We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In this article, I study the effect of endogenous challenger entry on electoral accountability in the presence of adverse selection. To this end, I analyze a two-period electoral agency model wherein a potential challenger freely chooses whether to run for office. The effect of endogenous challenger entry on policy decisions in this model is ambiguous: depending on model parameters, it can worsen or ease policy distortions. Analogously, marginally increasing the cost of running for office can deepen or reduce these distortions. This uncertainty regarding the effect of endogenous challenger entry on policymaking leads to equally ambiguous welfare implications. Nonetheless, I identify conditions under which endogenous challenger entry improves policymaking and voter welfare. This suggests that, in some circumstances, imposing higher barriers to entry in elections can improve policymaking and voter welfare.
In this paper, we present experimental evidence on the effect adverse selection has on coverage choices and pricing in corporate insurance markets. Two sets of experimental data, each generated by experiments utilizing a specific parameterization of a corporate insurance decision, are presented to gauge these effects. In the first, subject behavior conforms to a unique equilibrium in which high risk firms choose higher coverage and contracts are priced accordingly. Insurers act competitively and convergence to equilibrium behavior is marked. In the second set, there is little evidence that subject behavior is consistent with either of the two equilibrium outcomes supported by the experimental setting—pooling by fully insuring losses and pooling by self insuring.
Charness and Dufwenberg (Am. Econ. Rev. 101(4):1211–1237, 2011) have recently demonstrated that cheap-talk communication raises efficiency in bilateral contracting situations with adverse selection. We replicate their main finding and extend their design to include competition between agents. We find that communication and competition act as “substitutes:” communication raises efficiency in the absence of competition but not with competition, and competition raises efficiency without communication but lowers efficiency with communication. We briefly review some behavioral theories that have been proposed in this context and show that each can explain some but not all features of the observed data patterns. Our findings highlight the fragility of cheap-talk communication and may serve as a guide to refine existing behavioral theories.
This chapter discusses the importance of decision-making and agency problems in bank governance with particular focus on the role of the board of directors in addressing sustainability risks that are increasingly affecting the banking business. It considers traditional agency theories that underpin corporate governance and suggests that they do not offer a full explanation of the ‘collective’ agency problems that exist in large complex organisations, such as banks and other financial institutions. Human agency theory offers an alternative theory that emphasises the importance of organisational culture in determining standards, norms and values that influence agent behaviour. As to bank boards, the chapter stresses that although their role is primary, regulatory intervention may be necessary to ensure that organisational practices are adequately managing agency problems regarding sustainability concerns. The chapter concludes with some recommendations for how bank governance and business practices could be improved to support society’s sustainability objectives.
Chapter 11 focuses on the adverse selection problem in the health insurance market, which is sometimes referred to as the “death spiral.” First, the concept of “uninsurable” individuals is developed and the rationale for eliminating differential pricing based on pre-existing conditions (experience rating) is explored. Then the chapter discusses the consequences of this choice: the adverse selection problem. Finally, alternative solutions to adverse selection are explored – both single-payer systems and market-based solutions such as the Affordable Care Act. The end of chapter supplement explores the historical reasons for differences between the health insurance system in the United States and the system of a close ally, the United Kingdom.
This paper investigates an operation mechanism for mutual aid platforms to develop more sustainably and profitably. A mutual aid platform is an online risk-sharing platform for risk-heterogeneous participants, and the platform extracts revenues by charging participants commission and subscription fees. A modeling framework is proposed to identify the optimal commissions and subscriptions for mutual aid platforms. Participants are divided into different types based on their loss probabilities and values derived from the platform. We present how these commissions and subscriptions should be set in a mutual aid plan to maximize the platform’s revenues. Our analysis emphasized the importance of accounting for risk heterogeneity in mutual aid platforms. Specifically, different types of participants should be charged different commissions/subscriptions depending on their loss probabilities and values on the platform. Participants’ shared costs should be determined based on their loss probabilities. Adverse selection occurs on the platform if participants with different risks pay the same shared costs. Our results also show that the platform’s maximum revenue will be lower if the platform charges the same fee to all participants. The numerical results of a practical example illustrate that the optimal commission/subscription scheme and risk-sharing rule result in considerable improvements in platform revenue over the current scheme implemented by the platform.
