基于社会预期效用最大化准则的再保险定价与最优保额确定

IF 4.2 Q2 BUSINESS
Hong Mao, Krzysztof Ostaszewski
{"title":"基于社会预期效用最大化准则的再保险定价与最优保额确定","authors":"Hong Mao, Krzysztof Ostaszewski","doi":"10.1108/ejmbe-06-2022-0194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe authors consider the mutual benefits of the ceding company and reinsurance company in the design of reinsurance contracts. Two objective functions to maximize social expected utilities are established, which are to maximize the sum of the expected utilities of both the ceding company and reinsurance company, and to maximize their products. The first objective function, additive, emphasizes the total gains of both parties, while the second, multiplicative, accounts for the degree of substitution of gains of one party through the loss of the other party. The optimal price and retention of reinsurance are found by a grid search method, and numerical analysis is conducted. The results indicate that the optimal solutions for two objective functions are quite different. However, optimal solutions are sensitive to the change of the means and volatilities of the claim loss for both objective functions. The results are potentially valuable to insurance regulators and government entities acting as reinsurers of last resort.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors apply relatively simple, but in the view significant, methods and models to discuss the optimization of excess loss reinsurance strategy. The authors only consider the influence of loss distribution on optimal retention and reinsurance price but neglect the investment factor. The authors also consider the benefits of both ceding company and reinsurance company to determine optimal premium and retention of reinsurance jointly based on maximizing social utility: the sum (or the product) of expected utilities of reinsurance company and ceding company. The authors solve for optimal solutions numerically, applying simulation.FindingsThis paper establishes two optimization models of excess-of-loss reinsurance contract against catastrophic losses to determine optimal premium and retention. One model considers the sum of the expected utilities of a ceding company and a reinsurance company's expected utility; another considers the product of them. With an example, the authors find the optimal solutions of premium and retention of excess loss reinsurance. Finally, the authors carry out the sensitivity analysis. The results show that increasing the means and the volatilities of claim loss will increase the optimal retention and premium. For objective function I, increasing the coefficients of risk aversion of or reducing the coefficients of risk aversion of will make the optimal retention reduced but the optimal premium increased, and vice versa. However, for objective function 2, the change of coefficient of risk aversion has no effect on optimal solutions.Research limitations/implicationsUtility of the two partners: The ceding company and the reinsurance company, may have different weights and different significance. The authors have not studied their relative significance. The simulation approach in numerical methods limits us to the probability distributions and stochastic processes the authors use, based on, generally speaking, lognormal models of rates of return. This may need to be generalized to other returns, including possible models of shocks through jump processes.Practical implicationsIn the recent two decades, reinsurance companies have played a great role in hedging mega-catastrophic losses. For example, reinsurance companies (and special loss sharing arrangements) paid as much as two-thirds of the insured losses for the September 11, 2001 tragedy. Furthermore, large catastrophic events have increased the role of governments and regulators as reinsurers of last resort. The authors hope that the authors provide guidance for possible balancing of the needs of two counterparties to reinsurance contracts.Social implicationsNearly all governments around the world are engaged in regulation of insurance and reinsurance, and some are reinsurers themselves. The authors provide guidance for them in these activities.Originality/valueThe authors believe this paper to be a completely new and original contribution in the area, by providing models for balancing the utility to the ceding insurance company and the reinsurance company.","PeriodicalId":45118,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Management and Business Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pricing reinsurance and determining optimal retention based on the criterion of maximizing social expected utility\",\"authors\":\"Hong Mao, Krzysztof Ostaszewski\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ejmbe-06-2022-0194\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe authors consider the mutual benefits of the ceding company and reinsurance company in the design of reinsurance contracts. Two objective functions to maximize social expected utilities are established, which are to maximize the sum of the expected utilities of both the ceding company and reinsurance company, and to maximize their products. The first objective function, additive, emphasizes the total gains of both parties, while the second, multiplicative, accounts for the degree of substitution of gains of one party through the loss of the other party. The optimal price and retention of reinsurance are found by a grid search method, and numerical analysis is conducted. The results indicate that the optimal solutions for two objective functions are quite different. However, optimal solutions are sensitive to the change of the means and volatilities of the claim loss for both objective functions. The results are potentially valuable to insurance regulators and government entities acting as reinsurers of last resort.