IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/insuma/v93y2020icp196-205.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nash equilibria in optimal reinsurance bargaining

Author

Listed:
  • Anthropelos, Michail
  • Boonen, Tim J.

Abstract

We introduce a strategic behavior in reinsurance bilateral transactions, where agents choose the risk preferences they will appear to have in the transaction. Within a wide class of risk measures, we identify agents’ strategic choices to a range of risk aversion coefficients. It is shown that at the strictly beneficial Nash equilibria, agents appear homogeneous with respect to their risk preferences. While the game does not cause any loss of total welfare gain, its allocation between agents is heavily affected by the agents’ strategic behavior. This allocation is reflected in the reinsurance premium, while the insurance indemnity remains the same in all strictly beneficial Nash equilibria. Furthermore, the effect of agents’ bargaining power vanishes through the game procedure and the agent who gets more welfare gain is the one who has an advantage in choosing the common risk aversion at the equilibrium.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthropelos, Michail & Boonen, Tim J., 2020. "Nash equilibria in optimal reinsurance bargaining," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 196-205.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:93:y:2020:i:c:p:196-205
    DOI: 10.1016/j.insmatheco.2020.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167668720300652
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2020.05.001?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Michail Anthropelos & Constantinos Kardaras, 2014. "Equilibrium in risk-sharing games," Papers 1412.4208, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2016.
    3. Michail Anthropelos & Constantinos Kardaras & Georgios Vichos, 2020. "Effective risk aversion in thin risk‐sharing markets," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1565-1590, October.
    4. Eric van Damme, 1984. "The Nash Bargaining Solution is Optimal," Discussion Papers 597, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    5. Britz, Volker & Herings, P. Jean-Jacques & Predtetchinski, Arkadi, 2010. "Non-cooperative support for the asymmetric Nash bargaining solution," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(5), pages 1951-1967, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Rubinstein, Ariel & Safra, Zvi & Thomson, William, 1992. "On the Interpretation of the Nash Bargaining Solution and Its Extension to Non-expected Utility Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1171-1186, September.
    8. Rob Kaas & Marc Goovaerts & Jan Dhaene & Michel Denuit, 2008. "Modern Actuarial Risk Theory," Springer Books, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-540-70998-5, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    11. Damme, Eric van, 1986. "The Nash bargaining solution is optimal," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 78-100, February.
    12. Zhuang, Sheng Chao & Weng, Chengguo & Tan, Ken Seng & Assa, Hirbod, 2016. "Marginal Indemnification Function formulation for optimal reinsurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 65-76.
    13. Young, Virginia R., 1999. "Optimal insurance under Wang's premium principle," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 109-122, November.
    14. Semyon Malamud & Marzena Rostek, 2017. "Decentralized Exchange," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3320-3362, November.
    15. 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.
    16. Denuit, Michel & Vermandele, Catherine, 1998. "Optimal reinsurance and stop-loss order," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 229-233, July.
    17. Marzena Rostek & Marek Weretka, 2015. "Dynamic Thin Markets," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 28(10), pages 2946-2992.
    18. van Damme, E.E.C., 1986. "The Nash bargaining solution is optimal," Other publications TiSEM b408f4e4-5094-48a1-a02f-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. 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.
    20. Ambrose Lo & Zhaofeng Tang, 2019. "Pareto-optimal reinsurance policies in the presence of individual risk constraints," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 274(1), pages 395-423, March.
    21. Raviv, Artur, 1979. "The Design of an Optimal Insurance Policy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 84-96, March.
    22. Wang, Shaun S. & Young, Virginia R. & Panjer, Harry H., 1997. "Axiomatic characterization of insurance prices," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 173-183, November.
    23. Michail Anthropelos & Constantinos Kardaras, 2017. "Equilibrium in risk-sharing games," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 815-865, July.
    24. Cai, Jun & Liu, Haiyan & Wang, Ruodu, 2017. "Pareto-optimal reinsurance arrangements under general model settings," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 24-37.
    25. Hansjörg Albrecher & Daily-Amir Dalit, 2017. "On effects of asymmetric information on non-life insurance prices under competition," International Journal of Data Analysis Techniques and Strategies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(4), pages 287-299.
    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. 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.
    2. Yanfei Bai & Zhongbao Zhou & Rui Gao & Helu Xiao, 2020. "Nash Equilibrium Investment-Reinsurance Strategies for an Insurer and a Reinsurer with Intertemporal Restrictions and Common Interests," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-26, January.
    3. Lu-Ping Liu & Wen-Sheng Jia, 2021. "An Intelligent Algorithm for Solving the Efficient Nash Equilibrium of a Single-Leader Multi-Follower Game," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-14, February.
    4. 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.

    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. Asimit, Alexandru V. & Boonen, Tim J. & Chi, Yichun & Chong, Wing Fung, 2021. "Risk sharing with multiple indemnity environments," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(2), pages 587-603.
    2. 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.
    3. Zhu, Michael B. & Ghossoub, Mario & Boonen, Tim J., 2023. "Equilibria and efficiency in a reinsurance market," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 24-49.
    4. Ghossoub, Mario & Zhu, Michael B., 2024. "Stackelberg equilibria with multiple policyholders," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 189-201.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Boonen, Tim J. & Jiang, Wenjun, 2022. "A marginal indemnity function approach to optimal reinsurance under the Vajda condition," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(2), pages 928-944.
    8. Jiang, Wenjun & Hong, Hanping & Ren, Jiandong, 2021. "Pareto-optimal reinsurance policies with maximal synergy," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 185-198.
    9. Chen, Lv & Shen, Yang & Su, Jianxi, 2020. "A continuous-time theory of reinsurance chains," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 129-146.
    10. Anthropelos, Michail & Kardaras, Constantinos, 2024. "Price impact under heterogeneous beliefs and restricted participation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Asimit, Alexandru V. & Cheung, Ka Chun & Chong, Wing Fung & Hu, Junlei, 2020. "Pareto-optimal insurance contracts with premium budget and minimum charge constraints," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 17-27.
    13. Boonen, Tim J. & Tan, Ken Seng & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2021. "Optimal reinsurance with multiple reinsurers: Competitive pricing and coalition stability," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(PB), pages 302-319.
    14. Cheung, Ka Chun & He, Wanting & Wang, He, 2023. "Multi-constrained optimal reinsurance model from the duality perspectives," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 199-214.
    15. Boonen, Tim J., 2016. "Nash equilibria of Over-The-Counter bargaining for insurance risk redistributions: The role of a regulator," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(3), pages 955-965.
    16. 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.
    17. Naeve-Steinweg, Elisabeth, 2002. "Mechanisms supporting the Kalai-Smorodinsky solution," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 25-36, September.
    18. Birghila, Corina & Pflug, Georg Ch., 2019. "Optimal XL-insurance under Wasserstein-type ambiguity," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 30-43.
    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. Boonen, Tim J. & Tan, Ken Seng & Zhuang, Sheng Chao, 2016. "The role of a representative reinsurer in optimal reinsurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 196-204.

    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:93:y:2020:i:c:p:196-205. 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.