Joan Costa-Font, London School of Economics and Political Science,Tony Hockley, London School of Economics and Political Science,Caroline Rudisill, University of South Carolina
This chapter goes over the decision to purchase health insurance (or not). The way information is presented to individuals has a significant impact on their decision to purchase insurance to protect themselves from the financial consequences of health risks. Eliminating minor inconvenience costs or simplifying the insurance selection process can influence whether or not people purchase insurance. This chapter examines the roles of adverse selection and moral hazard in insurance-related behaviour, as well as the barriers to insurance uptake for individuals ranging from affordability to unobservable quality and information/choice overload. The chapter investigates the role of various nudges in increasing health insurance uptake.
Many economies have recently adopted the defined-contribution retirement financing system, but one disadvantage of this system is that retirees have to bear longevity risk. As a result, several economies have also introduced the public annuity plans. We analyze the similarities and differences between voluntary public annuity with ceiling (VPAc) plan and mandatory public annuity with flexibility (MPAf) plan that are empirically observed. Introducing either plan reduces the severity of adverse selection in public annuities, but further distorts the private annuity market. These two plans have systematically different effects on retirees’ utility levels: the good health group is adversely affected and the average health group benefits. On the other hand, the poor health group benefits from the VPAc plan but may be adversely affected under the MPAf plan.
Mutual benefit societies evolved as the major provider for sickness, accident and life insurance in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries on both sides of the Atlantic. One of the major problems facing insurers was the risk of adverse selection, i.e. that unhealthy individuals had more incentives than healthy individuals to insure when priced for the average risk. By empirically examining whether longevity among insured individuals in a nationwide mutual health society was different from a matched sample of uninsured individuals, we seek to identify the presence of adverse selection. We find no compelling evidence showing that unhealthy individuals were more likely to insure, or reasons to believe that problems related to adverse selection would have been a major reason for government intervention in the health insurance market in Sweden.
This chapter addresses insuring natural catastrophes in America. It provides an overview of the existing lines of insurance for natural catastrophe losses, such as homeowners insurance, commercial property insurance (including business interruption insurance), the National Flood Insurance Program, and earthquake insurance (including the California Earthquake Authority). Currently, most natural catastrophe losses are uninsured in America as a result of consumer ignorance regarding risk and private insurers’ general treatment of natural catastrophes as uninsurable correlated risks. Consequently, this chapter also includes a discussion of ways more natural catastrophe losses could be insured in America by considering the ways other developed countries throughout the world insure natural catastrophe losses.
Chapter 4 chronicles the status quo and innovations in underwriting practices in the life insurance domain and shows how private markets deal with information problems and how they eagerly capitalize on novel ways – such as tracking devices – to mitigate asymmetric information. Using quantitative analysis, the chapter also shows that private life insurance markets are more developed in country-years with better information, but that partisanship mediates this relationship. Life insurance is an interesting domain to study because it has many parallels to health insurance, yet the former is mostly private, while the latter is mostly public. The chapter discusses the emergence of a supplementary private health insurance market, but it also documents the continued popularity of public solutions in areas where the time-inconsistency problem cannot be overcome by private actors.
Chapter 2 presents the (formal) theoretical framework and advances four arguments. First, whether or not majority support for public provision of insurance exists depends on the distribution of information. Second, some insurance is best provided via pay-as-you-go systems, but these involve a difficult time-inconsistency problem that private markets cannot solve. Some social insurance is therefore bound to remain almost entirely within the purview of the state. Third, people’s preferences regarding social insurance are also a function of the availability of private options. If social insurance is the only game in town, even those subsidizing the system will support it, leading to broad cross-class majorities. With private alternatives, the better-off will lower their support for public spending, which erodes the broad support public social policy programs traditionally enjoy. Fourth, parties continue to matter because they represent different risk groups, and we expect that partisan conflicts will extend into new areas, most importantly the regulation of information and how it may be used.
We propose a macroeconomic model in which adverse selection in investment amplifies macroeconomic fluctuations, in line with the prominent role played by the credit crunch during the financial crisis. Endogenous lending standards emerge due to an informational asymmetry between borrowers and lenders about the riskiness of borrowers. By using loan approval probability as a screening device, banks ration credit following increases in lending risk, generating large endogenous movements in TFP, explaining why productivity often falls during crises. Furthermore, the mechanism implies that financial instability is heightened when interest rates are low.
