Severe convective storm losses drove adverse results in 2023 underwriting profitability for the property/casualty industry, according to the latest projections by actuaries at the Triple-I and Milliman.
The quarterly report, Insurance Economics and Underwriting Projections: A Forward View, which was presented on January 30, at a members-only webinar, found that the overall combined ratio is forecast to be 103.9, with commercial lines at 97.7, outperforming personal lines at 109.9. Combined ratio is a standard measure of underwriting profitability, in which a result below 100 represents a profit and one above 100 represents a loss.
Hard markets continue with 2023 net written premium growth forecast at 9.0 percent.
Dale Porfilio, FCAS, MAAA, Chief Insurance Officer at Triple-I, discussed the overall P&C industry underwriting projections.
“The bad news is that the 2023 Q3 incurred loss ratio for homeowners, commercial auto, and commercial multi-peril exceeded our expectations, as 2023 Q3 incurred loss ratios were above historical averages.” Porfilio said.
Porfilio elaborated on the industry’s bleak homeowners financial results, stating that, “For 2023, the net combined ratio is forecast at 112.3, the worst since 2011.”
Porfilio added that the 2023 net written premium growth rate of 12.4 percent is the highest in over 10 years, reflecting rate increases to offset inflationary loss costs.
“We expect personal auto and homeowners lines to improve in 2024 and 2025, but to remain unprofitable,” Porfilio added.
Jason B. Kurtz, FCAS, MAAA, a Principal and Consulting Actuary at Milliman – a premier global consulting and actuarial firm – said commercial property and workers compensation continue to be profitable, while commercial multi-peril and commercial auto remain troubled.
“Looking at commercial auto, underwriting losses continue, with a projected 2023 net combined ratio of 110.2, the highest since 2017,” said Kurtz. “For 2023 Q3, the incurred loss ratio was the highest in over 15 years, while the 2023 Net Written Premium growth rate of 6 percent is noticeably lower than the prior two years.”
Turning to workers compensation, Kurtz noted that “the 2023 net combined ratio of 88.7 is in line with the five-year average of approximately 89. With anticipated net written premium growth of 2 percent per year from 2023 through 2025, growth will be modest, but the net combined ratio is expected to remain favorable for our forecast horizon.”
Michel Léonard, Ph.D., CBE, Chief Economist and Data Scientist at Triple-I, discussed key macroeconomic trends impacting the property/casualty industry results including inflation, interest rates, and overall economic underlying growth.
“Real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product in the third quarter of 2023 accelerated to 4.9 percent, but economists still expect year-over-year growth of 2.1 percent,” said Léonard, noting that for GDP, “revised Q3 numbers did not disappoint, but all eyes remain on Q4.”
Léonard said inflation as measured by the consumer price index (CPI) continues to slow down to 3.1 percent as of November, but CPI, less food and energy prices, is still up 4.0 percent year over year.
“Year-over-year, P&C underlying growth grew 1.3 percent in 2023 and is forecasted by Triple-I to grow 2.6 percent in 2024,” said Léonard. “This is below U.S. GDP growth in 2023 and slightly above U.S. GDP growth in 2024. Year-over-year P&C replacement costs increased by 1.1 percent in 2023 and are forecasted to increase by 2.0 percent in 2024.”
Donna Glenn, FCAS, MAAA, Chief Actuary at the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI), identified rate adequacy and medical inflation as two of the workers compensation line’s top concerns.
“We’ve seen loss costs decline for 10 consecutive years,” Glenn said. She credits a “strong labor market and overall economy” resulting in “payroll increases outpacing loss cost declines.”
Glenn added that the “NCCI continues to analyze the data with healthy skepticism to identify changes in trends.”
Homes with more modern roofs were able to avoid significant damage from Hurricane Ian, compared with those with older roofs, according to a recent study by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Of the 200 homes surveyed, 90 percent with roofs installed before 2015 had roof damage, as opposed to 28 percent for those installed after 2015, when Florida imposed new ordinances regarding how roofs are attached to houses and how waterproof they need to be. Indeed, when Hurricane Ian made landfall at Cayo Costa, a barrier island in Lee County, Fla., on Sept. 28, 2022, it damaged 52,514 homes and other structures in the area, causing an estimated $55 billion in insured losses in 2024 dollars.
