Can risk-rating of incremental premiums improve consumer sorting across coverage options in mandatory health insurance markets?

IF 2.7 3区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Marcello Antonini , Josefa Henriquez , Richard van Kleef , Adrian Melia , Francesco Paolucci
{"title":"Can risk-rating of incremental premiums improve consumer sorting across coverage options in mandatory health insurance markets?","authors":"Marcello Antonini ,&nbsp;Josefa Henriquez ,&nbsp;Richard van Kleef ,&nbsp;Adrian Melia ,&nbsp;Francesco Paolucci","doi":"10.1016/j.jebo.2026.107452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Several mandatory health insurance schemes include some consumer choice of coverage (e.g., in terms of deductible levels). Premiums in these schemes are typically community-rated per insurance plan. While community-rated premiums help achieve objectives of fairness, they can also lead to adverse selection across coverage options. Consequently, consumers may sort inefficiently across these coverage options resulting in forgone welfare gains. This paper aims to explore under what conditions risk rating of incremental premiums for more comprehensive coverage (compared to a basic plan) can improve consumer sorting. In a simulation analysis on Chilean data, results show that under perfect risk adjustment, risk rating of incremental premiums can improve consumer sorting. With imperfect risk adjustment, however, the effects of risk rating on consumer sorting are ambigous as incremental premiums will not just reflect the direct effect of more comprehensive coverage on healthcare spending, but also the under/overcompensation from the (imperfect) risk adjustment system. Moreover, we find that in the presence of imperfect risk adjustment, risk rating improves welfare over community rating but does not fully solve the problem of inefficient sorting<strong>.</strong></div></div>","PeriodicalId":48409,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization","volume":"243 ","pages":"Article 107452"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268126000405","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Several mandatory health insurance schemes include some consumer choice of coverage (e.g., in terms of deductible levels). Premiums in these schemes are typically community-rated per insurance plan. While community-rated premiums help achieve objectives of fairness, they can also lead to adverse selection across coverage options. Consequently, consumers may sort inefficiently across these coverage options resulting in forgone welfare gains. This paper aims to explore under what conditions risk rating of incremental premiums for more comprehensive coverage (compared to a basic plan) can improve consumer sorting. In a simulation analysis on Chilean data, results show that under perfect risk adjustment, risk rating of incremental premiums can improve consumer sorting. With imperfect risk adjustment, however, the effects of risk rating on consumer sorting are ambigous as incremental premiums will not just reflect the direct effect of more comprehensive coverage on healthcare spending, but also the under/overcompensation from the (imperfect) risk adjustment system. Moreover, we find that in the presence of imperfect risk adjustment, risk rating improves welfare over community rating but does not fully solve the problem of inefficient sorting.
增量保费的风险评级能否改善强制性健康保险市场中消费者对不同保险选择的分类?
若干强制性健康保险计划包括一些消费者选择的保险范围(例如,在免赔额方面)。这些计划的保费通常是按每个保险计划的社区费率计算的。虽然社区评级保费有助于实现公平的目标,但它们也可能导致不同保险选择之间的逆向选择。因此,消费者可能会对这些保险选择进行低效排序,从而放弃福利收益。本文旨在探讨在何种条件下,更全面的覆盖(与基本计划相比)的增量保费风险评级可以改善消费者分类。在对智利数据的模拟分析中,结果表明,在完善的风险调整下,增量保费的风险评级可以改善消费者的分拣。然而,在风险调整不完善的情况下,风险评级对消费者分类的影响是模糊的,因为增量保费不仅反映了更全面的医疗保健支出覆盖的直接影响,而且还反映了(不完善的)风险调整系统的补偿不足/过度。此外,我们发现在风险调整不完善的情况下,风险评级比社区评级提高了福利,但并不能完全解决排序效率低下的问题。
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
3.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
392
期刊介绍: The Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization is devoted to theoretical and empirical research concerning economic decision, organization and behavior and to economic change in all its aspects. Its specific purposes are to foster an improved understanding of how human cognitive, computational and informational characteristics influence the working of economic organizations and market economies and how an economy structural features lead to various types of micro and macro behavior, to changing patterns of development and to institutional evolution. Research with these purposes that explore the interrelations of economics with other disciplines such as biology, psychology, law, anthropology, sociology and mathematics is particularly welcome.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书