IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/anacsi/v16y2022i2p289-318_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Functional disability with systematic trends and uncertainty: a comparison between China and the US

Author

Listed:
  • Fu, Yu
  • Sherris, Michael
  • Xu, Mengyi

Abstract

China and the US are two contrasting countries in terms of functional disability and long-term care. China is experiencing declining family support for long-term care and developing private long-term care insurance. The US has a more developed public aged care system and private long-term care insurance market than China. Changes in the demand for long-term care are driven by the levels, trends and uncertainty in mortality and functional disability. To understand the future potential demand for long-term care, we compare mortality and functional disability experiences in China and the US, using a multi-state latent factor intensity model with time trends and systematic uncertainty in transition rates. We estimate the model with the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Survey (CLHLS) and the US Health and Retirement Study (HRS) data. The estimation results show that if trends continue, both countries will experience longevity improvement with morbidity compression and a declining proportion of the older population with functional disability. Although the elderly Chinese have a shorter estimated life expectancy, they are expected to spend a smaller proportion of their future lifetime functionally disabled than the elderly Americans. Systematic uncertainty is shown to be significant in future trends in disability rates and our model estimates higher uncertainty in trends for the Chinese elderly, especially for urban residents.

Suggested Citation

  • Fu, Yu & Sherris, Michael & Xu, Mengyi, 2022. "Functional disability with systematic trends and uncertainty: a comparison between China and the US," Annals of Actuarial Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 289-318, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:anacsi:v:16:y:2022:i:2:p:289-318_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1748499521000233/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:anacsi:v:16:y:2022:i:2:p:289-318_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/aas .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.