IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea26/404594.html

Is the Social Welfare Effect of Pet Insurance Non-Monotonic? Evidence from Veterinary Price Dispersion and Treatment Access

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Minjung
  • Yoo, Do-il

Abstract

This paper examines whether expanding pet insurance improves social welfare in a veterinary market without price regulation. Two structural features distinguish this market from the settings in which standard insurance welfare frameworks were developed. The first is extreme price dispersion: the estimated cost distribution in the current Korean market implies that a guardian visiting a randomly chosen hospital faces costs that could plausibly differ from the market median by several hundred percent. The second is economic euthanasia, a discontinuous demand mechanism through which demand drops to zero instantaneously when treatment costs exceed a guardian's willingness to pay. We construct a welfare function that decomposes net social welfare into three components: the Rescue Benefit from preventing economic euthanasia, the Price Distortion Loss from insurance-induced demand shifts toward high-cost providers as price search incentives weaken, and the Loading Cost embedded in the insurance premium. Calibrating the supply side from the complete universe of Korean pet insurance claims and the demand side from household survey microdata, a Monte Carlo simulation traces net welfare across varying levels of price dispersion. Net welfare follows an inverted-U trajectory, turning negative beyond a critical dispersion threshold. The current Korean market exceeds this threshold by approximately 78 percent in the dog market and 39 percent in the cat market, a conclusion that holds across all 27 insurance product parameter combinations examined. Supply-side reforms such as standardizing veterinary service items and mandating price disclosure are identified as necessary preconditions for insurance activation to generate welfare gains.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Minjung & Yoo, Do-il, 2026. "Is the Social Welfare Effect of Pet Insurance Non-Monotonic? Evidence from Veterinary Price Dispersion and Treatment Access," 2026 Annual Meeting, July 26 - 28, 2026, Kansas City, Missouri 404594, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea26:404594
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.404594
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/404594/files/177582_209255_115232_AAEA_Paper2026_Insurance_v1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.404594?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harrington, Winston & Portney, Paul R., 1987. "Valuing the benefits of health and safety regulation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 101-112, July.
    2. Jayson L. Lusk & F. Bailey Norwood, 2011. "Animal Welfare Economics," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 463-483.
    3. Manning, Willard G, et al, 1987. "Health Insurance and the Demand for Medical Care: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 251-277, June.
    4. Brockman, Beverly K. & Taylor, Valerie A. & Brockman, Christopher M., 2008. "The price of unconditional love: Consumer decision making for high-dollar veterinary care," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(5), pages 397-405, May.
    5. Jung, Juergen & Tran, Chung, 2022. "Social health insurance: A quantitative exploration," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Timothy J. Bartik, 2008. "Evaluating the Benefits of Non-marginal Reductions in Pollution Using Information on Defensive Expenditures," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Joseph Herriges & Catherine L. Kling (ed.),Revealed Preference Approaches to Environmental Valuation, volume 0, pages 459-475, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    7. Jonathan Gruber & Maria Owings, 1996. "Physician Financial Incentives and Cesarean Section Delivery," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 99-123, Spring.
    8. Nyman, John A., 1999. "The value of health insurance: the access motive," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-152, April.
    9. Norwood, F. Bailey & Lusk, Jayson L., 2011. "Compassion, by the Pound: The Economics of Farm Animal Welfare," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199551163.
    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. Joshua Graff Zivin & Matthew Neidell, 2013. "Environment, Health, and Human Capital," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(3), pages 689-730, September.
    2. Pierre-Thomas Léger & Erin C. Strumpf, 2010. "Système de paiement des médecins : bref de politique," CIRANO Project Reports 2010rp-12, CIRANO.
    3. Jayson Lusk, 2011. "The market for animal welfare," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(4), pages 561-575, December.
    4. John A. Nyman, 2012. "The Value of Health Insurance," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Frankovic, Ivan & Kuhn, Michael, 2023. "Health insurance, endogenous medical progress, health expenditure growth, and welfare," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    6. Mengna Luan & Wenjing Shi & Zhigang Tao & Hongjie Yuan, 2023. "When patients have better insurance coverage in China: Provider incentives, costs, and quality of care," Economics of Transition and Institutional Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 1073-1106, October.
    7. Leslie Richardson & John B. Loomis & Patricia A. Champ, 2013. "Valuing Morbidity from Wildfire Smoke Exposure: A Comparison of Revealed and Stated Preference Techniques," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(1), pages 76-100.
    8. Nicolas Treich, 2022. "The Dasgupta Review and the Problem of Anthropocentrism," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(4), pages 973-997, December.
    9. Droz, Bénédicte & Buechel, Berno & Capra, Mónica & Chen, Xi & Nassar, Anis & Park, Seong Gyu & Xu, Jin & Zhang, Shanshan & Tasoff, Joshua, 2025. "Appetite for Ignorance: Does eating meat cause information avoidance about its harms?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    10. Läpple, Doris & Osawe, Osayanmon Wellington, 2022. "Animal Welfare, Altruism and Policy Support," 96th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2022, K U Leuven, Belgium 321212, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    11. Espinosa, Romain & Treich, Nicolas, 2024. "Animal welfare as a public good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    12. Jan Michael Bauer & Jörg Schiller & Christopher Schreckenberger, 2020. "Heterogeneous selection in the market for private supplemental dental insurance: evidence from Germany," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 59(1), pages 205-231, July.
    13. Brenna Ellison & Kathleen Brooks & Taro Mieno, 2017. "Which livestock production claims matter most to consumers?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 819-831, December.
    14. Nyman, John A., 2001. "The income transfer effect, the access value of insurance and the Rand health insurance experiment," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 295-298, March.
    15. David A. Dana & Janice Nadler, 2019. "Regulation, Public Attitudes, and Private Governance," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 69-93, March.
    16. Sérgio Luís Castro Júnior & Eduardo Eugênio Spers & Hermes Moretti Ribeiro Silva & Iran José Oliveira Silva, 2025. "Antecedents of the intention to buy animal welfare certified products: A study with brazilian consumers," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 22(2), pages 295-325, June.
    17. Blomqvist, Ake, 2001. "Does the economics of moral hazard need to be revisited? A comment on the paper by John Nyman," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 283-288, March.
    18. Hestermann, Nina & Le Yaouanq, Yves & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "An economic model of the meat paradox," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    19. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    20. McKendree, Melissa G.S. & Olynk Widmar, Nicole & Ortega, David L. & Foster, Kenneth A., 2013. "Consumer Preferences for Verified Pork-Rearing Practices in the Production of Ham Products," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 38(3), pages 1-21.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:aaea26:404594. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.