Entries tagged with “Economy”.


Natural catastrophes and man-made disasters cost insurers $34 billion in 2014, down 24 percent from $45 billion in 2013, according to just-released Swiss Re sigma preliminary estimates.

Of the $34 billion tab for insurers, some $29 billion was triggered by natural catastrophe events (compared with $37 billion in 2013), while man-made disasters generated the additional $5 billion in insured losses in 2014.

Despite total losses coming in at below annual averages, the United States still accounted for three of the most costly insured catastrophe losses for the year, with two thunderstorm events and one winter storm event causing just shy of $6 billion in insured losses (see chart below).

sigma_prel_cat_estimates_fig1

In mid-May, a spate of strong storms with large hail stones hit many parts of the U.S. over a five-day period resulting in insured losses of $2.9 billion – the highest of the year.

Extreme winter storms at the beginning of 2014 caused insured losses of $1.7 billion, above the average full-year winter storm loss number of $1.1 billion of the previous 10 years, sigma said.

Total economic losses from disaster events in 2014 reached $113 billion worldwide, according to sigma estimates, and around 11,000 people lost their lives in those events.

Ongoing events and revisions to estimates for previous ones may further change the 2014 loss outcomes, sigma noted, as this data includes updates to source data made by 28 November 2014 only.

More on global catastrophe losses from the I.I.I. here.

It’s Election Day and as you head to the polls the insurance issue that remains at the top of mind for most is the future of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA).

In a new paper the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.) says the question of what happens if the federal act is not renewed by Congress is no longer a theoretical one:

Since insurance policies negotiated during 2014 extend beyond the imminent December 31 expiration date of the program, the negative consequences of non-renewal are already being experienced by businesses across America and their insurers.”

The private sector simply does not have the capacity to provide insurance or reinsurance for terrorism risk to the extent currently provided by the federal program, the I.I.I. says. As a result, in the absence of the act, terrorism risk insurance would be less available and less affordable.

Over at WGA InsureBlog, David Bardelli, senior vice president and casualty practice leader for William Gallagher Associates, notes that with Congress not back in session until mid-November, the clock is ticking for lawmakers to come up with a solution before the end of the year.

Bardelli writes:

A lame duck Congressional session could pass an extension, which has been the case with previous versions of the bill. With House Democrats and Republicans at odds over the latest version of the House Committee’s proposal, it looks like the November elections will have the biggest impact on what happens with TRIA.”

Insurers are not alone in their concerns over the future of terrorism risk insurance. Just on Friday, the Real Estate Roundtable reported that while senior commercial real estate executives see a continuing recovery in the markets, they remain concerned about the lack of clear direction in many federal policies, primarily terrorism risk insurance.

Roundtable President and CEO Jeffrey D. DeBoer, said:

Without a long-term reauthorization of TRIA when policymakers return in November, financing for CRE projects will be directly threatened, job creation will suffer as it did after 9-11, and businesses can expect a general slowdown as many financing contracts will be found to be in technical default without terrorism insurance.”

Congress will return November 12 for the “lame duck” session.

Some 25 years after the Loma Prieta earthquake, the San Francisco Bay area faces increased risk of a major quake, two separate studies suggest.

A study published online in the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America says that sections of the San Andreas fault system—the Hayward, Rodgers Creek and Green Valley faults—are nearing or past their average earthquake recurrence intervals.

It says the faults ‘are locked and loaded’ and estimates a 70 percent chance that one of them will rupture within the next 30 years. This would trigger an earthquake of magnitude 6.7 or larger, the study’s authors say.

A second study by catastrophe modeler RMS says the next major quake could be financially devastating to the Bay Area economy in part because of low earthquake insurance penetration.

RMS warns that a worst-case 7.9 magnitude earthquake on the San Andreas fault could cause over $200 billion in commercial and residential property losses, yet only 10 percent of households currently have earthquake insurance.

Dr. Patricia Grossi, earthquake expert at RMS says:

The Bay Area has made significant progress in terms of infrastructure preparedness and retrofitting, but without significant earthquake insurance penetration to facilitate rebuilding, the recovery from a major earthquake will be considerably harder.”

Without insurance, homeowners may walk away after a quake if the residual value of their property is less than the outstanding value of their mortgage, RMS notes. Even those with insurance are likely to struggle to meet high deductibles, potentially leading to significant blight and disrepair in badly damaged neighborhoods.

Despite low earthquake insurance penetration, a magnitude 7.0 earthquake rupturing on the Hayward fault could produce $25 billion in insured loss across residential and commercial lines of business, RMS concludes.

BayAreaEarthquakeRisk

A glance at the economic context shows that since the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, population in the Bay Area has increased 25 percent, while the value of residential property has jumped by 50 percent, reaching $1.2 trillion.

The Bay Area is also the most productive economy in the U.S. with a gross domestic product of $535 billion, ranking 19th in the world compared to national economies, RMS says.

Check out I.I.I. facts and stats on earthquakes.

While low interest rates are likely to continue to present a challenge well into 2015, a stronger economy presents the property/casualty insurance industry’s best opportunity for growth, according to I.I.I. president Dr. Robert Hartwig.

