Abstract
Prior studies on the effects of catastrophes on insurance markets have either focused on one specific type of hazard or pooled several natural disasters. We argue that insurers evaluate disaster risk with respect to not only the frequency and severity of disasters but also the disaster type. We analyse U.S. property insurers’ supply decisions between 1992 and 2012 and find that insurers’ responses with respect to the reduction of business volume and exit decisions differ across hazards, even after controlling for damage size. The negative effects of catastrophes on supply decisions are more pronounced after extreme hurricane years compared with tornado years. We argue that supply distortions in the aftermath of unprecedented catastrophes are driven primarily by correlated losses besides the damage size of the event. Our results show that the predictability of catastrophe losses poses less-severe threats to insurers. Thus, we propose that insurers and regulators should focus primarily on measures that encourage diversification.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.