IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v9y2021i22p2853-d676386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Effort on Self-Insurance-Cum-Protection: A New Analysis Using Yaari’s Dual Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Wing Yan Lee

    (Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Insurance, The Hang Seng University of Hong Kong, Hang Shin Link, Shatin, Hong Kong, China)

  • Derrick W. H. Fung

    (Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Insurance, The Hang Seng University of Hong Kong, Hang Shin Link, Shatin, Hong Kong, China)

Abstract

People take different measures to control risks. The measures that can simultaneously reduce loss probability and loss size are called self-insurance-cum-protection. This paper studies self-insurance-cum-protection using Yaari’s dual theory. We analyze the comparative statics of increased risk aversion. Two different sufficient conditions are found in the two-state model, from which an increase in the level of risk aversion will lead to an increase in the level of self-insurance-cum-protection. The first condition is a new result under Yaari’s dual theory and its implication is that the more risk-averse individual is willing to exert greater effort on self-insurance-cum-protection if the probability of loss can be reduced to very small by a less risk-averse individual with optimal effort. The second condition depends on the forms of the self-insurance-cum protection cost and the loss. This condition is the same as that obtained under expected utility in existing literature. Our study therefore assures the robustness this result. We also study comparative statics in the continuous model and find out that the results are analogous to that in the two-state model. In addition, we consider how the availability of market insurance affects the self-insurance-cum-protection level. When the probability of loss is small, the self-insurance-cum-protection and market insurance are substitutes. This means when market insurance is available, people tend to exert less effort on self-insurance-cum-protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Wing Yan Lee & Derrick W. H. Fung, 2021. "Optimal Effort on Self-Insurance-Cum-Protection: A New Analysis Using Yaari’s Dual Theory," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(22), pages 1-12, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:22:p:2853-:d:676386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/22/2853/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/22/2853/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    2. Tim Lohse & Julio R. Robledo & Ulrich Schmidt, 2012. "Self‐Insurance and Self‐Protection as Public Goods," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 79(1), pages 57-76, March.
    3. Louis Eeckhoudt & Harris Schlesinger, 2006. "Putting Risk in Its Proper Place," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 280-289, March.
    4. Dionne, Georges & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 1985. "Self-insurance, self-protection and increased risk aversion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 17(1-2), pages 39-42.
    5. Kai A. Konrad & Stergios Skaperdas, 1993. "Self-Insurance and Self-Protection: A Nonexpected Utility Analysis," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 18(2), pages 131-146, December.
    6. McGuire, Martin C & Pratt, John & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1991. "Paying to Improve Your Chances: Gambling or Insurance?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 329-338, December.
    7. Christophe Courbage, 2001. "Self-Insurance, Self-Protection and Market Insurance within the Dual Theory of Choice," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 26(1), pages 43-56, June.
    8. Doherty, Neil A & Eeckhoudt, Louis, 1995. "Optimal Insurance without Expected Utility: The Dual Theory and the Linearity of Insurance Contracts," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 157-179, March.
    9. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    10. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah Bensalem, 2020. "Self-insurance and Non-concave Distortion Risk Measures," Working Papers hal-02936349, HAL.
    2. Han Bleichrodt, 2022. "The prevention puzzle," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 47(2), pages 277-297, September.
    3. Biener, Christian & Eling, Martin & Landmann, Andreas & Pradhan, Shailee, 2018. "Can group incentives alleviate moral hazard? The role of pro-social preferences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 230-249.
    4. Henri Loubergé, 1998. "Risk and Insurance Economics 25 Years After," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 23(4), pages 540-567, October.
    5. Neji Saidi, 2022. "Willingness to pay, surplus and Insurance policy under dual theory," Papers 2204.04794, arXiv.org.
    6. Filiz-Ozbay, Emel & Guryan, Jonathan & Hyndman, Kyle & Kearney, Melissa & Ozbay, Erkut Y., 2015. "Do lottery payments induce savings behavior? Evidence from the lab," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 1-24.
    7. Foster, Gigi & Frijters, Paul & Schaffner, Markus & Torgler, Benno, 2018. "Expectation formation in an evolving game of uncertainty: New experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 379-405.
    8. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    9. Richard Peter, 2024. "The economics of self-protection," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 49(1), pages 6-35, March.
    10. Christophe Courbage, 2006. "Smoking Behavior and Rank-Dependent Expected-Uitility," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 142(II), pages 223-230, June.
    11. Aluma Dembo & Shachar Kariv & Matthew Polisson & John Quah, 2021. "Ever since Allais," IFS Working Papers W21/15, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    12. van Bruggen, Paul & Laeven, Roger J. A. & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2024. "Higher-Order Risk Attitudes for Non-Expected Utility," Other publications TiSEM c566934e-eb60-4b4b-a972-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Polkovnichenko, Valery & Zhao, Feng, 2013. "Probability weighting functions implied in options prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 580-609.
    14. Stephen G Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2021. "Household Portfolio Underdiversification and Probability Weighting: Evidence from the Field," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4524-4563.
    15. Andersen, Steffen & Harrison, Glenn W. & Lau, Morten Igel & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2010. "Behavioral econometrics for psychologists," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 553-576, August.
    16. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Arjan Verschoor & Ben D’Exelle, 2022. "Probability weighting for losses and for gains among smallholder farmers in Uganda," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 223-258, February.
    19. Louis R. Eeckhoudt & Roger J. A. Laeven, 2021. "Probability Premium and Attitude Towards Probability," Papers 2105.00054, arXiv.org.
    20. Eeckhoudt, Louis R. & Laeven, Roger J.A. & Schlesinger, Harris, 2020. "Risk apportionment: The dual story," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    21. Erling Eide & Kristine von Simson & Steinar Strøm, 2011. "Rank-Dependent Utility, Tax Evasion, and Labor Supply," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 67(3), pages 261-281, September.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:9:y:2021:i:22:p:2853-:d:676386. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.