Journal of Korea Trade

한국무역학회 (Korea Trade Research Association)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Status Quo Bias in Ocean Marine Insurance and Implications for Korean Trade

  • Jung, Hongjoo (Business School, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Lim, Soyoung (Department of Foreign Trade, Sungkyunkwan University)
  • 투고 : 2021.04.13
  • 심사 : 2021.08.10
  • 발행 : 2021.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose - This research uses ocean marine insurance (OMI) statistics, international emails, focus-group interviews, and surveys to fill the gap between the theory of behavioral insurance, particularly status quo bias (SQB), and the practice of OMI in Korea. The contractual forms of OMI, the oldest and most globalized form of commercial insurance, were developed in the UK as the Institute Cargo Clauses in 1906 and revised in 1963, 1982, and 2009. SQB has been academically explored, mostly in health insurance and the financial services sector, but never in OMI. Thanks to the availability of OMI statistics in Korea, we can conduct SQB research here for the first time in this field. Design/methodology - We show the existence of SQB in the OMI of Korea through Korean statistics between 2009 and 2018, email correspondence with experts in the UK, Germany, and Japan, focus-group interviews with Korean OMI underwriters, an in-depth interview with one underwriter, and a survey of 15 OMI insureds (company representatives). Findings - We find that Korean foreign traders rely on the old-type OMI contracts developed in 1963, whereas other industrialized countries use the newest type of OMI contract developed in 2009. With a simple loss ratio analysis during 2009-2018, we show that the behavior of insurers has little to do with rational profit maximization and is instead driven by irrational bias, as they forgo the more profitable contracts provided by the new clauses by keeping the old clauses. The consistent addiction to old types of contracts in the OMI market suggests strong SQB among Korean exporters, importers, bankers, or insurers, which we confirmed in our interviews and survey. Originality/value - This research has significant originality and academic value because it reports new findings with crucial implications for the development of efficient trade practices and policy. First, this research is based on actual statistics that have not been used in previous Korean research on OMI. Second, this research shows that all-risk OMI policies provide more value to insureds, in terms of coverage given premium, than partial coverage policies, which differs from arguments previously made in Korea. Third, this research reveals strong SQB in Korea, where foreign trade plays a pivotal role in economic growth. That bias could be attributable to uninformed traders, informed but idle insurers, or conservative bankers. Fourth, to further develop foreign trade, policy initiatives are needed to review the current practices of OMI contracts and move forward with the new contract forms. All of these findings and arguments are both new and important.

키워드

과제정보

The authors appreciate KIDI(Korean Insurance Development Institute) for providing ocean marine insurance data.

