Underinsurance of Property Risks: Closing the Gap
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
No 5 /2015 01 Executive summary Underinsurance 02 Introduction: assessing underinsurance in global of property risks: property risk 04 How big is the natural closing the gap catastrophe protection gap? 13 The global shortfall in property insurance 19 Underinsurance explained 25 Dealing with under- insurance 33 Conclusions 34 Appendix Executive summary The lack of cover for natural disaster risk Underinsurance of property risks1 is a global challenge. Much of the protection gap has averaged USD 127 billion annually in is due to uninsured global natural catastrophe risk, which has been rising steadily the last 10 years. over the past 40 years. Swiss Re’s sigma data show that total economic losses from natural disasters have averaged around USD 180 billion annually in the last decade, with 70% (USD 127 billion, or USD 1.3 trillion in total over the 10 years) of that uninsured. Earthquakes, floods and windstorms are the main perils, particularly in areas of high population and property value concentrations. Modelled loss potential stemming from But historical data do not fully capture all major catastrophe scenarios. Modelling natural catastrophes amounts to potential future events yields a global estimate of the expected uninsured losses USD 153 billion. from natural disasters of USD 153 billion annually. In absolute terms, the US, Japan and China account for most of the global gap (USD 81 billion). In emerging markets, on average 80–100% of economic losses are uninsured. Expected losses are not as high in absolute terms, but they can still significantly deplete economic resources. Benchmarking across countries suggests For the broader scope of property risks – including fire, burglary and water – and a further general property protection gap business interruption risks, underinsurance can be estimated by the difference of USD 68 billion … between best-practice countries and those with lower insurance penetration rates (premiums as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP)). Insurance demand tends to be driven by economic factors but correlation with risk factors such as natural catastrophe exposure is weak, and many high-risk areas have low coverage. A global benchmarking of penetration across nations suggests a general property risk protection gap of USD 68 billion worldwide. Of the countries most underinsured relative to GDP, many are high-growth economies. Here, while a rapidly growing middle class is accumulating substantial new wealth, insurance buying still lags. … and thus a total global property The property market is estimated to have had global premium volumes of insurance shortfall of USD 221 billion. USD 413 billion in 2014. Summing the natural catastrophe modeling data and the economic benchmarking of property markets suggests a global underinsurance in property of USD 221 billion in terms of expected losses. The root causes of underinsurance Underinsurance falls into several categories: completely uninsured, insured for include exclusions, undervaluation and certain perils, insured with restrictive policy terms (deductibles/exclusions), and challenges to insurability, as well as the undervaluation of assets. Certain risks such as some peak natural catastrophe, consumer and business perceptions and terrorism, cyber or contingent business interruption risk, can challenge the bounds of behaviour. insurability. And for individuals, factors like perception of risk, insurance knowledge, affordability, reliance on government post-disaster relief, trust in insurers and ease of doing business can hinder adequate take up of cover, especially in new markets. Closing the property underinsurance Closing the underinsurance gap will require specific measures by insurers and the gap is a crucial challenge for society. state to change buying behaviour and market structures. Drawing on their expertise Public/private collaboration is key. and focusing on those who are completely un- or insufficiently insured, insurers can play a vital role in strengthening the resilience of households and companies against property risks. Product and distribution innovation, and measures to handle accumulation exposure will be critical to help society better manage the risks. So too will be developing data and analytical tools to better understand the exposure. At the same time, governments need to provide a strong regulatory environment, set and enforce building standards, and promote mitigation to reduce risk exposures. In this way, public-private partnerships can be key to closing the protection gap in cases where there is limited insurability. 1 For the purpose of this publication, property risks are understood to be buildings and contents risk – including fire, burglary and water-damage insurance – and related business interruption risks. Swiss Re sigma No 5/2015 1 Introduction: assessing underinsurance in global property risk Insuring property risks Property insurance covers buildings and Property insurance mainly encompasses coverage for buildings and their contents, their contents in case of fire, natural such as furniture and machinery. It typically includes fire insurance, which provides hazards and damage from other perils. protection against losses from fire, lightning and explosion. Additional perils usually covered include wind, theft, vandalism and non-flood water damage. Other risks not always included or not available are floods, earthquakes, tsunamis and acts of terrorism. In the case of commercial insurance, policies can also cover business interruption risk, ie, loss of income due to an insured event. Cover is available for both residential and Coverage against fire is the most important component of a standard property commercial property, in different forms. insurance policy for residential and commercial buildings. For both segments, there is a vast array of policy types. These include contracts covering against specific perils (eg, fire, lightning, explosion and wind) only, modular contracts with additional cover options (eg, flood, business interruption), and multiple-peril policies which also cover certain third-party liability risks. Protection gap vs underinsurance The protection gap is the difference The terms “protection gap” and “underinsurance” are often used interchangeably, between insured and total losses. especially in life and health risks. Used in the context of property risk, there is a subtle difference in meaning when assessing the (in)adequacy of insurance cover. The property protection gap is defined as the uninsured portion of losses resulting from an event, meaning the difference between total economic and insured losses. It can be more cost efficient to retain The ideal level of risk transfer is typically not 100%. For example, insurers avoid some portion of risk. offering cover for frequently-occuring losses because it is not economically viable. And, on the other side of the insurance relationship, households, firms and government agencies sometimes prefer to retain some risks according to their risk appetite profile, and to save on premium payments. To do so can be a more cost- effective way of managing risk exposure than buying the maximum coverage available. Underinsurance is the purchase of less The term underinsurance, on the other hand, may be defined as the difference than the economically beneficial amount between the amount of insurance that is economically beneficial – which may include of coverage. some purposely chosen self-insurance – and the amount actually purchased.2 Roadmap for assessing underinsurance There are two main areas of risk to This report considers two main areas of risk in the context of property insurance. consider in property insurance: natural The first is natural catastrophe risk, those events such as earthquakes, flooding, catastrophe and general property risk. hurricanes and all other natural perils that can often inflict severe damage on property assets, not to mention human lives. The second area of risk is general property risk, such as fire, water damage, business interruption, burglary etc. With these wide range of risk variables, it is not possible to quantify the adequate level of insurance from a purely theoretical standpoint. Rather, this report uses pragmatic methods to benchmark the extent of property underinsurance in the world today. First, the global property protection gap between insured and uninsured losses from natural catastrophes is estimated. Natural catastrophes are a large and highly-visible portion of global underinsurance, and the protection gap is estimated by looking at both historic losses and probabilistic models of expected losses. 2 The Global Insurance Protection Gap — Assessment and Recommendations, The Geneva Association, November 2014. 2 Swiss Re sigma No 5/2015 Benchmarking is used to assess general Second, using property insurance penetration rates for general property risk as property underinsurance. a proxy for insurance buying, each country’s expected (or potential) insurance penetration is estimated based on a best-practice comparison with peer countries. This expected insurance penetration is then compared to actual penetration to derive a measure of a country’s general property underinsurance. Finally, adding the estimated general underinsurance of each country to the global premium equivalent of the natural catastrophe protection gap yields an estimate of the extent of global property underinsurance in the world today. That is, in other words, the shortfall in the amount of insurance purchased relative to the amount