بررسی ریسک زلزله به روش احتمالاتی و پیشنهاد سیستم‌های بیمه‌ای کارآمد بر پایه ریسک

نوع مقاله : Articles

نویسندگان

1 گروه مهندسی عمران، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران

2 پژوهشکده مهندسی سازه، پژوهشگاه بین‌المللی زلزله‌شناسی و مهندسی زلزله، تهران، ایران

چکیده

ترکیب لرزه‌خیزی بالا و آسیب‌پذیری بالای سازه‌ها در ایران سبب گشته است که ریسک یا خطرپذیری در ایران در سطح بالایی قرار گیرد. به‌صورت کلی دو رویکرد اصلی در مدیریت ریسک وجود دارند که عبارتند از توزیع ریسک و کاهش ریسک که تمرکز اصلی این تحقیق بر توزیع ریسک است. جهت برآورد منابع مالی موجود جهت مقابله با خسارات زلزله، ابزارهای توزیع ریسک ،که در اینجا سیستم‌های بیمه زلزله می‌باشند، با در نظر گفتن آسیب‌پذیری اقتصادی موجود مالکین و ریسک منطقه، طراحی شده‌اند. از سوی دیگر، در هر سیستم بیمه زلزله طراحی شده، قابلیت پرداخت حق بیمه‌ها از سوی ساکنین در جامعه نیز که در پذیرفته شدن سیستم و پایداری آن ضروری است مورد بررسی قرار گرفته است. رویکرد احتمالاتی مدل‌سازی ریسک مورد استفاده در اینجا، تفاوت زیادی را بین حق بیمه‌های موجود در کشور و حق بیمه‌های بر پایه ریسک محاسبه شده نشان می‌دهد که نشان‌دهنده اهمیت فراوان در نظر گرفتن واقعی ریسک زلزله در فرآیندهای تصمیم‌گیری‌های مالی قبل و پس از وقوع زلزله است. همچنین نیاز به روش‌های کاهش ریسک برای ساختمان‌های بسیار آسیب‌پذیر و لزوم بهره‌گیری از پوشش بیمه اتکایی و کمک‌های دولتی برای مدیریت ریسک رویدادهای فاجعه‌آمیز نشان داده شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Probabilistic Assessment of Earthquake Risk and Proposing Optimized Risk-Based Insurance Systems

نویسندگان [English]

