Optimal Long-Term Health Insurance Contracts: Characterization, Computation, and Welfare Effects

IF 5.9 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Review of Economic Studies Pub Date : 2023-05-11 DOI:10.1093/restud/rdad054
Soheil Ghili, Ben Handel, Igal Hendel, Michael D. Whinston
{"title":"Optimal Long-Term Health Insurance Contracts: Characterization, Computation, and Welfare Effects","authors":"Soheil Ghili, Ben Handel, Igal Hendel, Michael D. Whinston","doi":"10.1093/restud/rdad054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Reclassification risk is a major concern in health insurance where contracts are typically 1 year in length but health shocks often persist for much longer. While most health systems with private insurers pair short-run contracts with substantial pricing regulations to reduce reclassification risk, long-term contracts with one-sided insurer commitment have significant potential to reduce reclassification risk without the negative side effects of price regulation, such as adverse selection. We theoretically characterize optimal long-term insurance contracts with one-sided commitment, extending the literature in directions necessary for studying health insurance markets. We leverage this characterization to provide a simple algorithm for computing optimal contracts from primitives. We estimate key market fundamentals using data on all under-65 privately insured consumers in Utah. We find that dynamic contracts are very effective at reducing reclassification risk for consumers who arrive at the market in good health, but they are ineffective for consumers who come to the market in bad health, demonstrating that there is a role for the government insurance of pre-market health risks. Individuals with steeply rising income profiles find front-loading costly, and thus relatively prefer ACA-type exchanges. Switching costs enhance, while myopia moderately compromises, the performance of dynamic contracts.","PeriodicalId":48449,"journal":{"name":"Review of Economic Studies","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Economic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdad054","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Reclassification risk is a major concern in health insurance where contracts are typically 1 year in length but health shocks often persist for much longer. While most health systems with private insurers pair short-run contracts with substantial pricing regulations to reduce reclassification risk, long-term contracts with one-sided insurer commitment have significant potential to reduce reclassification risk without the negative side effects of price regulation, such as adverse selection. We theoretically characterize optimal long-term insurance contracts with one-sided commitment, extending the literature in directions necessary for studying health insurance markets. We leverage this characterization to provide a simple algorithm for computing optimal contracts from primitives. We estimate key market fundamentals using data on all under-65 privately insured consumers in Utah. We find that dynamic contracts are very effective at reducing reclassification risk for consumers who arrive at the market in good health, but they are ineffective for consumers who come to the market in bad health, demonstrating that there is a role for the government insurance of pre-market health risks. Individuals with steeply rising income profiles find front-loading costly, and thus relatively prefer ACA-type exchanges. Switching costs enhance, while myopia moderately compromises, the performance of dynamic contracts.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
最优长期健康保险合同:特征、计算和福利效应
重新分类风险是健康保险的一个主要问题,其中合同通常为1年,但健康冲击往往持续更长时间。虽然大多数有私人保险公司的卫生系统将短期合同与实质性的定价规定结合起来,以减少重新分类风险,但有单方面保险公司承诺的长期合同具有很大的潜力,可以减少重新分类风险,而不会产生价格管制的负面副作用,如逆向选择。我们从理论上描述了具有单边承诺的最优长期保险合同,将文献扩展到研究健康保险市场所需的方向。我们利用这个特征提供了一个简单的算法,用于从原语计算最优契约。我们使用犹他州所有65岁以下私人保险消费者的数据来估计关键的市场基本面。我们发现,动态契约对于健康进入市场的消费者降低重新分类风险非常有效,但对于健康状况不佳的消费者则无效,这表明政府保险在市场前健康风险方面具有一定的作用。收入水平急剧上升的个人发现提前投保成本很高,因此相对而言更喜欢aca类型的保险。转换成本增强,而近视适度妥协,动态契约的性能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
3.40%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Founded in 1933 by a group of young British and American economists, The Review of Economic Studies aims to encourage research in theoretical and applied economics, especially by young economists. Today it is widely recognised as one of the core top-five economics journals. The Review is essential reading for economists and has a reputation for publishing path-breaking papers in theoretical and applied economics. The Review is committed to continuing to publish strong papers in all areas of economics. The Editors aim to provide an efficient and high-quality review process to the Review''s authors. Where articles are sent out for full review, authors receive careful reports and feedback. Since 1989 The Review has held annual May Meetings to offer young students in economics and finance the chance to present their research to audiences in Europe.
期刊最新文献
Strategic Foundations of Efficient Rational Expectations Capital Regulation and Shadow Finance: A Quantitative Analysis Bargaining as a Struggle Between Competing Attempts at Commitment Contingent Thinking and the Sure-Thing Principle: Revisiting Classic Anomalies in the Laboratory Single-Crossing Differences in Convex Environments
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1