Privacy concerns in insurance markets: Implications for market equilibria and customer utility

IF 1.3 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Irina Gemmo, Mark J. Browne, Helmut Gründl
{"title":"Privacy concerns in insurance markets: Implications for market equilibria and customer utility","authors":"Irina Gemmo,&nbsp;Mark J. Browne,&nbsp;Helmut Gründl","doi":"10.1111/caje.70004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We analyze insurance market outcomes and customer utility under asymmetric information when customers have heterogeneous privacy concerns and access to a screening technology that permits their private information to be revealed. If the market outcome without the technology is of the Rothschild–Stiglitz type, so too is the market outcome with the technology for those who do not submit to the screening technology and thus retain their private information. Low-risk customers who reveal their private information are better off and those who do not reveal their risk type are no worse off, resulting in a Pareto improvement. If, however, the market outcome without the technology is of the Wilson–Miyazaki–Spence type, the market may no longer exhibit cross-subsidies after the screening technology is introduced. In this case, low-risk customers who reveal their risk type are better off, but this is at the expense of those who do not reveal their risk type, who are worse off due to intensified adverse selection. The negative externality on those who do not reveal their risk type can outweigh the utility gains of those low-risk customers who do reveal their risk type, resulting in lower expected welfare. In this case, a privacy law would improve expected welfare.</p>","PeriodicalId":47941,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Economics-Revue Canadienne D Economique","volume":"58 2","pages":"484-514"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Economics-Revue Canadienne D Economique","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/caje.70004","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We analyze insurance market outcomes and customer utility under asymmetric information when customers have heterogeneous privacy concerns and access to a screening technology that permits their private information to be revealed. If the market outcome without the technology is of the Rothschild–Stiglitz type, so too is the market outcome with the technology for those who do not submit to the screening technology and thus retain their private information. Low-risk customers who reveal their private information are better off and those who do not reveal their risk type are no worse off, resulting in a Pareto improvement. If, however, the market outcome without the technology is of the Wilson–Miyazaki–Spence type, the market may no longer exhibit cross-subsidies after the screening technology is introduced. In this case, low-risk customers who reveal their risk type are better off, but this is at the expense of those who do not reveal their risk type, who are worse off due to intensified adverse selection. The negative externality on those who do not reveal their risk type can outweigh the utility gains of those low-risk customers who do reveal their risk type, resulting in lower expected welfare. In this case, a privacy law would improve expected welfare.

保险市场中的隐私问题:对市场均衡和客户效用的影响
我们分析了不对称信息下的保险市场结果和客户效用,当客户有异质的隐私问题,并获得允许其私人信息被披露的筛选技术时。如果没有技术的市场结果是罗斯柴尔德-斯蒂格利茨型的,那么对于那些不服从筛选技术并因此保留其私人信息的人来说,有了技术的市场结果也是如此。披露其私人信息的低风险客户的情况会更好,而不披露其风险类型的客户的情况不会更糟,从而导致帕累托改进。然而,如果没有该技术的市场结果是Wilson-Miyazaki-Spence型的,那么在引入筛选技术后,市场可能不再出现交叉补贴。在这种情况下,暴露风险类型的低风险客户的情况会更好,但这是以牺牲那些没有暴露风险类型的客户为代价的,他们的情况会因为逆向选择的加剧而更糟。对于那些没有披露其风险类型的低风险客户,其负外部性可能超过那些披露其风险类型的低风险客户的效用收益,从而导致较低的期望福利。在这种情况下,隐私法将改善预期福利。
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
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
86
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Economics (CJE) is the journal of the Canadian Economics Association (CEA) and is the primary academic economics journal based in Canada. The editors seek to maintain and enhance the position of the CJE as a major, internationally recognized journal and are very receptive to high-quality papers on any economics topic from any source. In addition, the editors recognize the Journal"s role as an important outlet for high-quality empirical papers about the Canadian economy and about Canadian policy issues.
×
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