向实体-网络市场过渡的保险业:网络风险覆盖范围的沟通、协调与统一

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW Connecticut Insurance Law Journal Pub Date : 2018-10-15 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3201875
W. Kwon
{"title":"向实体-网络市场过渡的保险业:网络风险覆盖范围的沟通、协调与统一","authors":"W. Kwon","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3201875","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This investigative study examines the business of insurance from a loss exposure and coverage development perspective and compares its findings with current market practices dealing with cyber risk(s). It discusses the importance of government regulation of data and privacy protection for the public, in general, and insurance buyers, in particular. Evidence shows incomplete communication among information technology professionals, risk managers and insurance underwriters. Their efforts are inadequately coordinated, and each industry seems to have its own set of risk management guidelines. Evidence shows that insurance policies – including risk classification and policy wording – are not standardized, likely resulting in coverage gaps and a litigious claims environment. More importantly, the insurance market treats all insurable loss exposures and the parties exposed to them in cyberspace using a single policy approach – an approach for a world of risk in which human activities, artificial intelligence and machine-learning become complicated and are increasingly interconnected. This multiplicity-in-cause, multiplicity-in-outcome nature of the risks in the cyber world, of which coverages every individual and business will need, requires the insurance industry to evaluate whether this single policy approach is appropriate, and separately to agree on meaningful standardization of coverages. Finally, this study proposes that, as the cyber world adds more risks on top of cybersecurity-related loss exposures, the business of insurance is in transition to operations in the physical-cyber market.","PeriodicalId":29865,"journal":{"name":"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Insurance Business in Transition to the Physical-Cyber Market: Communication, Coordination and Harmonization of Cyber Risk Coverages\",\"authors\":\"W. Kwon\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3201875\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This investigative study examines the business of insurance from a loss exposure and coverage development perspective and compares its findings with current market practices dealing with cyber risk(s). It discusses the importance of government regulation of data and privacy protection for the public, in general, and insurance buyers, in particular. Evidence shows incomplete communication among information technology professionals, risk managers and insurance underwriters. Their efforts are inadequately coordinated, and each industry seems to have its own set of risk management guidelines. Evidence shows that insurance policies – including risk classification and policy wording – are not standardized, likely resulting in coverage gaps and a litigious claims environment. More importantly, the insurance market treats all insurable loss exposures and the parties exposed to them in cyberspace using a single policy approach – an approach for a world of risk in which human activities, artificial intelligence and machine-learning become complicated and are increasingly interconnected. This multiplicity-in-cause, multiplicity-in-outcome nature of the risks in the cyber world, of which coverages every individual and business will need, requires the insurance industry to evaluate whether this single policy approach is appropriate, and separately to agree on meaningful standardization of coverages. Finally, this study proposes that, as the cyber world adds more risks on top of cybersecurity-related loss exposures, the business of insurance is in transition to operations in the physical-cyber market.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29865,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3201875\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Connecticut Insurance Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3201875","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本调查研究从损失暴露和保险范围发展的角度考察了保险业务,并将其研究结果与当前处理网络风险的市场实践进行了比较。它讨论了政府对数据和隐私保护的监管对公众的重要性,特别是对保险购买者。有证据表明,信息技术专业人员、风险管理人员和保险承销商之间的沟通不充分。他们的努力没有充分协调,而且每个行业似乎都有自己的一套风险管理指导方针。有证据表明,保险政策——包括风险分类和政策措辞——没有标准化,可能导致覆盖范围的空白和诉讼索赔环境。更重要的是,保险市场使用单一的政策方法来处理网络空间中所有可保险的损失风险敞口及其相关方——这是一种针对人类活动、人工智能和机器学习变得复杂且日益相互关联的风险世界的方法。网络世界的风险具有多重原因、多重结果的性质,涉及到每一个个人和企业,这就要求保险业评估这种单一的政策方法是否合适,并分别就有意义的保险范围标准化达成一致。最后,本研究提出,随着网络世界在网络安全相关损失暴露的基础上增加了更多风险,保险业务正在向实体网络市场的运营过渡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Insurance Business in Transition to the Physical-Cyber Market: Communication, Coordination and Harmonization of Cyber Risk Coverages
This investigative study examines the business of insurance from a loss exposure and coverage development perspective and compares its findings with current market practices dealing with cyber risk(s). It discusses the importance of government regulation of data and privacy protection for the public, in general, and insurance buyers, in particular. Evidence shows incomplete communication among information technology professionals, risk managers and insurance underwriters. Their efforts are inadequately coordinated, and each industry seems to have its own set of risk management guidelines. Evidence shows that insurance policies – including risk classification and policy wording – are not standardized, likely resulting in coverage gaps and a litigious claims environment. More importantly, the insurance market treats all insurable loss exposures and the parties exposed to them in cyberspace using a single policy approach – an approach for a world of risk in which human activities, artificial intelligence and machine-learning become complicated and are increasingly interconnected. This multiplicity-in-cause, multiplicity-in-outcome nature of the risks in the cyber world, of which coverages every individual and business will need, requires the insurance industry to evaluate whether this single policy approach is appropriate, and separately to agree on meaningful standardization of coverages. Finally, this study proposes that, as the cyber world adds more risks on top of cybersecurity-related loss exposures, the business of insurance is in transition to operations in the physical-cyber market.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Demand for Health Insurance in the Time of COVID-19: Evidence from the Special Enrollment Period in the Washington State ACA Marketplace Licensing the Insured: Providing Driver Licenses to Unauthorized Immigrants Has Not Impacted Auto Insurance in California Terrorism Risk Insurance Act: Time to Renew . . . or Rethink? Loss of ‘Unattended Property in a Public Place’ – Testing the Good Faith of the Travel Insurer The Insurance Business in Transition to the Physical-Cyber Market: Communication, Coordination and Harmonization of Cyber Risk Coverages
×
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