Swiss Re Insurance-Linked Fund Management

Original Risk: A Society for Change Agents

Climate change raises questions about Flood Re funding: Fitch


Uncertainty surrounding climate change and its influence on increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events raises questions about the funding adequacy of the UK’s government-backed reinsurance scheme Flood Re, according to Fitch Ratings.

Flooding image from the BBCFlood Re remains scheduled for launch in April 2016, in what’s an effort from the UK government and global insurers and reinsurers to provide more affordable flood insurance for vulnerable UK residents.

While the new risk brought to the market via Flood Re has seen strong demand, Fitch Ratings has highlighted potential challenges brought about by climate change, and also the continued and possibly increased need for flood defence spending.

“Increasing frequency and severity of storms as a result of climate change could result in Flood Re being inadequately funded,” said Fitch.

Climate change has fast become one of the most pressing issues and debated topics across all industries.

And following pledges from world leaders at the Paris COP21 climate talks in late 2015 to increase the role of insurance to protect the vulnerable against its perils; the risk transfer landscape has often been at the forefront of discussions.

The impacts of climate change remain uncertain, and while some scientific research predicts a rise in the number of events and the severity of these events, just how much of an influence climate change actually has here isn’t clear.

But the general view across the risk transfer industry and also from talks at COP21 and beyond, seemingly points towards a rise in the frequency and severity of natural catastrophe events.

For Flood Re, as highlighted by Fitch, a rise in extreme storms across the UK could mean that the funding of the retrocessional reinsurance scheme might be insufficient, which in turn would likely result in additional industry levies, that would “likely be passed on to policyholders.”

“A study by the Committee on Climate Change estimated that flood defence spending would need to increase by GBP20m a year on top of inflation until 2035 just to keep the number of significant-risk properties steady,” said Fitch.

It’s worth noting here that owing to the broad uncertainty of climate change and its impact on more intense and frequent storms and resulting flooding, the £20 million per year figure could in fact be higher, underlining the need for continued research into climate change and the possible need for further flood defence funding.

It’s also important to note that reinsurers participating in the Flood Re retrocession program will want to be aware of the climate related uncertainty and ensure it has been factored into their modelling and pricing of the reinsurance program.

Fitch stresses that any shortfall in Flood Re capacity owing to higher-than expected flood losses from climate change would most likely see re/insurers cover the additional costs, again noting that this could lead to higher annual premiums for policyholders, something the scheme was designed to mitigate.

In its special report, ‘Flood Re: Temporary Solution for Policyholders,’ Fitch also highlights the need for continued investment in flood defence systems in the UK, citing that Chancellor George Osbourne recently announced additional funding for flood defences in his 2016/2017 budget.

However, “Fitch believes that by making home insurance affordable, Flood Re reduces the financial incentive for policyholders to make flood-resilience improvements to their properties and or the government to invest in flood defences.”

Fitch suggests that by enabling more affordable flood protection, which is the reason for the establishment of Flood Re, policyholders will be less inclined to spend money on flood defence systems to protect their homes, as they will be paying a premium that will repair any damage from flooding.

This could be extremely detrimental to effectiveness and funding adequacy of Flood Re, especially when combined with the potential for greater capitalisation needs in light of any increased frequency and severity of flooding events as a result of climate change.

Should a rise in flooding events occur alongside a reduction in flood defence measurements, Flood Re could find itself in need of greater retrocessional reinsurance, which in turn could create opportunities for capital markets investors to participate in the scheme and access new risk.

As Fitch notes, Flood Re will likely provide more affordable home insurance for households at heightened risk of flooding until it expires in 2039.

However, a failure to continue flood defence resilience practices and the potential influence of climate change could hinder the performance of the retrocessional reinsurance scheme, meaning that without additional capacity from insurers, reinsurers, and possibly the capital markets, policyholders could be paying higher premiums once again.

Also read:

Flood Re finalises £2.1bn retro reinsurance using ~40 counterparties.

UK flood loss estimates rise to £1.5bn, Flood Re expansion called for.

JBA’s new UK flood model could help Flood Re sponsor a cat bond.

Flood Re secures £1.29bn traditional retro from 6 counterparties.

Artemis Live - ILS and reinsurance video interviews and podcastView all of our Artemis Live video interviews and subscribe to our podcast.

All of our Artemis Live insurance-linked securities (ILS), catastrophe bonds and reinsurance video content and video interviews can be accessed online.

Our Artemis Live podcast can be subscribed to using the typical podcast services providers, including Apple, Google, Spotify and more.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Artemis Newsletters and Email Alerts

Receive a regular weekly email newsletter update containing all the top news stories, deals and event information

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Receive alert notifications by email for every article from Artemis as it gets published.