of products, with a high proportion offering crop insurance (72.5%) and farm asset insurance (72.5%), but a notable gap in the availability of more modern solutions like weather-index insurance (only 45% of firms offered it). The analysis further revealed a very strong positive correlation between the financial impact of claims and the solvency of insurance firms. Key challenges identified by insurers were pricing difficulties and high administrative costs, which were consistently perceived as the most significant challenges. The study concludes with the finding that these climate-induced financial risks have a direct and significant impact on both smallholder farmer livelihoods and the solvency of agricultural insurance providers.

Purpose This study explores the innovative bundling of crop insurance and credit and its impacts on economic outcomes. This article first presents a theoretical model for “bundlization” of credit and crop insurance. Propositions of such a model are tested in the light of evidence from a nationally representative survey in India. Specifically, this study identifies the correlates of crop insurance access (or bundling of crop insurance and credit) and its impacts on farm income and outstanding debt. Design/methodology/approach A unit-level dataset of 34,946 observations related to 31,784 cereal-producing households is compiled from the Situation Assessment Survey of Agricultural Households in Rural India (2019). Econometric methods (Logistic regression, Multinomial logit model, Propensity score matching and Sensitivity analysis) are used in this study. Findings The survey reveals that only 8% of farmers have access to insurance. Credit-linked insurance has a higher uptake than voluntary insurance. Out of 92% of uninsured farmers, nearly 43% are unaware of the existence of a crop insurance scheme. Most insured farmers who experience crop failure are denied claims without explanation. Logistic regression suggests that higher age, higher yield, greater landholding, formal training, working in an employment guarantee scheme, possession of a Kisan Credit Card and experience of loss increase crop insurance access. Multinomial logit regression findings suggest the positive relationship between yield and crop insurance access is limited to loanee farmers. Finally, propensity score matching results suggest that crop insurance significantly improves farm income and mitigates downward risk during crop failure. Bundling crop insurance and credit provides no additional benefits. Practical implications The results of this study find no economic rationale for bundling crop insurance and credit; therefore, policymakers can delink the compulsory provision of crop insurance in credit contracts. However, considering the positive impact of crop insurance in increasing farm income and safeguarding against crop failure, policymakers should consider strategies to increase crop insurance access by making farmers aware of the crop insurance scheme. Originality/value This article made a novel contribution in the extant literature on two counts. First, this study develops atheoretical framework to compare payoffs of different categories of farmers, i.e. insured vis-à-vis noninsured farmers, and loanee vis-à-vis nonloanee farmers. Secondly, following the framework's propositions, the determinants of crop insurance access are identified by considering these categories of farmers. Additionally, this study estimates the impact of crop insurance in the event of crop success and crop failure.

Addressing the intertwined challenges of food security and climate vulnerability requires robust and regionally tailored strategies for staple crops such as common beans. Although adjusting sowing dates is a key adaptive practice, spatio-temporal climate variability complicates the identification of optimal planting windows. This study integrates crop modeling with Functional Data Analysis (FDA) to quantify sowing-date-dependent yield losses for rainfed common beans across Central-Southern Brazil. The CSM-CROPGRO-Dry Bean model, driven by long-term climate data (1980–2016), soil properties, and management practices, was used to simulate yields for the BRS Estilo cultivar. FDA was subsequently applied to cluster yield-loss curves across municipalities and growing seasons, generating representative regional risk profiles. The results reveal clear spatial patterns. During the wet season, earlier sowing minimizes losses in Goiás, Minas Gerais, and western Paraná, whereas later sowing is beneficial in São Paulo, Santa Catarina, and eastern Paraná. In the dry season, earlier sowing consistently reduces losses across most regions. These patterns are primarily driven by water deficits and suboptimal temperatures during critical phenological phases. The resulting spatio-temporal sowing calendar provides an evidence-based decision-support tool to help farmers mitigate climatic risks. Moreover, it offers a scientific foundation for policymakers to refine sustainable management practices, improve crop insurance design, and enhance agricultural resilience and productivity under increasing climate uncertainty.

Climate change threatens the existence of food security in Bangladesh’s coastal areas, especially because financial adaptation programs such as micro-credit are necessary to endure in the long run. The present study aims to use the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to assess the determinants of intentions of smallholder farmers to use micro-credit to adapt to climate change, as opposed to consumption. The design is specifically to determine the predictive validity and hierarchical effect of attitude, subjective norms (SN), and perceived behavioral control (PBC) in a high-risk area. A cross-sectional survey was done on 385 smallholder farmers in the climate-prone coastal areas of Bhola and Barisal. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) was used to analyze data in an attempt to test the structural relationships between TPB constructs and adaptation intention (AI). PLS-SEM analysis demonstrated that there was a unique sequence of motivations typical of the necessity-driven adaptation. Attitude proved to be the most influential source of intention (T = 6.593), another factor was subjective norms (T = 5.302), and perceived behavioral control (T = 2.848) had the least, but again a significant impact. These findings show that the personal convictions of the farmer in the effectiveness of the strategy and social acceptance are much stronger than the issues of accessibility and structural obstacles in high-risk climate zones. To gain faster adoption, microfinance institutions (MFIs) must go beyond accessibility. The policies must package micro-credit with crop insurance to increase the sense of perceived control and deploy local climate adaptation champions to capitalize on social norms. The paper is one of the first works to empirically show a change in the hierarchy of motivation to climate finance. It adds to the literature of TPBs as it demonstrates that environmental vulnerability increases the contribution of attitude and social norms compared to PBC, providing a new behavioral paradigm to the Global South.