期刊RMIR 2025年28卷第4期目录及摘要｜保险学术前沿

声明：本系列文章基于原期刊目录和摘要内容整理而得，仅限于读者交流学习。如有侵权，请联系删除。

期刊介绍：

《Risk Management and Insurance Review》（RMIR）为季刊，由美国风险与保险协会（American Risk and Insurance Association，ARIA）主办，每年4期。2024年影响因子为1.4，CiteScore为2.5，是风险管理与保险领域具有较高影响力的国际学术期刊。该刊主要发表风险管理与保险方面的应用研究、政策讨论以及数据分析类论文，设有Feature Articles、Perspectives与Data Insights等栏目，为学术研究与实践决策提供重要参考。

本期看点：

●保险公司正面临索赔事件相互关联、保险消费者日益认为保费定价有失公允等问题，这些问题削弱了市场信任。保险公司必须围绕韧性、风险重构和革新三大原则进行转型。

●采用简化理赔逻辑的财产险产品可使保险公司综合成本率最多降低五个百分点，这得益于其核保与理赔管理成本的压缩。然而这类产品也为投保人带来了基差风险。

●在财产责任保险行业中，内部激励会导致更保守的损失准备金管理，该效应在收益波动性更高、理赔损失准备金占总负债比例更大的保险公司中更为显著。

●在生命周期内，长期护理支出的投保比例随年龄增长而递减。当面临需增加长期护理支出的健康冲击时，个体会出售资产以维持消费水平（即"消费平滑"效应）。保险加成的降低可能提升富裕/健康人群的福利水平，而利率上升则可能大幅削弱保险覆盖。

●2012年后，美国寿险市场并购减少，变额年金销售额与盈利水平均出现下滑。2008至2012年美联储量化宽松政策实施后持续的低利率环境，是造成2012年后美国寿险和非寿险领域并购差异的关键证据。

※ 本期目录

●tournament incentives and reserve management

●Do customers opt for insurance products with a simplified loss settlement logic?

●Optimal consumption, portfolio, and long-term-care health insurance in a dynamic framework

●Insurers' M&As in the United States during the 1990‒2022 period: Is the Fed monetary policy a causal factor?

●On IoT-enabled risk prevention and insurance: A systematic literature review

●Resilience, risk, and reinvention: The challenges of insurance markets amid technological, behavioral, and systemic shocks

Tournament incentives and reserve management

锦标赛激励与准备金管理

作者

Gene Lai（北卡罗来纳大学夏洛特分校），Ahmet Nart（美国银行），Chia-Ling Ho（淡江大学）， Gunratan Lonare

摘要：This paper examines the impact of internal tournament incentives on reserve management within the property-liability insurance industry. We find a positive relationship between internal tournament incentives and reserve errors, suggesting that a larger tournament prize is associated with more conservative loss-reserve management. In contrast to the literature on nonfinancial firms, we do not observe a positive association between tournament incentives and risk-taking behavior or performance. The overall evidence indicates that vice presidents participating in internal tournaments prioritize strong financial health over performance. Moreover, the positive effect of tournament incentives on conservative reserve management is more pronounced for insurers with more volatile returns and a higher ratio of claim loss reserves to total liabilities. This effect attenuates for larger insurers, those underwriting long-tail lines, and those operating in less competitive environments. Our findings also suggest that the Sarbanes–Oxley Act significantly influences executives' reserve behavior. Finally, we show that stronger board monitoring is associated with more conservative reserve practices in internal tournaments.

