Tag Archives: Hurricanes

Disaster Resilience, Floods

Attacking the Risk Crisis: Roadmap to Investment
in Flood Resilience

Leave a comment

As part of its attack on the risk crisis, Triple-I recently participated in a project led by the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) to develop a roadmap for mitigation investment incentives. The Resilience Incentivization Roadmap 2.0 builds off research NIBS published in 2019 and focuses on urban pluvial flooding, though many of the principles can be applied to riverine and coastal flooding, as well as non-flood perils.

The roadmap draws heavily from voluntary programs that have seen success in the context of other risks – such as the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS) FORTIFIED Home™ Standard and the California Earthquake Authority’s Brace + Bolt retrofit program.

“Pluvial urban flooding” refers to rainwater that can’t flow downhill fast enough to reach streams and stormwater systems and therefore backs up into buildings. Much of the inland flooding caused by Hurricane Ida (2021), Hurricane Ian (2022), and more recent flooding in California due to “atmospheric rivers” and in the Northeast would fall under this category. Common low-cost measures exist to protect buildings from such flooding, and the relative ease and affordability of such mitigations made pluvial urban flooding an appropriate initial target.

This project was a collaboration representing stakeholders in the built environment – lenders, developers, insurers, engineers, agencies, policymakers – with the goal of helping communities develop layered mitigation investment packages. Triple-I’s role was to represent the property/casualty insurance industry as a stakeholder and co-beneficiary of investment in advance mitigation and resilience.

Insurers have strong incentives to encourage policyholders to make improvements that reduce the risk of costly claims. In the case of flood risk – an increasingly expensive peril outside FEMA-designated flood zones – encouraging such improvements is preceded by a different challenge: persuading homeowners to obtain flood insurance.

About 90 percent of U.S. natural disasters involve flooding. Estimates of size of the “flood protection gap” vary widely among experts, but illustrations worth noting include:

  • Less than 25 percent of buildings inundated by Hurricanes Harvey, Sandy, and Irma had flood coverage;
  • Inland areas hardest hit by the remnants of Hurricane Ida in 2021 were in areas in which less than 2 percent of properties had federal flood insurance;
  • In 2022, historic flooding in and around Yellowstone National Park affected areas in which only 3 percent of residents have federal flood insurance; and
  • More recently, precipitation from atmospheric rivers affecting the U.S. West Coast has resulted in an unparalleled weather event not experienced in several decades, with much of the activity affecting areas with low flood-insurance purchase rates.

For decades, U.S. insurers considered flood risk “untouchable” because of how hard it is to quantify their risk. As a result, flood is excluded under standard homeowners and renters policies, but coverage is available from FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and a growing number of private insurers that have gained confidence in recent years in their ability to underwrite this risk using sophisticated risk modeling.

Consumer research has consistently shown that some of the most common reasons for not buying flood insurance include:

  • An erroneous belief that flood risk is covered under standard homeowners insurance;
  • If the mortgage lender doesn’t require flood insurance, it must not be necessary; and
  • The coverage is too expensive.

The roadmap provides findings and specific recommendations developed by its multidisciplinary team of authors in collaboration with broad and diverse participation of stakeholder group members. The NIBS Committee on Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate (CFIRE) will host a webinar on October 18 to go over these findings and recommendations. In addition, CFIRE chair Dan Kaniewski will be a participant in Triple-I’s November 30 Town Hall: Attacking the Risk Crisis in Washington, D.C.

A close-up of a logo Description automatically generated

Learn More:

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

Shutdown Threat Looms Over U.S. Flood Insurance

FEMA Incentive Program Helps Communities Reduce Flood Insurance Rates for Their Citizens

More Private Insurers Writing Flood Coverage; Consumer Demand Continues to Lag

NAIC Seeks Granular Data From Insurers to Help Fill Local Protection Gaps

Kentucky Flood Woes Highlight Inland Protection Gap

Inland Flooding Adds a Wrinkle to Protection Gap

Cyber Risk, Disaster Resilience, Earthquakes, Floods, Highway Safety, Insurers and the Economy, Terrorism Risk

It’s Not an “Insurance Crisis” — It’s a Risk Crisis

Leave a comment

Ten states – Louisiana, Florida, Idaho, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia – as well as additional plaintiffs, are suing the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) over its new methodology for pricing flood insurance, Risk Rating 2.0. On Sept. 14, a federal hearing lasted six hours as the plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction to halt the new pricing regime while the lawsuit plays out.

Many residents of these states are understandably upset about seeing their flood insurance premium rates rise under the new approach. There may not be much comfort for them in knowing that the current system is much fairer than the previous one, in which higher-risk homeowners subsidized those with lower risks. Similarly, policyholders who have had their premium rates reduced under Risk Rating 2.0 are unlikely to take to the streets in celebration.

These homeowners aren’t alone in seeing insurance rates rise – or even having to struggle to obtain insurance. And these difficulties aren’t confined to holders of flood insurance policies. Florida and California are two states in which insurers have been forced to rethink their risk appetite – due in part to rising natural catastrophe losses and in part to regulatory and litigation environments that make it increasingly difficult for insurers to profitably write coverage.

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine – and the supply-chain and inflationary pressures they created – the property/casualty insurance market was hardening as insurers adjusted their pricing and their risk appetites to keep pace with conditions that were driving losses up and eroding underwriting profitability – topics Triple-I has written about extensively (see a partial list below).

“Rising insurance rates are not the problem,” says Dale Porfilio, chief insurance officer at Triple-I. “They are a symptom of rising losses related to a range of factors, from climate and population trends to post-pandemic driving behaviors and surging cybercrime to antiquated policies, outdated building codes, fraud, and legal system abuse.”

In short, we are not experiencing an “insurance crisis,” as many media outlets tend to describe the current state of the market; we are experiencing a risk crisis. And even as the states referenced above push back against much-needed flood insurance reform, legislators in several states have been pushing measures that would restrict insurers’ ability to price coverage accurately and fairly – rather than addressing the underlying perils and forces aggravating them.  

Triple-I, its members, and a range of partners are working to educate stakeholders and decisionmakers and promote pre-emptive risk mitigation and investment in resilience. We are using our position as thought leaders and our unique non-lobbying role in the insurance industry to reach across sector boundaries and drive constructive action. You will be hearing more about these efforts over the next few months.

The success of these efforts will require a collective understanding among stakeholders and decisionmakers that for insurance to be available and affordable frequency and severity of risk must be measurably reduced. This will require highly focused, integrated projects and programs – many of them at the community level – in which all stakeholders (co-beneficiaries of these efforts) will share responsibility.

Want to know more about the risk crisis and how insurers are working to address it? Check out Triple-I’s upcoming Town Hall, “Attacking the Risk Crisis,” which will be held Nov. 30 in Washington, D.C.

Learn More:

Shutdown Threat Looms Over U.S. Flood Insurance

FEMA Incentive Program Helps Communities Reduce Flood Insurance Rates for Their Citizens

More Private Insurers Writing Flood Coverage; Consumer Demand Continues to Lag

Shift in Hurricane Season’s Predicted Severity Highlights Need for Prospective Cat Risk Pricing

California Needs to Make Changes to Address Its Climate Risk Crisis

Illinois Bill Highlights Need for Education on Risk-based Pricing of Insurance Coverage

IRC Outlines Florida’s Auto Insurance Affordability Problems

Education Can Overcome Doubts on Credit-Based Insurance Scores, IRC Survey Suggests

Matching Price to Peril Helps Keep Insurance Available & Affordable

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

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

Triple-I Issues “Trends and Insights” Brief: Risk-Based Pricing of Insurance

Disaster Resilience, Floods, Insurers and the Economy

Shutdown Threat Looms Over U.S. Flood Insurance

Leave a comment

Even as the 2023 Atlantic hurricane season proves to be more intense than originally predicted, federal funding for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is threatened by a potential government shutdown. Funding for NFIP will expire after September 30 if lawmakers don’t reach a deal.

Claims on existing policies would still get paid if NFIP isn’t reauthorized. But the program would be unable to issue new policies and would face other funding constraints. If it can’t issue new policies, thousands of real estate transactions requiring flood coverage could be derailed. 

Insured losses from hurricanes have risen over just the past 15 years. When adjusted for inflation, nine of the 10 costliest hurricanes in U.S. history have struck since 2005. This is due in large part to the fact that more people have been moving into harm’s way since the 1940s, and Census Bureau data show that homes being built are bigger and more expensive than before. Bigger homes filled with more valuables means bigger claims when a flood occurs – a situation exacerbated by continuing replacement cost inflation.

Flooding isn’t just a problem for East and Gulf Coast communities. Inland flooding also is on the rise. In August 2021, Hurricane Ida brought heavy flooding to the Louisiana coast before delivering so much water to the northeast that Philadelphia and New York City saw flooded subway stations days after the storm passed. Floods in Eastern Kentucky in 2022 further underscored the need for more comprehensive planning on how to deal with these disasters and reduce the nationwide flood protection gap. California and the Pacific Northwest have been hit in recent years by drenching “atmospheric rivers” and, most recently, Hurricane Hilary, which slammed Southern California and neighboring Nevada, where it turned the Burning Man festival in the state’s northern desert into a dangerous mess of foot-deep mud and limited supplies.

Flood insurance is provided by NFIP and a small but growing number of private insurers, who have become increasingly comfortable writing the coverage since the advent of sophisticated modeling and analytical tools. Between 2016 and 2022, the total flood market grew 24 percent – from $3.29 billion in direct premiums written (DPW) to $4.09 billion – with 77 private companies writing 32.1 percent of the business.

Flood risk was long considered untouchable by private insurers, which is a large part of the reason the federally run NFIP exists. While private participation in the flood market is growing, NFIP remains a critical source of protection for this growing and underinsured peril.

Want to know more about the risk crisis and how insurers are working to address it? Check out Triple-I’s upcoming Town Hall, “Attacking the Risk Crisis,” which will be held Nov. 30 in Washington, D.C.

