IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/macdyn/v18y2014i07p1607-1634_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Tragedy Of Annuitization? Longevity Insurance In General Equilibrium

Author

Listed:
  • Heijdra, Ben J.
  • Mierau, Jochen O.
  • Reijnders, S. M.

Abstract

We study the microeconomic and macroeconomic effects of longevity insurance. Using a tractable discrete-time overlapping-generations model of a closed economy we first study different types of government redistribution of accidental bequests in general equilibrium. Individuals face longevity risk, as there is a positive probability of passing away before the retirement period. We find nonpathological cases where it is better for long-run welfare to waste accidental bequests than to give them to the elderly. Next we study the introduction of a perfectly competitive life insurance market offering actuarially fair annuities. There exists a tragedy of annuitization: although full annuitization of assets is privately optimal, it is not socially beneficial, because of adverse general equilibrium repercussions.

Suggested Citation

  • Heijdra, Ben J. & Mierau, Jochen O. & Reijnders, S. M., 2014. "A Tragedy Of Annuitization? Longevity Insurance In General Equilibrium," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(7), pages 1607-1634, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:macdyn:v:18:y:2014:i:07:p:1607-1634_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1365100513000072/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:dgr:rugsom:14015-eef is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Theresa Grafeneder-Weissteiner & Klaus Prettner & Jens Südekum, 2020. "Three Pillars of Urbanization: Migration, Aging, and Growth," De Economist, Springer, vol. 168(2), pages 259-278, June.
    3. Aleksandar Arandjelovi'c & Geoffrey Kingston & Pavel V. Shevchenko, 2023. "Life cycle insurance, bequest motives and annuity loads," Papers 2310.06274, arXiv.org.
    4. Maik T. Schneider & Ralph Winkler, 2021. "Growth and Welfare under Endogenous Lifetimes," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(4), pages 1339-1384, October.
    5. Dávila, Julio & Leroux, Marie-Louise, 2015. "Efficiency in overlapping generations economies with longevity choices and fair annuities," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 363-383.
    6. Heijdra, Ben J. & Mierau, Jochen O. & Trimborn, Timo, 2017. "Stimulating annuity markets," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(4), pages 554-583, October.
    7. Stelter, Robert, 2014. "Over-aging: Are present human populations too old?," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 137, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    8. Miyoshi, Yoshiyuki & Toda, Alexis Akira, 2017. "Growth effects of annuities and government transfers in perpetual youth models," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1-6.
    9. Torben M. Andersen & Joydeep Bhattacharya, 2017. "The Intergenerational Welfare State and the Rise and Fall of Pay‐as‐you‐go Pensions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(602), pages 896-923, June.
    10. Erin Cottle Hunt & Frank N. Caliendo, 2022. "Social security and risk sharing: A survey of four decades of economic analysis," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1591-1609, December.
    11. Ben J. Heijdra & Laurie S. M. Reijnders, 2016. "Human Capital Accumulation and the Macroeconomy in an Ageing Society," De Economist, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 297-334, September.
    12. Heijdra, Ben J. & Reijnders, Laurie S. M., 2018. "Longevity shocks with age-dependent productivity growth," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 200-230, April.
    13. Stelter, Robert, 2016. "Over-aging — Are present-day human populations too old?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 116-143.

    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:macdyn:v:18:y:2014:i:07:p:1607-1634_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/mdy .

    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.