Document Type

Article

Publication Date

1-1-2012

Publisher

Georgetown Law

Language

en-US

Abstract

Despite common claims made in policy debates, the theoretical connection between tort reform and medical malpractice insurance premiums is ambiguous. Simple models suggest reforms such as statutory damages caps reduce premiums. More elaborate models that account for changes in physician behavior suggest caps might increase or have no impact on premiums. A number of empirical studies have been conducted to estimate the impacts of caps on premiums, and several qualitative literature reviews have attempted to draw general conclusions from the literature. No review, however, has offered a comprehensive and systematic analysis of the full set of empirical studies. This chapter fills that gap. We provide a first glimpse at the wide methodological variations in the studies that employ regression analysis to estimate the impacts of caps on medical malpractice insurance premiums. We describe 16 empirical studies that report 197 estimates of the impact of caps on premiums. Using a theory-driven framework to develop a set of best practices, we find that little weight can be put on any one study due to broad methodological shortcomings. This chapter highlights the need for better data and additional research on the impact of caps on premiums.

Comments

Written when Prof. Zeiler was a Professor at Georgetown University Law Center. Later published in Research Handbook on the Economics of Torts p. 551-587 (Jennifer Arlen ed., Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing 2013).

Find on SSRN

Included in

Insurance Law Commons

Share

COinS