Can risk rating increase the ability of voluntary deductibles to reduce moral hazard?

M Antonini, R C van Kleef, J Henriquez, F Paolucci
{"title":"Can risk rating increase the ability of voluntary deductibles to reduce moral hazard?","authors":"M Antonini,&nbsp;R C van Kleef,&nbsp;J Henriquez,&nbsp;F Paolucci","doi":"10.1057/s41288-021-00253-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Several regulated health insurance markets include the option for consumers to choose a voluntary deductible. An important motive for this option is to reduce moral hazard. In return for a voluntary deductible, consumers receive a premium rebate, which is typically community rated. Under community rating, voluntary deductibles are particularly attractive for low-risk consumers. Since these people use relatively little medical care, the total moral hazard reduction might be relatively small compared to the total healthcare spending. This paper examines the potential moral hazard reduction under risk-rated premiums. We use Chile as a case study due to institutional features that make it a valid benchmark for other countries. Our simulations show that in the presence of self-selection and under a uniform percentage moral hazard reduction across risk types, the absolute moral hazard reduction from a voluntary deductible is indeed expected to be larger in a system with risk-rated premiums than in a system with community-rated premiums. Nevertheless, sensitivity checks show that this conclusion might no longer hold as the percentage moral hazard reduction is lower for high-risk individuals compared to low-risk individuals.</p>","PeriodicalId":75009,"journal":{"name":"The Geneva papers on risk and insurance. Issues and practice","volume":"48 1","pages":"130-156"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8562369/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Geneva papers on risk and insurance. Issues and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41288-021-00253-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Several regulated health insurance markets include the option for consumers to choose a voluntary deductible. An important motive for this option is to reduce moral hazard. In return for a voluntary deductible, consumers receive a premium rebate, which is typically community rated. Under community rating, voluntary deductibles are particularly attractive for low-risk consumers. Since these people use relatively little medical care, the total moral hazard reduction might be relatively small compared to the total healthcare spending. This paper examines the potential moral hazard reduction under risk-rated premiums. We use Chile as a case study due to institutional features that make it a valid benchmark for other countries. Our simulations show that in the presence of self-selection and under a uniform percentage moral hazard reduction across risk types, the absolute moral hazard reduction from a voluntary deductible is indeed expected to be larger in a system with risk-rated premiums than in a system with community-rated premiums. Nevertheless, sensitivity checks show that this conclusion might no longer hold as the percentage moral hazard reduction is lower for high-risk individuals compared to low-risk individuals.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

风险评级能提高自愿免赔额降低道德风险的能力吗?
一些受监管的健康保险市场包括消费者选择自愿免赔额的选项。这一选择的一个重要动机是减少道德风险。作为自愿免赔额的回报,消费者会获得保费回扣,这通常是社区评级的。根据社区评级,自愿免赔额对低风险消费者特别有吸引力。由于这些人使用相对较少的医疗保健,总的道德风险减少可能相对于总的医疗保健支出相对较小。本文考察了风险等级溢价下潜在的道德风险降低。我们将智利作为案例研究,因为它的制度特点使其成为其他国家的有效基准。我们的模拟表明,在存在自我选择的情况下,在所有风险类型的道德风险降低的统一百分比下,在风险评级保费的系统中,自愿免赔额的绝对道德风险降低确实比在社区评级保费的系统中更大。然而,敏感性检查表明,这一结论可能不再成立,因为与低风险个体相比,高风险个体的道德风险降低百分比更低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信