Search

This paper examines whether myopia (misperception of the long-term care (LTC) risk) and private insurance market loading costs can justify social LTC insurance and/or the subsidization of private insurance. We use a two-period model wherein individuals differ in three unobservable characteristics: level of productivity, survival probability and degree of ignorance concerning the risk of LTC (the former two being perfectly positively correlated). The decentralization of a first-best allocation requires that LTC insurance premiums of the myopic agents are subsidized (at a Pigouvian rate) and/or that there is public provision of the appropriate level of LTC. The support for the considered LTC policy instruments is less strong in a second-best setting. When social LTC provision is restricted to zero, a myopic agent's tax on private LTC insurance premiums involves a tradeoff between paternalistic and redistributive (incentive) considerations and we may have a tax as well as a subsidy on private LTC insurance. Interestingly, savings (which goes untaxed in the first-best but plays the role of self-insurance in the second-best) is also subject to (positive or negative) taxation. Social LTC provision is never second-best optimal when private insurance markets are fair (irrespective of the degree of the proportion of myopic individuals and their degree of misperception). At the other extreme, when the loading factor in the private sector is sufficiently high, private coverage is completely crowded out by public provision. For intermediate levels of the loading factors, the solution relies on both types of insurance.

The external accident cost of road use is a function of the marginal relationship between road use and accidents, as expressed, for instance, by the elasticity. This elasticity is, however, not necessarily constant, but may be assumed to depend on the traffic volume as seen in relation to road capacity. Dense or congested traffic may force speed levels down, decreasing the risk of accidents or at least the average loss incurred given that an accident takes place. Relying on a large econometric accident model based on monthly cross-section/time-series data for all provinces of Norway, we derive non-linear empirical functions describing the relationship between road use and accidents and discuss their implications in terms of accident costs and externalities. The analysis reveals that there is probably a large accident externality generated by heavy vehicle road use, but that the marginal external accident cost of private car use is quite small, perhaps even negative. To the extent that it is positive, it is so in large part on account of public and private insurance. Contrary to what is frequently believed and maintained, auto insurance does not serve to internalise the cost of accidents. In fact, its primary purpose and effect is exactly the opposite. The adverse incentives created by insurance could, however, be mitigated by certain innovative approaches to ratemaking. Such schemes would ideally involve more decision variables than just the decision to drive. Incentives could, in principle, be attached to speeding, route choice, vehicle choice, safety equipment, or time of day/week/year.

This paper prices the risk of climate change by calculating a lower bound for the price of a virtual insurance policy against climate risks associated with the business as usual (BAU) emissions path. In analogy with ordinary insurance pricing, this price depends on the current risk to which society is exposed on the BAU emissions path and on a second emissions path reflecting risks that society is willing to take. The difference in expected damages on these two paths is the price which a risk neutral insurer would charge for the risk swap excluding transaction costs and profits, and it is also a lower bound on society's willingness to pay for this swap. The price is computed by (1) identifying a probabilistic risk constraint that society accepts, (2) computing an optimal emissions path satisfying that constraint using an abatement cost function, (3) computing the extra expected damages from the business as usual path, above those of the risk constrained path, and (4) apportioning those excess damages over the emissions per ton in the various time periods. The calculations follow the 2010 US government social cost of carbon analysis, and are done with DICE2009.

In this paper, we provide an extensive summary of a field experiment we have recently conducted on the behavioural effects of pay-as-you-drive (PAYD) vehicle insurance (Bolderdijk et al., 2011a). We start with a review of the rationale for PAYD schemes from a behavioural science perspective. Next, we describe the design of our study, and discuss and elaborate on the main empirical findings. Based on this, we present practical guidelines for policy makers and insurance companies aiming to introduce PAYD schemes as a tool to reduce crash risk, improve traffic safety, and reduce the negative environmental impacts of car use.

Premium subsidies have been advocated as an alternative to social health insurance. These subsidies are paid if expenditure on health insurance exceeds a given share of income. In this paper, we examine whether this approach is superior to social insurance from a welfare perspective. We show that the results crucially depend on the correlation of health and productivity. For a positive correlation, we find that combining premium subsidies with social insurance is the optimal policy.

This paper investigates the impact of insurance contract design on the behavior of filing fraudulent claims in an experimental setup. We test how fraud behavior varies for insurance contracts with full coverage, a straight deductible or variable premiums (bonus-malus contract). In our experiment, filing fraudulent claims is a dominant strategy for selfish participants, with no psychological costs of committing fraud. While some people always commit fraud, a substantial share of people only occasionally or never defraud. In addition, we find that deductible contracts may be perceived as unfair and thus increase the extent of claim build-up compared to full coverage contracts. In contrast, bonus-malus contracts with variable insurance premiums significantly reduce the filing of fictitious claims compared to both full coverage and deductible contracts. This reduction cannot be explained by monetary incentives. Our results indicate that contract design significantly affects psychological costs and, consequently, the extent of fraudulent behavior of policyholders.