本文研究了财产责任保险行业内锦标赛式晋升激励对准备金管理的影响。研究发现：内部锦标赛激励与准备金差错呈正相关，表明更大的晋升奖励会导致更保守的损失准备金管理。与非金融企业的现有文献不同，本研究未观察到锦标赛激励与风险承担行为或经营绩效之间存在正向关联。整体证据表明，参与内部锦标赛的副总裁更看重企业稳健的财务状况而非短期业绩。进一步分析显示，锦标赛激励对保守准备金管理的正向效应在收益波动性更高、理赔损失准备金占总负债比例更大的保险公司中更为显著；而对于规模较大、承保长尾业务线或在竞争较弱环境中运营的保险公司，这种效应会减弱。研究还发现，《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》显著影响了高管的准备金管理行为。最后，本文论证了在内部锦标赛机制下，更强的董事会监督与更保守的准备金管理实践密切相关。

原文链接：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rmir.70016

Do customers opt for insurance products with a simplified loss settlement logic?

客户是否会选择理赔逻辑更简化的保险产品？

作者

Laurenz Hommel（圣加仑大学），Hato Schmeiser（圣加仑大学）

摘要：Property and Casualty (P&C) products with a simplified loss settlement logic (SLSL) can reduce insurers' combined ratios by up to five percentage points, as they lower underwriting and claims administration costs. However, these products introduce basis risk for policyholders. As shown in the theoretical section of our paper, policyholders who use an exponential utility function tend to combine traditional indemnity insurance with SLSL-based insurance to mitigate this risk. In the empirical section, we investigate willingness to pay for SLSL-based insurance using a behavioral experiment involving a low sum insured. The experiment revealed no significant difference in willingness to pay between indemnity insurance and SLSL-based products. This could be for a number of reasons, including that participants do not fully understand basis risk and its implications, the convenience of insuring with an SLSL product outweighs basis risk, or they perceive products to be of similar value if basis risk is not severe. Insurers could test demand for SLSL insurance in a pilot scheme. However, they should proceed with caution to mitigate the risks of potential litigation and reputational damage.

采用简化理赔逻辑的财产险产品可使保险公司综合成本率最多降低五个百分点，这得益于其核保与理赔管理成本的压缩。然而这类产品也为投保人带来了基差风险。正如本文理论部分所示，采用指数效用函数的投保人倾向于将传统补偿型保险与简化理赔逻辑保险相结合以对冲此类风险。在实证研究部分，我们通过小额保额行为实验考察了市场对简化理赔逻辑保险的支付意愿。实验显示补偿型保险与简化理赔逻辑产品之间的支付意愿并无显著差异，这可能源于多重因素：参与者未能充分理解基差风险及其影响、简化理赔产品的便利性优势盖过了基差风险、或当基差风险不严重时二者被感知为等值产品。保险公司可通过试点项目测试简化理赔保险的市场需求，但需审慎推进以规避潜在诉讼风险及声誉损害。

原文链接：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rmir.70026

Optimal consumption, portfolio, and long-term-care health insurance in a dynamic framework

动态框架下的最优消费、投资组合与长期健康保险

作者

Lucia Leporatti（热那亚大学），Rosella Levaggi（布雷西亚大学），Francesco Menoncin（布雷西亚大学），Raffaele Miniaci（布雷西亚大学）

摘要：We study the optimal dynamic strategy of representative agents who can invest in the financial market and sign an insurance contract to optimise the utility of intertemporal consumption and face the risk of long-term-care (LTC) expenses. The time horizon of the agent coincides with the stochastic death time, and the health expenditure risk takes the form of a jump Poisson process. The agent may hedge against this health risk by signing an insurance contract, on which we assume there exists a mark-up. We find a closed-form solution for the optimal consumption, the optimal portfolio, and the optimal insurance hedge. We show that the decision to purchase LTC insurance is more complex than what emerges from most insurance models. The proportion of LTC expenditure insured decreases with age. Our model predicts substitution between private coverage and savings as a means to finance LTC expenditure. In response to a health shock requiring an increase in LTC expenditure, the individuals sell their assets to keep up the level of consumption (the so-called “consumption smoothing” effect). Richer individuals dissave more than poorer ones. An increase in the interest rate has the same qualitative impact. The reduction in the mark-up, either due to increasing competitiveness or through public subsidies, is likely to increase the welfare of well-off/fit individuals, while an increase in the interest rate may reduce coverage in a very substantial way, an aspect that has been overlooked by the literature so far.

