非正式风险分担机制中的战略竞争与集体指数保险。

IF 3.5 2区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Journal of The Royal Society Interface Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-07-16 DOI:10.1098/rsif.2025.0163
Lichen Wang, Shijia Hua, Yuyuan Liu, Zhengyuan Lu, Liang Zhang, Linjie Liu, Attila Szolnoki
{"title":"非正式风险分担机制中的战略竞争与集体指数保险。","authors":"Lichen Wang, Shijia Hua, Yuyuan Liu, Zhengyuan Lu, Liang Zhang, Linjie Liu, Attila Szolnoki","doi":"10.1098/rsif.2025.0163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The frequent occurrence of natural disasters has posed significant challenges to society, necessitating the urgent development of effective risk management strategies. From the early informal community-based risk-sharing mechanisms to modern formal index insurance products, risk management tools have continuously evolved. Although index insurance provides an effective risk transfer mechanism in theory, it still faces the problems of basis risk and pricing in practice. At the same time, in the presence of informal community risk-sharing mechanisms, the competitiveness of index insurance deserves further investigation. Here, we propose a three-strategy evolutionary game model, which simultaneously examines the competitive relationship between formal index insurance purchasing ([Formula: see text]), informal risk-sharing strategies ([Formula: see text]) and complete non-insurance ([Formula: see text]). Furthermore, we introduce a method for calculating insurance company profits to aid in the optimal pricing of index insurance products. We find that basis risk and risk loss ratio have significant impacts on insurance adoption rate. Under scenarios with low basis risk and high loss ratios, index insurance is more popular; meanwhile, when the loss ratio is moderate, an informal risk-sharing strategy is the preferred option. Conversely, when the loss ratio is low, individuals tend to forego any insurance. Furthermore, accurately assessing the degree of risk aversion and determining the appropriate ratio of risk sharing are crucial for predicting the future market sales of index insurance.</p>","PeriodicalId":17488,"journal":{"name":"Journal of The Royal Society Interface","volume":"22 228","pages":"20250163"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12303096/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strategic competition in informal risk-sharing mechanisms versus collective index insurance.\",\"authors\":\"Lichen Wang, Shijia Hua, Yuyuan Liu, Zhengyuan Lu, Liang Zhang, Linjie Liu, Attila Szolnoki\",\"doi\":\"10.1098/rsif.2025.0163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The frequent occurrence of natural disasters has posed significant challenges to society, necessitating the urgent development of effective risk management strategies. From the early informal community-based risk-sharing mechanisms to modern formal index insurance products, risk management tools have continuously evolved. Although index insurance provides an effective risk transfer mechanism in theory, it still faces the problems of basis risk and pricing in practice. At the same time, in the presence of informal community risk-sharing mechanisms, the competitiveness of index insurance deserves further investigation. Here, we propose a three-strategy evolutionary game model, which simultaneously examines the competitive relationship between formal index insurance purchasing ([Formula: see text]), informal risk-sharing strategies ([Formula: see text]) and complete non-insurance ([Formula: see text]). Furthermore, we introduce a method for calculating insurance company profits to aid in the optimal pricing of index insurance products. We find that basis risk and risk loss ratio have significant impacts on insurance adoption rate. Under scenarios with low basis risk and high loss ratios, index insurance is more popular; meanwhile, when the loss ratio is moderate, an informal risk-sharing strategy is the preferred option. Conversely, when the loss ratio is low, individuals tend to forego any insurance. Furthermore, accurately assessing the degree of risk aversion and determining the appropriate ratio of risk sharing are crucial for predicting the future market sales of index insurance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17488,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of The Royal Society Interface\",\"volume\":\"22 228\",\"pages\":\"20250163\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12303096/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of The Royal Society Interface\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2025.0163\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of The Royal Society Interface","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2025.0163","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自然灾害的频繁发生给社会带来了重大挑战,迫切需要制定有效的风险管理战略。从早期非正式的以社区为基础的风险分担机制到现代正式的指数保险产品,风险管理工具不断演变。虽然指数保险在理论上提供了一种有效的风险转移机制,但在实践中仍面临着基差风险和定价问题。同时,在非正式社区风险分担机制存在的情况下,指数保险的竞争力值得进一步研究。本文提出了一个三策略演化博弈模型,同时考察了正规指数保险购买([公式:见文])、非正规风险分担策略([公式:见文])和完全无保险([公式:见文])之间的竞争关系。此外,我们还引入了一种计算保险公司利润的方法,以帮助指数保险产品的最优定价。研究发现,基础风险和风险损失率对保险采用率有显著影响。在低基风险和高损失率的情况下,指数保险更受欢迎;同时,当损失率适中时,非正式的风险分担策略是首选策略。相反,当损失率较低时,个人倾向于放弃任何保险。此外,准确评估风险厌恶程度和确定适当的风险分担比例对于预测指数险未来的市场销售至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Strategic competition in informal risk-sharing mechanisms versus collective index insurance.

The frequent occurrence of natural disasters has posed significant challenges to society, necessitating the urgent development of effective risk management strategies. From the early informal community-based risk-sharing mechanisms to modern formal index insurance products, risk management tools have continuously evolved. Although index insurance provides an effective risk transfer mechanism in theory, it still faces the problems of basis risk and pricing in practice. At the same time, in the presence of informal community risk-sharing mechanisms, the competitiveness of index insurance deserves further investigation. Here, we propose a three-strategy evolutionary game model, which simultaneously examines the competitive relationship between formal index insurance purchasing ([Formula: see text]), informal risk-sharing strategies ([Formula: see text]) and complete non-insurance ([Formula: see text]). Furthermore, we introduce a method for calculating insurance company profits to aid in the optimal pricing of index insurance products. We find that basis risk and risk loss ratio have significant impacts on insurance adoption rate. Under scenarios with low basis risk and high loss ratios, index insurance is more popular; meanwhile, when the loss ratio is moderate, an informal risk-sharing strategy is the preferred option. Conversely, when the loss ratio is low, individuals tend to forego any insurance. Furthermore, accurately assessing the degree of risk aversion and determining the appropriate ratio of risk sharing are crucial for predicting the future market sales of index insurance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
Journal of The Royal Society Interface 综合性期刊-综合性期刊
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
2.60%
发文量
234
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: J. R. Soc. Interface welcomes articles of high quality research at the interface of the physical and life sciences. It provides a high-quality forum to publish rapidly and interact across this boundary in two main ways: J. R. Soc. Interface publishes research applying chemistry, engineering, materials science, mathematics and physics to the biological and medical sciences; it also highlights discoveries in the life sciences of relevance to the physical sciences. Both sides of the interface are considered equally and it is one of the only journals to cover this exciting new territory. J. R. Soc. Interface welcomes contributions on a diverse range of topics, including but not limited to; biocomplexity, bioengineering, bioinformatics, biomaterials, biomechanics, bionanoscience, biophysics, chemical biology, computer science (as applied to the life sciences), medical physics, synthetic biology, systems biology, theoretical biology and tissue engineering.
×
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