The individual or the institution?: ethics and behavioural responses to social insurance
2007 (English)In: Journal of Applied Philosophy, ISSN 0264-3758, E-ISSN 1468-5930, Vol. 24, no 3, 316-328 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Individuals tend to change their behaviour as a response to insurance. Such behavioural responses to insurance are commonly seen as ethically and morally problematic.This is especially true of effects on behaviour from social insurance. These effects have beenseen as an ethical problem, associated with irresponsibility, fraud and an immoral character.This article discusses the relevance of four different types of reasons for claims that behaviouralresponses to social insurance are immoral. These reasons are (1) independent reasons (2) contractrelated reasons (3) reasons related to fraud and (4) reasons related to justice. I arguethat reasons related to justice are most relevant, but that this type of reason does not render theindividual morally blameworthy. Hence, insofar as behavioural responses to social insurance are an ethical problem it is a problem that concerns the institution, i.e. what incentives socialinsurance exhibits, rather than the individual, i.e. the morality of the individual responding toit. Insofar as behavioural responses to social insurance are an ethical problem it is a problemfor political philosophy rather than individual ethics.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2007. Vol. 24, no 3, 316-328 p.
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-6779DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5930.2007.00373.xOAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-6779DiVA: diva2:11585
Uppdaterad från accepted till published: 20101104.
QC 201011042007-02-152007-02-152015-01-21Bibliographically approved