本文研究代表性主体的最优动态策略：这些主体可通过金融市场投资及签订保险合同，在面临长期护理支出风险时优化跨期消费效用。其时间跨度与随机死亡时点重合，健康支出风险则表现为跳跃泊松过程。主体可通过签订保险合同对冲健康风险，我们假定该保险存在价格加成。研究得出最优消费、最优投资组合及最优保险对冲的解析解。我们发现，购买长期护理保险的决策比大多数保险模型所揭示的更为复杂——长期护理支出的投保比例随年龄增长而递减。模型预测私人保险覆盖与储蓄之间存在替代效应，两者共同构成长期护理支出的融资手段。当面临需增加长期护理支出的健康冲击时，个体会出售资产以维持消费水平（即"消费平滑"效应）。较富裕个体比贫困者动用更多储蓄。利率上升亦会产生同质化影响。保险加成的降低（源于市场竞争加剧或公共补贴）可能提升富裕/健康人群的福利水平，而利率上升则可能大幅削弱保险覆盖——这一影响机制在现有文献中长期被忽视。

原文链接：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rmir.70021

Insurers' M&As in the United States during the 1990‒2022 period: Is the Fed monetary policy a causal factor?

1990-2022年间美国保险公司的并购活动：美联储货币政策是成因吗？

作者

Georges Dionne（蒙特利尔高等商学院）， Akouété-Tognikin Fenou（蒙特利尔高等商学院），Mohamed Mnasri（蒙特利尔高等商学院）

摘要：We investigate the causes of the gap in mergers and acquisitions (M&As) between life and nonlife insurers in the United States from 1990 to 2022. Our causality analysis indicates parallel trends between M&As in the life insurance and nonlife insurance sectors from 1990 to 2012, and a significant difference after 2012. There was a shock in the life insurance market that resulted in a reduction in M&As after 2012. Variable annuity sales and profitability in the life insurance sector declined after 2012. We find evidence that low interest rates observed after the implementation of the Fed's quantitative easing policy from 2008 to 2012 caused the difference in M&As between the life and nonlife sectors after 2012.

本研究旨在探究1990至2022年间美国寿险与非寿险行业并购活动差异的成因。因果分析表明：1990至2012年间两大保险领域的并购趋势呈现同步性，而2012年后则出现显著分化。2012年后寿险市场受到冲击导致并购活动缩减，其变额年金销售额与盈利水平均出现下滑。研究发现，2008至2012年美联储量化宽松政策实施后持续的低利率环境，是造成2012年后两大保险领域并购差异的关键证据。

原文链接：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rmir.70024

On IoT-enabled risk prevention and insurance: A systematic literature review

物联网赋能的风险防控与保险：系统性文献综述

作者

Ion Cimbru（苏黎世应用科技大学），Joël Wagner（洛桑大学），Angela Zeier Röschmann（苏黎世应用科技大学）

摘要：The insurance market is increasingly adopting connected insurance offerings, such as telematics, wearables, and parametric products, enabled by Internet of Things (IoT) technologies. These innovations generate granular, observable risk data and support the delivery of preventive services. While connected insurance has gained research attention, the role of IoT-enabled prevention and its impact on insurance, in particular on demand, remain underexplored. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review following the PRISMA guidelines. From 5764 records identified across databases, journals, and industry sources, we analyzed 56 academic and 18 practitioner studies. The results include a comprehensive analysis of how IoT expands risk prevention and insurance mechanisms, as well as the additional benefits and costs introduced to connected insurance solutions, such as discounts, rewards, real-time services, technology expenses, privacy loss, and cyber risks. This evolution makes the cost–benefit structure broader and more complicated and introduces new drivers of insurance demand, such as technology affinity and the willingness to share data. We argue that existing demand models should be revisited to reflect these dynamics and outline implications for insurers' evolving role, from risk financiers to partners in risk management.

