This article was first published in the IIB Bulletin, 2015, Vol. 1, Iss. 3, pp10-12
https://iib.gov.in/IRDA/Articles/IIB%20Bulletin%20Q3%202014-15.pdfCo-Author: Pushpendra Johari (RMSI Private Limited)
Images of destruction caused by the Uttarakhand Floods,
Cyclone Hudhud or the Bhuj Earthquake are still livid in the minds of most of
us. While loss of lives and property are always painful, the scale of
destruction during a natural disaster hits us with a sense of despair at the
helplessness of human beings. Advances in technology and development in economy
could not prevent the Tsunami or the Katrina.
India is prone to natural disasters due to its climate and
topography. As per the research done by Mishra (2014) during the past 100 years
(1913-2013), 51.4 percent of the natural disasters in India were due to floods,
32.7 percent from storms, 7.4 percent from landslides, 5.6 percent from
earthquakes and 2.9 percent from droughts.
The economic losses to the nation are huge; to give a
perspective, in a report in 2003, World Bank estimated that the Economic losses
to India due to natural disasters were around 2 percent of the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP), per annum.
“Reported direct
losses on public and private economic infrastructure in India have amounted to
approximately $30 billion over the past 35 years [up to 2001] (nominal values
at then applying exchange rates). Since less than 25% of the registered loss
events actually provide any loss estimates, the official numbers substantially
understate the true economic impact of direct losses. A crude grossing up for
reporting frequency indicates that direct natural disasters losses equate to up
to 2% of India's GDP and up to 12% of federal government revenues”...Pg 8, The
World Bank Report (2003).
The stakes could be as high as 4.4% and 6.5% of the States
GDP in states like Gujarat and Orissa. The report also noted that the official
figures are generally lower than the actual losses and it also observed a
rising trend in the losses over the years. It must also be noted that these
figures do not include the cost of rehabilitation and restoration.
According to a report on “Natural Hazards, UnNatural
Disasters” by the World Bank and the United Nations, the impact of natural
disasters on the GDP is 20 times higher in developing countries than in industrialized
nations.
The years 2013 and 2014 have seen catastrophes like the
Uttarakhand Floods and the Cyclone Hudhud, which have resulted in large losses,
both of lives and property (Table 1).
Event
|
No. Killed
|
No. Total Affected
|
~Economic Losses
(in Rs crores)
|
~Insured Losses
(in Rs crores)
|
Uttarakhand
Floods
|
6054
|
504473
|
6600
|
3000*
|
Cyclone
Phailin
|
47
|
13230000
|
3800
|
600*
|
Cyclone
Hudhud
|
109
|
10000000*
|
65000*
|
4000*
|
Source: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International
Disaster Database
*Estimate based on news reports
The irony is
that the General Insurance penetration in India is very low, especially for
personal property. The gap between people who need Insurance most and the
penetration of Insurance amongst them is huge. The pace at which the economy of
India is growing is indicative of a huge potential for increasing the insurance
penetration.
The
government of India is desirous to make Insurance as the primary mechanism for
disaster risk financing in India (Ref. Disaster Relief and Risk Transfer
through Insurance, IRDA-NDMA July 2013). A panel including NDMA, IRDA and
general insurers in India is considering several options including:
·
Setting up a pool for states, NDRF, etc.
·
Parametric insurance solutions for NDRF
·
Optional simple Indian Natural Catastrophe
Insurance Policy
·
Mandatory property insurance in highly prone urban
areas
However,
there are several questions that need to be answered before such schemes could
be launched. Some of these questions are:
·
How much fund is needed for the pool
·
Who would fund the pool
·
Categories of population to be covered under the
Indian Natural Catastrophe Insurance policy
·
How to price the coverage of such policies
·
What should be the triggers and how much payment
should be associated to specific triggers for parametric insurance solutions,
etc.
Natural Catastrophe
modelling is the science that can help in finding the answers to several of
these questions.
Probabilistic NatCat modelling can be
used to arrive at the possible economic loss scenarios associated to various
return periods, the impact of specific historical or latest hazard events, as
well as the average annual direct economic loss by state or any other
resolution at which the pool needs to be setup. Figure 1 shows the impact of cyclone Hudhud based on RMSI
CycloneRIsk Model.
Figure 1: Cyclone Hudhud wind and surge estimates using RMSI’s
CycloneRIsk model.
Based on return period scenarios various
categories of population that are under high risk zones could be estimated.
Return period losses and average annual loss could be estimated for all these
population categories thereby giving insights into the coverage pricing for
various population categories. Based on the income levels and sample surveys eliciting
willingness to pay for various population categories, an estimate of insurance
affordability could be arrived at. This information could be combined with the
NatCat modelled loss estimates to decide if the entire burden of the insurance
could be passed to any specific population category or not.
Using probabilistic NatCat modelling, homogeneous risk zones could also be created , that associate hazard intensities to average losses within every homogeneous zone and provides a hazard risk score. Specific rates could be developed by risk zone for taking into account the NatCat risk in pricing of policies. Figure 2 shows the flood hazard risk score zones. This could serve as a basis for the definition of the triggers for specific areas along with payouts associated to the trigger. For every such homogeneous zone, an authentic source that provides the hazard intensity values at the time of the event will have to be setup to ensure success of parametric insurance. So, NatCat modelling not only helps to setup the triggers and associated payouts but also the number of trigger monitoring stations and areas where these should be setup.
The models
could also be used to test out various insurance penetration scenarios and how
various levels of penetration could impact the risk as well as pricing of the
coverage.
No comments:
Post a Comment