Some of this damage, according to the data, could have been mitigated by updated roofs.
History tells the same story
After the devastation of Hurricane Andrew in 1992, Florida took the initiative to develop innovative plans to prevent hurricane damage. These changes further came into effect in 2002, with a new focus on roofing. However, there were inconsistencies in the quality of the roofing.
“The 1970s-era homes performed better than some of the post-2002 new building code homes because of the sealed roof deck,” Leslie Chapman-Henderson, president of the Federal Alliance for Safe Homes, told The Miami Herald. “It was a nominal cost (to reinforce the roof) and a simple thing to do, but it made a huge difference.”
Now, with a renewed focus on metal sheet roofs—which bear the brunt of storms more resiliently than asphalt shingle roofs—FEMA’s data could drastically change the way in which homes are built, and how insurers are responding to fraudulent claims.
Insurance scams set progress back
Insurers are forced to raise the price of coverage in hurricane-prone areas in Florida because of a rash of schemes to deliberately damage roofs to qualify them for insurance claims, a persisting trend.
“Fraud drives insurance rates up and harms all Florida policyholders,” Citizens Property Insurance CEO Tim Cerio said. Still, implementing the changes suggested by the FEMA study may help alleviate some of the concerns posed by insurers—and help homeowners.
“When you’re looking at a home and evaluating its ability to survive a hurricane, the health of the roof is the first question to ask,” said Chapman-Henderson. “It not only increases your performance in the hurricane itself, but in the current environment it can help save you money on your insurance.”
Distracted driving—which has significantly increased since the coronavirus pandemic—is most significantly affected by cellphone use, according to a new Issues Brief by Triple-I.
The report, Distracted Driving: State of the Risk, states that cellphone use–which includes dialing, texting, and browsing–was among the most ubiquitous and highest-risk behaviors found in governmental and private sector studies. According to a 2022 national observational survey from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a total of 2.5 percent of drivers stopped at intersections were talking on hand-held phones at any moment during the day in 2021.
The brief also found that the U.S. personal auto insurance industry’s combined ratio—a measure that represents underwriting profitability—increased dramatically from 2022, to 112.2. A combined ratio below 100 indicates an underwriting profit, while one above 100 indicates an underwriting loss.
“As drivers returned to the roads following the pandemic, distracted driving surged, causing higher rates of accidents, injuries, and deaths. This high-risk behavior has worsened in the years since, having huge implications for the insurance industry and their policyholders,” stated Dale Porfilio, chief insurance officer, Triple-I.
The report notes that telematics and usage-based insurance can potentially help insurers—and their policyholders—better understand a driver’s risk profile and tailor auto insurance rates based on individual driving habits.
Indeed, according to an Insurance Research Council survey in 2022, 45 percent of drivers said they made significant safety-related changes in how they drove after participating in a telematics program. An additional 35 percent stated that they made small changes in their driving behavior. Policyholders became more comfortable with having their insurer monitor their driving behavior when it resulted in potentially lower insurance costs during the onset of the pandemic.
“If telematics can influence drivers to change behaviors and reduce the number of accidents, the nation’s roadways will be safer and auto insurance can be more affordable,” Porfilio concluded.
Legislation proposed by U.S. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) to create a federal “catastrophe reinsurance program” raises several concerns that warrant scrutiny and discussion – starting with the question: Does what’s being proposed even qualify as insurance?
If enacted into law, the bill would establish a “catastrophic property loss reinsurance program…to provide reinsurance for qualifying primary insurance companies.” To qualify, insurers would have to offer:
An all-perils property insurance policy for residential and commercial property, and
A loss-prevention partnership with the policyholder to encourage investments and activities that reduce insured and economic losses from a catastrophe peril.
The proposed program would phase in coverage requirements peril by peril over several years and discontinue FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). It would set coverage thresholds and dictate rating factors based on input from a board in which the insurance industry is only nominally represented.
And nowhere in the 22-page proposal do any of the following words or phrases appear:
“Actuarial soundness”;
“Risk-based pricing”;
“Reserves”; or
“Policyholder surplus”.