This paper studies the interdependence between property insurance and portfolio selection. The insurance premium of property loss is shown to play the role of subsistence consumption in the analysis. Then, “security” becomes a necessity good and an increase in any insurance parameter would make the investor more “conservative.” The effect of a stock market parameter on the marginal propensity to insure is shown to be opposite that on the marginal propensity to consume. Consequently, an increase in volatility would encourage those with a greater-than-unity relative risk aversion to purchase more insurance at the expense of current consumption.

Mutual insurance companies and stock insurance companies are different forms of organized risk sharing: policyholders and owners are two distinct groups in a stock insurer, while they are one and the same in a mutual. This distinction is relevant to raising capital, selling policies, and sharing risk in the presence of financial distress. Up-front capital is necessary for a stock insurer to offer insurance at a fair premium, but not for a mutual. In the presence of an ownermanager conflict, holding capital is costly. Free-rider and commitment problems limit the degree of capitalization that a stock insurer can obtain. The mutual form, by tying sales of policies to the provision of capital, can overcome these problems at the potential cost of less diversified owners. JEL Classification: G22, G32

The ecological literature suggests that biodiversity reduces the variance of ecosystem services. Thus, conservative biodiversity management has an insurance value to risk-averse users of ecosystem services. We analyze a conceptual ecological-economic model in which such management measures generate a private benefit and, via ecosystem processes at higher hierarchical levels, a positive externality on other ecosystem processes at higher hierarchical levels, a positive externality on other ecosystem users. We find that ecosystem management and environmental policy depend on the extent of uncertainty and risk-aversion as follows: (i) Individual effort to improve ecosystem quality unambiguously increases. The free-rider problem may decrease or increase, depending on the characteristics of the ecosytsem and its management; in particular, (ii) the size of the externality may decrease or increase, depending on how individual and aggregate management effort influence biodiversity; and (iii) the welfare loss due to free-riding may decrease or increase, depending on how biodiversity influences ecosystem service provision.

The ecological literature suggests that biodiversity reduces the variance of ecosystem services. Thus, conservative biodiversity management has an insurance value to risk-averse users of ecosystem services. We analyze a conceptual ecological-economic model in which such management measures generate a private benefit and, via ecosystem processes at higher hierarchical levels, a positive externality on other ecosystem users. We find that ecosystem management and environmental policy depend on the extent of uncertainty and risk-aversion as follows: (i) Individual effort to improve ecosystem quality unambiguously increases. The free-rider problem may decrease or increase, depending on the characteristics of the ecosystem and its management; in particular, (ii) the extent of optimal regulation may decrease or increase, depending on the relative size of private and external effects of management effort on biodiversity; and (iii) the welfare loss due to free-riding may decrease or increase, depending on how biodiversity influences ecosystem service provision; it increases, unless higher biodiversity greatly decreases the variance of ecosystem services.

A major shortcoming of the growing empirical work on asymmetric information is the inability to separately identify moral hazard from adverse selection. Abbring et. al. (2003) point out that dynamic insurance data can help here, by asking whether consumers have fewer claims when they are at a place in the ?experience rating? scheme where additional claims are more expensive. However, in the French setting they study, this test boils down to asking whether there is negative state dependence in claims occurrence, and thus requires them to assume away all other forms of state dependence in claims. This paper overcomes this problem by considering U.S data, where claims fall off consumer records after three years, creating an ?insurance event? that changes a consumer?s position in the experience rating scheme with no simultaneous claim, and thus allowing identification of moral hazard even with fairly general controls for state dependence and unobserved heterogeneity. In addition, the U.S. data follow consumers for 10 years (vs. 1 in Abbring et. al) and contain a much wider range of claim price effects, both of which increase identification power. The paper?s core finding is a small, but statistically significant, moral hazard effect. This is made more convincing by the fact that the effect grows following a 1997 pricing change that increased the cost of additional claims relative to the first one. Finally, without the controls for state dependence in claims, this effect disappears. This suggests that the lack of evidence for moral hazard in previous work may have resulted from confounding the negative state dependence associated with moral hazard with some underlying source of positive state dependence in claims occurrence.

In a two-stage model insurance companies first decide upon risk classification and then compete in prices. I show that the observed heterogeneous behavior of similar firms is compatible with rational behavior. On the deregulated German insurance market individual application of classification schemes induces welfare losses due to cream skimming. Classification costs and pricing above marginal cost can be prevented by common industry-wide loss statistics which already exist to a rudimentary extent. They allow competition to approach Bertrand type. The computation of a mixed-strategy equilibrium for Bertrand competition allows to explain the decrease of industry profit after deregulation.