Dr. Hartwig shared his thoughts on the industry’s growth outlook in his Commentary on 2014 First Half Results.

There are two principal drivers of premium growth in the P/C insurance industry he noted: exposure growth and rate activity.

Exposure growth—basically an increase in the number and/or value of insurable interests (such as property and liability risks)—is being fueled primarily by economic growth and development.

Although the nation’s real (inflation-adjusted) GDP in the first quarter of 2014 actually declined at an annual rate of -2.1 percent, economic growth snapped back in the second quarter, as real GDP surged by 4.6 percent.

Dr. Hartwig says:

Growth in key areas of the economy such as new vehicle sales, multi-unit residential construction, and consistent employment and payroll growth are clearly benefitting the P/C insurance industry. For the remainder of 2014 and into 2015, the consensus forecasts call for real GDP growth to hold steady at about 3 percent.”

The other important determinant in industry growth is rate activity. Rates tend to be driven by trends in claims costs, conditions in the reinsurance market, marketing and distribution costs, and investments in technology, among other factors.

Although it’s challenging to foresee the interplay of all of these and macroeconomic factors, Dr. Hartwig says it is certainly possible that overall industry growth in net written premiums could keep pace with overall economic growth in 2014.

In the first half of 2014 the industry’s net written premium growth actually decelerated slightly to 4.0 percent in the first half of 2014, compared to 4.3 percent in the first half of 2013.

But, as Dr. Hartwig concludes:

Premium growth, while still modest, is now experiencing its longest sustained period of gains in a decade.”

Workers compensation is likely to remain the fastest growing major P/C line of insurance in 2014 if economic growth and hiring behave as projected.

A report just released by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) puts a $277 billion price tag on the economic costs of traffic crashes in the United States in 2010, a 20 percent increase over its 2000 data.

The economic costs are equivalent to approximately $897 for every person living in the U.S. and 1.9 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product, the NHTSA says, and based on the 32,999 fatalities, 3.9 million non-fatal injuries, and 24 million damaged vehicles that took place in 2010.

Included in these economic costs are lost productivity, medical costs, legal and court costs, emergency service costs (EMS), insurance administration costs, congestion costs, property damage and workplace losses.

When you add in the $594 billion societal cost of crashes, such as harm from the loss of life and pain and decreased quality of life due to injuries, the total impact of crashes is $877 billion.

The following chart breaks out the economic costs:

It’s interesting to note that the most significant components were property damage and lost market productivity. In dollar terms, property damage losses were responsible for $76.1 billion and lost productivity (both market and household) for $93.1 billion.

The NHTSA explains that for lost productivity, these high costs are a function of the level of disability that has been documented for crashes involving injury and death. For property damage, costs are mainly a function of the very high incidence of minor crashes in which injury does not occur or is negligible.

Another takeaway from the survey is the impact of congestion, which accounts for some $28 billion, or 10 percent of total economic costs. This includes travel delay, added fuel consumption, and pollution impacts caused by congestion at the crash site.

There’s a separate chapter of the NHTSA report devoted to congestion impacts that includes some fascinating data.

For additional data on motor vehicle crashes, check out I.I.I. facts and statistics on highway safety.

Global insurance markets are seeing stronger growth, thanks to the economic upswing in many industrialized countries, according to an annual study by Munich Re.

Munich Re’s Insurance Market Outlook 2014 finds that rate increases in a number of high volume markets are also having a positive effect on premium growth.

At the global level, Munich Re expects real overall growth in primary insurance premiums at 2.8 percent this year and 3.2 percent in 2015, influenced mainly by stronger growth again in life insurance.

[In 2013, global insurance markets saw restrained growth of 2.1 percent in real terms, with primary insurance premiums in the life insurance segment growing by just 1.8 percent, due to a number of regulatory one-off effects.]

While in recent years dynamic growth in emerging countries has served as the decisive growth driver of global premium volumes, especially in property/casualty insurance, Munich Re notes that it is the industrial countries whose contribution to growth is currently increasing.

Many emerging countries are currently experiencing a cooling of their economies, and this is expected to have a dampening effect on premium growth in 2014 and 2015.

In the long-term however, Munich Re expects that emerging countries will continue to become more important for the global insurance markets.

The emerging Asian countries will see the highest increases, with their share of global premium volume expected to rise by 5 percentage points, from 9 percent in 2013 to 14 percent in 2020.

The Chinese market, already the fourth-largest primary insurance market with premium volume of over €210 billion in 2013, will more than double by 2020 to become the third-largest market worldwide, according to Munich Re.

Images of wildfires burning in suburban neighborhoods in Southern California are a reminder of the risk faced by many homeowners.

Nearly 2 million, or 14.5 percent, of the 13.7 million homes in California face severe wildfire risk, according to the most recent FireLine State Risk Report by Verisk Underwriting Solutions.

Some 417,500 of these high-risk homes are located in Los Angeles County, while 239,400 are located in San Diego County.

