IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i24p16792-d1003504.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Sharing in Insurance Communities: A Hybrid Approach Based on Multiple-Choice Objective Programming and Cooperative Games

Author

Listed:
  • Yuanzhong Li

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China)

  • Xinbang Cao

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China)

  • Shaojian Qu

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China)

  • Ying Ji

    (School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

  • Zilong Xia

    (School of Management Science and Engineering, Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology, Nanjing 210044, China)

Abstract

At present, utilizing the insurance community is a common method to deal with investment risks along the Belt and Road; however, there is no clear method or mechanism to deal with the decision-making optimization and cost allocation of the insurance community participants. We propose a hybrid approach to solve this problem. First, we construct an underwriting decision optimization model for the insurance community using the multi-choice goal programming method, which generates the cost characteristic function based on a cooperative alliance. Second, we use the cooperative game method combined with the modified Shapley value method to take risk factors into consideration, which allows us to optimize the cost allocation among members of the insurance community. Finally, our simulation analysis results show that the multi-choice goal programming method can optimize the insurance community’s underwriting decisions. Specifically, the total underwriting cost is lower than the sum of the underwriting costs under the insurance company’s single-action strategy, and the total underwriting scale is as large as possible. Compared with the classical Shapley value method, the modified Shapley value method can better reflect differences in the underwriting risks of different regions, encouraging governments to take measures to reduce underwriting risks. To conclude, we propose some suggestions based on our research findings. The possible contributions of this paper are as follows: our research provides a hybrid optimization method based on multiple-choice objective programming and cooperative games to solve the cost allocation problem facing the insurance community, and it has some reference value for improving the cost-sharing system of the insurance community.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuanzhong Li & Xinbang Cao & Shaojian Qu & Ying Ji & Zilong Xia, 2022. "Cost Sharing in Insurance Communities: A Hybrid Approach Based on Multiple-Choice Objective Programming and Cooperative Games," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16792-:d:1003504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16792/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/24/16792/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mingming Leng & Mahmut Parlar, 2009. "Allocation of Cost Savings in a Three-Level Supply Chain with Demand Information Sharing: A Cooperative-Game Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 200-213, February.
    2. Haiyue Liu & Jie Jiang & Lei Zhang & Xiaolan Chen, 2018. "OFDI Agglomeration and Chinese Firm Location Decisions under the “Belt and Road” Initiative," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-22, November.
    3. Samouilidis, Jesus E. & Pappas, Ioannis A., 1980. "A goal programming approach to energy forecasting," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 5(5), pages 321-331, November.
    4. Jakobsen, Jo, 2010. "Old problems remain, new ones crop up: Political risk in the 21st century," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 53(5), pages 481-490, September.
    5. Paul Fenn & Ioannis Vlachonikolis, 1990. "Bargaining Behaviour by Defendant Insurers: an Economic Model," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 15(1), pages 41-52, January.
    6. Carmen M. Reinhart & Kenneth S. Rogoff, 2010. "Growth in a Time of Debt," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 573-578, May.
    7. Ye Xue & Ying Li, 2022. "Cohesion of Agricultural Crowdfunding Risk Prevention under Sustainable Development Based on Gray–Rough Set and FAHP-TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, October.
    8. Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Chang, Ching-Ter, 2021. "Topology design of remote patient monitoring system concerning qualitative and quantitative issues," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    9. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1969. "The nucleolus of a characteristic function game," LIDAM Reprints CORE 44, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    10. Radoslav Raykov, 2015. "Catastrophe insurance equilibrium with correlated claims," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 78(1), pages 89-115, January.
    11. Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Liu, Zhi & Li, Kevin W. & Huang, Jun & Chen, Ji, 2019. "Cooperative game approaches to coordinating a three-echelon closed-loop supply chain with fairness concerns," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 92-110.
    12. Lemaire, Jean, 1984. "An Application of Game Theory: Cost Allocation," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 61-81, April.
    13. Chang, Ching-Ter, 2011. "Multi-choice goal programming with utility functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(2), pages 439-445, December.
    14. Joselyne Solórzano & Fernando Morante-Carballo & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Josué Briones-Bitar & Paúl Carrión-Mero, 2022. "A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Geotechnics and Disasters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-31, October.
    15. Cummins, J. David & Doherty, Neil & Lo, Anita, 2002. "Can insurers pay for the "big one"? Measuring the capacity of the insurance market to respond to catastrophic losses," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(2-3), pages 557-583, March.
    16. Zu-Jun, Ma & Zhang, Nian & Dai, Ying & Hu, Shu, 2016. "Managing channel profits of different cooperative models in closed-loop supply chains," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 59(PB), pages 251-262.
    17. Tapiero, Charles S., 1982. "The Optimal Control of a Jump Mutual Insurance Process," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 13-22, June.
    18. Hong-Bin Yan & Xiang-Sheng Meng & Tieju Ma & Van-Nam Huynh, 2019. "An uncertain target-oriented QFD approach to service design based on service standardization with an application to bank window service," IISE Transactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(11), pages 1167-1189, November.
    19. Crew, Michael A, 1969. "Coinsurance and the Welfare Economics of Medical Care," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(5), pages 906-908, December.
    20. Lemaire, Jean, 1991. "Cooperative Game Theory and its Insurance Applications," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 17-40, April.
    21. Chen, Zhongfei & Matousek, Roman & Wanke, Peter, 2018. "Chinese bank efficiency during the global financial crisis: A combined approach using satisficing DEA and Support Vector Machines☆," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 71-86.
    22. Clemente, Gian Paolo & Cornaro, Alessandra, 2022. "A multilayer approach for systemic risk in the insurance sector," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    23. Xuan Lv & Menggang Li & Yingjie Zhang, 2022. "Financial Stability and Economic Activity in China: Based on Mixed-Frequency Spillover Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-22, October.
    24. R. Canan Savaskan & Shantanu Bhattacharya & Luk N. Van Wassenhove, 2004. "Closed-Loop Supply Chain Models with Product Remanufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 239-252, February.
    25. Jiali Wang & Xue Peng & Yunan Du & Fulin Wang, 2022. "A tripartite evolutionary game research on information sharing of the subjects of agricultural product supply chain with a farmer cooperative as the core enterprise," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(1), pages 159-177, January.
    26. Skees, Jerry & Hazell, P. B. R. & Miranda, Mario, 1999. "New approaches to crop yield insurance in developing countries:," EPTD discussion papers 55, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Li, Deng-Feng & Liu, Zhi & Jia, Fu & Lev, Benjamin, 2021. "Willingness-to-cede behaviour in sustainable supply chain coordination," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 240(C).
    2. Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Li, Deng-Feng & Liu, Zhi & Jia, Fu & Sheu, Jiuh-Biing, 2019. "Coordinating a closed-loop supply chain with fairness concerns through variable-weighted Shapley values," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 227-253.
    3. Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Li, Deng-Feng, 2023. "A new biform game-based investment incentive mechanism for eco-efficient innovation in supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    4. Izquierdo, Josep M. & Rafels, Carles, 2001. "Average Monotonic Cooperative Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 174-192, August.
    5. Qi Wang & Kebing Chen & Shengbin Wang & Xiaogang Cao, 2022. "Optimal decisions in a closed-loop supply chain: fairness concerns, corporate social responsibility and information value," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 309(1), pages 277-304, February.
    6. Manyi Tan & Fei Pei & Li He & Hong Cheng & Shupeng Huang, 2023. "Optimal Decision-Making of Closed-Loop Supply Chains in E-Commerce Platform Considering Sales Cooperations under Environmental Effects and WEEE Regulations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(9), pages 1-28, May.
    7. Guajardo, Mario & Jörnsten, Kurt, 2015. "Common mistakes in computing the nucleolus," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 241(3), pages 931-935.
    8. Liu, Zhi & Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Li, Deng-Feng & Liao, Chen-Nan & Sheu, Jiuh-Biing, 2021. "A novel cooperative game-based method to coordinate a sustainable supply chain under psychological uncertainty in fairness concerns," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    9. Zhang, Ranran & Ma, Weimin & Si, Hongyun & Liu, Jinjin & Liao, Le, 2021. "Cooperative game analysis of coordination mechanisms under fairness concerns of a green retailer," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    10. J. Zambujal-Oliveira, 2021. "Supply Chain Innovation Research: A Conceptual Approach of Information Management with Game Theory," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 377-394, April.
    11. Yong Liu & Qian-qian Shi & Qian Xu, 2019. "Alliance Decision of Supply Chain Considering Product Greenness and Recycling Competition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-24, December.
    12. Zheng, Xiao-Xue & Liu, Zhi & Li, Kevin W. & Huang, Jun & Chen, Ji, 2019. "Cooperative game approaches to coordinating a three-echelon closed-loop supply chain with fairness concerns," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 92-110.
    13. Assarzadegan, Parisa & Rasti-Barzoki, Morteza, 2020. "A game theoretic approach for pricing under a return policy and a money back guarantee in a closed loop supply chain," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    14. Mario Guajardo & Kurt Jörnsten & Mikael Rönnqvist, 2016. "Constructive and blocking power in collaborative transportation," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 38(1), pages 25-50, January.
    15. Qingyuan Zhu & Chenghao Yu & Zhiyang SHEN & Malin Song, 2023. "Competition between a manufacturer and a relicensing third party when customers are strategic," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(4), pages 2021-2040, June.
    16. Bo Wang & Ning Wang, 2022. "Decision Models for a Dual-Recycling Channel Reverse Supply Chain with Consumer Strategic Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-18, August.
    17. Mourdoukoutas, Fotios & Boonen, Tim J. & Koo, Bonsoo & Pantelous, Athanasios A., 2021. "Pricing in a competitive stochastic insurance market," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 44-56.
    18. Yanting Huang & Zongjun Wang, 2017. "Dual-Recycling Channel Decision in a Closed-Loop Supply Chain with Cost Disruptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-28, November.
    19. Liu, Chang-Yi & Wang, Hui & Tang, Juan & Chang, Ching-Ter & Liu, Zhi, 2021. "Optimal recovery model in a used batteries closed-loop supply chain considering uncertain residual capacity," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    20. Jackson Jinhong Mi & Zongsheng Huang & Kai Wang & Sang-Bing Tsai & Guodong Li & Jiangtao Wang, 2018. "The Presence of a Powerful Retailer on Dynamic Collecting Closed-Loop Supply Chain From a Sustainable Innovation Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, 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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:24:p:16792-:d:1003504. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.