Actuarially sound risk-based pricing and the need to maintain adequate reserves and policyholder surplus to ensure financial strength and claims-paying ability are the bedrock of any insurance program worthy of the name – not technical fine print to be worked out down the road while existing mechanisms are being dismantled and market forces distorted through government involvement.
Insurance is a complicated discipline, and prior federal attempts at providing coverage have struggled to balance their goal of increasing availability and reducing premiums against the need to base underwriting and pricing on actuarially sound principles to ensure sufficient reserves for paying claims.
Actuarially sound risk-based pricing and the need to maintain adequate reserves and policyholder surplus…are the bedrock of any insurance program worthy of the name – not technical fine print to be worked out down the road…
Sean Kevelighan, CEO, Triple-I
Learn from history
NFIP is a strong case in point. Created in 1968 to protect property owners for a peril that most private insurers were reluctant to cover, NFIP’s “one-size-fits-all” approach to underwriting and pricing has led to the program now owing more than $20 billion to the U.S. Treasury because it lacked the reserves to fully pay claims after major events like Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy. It also often led to lower-risk property owners unfairly subsidizing coverage for higher-risk properties.
Having thus learned the importance of risk-based pricing, NFIP has changed its underwriting and pricing methodology. The new approach – Risk Rating 2.0, announced in 2019 and fully implemented as of April 1, 2023 – more equitably distributes premiums based on home value and individual properties’ flood risk. As a result, premiums of previously subsidized policyholders – particularly in coastal areas with higher values – have risen, leading to outcries from many higher-risk owners who have seen their subsidies reduced.
In addition to leading to fairer pricing, Risk Rating 2.0 – by reducing market distortions – increases incentives for private insurers to get involved. For a long time, private insurers considered flood an untouchable peril, but improved data modeling and analytical tools have increased their comfort writing this business. As the charts below show, private insurers have been playing a steadily increasing role in recent years, covering a larger percentage of a growing risk pool.
Over time, this trend should lead to greater availability and affordability of flood insurance coverage.
Rather than incorporating the lessons generated by NFIP’s experience with a single peril, Rep. Schiff’s proposal would discontinue the reformed flood insurance program while adding a new layer of complexity to coverage across all perils and casting into question the future of various state insurance programs and residual market mechanisms currently in place.
Time-tested principles
Any attempt by the federal government to address insurance availability and affordability concerns must be made with an understanding of how insurance works – from pricing and underwriting to reserving and claim settlement. For example, the Schiff bill proposes piloting an all-perils policy with a term of five years. There are good reasons for property/casualty policies to be written with a one-year term. Specifically, the conditions that affect claims costs can change quickly, and insurers – as referenced above – must set aside sufficient reserves to be able to pay all legitimate claims. If they cannot revisit pricing annually, the financial results could be disastrous.
“Who would have thought in 2019 that replacement costs would increase 55 percent within three years?” asked Dale Porfilio, Triple-I’s chief insurance officer. Supply-chain disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine contributed to just such a replacement-cost spike. “Requiring five-year terms for policies would have led to a massive drain on policyholder surplus.”
Policyholder surplus is the financial cushion representing the difference between an insurer’s assets and its liabilities.
In announcing his proposed legislation, Rep. Schiff said it is intended to “insulate consumers from unrestrained cost increases by offering insurers a transparent, fairly priced public reinsurance alternative for the worst climate-driven catastrophes.”
This language ignores the fact that, under state-by-state regulation, premium rate increases are anything but “unrestrained” and ratemaking is based on actuarially sound principles that are transparent and fair. Property/casualty insurance already is one of the most heavily regulated industries in the United States.
Consumers deserve real solutions
Policyholders have legitimate concerns about affordability and, in some cases, availability of insurance. These concerns can create pressure for political leaders at both the state and federal levels to advance measures that are perceived as promising to help. Unfortunately, many recent proposals begin by mischaracterizing current trends as an “insurance crisis,” as opposed to what they really represent: A risk crisis.
Insurance premium rates tend to move in line with the frequency and severity of the perils they cover. They also are affected by factors like fraud and litigation abuse; climate, population, and development trends; and global economics and geopolitics. That is why insurers hire actuaries and data scientists and employ cutting-edge modeling technology to ensure that insurance pricing is actuarially sound, fair, and compliant with regulatory requirements in all states in which they do business.
