Skip to main content
Top
Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics 5/2018

Open Access 01-06-2018 | Original Paper

Can premium differentiation counteract adverse selection in the Dutch supplementary health insurance? A simulation study

Authors: K. P. M. van Winssen, R. C. van Kleef, W. P. M. M. van de Ven

Published in: The European Journal of Health Economics | Issue 5/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Most health insurers in the Netherlands apply community-rating and open enrolment for supplementary health insurance, although it is offered at a free market. Theoretically, this should result in adverse selection. There are four indications that adverse selection indeed has started to occur on the Dutch supplementary insurance market. The goal of this paper is to analyze whether premium differentiation would be able to counteract adverse selection. We do this by simulating the uptake and premium development of supplementary insurance over 25 years using data on healthcare expenses and background characteristics from 110,261 insured. For the simulation of adverse selection, it is assumed that only insured for whom supplementary insurance is expected not to be beneficial will consider opting out of the insurance. Therefore, we calculate for each insured the financial profitability (by making assumptions about the consumer’s expected claims and the premium set by the insurer), the individual’s risk attitude and the probability to opt out or opt in. The simulation results show that adverse selection might result in a substantial decline in insurance uptake. Additionally, the simulations show that if insurers were to differentiate their premium to 28 age and gender groups, adverse selection could be modestly counteracted. Finally, this paper shows that if insurers would apply highly refined risk-rating, adverse selection for this type of supplementary insurance could be counteracted completely.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
Van de Ven and Van Vliet [38] emphasize that, in case of adverse selection, asymmetric information is often used as a more general term for consumer information surplus. Consumer information surplus implies that individuals know their individual risk deviates from the average risk within their risk group (i.e., the risk group used by the insurer to differentiate the premium).
 
2
For empirical evidence on adverse selection see for instance: [11, 12, 14, 23, 25, 36, 48].
 
3
With premium differentiation, the premium for each insurance policy is adjusted to the individual’s risk [39]. As the differentiation is more refined, risk pools are less heterogeneous, implying less asymmetric information. Van de Ven and Van Vliet [38] for instance show that the use of risk factors like age, gender, health indicators, prior healthcare expenditures, supplementary insurance and region, reduces the consumer information surplus by about 80% in case of deductible choice.
 
4
This paper focuses on the potential of premium differentiation to counteract adverse selection. Another option would be to look at selective underwriting. However, due to the ‘guaranteed renewability’ clause in all Dutch supplementary insurances, selective underwriting for insured who currently have a supplementary insurance is very unlikely and therefore not a realistic simulation for the Dutch supplementary insurance market.
 
5
The insurance claims are corrected for inflation.
 
6
PCGs and DCGs are risk adjusters used as a proxy for health status based upon prior use of pharmaceuticals and prior hospital inpatient diagnoses, respectively [41].
 
7
Note that we select insured who have had the same supplementary insurance policy in the period 2006-2011 and that we use exactly these insured to simulate adverse selection. This might seem paradoxical since these insured did not opt out of the policy in the period 2006-2011. We consider this group of insured, however, as a pool of insured in which at a certain point in time the trend of adverse selection as observed in the Dutch supplementary health insurance occurs.
 
8
I.e., 2006 in the data is year t-2 in the simulations, 2007 is year t − 1, 2008 is year t, 2009 is year t + 1, 2010 is year t + 2, 2011 is year t + 3, 2007 is year t + 4, 2008 is year t + 5, 2009 is year t + 6, 2010 is year t + 7, 2011 is year t + 8, 2007 is year t + 9, etc.
 
9
Additionally, this looping process does not result in any problems concerning the background characteristics of insured when going from the year 2011 to 2007, because insured have the appropriate risk factors and corresponding predicted claims for each year, also when the looping process continues.
 
10
The average loading fee concerns the difference between the average annual reimbursed expenses under supplementary insurance and the average annual premium for supplementary insurance for the years 2008 to 2011 [44].
 
11
Note that the uptake is not 100%, as might be expected, since, in our simulations, the risk premium insured are willing to pay (i.e., €100 as the default option) is independent of the insured’s predicted claims while the loading fee (i.e., 23% of the average claims in a specific year) is dependent upon the average claims.
 
12
Note that if we would want to simulate the effect of risk attitude on the uptake of supplementary insurance in case of a continuation of adverse selection as observed in the Dutch supplementary health insurance (i.e., on average a 1% decrease in insurance uptake each year), we would not only need to adjust the risk premium the insured is willing to pay but also need to adjust the probability to opt out of the supplementary health insurance since the probability to opt out depends upon the assumptions regarding the insured’s risk attitude.
 
