IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/zbw/usgivw/342532.html

Wirksamkeit und Effizienz der Versicherungsregulierung in der deutschsprachigen Assekuranz

Author

Listed:
  • Oertle, Davide
  • Eling, Martin

Abstract

Diese Studie untersucht die Wirksamkeit und Effizienz der Versicherungsregulierung in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz seit 2014. Aufbauend auf Eling und Kilgus (2014) verbinden wir einen strukturierten Kriterienkatalog zu wirksamer Regulierung mit einer breit angelegten Branchenbefragung. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Umfang und Komplexität der Regulierung weiter zugenommen haben und Herausforderungen zwischen konzeptioneller Ausgestaltung und praktischer Umsetzung bestehen. Das Proportionalitätsprinzip wird in der Praxis unterschiedlich wahrgenommen; insbesondere kleinere und mittelgrosse Unternehmen berichten von höheren administrativen Anforderungen, was auf mögliche Unterschiede in der praktischen Umsetzung hinweist. Während der Swiss Solvency Test stärker prinzipien- und risikoorientiert ausgestaltet ist, folgt Solvency II einem detaillierteren Regelrahmen, was sich in unterschiedlichen Vollzugs- und Kostenmustern widerspiegelt. Auf dieser Grundlage formuliert die Studie drei Empfehlungen zur Weiterentwicklung bestehender Ansätze: (1) eine noch stärker risikobasierte Ausgestaltung des Vollzugs mit abgestufter Prüf- und Nachweistiefe, (2) eine frühzeitige und systematische Einbindung der Marktteilnehmenden sowie Rückmeldungen im Konsultationsprozess und (3) ein kontinuierliches Monitoring von Kosten, Prozessen und Wirkungen. Die Studie bietet damit neue empirische Evidenz zu Zielerreichung, Proportionalität und Vollzug, zeigt Ansatzpunkte für eine weiterhin effiziente Aufsicht, und soll Grundlage eines konstruktiven Stakeholder-Dialog sein. Die Studie richtet sich an Aufsichtsbehörden, Versicherungsunternehmen und den Gesetzgeber gleichermassen - nicht mit dem Anspruch, Antworten zu liefern, sondern mit dem Ziel, einen faktenbasierten und konstruktiven Dialog zu fördern, der Regulierung wirksamer und effizienter macht.

Suggested Citation

  • Oertle, Davide & Eling, Martin, 2026. "Wirksamkeit und Effizienz der Versicherungsregulierung in der deutschsprachigen Assekuranz," I.VW HSG Schriftenreihe, University of St.Gallen, Institute of Insurance Economics (I.VW-HSG), volume 74, number 342532.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:usgivw:342532
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/342532/1/1975360117.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Eling & Nadine Gatzert & Hato Schmeiser, 2008. "The Swiss Solvency Test and its Market Implications," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 33(3), pages 418-439, July.
    2. Jørgensen, Peter Løchte, 2018. "An analysis of the Solvency II regulatory framework’s Smith-Wilson model for the term structure of risk-free interest rates," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 219-237.
    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. Liu, Shuyan & Jia, Ruo & Zhao, Yulong & Sun, Qixiang, 2019. "Global consistent or market-oriented? A quantitative assessment of RBC standards, solvency II, and C-ROSS," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    2. Susanna Levantesi & Massimiliano Menzietti, 2017. "Maximum Market Price of Longevity Risk under Solvency Regimes: The Case of Solvency II," Risks, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-21, May.
    3. Benjamin Lorent, 2010. "Insurance Solvency Regulation: Regulatory Approaches Compared," Working Papers CEB 10-041, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Zhao, Chaoyi & Jia, Zijian & Wu, Lan, 2024. "Construct Smith-Wilson risk-free interest rate curves with endogenous and positive ultimate forward rates," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 156-175.
    5. Höring, Dirk, 2012. "Will Solvency II market risk requirements bite? The impact of Solvency II on insurers' asset allocation," ICIR Working Paper Series 11/12, Goethe University Frankfurt, International Center for Insurance Regulation (ICIR).
    6. Tang, Meiling & Bai, Haotian, 2026. "CFO superstitions and the cost of debt: Evidence from Chinese “zodiac year” beliefs," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Boonen, Tim J., 2017. "Risk Redistribution Games With Dual Utilities," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 303-329, January.
    8. Emilio Barucci & Daniele Marazzina & Edit Rroji, 2025. "An investigation of the Volatility Adjustment," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 48(2), pages 1337-1367, December.
    9. Eling, Martin & Pankoke, David, 2012. "Systemic Risk in the Insurance Sector – What Do We Know?," Working Papers on Finance 1222, University of St. Gallen, School of Finance.
    10. Boonen, Tim J. & Tan, Ken Seng & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2021. "Optimal reinsurance with multiple reinsurers: Competitive pricing and coalition stability," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(PB), pages 302-319.
    11. Martin Eling & David Antonius Pankoke, 2016. "Systemic Risk in the Insurance Sector: A Review and Directions for Future Research," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 19(2), pages 249-284, September.
    12. Magomet Yandiev, 2021. "Risk-Free Rate in the Covid-19 Pandemic: Application Mistakes and Conclusions for Traders," Papers 2111.07075, arXiv.org.
    13. Martin Eling & David Pankoke, 2016. "Costs and Benefits of Financial Regulation: An Empirical Assessment for Insurance Companies," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 41(4), pages 529-554, October.

    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:zbw:usgivw:342532. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ivwsgch.html .

    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.