Skip Navigation


British Journal of Criminology Advance Access originally published online on September 5, 2006
British Journal of Criminology 2006 46(6):993-1010; doi:10.1093/bjc/azl066
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
46/6/993    most recent
azl066v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ericson, R. V.
Right arrow Articles by Doyle, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The British Journal of Criminology 46:993-1010 (2006)
© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (ISTD). All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The Institutionalization of Deceptive Sales in Life Insurance

Five Sources of Moral Risk

Richard V. Ericson and Aaron Doyle*

* Richard V. Ericson, Professor and Director, Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; richard.ericson{at}utoronto.ca. Aaron Doyle, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada; aaron_doyle{at}carleton.ca. Correspondence can be addressed to either author.

Interview and ethnographic data are used to show how deceptive sales practices are rife and institutionalized in the life insurance industry. The data are analysed using the concept of ‘moral risk’: the paradoxical tendency of the structure and culture of the insurance institution to facilitate and encourage risky behaviour on behalf of the various players in the insurance relationship, in this case behaviour by insurance companies and their agents that puts consumers at risk through deceptive selling. We give empirical evidence of five key sources of moral risk that are part of the enduring structure and culture of life insurance sales. Although moral risk has been pervasive in life insurance sales since the birth of the industry, it articulates with key contemporary social tendencies: the responsibilization of the individual consumer, the erosion of the social safety net, fragmentation, individualism and the attenuation of family ties, the growth of a ‘flexible’ labour force, and the downloading of regulatory responsibility from the state. Deceptive sales practices corrode trust and promote yet more individualism, erasing the potential of insurance as a mechanism of social solidarity.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Theoretical CriminologyHome page
R. V. Ericson
Rules in policing: Five perspectives
Theoretical Criminology, August 1, 2007; 11(3): 367 - 401.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.