Literature
1.
go back to reference Akerlof, G.A.: The market for ‘lemons’; quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q. J. Econ. 84, 488–500 (1970)CrossRef Akerlof, G.A.: The market for ‘lemons’; quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q. J. Econ. 84, 488–500 (1970)CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Bakker, F.M.: Effecten van eigen betalingen op premies voor ziektekostenverzekeringen (Effects of cost sharing on premiums for health insurance). Ph.D. Dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam (1997) (in Dutch) Bakker, F.M.: Effecten van eigen betalingen op premies voor ziektekostenverzekeringen (Effects of cost sharing on premiums for health insurance). Ph.D. Dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam (1997) (in Dutch)
4.
go back to reference Cave, J.: Equilibrium in insurance market with asymmetric information and adverse selection. In: Scheffler, R.M., Rossiter, L.F. (eds.) Advances in health economics and health services research, vol. 6. JAI Press, Greenwich (1985) Cave, J.: Equilibrium in insurance market with asymmetric information and adverse selection. In: Scheffler, R.M., Rossiter, L.F. (eds.) Advances in health economics and health services research, vol. 6. JAI Press, Greenwich (1985)
5.
go back to reference Chiappori, P.-A., Salanié, B.: Asymmetric information in insurance markets: prediction and tests. In: Dionne, G. (ed.) Handbook of insurance. Springer, New York (2013) Chiappori, P.-A., Salanié, B.: Asymmetric information in insurance markets: prediction and tests. In: Dionne, G. (ed.) Handbook of insurance. Springer, New York (2013)
8.
go back to reference Consumentenbond: 12 problemen zorgstelsel. Consumentenbond: Den Haag (2015) (in Dutch) Consumentenbond: 12 problemen zorgstelsel. Consumentenbond: Den Haag (2015) (in Dutch)
10.
go back to reference Dionne, G., Fombaron, N., Doherty, N.: Adverse selection in insurance contracting. In: Dionne, G. (ed.) Handbook of insurance. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRef Dionne, G., Fombaron, N., Doherty, N.: Adverse selection in insurance contracting. In: Dionne, G. (ed.) Handbook of insurance. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Ellis, R.P.: The effect of prior year health expenditures on health coverage plan choice. In: Scheffler, R.M., Rossiter, L.F. (eds.) Advances in health economics and health services research, vol. 6. Jai Press, Greenwich (1985) Ellis, R.P.: The effect of prior year health expenditures on health coverage plan choice. In: Scheffler, R.M., Rossiter, L.F. (eds.) Advances in health economics and health services research, vol. 6. Jai Press, Greenwich (1985)
12.
go back to reference Geurts, J.J.M., Rutten, F.F.H.: Tot de tanden verzekerd; de verzekeringskeuze voor tandheelkundige hulp nader onderzocht. Nederlands Tijdschrift Tandheelkunde 94, 287–291 (1987). (in Dutch) Geurts, J.J.M., Rutten, F.F.H.: Tot de tanden verzekerd; de verzekeringskeuze voor tandheelkundige hulp nader onderzocht. Nederlands Tijdschrift Tandheelkunde 94, 287–291 (1987). (in Dutch)
19.
go back to reference Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econom 47(2), 263–291 (1979)CrossRef Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econom 47(2), 263–291 (1979)CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Marquis, M.S., Holmer, M.R.: Choice under uncertainty and the demand for health insurance. RAND, N-2516-HHS (1986) Marquis, M.S., Holmer, M.R.: Choice under uncertainty and the demand for health insurance. RAND, N-2516-HHS (1986)
27.
go back to reference Pauly, M.V.: Taxation, health insurance, and market failure in the medical economy. J. Econ. Lit. 24, 629–675 (1986)PubMed Pauly, M.V.: Taxation, health insurance, and market failure in the medical economy. J. Econ. Lit. 24, 629–675 (1986)PubMed
33.
go back to reference Reitsma-van Rooijen, M., de Jong, J.: Percentage overstappers afgenomen; keuzevrijheid minstens zo belangrijk als premie. NIVEL, Utrecht (2014). (in Dutch) Reitsma-van Rooijen, M., de Jong, J.: Percentage overstappers afgenomen; keuzevrijheid minstens zo belangrijk als premie. NIVEL, Utrecht (2014). (in Dutch)
39.
go back to reference Van de Ven, W.P.M.M., Schut, F.T.: Guaranteed access to affordable coverage in individual health insurance markets. In: Glied, S., Smith, P.C. (eds.) The Oxford handbook of health economics, pp. 380–404. University Press, Oxford (2011) Van de Ven, W.P.M.M., Schut, F.T.: Guaranteed access to affordable coverage in individual health insurance markets. In: Glied, S., Smith, P.C. (eds.) The Oxford handbook of health economics, pp. 380–404. University Press, Oxford (2011)
40.
43.
go back to reference Vektis: Jaarcijfers 2015: zorgverzekeraars en zorgfinanciering. Vektis, Zeist (2015a) (in Dutch) Vektis: Jaarcijfers 2015: zorgverzekeraars en zorgfinanciering. Vektis, Zeist (2015a) (in Dutch)
44.
go back to reference Vektis: Zorgthermometer: verzekerden in beweging 2014. Vektis, Zeist (2014) (in Dutch) Vektis: Zorgthermometer: verzekerden in beweging 2014. Vektis, Zeist (2014) (in Dutch)
45.
go back to reference Vektis: Zorgthermometer: verzekerden in beeld 2015. Vektis, Zeist (2015b) (in Dutch) Vektis: Zorgthermometer: verzekerden in beeld 2015. Vektis, Zeist (2015b) (in Dutch)
46.
go back to reference Vektis: Zorgthermometer: verzekerden in beeld 2016. Vektis, Zeist (2016) (in Dutch) Vektis: Zorgthermometer: verzekerden in beeld 2016. Vektis, Zeist (2016) (in Dutch)
Metadata
Title
Can premium differentiation counteract adverse selection in the Dutch supplementary health insurance? A simulation study
Authors
K. P. M. van Winssen
R. C. van Kleef
W. P. M. M. van de Ven
Publication date
01-06-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
The European Journal of Health Economics / Issue 5/2018
Print ISSN: 1618-7598
Electronic ISSN: 1618-7601
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-017-0918-2

Other articles of this Issue 5/2018

The European Journal of Health Economics 5/2018 Go to the issue