Search

The distribution of risks for residential real estate, including flood risk, depends largely on how these risks are allocated across individual mortgages and within mortgagebacked securities (MBS). This paper is the first to document how flood risks relate not only to individual mortgage performance and underwriting, but also how flood risks correlate to MBS performance and structure. Across residential mortgages we find that defaults are concentrated among the most flood-prone properties and this risk is somewhat offset by larger down payments and slightly higher mortgage rates. Even when mortgages are combined into MBS's, we show that average mortgage default within MBS's increases with average flood risk and that higher flood risk is primarily offset by increased credit protection or subordination; a one unit increase in flood risk is associated with a 2.6 percent increase in subordination. Ultimately, our analysis suggests that flood risk is reflected in mortgage-level performance and pricing and is partially, but not fully, accounted for in MBS deal-level performance and structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the provision of official flood risk information in the United States and its distributional impacts on residential flood insurance take-up. Assembling all flood maps produced after Hurricane Katrina, I document that updated maps decreased the number of properties zoned in high-risk floodplains and incorrectly omitted five million properties, primarily in neighborhoods with more Black and Hispanic residents. Leveraging the staggered timing of map updates, I estimate they decreased flood insurance take-up and exacerbated racial disparities in insurance coverage. Correcting flood maps could increase welfare by $20 billion annually, but past map updates distorted risk and price signals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is the main source of primary flood insurance coverage in the United States, collecting over $4.6 billion in premiums, fees, and surcharges for over five million flood insurance policies. This is in contrast to the majority of other property and casualty risks, such as damage from fire or accidents, which are covered by a broad array of private insurance companies. One of the primary reasons behind the creation of the NFIP in 1968 was the withdrawal by private insurers from providing flood insurance coverage, leaving flood victims largely reliant on federal disaster assistance to recover after a flood. While private insurers have taken on relatively little flood risk, they have been involved in the administration of the NFIP through sales and servicing of policies and claims. In recent years, private insurers have expressed increased interest in providing flood coverage. Advances in the analytics and data used to quantify flood risk along with increases in capital market capacities may allow private insurers to take on flood risks that they shunned in the past. Private flood insurance may offer some advantages over the NFIP, including more flexible flood polices, integrated coverage with homeowners insurance, or lower-cost coverage for some consumers. Private marketing might also increase the overall amount of flood coverage purchased, reducing the amount of extraordinary disaster assistance necessary to be provided by the federal government. Increased private coverage could reduce the overall financial risk to the NFIP, reducing the amount of NFIP borrowing necessary after major disasters. Increasing private insurance, however, may have some downsides compared to the NFIP. Private coverage would not be guaranteed to be available to all floodplain residents, unlike the NFIP, and consumer protections could vary in different states. The role of the NFIP has historically been broader than just providing insurance. As currently authorized, the NFIP also encompasses social goals to provide flood insurance in flood-prone areas to property owners who otherwise would not be able to obtain it, and to reduce government's cost after floods. Through flood mapping and mitigation efforts, the NFIP has tried to reduce the future impact of floods, and it is unclear how effectively the NFIP could play this broader role if private insurance became a large part of the flood marketplace. Increased private insurance could also have an impact on the subsidies that are provided for some consumers through the NFIP. The 2012 reauthorization of the NFIP (Division F, Title II of P.L. 112-141) included provisions encouraging private flood insurance; however, various barriers have remained. Legislation passed the House in the 114th Congress (H.R. 2901) and 115th Congress (H.R. 2874) which would have attempted to expand the role of private flood insurance; neither bill was taken up by the Senate. In the 116th Congress, no NFIP legislation advanced past introduction. Two bills were introduced in the 117th Congress for long-term reauthorization and reform of the NFIP. The NFIP is currently operating under a short-term reauthorization until September 30, 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Annual Report from the Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys provides information on the Geologic Hazards Section, which focuses on studying and responding to geologic processes that pose threats to lives and infrastructure in Alaska. The report discusses various programs and initiatives undertaken by the division, including assessing avalanche, earthquake, tsunami, and landslide hazards. The division collaborates with other organizations and uses data, modeling techniques, and mapping to improve preparedness, resilience, and public education regarding these natural hazards. The programs aim to provide accurate information and support decision-making for communities in Alaska. [Extracted from the article]

The article provide a short overview of what would happen if the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) were not to be reauthorized by December 3, 2021, and allowed to lapse. It mentions National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is authorized by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. It also mentions NFIP does not contain a single comprehensive expiration, termination, or sunset provision for the whole of the program.

