This work addresses potential innovative insurance mechanisms to compensate flood losses in central Europe by applying financial instruments for pooling multi-country risks to reduce single-country costs.

This applied study addresses the large flood exposures of Central Europe and proposes efficient financial and risk transfer mechanisms to mitigate fiscal losses from such natural catastrophes. In 2010 the V-4 Visegrad countries (i.e., Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia) demonstrated their historical vulnerability to floods - Poland suffered 3.2 billion in flood related losses, comparable to it 3.5 billion of losses in 1997. Flood modeling analysis of the V-4 shows that a disaster event with a 5 percent probability in any given year can lead to economic losses in these countries of.

Stefan Hochrainer develops a catastrophe risk management model. It illustrates which trade-offs and choices a country must make in managing economic risks due to natural disasters. Budgetary resources are allocated to pre-disaster risk management strategies to reduce the probability of financing gaps. The framework and model approach allows cross country comparisons as well as the assessment of financial vulnerability, macroeconomic risk, and risk management strategies. Three case studies demonstrate its flexibility and coherent approach.

In providing support for disaster-prone areas such as the Caribbean, the development community has begun to progress from disaster reconstruction assistance to funding for investment in mitigation as an explicit tool for sustainable development. Now it must enter a new phase, applying risk transfer mechanisms to address the financial risk of exposure to catastrophic events that require funding beyond what can be controlled solely through mitigation and physical measures.

Is it possible that the insurance and reinsurance industries cannot handle a major catastrophe? Ten years ago, the notion that the overall cost of a single catastrophic event might exceed $10 billion was unthinkable. With ever increasing property-casualty risks and unabated growth in hazard-prone areas, insurers and reinsurers now envision the possibility of disaster losses of $50 to $100 billion in the United States. Against this backdrop, the capitalization of the insurance and reinsurance industries has become a crucial concern. While it remains unlikely that a single event might entirely bankrupt these industries, a big catastrophe could place firms under severe stress, jeopardizing both policy holders and investors and causing profound ripple effects throughout the U.S. economy. The Financing of Catastrophe Risk assembles an impressive roster of experts from academia and industry to explore the disturbing yet realistic assumption that a large catastrophic event is inevitable. The essays offer tangible means of both reassessing and raising the level of preparedness throughout the insurance and reinsurance industries.

Abstract: Economic theory suggests that countries should ignore uncertainty for public investment and behave as if indifferent to risk because they can pool risks to a much greater extent than private investors can. This paper discusses the general economic theory in the case of developing countries. The analysis identifies several cases where the government's risk-neutral assumption does not hold, thus making rational the use of ex ante risk financing instruments, including sovereign insurance. The paper discusses the optimal level of sovereign insurance. It argues that, because sovereign insurance is usually more expensive than post-disaster financing, it should mainly cover immediate needs, while long-term expenditures should be financed through post-disaster financing (including ex post borrowing and tax increases). In other words, sovereign insurance should not aim at financing the long-term resource gap, but only the short-term liquidity need.