Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2605.27265

Quantifying Social Inflation in Liability Insurance with Advanced Statistical Methods

Abstract

Social inflation, which is the rise in liability claim costs beyond general economic inflation, has become a major concern for insurers and reinsurers, yet it is difficult to quantify because litigation outcomes are heavy-tailed and the mix of cases reaching verdict versus settlement changes over time. Using a large database of US jury verdicts and settlements, we develop case-mix-adjusted social inflation measures through multiple channels that matter to reinsurers: plaintiff win rates (a frequency-type channel), settlement propensity (a frequency-type channel), and verdict/settlement severity. The approach combines rolling-window logistic regression for probabilities and quantile (value-at-risk) regression for severities, with uncertainty quantified via a random-weighted bootstrap. We find statistically significant relative increases in plaintiff win probability of approximately 20%-30% from 2009 to 2024, alongside a statistically significant relative decline in settlement probability of more than 10% over the same period. The dominant channel is verdict severity: Even after controlling for explanatory variables, verdict awards show a sharp rise after 2020, increasing by more than 100% from 2020 to 2024, whereas settlement amounts show limited and often statistically insignificant inflation. Therefore, inflation in total amounts payable to plaintiffs closely tracks verdict severity. Social inflation is more pronounced in corporate-defendant and uninsured-defendant cases and in states without tort caps or third-party litigation funding regulation. In addition, we find that social inflation has impacts not only on "nuclear verdicts" but also, in a similar manner, on moderate losses.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tsz Chai Fung, Lie Ma, Liang Peng, Fang Yang. 2026-05-28. Quantifying Social Inflation in Liability Insurance with Advanced Statistical Methods. https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.27265

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN