Special Issue "Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework"

A special issue of Risks (ISSN 2227-9091).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 July 2019

Special Issue Editor

Guest Editor
Dr. Gian Paolo Clemente

Faculty of Banking, Finance and Insurance, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Italy
Website | E-Mail
Interests: Capital Requirement for Non-Life Insurance; Reinsurance; Network and Graph Teory

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The regulatory Solvency II framework recently came in force in order to improve the solvency of the insurance sector and, by extension, underpin the stability of the broader financial system. As well-known, a risk-based system has been developed defining the criteria for computing the capital requirement by using either a standard formula or an internal model. Also diversification and risk-mitigation effects are taken into account. In this framework, actuarial literature and practitioners are focusing on both the assessment of capital requirement for different sources of risk and the valuation of asset and liabilities.

Moving from these considerations, this Special Issue aims to compile high quality papers that offer a discussion of the state-of-the-art or introduce new theoretical or practical developments in this field. We welcome papers related, but not limited to, the following topics:

  • Quantification of capital requirement for Life or Non-Life Underwriting Risk
  • Extensions of Solvency II Standard formula.
  • Assessing diversification
  • Modelling risk-mitigation effects
  • Capital allocation
  • Valuation of technical liabilities in a Solvency II framework

Dr. Gian Paolo Clemente
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Risks is an international peer-reviewed open access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 350 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Capital Requirement
  • Reinsurance
  • Solvency II
  • Best Estimate and Risk Margin
  • Dependency

