Tag Archives: Swiss Re

Swiss Re forecasts growth in insurance markets

This in from Swiss Re Institute’s Global Insurance Review 2017 and Outlook 2018/2019 report:

The cyclical upswing in the global economy is set to continue in 2018 and 2019, supporting insurance premium volume growth.

Global non-life premiums are forecast to grow by at least 3 percent annually in real terms in the next two years and life premiums by 4 percent.

Emerging markets, particularly in Asia, will remain the driver of global non-life and life premium growth, according to Swiss Re.

When a fire becomes a liability accumulation event

Accumulation risk, where a single event triggers losses under multiple policies in one or more lines of insurance, is emerging in new and unforeseen ways in today’s interconnected world, says a post at Swiss Re Open Minds blog.

From Ruta Mikiskaite, casualty treaty underwriter, and Catriona Barker, claims expert UK&International Claims at Swiss Re:

“Accumulation scenarios have always been familiar in property insurance but for casualty lines of business, they have been perhaps less of an issue. However, large losses in recent years show how traditional physical perils should not be underestimated for their casualty clash potential.”

For example, Kilmore East-Kinglake bushfire, the most severe of a series of deadly wildfires in the Australian state of Victoria on Black Saturday, 7 February 2009, led to a settlement of A$500 million—the biggest class action settlement in Australian legal history.

Per Swiss Re’s post, the Royal Commission found that the fire was caused by poorly maintained power lines owned by power company SP AusNet and maintained by asset manager Utility Services Group. The Victoria State government was also held liable for its failure to provide sufficient prevention measures and inadequate warnings during the fires.

“With improved technology and scientific tools available to analyze and simulate scenarios following storms, fires and floods to predict their likely or alternative courses, any action by an individual, corporate body or government now attracts far greater scrutiny. As a result, there can be a greater readiness to sue for alleged nuisance or negligence leading to more casualty claims out of natural perils.”

The upshot: insurers need to look at their reinsurance programs to see how they would respond to liability clash events.

 

Coastal resilience, or putting an insurance policy on nature

Our earlier post Working with nature to build resilience to hurricanes discussed how insurers look to natural infrastructure like coastal wetlands and mangrove swamps to mitigate storm losses.

The Mesoamerican Reef, which runs south for some 700 miles from the tip of the Yucatán Peninsula protects coastal communities and property by reducing  the force of storms, but its corals require continued repairs.

For every meter of height the reef loses, the potential economic damage from a major hurricane triples, according to The Nature Conservancy (TNC).

Now thanks to TNC and Swiss Re, the reef is about to get its own insurance policy.

From Bloomberg:

“After Hurricane Wilma struck in 2005, causing $7.5 billion of damage in Mexico, beachfront hotel owners began paying extra taxes to the state government to handle beach restoration and protect the reef.”

TNC has proposed a different approach:

“The extra money paid by the hotel owners to the government could be converted into premium payments to Swiss Re to cover the reef. The policy would be what’s called parametric insurance, in which a large hurricane would trigger near-immediate payouts. By having the money arrive quickly, reef repairs could begin sooner.”

From Artemis blog, via TNC:

“One of the most promising new developments to maximize the value of nature is the possibility of putting an insurance policy on habitats like reefs and beaches. By combining insurance and new science, we can protect and improving the health of reefs and beaches so they can continue to protect us.”

 

Insurance Payouts Underpin Disaster Recovery Process

Tens of thousands of policyholders caught in a disaster in 2016 were better able to recover from the losses and hardships inflicted thanks to insurance.

Global insured losses from catastrophes totaled around $54 billion in 2016 – the highest level since 2012, according to the latest report from Swiss Re sigma.

North America accounted for more than half the global insured losses in 2016, with insured losses from disaster events reaching $30 billion, the highest of all regions.

This was due to a record number of severe convective storms in the United States and because the level of insurance penetration for such storm risks in the U.S. is high, sigma noted.

For example, a hailstorm that struck Texas in April 2016 resulted in an economic loss of $3.5 billion, of which $3 billion, or 86 percent, was covered by insurance.

“With insurance, many households and businesses benefited from insurance payouts for the heavy damage to their property caused by large hailstones.”

However, insurance cover is not universal. The shortfall in insurance relative to total economic losses from all disaster events—the protection gap—was $121 billion in 2016. See this chart:

“Under-insurance against catastrophe risk is a reality in both advanced and emerging markets, and there is still large opportunity for the industry to help strengthen worldwide resilience.”

For example, Swiss Re noted that the U.S. has been and continues to be critically underinsured for flood risk, with a flood protection gap of around $10 billion annually.

Additional Insurance Information Institute facts and statistics on global catastrophe losses are available here.

Satellite, Mobile Technologies Underpin Insurance Payout To Herders In Kenya

A $2 million insurance payout to thousands of livestock owners in Kenya hit by drought is a good example of insurance and technology coming together to deliver financial protection where it is needed most.

The Kenya Livestock Insurance Program (KLIP), a public-private partnership developed by the government of Kenya and reinsured by Swiss Re, just announced the payout which averages around $170 per household and will be made by the end of February.

KLIP uses satellite technology to measure vegetation available to livestock. Payment is triggered for feed, veterinary medicines and water trucks when the satellite data shows drought is so bad that animal lives are at risk.

In this case, the $2 million payout will help save 70,000 tropical livestock – primarily cows, goats and camels – that in turn sustain approximately 100,000 people across six counties.

Even better, a consortium of insurers led by APA Insurance will pay funds directly into the livestock owners’ bank accounts or via mobile phone accounts.

Here’s the infographic:

The 2016/2017 drought in Kenya was one of the worst in 16 years. Between 2008 and 2011, livestock losses in Kenya accounted for 70 percent of the $12.1 billion in damages caused by drought.

More on this story from Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Insurance Information Institute facts and statistics on droughts and heatwaves are available here.

Nat Cat Losses Increase in 2016

Total global insured losses from natural catastrophes and man-made disasters in 2016 rose to at least $49 billion in 2016, 32 percent higher than the $37 billion recorded in 2015.

Preliminary estimates from Swiss Re sigma put insured losses from natural catastrophe events at $42 billion in 2016, up from $28 billion in 2015, but slightly below the annual average of the previous 10 years ($46 billion).

Man-made disasters triggered an additional $7 billion in insurance claims in 2016, down from $9 billion the previous year.

Hurricane Matthew and severe storms in the United States generated high losses during the year, Swiss Re noted.

Insured losses from Hurricane Matthew, which caused devastation across the east Caribbean and southeastern U.S. in October, are estimated to be in excess of $4 billion, while economic losses were $8 billion.

Matthew was also the deadliest natural catastrophe of the year globally, claiming up to 733 lives, most of those in Haiti.

A number of severe weather events impacted the U.S. in 2016, including a series of severe hail and thunderstorms.

The costliest was a hailstorm that struck Texas in April, resulting in economic losses of $3.5 billion and insured losses of $3 billion due to heavy damage to property from large hailstones, Swiss Re said.

Swiss Re chief economist Kurt Karl, noted in a press release:

“In this case, because households and businesses were insured, they were much better protected against the financial losses resulting from the storms.”

Total economic losses from natural catastrophes and man-made disasters globally are estimated at $158 billion in 2016, significantly higher than the $94 billion recorded in 2015, due to some large natural catastrophes such as earthquakes and floods.

The gap between total losses and insured losses in 2016 shows that many events took place in areas where insurance coverage was low, Swiss Re said.

Earthquake losses, in particular, underscore the underinsurance problem. For example, government sources put the overall reconstruction cost of an earthquake in August in Italy as high as $5 billion. But insured losses for that event are only a fraction of the total, estimated at $70 million, mainly from commercial assets.

“Society is underinsured against earthquake risk. And the protection gap is a global concern.”

The Kumamoto quakes that struck Japan in April were the costliest disaster event of the year, causing at least $20 billion in economic losses, and $5 billion in insured losses.

Growing Insurance Resilience to Disasters

Latest estimates from Aon Benfield that just 50 percent of the U.S. losses from Hurricane Matthew are covered by public and private insurance renews the spotlight on the growing risk protection gap and disaster resilience.

In its latest Global Catastrophe Recap report, Aon Benfield’s Impact Forecasting unit expected total economic losses from Matthew would range up to a high of $10 billion. Public and private insurance losses were considerably less, estimated as high as $5 billion.

The reason for this is that a large portion of the inland flood loss in North Carolina went uninsured due to low take-up of the federally-backed National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Aon said.

A post over at Artemis blog reports:

“Once again this demonstrates the insurance and reinsurance protection gap is not simply an emerging market issue, rather it is evident in perhaps the most mature property catastrophe insurance market in the world in the United States.”

Indeed, Swiss Re sigma has said the amount of financial loss caused by catastrophes not covered by insurance is growing.

This so-called global insurance protection or funding gap totaled $75 billion in 2014, according to Swiss Re.

A recent issue brief by Wharton Risk Center co-director Howard Kunreuther pointed to evidence showing that consumers tend to purchase too little insurance or purchase it too late.

As a result, it said, taxpayers wind up bearing substantial burdens for paying restoration costs from extreme events. The 2005 and 2012 hurricane seasons alone cost taxpayers nearly $150 billion.

The Wharton brief suggests there is much that can be done to better facilitate the role that insurance can play in addressing losses from extreme events, both natural and man-made.

To better meet its objectives, insurance must embody two guiding principles, first premiums must accurately reflect risk and secondly, to ensure equity and affordability, special financial assistance should be made available to homeowners who would no longer be able to afford their premiums.

More information on the protection gap problem in this Insurance Information Institute report Underinsurance of Property Risks: Closing the Gap.

I.I.I. facts and statistics on flood insurance are available here.

Lower First Half Cat Losses, But Higher Percentage Insured

While total economic losses from natural catastrophes and man-made disaster events remain far below-average in the first half of 2015, the global insurance and reinsurance industry is covering a higher than average percentage of those losses.

That’s the key takeaway from preliminary sigma estimates of global catastrophe losses for the first half of 2015, just released by Swiss Re.

Of the $37 billion in total economic losses from disaster events in the first half of 2015, the global insurance and reinsurance industry covered nearly 45 percent, or $16.5 billion, of these losses.

This is higher than the previous 10-year average of 27 percent covered by the global re/insurance industry.

Of the overall insured losses in the first half of 2015, $12.9 billion came from natural disasters, down from nearly $20 billion in first half 2014, and again below the average first-half year loss of the previous 10 years ($25 billion).

Man-made disasters triggered an additional $3.6 billion in insured losses in the first half of 2015, sigma said.

So why did insurance and reinsurance cover a higher proportion of global catastrophe losses in the first half?

The answer lies in the location of the most costly insured natural catastrophes losses for the insurance industry in the first half of 2015–thunderstorms in the United States and winter storm losses in Europe.

These larger loss events, as well as the severe winter weather in North America, all contributed to the  lower percentage of uninsured losses through the first half of the year.

Here’s the Swiss Re chart showing the dollar breakout of insured and uninsured catastrophe-related losses from 2005 through 2015:

CatastropheLossesInsuredandUninsured

Note: insured losses + uninsured losses= total economic losses

But, as Artemis blog reports here, sadly the lower proportion of uninsured losses is not related to any major increase in insurance penetration.

The Nepal earthquakes provide a striking example. While economic losses from the quakes are estimated at $5 billion, only around $160 million were insured.

In the words of Kurt Karl, chief economist at Swiss Re:

The tragic events in Nepal are a reminder of the utility of insurance. Insurance cover does not lessen the emotional trauma that natural catastrophes inflict, but it can help people better manage the financial fallout from disasters so they can start to rebuild their lives.”

Check out Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.) facts and statistics on global catastrophes.

Insurance Responds To Rising Costs of Food Recalls

You may have read that the Justice Department is warning food manufacturers that they could face criminal and civil penalties if they poison their customers with contaminated food.

Recent high profile food recalls, such as the one at Texas-based Blue Bell Creameries and another at Ohio-based Jeni’s Splendid Ice Creams, have drawn attention to this issue once again.

Now a new report by Swiss Re finds that the number of food recalls per year in the United States has almost doubled since 2002, while the costs are also rising.

Half of all food recalls cost the affected companies more than $10 million each and losses of up to $100 million are possible, Swiss Re says. These figures exclude the reputational damage that may take years for a company to recover from.

Contaminated food also takes a financial toll on the public sector. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, costs for the U.S. public health system from hospitalized patients and lost wages in 2013 alone was $15.6 billion. In total, 8.9 million people fell ill from the 15 pathogens tracked, with over 50,000 hospitalized and 2,377 fatalities.

Demographic change is putting more sensitive consumer groups at risk. Ageing societies, an increase in allergies in the overall population and the fact that malnourishment is still prevalent in many countries are significant drivers of the increase in exposure, Swiss Re notes.

Which brings us to insurance.

A variety of insurance products are available to help companies protect their bottom line from this potentially catastrophic exposure.

Product recall/contaminated product insurance will cover the costs of recalling accidentally or maliciously contaminated food from the market, and impaired or mislabeled products that cause bodily injury, sickness, disease or death.

Product liability insurance also provides compensation of third party liability claims for bodily injury and property damage caused by an impaired product.

As Roland Friedli, risk engineer at Swiss Re and co-author of the report says:

Food recalls can be caused by something as simple as a labeling error on the packaging, or as complex as a microbial contamination somewhere along a vast globalized supply chain. Yet event a simple mistake can cost a food manufacturer millions in losses and even more in terms of reputation. Insurance and sound risk management are essential for keeping affected businesses afloat.”

Further information on product liability, recall and contamination insurance and is available from the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.) here.

Swiss Re: Lack of Insurance Cover An Issue in Many Countries

The amount of financial loss caused by catastrophes not covered by insurance is growing, according to the latest Swiss Re sigma report.

This so-called global insurance protection or funding gap totaled $75 billion in 2014.

The rate of growth of total losses has outpaced the growth of insured losses over the course of the last three decades, Swiss Re notes:

In terms of the 10-year moving average, insured losses grew at 10.7 percent between 1979 and 2014, and total losses by 11.4 percent.”

Here’s the Swiss Re visual showing global  insured vs. uninsured losses from natural catastrophes and man-made disasters from 1970 to 2014:

CA8oVonUUAAcllL

Lack of insurance cover clearly remains an issue in many countries.

Swiss Re gives the example of  low pressure system Yvette last May which brought very heavy rain in Europe to Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia — in some areas the heaviest downpour in 120 years. Yvette resulted in 82 fatalities, the largest loss of life from a natural catastrophe in Europe in 2014, and total losses were estimated to be $3 billion — mostly uninsured.

Areas of the United States are also underinsured, sigma reports. Last August’s South Napa earthquake caused structural and inventory damage of $0.7 billion, particularly in the numerous local wine barrel storage facilities. However, the insured loss was just $0.16 billion.

As Lucia Bevere, co-author of the sigma study, notes:

In spite of high exposure to seismic risk, insurance take-up in San Francisco County and California state generally is still very low, even for commercial properties. That’s why insured losses, in certain areas, can be surprisingly low when disaster events happen.”

Meanwhile, the economic cost of natural disasters continues to rise due to economic development, population growth, a higher concentration of assets in exposed areas and a changing climate.

Without a commensurate increase in insurance penetration, the above will likely result in a widening protection gap over the long term, sigma concludes.

I.I.I. has more facts and statistics on global catastrophes available here.