Insurance by Government or Against Government? Overview of Public Risk Management Policies

J. Libich, M. Macháček
{"title":"Insurance by Government or Against Government? Overview of Public Risk Management Policies","authors":"J. Libich, M. Macháček","doi":"10.1111/joes.12144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In what contexts is it desirable that the government, rather than the private sector, takes on the role of an insurer and helps people reduce risks? Our discussion implies that while in a number of areas individuals benefit from well-designed insurance provided by their government, ill-designed public policies (for example existing pay-as-you-go pension systems) force individuals to insure against their government. It is further discussed how governments could improve their risk managing role in many areas by using income contingent loans, provided the country has high-quality institutions and governance. Such loans to artists, sportspeople, flood victims or collapsing financial institutions would replace the existing nonrepayable transfers, grants, subsidies and bailouts. Using a simple efficiency-equity-sustainability framework for comparing income contingent schemes with conventional public and private insurance policies, we document that this would enable governments to extend their insurance assistance to a greater number of people and institutions – in a way that is not only equitable but also efficient and fiscally sustainable.","PeriodicalId":365755,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Mathematical Methods & Programming (Topic)","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Mathematical Methods & Programming (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In what contexts is it desirable that the government, rather than the private sector, takes on the role of an insurer and helps people reduce risks? Our discussion implies that while in a number of areas individuals benefit from well-designed insurance provided by their government, ill-designed public policies (for example existing pay-as-you-go pension systems) force individuals to insure against their government. It is further discussed how governments could improve their risk managing role in many areas by using income contingent loans, provided the country has high-quality institutions and governance. Such loans to artists, sportspeople, flood victims or collapsing financial institutions would replace the existing nonrepayable transfers, grants, subsidies and bailouts. Using a simple efficiency-equity-sustainability framework for comparing income contingent schemes with conventional public and private insurance policies, we document that this would enable governments to extend their insurance assistance to a greater number of people and institutions – in a way that is not only equitable but also efficient and fiscally sustainable.
由政府投保还是向政府投保?公共风险管理政策概述
在什么情况下,政府(而不是私营部门)扮演保险公司的角色,帮助人们降低风险是可取的?我们的讨论表明,虽然在许多领域,个人受益于政府提供的精心设计的保险,但设计不良的公共政策(例如现有的现收现付养老金制度)迫使个人向政府投保。本文还进一步讨论了政府如何在拥有高质量机构和治理的前提下,通过使用收入或有贷款来改善其在许多领域的风险管理作用。向艺术家、运动员、洪水灾民或濒临破产的金融机构发放的此类贷款将取代现有的不可偿还的转移支付、赠款、补贴和救助。我们使用一个简单的效率-公平-可持续性框架将收入条件计划与传统的公共和私人保险政策进行比较,结果表明,这将使政府能够以一种不仅公平而且高效和财政可持续的方式将其保险援助扩展到更多的人和机构。
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