An empirical examination of risk equalisation in a regulated community rated health insurance market

Despite universal access entitlements to the public healthcare system in Ireland, over half the population is covered by voluntary private health insurance. The market operates on the basis of community rating, open enrolment and lifetime cover. A set of minimum benefits also exists, and two risk equalisation schemes have been put in place but neither was implemented. These schemes have proved highly controversial. To date, the debate has primarily consisted of qualitative arguments. This study adds a quantitative element by analysing a number of pertinent issues. A model of a community rated insurance market is developed, which shows that community rating can only be maintained in a competitive market if all insurers in the market have the same risk profile as the market overall. This has relevance to the Irish market in the aftermath of a Supreme Court decision to set aside risk equalisation. Two reasons why insurers’ risk profiles might differ are adverse selection and risk selection. Evidence is found of the existence of both forms of selection in the Irish market. A move from single rate community rating to lifetime community rating in Australia had significant consequences for take-up rates and the age profile of the insured population. A similar move has been proposed in Ireland. It is found that, although this might improve the stability of community rating in the short term, it would not negate the need for risk equalisation. If community rating were to collapse then risk rating might result. A comparison of the Irish, Australian and UK health insurance markets suggests that community rating encourages higher take-up among older consumers than risk rating. Analysis of Irish hospital discharge figures suggests that this yields significant savings for the Irish public healthcare system. This thesis has implications for government policy towards private health insurance in Ireland.

Risk management and the potential of cattle insurance in Tigray, Northern Ethiopia

This study explores the role of livestock insurance to complement existing risk management strategies adopted by smallholder farmers. Using survey data, first, it provides insights into farmers’ risk perception of livestock farming, in terms of likelihood and severity of risk, attitude to risk and their determinants. Second, it examines farmers’ risk management strategies and their determinants. Third, it investigates farmers’ potential engagement with a hypothetical cattle insurance decision and their intensity of participation. Factor analysis is used to analyse risk sources and risk management, multiple regressions are used to identify the determinants; a Heckman model was used to investigate cattle insurance participation and intensity of participation. The findings show different groups of farmers display different risk attitude in their decision-making related to livestock farming. Production risk (especially livestock diseases) was perceived as the most likely and severe source of risk. Disease control was perceived as the best strategy to manage risk overall. Disease control and feed management were important strategies to mitigate the production risks. Disease control and participation on safety net program were found to be important to counter households’ financial risks. With regard to the hypothetical cattle insurance scheme, 94.38% of households were interested to participate in cattle insurance. Of those households that accepted cattle insurance, 77.38% of the households were willing to pay the benchmark annual premium of 4% of the animal value while for the remaining households this was not affordable. The average number of cattle that farmers were willing to insure was 2.71 at this benchmark. Results revealed that income (log income) and education levels influenced positively and significantly farmers’ participation in cattle insurance and the number of cattle to insure. The findings prompt policy makers to consider livestock insurance as a complement to existing risk management strategies to reduce poverty in the long-run.