That is how insurers keep lower-risk policyholders from unfairly subsidizing higher-risk ones.
But history has shown that direct government involvement in the underwriting and pricing of insurance products tends not to end well. Any plan that would attempt to micromanage insurers’ coverage of all perils through a lens that ignores time-tested, actuarially sound risk-based pricing principles raises a host of red flags that must be discussed and addressed before such a plan is allowed to become law.
Miami-Dade County, Fla., has become the latest jurisdiction in the hurricane- and flood-prone state to benefit from participation in FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS) – an incentive program that recognizes and encourages floodplain management practices that exceed the minimum requirements of FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
The county’s new Class 3 rating will result in an estimated $12 million savings annually by giving qualifying residents and business owners in unincorporated parts of the county a 35 percent discount on flood insurance premiums.
“This is a huge step forward in resilience for our county,” Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava said after FEMA announced that Miami Dade had leaped ahead two rankings in the flood-risk rating. “It indicates that we have been able to demonstrate that we can create more resilience, more protection for our community.”
Miami-Dade County has invested $1 billion in stormwater infrastructure over the past 33 years since the inception of the county’s stormwater utility. Under Mayor Levine Cava’s administration, the county has planned to invest an additional $1 billion in stormwater infrastructure. In the past two years, the county has accelerated projects to upgrade Miami-Dade’s infrastructure and implement critical flood mitigation activities.
Last year, 17 Florida jurisdictions achieved Class 3 ratings. In Cutler Bay – a town on Miami’s southern flank with about 45,000 residents – the average premium dropped by $338. Citywide, that represented a savings of $2.3 million.
Over 1,500 communities nationwide participate in the CRS program, but only Tulsa, Okla., and Roseville, Calif., have taken sufficient steps to achieve Class 1 status and have their citizens receive the greatest premium discount of 45 percent. Both of these communities previously experienced disastrous flooding. Tulsa spent decades developing and implementing stormwater management improvements before receiving its Class 1 designation in 2022.
About 90 percent of all U.S. natural disasters involve flooding. Whether related to coastal and inland inundation due to hurricanes, extreme rainfall, snowmelt, mudflows, or other events, floods cause billions of dollars in losses each year.
As reported in a recent Triple-I “State of the Risk” Issues Brief, flood is no longer an “untouchable” risk for private insurers. For decades, the federally run NFIP was the only place where homeowners could buy flood insurance. But improved data, analysis, and modeling have helped drive private-sector interest in flood risk.
That’s good news for homeowners who understand the evolving nature of this peril, especially as FEMA’s new pricing methodology – Risk Rating 2.0 – applies more actuarially sound pricing to make NFIP’s premium rates more equitable. As NFIP rates become more aligned with principles of risk-based pricing, some policyholders’ prices are expected to fall, while many are going to rise.
CRS provides one avenue for communities to help their citizens get lower rates while proactively reducing flood risk.
According to a recent Chubb survey of 800 high-net-worth individuals in the United States and Canada, 92 percent are concerned about the size of a verdict against them if they were a defendant in a liability case – yet only 36 percent have excess liability insurance.
When it comes to liability, Chubb says respondents are most worried about auto accidents, allegations of assault or harassment, and someone working in their home getting hurt. Damage awards are rising dramatically for a number of reasons, according to Laila Brabander, head of North American personal lines claims for Chubb.
“Economic damages historically were based on factors such as the extent of an injury and resultant medical expenses or past and future loss of income,” she said. “But we are seeing a rise in non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering and post-traumatic stress disorder, that overshadow actual economic losses.”
Brabander described a case in which a client at a yoga studio fell onto the person next to her and was sued by the injured party for pain and suffering.
“The same plaintiffs’ tactics to encourage large verdicts in commercial trucking, auto liability, product liability and medical malpractice suits are now being utilized to push for larger jury awards against our high-net-worth clients,” Brabander said.
Another factor driving up the cost of settlements is the third-party litigation funding, in which firms provide funding to plaintiffs and their lawyers in exchange for a percentage of the settlement. These private-equity firms began in the commercial space and are now funding lawsuits against individuals and their insurers.
High-net-worth people also are deeply concerned about the threats posed to their homes by extreme weather and climate-related events. Much of this concern may be due to increased development in coastal areas vulnerable to tropical storms and flooding and in the wildland-urban interface – areas in which development places property into proximity with fire-prone wilderness (see links below).
