Modeling Period Effects in Multi-Population Mortality Models: Applications to Solvency II

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Zhou ◽  
Yujiao Wang ◽  
Kai Kaufhold ◽  
Johnny Siu-Hang Li ◽  
Ken Seng Tan
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-29
Author(s):  
Jie Wen ◽  
Andrew J.G. Cairns ◽  
Torsten Kleinow

Abstract We compare results for 12 multi-population mortality models fitted to 10 distinct socio-economic groups in England, subdivided using the Index of Multiple Deprivation. Using the Bayes Information Criterion to compare models, we find that a special case of the common age effect (CAE) model fits best in a variety of situations, achieving the best balance between goodness of fit and parsimony. We provide a detailed discussion of key models to highlight which features are important. Group-specific period effects are found to be more important than group-specific age effects, and non-parametric age effects deliver significantly better results than parametric (e.g. linear) age effects. We also find that the addition of cohort effects is beneficial in some cases but not all. The preferred CAE model has the additional benefit of being coherent in the sense of Hyndman et al. ((2013) Demography50(1), 261–283); some of the other models considered are not.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2017 (4) ◽  
pp. 319-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vasil Enchev ◽  
Torsten Kleinow ◽  
Andrew J. G. Cairns

2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (S1) ◽  
pp. 73-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. O. Forfar

ABSTRACTThe mortality data (registered deaths and population size) over the years 1961–2007 for the population of England and Wales and for Scotland were obtained from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and from the Scottish Registrar General. This paper addresses the following questions:(i) Is there statistical evidence for a cohort effect (i.e. a generation effect separate from the period effect) being present in the data?(ii) Do both males and females exhibit similar cohort (generation) effects?(iii) Are period effects (i.e. the improvement in mortality with time) more significant than cohort effects?(iv) How should one allow, in forecasts of population mortality, for age, period and cohort effects?(v) Is it sensible to combine male and female mortality experience to determine the period effect and the cohort effect?(vi) How do the forecasts for the expectation of life at birth, using the Extended-Lee–Carter-Combined (ELCC) model (described in the paper) differ from the (2008 based) Office of National Statistics (ONS) forecasts of the expectation of life at birth?


Risks ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 221
Author(s):  
Geert Zittersteyn ◽  
Jennifer Alonso-García

Recent pension reforms in Europe have implemented a link between retirement age and life expectancy. The accurate forecast of life tables and life expectancy is hence paramount for governmental policy and financial institutions. We developed a multi-population mortality model which includes a cause-specific environment using Archimedean copulae to model dependence between various groups of causes of death. For this, Dutch data on cause-of-death mortality and cause-specific mortality data from 14 comparable European countries were used. We find that the inclusion of a common factor to a cause-specific mortality context increases the robustness of the forecast and we underline that cause-specific mortality forecasts foresee a more pessimistic mortality future than general mortality models. Overall, we find that this non-trivial extension is robust to the copula specification for commonly chosen dependence parameters.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document