참고문헌

  1. Barnes, J. G. and M. Ronald (1983), "Segmenting Industrial Markets by Buyer Sophistication", European Journal of Marketing, 17, 16-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004820
  2. A Fendulis, C. C., A. D. Sinaiko and R. G. Frank (2015), "Dominated Choices and Medicare Advantage Enrollment", Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 119, 72-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2015.07.009
  3. Bae, Soon-Young (2019), Cases and Implications of Consumer Policy Application of Behavioral Economics - Based on the discussion at the OECD Consumer Policy Committee, Consumer Policy Trends in Korea 100
  4. Becker, K. and P. Zweifel (2008), "Age and Choice in Health Insurance", The Patient : PatientCentered Outcomes Research, 1(1), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.2165/01312067-200801010-00006
  5. Brown, A. L. and J. H. Kagel (2009), "Behavior in a Simplified Stock Market : The Status Quo Bias, the Disposition Effect and the Ostrich Effect", Annals of Finance, 5(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10436-007-0092-0
  6. Byun, Hye-Won (2018), Financial Consumer Protection Plan based on Behavioral Economics, Discussion on financial consumer protection policy directions.
  7. Campana, P. (2016), "When Rationality Fails: Making Sense of the 'Slippery Slope' to Corporate Fraud", Theoretical Criminology, 20(3), 322-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480615612147
  8. Choi, Chang-Yeoul, Ung-Sup Kim and Ki-Hyung Bae (2010), "A Comparative Analysis with Propriety of Covered Risks on ICC", Journal of International and Insurance, 11(3), 59-89.
  9. Frank, R. G. and K. Lamiraud (2009), "Choice, Price Competition and Complexity in Markets for Health Insurance", Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 71(2), 550-562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2009.04.005
  10. Freiburg, M. and D. Grichnik (2013), "Institutional Reinvestments in Private Equity Funds as a Double-Edged Sword: The Role of the Status Quo Bias", Journal of Behavioral Finance, 14(2), 134-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2013.791295
  11. Go, Hyung-Seok (2017, February 20), "Definition of the Concept of Financial Consumers", Korean Academy of Financial Consumers Winter Conference : Financial 4.0 Era and Financial Consumer Protection, Seoul, Korea.
  12. Han, Chang-Hee (2020), "A study on the legal issues regarding the enforcement of the English Insurance Act 2015 in marine insurance", Kookmin Law Review, 32(3), 583-652. https://doi.org/10.17251/legal.2020.32.3.583
  13. Han, Sang-Hyun (2015), "A Study on the Interpretations and Applications of the Insolvency Exclusion Clause (4.6) under the Institute Cargo Clause (ICC) 2009", Journal of International Trade & Commerce, 9(7), 97-119. https://doi.org/10.16980/jitc.11.5.201510.649
  14. Heaton, J. B. (2019), "Managerial Optimism: New Observations on the Unifying Theory," European Financial Management, 25(5), 1150-1167. https://doi.org/10.1111/eufm.12218
  15. IUMI(2019). STATS - An Analysis of the Global Marine Insurance Market 2019.
  16. IUMI(2019). Global Marine Insurance Report 2019.
  17. IUMI(2020). EYE. Issue 28, March 2020.
  18. Jeong, Boon-Do and Bong-Ju Yun (2013), " A Study on Selection Criteria of Insurance under Cover Condition of Marine Cargo Insurance", Korea Trade Review, 38(3), 83-101.
  19. Ji, Sang-Gyu (2017), "The Study on English law and practice clauses and insurer's duty to explain standardized contracts in the marine cargo insurance contrac", Seoul Law Review, 25(2), 365-396. https://doi.org/10.15821/slr.2017.25.2.010
  20. Karl, F. M., R. Holle, L. Schwettmann, A. Peters and M. Laxy (2019), "Status Quo Bias and Health Behavior : Findings from a Cross-Sectional Study", European Journal of Public Health, 29(5), 992-997. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckz017
  21. Kempf, A. and S. Ruenzi (2006), "Status Quo Bias and the Number of Alternatives : An Empirical Illustration from the Mutual Fund Industry", The Journal of Behavioral Finance, 7(4), 204-213. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427579jpfm0704_3
  22. Koo, Jong-Soon (2014), "Some Problems on Expense Loss in Marine Cargo Insurance", Journal of International and Insurance, 15(1), 85-107. https://doi.org/10.22875/jiti.2020.21.6.001
  23. Koo, Jong-Soon (2017), "One Thought for Marine Cargo Clauses - Institute Container Cargo Clauses (tentative named)", Journal of International and Insurance, 18(1), 23-54. https://doi.org/10.22875/jiti.2017.18.1.002
  24. Krieger, M. and S. Felder (2013), "Can Decision Biases Improve Insurance Outcomes? An Experiment on Status Quo Bias in Health Insurance Choice", International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10(6), 2560-2577. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph10062560
  25. Kunreuther, H. C., M. V. Pauly and S. McMorrow. (2013), Insurance and Behavioral Economics : Improving Decisions in the Most Misunderstood Industry, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  26. La, Kong-Woo (2005), "A Empirical Study on the Primary Factor of Choice in Marine cargo insurance conditions of the Korean Trade Firms", Korea trade review, 30(1), 147-167.
