Abstract
AbstractI analyze a model of monopoly insurance contracting where the consumer has access to endogenous, costly evidence of his risk type. I characterize when the consumer is worse off if the insurer is allowed to condition contracts on evidence and when the ability to contract on evidence leads to a Pareto improvement. I compare the results to an analogous setting with perfect competition: Under perfect competition, when evidence acquisition costs are low, the ability to contract on evidence is always Pareto improving. For intermediate costs, I uncover a new source of unraveling.
Full Text 
Sign-in/Register to access full text options
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Paper version not known
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
