Advertisement

Lemons or Cherries? Asymmetric Information in the German Private Long-term Care Insurance Market

  • Mark J. Browne
  • Tian Zhou-Richter

Abstract

This study provides evidence of the presence of asymmetric information in the German long-term care (LTC) insurance market. While certain private information—individuals’ pessimism level and preference for insurance—contributes to advantageous selection, the major source of adverse selection—individuals’ self-assessed high LTC risk—switches the final correlation between insurance and risk to one that is significantly positive. In addition, the study reveals that although individuals’ self-assessment of poor health predicts their future care needs very well, such assessments are not necessarily reflected in insurance demand. The results from this study could assist insurers in better understanding and managing LTC risk.

Keywords

Private Information Asymmetric Information Insurance Market Adverse Selection Post Care 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akerlof, G.A. (1970) ‘The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 84(3): 488–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barksy, R.B., Juster, F.T., Kimball, M.S. and Shapiro, M.D. (1997) ‘Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(2): 537–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barseghyan, L., Prince, J. and Teitelbaum, J.C. (2011) ‘Are risk preferences stable across contexts? Evidence from in surance data’, The American Economic Review 101(2): 591–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Besche, A. (2003) Die Pflegeversicherung. [Long-term Care Insurance (in German)] Cologne: Bundesanzeiger.Google Scholar
  5. Browne, M.J. (2006) ‘Adverse selection in the long-term care insurance market’, in P.-A. Chiappori and C. Gollier (eds.) Competitive Failures in Insurance Markets, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 97–112.Google Scholar
  6. Bundesaufsichtsamt für das Versicherungswesen (BAV) [German Federal Supervisory Agency for Insurance] (1992) ‘Anordnungen und Verwaltungsgrundsätze [Directives and and administrative principles]’, Veröffentlichung en des BAV 41(5): 158–160.Google Scholar
  7. Cawley, J. and Philipson, T. (1999) ‘An empirical examination of information barriers to trade in insurance’, The American Economic Review 89(4): 827–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chiappori, P.-A. (2000) ‘Econometric models of insurance under asymmetric information’, in G. Dionne (ed.) Handbook of Insurance, Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 365–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chiappori, P.-A. and Salanié, B. (2000) ‘Testing for asymmetric information in insurance markets’, Journal of Political Economy 108(1): 56–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chiappori, P.-A., Jullien, B., Salanié, B. and Salanié, F. (2006) ‘Asymmetric information in insurance: General testable implications’, The RAND Journal of Economics 37(4): 783–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen, A. and Einav, L. (2007) ‘Estimating risk preferences from deductible choice’, The American Economic Review 97(3): 745–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, A. and Siegelman, P. (2010) ‘Testing for adverse selection in insurance markets’, The Journal of Risk and Insurance 77(1): 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Meza, D. and Webb, D. (2001) ‘Advantageous selection in insurance markets’, The RAND Journal of Economics 32(2): 249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deutsche Aktuarvereinigung (DAV) (2009) ‘Herleitung der Rechnungsgrundlagen DAV 2008 P für die Pflegerenten (zusatz)versicherung,’ [Derivation of Actuarial Basis DAV 2008 P for Long-Term Care Life Annuities (Complementary Insurance) (in German)]’, Blätter der DGVFM 30(1): 31–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Department of Health of the United Kingdom (DH) (2004) At Least Five a Week: Evidence on the Impact of Physical Activity and Its Relationship to Health, from http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk /20130107105354/http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/dh_4080981.pdf, accessed 25 January 2010.
  16. Einav, L., Finkelstein, A., Pascu, J. and Cullen, M.R. (2012) ‘How general are risk preferences? Choices under uncertainty in different domains’, The American Economic Review 102(6): 2606–2638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fang, H., Keane, M.P. and Silverman, D. (2008) ‘Sources of advantageous selection: Evidence from the medigap insurance m arket’, Journal of Political Economy 116(2): 303–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Finkelstein, A. and McGarry, K. (2006) ‘Multiple dimensions of private information: Evidence from the long-term care insurance market’, The American Economic Review 96(4): 938–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Geraedts, M., Heller, G.V. and Harrington, C.A. (2000) ‘Germany’s long-term-care insurance: Putting a social insurance model into practice’, The Milbank Quarterly 78(3): 375–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grupp, J., Richter, H. and Wolfsdorf, K. (1992) ‘Die Ableitung der neuen Pflegefallwahrscheinlichkeiten für die Pflegerentenversicherung [Derivation of the new long-term care incidence rates for long-term care pension]’, Blätter der DGVFM 20(4): 517–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hemenway, D. (1990) ‘Propitious selection’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 105(4): 1063–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koufopoulos, K. (2008) Asymmetric Information, Heterogeneity in Risk Perceptions and Insurance: An Explanation to a Puzzle. World Wide Web: http://ssrn.com /abstract=1301522, accessed 25 January 2010.
  23. McCarthy, D. and Mitchell, O.S. (2010) ‘International adverse selection in life insurance and annuities’, in S. Tuljapurkar, N. Ogawa and A.H. Gauthier (eds.) Ageing in Advanced Industrial States—Riding the Waves Volume 3. Int ernational Studies in Population series, vol. 8. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag, pp. 119–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pauly, M.V. (1990) ‘The rational nonpurchase of long-term-care insurance’, Journal of Political Economy 98(1): 153–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rothschild, M. and Stiglitz, J. (1976) ‘Equilibrium in competitive insurance markets: An essay on the economics of imperfect information’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 90(4): 629–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Saito, K. (2006) ‘Testing for asymmetric information in the automobile insurance market under rate regulation’, The Journal of Risk and Insurance 73(2): 335–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sandroni, A. and Squintani, F. (2007) ‘Overconfidence, insurance, and paternalism’, The American Economic Review 97(5): 1994–2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Verband der privaten Krankenversicherung (PKV) [Private Health Insurance Association] (1998) Die private Krankenversicherung — Zahlenbericht 1997/1998 [Private Health Insurance — Data Report 1997/1998], from, https://www.pkv.de /service/zahlen-und-fakten/archiv-pkv-zahlenbericht/zahlenbericht_1997_1998.pdf.
  29. World Health Organization (WHO) (2001) The World Health Report 2001: Mental Health: New Understanding, New Hope, Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar
  30. Zhou-Richter, T., Browne, M.J. and Gründl, H. (2010) ‘Don’t they care? Or, are they just unaware? Risk perception and the demand for long-term care insurance’, The Journal of Risk and Insurance 77(4): 715–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zweifel, P. and Strüwe, W. (1998) ‘Long-term care insurance in a two-generation model’, The Journal of Risk and Insurance 65(1): 13–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark J. Browne
    • 1
  • Tian Zhou-Richter
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Risk Management, Tobin College of BusinessSt. John’s UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Munich Reinsurance CompanyMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations