Insurance strength is to quantify a risk to price it. By doing that, it allows individuals to cover what they can’t expect. But insurance doesn’t cover everything. Sometimes individuals had better not use them.
Insurance limits its scope of coverage
Although they let individuals think they are protected, insurance does not cover everything and requires them to take a part of the risk on their own.
Even if i’m covered, my insurance company imposes a deductible to me and requires that I have done everything to avoid the risk.
In case of accident, the insurance can have negative consequences
Using its own insurance can be more disadvantageous than solving the problem itself. In case of accident, it is sometimes more interesting for me to finance the reparations myself than using my insurance, which can increase its price.
Insurance doesn’t motivate individuals to additional practices, and doesn’t help them to evaluate their best interests.
Insurance doesn’t motivate individuals to add savings to their protection. When an accident occurs, they don’t help them to act in their own interests: favor other ways to protect themsleves rather than risking the double sentence of the harm and the penalty.
What if the insurance help individuals to take action in their own interest?
Rather than imposing how they work, what if the insurances help individuals to get the protection they really need ?
Enquête sur la perception des risques et leur protection
Insurances have a limited and absolute vision of the risks and manners people have to protect themselves. Those preconceived ideas organize insurances’ products and the relationship that they foster with individuals. These lessons are some conclusions from ou study : Enquête sur la perception des risques et leur protection.
However, the way people protect themselves are various and deserves a deep reflection. Do the perception of risks and the practices of protection match the preconceived ideas of insurances?
The field research was conducted in part during summer 2015, and then during fall 2015, throughout 20 in-depth interviews. It was completed with participant observations on some locations where people practice high-risk sport. The panel was constituted of strongly different type of profiles in terms of age, life cycle, revenues and possessions, marital status, living areas and level of exposure to the risk.
THE AUTHOR OF THIS STUDY
GUILLAUME MONTAGU - Anthropology & Strategy
After following a sociology and political anthropology research program at La Sorbonne, Guillaume has offered his social sciences skills to companies. He joined unknowns to lead researches and studies.
WANT TO BE INVOLVED IN A STUDY ?
You think of a topic that matters to you and would like to sponsor or co-realize a study with us ? You would like to be involved into one of our next study, or you just want to solicit us about a topic of your choice
All icons used in visuals come from thenounproject.com. Creative Commons – Attribution (CC BY 3.0) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
Thanks to the authors : Kevin Augustine LO, Mister Pixel, Michael Thompson, Bradley Ashburn, Nicholas Menghini, Nicky Knicky, Aha-Soft, Martin Lebreton, Rohith M S, Jessica Scott, Vineet Kumar Thakur, Thomas Helbig, parkjisun, Yazmin Alanis, Pablo Rozenberg, Rediffusion & Kenneth Von Alt, Arthur Shlain, Caitlin McCormick, layerlv, Creative Stall, Adriano Emerick