保险市场正日益广泛地采纳以物联网技术为支撑的互联保险产品，例如远程信息处理设备、可穿戴设备及参数化保险产品。这些创新能够生成精细化的可观测风险数据，并支持预防性服务的提供。尽管互联保险已引起学界关注，但物联网赋能的预防机制及其对保险（尤其是保险需求）的影响仍未得到充分探索。为弥补这一研究空白，我们依据PRISMA指南开展了系统性文献综述。从跨数据库、期刊及行业来源识别出的5764条记录中，我们最终分析了56篇学术文献与18篇行业实践研究报告。研究结果系统阐释了物联网如何拓展风险预防与保险机制，同时揭示了互联保险解决方案带来的额外收益与成本（如保费折扣、奖励机制、实时服务、技术支出、隐私损失及网络风险）。这一演进使得成本效益结构更广泛复杂，并催生了保险需求的新驱动因素（如技术亲和性与数据共享意愿）。我们认为，现有保险需求模型需重新审视以反映这些动态变化，并进一步阐述了保险公司角色从风险融资者向风险管理合作伙伴转型的重要意义。

原文链接：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rmir.70025

Resilience, risk, and reinvention: The challenges of insurance markets amid technological, behavioral, and systemic shocks

韧性、风险与革新：技术、行为及系统性冲击下保险市场的挑战

作者

Nicos A. Scordis（圣约翰大学），Maurizio Pompella（锡耶纳大学）

摘要：Insurers face difficulties because modernity creates risks that are human-made, globally interconnected, and unpredictable. This leads to correlated, cascading claims, while insurance consumers increasingly view prices as unfair. These issues weaken trust just when the industry needs credibility most. Insurers must evolve around the principles of resilience, risk reconceptualization, and reinvention. Resilience involves building adaptive capacity before, during, and after shocks. Risk reconceptualization requires shifting to a view of probability that updates beliefs as new risks emerge. Reinvention demands transparent products that reflect how consumers actually perceive fairness and value. Insurers engage in a series of targeted audits of their assumptions about the way they operate and the design of their offerings. In their audits, they incorporate empirical evidence on how consumers internalize the language of risk. Insurers provide meaningful and substantial context for consumers to understanding how consumers' risk-related choices link to what consumers pay for insurance. Insurers who act now will earn the trust of the future and succeed. Those who stick to familiar strategies will find themselves in a market they no longer control.

保险公司正面临困境，因为现代性催生了一系列人为造成的、全球互联且难以预测的风险。这导致索赔事件相互关联、层层叠加，而保险消费者日益认为保费定价有失公允。这些问题削弱了市场信任，而此时正是行业最需要公信力的关键时刻。保险公司必须围绕韧性、风险重构和革新三大原则进行转型。韧性意味着在冲击发生前、发生时和发生后建立适应能力；风险重构要求转向动态概率观，随着新风险的出现不断更新认知；革新则需推出透明化的产品，真实反映消费者对公平与价值的实际感知。保险公司应对其运营模式和产品设计的核心假设展开一系列针对性审视，在审视过程中纳入消费者如何内化风险语言的实证依据，并为消费者提供充分且实质的语境，帮助他们理解自身的风险相关选择如何与所支付的保费相关联。即刻行动的保险公司将赢得未来的信任并走向成功；而那些固守传统策略的企业，终将发现自己身处一个无法掌控的市场之中。

原文链接：https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rmir.70027

更多推荐文章

文章推荐：2025-26年医疗健康领域的主要风险｜保险学术前沿

文章推荐：2025年长期护理保险行业现状报告｜保险学术前沿

Journal of Political Economy 2025年精选文章目录与摘要｜保险学术前沿

文章推荐：结构性风险：保险业面临的机遇与挑战｜保险学术前沿

期刊The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review 2025年第2期目录及摘要｜保险学术前沿