网络保险中的风险缓解服务:最佳合同设计和价格结构。

Gabriela Zeller, Matthias Scherer
{"title":"网络保险中的风险缓解服务:最佳合同设计和价格结构。","authors":"Gabriela Zeller,&nbsp;Matthias Scherer","doi":"10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As the cyber insurance market is expanding and cyber insurance policies continue to mature, the potential of including pre-incident and post-incident services into cyber policies is being recognised by insurers and insurance buyers. This work addresses the question of how such services should be priced from the insurer's viewpoint, i.e. under which conditions it is rational for a profit-maximising, risk-neutral or risk-averse insurer to share the costs of providing risk mitigation services. The interaction between insurance buyer and seller is modelled as a Stackelberg game, where both parties use distortion risk measures to model their individual risk aversion. After linking the notions of pre-incident and post-incident services to the concepts of self-protection and self-insurance, we show that when pricing a single contract, the insurer would always shift the full cost of self-protection services to the insured; however, this does not generally hold for the pricing of self-insurance services or when taking a portfolio viewpoint. We illustrate the latter statement using toy examples of risks with dependence mechanisms representative in the cyber context.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7.</p>","PeriodicalId":75009,"journal":{"name":"The Geneva papers on risk and insurance. Issues and practice","volume":"48 2","pages":"502-547"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10165595/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk mitigation services in cyber insurance: optimal contract design and price structure.\",\"authors\":\"Gabriela Zeller,&nbsp;Matthias Scherer\",\"doi\":\"10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>As the cyber insurance market is expanding and cyber insurance policies continue to mature, the potential of including pre-incident and post-incident services into cyber policies is being recognised by insurers and insurance buyers. This work addresses the question of how such services should be priced from the insurer's viewpoint, i.e. under which conditions it is rational for a profit-maximising, risk-neutral or risk-averse insurer to share the costs of providing risk mitigation services. The interaction between insurance buyer and seller is modelled as a Stackelberg game, where both parties use distortion risk measures to model their individual risk aversion. After linking the notions of pre-incident and post-incident services to the concepts of self-protection and self-insurance, we show that when pricing a single contract, the insurer would always shift the full cost of self-protection services to the insured; however, this does not generally hold for the pricing of self-insurance services or when taking a portfolio viewpoint. We illustrate the latter statement using toy examples of risks with dependence mechanisms representative in the cyber context.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75009,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Geneva papers on risk and insurance. Issues and practice\",\"volume\":\"48 2\",\"pages\":\"502-547\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10165595/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Geneva papers on risk and insurance. Issues and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Geneva papers on risk and insurance. Issues and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

随着网络保险市场的扩张和网络保险政策的不断成熟,将事故前和事故后服务纳入网络保单的潜力正在得到保险公司和保险买家的认可。这项工作从保险公司的角度解决了如何对此类服务进行定价的问题,即在何种条件下,利润最大化、风险中性或规避风险的保险公司分担提供风险缓解服务的成本是合理的。保险买方和卖方之间的互动被建模为Stackelberg博弈,双方都使用扭曲风险度量来建模他们的个人风险厌恶。在将事故前和事故后服务的概念与自我保护和自我保险的概念联系起来之后,我们表明,在为单一合同定价时,保险人总是将自我保护服务的全部成本转移给被保险人;然而,这通常不适用于自保服务的定价或从投资组合的角度来看。我们使用在网络环境中具有代表性的依赖机制的风险玩具示例来说明后一种说法。补充信息:在线版本包含补充材料,可访问10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Risk mitigation services in cyber insurance: optimal contract design and price structure.

As the cyber insurance market is expanding and cyber insurance policies continue to mature, the potential of including pre-incident and post-incident services into cyber policies is being recognised by insurers and insurance buyers. This work addresses the question of how such services should be priced from the insurer's viewpoint, i.e. under which conditions it is rational for a profit-maximising, risk-neutral or risk-averse insurer to share the costs of providing risk mitigation services. The interaction between insurance buyer and seller is modelled as a Stackelberg game, where both parties use distortion risk measures to model their individual risk aversion. After linking the notions of pre-incident and post-incident services to the concepts of self-protection and self-insurance, we show that when pricing a single contract, the insurer would always shift the full cost of self-protection services to the insured; however, this does not generally hold for the pricing of self-insurance services or when taking a portfolio viewpoint. We illustrate the latter statement using toy examples of risks with dependence mechanisms representative in the cyber context.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41288-023-00289-7.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Microinsurance research: status quo and future research directions Investment in big data analytics and loss reserve accuracy: evidence from the U.S. property-liability insurance industry Actuarial premium calculation for beekeeping insurance in Turkiye Discretionary decisions in capital requirements under Solvency II Technology investment and insurer efficiency
×
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