The Global Risks Report 2017, produced by the World Economic Forum with support from Marsh & McLennan Companies and other partners, was published this week. Now in its twelfth edition, the report provides insights into the key global risks facing businesses as well as the collective view of risk experts in all sectors as to the most significant threats to global prosperity over the next decade. The Global Risks Report 2017 will inform discussions at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting next week in Davos, Switzerland.
Posts Tagged ‘political risk’
Here we review GC Capital Ideas posts on how catastrophic exposures are adversely impacting public entities.
Many governments today are straining under public debt and many of the most catastrophically exposed governments are in the worst financial position. This is particularly true for countries exposed to the perils of flood, tropical cyclone and earthquake. Compounding this situation are demographic and economic trends that are adding additional pressure on already stressed balance sheets, both in emerging and developed economies.
Marsh and McLennan Companies, in Collaboration With the World Economic Forum, Publish the 11th Annual Global Risks Report
Disruptive shifts in technology, geopolitics, societal expectations, and economic patterns are creating instabilities that are directly impacting events in the world today. The World Economic Forum’s eleventh Global Risks Report highlights the issues that will exacerbate volatility and uncertainty over the next decade - while also presenting opportunities for governments and businesses to build resilience and deliver sustainable growth.
The dramatic rise in political instability and civil unrest across the globe, including uprisings in the Middle East and protests in Greece and Spain, has triggered a significant shift in the nature of terrorism risk and has highlighted the need for tailored terrorism and political violence protection, according to “Tensions Building: the Changing Nature of Terrorism Risk and Coverage,” by Guy Carpenter.
David Flandro, Global Head of Business Intelligence, Julian Alovisi, Assistant Vice President, Lucy Dalimonte, Senior Vice President, Ellen Rieder, Managing Director and Emma Karhan, Senior Vice President
The unrest around the world outlined earlier in the report has begun to impact the terror (re)insurance market, not only with regard to supply and demand but also in terms of how risks and coverages are defined. Although there is an abundance of capacity in the market due to the absence of a recent major terrorism loss (resulting in a stable to softening treaty terrorism market), civil unrest and/or riot coverages in some international terrorism programs are impacting several carriers. Indeed, the dramatic increase in global unrest has caused an increased frequency of localized or territory-specific losses in the facultative reinsurance market.
The dramatic rise in political instability and civil unrest across the globe, including uprisings in the Middle East and protests in Greece and Spain, has triggered a significant shift in the nature of terrorism risk and has highlighted the need for tailored terrorism and political violence protection, according to a new report on global terrorism and the terror reinsurance market, “Tensions Building: the Changing Nature of Terrorism Risk and Coverage,” released by Guy Carpenter.
In the credit and bond primary market, rates are flat, but these are not rate-driven classes. In political risk and especially structured credit, rates are under considerable upwards pressure for obvious reasons. The outlook for 2012 is turbulent, given the prevailing macroeconomic uncertainty and instability around the world. Loss ratios are quite likely to increase.
Loss experience defined the credit, bond and political risk reinsurance renewal, with loss-free programs securing significant rate declines and those affected seeing steep increases. Reinsurance rates on loss-free working layers fell 20 percent on average, while those with losses saw increases of 15 percent to 25 percent, depending on severity. Rate increases were slight for high-risk excess programs if there was underlying activity and flat where there was none.