Chubb’s findings are based on a survey of 800 wealthy individuals in the United States (650 respondents) and Canada (150 respondents). Respondents had investable assets of at least $500,000, with the majority reporting assets of $1.5 million to $50 million and 12 percent reporting assets of more than $50 million.
The Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) is mitigating flood risks using reforestation, wetlands restoration, and other nature-based solutions. MMSD has developed a roadmap for scaling up the project. Triple-I – in an analysis requested by the district – has determined such an effort would increase resilience across all the metrics it considered.
“Community-based programs can incorporate a combination of parametric insurance and traditional indemnity coverage,” the report stated. “Unlike indemnity insurance, parametric structures cover risks without the complications of sending adjusters to assess damage after an event. Instead of paying for damage that has occurred, parametric insurance pays out if certain agreed-upon conditions are met. If coverage is triggered, a payment is made.”
MMSD serves 28 communities in the Greater Milwaukee area and has already committed substantial resources to reforestation, wetlands restoration, and other nature-based solutions, including green stormwater infrastructure projects.
“This commitment has positioned MMSD to build upon its past work to implement integrated nature-based solutions for stormwater management on a large scale,” the report says. “To keep up with growing flood risk, MMSD has committed to investing $294 million in watercourse and flood management projects over the next ten years…. This is a substantial increase and will likely require MMSD to find new ways to generate funding to pay for these projects.”
The report outlines avenues that include federal and state funding sources, as well as public-private partnerships and instruments like environmental impact bonds (EIB) that can help cities pay for innovative projects where traditional sources of financing may be harder to access. EIBs use private capital for investments in environmental projects and are repaid based on the project’s success in achieving its goals.
Louisiana continues to be the least affordable state for personal auto and homeowners insurance, according to a new report by the Insurance Research Council (IRC).
The average annual expenditure for auto insurance in Louisiana was $1,495 In 2020, more than 40 percent above the national average, the report finds. These costs account for 2.93 percent of the median household income in the state, rendering it the least affordable.
Louisianans also pay significantly more for homeowners coverage compared to the national average, with an average annual expenditure of $1,965. These are among the highest rates in the country, representing 3.84 percent of the median household income in the state – 55 percent above the national average.
“The state has faced multiple major weather events, with extensive litigation following each natural disaster,” the report finds. “Rising auto-repair and construction costs, as well as the state’s relatively low household income, have compounded these issues.”
Personal auto cost drivers include:
Accident frequency: The number of property damage liability claims per 100 insured vehicles in Louisiana is 16 percent higher than the countrywide average.
Injury claim relative frequency: Louisianians show a greater propensity to file injury claims once an accident has occurred, with a relative claim frequency almost twice the national average.
Medical utilization: Louisiana auto claimants are more likely than those in other states to receive diagnostic procedures, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
Attorney involvement: Louisiana claimants are more likely than those in other states to hire attorneys. Attorney involvement has been associated with higher claim costs and longer settlement times.
Claim litigation: The rate of litigation in personal auto claims in Louisiana is more than twice the national average. This rate is the second-highest in the country, surpassed only by Florida.
Homeowners cost drivers include:
Claim frequency, catastrophe claims: The number of catastrophe claims paid for every 100 homes insured for the entire year in Louisiana is almost six times higher than the national average.
Claim severity, catastrophe claims: In the hurricane-prone region, Louisianians are second only to Floridians in the amount paid for the average homeowners insurance claim. Louisiana is 12 percent higher than the national average.
Natural-hazard risk, weather: Louisiana’s exposure to building damage from weather hazards is second only to Florida’s and is dramatically higher than other states.
Claim litigation: Claims in Louisiana were 12 times more likely to involve litigation, compared with states other than Florida.
These issues have led to the insolvency of several carriers and the departure of key insurance providers from the market. Many remaining insurers have chosen to limit coverage and raise premiums.
Louisiana has tried to address these coverage gaps through incentive programs for private carriers and a greater reliance on the state-run insurer Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, the last-resort insurance. However, Louisiana Citizens Property Insurance Corporation can be expensive, making it unaffordable for many and especially for the state’s most vulnerable residents.
