» Articles » PMID: 28762051

Can Premium Differentiation Counteract Adverse Selection in the Dutch Supplementary Health Insurance? A Simulation Study

Overview
Specialty Health Services
Date 2017 Aug 2
PMID 28762051
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
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.

Citing Articles

Adverse selection and health insurance decisions of young migrant workers: An empirical study in China.

Wang H, Gong X Front Public Health. 2023; 11:1084133.

PMID: 36960379 PMC: 10027710. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1084133.

References
1.
van Winssen K, van Kleef R, van de Ven W . The demand for health insurance and behavioural economics. Eur J Health Econ. 2016; 17(6):653-7. DOI: 10.1007/s10198-016-0776-3. View

2.
Short P, Taylor A . Premiums, benefits, and employee choice of health insurance options. J Health Econ. 1989; 8(3):293-311. DOI: 10.1016/0167-6296(89)90023-4. View

3.
van de Ven W, van Vliet R . Consumer information surplus and adverse selection in competitive health insurance markets: an empirical study. J Health Econ. 1995; 14(2):149-69. DOI: 10.1016/0167-6296(94)00043-4. View

4.
Marquis M, Phelps C . Price elasticity and adverse selection in the demand for supplementary health insurance. Econ Inq. 1987; 25(2):299-313. DOI: 10.1111/j.1465-7295.1987.tb00741.x. View

5.
Ellis R . The effect of prior-year health expenditures on health coverage plan choice. Adv Health Econ Health Serv Res. 1984; 6:149-70. View