Check out this snapshot from the Verisk report illustrating California’s wildfire risk:

For the latest information on the wildfires burning in the state go to the CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection) site.

I.I.I. facts and statistics on wildfires are available here.

Good news for insurers. Latest data points to a promising decline in the national problem of metal theft, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB).

In a new report, the NICB notes that in just three years the number of metal theft insurance claims has declined by over 26 percent from 14,676 in 2011 to 10,807 in 2013.

The report reviews metal theft claims from January 1, 2011, through December 31, 2013.

During this period, 41,138 insurance claims for the theft of copper, bronze, brass or aluminum were handled – of which 39,976 (97 percent) were for copper alone.

The NICB notes that when the number of metal theft insurance claims per month and monthly average copper prices are compared, the number of claims filed is found to have a statistically significant correlation with the price of copper.

Tightening controls on the sale of scrap metal have had a positive impact in local communities, the NICB says.

Ohio still ranks first of all states generating 4,144 metal theft claims in 2013, followed by Texas (2,827), California (2,489), Pennsylvania (2,345) and Georgia (2,067).

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ-PA (1,725 claims) was the leading statistical area generating the most metal theft claims.

More on the link between copper prices and incidents of metal theft in this NICB video.

The second earthquake to strike the Los Angeles area on March 28 is a wake-up call and reminder of the risk to commercial and residential properties in Southern California, according to catastrophe modeling firm EQECAT.

(The M5.1 quake located 1 mile south of La Habre follows the M4.4 earthquake near Beverley Hills (30 miles to the northwest) on March 17.)

In its report on the latest quake, EQECAT notes that most homeowners do not carry earthquake insurance (only about 12 percent of Californians have earthquake coverage, according to I.I.I. stats), and those that do typically carry deductibles ranging from 10 percent to 15 percent of the replacement value of the home, and commercial insurance often carries large deductibles and strict limits on insurance coverage.

The remainder of the risk which is not insured is retained by property owners and frequently, their lenders. EQECAT reports:

CoreLogic regional studies have noted that a major earthquake in the Los Angeles Basin could easily produce damages to residential and commercial property exceeding $200 billion (Source: the EQECAT Insured Loss Database, 2013). The general lack of insurance coverage and high deductibles have led to concerns over the likelihood of widespread residential mortgage defaults arising from a large basin earthquake.”

This raises an important point.

Concerns have been raised before (here) about how the lack of mandatory earthquake insurance in California would result in high levels of mortgage defaults should a major earthquake occur, with widespread economic implications.

The post-quake scenario envisioned is one in which homeowners walk away from their damaged homes without repairing them, leaving many homes in foreclosure and forcing banks to bear the brunt of the loss in capital.

The potential knock-on effect for insurers and reinsurers? The loss of home ownership could severely diminish incoming capital on homeowner insurance policies.

According to an Aon Benfield report, the 1994 Northridge earthquake cost the mortgage industry up to $400 million in mortgage defaults due to foreclosure expenses, property repair costs, lost interest income, write-downs of existing loan balances and other administrative costs.

Check out an informative I.I.I. background paper on earthquake risk and insurance issues here.

Swiss Re’s final tally of 2013 global cat losses highlights the growing risk protection gap between economic losses and insured losses.

Total economic losses from natural catastrophes and man-made disasters amounted to $140 billion in 2013, of which almost one third – around $45 billion – were insured.

This means that in 2013 the global protection gap (the level of uninsured losses) was $95 billion.

Swiss Re notes:

Economic development, population growth, urbanization and a higher concentration of assets in exposed areas are increasing the economic cost of natural disasters. In addition, climate change is expected to increase weather-related losses in the future. All of the above, if not accompanied by a commensurate increase in insurance penetration, results in a widening protection gap.”

That’s not to say that there hasn’t been any progress over the years in the area of risk prevention and mitigation measures.

Swiss Re makes the point that a very effective pre-designed evacuation drive saved thousands of lives when Cyclone Phailin made landfall in Odisha, India in October 2013, with winds up to 260km per hour.

However, the cyclone destroyed around 100,000 homes and more than 1.3 million hectares of cropland.

Kurt Karl, chief economist at Swiss Re, says:

The total economic loss of Cyclone Phailin is estimated to be $4.5 billion, with just a tiny portion covered by insurance. The insurance industry can play a much larger role in helping societies deal with the fallout of disaster events, such as this and Typhoon Haiyan.”

Meanwhile, a post at Artemis blog suggests that sustaining local markets is the key to increasing insurance penetration and ultimately narrowing the gap between economic and insured losses:

In order to narrow this gap reinsurers and insurers need to work together with development organisations and the capital markets to create risk transfer facilities that truly meet the goal of growing insurance penetration. Sustaining local markets is key here. Initiatives which seek to create new capacity for a single, often reinsurer, backer just don’t seem to be having the desired effect so far and at the moment seem less likely to be sustainable over the longer-term.”

Here’s the Swiss Re chart showing the difference between total losses and insured losses from 1970 to 2013, highlighting the widening protection gap over the last 40 years:

Check out our prior post on the widening gap between economic and insured cat losses here.