14-1190b-innovation-managing-risk-evidence
14-1190b-innovation-managing-risk-evidence
14-1190b-innovation-managing-risk-evidence
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
124<br />
Convention on Climate Change Conference of Parties<br />
in Paris in December. In this context, there is a growing<br />
recognition that the insurance industry’s experience may<br />
provide essential ingredients for dealing with the overall<br />
challenges of natural disaster and climate <strong>risk</strong>, and also<br />
shed light on how we confront other <strong>risk</strong>s of resilience and<br />
sustainable growth.<br />
Under the auspices of the UN Secretary General’s Office,<br />
a consortium including scientists, regulators, human rights<br />
experts, credit rating agencies and financial institutions have<br />
propelled an initiative that will integrate natural disaster <strong>risk</strong><br />
and resilience into the financial system. What was once an<br />
existential <strong>risk</strong> to the insurance sector has now become a<br />
material <strong>risk</strong> across the wider economy, and should now be<br />
appropriately encoded into decision making. The outcome<br />
will influence how we build and operate our cities, arrange<br />
our companies and protect our populations. In the coming<br />
decades, millions of lives and livelihoods and billions of<br />
dollars of assets are at stake.<br />
The initiative proposes that securities (including listed<br />
equities and bonds) and bank debt (including mortgage<br />
portfolios) should be exposed to the following stress tests<br />
to assess their exposure to natural disaster <strong>risk</strong>:<br />
• 1-in-100 year maximum probable annual loss to natural<br />
disaster <strong>risk</strong> (as a survivability/solvency test).<br />
• 1-in-20 year maximum probable annual loss to natural<br />
disaster <strong>risk</strong> (as an operational <strong>risk</strong> / profits test).<br />
• The Annual Average Loss (AAL) to natural disaster <strong>risk</strong>.<br />
The application of these metrics by insurance companies<br />
has been instrumental in the effective transformation of the<br />
industry’s performance. In essence, <strong>risk</strong> discounts the value<br />
of assets and resilience increases the value of assets in the<br />
eyes of buyers and investors.<br />
There is a growing recognition that many of the systemic<br />
changes that are necessary to confront our major challenges<br />
cannot be progressed until the costs of ‘business as usual’<br />
are accounted for proportionately. Current levels of natural<br />
disaster <strong>risk</strong> seem to be a good place to start. Once<br />
properly informed, the invisible hand of the market has the<br />
power to transform urban landscapes, corporate operations<br />
and public policy to underpin resilience and sustainable<br />
growth.<br />
This all rests on improvements in science that have<br />
enabled natural hazards to be understood as foreseeable,<br />
quantifiable and (in non-seismic <strong>risk</strong>s) often forecasted<br />
events. But this scientific knowledge must be transformed<br />
by financial and legal mechanisms to have optimum<br />
impact on systemic <strong>risk</strong>-management and the protection<br />
of populations. This requires a common language and<br />
modelling framework to enable the communication and<br />
interoperability needed to manage <strong>risk</strong>.<br />
This recent statement by the UN Office of the High<br />
Commissioner for Human Rights illustrates how the<br />
language of science, engineering and <strong>risk</strong> management is<br />
now informing the development and operation of social<br />
protections against excess losses:<br />
“All states have positive human rights obligations to<br />
protect human rights. Natural hazards are not disasters, in<br />
and of themselves. They become disasters depending on the<br />
elements of exposure, vulnerability and resilience, all factors<br />
that can be addressed by human (including state) action.<br />
A failure (by governments and others) to take reasonable<br />
preventive action to reduce exposure and vulnerability<br />
and to enhance resilience, as well as to provide effective<br />
mitigation, is therefore a human rights question.”<br />
THE INSURANCE MARKET’S<br />
PERSPECTIVE<br />
Trevor Maynard (Head of Exposure Management and<br />
Reinsurance, Lloyd’s of London)<br />
Lloyd’s of London is a specialist insurance and<br />
reinsurance marketplace consisting of multiple<br />
competing entities (known as syndicates) with a<br />
mutualized central fund at its heart. To ensure that the<br />
fund is as safe as possible, the Corporation of Lloyd’s sets<br />
capital requirements for these syndicates and has a suite of<br />
minimum standards covering every aspect of doing business,<br />
from claims management to catastrophe modelling. As such,<br />
the Corporation regulates the Lloyd’s market with a small<br />
‘r’; the true financial regulator is the Prudential Regulation<br />
Authority, as it is for all other insurers in the United<br />
Kingdom.<br />
Natural disasters are an important issue for Lloyd’s; it<br />
actively seeks to take catastrophe <strong>risk</strong>s from businesses, and<br />
also other insurers (called reinsurance). When disasters<br />
strike, the Lloyd’s market will often pay a significant<br />
proportion of the insurance claims and so the <strong>risk</strong>s need to<br />
be well understood and managed. This short case study will<br />
consider the management of natural disasters before, during,<br />
after and long after they occur.<br />
Before the disaster, the Lloyd’s market must estimate<br />
how much <strong>risk</strong> it has taken onto its balance sheet in order<br />
to ensure that premium rates and additional capital are<br />
sufficient to pay the claims that might arise. Policyholder<br />
security is paramount and we seek to hold assets well<br />
in excess of regulatory minima. However, no insurer’s<br />
resources are infinite and some events could exhaust our<br />
funds. There is a trade off, though: the more funds that<br />
are held, the more expensive the insurance becomes,<br />
because shareholders need rewarding for the capital they<br />
make available to support the business. This is the first<br />
key regulatory decision that must be made in the face of<br />
uncertainty: what level of confidence should policyholders<br />
have a right to expect?<br />
The Lloyd’s approach largely follows the current<br />
regulatory approach in the United Kingdom. In simple terms,<br />
we estimate the size of claims that could only be exceeded<br />
with 0.5% probability over the coming year, and then deduct