Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T20:39:16.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Moral Hazard in a Mutual Health Insurance System: German Knappschaften, 1867–1914

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2011

Timothy W. Guinnane  and
Jochen Streb
Timothy W. Guinnane*
Affiliation:
Philip Golden Bartlett Professor of Economic History, Department of Economics, Yale University, Box 208269, New Haven, CT 06520-8269. E-mail: timothy.guinnane@yale.edu.
Jochen Streb*
Affiliation:
Professor of Economic History, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Schloss, Speisemeistereiflügel, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany. E-mail: jochen.streb@uni-hohenheim.de.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Knappschaft was a mutual association through which German miners insured themselves against accident, illness, and old age. The Knappschaft underlies Bismarck's sickness and accident insurance legislation, and thus Germany's system today. This article focuses on moral hazard, which plagued the Knappschaften in the later nineteenth century. Sick pay made it attractive for miners to feign illness that made them unable to work. We outline the moral hazard problem the Knappschaften faced as well as the mechanisms they devised to control it, and then use econometric models to demonstrate that those mechanisms were at best imperfect.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
The Journal of Economic History , Volume 71 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 70 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © The Economic History Association 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ashton, T. S. “The Relation Between Unemployment and Sickness.” The Economic Journal 26, no. 103 (1916): 396–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banken, Ralf. Die Industrialisierung der Saarregion, 1815–1914. Vol. 2: Take-Off-Phase und Industrialisierung. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2000.Google Scholar
Besley, Timothy J., Coate, Stephen C., and Guinnane, Timothy W.. “Incentives, Information, and Welfare: England's New Poor Law and the Workhouse Test.” In History Matters: Essays on Economic Growth, Technology, and Demographic Change, edited by Guinnane, Timothy W., Sundstrom, William A., and Whatley, Warren C., 245–70. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bluma, Lars, Schulz, Stefan, and Streb, Jochen. “Prinzipal-Agenten-Probleme in der knappschaftlichen Krankenversicherung: Die Bekämfung des “Simulantentums” durch Anreize und Kontrolle. Vierteljahrschrift für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 97, no. 3 (2010): 310–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bound, John, Jaeger, David A., and Baker, Regina M.. “Problems with Instrumental Variables Estimation When the Correlation Between the Instruments and the Endogenous Explanatory Variable is Weak.” JASA 90, no. 430 (1995): 443–50.Google Scholar
Bry, Gerhard. Wages in Germany, 1871–1945. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1960.Google Scholar
Bülow, Wilhelm. Das Knappschaftswesen im Ruhrkohlenbezirk bis zum allgemeinen preußischen Berggesetz vom 24. Juni 1865. Ph.D. Diss., Tübingen, 1905.Google Scholar
Elsholz, Ulrich. Die Entwicklung des sächsischen Knappschaftswesens. Ph.D. Diss., Jena, 1910.Google Scholar
Emery, J. C. Herbert. “Risky Business? Nonactuarial Pricing Practices and the Financial Viability of Fraternal Sickness Insurers.” Explorations in Economic History 33, no. 2 (1996): 195–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, Bentley. “The Decay of Nineteenth-Century Provident Institutions and the Coming of the Old Age Pensions in Great Britain.” Economic History Review 17, no. 3 (1965): 551–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottlieb, Daniel. “Asymmetric Information in Late Nineteenth-Century Cooperative Insurance Societies.” Explorations in Economic History 44, no. 2 (2007): 270–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guinnane, Timothy W. “Cooperatives as Information Machines: German Rural Credit Cooperatives, 1883–1914.” The Journal of Economic History 61, no. 2 (2001): 366–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guinnane, Timothy W., and Streb, Jochen. “Moral Hazard in a Mutual Health-Insurance System: German Knappschaften, 1867–1914.” Ruhr Economic Papers No. 163, SSRN No. 1484753, 2010.Google Scholar
Hennock, E. Peter. The Origin of the Welfare State in England and Germany, 1850–1914: Social Policies Compared. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
Hentschel, Volker. Geschichte der deutschen Sozialpolitik, 1880–1980. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1983.Google Scholar
Imbusch, Heinrich. Das deutsche Knappschaftswesen: eine Darstellung seiner Entwicklung und seines heutigen Standes, unter besonder Berüsichtigung des Knappsrechtes und des Wirkens der Knappschaftsvereine in der Praxis. Köln: Christlicher Gewerkschafts-Verlag, 1910.Google Scholar
Jopp, Tobias A. “Ein risikoreiches Geschäft? Internes und externes Wachstum als risikopolitische Instrumente im preußischen Knappschaftswesen, 1854–1923.” In Berufliches Risiko und Soziale Sicherheit, edited by Bartels, Christoph, 189–224. Bochum: Deutsches Bergbaumuseum, 2010a.Google Scholar
Jopp, Tobias A. “The Welfare State Evolves: German Knappschaften, 1854–1923.” University of Hohenheim FZID Discussion Papers 16, 2010b.Google Scholar
Khoudhour-Castéras, David. “Welfare State and Labor Mobility: The Impact of Bismarck's Social Legislation on German Emigration Before World War I.” The Journal of Economic History 68, no. 1 (2008): 211–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, Jennifer. For All These Rights: Business, Labor, and the Shaping of America's Public-Private Welfare State. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Köhne, August. Die deutschen Knappschaftsvereine, ihre Einrichtung und ihre Bedeutung. Hannover: Helwingsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1915.Google Scholar
Lauf, Ulrich. Die Krankenhäuser der deutschen Knappschaftsvereine im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert. Bochum: Deutsche Rentenversicherung Knappschaft-Bahn-See, 2005.Google Scholar
Lauf, Ulrich. “Die deutschen Knappschaftsvereine (1854–1923). Ein altes Sozialsystem im Rückblick. Der Anschnitt 58 (2006): 264–94.Google Scholar
Menzel, Elmar. Bergbau-Medizin einst und jetzt. Entwicklung des bergmännischen Gesundheitswesens unter Einschluss der Kranken-und Unfallversicherung Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
Murray, John. “Worker Absenteeism Under Voluntary and Compulsory Sickness Insurance: Continental Europe, 1885–1908.” Research in Economic History 23 (2005): 177–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, John. Origins of American Health Insurance: A History of Industrial Sickness Funds. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
Riley, James C. Sick, Not Dead: The Health of British Workingmen During the Mortality Decline. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Schlockow, Isak. Die Gesundheispflege und medizinische Statistik beim Preußischen Bergbau. Heymann, Berlin, 1881.Google Scholar
Simons, Peter. Das deutsche Knappschaftswesen. Mainz: Diemer, 1895.Google Scholar
Tampke, Jürgen. “Bismarcks Sozialgesetzgebung: Ein wirklicher Durchbruch?” In Die Entstehung des Wohlfahrtsstaates in Großbritannien und Deutschland, 1850–1950, edited by Mommsen, Wolfgang J., 79–91. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1982.Google Scholar
Wagner-Braun, Margarete. Zur Bedeutung berufsständischer Krankenkassen innerhalb der privaten Krankenversicherung in Deutschland bis zum Zweiten Weltkrieg. Beiträge zur Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte vol. 95. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2002.Google Scholar
Whiteside, Noel. “Counting the Cost: Sickness and Disability Among Working People in an Era of Industrial Recession, 1920–1939.” Economic History Review 40, no. 2 (1987): 228–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, John F. “Friendly Society Finance.” Economic Journal 2, no. 8 (1892):721–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wirtz, August. Entwicklung und Organisation des Knappschaftswesens im Ruhrkohlenbezirk. Ph.D. Diss., Heidelberg, 1911.Google Scholar