Insurance engagement in flood risk reduction – examples from household and business insurance in developed countries

Seifert-Dähnn, Isabel

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2409-2018

Articles | Volume 18, issue 9

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2409-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-2409-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 18, issue 9

Research article

|

14 Sep 2018

Research article |

| 14 Sep 2018

Insurance engagement in flood risk reduction – examples from household and business insurance in developed countries

Isabel Seifert-Dähnn

Download

Final revised paper (published on 14 Sep 2018)
Preprint (discussion started on 11 Jul 2017)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #1, 14 Jul 2017
- AC1: 'Answer to your comments', Isabel Seifert-Dähnn, 28 Jun 2018
RC2: 'Review to "When is it beneficial for insurers to engage in climate change adaptation - a cross country comparison"', Anonymous Referee #2, 26 Jul 2017
- AC2: 'Answer to your comments', Isabel Seifert-Dähnn, 28 Jun 2018
RC3: 'Review report', Anonymous Referee #3, 08 Aug 2017
- AC3: 'Answer to your comments', Isabel Seifert-Dähnn, 28 Jun 2018

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (01 Jul 2018) by Sven Fuchs

AR by Isabel Seifert-Dähnn on behalf of the Authors (03 Aug 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (09 Aug 2018) by Sven Fuchs

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (09 Aug 2018)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (22 Aug 2018)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

Review on the article “Insurance engagement in flood risk reduction – examples from household and business insurance in developed countries” by Isabel Seifert-Dähnn

The manuscript now improved a lot. The manuscript now synthesizes the potential measures for flood risk reduction that insurers can take. In comparison to the first version, the title, the research question, the method description and the conclusions are now streamlined. Thus, I do not see any relevant issues that prevent the publication of the manuscript. I have solely a few minor remarks:
- the author is writing in plural (we analysed, our analysis). It might be better to add the co-author or to change this and to write about herself (I analyzed).
-Table 1: The definition of “all hazards” is vague. In some countries landslides or earthquakes are not included while for example floods, snow avalanches and rockfall processes are included. Please specify the types of processes considered (to be preferred) or write about “multiple hazards” instead of “all hazards” (not preferable).
-there are a number of typos
-page 9, line 30: you are writing how you adapted the figure but not why.
-page 12, line 30: data protection issues --> data privacy issues
-you mention “building codes” in chapter 4.1.2 and “property level measures” in 4.1.3. These terms both are the same matter. In my view, the building code regulates whether object protection is needed or not and thus, both are related. Please specify the division of both in detail or merge them into one chapter.
-in page 19, line 30-35 you mentioned the potential of deductibles as incentives. However, the discussion section does not mention this very important point (may somewhere at line 15, page 28).
- the conclusion section needs a grammar revision and a thorough check for typos.
-page 29, line 7: Financial aid for both, property-level protection measures and for large-scale protection infrastructure in form of subsidies and grants was found under public as well as in private insurance schemes.
-maybe the most critical point to consider is that you often mentioned the high amount of transaction costs of implementing flood risk reduction strategies. However, I do not have seen the proof of this statement. Please add references regarding the transaction costs or soften this statement.

Hide

ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (24 Aug 2018) by Sven Fuchs

AR by Isabel Seifert-Dähnn on behalf of the Authors (30 Aug 2018) Author's response Manuscript

Short summary

Insurance is suggested to be an important mechanism to boost flood risk reduction, especially at an individual level. This study shows how insurers in developed countries are engaged in flood risk reduction and under which conditions (insurance scheme, market penetration). Insurers in public insurance schemes seem to be more proactive when it comes to flood risk reduction. Surprisingly, risk-based pricing is seldom practiced, even though it is heavily argued for in the academic literature.