Insurers Need to Lead
on Ethical Use of AI

 

Every major technological advancement prompts new ethical concerns or shines a fresh light on existing ones. Artificial intelligence is no different in that regard. As the property/casualty insurance industry taps the speed and efficiency generative AI offers and navigates the practical complexities of the AI toolset, ethical considerations must remain in the foreground.  

Traditional AI systems recognize patterns in data to make predictions. Generative AI goes beyond predicting – it generates new data as its primary output.  As a result, it can support strategy and decision making through conversational, back-and-forth “prompting” using natural language, rather than complicated, time-consuming coding.

A recently published report by Triple-I and SAS, a global leader in data and AI, discusses how insurers are uniquely positioned to advance the conversation for ethical AI – “not just for their own businesses, but for all businesses; not just in a single country, but worldwide.” 

AI inevitably will influence the insurance sector, whether through the types of perils covered or by influencing how insurance functions like underwriting, pricing, policy administration, and claims processing and payment are carried out. By shaping an ethical approach to implementing AI tools, insurers can better balance risk with innovation for their own businesses, as well as for their customers.

Conversely, failure to help guide AI’s evolution could leave insurers — and their clients — at a disadvantage. Without proactive engagement, insurers will likely find themselves adapting to practices that might not fully consider the specific needs of their industry or their clients. Further, if AI is regulated without insurers’ input, those regulations could fail to account for the complexity of insurance – leading to guidelines that are less effective or equitable.

“When it comes to artificial intelligence, insurers must work alongside regulators to build trust,” said Matthew McHatten, president and CEO of MMG Insurance, in a webinar introducing the report. “Carriers can add valuable context that guides the regulatory conversation while emphasizing the value AI can bring to our policyholders.” 

During the webinar, Peter L. Miller, CPCU, president and CEO of The Institutes, noted that generative AI already is helping insurers “move from repairing and replacing after a loss occurs to predicting and preventing losses from ever happening in the first place,” as well as enabling efficiencies across the risk-management and insurance value chain.

Jennifer Kyung, chief underwriting officer for USAA, discussed several use cases involving AI, including analyzing aerial images to identify exposures for her company’s members. If a potential condition concern is identified, she said, “We can trigger an inspection or we can reach out to those members and have a conversation around mitigation.”

USAA also uses AI to transcribe customer calls and “identify themes that help us improve the quality of our service.”  Future use cases Kyung discussed include using AI to analyze claim files and other large swaths of unstructured data to improve cost efficiency and customer experience.

Mike Fitzgerald, advisory industry consultant for SAS, compared the risks associated with generative AI to the insurance industry’s early experience with predictive models in the early 2000s. Predictive models and insurance credit scores are two innovations that have benefited policyholders but have not always been well understood by consumers and regulators.  Such misunderstandings have led to pushback against these underwriting and pricing tools that more accurately match risk with price.

Fitzgerald advised insurers to “look back at the implementation of predictive models and how we could have done that differently.”

When it comes to AI-specific perils, Iris Devriese, underwriting and AI liability lead for Munich Re, said, “AI insurance and underwriting of AI risk is at the point in the market where cyber insurance was 25 years ago. At first, cyber policies were tailored to very specific loss scenarios… You could really see cyber insurance picking up once there was a spike of losses from cyber incidents. Once that happened, cyber was addressed in a more systematic way.”

Devriese said lawsuits related to AI are currently “in the infancy stage. We’ve all heard of IP-related lawsuits popping up and there’ve been a few regulatory agencies – especially here in the U.S. – who’ve spoken out very loudly about bias and discrimination in the use of AI models.”

She noted that AI regulations have recently been introduced in Europe.

“This will very much spur the market to form guidelines and adopt responsible AI initiatives,” Devriese said.

The Triple-I/SAS report recommends that insurers lead by example by developing their own detailed plans to deliver ethical AI in their own operations. This will position them as trusted experts to help lead the wider business and regulatory community in the implementation of ethical AI. The report includes a framework for implementing an ethical AI approach.

LEARN MORE AT JOINT INDUSTRY FORUM

Three key contributors to the project – Peter L. Miller, Matthew McHatten, and Jennifer Kyung — will share their insights on AI, climate resilience, and more at Triple-I’s Joint Industry Forum in Miami on Nov. 19-20. 

Executive Exchange: Using Advanced Tools
to Drill Into Flood Risk

Analysis based on precise, granular data is key to fair, accurate insurance pricing – and is more important than ever before in an era of increased climate-related risks. In a recent Executive Exchange discussion with Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan, a co-founder of Norway-based 7Analytics discussed how his company’s methodology – honed by use in the oil and gas industry – can help insurers identify opportunities to profitably write flood coverage in what might seem to be “untouchable” areas.

7Analytics uses hydrology, geology, and data science to develop high-precision flood risk data tools.

“We are four oil and gas geologists behind 7Analytics,” said Jonas Torland, who also is the company’s chief commercial officer, “and between us we’ve spent 100 years chasing fluids in the very complicated subsurface.”

Torland believes his firm can bring a new level of refined expertise to U.S. insurers seeking to pinpoint pockets of insurability against flood.

“Instead of analyzing faults and carrier beds, we’re now analyzing streams and culverts and changing land-use features,” Torland told Kevelighan. “I think the approach we bring is brilliant for problems related to climate and population migration and urban pluvial flooding in particular.”

Torland said he hopes his company can help close the U.S. flood protection gap by giving private insurers the comfort levels and incentives they need to write the coverage. While more insurers have been covering flood risk in recent years, the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) still underwrites the lion’s share of flood risk.

NFIP’s recently reformed pricing methodology, Risk Rating 2.0 – which aims to make the government agency’s premium rates more actuarially sound and equitable by better aligning them with individual properties’ risk – has created concerns among policyholders whose premiums are rising as rates become more aligned with principles of risk-based pricing.

As the cost of participating in NFIP rises for some, it is reasonable to expect that private insurers will recognize the market opportunity and respond by applying cutting-edge data and analytics capabilities and more refined pricing techniques to seize those opportunities. This is where Torland believes 7Analytics can help, and he noted that the company had already had some positive test results in flood-prone Florida.

Kevelighan agreed that solutions like those provided by 7Analytics are what is needed to help private insurers close the flood insurance gap. Insurers are telling Triple-I as much.

“I think we can all agree that the current way we review flood risk is antiquated,” Kevelighan said. “So we’ve got to bring that new technology, that new innovation to begin changing behaviors and changing how and where we develop and how we live.”

Learn More:

Triple-I “State of the Risk” Issues Brief: Flood

Accurately Writing Flood Coverage Hinges on Diverse Data Sources

Lee County, Fla., Towns Could Lose NFIP Flood Insurance Discounts

Miami-Dade, Fla., Sees Flood-Insurance Rate Cuts, Thanks to Resilience Investment

Milwaukee District Eyes Expanding Nature-Based Flood-Mitigation Plan

Attacking the Risk Crisis: Roadmap to Investment in Flood Resilience