IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/insuma/v91y2020icp188-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Bowley solution with limited ceded risk for a monopolistic reinsurer

Author

Listed:
  • Chi, Yichun
  • Tan, Ken Seng
  • Zhuang, Sheng Chao

Abstract

Borch (1969) advocated that the study of optimal reinsurance design should take into consideration the conflicting interests of both an insurer and a reinsurer. Motivated by this and exploiting a Bowley solution (or Stackelberg equilibrium game), this paper proposes a two-step model that tackles an optimal risk transfer problem between the insurer and the reinsurer. From the insurer’s perspective, the first step of the model provisionally derives an optimal reinsurance policy for a given reinsurance premium while reflecting the reinsurer’s risk appetite. The reinsurer’s risk appetite is controlled by imposing upper limits on the first two moments of the coverage. Through a comparative analysis, the effect of the insurer’s initial wealth on the demand for reinsurance is then examined, when the insurer’s risk aversion and prudence are taken into account. Based on the insurer’s provisional strategy, the second step of the model determines the monopoly premium that maximizes the reinsurer’s expected profit while still satisfying the insurer’s incentive condition. Numerical examples are provided to illustrate our Bowley solution.

Suggested Citation

  • Chi, Yichun & Tan, Ken Seng & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2020. "A Bowley solution with limited ceded risk for a monopolistic reinsurer," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 188-201.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:91:y:2020:i:c:p:188-201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.insmatheco.2020.02.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167668720300184
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2020.02.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles N. Noussair & Stefan T. Trautmann & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2014. "Higher Order Risk Attitudes, Demographics, and Financial Decisions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 325-355.
    2. Chan, Fung-Yee & Gerber, Hans U., 1985. "The Reinsurer's Monopoly and the Bowley Solution," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 141-148, November.
    3. Kimball, Miles S, 1990. "Precautionary Saving in the Small and in the Large," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 58(1), pages 53-73, January.
    4. A. Sandmo, 1970. "The Effect of Uncertainty on Saving Decisions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 37(3), pages 353-360.
    5. MOSSIN, Jan, 1968. "Aspects of rational insurance purchasing," LIDAM Reprints CORE 23, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    6. Kimball, Miles S, 1993. "Standard Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 589-611, May.
    7. Chen, Lv & Shen, Yang, 2018. "On A New Paradigm Of Optimal Reinsurance: A Stochastic Stackelberg Differential Game Between An Insurer And A Reinsurer," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(2), pages 905-960, May.
    8. Cai, Jun & Lemieux, Christiane & Liu, Fangda, 2016. "Optimal Reinsurance From The Perspectives Of Both An Insurer And A Reinsurer," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(3), pages 815-849, September.
    9. Whitmore, G A, 1970. "Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 457-459, June.
    10. G. Hanoch & H. Levy, 1969. "The Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 36(3), pages 335-346.
    11. You-Qiang Wang, 1999. "Commodity Taxes under Fiscal Competition: Stackelberg Equilibrium and Optimality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 974-981, September.
    12. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    13. Ohlin, Jan, 1969. "On a class of measures of dispersion with application to optimal reinsurance," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 249-266, May.
    14. Boonen, Tim J. & Tan, Ken Seng & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2016. "Pricing In Reinsurance Bargaining With Comonotonic Additive Utility Functions," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 507-530, May.
    15. Raviv, Artur, 1979. "The Design of an Optimal Insurance Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 84-96, March.
    16. Carole Bernard & Xuedong He & Jia-An Yan & Xun Yu Zhou, 2015. "Optimal Insurance Design Under Rank-Dependent Expected Utility," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 154-186, January.
    17. Menezes, C & Geiss, C & Tressler, J, 1980. "Increasing Downside Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 921-932, December.
    18. Giovanni Millo, 2016. "The Income Elasticity of Nonlife Insurance: A Reassessment," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 83(2), pages 335-362, June.
    19. Jiang, Wenjun & Ren, Jiandong & Yang, Chen & Hong, Hanping, 2019. "On optimal reinsurance treaties in cooperative game under heterogeneous beliefs," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 173-184.
    20. Guerra, Manuel & Centeno, M.L., 2012. "Are quantile risk measures suitable for risk-transfer decisions?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 446-461.
    21. Borch, Karl, 1969. "The optimal reinsurance treaty," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 293-297, May.
    22. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    23. Jun-ya Gotoh & Hiroshi Konno, 2000. "Third Degree Stochastic Dominance and Mean-Risk Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 289-301, February.