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors apply relatively simple, but in the view significant, methods and models to discuss the optimization of excess loss reinsurance strategy. The authors only consider the influence of loss distribution on optimal retention and reinsurance price but neglect the investment factor. The authors also consider the benefits of both ceding company and reinsurance company to determine optimal premium and retention of reinsurance jointly based on maximizing social utility: the sum (or the product) of expected utilities of reinsurance company and ceding company. The authors solve for optimal solutions numerically, applying simulation.FindingsThis paper establishes two optimization models of excess-of-loss reinsurance contract against catastrophic losses to determine optimal premium and retention. One model considers the sum of the expected utilities of a ceding company and a reinsurance company's expected utility; another considers the product of them. With an example, the authors find the optimal solutions of premium and retention of excess loss reinsurance. Finally, the authors carry out the sensitivity analysis. The results show that increasing the means and the volatilities of claim loss will increase the optimal retention and premium. For objective function I, increasing the coefficients of risk aversion of or reducing the coefficients of risk aversion of will make the optimal retention reduced but the optimal premium increased, and vice versa. However, for objective function 2, the change of coefficient of risk aversion has no effect on optimal solutions.Research limitations/implicationsUtility of the two partners: The ceding company and the reinsurance company, may have different weights and different significance. The authors have not studied their relative significance. The simulation approach in numerical methods limits us to the probability distributions and stochastic processes the authors use, based on, generally speaking, lognormal models of rates of return. This may need to be generalized to other returns, including possible models of shocks through jump processes.Practical implicationsIn the recent two decades, reinsurance companies have played a great role in hedging mega-catastrophic losses. For example, reinsurance companies (and special loss sharing arrangements) paid as much as two-thirds of the insured losses for the September 11, 2001 tragedy. Furthermore, large catastrophic events have increased the role of governments and regulators as reinsurers of last resort. The authors hope that the authors provide guidance for possible balancing of the needs of two counterparties to reinsurance contracts.Social implicationsNearly all governments around the world are engaged in regulation of insurance and reinsurance, and some are reinsurers themselves. The authors provide guidance for them in these activities.Originality/valueThe authors believe this paper to be a completely new and original contribution in the area, by providing models for balancing the utility to the ceding insurance company and the reinsurance company.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Management and Business Economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Management and Business Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ejmbe-06-2022-0194\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Management and Business Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ejmbe-06-2022-0194","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的在再保险合同设计中考虑再保险分出公司和再保险公司的共同利益。建立了社会预期效用最大化的两个目标函数,即使分出公司和再保险公司的预期效用之和最大化,以及使其产品最大化。第一个目标函数是加法,强调双方的总收益,而第二个目标函数则是乘法,说明一方的收益通过另一方的损失而被替代的程度。采用网格搜索的方法找到再保险的最优价格和保留率,并进行了数值分析。结果表明,两个目标函数的最优解是完全不同的。然而,对于两个目标函数,最优解对索赔损失的均值和波动性的变化都很敏感。这一结果可能对保险监管机构和作为最后再保险人的政府实体有价值。设计/方法论/方法在本文中,作者运用相对简单但意义重大的方法和模型来讨论超额损失再保险策略的优化问题。本文只考虑了损失分配对最优保留和再保险价格的影响,而忽略了投资因素。在社会效用最大化的基础上,考虑再保险分出公司和再保险公司的利益,共同确定再保险的最优保费和保留率:再保险公司和再保险分出公司的预期效用之和(或乘积)。作者采用数值模拟方法求解最优解。本文建立了两个针对灾难性损失的超额损失再保险合同优化模型,以确定最优保费和留存率。一个模型考虑了再保险公司的预期效用和再保险公司的预计效用之和;另一个则认为是它们的产物。通过算例,给出了超额损失再保险的保费和保留额的最优解。最后,作者进行了敏感性分析。结果表明,增加索赔损失的平均数和波动率将提高最优保留率和保费。对于目标函数I,增加的风险厌恶系数或减少的风险厌恶因子将使最优留存率降低,但最优溢价增加,反之亦然。然而,对于目标函数2,风险厌恶系数的变化对最优解没有影响。研究局限性/含义两个合伙人的效用:分出公司和再保险公司,可能具有不同的权重和不同的意义。作者没有研究它们的相对意义。数值方法中的模拟方法将我们限制在作者使用的概率分布和随机过程,通常基于收益率的对数正态模型。这可能需要推广到其他回报,包括可能的跳跃过程冲击模型。实际意义近二十年来,再保险公司在对冲特大灾难性损失方面发挥了重要作用。例如,再保险公司(以及特殊损失分担安排)为2001年9月11日的悲剧支付了高达三分之二的保险损失。此外,大型灾难性事件增加了政府和监管机构作为最后再保险人的作用。作者希望作者为再保险合同的两个交易对手的需求的可能平衡提供指导。社会影响世界上几乎所有的政府都参与保险和再保险的监管,有些政府本身就是再保险人。作者在这些活动中为他们提供指导。独创性/价值作者认为,本文通过为再保险公司和再保险公司提供平衡效用的模型,在该领域做出了全新的独创性贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pricing reinsurance and determining optimal retention based on the criterion of maximizing social expected utility