  • Naghmeh Pakdel-Lahiji 1
  • Mohsen Ghafory-Ashtiany 2
1 Department of Civil Engineering, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Structural Engineering Research Center, International Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Seismology (IIEES), Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Iran is located in a high seismic area and has many vulnerable buildings against earthquake as well. Combination of high seismicity of the country and vulnerability of buildings can lead to high levels of risk for the country, which shows the importance of risk management before and after events.
A catastrophic event such as a major earthquake can result in loss of life and serious damage to buildings and their contents, which Iran has experienced many of them during Bam, Manjil and other big earthquakes in the past.
Being prepared for a natural disaster is not a new problem. More-developed countries, governments, individuals and corporations around the world are aware of the fact that they need to be prepared against catastrophic events; however, they do not often take the necessary steps to prepare for a disaster. Only after a big disaster occurs, they recognize the importance of preparing for these types of extreme events and implication of disaster risk management tools. This is a bigger issue in developing countries where there is not enough financial resources or lacking a comprehensive risk management plan in place to manage these risks.  In general, there are two approaches in managing catastrophic risks, risk distribution and risk mitigation. The main focus of this paper is on risk distribution. In order to assess available financial resources to cope with earthquake losses, we developed risk distribution tools which also take the financial vulnerability of the people and the region into account. These tools are earthquake insurance systems by using excess of loss insurance mechanism in which we could look at different layers of risk and risk management strategy associated with them. An insurer provides protection to residential and commercial property owners for losses resulting from natural disasters. Losses from natural disasters can have a severe impact on an insurer’s financial condition. Owners of commercial and residential structures on the other side, have a range of risk management strategies from which to choose. They can reduce their risk by retrofitting a structure to withstand earthquake loading, transfer part of their risk by purchasing some form of insurance, and/or keep and finance their risk. The ways in which particular individuals decide to manage risk is often a function of their perceptions. Many homeowners do not take action even when the risk is abundantly clear and loss-reducing measures are available. It is often the case that these homeowners feel that a disaster will not affect them. This shows the high importance of the acceptance of these risk management approaches by the society and the need to make people aware of their risk and providing incentives for them.
The other important factor in every insurance system is affordability of earthquake premiums for people that is crucial in establishment and stability of the insurance system in the society which is investigated in this research. Probabilistic approach used here to assess the risk, shows a big difference between insurance premiums in Iran at the moment and risk-based premiums calculated in this research. This emphasizes the importance of incorporating the real risk assessment in decision making before and after catastrophic events. Catastrophe models are playing an important role in managing the risk of natural hazards through the establishment of risk-based insurance rates. These rates provide price information and economic incentives to mitigate and manage risks from low probability events that otherwise would be ignored until the disaster has occurred. The paper concluded by discussing the essential need to the use of catastrophe models for rate-setting purposes and also the importance of public-private partnership of the people and government and insurance companies in managing catastrophic events.
Finally, the essential need to risk mitigation actions for very vulnerable assets and the need to get help from reinsurance and governmental help in the process of catastrophe risk management is shown here.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Vulnerability of Structures
  • Earthquake Risk Distribution
  • Earthquake Risk-Based Premiums
  • Affordability of Earthquake Premiums
1. Ghafory-Ashtiany, M. (2006) Earthquake risk in Iran and risk reduction achievement from Manjil
earthquake to post-bam strategy. 8th U.S. National Conference on Earthquake.
2. Statistical center of Iran. [Online]. Available:http://www.amar.org.ir [2014].
3. Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) [Online].Available: http: //www. isna.ir [2014].
4. Ghafory-Ashtiany, M. (2010) Earthquake Risk Management Insurance. Proceeding of UNESCORELEMR Seismicity and Earthquake Engineering in
the Extended Mediterranean Region Workshop,Ankara, Istanbul, June, 21-24.
5. Sadeghi, M., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Ghafory-Ashtiany,M. (2015) Evaluation of earthquake mitigation
measures to reduce economic and human losses: a case study to residential property owners in the metropolitan area of Shiraz, Iran. Nat. Hazards., 78,
