IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bracjl/v21y2016i02p314-363_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert judgement

Author

Listed:
  • Ashcroft, M.
  • Austin, R.
  • Barnes, K.
  • MacDonald, D.
  • Makin, S.
  • Morgan, S.
  • Taylor, R.
  • Scolley, P.

Abstract

Expert judgement has been used since the actuarial profession was founded. In the past, there has often been a lack of transparency regarding the use of expert judgement, even though those judgements could have a very significant impact on the outputs of calculations and the decisions made by organisations. The lack of transparency has a number of dimensions, including the nature of the underlying judgements, as well as the process used to derive those judgements. This paper aims to provide a practical framework regarding expert judgement processes, and how those processes may be validated. It includes a worked example illustrating how the process could be used for setting a particular assumption. It concludes with some suggested tools for use within expert judgement. Although primarily focussed on the insurance sector, the proposed process framework could be applied more widely without the need for significant changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashcroft, M. & Austin, R. & Barnes, K. & MacDonald, D. & Makin, S. & Morgan, S. & Taylor, R. & Scolley, P., 2016. "Expert judgement," British Actuarial Journal, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 314-363, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bracjl:v:21:y:2016:i:02:p:314-363_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1357321715000239/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:bracjl:v:21:y:2016:i:02:p:314-363_00. 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/baj .

    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.