Published Papers (7 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-7
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessArticle Systemic Risk and Insurance Regulation
Received: 25 June 2018 / Revised: 19 July 2018 / Accepted: 25 July 2018 / Published: 27 July 2018
PDF Full-text (848 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
This paper provides a rationale for the macro-prudential regulation of insurance companies, where capital requirements increase in their contribution to systemic risk. In the absence of systemic risk, the formal model in this paper predicts that optimal regulation may be implemented by capital [...] Read more.
This paper provides a rationale for the macro-prudential regulation of insurance companies, where capital requirements increase in their contribution to systemic risk. In the absence of systemic risk, the formal model in this paper predicts that optimal regulation may be implemented by capital regulation (similar to that observed in practice, e.g., Solvency II ) and by actuarially fair technical reserve. However, these instruments are not sufficient when insurance companies are exposed to systemic risk: prudential regulation should also add a systemic component to capital requirements that is non-decreasing in the firm’s exposure to systemic risk. Implementing the optimal policy implies separating insurance firms into two categories according to their exposure to systemic risk: those with relatively low exposure should be eligible for bailouts, while those with high exposure should not benefit from public support if a systemic event occurs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle Surrender Risk in the Context of the Quantitative Assessment of Participating Life Insurance Contracts under Solvency II
Received: 18 May 2018 / Revised: 22 June 2018 / Accepted: 22 June 2018 / Published: 27 June 2018
PDF Full-text (1997 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Participating life insurance contracts entitle the policyholder to participate in the company’s annual surplus. Typically, they are also equipped with a surrender option that allows the policyholder to terminate the contract prior to maturity, receiving a predetermined surrender value. The option interacts with [...] Read more.
Participating life insurance contracts entitle the policyholder to participate in the company’s annual surplus. Typically, they are also equipped with a surrender option that allows the policyholder to terminate the contract prior to maturity, receiving a predetermined surrender value. The option interacts with (often cliquet-style) interest guarantees that are a key feature of traditional participating contracts. Surrender options can considerably affect an insurer’s liabilities and bear material risks. This paper addresses the recognition of those risks in the quantitative assessment of a heterogeneous insurance portfolio under Solvency II, taking into account the complex interrelation between minimum interest guarantees, reserving requirements, and profit sharing. The lapse risk module of the Solvency II standard formula requires the identification of portfolio segments that are exposed to a specific change of surrender rates (long-term increase/decrease, one-off increase). We provide a heuristic that identifies homogeneous risk groups in the sense that the respective stress would increase the insurer’s liabilities. Our approach can be used to derive an appropriate segmentation in practical applications. We further analyze implications of the segmentation on the Risk Margin (as part of the Technical Provisions under Solvency II) and discuss consequences of policyholder options on the calculation of Going Concern Reserve and Surplus Funds. To illustrate our findings, we set up a stochastic balance sheet and cash flow projection model for a stylized life insurance company. We conclude that current methods used for practical applications underestimate surrender risk under Solvency II and that the proposed modeling refinements may improve the appropriateness of solvency ratios for participating business. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle A Least-Squares Monte Carlo Framework in Proxy Modeling of Life Insurance Companies
Received: 29 March 2018 / Revised: 5 June 2018 / Accepted: 7 June 2018 / Published: 11 June 2018
PDF Full-text (1086 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
The Solvency II directive asks insurance companies to derive their solvency capital requirement from the full loss distribution over the coming year. While this is in general computationally infeasible in the life insurance business, an application of the Least-Squares Monte Carlo (LSMC) method [...] Read more.
The Solvency II directive asks insurance companies to derive their solvency capital requirement from the full loss distribution over the coming year. While this is in general computationally infeasible in the life insurance business, an application of the Least-Squares Monte Carlo (LSMC) method offers a possibility to overcome this computational challenge. We outline in detail the challenges a life insurer faces, the theoretical basis of the LSMC method and the necessary steps on the way to a reliable proxy modeling in the life insurance business. Further, we illustrate the advantages of the LSMC approach via presenting (slightly disguised) real-world applications. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle The Effect of Non-Proportional Reinsurance: A Revision of Solvency II Standard Formula
Received: 26 March 2018 / Revised: 22 April 2018 / Accepted: 25 April 2018 / Published: 2 May 2018
PDF Full-text (878 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Solvency II Standard Formula provides a methodology to recognise the risk-mitigating impact of excess of loss reinsurance treaties in premium risk modelling. We analyse the proposals of both Quantitative Impact Study 5 and Commission Delegated Regulation highlighting some inconsistencies. This paper tries to [...] Read more.
Solvency II Standard Formula provides a methodology to recognise the risk-mitigating impact of excess of loss reinsurance treaties in premium risk modelling. We analyse the proposals of both Quantitative Impact Study 5 and Commission Delegated Regulation highlighting some inconsistencies. This paper tries to bridge main pitfalls of both versions. To this aim, we propose a revision of non-proportional adjustment factor in order to measure the effect of excess of loss treaties on premium risk volatility. In this way, capital requirement can be easily assessed. As numerical results show, this proposal appears to be a feasible and much more consistent approach to describe the effect of non-proportional reinsurance on premium risk. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle The Cascade Bayesian Approach: Prior Transformation for a Controlled Integration of Internal Data, External Data and Scenarios
Received: 14 March 2018 / Revised: 22 April 2018 / Accepted: 23 April 2018 / Published: 27 April 2018
PDF Full-text (587 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
According to the last proposals of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, banks or insurance companies under the advanced measurement approach (AMA) must use four different sources of information to assess their operational risk capital requirement. The fourth includes ’business environment and internal [...] Read more.
According to the last proposals of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, banks or insurance companies under the advanced measurement approach (AMA) must use four different sources of information to assess their operational risk capital requirement. The fourth includes ’business environment and internal control factors’, i.e., qualitative criteria, whereas the three main quantitative sources available to banks for building the loss distribution are internal loss data, external loss data and scenario analysis. This paper proposes an innovative methodology to bring together these three different sources in the loss distribution approach (LDA) framework through a Bayesian strategy. The integration of the different elements is performed in two different steps to ensure an internal data-driven model is obtained. In the first step, scenarios are used to inform the prior distributions and external data inform the likelihood component of the posterior function. In the second step, the initial posterior function is used as the prior distribution and the internal loss data inform the likelihood component of the second posterior function. This latter posterior function enables the estimation of the parameters of the severity distribution that are selected to represent the operational risk event types. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle Operational Choices for Risk Aggregation in Insurance: PSDization and SCR Sensitivity
Received: 22 February 2018 / Revised: 30 March 2018 / Accepted: 6 April 2018 / Published: 13 April 2018
PDF Full-text (901 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
This work addresses crucial questions about the robustness of the PSDization process for applications in insurance. PSDization refers to the process that forces a matrix to become positive semidefinite. For companies using copulas to aggregate risks in their internal model, PSDization occurs when [...] Read more.
This work addresses crucial questions about the robustness of the PSDization process for applications in insurance. PSDization refers to the process that forces a matrix to become positive semidefinite. For companies using copulas to aggregate risks in their internal model, PSDization occurs when working with correlation matrices to compute the Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR). We examine how classical operational choices concerning the modelling of risk dependence impacts the SCR during PSDization. These operations refer to the permutations of risks (or business lines) in the correlation matrix, the addition of a new risk, and the introduction of confidence weights given to the correlation coefficients. The use of genetic algorithms shows that theoretically neutral transformations of the correlation matrix can surprisingly lead to significant sensitivities of the SCR (up to 6%). This highlights the need for a very strong internal control around the PSDization step. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessArticle On Central Branch/Reinsurance Risk Networks: Exact Results and Heuristics
Received: 27 February 2018 / Revised: 6 April 2018 / Accepted: 8 April 2018 / Published: 12 April 2018
Cited by 1 | PDF Full-text (969 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Modeling the interactions between a reinsurer and several insurers, or between a central management branch (CB) and several subsidiary business branches, or between a coalition and its members, are fascinating problems, which suggest many interesting questions. Beyond two dimensions, one cannot expect exact [...] Read more.
Modeling the interactions between a reinsurer and several insurers, or between a central management branch (CB) and several subsidiary business branches, or between a coalition and its members, are fascinating problems, which suggest many interesting questions. Beyond two dimensions, one cannot expect exact answers. Occasionally, reductions to one dimension or heuristic simplifications yield explicit approximations, which may be useful for getting qualitative insights. In this paper, we study two such problems: the ruin problem for a two-dimensional CB network under a new mathematical model, and the problem of valuation of two-dimensional CB networks by optimal dividends. A common thread between these two problems is that the one dimensional reduction exploits the concept of invariant cones. Perhaps the most important contribution of the paper is the questions it raises; for that reason, we have found it useful to complement the particular examples solved by providing one possible formalization of the concept of a multi-dimensional risk network, which seems to us an appropriate umbrella for the kind of questions raised here. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Capital Requirement Evaluation under Solvency II framework)
Figures

Figure 1

Risks EISSN 2227-9091 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top