1811-1826.
6. Sadeghi, M., Ghafory-Ashtiany, M., and PakdelLahiji, N. (2017) Multi-objective optimization approach to define risk layer for seismic mitigation,
Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 8(2), 257-270, DOI: 10.1080/19475705.2016.1199446.
7. Central Insurance of Iran. [Online]. Available: http://www.centinsur.ir. [2014].
8. Standard code No. 2800 (2005) Iranian Seismic Building Code, 3rd Edition. Building and Housing Research Center, Tehran (in Persian).
9. Walker, G.R. (2000) Earthquake engineering and insurance: past, present and future, 12WCEE.
10. Amendola, A., Ermoliev, Y., Ermolieva, T. Y., Gitis, V., Koff, G., and Linnerooth-Bayer, J. (2000) A
systems approach to modeling catastrophic risk and insurability. Nat. Hazards, 21, 381–393.
11. Scawthorn, C., Kunreuther, H., and Roth Jr., R. (2003) Insurance and financial risk transfer. W.-F Chen. and
C, Scawthorn (eds.), Earthquake Engineering Handbook, CRC Press, Chapter 32.
12. Petseti, A. and Nektarios, M. (2012) Proposal for a national earthquake insurance programme for Greece.
The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance—Issues and Practice, 37(2), 377–400.
13. Zhi, Z. and Ting, W. (2011) Selection and design for earthquake catastrophe insurance system in China.
China Soft Science, (1), 17–24.
14. Xue, Q., Chen, C.C. and Chen, K.C. (2010) Damage and loss assessment for the basic earthquake insurance
claim of residential RC buildings in Taiwan. Journal of Building Appraisal, 6(3), 213–226, doi:10.1057/jba.2010.23.
15. Chena, C.C., Xue, Q., Shih, F.M. and Chi, W.C.(2011) Development of total loss claim determination
information system for reinforced concrete for residential earthquake basic insurance in Taiwan.Procedia Engineering, 14(1), 1408–1416.
16. UNISDR, From Shared Risk to Shared Value—The Business Case for Disaster Risk Reduction, Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction,
Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) (2013) [Online].
Available: www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2013/?pid:34&pil:1, [1 June 2014].
17. Zolfaghari, M. (2003) Catastrophe Risk Management, an insurance-Based post disaster recovery plan.
Proceeding of the Forth International Conference on Seismology and Earthquake Engineering, Tehran, Iran.
18. Ghafory-Ashtiany, M., Naser-Asadi, K. (2011) Earthquake Premium Index Evaluation for Buildings
in Iran. Proceeding of 1st International Conference of Integrated Research on Disaster Risk, Beijing, China.
19. Ghafory-Ashtiany, M. and Naser-Asadi, K. (2011) Iran new earthquake insurance index-final management
report. Insurance faculty: Contract No. 1925-16, Tehran, Iran.
20. Sadeghi, M., Ghafory-Ashtiany, M., Pakdel-Lahiji, N. (2015) Developing seismic vulnerability curves
for typical Iranian buildings. J. Risk Reliab., 229(1), 627-640.
21. Walker, G.R. (1995) Insurance as a tool for reducing natural hazard impact. Insurance Viability & Loss
Mitigation. (Ed. N.R. Britton, J. McDonald & J. Oliver), Alexander Howden Reinsurance Brokers (Australia), 211-223.
22. Swiss Re. (1996) An Introduction to Reinsurance.Zurich, Swiss Reinsurance Company.
23. Andersen, T.J. (2001) Managing Economic Exposures of Natural Disasters: Exploring Alternative Financial Risk Opportunities and
Instruments. Washington DC, IDB.
24. Froot, K.A. (ed.) (1999) The Financing of Catastrophe Risk, Chicago: University of Chicago Press: FEMA.
25. Swiss Re. (1997) Too little reinsurance of natural disasters in many markets. Zurich, Swiss Reinsurance Company.
26. Hochrainer, S. (2006) Macroeconomic Risk Management against Natural Disasters. Wiesbaden, Germany: German University Press (DUV).
27. Pakdel-Lahiji, N., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., GhaforyAshtiany, M., Sadeghi, M. (2014) Consequences of financial vulnerability and insurance loading for the
affordability of earthquake insurance systems: evidence from Iran. Geneva papers on risk and insurance—issues and practice.
28. Grossi, P., Kunreuther, H., Windeler, D. (2005) Catastrophe Modeling, a New Approach. New York:Springer.
29. Pollner, J. (2001) Honduras Catastrophe Risk Management. Using Alternative Risk Financing and Insurance Pooling Mechanisms. Research working
paper 2560. Washington DC, World Bank.
30. Mechler, R. (2004) Natural Disaster Risk Management and Financing Disaster Losses in Developing Countries. Karlsruhe, Verlag Versicherungswirtschaft GmbH
31. Woo, G. (2002) Natural Catastrophe Probable Maximum Loss. British Actuarial Journal, Volume 8, Part V.
32. Sadeghi, M., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., GhaforyAshtiany, M., Pakdel-Lahiji, N. (2014) Earthquake risk modeling for the evaluation of losses to property
owners in the metropolitan area of Shiraz. Proceedings of the 10th U.S. National Conference in Earthquake Engineering. Anchorage (AK):
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.doi:10.4231/ D38W3831V.
33. Pakdel-Lahiji, N., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., GhaforyAshtiany, M., and Sadeghi, M. (2014) Risk management strategies for managing natural disaster
risks: a case study in Shiraz City, Iran. Proceedings of the 10th U.S. National Conference in Earthquake Engineering. Anchorage (AK): Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute. doi:10.4231/D32F7JR7R.