PurposeThe authors consider the mutual benefits of the ceding company and reinsurance company in the design of reinsurance contracts. Two objective functions to maximize social expected utilities are established, which are to maximize the sum of the expected utilities of both the ceding company and reinsurance company, and to maximize their products. The first objective function, additive, emphasizes the total gains of both parties, while the second, multiplicative, accounts for the degree of substitution of gains of one party through the loss of the other party. The optimal price and retention of reinsurance are found by a grid search method, and numerical analysis is conducted. The results indicate that the optimal solutions for two objective functions are quite different. However, optimal solutions are sensitive to the change of the means and volatilities of the claim loss for both objective functions. The results are potentially valuable to insurance regulators and government entities acting as reinsurers of last resort.Design/methodology/approachIn this paper, the authors apply relatively simple, but in the view significant, methods and models to discuss the optimization of excess loss reinsurance strategy. The authors only consider the influence of loss distribution on optimal retention and reinsurance price but neglect the investment factor. The authors also consider the benefits of both ceding company and reinsurance company to determine optimal premium and retention of reinsurance jointly based on maximizing social utility: the sum (or the product) of expected utilities of reinsurance company and ceding company. The authors solve for optimal solutions numerically, applying simulation.FindingsThis paper establishes two optimization models of excess-of-loss reinsurance contract against catastrophic losses to determine optimal premium and retention. One model considers the sum of the expected utilities of a ceding company and a reinsurance company's expected utility; another considers the product of them. With an example, the authors find the optimal solutions of premium and retention of excess loss reinsurance. Finally, the authors carry out the sensitivity analysis. The results show that increasing the means and the volatilities of claim loss will increase the optimal retention and premium. For objective function I, increasing the coefficients of risk aversion of or reducing the coefficients of risk aversion of will make the optimal retention reduced but the optimal premium increased, and vice versa. However, for objective function 2, the change of coefficient of risk aversion has no effect on optimal solutions.Research limitations/implicationsUtility of the two partners: The ceding company and the reinsurance company, may have different weights and different significance. The authors have not studied their relative significance. The simulation approach in numerical methods limits us to the probability distributions and stochastic processes the authors use, based on, generally speaking, lognormal models of rates of return. This may need to be generalized to other returns, including possible models of shocks through jump processes.Practical implicationsIn the recent two decades, reinsurance companies have played a great role in hedging mega-catastrophic losses. For example, reinsurance companies (and special loss sharing arrangements) paid as much as two-thirds of the insured losses for the September 11, 2001 tragedy. Furthermore, large catastrophic events have increased the role of governments and regulators as reinsurers of last resort. The authors hope that the authors provide guidance for possible balancing of the needs of two counterparties to reinsurance contracts.Social implicationsNearly all governments around the world are engaged in regulation of insurance and reinsurance, and some are reinsurers themselves. The authors provide guidance for them in these activities.Originality/valueThe authors believe this paper to be a completely new and original contribution in the area, by providing models for balancing the utility to the ceding insurance company and the reinsurance company.
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
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Management and Business Economics is interested in the publication and diffusion of articles of rigorous theoretical, methodological or empirical research associated with the areas of business economics, including strategy, finance, management, marketing, organisation, human resources, operations, and corporate governance, and tourism. The journal aims to attract original knowledge based on academic rigour and of relevance for academics, researchers, professionals, and/or public decision-makers.
×
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