In practice, the regulator generally has access to less information than the regulated firm on costs. In Baron– Myerson (1982) the regulated firm has private information on cost characteristics it cannot modify. In Laffont– Tirole (1986) the firm has private information on its endogenous effort to decrease cost. Regulators must pay information rent to access the information required for designing the contracts and must credibly commit to pay it to avoid a ratchet effect. The issue is politically sensitive because the ‘fee’ for information increases the operator’s profit whereas it is paid either by the consumers or the taxpayers, that is, by voters. Under adverse selection, to reduce the cost of the information rent, which is highest for the most efficient firm that is induced to produce the first-best level, less efficient firm production is distorted downward. The optimal regulation mechanism to address moral hazard risks impacting costs offers a menu of contracts where efficient firms choose a high fixed payment and produce the optimal effort while inefficient firms are constrained to choose cost-plus contracts, which again implies no rent and no effort for them.
If the logic of markets is that price equals value, sometimes there are forms of value that fall outside of what markets are able to recognize. We call this phenomenon market failure. It is not a personal or institutional failure or even a failure of economic theory, just a limitation of markets as a medium. Our core case study is of the opening of Tate Modern. The museum revitalized the Southwark area of London and increased property values sometimes 500%. The museum relied on philanthropy and government support and was not able to capture all of the value it created. We consider two very different methods economists use to evaluate these situations: contingent valuation method and economic development study. We compare and contrast the approaches taken by the Guggenheim and the Tate. We explore concepts of market failure including public goods, externalities, tragedy of the commons, free-rider problems, adverse selection, and moral hazard.
Bonus-malus systems (BMSs) are widely used in actuarial sciences. These systems are applied by insurance companies to distinguish the policyholders by their risks. The most known application of BMS is in automobile third-party liability insurance. In BMS, there are several classes, and the premium of a policyholder depends on the class he/she is assigned to. The classification of policyholders over the periods of the insurance depends on the transition rules. In general, optimization of these systems involves the calculation of an appropriate premium scale considering the number of classes and transition rules as external parameters. Usually, the stationary distribution is used in the optimization process. In this article, we present a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) formulation for determining the premium scale and the transition rules. We present two versions of the model, one with the calculation of stationary probabilities and another with the consideration of multiple periods of the insurance. Furthermore, numerical examples will also be given to demonstrate that the MILP technique is suitable for handling existing BMSs.
During the past decade, genetics research has allowed scientists and clinicians to explore the human genome in detail and reveal many thousands of common genetic variants associated with disease. Genetic risk scores, known as polygenic risk scores (PRSs), aggregate risk information from the most important genetic variants into a single score that describes an individual’s genetic predisposition to a given disease. This article reviews recent developments in the predictive utility of PRSs in relation to a person’s susceptibility to breast cancer and coronary artery disease. Prognostic models for these disorders are built using data from the UK Biobank, controlling for typical clinical and underwriting risk factors. Furthermore, we explore the possibility of adverse selection where genetic information about multifactorial disorders is available for insurance purchasers but not for underwriters. We demonstrate that prediction of multifactorial diseases, using PRSs, provides population risk information additional to that captured by normal underwriting risk factors. This research using the UK Biobank is in the public interest as it contributes to our understanding of predicting risk of disease in the population. Further research is imperative to understand how PRSs could cause adverse selection if consumers use this information to alter their insurance purchasing behaviour.
Insurance has two basic theoretical motivations. First, for those parties holding a risky asset to purchase a commodity that reduces the overall expected risk of the two assets, being the original asset and the asset of the insurance policy. Insurance policies are available in various forms on the market, but two of the main types of policies for environmental accidents are first-party (damage to self and own assets) and third-party (damage to other parties and their assets) liability insurance. Moral hazard contains the idea that if you assume the risk for someone else, then they no longer face the costs of those risks and thus are more likely to undertake those risks. Market capacity to supply the necessary volume of insurance policies and to be able to pay them out when needed can be reinforced with several tools, including forms of co-insurance, reinsurance, and pooling. Again, it bears repeating that while some injuries, like a wrecked car, might be remedied by cash payouts, this is not often the case for material environmental injuries. Thus, the creation of moral hazard for environmental insurance policies, both first-party and third-party, is a serious concern.