Disaster risk financing: a paradigm shift

Disaster risk financing: a paradigm shift

Clarence Wong, Swiss Re’s Chief Economist Asia, discusses how public-private partnerships can proactively help manage the mounting cost of disaster relief.

The Asia-Pacific region is again badly hit by natural disasters.  In the three months to October 2009, Typhoon Morakot devastated Taiwan and created havoc in coastal China, then two ultra-powerful typhoons battered the Philippines, a massive earthquake rocked western Sumatra in Indonesia, serious floods swept southern India, and an earthquake and tsunami struck Samoa. 

All these natural disasters not only caused widespread damage and placed heavy burdens on public budgets; they also sounded again urgent alarm calls for more sustainable risk financing arrangements – before disasters strike -- to enable the affected regions to recover swiftly. 

Rising impact of natural disasters

Over the last few decades, heightened natural disaster activity has impacted virtually all nations.  According to Swiss Re’s sigma study, “Natural catastrophes and man-made disasters in 2008”, 2008 was one of the worst years for natural and man-made catastrophes creating a total economic loss of USD 269bn and claiming more than 240,000 lives with Asia suffering the most.  As most of these catastrophe losses were not covered by insurance, the gap between economic and insured losses has been widening (see Figure 1).

Emerging economies are particularly vulnerable to disasters due to insufficient urban planning, high population growth and environmental degradation. In addition, risks are accumulating in regions most exposed to natural catastrophes, for example, along coastal regions. The insurance penetration, however, is typically very low.

Securing risk financing before a disaster – not afterwards

Given the huge impact of natural disasters on society and the economy, comprehensive national disaster management policies have grown in importance around the world.

These policies address disaster preparedness and relief, as well as disaster prevention and mitigation. “Ex-post” risk financing, in other words financing risk after the event has occurred (e.g. by issuing debt, raising taxes, relying on international aid) is becoming unsustainable given the magnitude of disasters and the growing risk exposure. This has led to a widening gap between available funds and post-disaster requirements. As a result, proactive risk management and mitigation strategies have become the top priorities in managing natural disasters in order to minimise losses and related funding requirements.

Understanding the overall risk landscape is important. Disasters are classified as either low risk (i.e. “high frequency/low severity”) or high risk (i.e. “low frequency/high severity”). For each category of risk, specific risk management strategies and potential risk transfer/financing solutions are needed. From a government perspective, natural disasters which fall in the high risk category need to be effectively managed. Governments can either transfer risk to traditional insurers and reinsurers or issue catastrophe bonds. They may also purchase derivatives and other financial instruments in order to hedge the risk. Figure 2 provides an overview of different loss financing mechanisms and instruments.

Read more

Swiss Re Property and Casualty

We translate our global expertise and local knowledge into sound risk transfer and risk financing solutions in all lines of business. Our Property & Casualty product offerings encompass traditional P&C...
Read the whole story

Getting China’s metro rail systems...

The booming rail line construction in China is a sign of the country’s progress. But developing and building metropolitan infrastructures also brings risks such as soil conditions and tight budgets. Swiss...
Read the whole story
© 2012 Swiss Re. All Rights Reserved | Swiss Re Share SREN CHF 52.6 | Legal notice | Privacy policy | Main: + 41 43 285 2121