Insurance markets are important for managing risk and promoting economic stability, since they play a key role in mitigating financial losses from unpredictable events such as natural disasters, cyberattacks, and health crises. However, these markets often face challenges, including market failures, information asymmetries, and correlated risks that can destabilize private insurers. In response, governments frequently intervene in insurance markets, either by providing insurance directly or by acting as a reinsurer of last resort. The interaction between government and private sector provision of insurance raises interesting and important questions about the appropriate role of each player in ensuring market efficiency and protecting individuals and businesses from catastrophic risks.
The paper, written with Benoit le Maux, “Natural Catastrophe Insurance: How Should Government Intervene?” should appear soon in the Journal of Public Economics.
This paper develops a theoretical framework for analyzing the decision to provide or buy insurance against the risk of natural catastrophes. In contrast to conventional models of insurance, the insurer has a non-zero probability of insolvency which depends on the distribution of the risks, the premium rate, and the amount of capital in the company. When the insurer is insolvent, each loss reduces the indemnity available to the victims, thus generating negative pecuniary externalities. Our model shows that government-provided insurance will be more attractive in terms of expected utility, as it allows these negative pecuniary externalities to be spread equally among policyholders. However, when heterogeneous risks are introduced, a government program may be less attractive in safer areas, which could yield inefficiency if insurance ratings are not chosen appropriately.
“The present paper develops a new theoretical framework for analyzing the decision to provide or buy insurance against the risk of natural catastrophes. In contrast with conventional models of insurance, the insurer has a non-zero probability of insolvency that depends on the distribution of the risks, the premium rate, and the amount of capital in the company. Among several results, we show that risk-averse policyholders will accept to pay higher rates for a government-provided insurance with unlimited guarantee. However, depending on the correlation between and within the regional risks, a government program can be more attractive to high-correlation than to low correlation areas, which may lead to inefficiencies if the insurance ratings are not appropriately chosen.”
"sendo l'intento mio scrivere cosa utile a chi la intende…"