    24. Georges Dionne (ed.), 2013. "Handbook of Insurance," Springer Books, Springer, edition 2, number 978-1-4614-0155-1, October.
    25. Cheung, Ka Chun & Yam, Sheung Chi Phillip & Zhang, Yiying, 2019. "Risk-adjusted Bowley reinsurance under distorted probabilities," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 64-72.
    26. Hayne E. Leland, 1968. "Saving and Uncertainty: The Precautionary Demand for Saving," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 82(3), pages 465-473.
    27. Asimit, Vali & Boonen, Tim J., 2018. "Insurance with multiple insurers: A game-theoretic approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(2), pages 778-790.
    28. Ken Seng Tan & Chengguo Weng, 2012. "Enhancing Insurer Value Using Reinsurance and Value-at-Risk Criterion," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 37(1), pages 109-140, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chen, Yanhong & Cheung, Ka Chun & Zhang, Yiying, 2024. "Bowley solution under the reinsurer's default risk," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 36-61.
    2. Li, Danping & Young, Virginia R., 2022. "Stackelberg differential game for reinsurance: Mean-variance framework and random horizon," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 42-55.
    3. David Landriault & Fangda Liu & Ziyue Shi, 2024. "Performance-based variable premium scheme and reinsurance design," Papers 2412.01704, arXiv.org.
    4. Boonen, Tim J. & Ghossoub, Mario, 2023. "Bowley vs. Pareto optima in reinsurance contracting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(1), pages 382-391.
    5. Chi, Yichun & Zhou, Xun Yu & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2024. "Variance insurance contracts," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 62-82.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chi, Yichun & Zhou, Xun Yu & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2024. "Variance insurance contracts," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 62-82.
    2. Yichun Chi & Xun Yu Zhou & Sheng Chao Zhuang, 2020. "Variance Contracts," Papers 2008.07103, arXiv.org.
    3. Chi, Yichun, 2018. "Insurance choice under third degree stochastic dominance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 198-205.
    4. Heinzel Christoph & Richard Peter, 2021. "Precautionary motives with multiple instruments," Working Papers SMART 21-09, INRAE UMR SMART.
    5. Eeckhoudt, Louis & Schlesinger, Harris & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2009. "Apportioning of risks via stochastic dominance," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 994-1003, May.
    6. Peter, Richard & Hofmann, Annette, 2024. "Precautionary risk-reduction and saving decisions: Two sides of the same coin?," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 175-194.
    7. Christoph Heinzel & Richard Peter, 2021. "Precautionary motives with multiple instruments [Motifs de précaution en cas de multiples instruments]," Working Papers hal-03484875, HAL.
    8. Heinzel, Christoph & Peter, Richard, 2021. "Precautionary motives with multiple instruments," Working Papers 316521, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    9. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Kuilen, Gijs van de, 2018. "Higher order risk attitudes: A review of experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 108-124.
    10. Loubergé, Henri & Malevergne, Yannick & Rey, Béatrice, 2020. "New Results for additive and multiplicative risk apportionment," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 140-151.
    11. Sebastian Ebert & Diego C. Nocetti & Harris Schlesinger, 2018. "Greater Mutual Aggravation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2809-2811, June.
    12. Donatella Baiardi & Marco Magnani & Mario Menegatti, 2020. "The theory of precautionary saving: an overview of recent developments," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 513-542, June.
    13. AJ A. Bostian & Christoph Heinzel, 2016. "Consumption Smoothing and Precautionary Saving under Recursive Preferences," FOODSECURE Working papers 44, LEI Wageningen UR.
    14. Light, Bar & Perlroth, Andres, 2021. "The Family of Alpha,[a,b] Stochastic Orders: Risk vs. Expected Value," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    15. Dionne, Georges & Harrington, Scott, 2017. "Insurance and Insurance Markets," Working Papers 17-2, HEC Montreal, Canada Research Chair in Risk Management.
    16. Thierry Post & Miloš Kopa, 2017. "Portfolio Choice Based on Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(10), pages 3381-3392, October.
    17. Chiu, Leslie J. Verteramo, 2013. "Risk Rationing and Jump Utility," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 150589, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Christian Gollier & James Hammitt & Nicolas Treich, 2013. "Risk and choice: A research saga," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 129-145, October.
    19. Chi, Yichun & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2020. "Optimal insurance with belief heterogeneity and incentive compatibility," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 104-114.
    20. Sebastian Ebert & Daniel Wiesen, 2014. "Joint measurement of risk aversion, prudence, and temperance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 231-252, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:91:y:2020:i:c:p:188-201. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505554 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.