IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/sactxx/v2020y2020i3p245-271.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Budget-constrained optimal retention with an upper limit on the retained loss

Author

Listed:
  • Mario Ghossoub

Abstract

Unlike sophisticated institutional insurance buyers, individual insurance seekers often use simple heuristic tools for risk management purposes, such as requiring that an insurance arrangement will not result in a retained loss that exceeds a certain predetermined and fixed level. In this paper, we re-examine the problem of budget-constrained demand for insurance indemnification when the insured and the insurer disagree about the likelihoods associated with the realizations of the insurable loss; but we further impose an additional upper-limit constraint on the retained loss and assume that the insurer distorts his subjective probability measure. We do not impose the no sabotage condition on admissible indemnities. Instead, we impose a state-verification cost that the insurer can incur in order to verify the loss severity, which rules out ex post moral hazard issues that could otherwise arise from possible misreporting of the loss by the insured. We characterize the optimal retention function and show that it has a simple two-part structure: zero retention (full insurance) on an event to which the insurer assigns zero probability, and a retention that could be described as a limited variable deductible on the complement of this event. As an illustration, we examine the case of a distorted Esscher premium principle.

Suggested Citation

  • Mario Ghossoub, 2020. "Budget-constrained optimal retention with an upper limit on the retained loss," Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2020(3), pages 245-271, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:sactxx:v:2020:y:2020:i:3:p:245-271
    DOI: 10.1080/03461238.2019.1659177
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03461238.2019.1659177
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/03461238.2019.1659177?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:sactxx:v:2020:y:2020:i:3:p:245-271. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/sact .

    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.