When primitive men and women discovered fire, it changed their very existence. Food and shelters could be heated, not to mention providing illumination and some degree of protection from the animal kingdom predators that roamed the planet. Not quite as dramatic except to those of us in the life insurance industry, the employment of actuarial science in the late 17th century provided kindling to the underwriting fire. This included the production of life tables and application of compound interest to the challenge of calculating the present value of the future liability, the very foundation of life insurance premiums.
What does this have to do with gender? In the early days, not very much. It was all an actuary could do to wade through individual birth and death records to calculate premiums based on the still most important risk factor, the age of the life being insured. No distinction between male and female was made and, as a result, unisex pricing was the norm. Around 1880, the rate of male mortality started to rise and astute actuaries the world over eventually began to reflect those differences in the pricing of life insurance rates. (1). The mortality/gender gap is especially pronounced in older lives, where 57% of all those aged 65 are female and by age 85 women make up 67% of the population (2). In Canada, women, on average, live 4 years longer than men, making the actuarial argument that men should pay more for life insurance (3). While Canadian insurance companies take these differences into account when pricing life insurance, it is not always the universal view. Since 2012, the European Union prohibits pricing based on gender for life, health and even auto insurance, raising the age-old question of fairness; should a lower risk group, in this case women, subsidize the higher-risk group, male policyholders (4)? Continue reading “The Gender Risk: What’s the Difference?” →
SHARE the client article from The Link Between:
The Gender Risk: What’s the Difference?