International food security expert Dr. Fadel ELZUBI explained that within the National Agricultural Development Strategy—now nearing completion—the file on improving the services of the Agricultural Risk Management Fund, particularly the establishment of a cooperative Takaful insurance company for the agricultural sector, has remained one of the most critical pillars that has not yet been translated into actual institutional achievement. This is despite its clear inclusion as a strategic solution to address farmers’ vulnerability to climate and economic risks, and its designation as a flagship initiative under the Economic Modernization Vision 2033.
He added that, in terms of what has been achieved, efforts have largely been confined to strengthening the compensatory role of the existing fund by expanding certain compensation schemes, improving field damage assessment mechanisms, and enhancing coordination with the Ministry of Agriculture and other stakeholders.
Dr. ELZUBI noted that while technical and operational concepts regarding the importance of cooperative agricultural insurance were discussed, and dialogues were held with local and international parties on cooperative insurance models, these efforts never matured into the establishment of an independent Takaful insurance company that could serve farmers in a sustainable and institutional manner.
The primary reason for this strategic gap, he explained, lies in the absence of a ready legislative and regulatory framework that would allow for the creation of a specialized agricultural Takaful insurance company—one that accounts for the unique nature of agricultural risks, which differ fundamentally from conventional commercial insurance.
He further pointed to the limited availability of start-up capital, weak private sector participation, and the reluctance of existing insurance companies to enter a sector perceived as high-risk and low-profit. Added to this is the weak insurance culture among many farmers, who continue to view insurance as an additional cost rather than a risk management tool—especially amid declining farm incomes and repeated losses. As a semi-governmental instrument, the Fund has remained restricted to post-damage compensation, without evolving into a comprehensive platform for preventive risk management or cooperative pooling.
What has been achieved on the ground, he stressed, has not gone beyond procedural improvements in compensation mechanisms within the existing fund. Worse still, the Fund’s coverage has remained narrow and selective, focusing mainly on plant production and certain direct climatic risks such as frost or floods, while leaving out entire critical sectors such as livestock, poultry, epidemics, market volatility, rising input costs, and supply chain disruptions.
This structural deficiency, he argued, is not a mere technical detail but has effectively stripped a wide segment of farmers and breeders of any real risk management tools, leaving them to bear the full cost of recurrent losses.
At the same time, the country has witnessed an unprecedented escalation in the frequency and severity of climate risks during the years of strategy implementation—frost waves, heatwaves, and droughts—which drained the Fund’s resources and forced it into a reactive mode of partial emergency compensation, rather than investing in sustainable structural solutions such as cooperative agricultural insurance. This failure was compounded by limited financing for the agricultural sector and its declining priority on the public policy agenda, leaving agricultural insurance postponed despite its heavy cost on food security, economic stability, and rural livelihoods.
Dr. ELZUBI concluded that while the National Agricultural Development Strategy partially succeeded in improving compensation tools, it failed to deliver the qualitative shift from compensation to cooperative agricultural insurance. He emphasized that this file represents one of the most important lessons learned and should be prioritized in the next agricultural strategy—through building a clear legislative framework, incentivizing private sector partnership, and integrating government support into subsidized insurance premiums. Such measures would ensure the protection of Jordanian farmers and strengthen their resilience against mounting risks.