Learn More:

FEMA Incentive Program Helps Communities Reduce Flood Insurance Rates for Their Citizens

More Private Insurers Writing Flood Coverage; Consumer Demand Continues to Lag

Stemming a Rising Tide: How Insurers Can Close the Flood Protection Gap

Kentucky Flood Woes Highlight Inland Protection Gap

Inland Flooding Adds a Wrinkle to Protection Gap

State of the Risk Issues Brief: Flood

State of the Risk Issues Brief: Hurricanes

Coastal Property, Disaster Resilience, Flood Insurance, Floods, Homeowners Insurance

Mangroves and Reefs: Insurance Can Help Protect Our Protectors

Leave a comment

Hurricanes and storm-related flooding are responsible for the bulk of damage from disasters in the United States, accounting for annual economic losses of about $54 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).  

These losses have been on the rise, due, in large part, to increased coastal development. More, bigger homes, more valuables inside them, more cars and infrastructure – these all can contribute to bigger losses. The CBO estimates that a combination of private insurance for wind damage, federal flood insurance, and federal disaster assistance would cover about 50 percent of losses to the residential sector and 40 percent of  commercial sector losses. 

Recent research illustrates the benefits provided by mangroves, barrier islands, and coral reefs – natural features that frequently fall victim to development – in terms of limiting storm damage. In many places, mangroves are the first line of defense, their aerial roots helping to reduce erosion and dissipate storm surge. A healthy coral reef can reduce up to 97 percent of a wave’s energy before it hits the shore. Reefs — especially those that have been weakened by pollution, disease, overfishing, and ocean acidification — can be damaged by severe storms, reducing the protection they offer for coastal communities. 

In Florida, a recent study found, mangroves alone prevented $1.5 billion in direct flood damages and protected over half a million people during Hurricane Irma in 2017, reducing damages by nearly 25% in counties with mangroves. Another study found that mangroves actively prevent more than $65 billion in property damage and protect over 15 million people every year worldwide.  

A separate study quantified the global flood-prevention benefits of coral reefs at $4.3 billion.  

Such estimates invite debate, but even if these endangered systems provided a fraction of the loss prevention estimated, wouldn’t you think coastal communities and the insurance industry would be investing in protecting them? 

Well, they’re beginning to.  

The Mexican state of Quintana Roo has partnered with hotel owners, the Nature Conservancy, and the National Parks Commission to pilot a conservation strategy that involves coral reef insurance. The insurance component – a one-year parametric policy – pays out if wind speeds in excess of 100 knots hit a predefined area. Unlike traditional insurance, which pays for damage if it occurs, parametric insurance pays claims when specific conditions are met – regardless of whether damage is incurred. Without the need for claims adjustment, policyholders quickly get their benefit and can begin their recovery. In the case of the coral reef coverage, the swift payout will allow for quick damage assessments, debris removal, and initial repairs to be carried out.  

Similar approaches could be applied to protecting mangroves, commercial fish stocks that can be harmed by overfishing or habitat loss, or other intrinsically valuable assets that are hard to insure with traditional approaches.  

Insurance Industry

A Better Tool to Predict Impact of Hurricanes? 

Leave a comment

Minimum sea level pressure can predict the scope of a storm’s  damage — including from storm surge, not just wind — and be more accurately measured in real time.

The more accurately experts can predict an impending storm’s impact, the better prepared individuals, communities, and businesses can be to soften the blow and bounce back. A recent paper published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society suggests an underutilized tool may be better at predicting hurricane damage than the traditionally used “maximum sustained wind speed.”

Atlantic hurricanes have a long history of financial impact. During 2017-18, hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, Florence, and Michael combined to cause more than $345 billion (U.S.) in direct economic damage.  The Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale categorizes only the hurricane wind threat – not the totality of impacts, including storm surge and rainfall.

According to the paper,  several scales have been proposed to replace Saffir-Simpson, but most aren’t easily calculated in real time, nor can they be reliably calculated historically. For example, “storm wind radius” datasets extend back only about 30 years. 

Minimum sea level pressure (MSLP), the paper finds, is a better predictor of the scope of a storm’s  damage and can be more accurately measured in real time, “making it an ideal quantity for evaluating a hurricane’s potential damage.”

MSLP is the lowest pressure recorded in a hurricane.  It occurs at the center of the storm and is part of the large-scale structure of a hurricane’s vortex. Because winds are generated by differences in  barometric pressure between the hurricane’s eye and its perimeter, lower pressure is typically associated with stronger winds.  Also, if two hurricanes have the same wind speed, the one with the lower pressure typically will cover a greater area, potentially posing greater storm surge risk.

“With aircraft reconnaissance, MSLP can be reliably calculated,” the paper says. It’s also much easier to measure at landfall than is maximum sustained wind speed.

“Barometers are among the simplest meteorological instruments and will usually operate in a wide range of conditions,” the report says. Anemometers, which measure wind speed, “are prone to mechanical failure…precisely when they matter most.”

The paper was authored by Colorado State University atmospheric scientist Dr. Philip J. Klotzbach — a Triple-I non-resident scholar — along with scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), North Carolina State University, the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, and insurance broker Aon.