The Impact of Mitigation on Homeowners and Insurers: An Analysis of Model Cities

Tropical cyclones, climate change, and scientific uncertainty: what do we know, what does it mean, and what should be done?

“…• Implement zoning rules and building codes not just for new homes, to adequately protect built structures and infrastructure against major TC related winds and floods. It is clear that there are technologies such as storm shutters, lower profile reinforced roof designs, and raised reinforced foundations (buildings on pilings) that can dramatically reduce losses, but in many vulnerable locations they are still not required (Kleindorfer et al 2005). • End cross subsidies to property owners and others who build, live or work in high risk areas so that market signals through insurance and other instruments correctly signal the true cost of exposure.…”

Seismic risk management of insurance losses using extreme value theory and copula

“…For instance, the HAZUS-Earthquake, developed by FEMA and NIBS (2003), is capable of assessing regional seismic loss to a number of buildings and infrastructure due to a scenario earthquake, and serves as a critical risk management tool for both pre-disaster planning and post-disaster relief activities. However, it cannot evaluate the probability distribution of aggregate seismic loss; such information is valuable for evaluating/comparing viable mitigation options and for analysing insurance/ reinsurance portfolio under earthquake risk (Kleindorfer et al, 2005;Bazzurro and Park, 2007). In fact, there is an urgent research need to further develop more rigorous tools/methods that can be used for complex risk management problems.…”

“…In fact, there is an urgent research need to further develop more rigorous tools/methods that can be used for complex risk management problems. One such problem is insurance/reinsurance portfolio analysis of properties protected by earthquake insurance (Dong and Grossi, 2005;Kleindorfer et al, 2005;Bazzurro and Park, 2007;Goda and Yoshikawa, 2012). …”

Earthquake insurance portfolio analysis of wood-frame houses in south-western British Columbia, Canada

“…For instance, the HAZUS-Earthquake (FEMA and NIBS 2003), which is widely accepted in the United States, can be used to assess the expected seismic loss of a portfolio of buildings and infrastructure due to a scenario earthquake, and serves as a critical risk management tool for both pre-disaster planning and post-disaster relief activities. However, it cannot evaluate the probability distribution of aggregate seismic loss; such information is valuable for evaluating/comparing viable mitigation options (Black et al 2010) and for analyzing insurance/reinsurance portfolio under earthquake risk (Dong and Grossi 2005;Kleindorfer et al 2005;Bazzurro and Park 2007). Alternatively, if a few site-specific structures are of interest, a rigorous assembly-based seismic loss model (Porter et al 2001) may be selected.…”

“…Alternatively, for characterizing catastrophic earthquake risk, a suitable earthquake-engineering-based seismic loss model (tools/methods mentioned above) can be used. In reality, the use of computer models for assessing the extent of seismic loss is inevitable due to limited availability of empirical seismic loss data, and is the standard practice for quantitative insurance portfolio analysis (Dong and Grossi 2005;Kleindorfer et al 2005;Kuzak and Larsen 2005). Specifically, the stochastic model of an insurer's net worth consists of a geometric Brownian motion and a regional seismic loss model of existing wood-frame houses in south-western British Columbia, Canada ).…”