Skip to main content
The Actuary: The magazine of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries - return to the homepage Logo of The Actuary website
  • Search
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on Facebook
  • Visit The Actuary Magazine on LinkedIn
  • Visit @TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Visit the website of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries Logo of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries

Main navigation

  • News
  • Features
    • General Features
    • Interviews
    • Students
    • Opinion
  • Topics
  • Knowledge
    • Business Skills
    • Careers
    • Events
    • Predictions by The Actuary
    • Whitepapers
    • Moody's - Climate Risk Insurers series
    • Webinars
    • Podcasts
  • Jobs
  • IFoA
    • CEO Comment
    • IFoA News
    • People & Social News
    • President Comment
  • Archive
Quick links:
  • Home
  • The Actuary Issues
  • December 2021
General Features

Game over for game theory and vaccinations

Open-access content Wednesday 1st December 2021
Authors
Ronald Meester

Game theory is no basis for decision-making when it comes to normative issues such as vaccination, says Ronald Meester

Game over for game theory and vaccinations

Servaas Houben published an article in the September issue of The Actuary (bit.ly/Act_VaxDilem) in which he applied game theory to the COVID-19 problem.

His conclusion was as follows: “This shows that current policies for providing positive incentives (such as easier overseas travel and access to certain events) for vaccinated individuals will result in a better outcome for society as a whole.” His conclusion was based on an analogue of the classical prisoner’s dilemma (Table 1) in which, say, (0, 10) means that Prisoner A gets 0 years in prison, and Prisoner B gets 10 years.

For each prisoner it is best to confess because, regardless of the decision of the other prisoner, this leads to fewer years in prison. However, while individually this is correct, it leads to a situation in which both prisoners get nine years of punishment, while (1, 1) would be optimal. This shows that individual optimality may lead to global sub-optimality.

Houben presents the COVID-19 vaccination situation as a ‘game’ between an individual and society (Table 2).

The numbers are negative, to stress that they are seen as punishments. Independent of society’s decision, the individual is better off not taking the vaccine. Of course, Houben constructed it this way by classifying an individual vaccination as a punishment, due to its possible side effects. Society’s choice is independent of the individual, so this game ends up in (0, -1).

Since Houben believes vaccination is a good thing, he claims that if vaccinations are rewarded by +2 on an individual basis, the individual will take the vaccine and we will end up in a ‘better’ situation. This can be accomplished, he says, by rewarding vaccination with “easier travelling” and “access to events”. This is the basis for the claim I quoted above.

Not playing along

Can game theory be used for purposes such as this? The answer is no. First of all, in the original prisoner’s dilemma, one defines ‘better’ in utilitarian sense: (1, 1) is better than (0, 10) since 1 + 1 is smaller than 0 + 10. However, in the (0, 10) outcome, Prisoner A is better off than they would be in the (1, 1) situation. In utilitarian ethics, torture is allowed if the pleasure of the executioner and/or others is greater than the victim’s pain. I am not sure whether we should embrace such a system – and this is probably enough to dismiss a game-theoretical approach to normative questions.

web_p35_Game-over-Table-1-and-2.jpg

Secondly, to apply game theory to normative questions, we need to define from the outset what is considered ‘good’ and ‘bad’. Houben had decided in advance what he considered good and bad, hence the numbers in Table 2. To then claim that game theory can help to reach a better outcome for society does not make any sense. The only thing one can conclude is that the game can help reach a state which the author of the table deems better.

In short, a game-theoretical approach is not helpful for normative issues such as the COVID-19 vaccination dilemma. The only thing it provides is an unwarranted scientific touch to a personal opinion.

I have no objection against a personal opinion, but I do object against the suggestion that game theory, let alone science, supports it.

Ronald Meester is a professor of probability theory

ACT Dec21_Full LR.jpg
This article appeared in our December 2021 issue of The Actuary .
Click here to view this issue

You may also be interested in...

