IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uaajxx/v8y2004i3p90-102.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Financial Economics and Actuarial Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Tony Day

Abstract

Starting in the United Kingdom and continuing through the U.S. and Canadian actuarial professions, proponents of financial economics have been forcefully promoting a review of traditional actuarial practices and training. In particular, the financial theories first proposed by Modigliani and Miller and subsequently developed by others have been used to highlight serious weaknesses in typical actuarial thinking. In summary, it is claimed that much actuarial advice wrongly specifies value, that guidelines and standards need radical revision, and that traditional actuarial intuition suffers in comparison to newer modes of thought adopted by other professions.This paper examines concepts from both financial economics and actuarial science as applied to defined benefit schemes using a simple discounted cash-flow framework as a reference point. The general finding is that many standard modes of actuarial thought are, in fact, indefensible when examined with the tools and techniques of financial economics. The call for revision of actuarial training and practices is credible and necessary.However, the paper also touches upon areas where a heavy-handed application of finance theory could be misguided due to limitations in the simple financial economic models presented. It concludes that financial economics should be carefully integrated into actuarial thought rather than appended to existing actuarial theory or inserted as a wholesale replacement.

Suggested Citation

  • Tony Day, 2004. "Financial Economics and Actuarial Practice," North American Actuarial Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 90-102.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:uaajxx:v:8:y:2004:i:3:p:90-102
    DOI: 10.1080/10920277.2004.10596153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10920277.2004.10596153
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10920277.2004.10596153?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:uaajxx:v:8:y:2004:i:3:p:90-102. 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/uaaj .

    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.