Advertisement

Experience Rating in Nonlife Insurance

  • Jean Pinquet
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter presents statistical models which lead to experience rating in insurance. Serial correlation for risk variables can receive endogenous or exogenous explanations. The interpretation retained by actuarial models is exogenous and reflects the positive contagion usually observed for the number of claims. This positive contagion can be explained by the revelation throughout time of a hidden features in the risk distributions. These features are represented by fixed effects which are predicted with a random effects model. This chapter discusses identification issues on the nature of the dynamics of nonlife insurance data. Examples of predictions are given for count data models with a constant or time-varying random effects, one or several equations, and for cost-number models on events.

Keywords

Observed and real contagion Overdispersion Fixed and random effects models Heterogeneity and state dependence Poisson models with random effects Experience rating with an expected value principle or a linear credibility approach 

References

  1. Abbring J, Chiappori PA, Pinquet J (2003) Moral hazard and dynamic insurance data. J Eur Econ Assoc 1:767–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angers JF, Desjardins D, Dionne G, Guertin F (2006) Vehicle and fleet random effects in a model of insurance rating for fleets of vehicles. ASTIN Bull 36:25–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates GE, Neyman J (1952) Contributions to the theory of accident proneness II: true or false contagion. Univ Calif Publ Stat 1:255–275Google Scholar
  4. Bolancé C, Guillén M, Pinquet J (2003) Time-varying credibility for frequency risk models: estimation and tests for autoregressive specifications on the random effects. Insur Math Econ 33:273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bolancé C, Guillén M, Pinquet J (2008) On the link between credibility and frequency premium. Insur Math Econ 43:209–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boucher J-P, Denuit M (2006) Fixed Versus random effects models in poisson regression models for claim counts: case study with motor insurance. ASTIN Bull 36:285–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boucher J-P, Denuit M, Guillén M (2009) Number of accidents or number of claims? An approach with zero-inflated poisson models for panel data. J Risk Insur 76:821–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bourgeon J-M, Picard P (2007) Point-record driving license and road safety: an economic approach. J Public Econ 91:235–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bühlmann H (1967) Experience rating and credibility. ASTIN Bull 4:199–207Google Scholar
  10. Bühlmann H, Gisler A (2005) A course in credibility theory and its applications. Springer, UniversitextGoogle Scholar
  11. Chiappori PA, Salanié B (2014) Asymmetric information in insurance markets: predictions and tests. In this bookGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis P, Rabinowitz P (1984) Methods of numerical integration. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Denuit M, Marechal X, Pitrebois S, Wahlin J-F (2007) Actuarial modelling of claim counts: risk classification, credibility and bonus-malus scales. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Desjardins D, Dionne G, Pinquet J (2001) Experience rating schemes for fleets of vehicles. ASTIN Bull 31:81–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dionne G, Vanasse C (1989) A generalization of automobile insurance rating models: the negative binomial distribution with a regression component. ASTIN Bull 19:199–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dionne G, Pinquet J, Vanasse C, Maurice M (2011) Incentive mechanisms for safe driving: a comparative analysis with dynamic data. Rev Econ Stat 93: 218–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ehrlich I, Becker GS (1972) Market insurance, self-insurance, and self-protection. J Polit Econ 80:623–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Feller W (1943) On a general class of “contagious” distributions. Ann Math Stat 14:389–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Frees EW, Valdez E (2008) Hierarchical insurance claims modeling. J Am Stat Assoc 103:1457–1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gerber H, Jones D (1975) Credibility formulas of the updating type. Trans Soc Actuaries 27:31–52Google Scholar
  21. Gouriéroux C, Monfort A (1991) Simulation based inference in models with heterogeneity. Ann d’Economie et de Stat 20–21:69–107Google Scholar
  22. Gouriéroux C, Jasiak J (2004) Heterogeneous INAR(1) model with application to car insurance. Insur Math Econ 34:177–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hausman JA, Hall BH, Griliches Z (1984) Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship. Econometrica 52:909–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hendel I, Lizzeri A (2003) The role of commitment in dynamic contracts: evidence from life insurance. Q J Econ 118:299–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Henriet D, Rochet JC (1986) La logique des systèmes bonus-malus en assurance automobile. Ann d’Economie et de Stat 1:133–152Google Scholar
  26. Klugman S, Panjer H, Willmot S (2008) Loss models: from data to decisions. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kunreuther H, Pauly MV (1985) Market equilibrium with private knowledge: an insurance example. J Public Econ 26:269–288. Reprinted in: Dionne G, Harrington S (eds) Foundations of Insurance Economics. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  28. Lemaire J (1995) Bonus-malus systems in automobile insurance. Huebner international series on risk, insurance and economic security. Springer-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  29. Lillard L (1993) Simultaneous equations for hazards (marriage duration and fertility timing). J Econometrics 56:189–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mac Fadden D (1989) A method of simulated moments for estimation of discrete response models without numerical integration. Econometrica 57: 995–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nelder JA, Wedderburn RWM (1972) Generalized linear models. J R Stat Soc A 135:370–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Neyman J (1939) On a new class of “contagious” distributions, applicable in entomology and bacteriology. Ann Math Stat 10:35–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nini G, Kofman P (2011) Do insurance companies exploit an informational monopoly? Empirical evidence from auto insurance,” Journal of Risk and Insurance (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  34. Picard P (1976) Généralisation de l’Etude sur la survenance des sinistres en assurance automobile. Bull Trimestriel de l’Institut des Actuaires Français 204–267Google Scholar
  35. Pinquet J (1997) Allowance for cost of claims in bonus-malus systems. ASTIN Bull 27(1):33–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pinquet J (1998) Designing optimal bonus-malus systems from different types of claims. ASTIN Bull 28(2):205–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pinquet J (2000) Experience rating through heterogeneous models. Handbook of insurance, vol 459–500. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Huebner International Series on Risk, Insurance and Economic Security (Editor: Georges Dionne)Google Scholar
  38. Sundt B (1981) Credibility estimators with geometric weights. Insur Math Econ 7:113–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Taylor G (1986) Underwriting strategy in a competitive insurance environment. Insur Math Econ 5:59–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognit Psychol 5:207–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zeger SL, Liang KY, Albert PS (1986) Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equations approach. Biometrics 44:1049–1060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang CH (1990) Fourier methods for estimating densities and distributions. Ann Stat 18:806–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business media, New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Université Paris-Ouest Nanterre La Défense and Ecole PolytechniqueParisFrance

Personalised recommendations