4.2 MUTUALITY THE GREATEST CHALLENGE IN DESIGNING AN ECONOMICALLY...

7.4.2  Mutuality  

The greatest challenge in designing an economically sustainable national flood insurance system is to

build a sufficiently broad risk community. A large enough risk community is necessary to meet the

interrelated conditions of mutuality and financial viability. There are several options for insurers to

build an appropriate sized risk community comprising the necessary cross-section of policyholders to

meet these two conditions.

A first option is for the insurance sector to offer comprehensive natural disaster insurance packages that

ties flood risk to other natural perils. This is the case in the Belgian WN and the French NAT/CAT where

flood insurance is offered with other natural hazards such as earthquake and hail. As the main natural

peril the Dutch face is flood, it could be politically difficult to combine a high risk flood population with

less exposed groups to build a sufficiently broad risk community. The example of the Belgian WN might

be followed. In order to make the catastrophe insurance more relevant to city dwellers, and, therefore

more widely legitimate, the compulsory WN was in 2005 expanded to cover losses related to sewer

overflows as well. What the equivalent expansion would be in the Netherlands is open for discussion.

A second option is to bundle flood insurance with other simpler risks such as fire insurance in order to

expand the risk community sufficiently that the overall insurance package becomes acceptable and

affordable for a large enough population (Swiss Re, 2012). This was the intention under the proposal

from the Association of Dutch insurers to add 5% to 10% to existing fire insurance policies to cover

certain forms of flood damage. As discussed in the Dutch case study, the Dutch Authority rejected this

proposal for Consumers and Markets as technically violating competition rules. In their informal ruling

they also cited the lack of choice for Dutch citizens who were not exposed to flood risk. This highlights

the potential political resistance to the imposition of compulsory insurances, particularly when introduced

by the private sector rather than by a not-for-profit public body.

The task is harder for natural catastrophe insurances. Studies have found that people are very reluctant

to purchase insurances for very low probability high damage natural events (Swiss Re, 2012). This is not

only about a lack of information and cognitive limitations in calculating real rather than perceived risk

probabilities. Faure and Bruggeman (2008) refer to research that suggests that the decision process

when buying insurance involves certain “heuristics and biases” that put people off paying a premium for

71  

a low probability event when there is a high possibility they will never receive any return on what is

considered to be a form of long term investment rather than straightforward insurance.

A third option is through changes that make flood insurance mandatory either through legislation or as a

quasi- obligation. For example, in the UK, it is not possible to secure a mortgage without sufficient

building insurance that includes flood protection as standard alongside other risks such as fire. The UK

flood insurance market is quite mature and to date has not relied on significant legislation but instead on

voluntary agreements between the insurance industry and the government.

When insurance is mandatory or quasi-mandatory, the risk is shared on a more collective basis than

when insurance is not mandatory. In countries that operate without a form of mandatory insurance, after

a flood, the victims who chose not to purchase insurance have to rely on their own savings if the state is

not prepared to offer them financial relief. In order to achieve sufficiently high penetration rates and to

build a risk community large enough for premiums to be affordable, the proposal from the Dutch

Association of Insurers to replace the current system emphasised the necessity of making flood

insurance mandatory.