Rising to the COP26 challenge

Rising to the COP26 challenge

The COP26 climate summit achieved more than some expected, but less than was required. Chris Seekings reports on the challenges and opportunities for the actuarial profession
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
Under the microscope: Financial regulation in small states

Under the microscope: Financial regulation in small states

Servaas Houben and Ronald Ketellapper explore the challenges of financial supervision in small countries, looking in particular at Curaçao
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
Rated 0: Getting ready for Ogden changes

Rated 0: Getting ready for Ogden changes

Mohammad Khan, Francisco Sebastian and Andrew Corner share the Ogden Discount Rate Working Party’s findings on a potential new rate, and whether the insurance sector is prepared for one
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
Considering the concept of exclusion-free insurance

Considering the concept of exclusion-free insurance

Richard Hartigan discusses the possibility of an insurance policy without exclusions
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
Lessons learnt from long-term care insurance in Israel

Lessons learnt from long-term care insurance in Israel

Amiad Ben-Meir and David Zaray-Mizrahi set out the successes and failures of long-term care insurance in Israel, and the lessons learnt by the country’s insurance sector along the way
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
Unfamiliar territory for artifical intelligence-related risk

Unfamiliar territory for artificial intelligence-related risk

Artificial intelligence-related risk differs from traditional model risk, explain Andrew Morgan, Valerie du Preez and Natasha Naidoo –how can we get to grips with it?
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content

Latest from Risk & ERM

KV

Liability-driven investments: new landscape

What now for liability-driven investments, after last year’s crash in the market? Pensions experts Rakesh Girdharlal and Moiz Khan say it should lead to a more balanced approach
Wednesday 1st February 2023
Open-access content
cj

Natural capital investing

Chris Howells and Andrew Dreaneen discuss how today’s investments in natural capital profit portfolios as well as the planet and humanity
Wednesday 1st February 2023
Open-access content
bl

'Takaful' models of Islamic insurance

Ethical, varied and a growing market – ‘takaful’ Islamic insurance is worth knowing about, wherever you’re from and whatever your beliefs, says Ali Asghar Bhuriwala
Wednesday 1st February 2023
Open-access content

Latest from General Features

yguk

Is anybody out there?

There’s no point speaking if no one hears you. Effective communication starts with silence – this is the understated art of listening, says Tan Suee Chieh
Thursday 2nd March 2023
Open-access content
ers

By halves

Reducing the pensions gap between men and women is a work in progress – and there’s still a long way to go, with women retiring on 50% less than men, says Alexandra Miles
Thursday 2nd March 2023
Open-access content
web_Question-mark-lightbulbs_credit_iStock-1348235111.png

Figuring it out

Psychologist Wendy Johnson recalls how qualifying as an actuary and running her own consultancy in the US allowed her to overcome shyness and gave her essential skills for life
Wednesday 1st March 2023
Open-access content

Latest from December 2021

Puzzles-iStock-1146577830.jpg

Puzzles December 2021

The November puzzles and the solutions are viewable in PDF format only.
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
People and society news: December

People and society news: December

Mr Piyush Majmudar (pictured, on left, with Tan Suee Chieh) passed away on 4 November 2021, just short of 90 years old. He qualified as a Fellow of the Institute of Actuaries in 1968 , becoming part of the early generation of actuaries in India.
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
Best kept secrets

Best kept secrets

Adeetya Tantia reflects on increasing concern around data privacy, and whether it may halt the predicted personalisation of insurance pricing
Wednesday 1st December 2021
Open-access content
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linked in
  • Mail
  • Print

Latest Jobs

Senior Pricing Associate

Scotland / England, London
Up to £60000 per annum
Reference
149081

Outside IR35 - Reserving Contract - 6-8 months

London (Central)
Daily rate contract - outside IR35
Reference
149079

Actuarial Analyst - Longevity Reinsurance

England, London
Up to £55000 per annum
Reference
149080
See all jobs »
 
 
 
 

Sign up to our newsletter

News, jobs and updates

Sign up

Subscribe to The Actuary

Receive the print edition straight to your door

Subscribe
Spread-iPad-slantB-june.png

Topics

  • Data Science
  • Investment
  • Risk & ERM
  • Pensions
  • Environment
  • Soft skills
  • General Insurance
  • Regulation Standards
  • Health care
  • Technology
  • Reinsurance
  • Global
  • Life insurance
​
FOLLOW US
The Actuary on LinkedIn
@TheActuaryMag on Twitter
Facebook: The Actuary Magazine
CONTACT US
The Actuary
Tel: (+44) 020 7880 6200
​

IFoA

About IFoA
Become an actuary
IFoA Events
About membership

Information

Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Cookie Policy
Think Green

Get in touch

Contact us
Advertise with us
Subscribe to The Actuary Magazine
Contribute

The Actuary Jobs

Actuarial job search
Pensions jobs
General insurance jobs
Solvency II jobs

© 2023 The Actuary. The Actuary is published on behalf of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries by Redactive Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any part is not allowed without written permission.

Redactive Media Group Ltd, 71-75 Shelton Street, London WC2H 9JQ