  27. La, Kong-Woo (2013), "A Study on the Choice of Reasonable Insurance Conditions through Simulation for Covering Marine Cargo Insurance", Korea trade review, 38(2), 417-437.
  28. La, Kong-Woo, Gil-Jong Hong and Jae-Sung Hong (2014), "A Study on the Development Plan of insurance conditions and System through Analysis Marine Cargo Insurance Policy", The Journal of Korea Research Society for Customs, 15(4), 301-319.
  29. Langevoort, D. C.(1997), "Organized Illusions: Behavioral Theory of Why Corporations Mislead Stock Market Investors (and cause other social harms)," University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 146(1), 101-172. https://doi.org/10.2307/3312706
  30. Lee, Bong-Sang (2008), An empirical study on cover to marine insurance conditions of the Korean export-import companies(Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation), Daejeon : Chungnam University.
  31. Lee, Han-Beul (2015), A study on the English law and practice clause under marine insurance contracts(Unpublished Master Dissertation), Seoul : Seoul National University.
  32. Lee, Jae-Bok (2003), "Non-payment of insurance premiums and liability of the insurer under the marine insurance contract", Insurance Development Research, 14(1), 35-65.
  33. Lee, Jae-Bok (2008), "Introduction of International Ship Insurance Terms and Conditions and Consideration on Main Features", Insurance Development Research, 19(1), 73-110.
  34. Leukert-Becker, K. and P. Zweifel (2014), "Preferences for Health Insurance in Germany and the Netherlands- A Tale of Two Countries", Health Economics Review, 4(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/2191-1991-4-1
  35. Lindley, R. H. (2009), Institute Cargo Clauses 2009 - A Comparison of the 1982 and 2009 Clauses with Additional Commentary.
  36. List, J. A. and M. S. Haigh (2005), "A simple test of expected utility theory using professional traders", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(3), 945-948. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0408022101
  37. Mankiw, N. G. (2020), Principles of Economics, Boston, MA : Cengage Learning.
  38. Mossin, J. (1968), "Aspects of Rational Insurance Purchasing", Journal of Political Economy, 76(4), 553-568. https://doi.org/10.1086/259427
  39. Murwirapachena, G. and J. Dikgang (2018), An Empirical Examination of Reducing Status Quo Bias in Heterogeneous Populations : Evidence from the South African Water Sector(No.91549), Munich: MPRA Paper, 1-38.
  40. Nakaide, S. (2018), Ocean Marine Insurance, Yoobigak Press(in Japanese)
  41. Oh, Ji-Yang (2010), A Study on the Institute Cargo Clause of the Marine Cargo Insurance(Unpublished Master Dissertation), Busan: Dongmyung University.
  42. Park, Young-Jung (2016), A Study on the Current Status of Marine Insurance Laws and Practices in Major Overseas Countries, National Assembly Legislative Research Office Policy Research Service Report
  43. Richter, A., J. Schiller and H. Schlesinger (2014), "Behavioral Insurance ; Theory and Experiments", Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 48(2), 85-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-014-9188-x
  44. Samuelson, W. and R. Zeckhauser (1988), "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making", Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1(1), 7-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00055564
  45. Shapira, Z. and I. Venezia (2008), "On the preference for full-coverage policies: Why do people buy too much insurance?", Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(5), 747-761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2007.07.007
  46. Sinaiko, A. D., C. C. Afendulis and R. G. Frank (2013), "Enrollment in Medicare Advantage Plans in Miami-Dade County: Evidence of Status Quo Bias?", The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision and Financing, 50(3), 202-215. https://doi.org/10.1177/0046958013516586
  47. Strombom, B. A., T. C. Buchmueller and P. J. Feldstein (2002), "Switching Costs, Price Sensitivity and Health Plan Choice", Journal of Health Economics, 21(1), 89-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-6296(01)00124-2
  48. Sung, Seung-Je (2010), Research on legal system improvement for financial consumer protection, Korea Legislative Research Institute Analysis of Current Issues 2010-10.
  49. Thaler, R. H. and Cass R. Sunstein (2008), Nudges, New Haven, CT : Yale University Press.
  50. Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1991), "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice : A Reference-Dependent Model", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 1039-1061. https://doi.org/10.2307/2937956
  51. Yoon, Min-Seop (2020), Major Contents and Implications of the Financial Consumer Protection Act, Consumer Policy Trends in Korea 101.
  52. Lloyd's Cargo Claims and Recoveries Module 3
  53. KITA(n.d.), International Trade, Available from https://www.kita.net/cmmrcInfo/cmmrcNews/cmmrcNews/cmmrcNewsDetail.do?pageIndex=1&nIndex=56175&sSiteid=1
  54. Practical Law(n.d.), UK Insurance Law, Available from https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/6-615-6445?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&b