IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/diw/diwvjh/77-4-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Schadensersatz für Opfer von Naturkatastrophen: ein Vergleich zwischen Belgien und den Niederlanden

Author

Listed:
  • Véronique Bruggeman
  • Michael G. Faure
  • Miriam Haritz

Abstract

The paper compares the development and present state of compensation for victims of catastrophes in Belgium and The Netherlands, two countries that have both undergone legislative changes in this field in recent years. From the perspective of law and economics, the evolution of private insurance and public intervention through compensation funds, the preference for private or public solutions and the actual financing of these are analyzed. Drawing from practical experience such as the case of flood risks, the solutions are tested in view of incentive-based financing, such as risk differentiation and other. The paper concludes that both countries have produced different forms of Public Private Partnerships, whereby the private insurance market is more developed in Belgium than in The Netherlands, where the reform process has not yet come to an end. Die vorliegende Untersuchung vergleicht die Entwicklung der Entschädigung für Opfer von Naturkatastrophen in Belgien und den Niederlande bis hin zum gegenwärtigen Stand der Dinge. In beiden Ländern ist es in den letzten Jahren zu Veränderungen in diesem Bereich gekommen, die hier aus Sicht der Rechtsökonomie untersucht werden. Dabei liegt der Schwerpunkt auf der Frage, inwieweit sich ein privater Versicherungsmarkt herausgebildet hat oder auf staatliche Katastrophenfonds zurückgegriffen wird, sowie einer Untersuchung der jeweiligen Finanzierungs- und Auszahlungsmechanismen. Zu diesem Zwecke wird die praktische Anwendung der Lösungen insbesondere am Beispiel von Hochwasserschäden, mit Blick auf die Möglichkeit einer anreizbasierten Finanzierung, wie der Risikodifferenzierung, deutlich gemacht. Im Ergebnis wird festgestellt, dass sich in beiden Ländern unterschiedliche Formen von sogenannten Public Private Partnerships entwickelt haben, wobei das Angebot privater Versicherungen in Belgien weitaus ausgeprägter ist als in den Niederlanden, wo der Reformprozess noch nicht abgeschlossen ist.

Suggested Citation

  • Véronique Bruggeman & Michael G. Faure & Miriam Haritz, 2008. "Schadensersatz für Opfer von Naturkatastrophen: ein Vergleich zwischen Belgien und den Niederlanden," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 77(4), pages 18-43.
  • Handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:77-4-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ejournals.duncker-humblot.de/DH/doi/pdf/10.3790/vjh.77.4.18
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Epstein, Richard A, 1996. "Catastrophic Responses to Catastrophic Risks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 12(2-3), pages 287-308, May.
    2. Reimund Schwarze & Gert G Wagner, 2004. "In the Aftermath of Dresden: New Directions in German Flood Insurance," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 29(2), pages 154-168, April.
    3. Christian Gollier, 2005. "Some Aspects of the Economics of Catastrophe Risk Insurance," CESifo Working Paper Series 1409, CESifo Group Munich.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Naturkatastrophen; Hochwasser; Eigenschadenversicherung; Entschädigungsfonds; anreizkompatible Finanzierung; Belgien; Niederlande;

    JEL classification:

    • G22 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Insurance; Insurance Companies; Actuarial Studies
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwvjh:77-4-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/diwbede.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.