IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rff/dpaper/dp-14-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Pricing Flood Insurance: How and Why the NFIP Differs from a Private Insurance Company

Author

Listed:
  • Kousky, Carolyn

    (Resources for the Future)

  • Shabman, Leonard

    (Resources for the Future)

Abstract

Flood insurance in the United States is offered through the federal National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). After going deeply into debt following the 2005 hurricane season, pricing in the program has been the subject of debate and two reform bills. Private sector insurance pricing has often been used as a benchmark in these discussions. In this paper, we explain NFIP pricing in the context of actuarial pricing principles, clarify why some polices are priced below what is considered to be the full risk rate, and explain how and, more importantly, why NFIP pricing practices differ from the private sector. NFIP pricing has incorporated other program goals that are at times at odds with the ability to cover all payouts for insured losses without taxpayer support. These multiple programmatic goals make the private sector a questionable analog for the NFIP.

Suggested Citation

  • Kousky, Carolyn & Shabman, Leonard, 2014. "Pricing Flood Insurance: How and Why the NFIP Differs from a Private Insurance Company," Discussion Papers dp-14-37, Resources For the Future.
  • Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-14-37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.rff.org/RFF/documents/RFF-DP-14-37.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Robert Hartwig & Greg Niehaus & Joseph Qiu, 2020. "Insurance for economic losses caused by pandemics," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 45(2), pages 134-170, September.
    2. Xiao Lin, 2020. "Risk awareness and adverse selection in catastrophe insurance: Evidence from California’s residential earthquake insurance market," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 43-65, August.
    3. Carolyn Kousky, 2017. "Disasters as Learning Experiences or Disasters as Policy Opportunities? Examining Flood Insurance Purchases after Hurricanes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 517-530, March.
    4. Benjamin L. Collier & Daniel Schwartz & Howard C. Kunreuther & Erwann O. Michel-Kerjan, 2017. "Risk Preferences in Small and Large Stakes: Evidence from Insurance Contract Decisions," NBER Working Papers 23579, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Benjamin L. Collier & Marc A. Ragin, 2020. "The Influence of Sellers on Contract Choice: Evidence from Flood Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(2), pages 523-557, June.
    6. Georgic, Will C. & Klaiber, Allen, 2018. "Identifying the Costs to Homeowners of Eliminating NFIP Subsidies," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274444, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Bakkensen, Laura A. & Ma, Lala, 2020. "Sorting over flood risk and implications for policy reform," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    8. Justin Tyndall, 2021. "Sea Level Rise and Home Prices: Evidence from Long Island," Working Papers 2021-2, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    9. Dinan, Terry, 2017. "Projected Increases in Hurricane Damage in the United States: The Role of Climate Change and Coastal Development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 186-198.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    flood insurance; rate-setting; NFIP; premiums;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rff:dpaper:dp-14-37. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/degraus.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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Webmaster The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Webmaster to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/degraus.html .

    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.