Aon Benfield Research
Conference workshop on 5 July 2012
Exploring opportunities for collaboration between re/insurance business, education
and research, and humanitarian and development activities
Convened by Steve Edwards of the Aon Benfield UCL Hazard Centre
The key aim of the workshop was to begin to understand the opportunities that may exist
for collaboration between re/insurers, humanitarian and development agencies and
academics. Such collaboration is timely, with current UK government initiatives calling
for this type of collaboration as explicitly set out in the recommendations published in the
2011 Humanitarian Emergency Response Review. The workshop provided only a brief
initial opportunity for participants to introduce themselves and to begin to consider how
and why working together might be mutually beneficial. The workshop had four
objectives:
1) to understand the relevant needs of humanitarian and development agencies and the
business opportunities that these may create;
2) to understand what re/insurance may offer and the opportunities that these may
provide for humanitarian and development actions;
3) to consider where academic research and knowledge exchange may be enhanced to
benefit potential collaboration;
4) to identify synergies in order to outline a way forward for future collaboration.
From the discussion it became clear that there was plenty of scope for collaboration, but
that resourcing this would be a challenge. The following list is a non-exhaustive summary
of many of the key points that emerged, which should be considered in future
developments.
• Corporate social responsibility is not the best vehicle to drive forward working
together. Rather, collaboration needs to be built around sound business initiatives
with incentives.
• Improve anticipation of hazardous events and, accordingly, enhance preparedness,
response and recovery; planning through scenarios should be important here.
• Build greater resilience by enhancing the ability of a region to absorb shocks and
recover and adapt; within this provide viable incentives for taking greater risks.
• Map out potential new re/insurance markets and then use local knowledge to
assist re/insurance grow new markets and to build or improve catastrophe models
in these areas.
• Humanitarian and development agencies could act as brokers between
communities and re/insurance companies.
•
•
•
•
•
There is a great deal of existing knowledge and a number of existing tools that
could be utilised now as long as appropriate resources are available. Quick wins
should be investigated to demonstrate that collaboration is worthwhile and
beneficial. Existing risk-mapping tools have obvious applications here.
Need to look at existing data for areas of mutual interest, with the aim of
uploading this into risk assessment tools that exist.
Focus should be regional, rather than at local and community level. Development
banks will be interested at this large scale and can promote access to the business
market.
Greater education and training in disaster preparedness and response needed at
many levels, up to national government and international organisations.
Research and knowledge exchange could be the media to initiate collaboration.
In a summary, Dickie Whitaker presented some specific ideas, which he has kindly
supplied and these are presented below.
1. Creating maximum benefit for developing countries and insurance
It is generally accepted that greatest benefit will accrue where there is a win–win
situation. The greatest impact on developing countries can occur when insurance schemes
are established. These are considered by the World Bank to be one of the most effective
ways to get aid quickly to disaster zones. In addition, brokers view these schemes as
giving them a good foothold into developing countries and providing risk transfer
mechanisms for acceptable fees. It was mentioned by Aon Benfield's CEO that this was
an area for future growth.
Suggested action:
Develop databases of territories that the development banks are looking to work with and
have joint meetings with Aon Benfield and relevant aid agencies and academic partners
to provide coordinated action plans.
2. Partnerships
These are recognised as being of key importance in creating success in this demanding
area. The distillation of possible partners and networks is, however, complex as they vary
in every situation.
Suggested action:
Develop lists of networks and partners that can offer practical benefits in general and can
form part of every new combined project activity. These should include government
agencies, research networks, aid agencies and quangos, in addition to insurance and
finance organisations.
3. Micro-insurance
This has the potential to provide effective benefit in the poorest countries. Its practical
benefits are, however, not widely known and shared, but the mainstream insurance
industry is keen to offer support and ideas. It is believed that efforts in this area are
fragmented and would benefit from additional research and collaboration.
Suggested action:
Produce an inventory of schemes, literature and research in this area and propose and
review opportunities for broader dissemination of best practice and identification of gaps
in knowledge that need additional innovation and/or research.
4. Funding opportunities
Many gaps in knowledge exist that require academic research to fill these and to
stimulate innovation. Funding for these can come from a number of sources, which
include industry, think tanks and UK research councils. Some specific schemes also exist
for certain sectors and the most practical have a co-funding component. These include
schemes with the Economic and Social Research Council, the Engineering and Physical
Sciences Research Council, the Natural Environment Research Council, the Technology
Strategy Board and the Lighthill Risk Network.
Suggested action:
Send opportunities, suggestions or questions to dickie.whitaker@fs-net.org.
5. Dissemination of models, datasets and maps
There is much environmental information that could be disseminated usefully to both the
developing and developed world. Some charities exist to provide GIS information, for
example. However, more complex models have historically lacked a simple vehicle to
allow dissemination. Aon Benfield's Elements and a new not-for-profit company called
Oasis, which is partly owned by Aon Benfield, could be used. Oasis, when completed,
will be used for free.
Suggested action:
Further information available from http://oasislmf.org/ or Dickie Whitaker.
6. Collaboration
Historically there has been little collaboration between humanitarian and development
organisations and the insurance sector and this should now be addressed.
Suggested actions:
Small focused groups should be used to enhance engagement between the sectors. There
may, however, be an opportunity for one event to provide a focus for this collaboration
and a suggestion has been made to hold a conference on Christchurch, which should have
the following objectives:
• To share world leading research and knowledge of disaster mitigation, resilience
and response to emerging and developed nations. New Zealand is already a leader
here.
• To discuss how academia and business can more effectively collaborate on
disaster mitigation and risk transfer.
The way forward
All participants are thanked for their initial interest and are encouraged to remain
engaged with this initiative. There is a need to follow-up on the discussions that took
place during the workshop. Steve Edwards is happy to take matters forward and initial
thoughts and ideas should in the first instance be channelled through him at
s.edwards@ucl.ac.uk.