Insuring the 'Uninsurable': Catastrophe Bonds, Pandemics, and Risk Securitization

S. Schwarcz
{"title":"Insuring the 'Uninsurable': Catastrophe Bonds, Pandemics, and Risk Securitization","authors":"S. Schwarcz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3712534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In theory, governments could protect against the potential economic devastation of future pandemics by requiring businesses to insure against pandemic-related risks. In practice, though, insurers do not currently offer pandemic insurance. Even assuming companies could obtain sufficient statistical data to reliably set pandemic underwriting standards and rate tables, the insurance industry is concerned that it lacks sufficient capacity to cover those risks, which are likely to occur worldwide and be highly correlated. Pandemics therefore are in the class of risks, like nuclear accidents, war, and terrorism, that are sometimes defined as “uninsurable,” at least by private markets. This Article focuses on using risk securitization—a relatively recent and innovative private-sector alternative to government insurance, funded by the issuance of catastrophe (“CAT”) bonds—to insure pandemic-related risks. Risk securitization would utilize the “deep pockets” of the global capital markets, which have a far greater capacity than the global insurance markets, to absorb these risks. The Article also examines how risk securitization could supplement public-private catastrophe insurance schemes, such as Chubb’s recent pandemic-coverage plan, to reduce the government’s shared exposure.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"305 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3712534","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

In theory, governments could protect against the potential economic devastation of future pandemics by requiring businesses to insure against pandemic-related risks. In practice, though, insurers do not currently offer pandemic insurance. Even assuming companies could obtain sufficient statistical data to reliably set pandemic underwriting standards and rate tables, the insurance industry is concerned that it lacks sufficient capacity to cover those risks, which are likely to occur worldwide and be highly correlated. Pandemics therefore are in the class of risks, like nuclear accidents, war, and terrorism, that are sometimes defined as “uninsurable,” at least by private markets. This Article focuses on using risk securitization—a relatively recent and innovative private-sector alternative to government insurance, funded by the issuance of catastrophe (“CAT”) bonds—to insure pandemic-related risks. Risk securitization would utilize the “deep pockets” of the global capital markets, which have a far greater capacity than the global insurance markets, to absorb these risks. The Article also examines how risk securitization could supplement public-private catastrophe insurance schemes, such as Chubb’s recent pandemic-coverage plan, to reduce the government’s shared exposure.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
为“不可保险”投保:巨灾债券、流行病和风险证券化
理论上,政府可以通过要求企业投保与大流行相关的风险,来防范未来大流行可能造成的经济破坏。但实际上,保险公司目前并不提供流行病保险。即使假设公司能够获得足够的统计数据,以可靠地制定大流行病承保标准和费率表,保险业也担心,它缺乏足够的能力来承保这些风险,这些风险可能在全球范围内发生,并且高度相关。因此,流行病与核事故、战争和恐怖主义一样,属于有时被定义为“不可保险”的风险类别,至少在私人市场上是如此。这篇文章的重点是使用风险证券化——一种相对较新的创新的私营部门替代政府保险,由发行巨灾债券(CAT)提供资金——来确保与流行病相关的风险。风险证券化将利用比全球保险市场能力大得多的全球资本市场的“大口袋”来吸收这些风险。本文还研究了风险证券化如何补充公私巨灾保险计划,例如Chubb最近的流行病保险计划,以减少政府的共同风险敞口。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bankruptcy's Equity Canon Insolvency Set Offs in India: A Comparative Perspective Betting on Farms: Feasible Chapter 12 Plans The Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act Reference Case, 1934 Bespoke Bankruptcy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1