INTER-ACTION - 'Defining how we can act together to manage insurable risk'

互动 - “定义我们如何共同行动来管理可保风险”

• 批准号: NE/R003297/1
• 负责人: John Hillier
• 金额: $ 28.62万
• 依托单位: Loughborough University
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Fellowship
• 财政年份: 2018
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2018 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=NE%2FR003297%2F1
• 关键词: INTER; ACTION; Defining; how; act; INTER; ACTION; Defining; how; act

The UK is impacted by a variety of natural hazards such as flooding and strong winds; Storm Desmond in early December 2015 is a recent illustration of this. Regulation (e.g. building codes), government response (e.g. the COBRA emergency committee) and various agencies (e.g. Environment Agency) seek to mitigate the effects and manage efforts to respond, but with payouts of up to ~£1 billion per year the insurance sector also has an important and often under-estimated role to play. In essence, insurance is our means to spread the cost of rebuilding between citizens/organizations and across time to pay for the repair of assets (e.g. our houses). Providing such insurance reliably, accurately and fairly is underpinned by environmental science. Typically, robust peer-reviewed science is done by academics, funded by government (e.g. by NERC), and is turned into tools such as 'catastrophe models' to assess risk by the insurance sector. This flow of information is, however, not perfect in a number of respects. This includes, but goes beyond, scientists not having a readily accessible list of current business-relevant questions from insurers that are phrased sufficiently tightly for them to work on. More fundamentally, noone in industry, academia or NERC has a full understanding of how, when or why NERC science is, or could be, used by insurers. Compounding this, academics must produce exciting original science, and it is proving difficult to create collaborations that are mutually beneficial and hit both targets - i.e., identified work must meet industry needs whilst also containing (or directly leading to) interesting world-leading science. This mismatch is global, but London's financial strength ideally places the UK to take a world-leading role in fixing it. The purpose of this fellowship is therefore to facilitate better use of environmental science in insurance through better mutual understanding, co-working and collaboration, particularly by improving structures (e.g. a mixed academic-insurer NERC Guidance Panel, 'sandpit' project-creation workshops, protocols, a 'Data Sharing Network', a data 'hub', 'Urgency' NERC funding responsive to a business need) to better share information and co-design research.The work of this fellowship will focus on 3 key aspects of the current position that I believe hamper efficient and effective interactions between the NERC's environmental science community and the insurance sector.Firstly, and most fundamentally, in Strand 1 high-level workshops will be used to map (i.e. determine and report) how and why environmental science is produced for insurance, including how decisions are make and which scientific inputs are most useful. Then 'collaboration pathways', i.e. feasible, timely, and mutually beneficial routes from academic science to insurance decision-making, can be charted. Potentially, such insights could bring about a step-change in the effectiveness of science usage in environmental risk insurance. To help this occur, Strand 2 targets a foreseeable key aspect in detail i.e., data-sharing. Legal issues, data security and simple inter-insurer competition are all potential barriers, but sharing data can be efficient in that it avoids duplication of effort and new access to data is an ideal incentive for academics. Existing expertise will be captured in a 'Data Sharing Network', whilst 3 mini-projects will focus a network of experts on creating viable practices and protocols, and also to demonstrate the feasibility of data sharing. Strand 3 will work out how to best co-design research projects. Alongside established practice, it will test out innovative methods, for example exciting 'sandpit-style' meetings containing mixes of insurers and academics will held both in London and at a science conference. The proposed workshop titles 'Existing science, new problems' and 'Existing loss data, new science' illustrate that the mismatch will be tackled from both sides.

英国受到各种自然危害的影响，例如洪水和强风。 Storm Desmond在2015年12月上旬是对此的最新例证。法规（例如，建筑法规），政府响应（例如，眼镜蛇紧急委员会）和各种机构（例如环境局）寻求减轻效果并管理响应的努力，但每年的支出高达约10亿英镑，保险部门也具有重要的且经常被估计的发挥作用。从本质上讲，保险是我们在公民/组织之间以及跨时间进行重建成本的手段，以支付资产维修费用（例如我们的房屋）。环境科学为可靠，准确和公平地提供此类保险。通常，由政府（例如NERC）资助的学者们完成了强大的同行评审科学，并将其变成工具，例如“灾难模型”，以评估保险业的风险。但是，这种信息流在许多方面并不完美。这包括但超越的，科学家没有从确保正确地措辞的确保列出当前与业务相关的问题的列表，以供他们处理。从根本上讲，在行业，学术界或NERC中没有人对NECC科学的何时或为什么被保险使用。使这一复杂化的学者必须产生令人兴奋的原始科学，并且很难创建互惠互利并达到两个目标的合作 - 即确定的工作必须满足行业需求，同时还包含（或直接导致）有趣的世界领先科学。这种不匹配是全球性的，但是伦敦的财务实力理想情况下，英国在修复它方面发挥了世界领先的作用。因此，该团契的目的是通过更好的相互理解，共同工作和协作，尤其是通过改进结构（例如，混合的学术保险公司NERC指导小组，“ sandpit”项目创建研讨会，协议，协议，“数据共享网络”，“数据共享”，“数据共享”，n ub'''ub'''ub'''''ub''''hub''，研究。这项团契的工作将重点关注当前立场的三个关键方面，我认为，NERC的环境科学界和保险部门之间有效有效的互动。首先，从根本上讲，在第1条中，将使用1个高级研讨会来映射（即确定和报告）如何和报告的保险范围，包括多个科学，包括大多数科学，包括多个科学的差异。然后可以绘制“合作途径”，即从学术科学到保险决策的可行，及时和互惠互利的路线。可能，这种见解可能会导致科学使用在环境风险保险中的有效性的逐步变化。为了帮助这种情况，链2针对可预见的关键方面，即数据共享。法律问题，数据安全性和简单的保险公司竞争都是潜在的障碍，但是共享数据可以有效，因为它可以避免重复努力，而对数据进行新的访问是对学术界的理想动机。现有的专家将在“数据共享网络”中捕获，而3个小型项目将集中精力于创建可行的实践和协议，并证明数据共享的可行性。 Strand 3将确定如何最佳共同设计研究项目。除了既定的实践外，它还将测试创新的方法，例如，令人兴奋的“砂锅风格”会议，其中包含了保险和学者的组合，并将在伦敦和科学会议上举行。拟议的研讨会冠军“现有科学，新问题”和“现有损失数据”，新科学表明，两方都将解决不匹配。