Harmful competition in the insurance markets
AbstractThere is a general presumption that competition is a good thing. In this paper we show that competition in the insurance markets can be bad and that adverse selection is in general worse under competition than under monopoly. The reason is that monopoly can exploit its market power to relax incentive constraints by cross-subsidization between different risk types. Cream-skimming behavior, on the contrary, prevents competitive firms from using implicit transfers. In effect monopoly is shown to provide better coverage to those buying insurance but at the cost of limiting participation to insurance. Performing simulation for di erent distributions of risk, we find that monopoly in general performs (much) better than competition in terms of the realization of the gains from trade across all traders in equilibrium. However, most of the surplus is retained by the firm and, as a result, most individuals prefer competitive markets notwithstanding their performance is generally poorer than monopoly.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE) in its series SIRE Discussion Papers with number 2009-46.
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
monopoly; competition; insurance; adverse selection;
Other versions of this item:
- G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies; Actuarial Studies
- H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hellwig, Martin, 1987.
"Some recent developments in the theory of competition in markets with adverse selection ,"
European Economic Review,
Elsevier, vol. 31(1-2), pages 319-325.
- Hellwig,Martin, 1986. "Some recent developments in the theory of competition in markets with adverse selection," Discussion Paper Serie A 82, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Jaffee, Dwight & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1990. "Credit rationing," Handbook of Monetary Economics, in: B. M. Friedman & F. H. Hahn (ed.), Handbook of Monetary Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 837-888 Elsevier.
- DE FEO, Giuseppe & HINDRIKS, Jean, 2005.
"Efficiency of competition in insurance markets with adverse selection,"
CORE Discussion Papers
2005054, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Giuseppe, DE FEO & Jean, HINDRIKS, 2005. "Efficiency of Competition in Insurance Markets with Adverse Selection," Discussion Papers (ECON - DÃ©partement des Sciences Economiques) 2005042, Université catholique de Louvain, Département des Sciences Economiques.
- HINDRIKS, Jean & DE DONDER, Philippe, 2001.
"The politics of redistributive social insurance,"
CORE Discussion Papers
2001054, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- Alberto Bisin & Piero Gottardi, 2006.
"Efficient Competitive Equilibria with Adverse Selection,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(3), pages 485-516, June.
- Alberto Bisin & Piero Gottardi, 2005. "Efficient Competitive Equilibria with Adverse Selection," CESifo Working Paper Series 1504, CESifo Group Munich.
- Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1976. "Equilibrium in Competitive Insurance Markets: An Essay on the Economics of Imperfect Information," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 90(4), pages 630-49, November.
- Engers, Maxim & Fernandez, Luis F, 1987. "Market Equilibrium with Hidden Knowledge and Self-selection," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(2), pages 425-39, March.
- Pradeep Dubey & John Geanakoplos, 2001. "Competitive Pooling: Rothschild-Stiglitz Reconsidered," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1346R2, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Feb 2002.
Blog mentionsAs found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:reading lists or Wikipedia pages:Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Gina Reddie).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.