These hardships have also influenced a population decline in Louisiana, as individuals and businesses are uprooting and seeking improved affordability elsewhere. Louisiana’s population declined by almost 1 percent in 2022, accounting for nearly 39,000 people, according to a new Census estimate.
With record-breaking wildfires making headlines in recent years, it may be surprising to learn that U.S. wildfire frequency and severity for in 2023 are on track to be the lowest in the past two decades. In fact, the trend has been generally downward since 2000, according to a recently published Triple-I Issues Brief.
Despite catastrophic losses in Washington State, Hawaii, Louisiana, and elsewhere, California – a state often considered synonymous with wildfire – is in the midst of its second mild fire season in a row. This may be due to drought-breaking rains and snows, but Texas is experiencing fewer wildfires than in 2022, despite worsening drought conditions. About 37 percent of the continental U.S. remains under some form of drought, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor.
At the same time, Swiss Re reports that wildfire’s share of insured natural catastrophe losses has doubled over the past 30 years. How can those trends be reconciled? At least part of the answer resides in population trends – specifically, growing numbers of people choosing to live in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), the zone between unoccupied and developed land, where structures and human activity intermingle with vegetative fuels.
Mitigation is necessary – but not sufficient
The improvements in frequency and severity are likely due to investments in mitigation. State and local authorities have invested heavily to mitigate the human causes of wildfire. In addition, the federal Infrastructure and Jobs Act of 2021 included billions to support wildfire-risk reduction, homeowner investment in mitigation, and improved responsiveness to fires. More recently, the Biden Administration announced $185 million for wildfire mitigation and resilience as part of the Investing in America Agenda, which should help continue the declines in frequency and severity.
But with more people living in the WUI – nearly 99 million, or one third of the U.S. population, according to the U.S. Fire Administration – more than 46 million homes with an estimated value of $1.3 trillion are at risk.
According to the 2022 Annual Report of Wildfires produced by the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC), 68,988 wildfires were reported and 7.5 million acres burned in 2022. Of these fires, 89 percent were caused by human activity and burned 55 acres per fire. By contrast, the 11 percent of fires caused by lightning resulted in an average of 563 acres burned, 10 times more than human-caused fires.
This difference may shed light on why the number of fires has been decreasing more dramatically than acres burned. Further, population shifts into the WUI are increasing the proximity of property to places prone to fire, helping to explain the rise in wildfire’s increased percentage of insured losses.
CSAA Insurance Group – a AAA insurer – is spurring innovation in the insurance industry through several initiatives tackling the dangers of climate risk.
“We’ve been on a journey to reduce our environmental footprint for a long time,” said Debbie Brackeen, Chief Strategy & Innovation Officer with CSAA, in a recent executive exchange with Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan. “We are seeking to reduce our carbon footprint by 50 percent by 2025. We view this work as aligned with our mission: to help our members prepare for and recover from climate risk.”
CSAA has taken several steps to help achieve its goals, including:
Leading the first-ever Innovation Challenge on climate resilience with IDEO and Aon, along with several other sponsors;
Working on the California Innovation Fund in partnership with Blue Forest, a $50 million fund that CSAA contributed half that capital, focused on forest restoration and reducing fuel in a smart and sustainable way; and
Supporting the Wildfire Interdisciplinary Research Center at San Jose State University, which conducts work around predictive modeling, among other endeavors.
While this may seem like a new development, Kevelighan noted that insurers have long worked toward these goals.
“We’ve seen the ESG movement take a hold in the past few years, but it’s been in the DNA of the Triple-I and the insurance industry generally for a long time,” Kevelighan said. “More than half the battle is recognizing that the risk is increasing, while identifying solutions.”
Still, with the increasing consequences associated with climate risk, more work needs to be done.
“There were billion-dollar wildfire losses at CSAA in my first two years in the industry,” Brackeen said. “I wondered if this was normal. It ignited in me that, whatever we do in innovation, it will have to do with wildfire risk. However, what concerns me the most is that risks are becoming uninsurable. This is from the cumulative effects of several different types of losses, including convective storms.”
“We have to seek different types of innovative partnerships to address these issues,” Brackeen concluded. “In this fight for our industry, there are no competitors. We have to be on the same side of the table.”