The article offers information on the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), its existing rating structure and how it will be impacted by Risk Rating 2.0. NFIP was established by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1967 with the aim of offering primary flood insurance to properties with flood risk and to reduce risk by adopting floodplain management standards. It explains how the program determines flood insurance premiums. It explains the proposed rating structure under Risk Rating 2.0.

Seventeen million people across the nation live or work behind a levee. Levees protect critical infrastructure systems, $2.3 trillion of property, 4,500 schools that collectively enroll over 2 million students, and a range of industries. The National Levee Database contains nearly 30,000 miles of levees across the U.S., and current estimates identify up to 10,000 additional miles of levees outside of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) portfolio whose location and condition are unknown due to complex and varying local ownership.1 The USACE estimates that $21 billion is needed to improve and maintain the moderate to high-risk levees in its portfolio, which represents only about 15% of the known levees in the U.S.2 As more extreme weather events result in increased flooding, such as the $20 billion in damages caused by flooding in the Midwest during the spring of 2019, it is now more important than ever to have a complete inventory of the nation's levees and to equip communities with resources to mitigate flood risk and make necessary repairs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on brief introduction of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and provide access to primary flood insurance, thereby allowing for the transfer of some of the financial risk of property owners to the federal government. It mentions NFIP mitigate and reduce the nation's comprehensive flood risk through the development and implementation of flood plain management standards. It also mentions NFIP is to reduce federal expenditure on disaster assistance after floods.

The article presents a reports of the U.S. Congressional Research Service, based on the role of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in the federal construction to help reduce community flood risk. It mentions that the U.S. Congress has specifically included natural and nature-based features (NNBFs) as a planning requirement for USACE flood risk reduction projects in 2016. It mentions that USACE flood risk reduction activities has evolved from supporting dams, and engineered dunes.

The article offers information on federal assistance and programs for flood resilience and risk reduction in the U.S. Topics discussed include Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Mitigation Assistance grant program, Army Corps of Engineers flood risk reduction projects and Department of Agriculture's acquisition of floodplain easements and grants for flood risk reduction projects.

The article provides an overview of the U.S. National Flood Insurance Program, established under the established by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 which is a primary source of flood insurance coverage of residential property. It mentions that the program provide access to primary flood insurance, and mitigate and reduce the nation's comprehensive flood risk through the development and implementation of floodplain management standards.

The article discusses the emergence of flood risk artificial intelligence (AI) in the insurance industry in 2019. It points out that flooding is difficult to underwrite due to the challenges in predicting flooding, the large numbers of properties involved, and moral hazard perspective by property owners. It mentions the plan of Hazard Hub to assign flooding risk scores to properties. Also cited is the benefit of integrating private flood insurance plans into homeowner policies.

The article examines the problem in flooding, flood damage mitigation, flood damage repair costs/financing and flood insurance availability in 2020. According to the company Aon, the global economic losses from flooding from 2011 to 2019 reached 600 billion dollars in which only 111 billion dollars are insured. The funding opportunity presented by catastrophe bonds and insurance linked securities (ILS) for flood risk is mentioned. Also noted are the advantages of the Flood Re insurance model.

The article provides an overview of the U.S. Private Flood Insurance and the National Flood Insurance Program, authorized by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. It mentions the program aims at maintaining the funding of federal flood mapping and flood mitigation programs largely paid for through Standard Flood Insurance Policy premiums; reducing and paying off debt program owes to the U.S. Treasury; and ensuring the availability of flood insurance to property owners in flood zones.

The article provides an overview of the U.S. National Flood Insurance Program, which is a primary source of flood insurance coverage for residential properties. It mentions that the program provide access to primary flood insurance, and mitigate and reduce the nation's comprehensive flood risk through the development and implementation of floodplain management standards.

The article discusses various federal programs including the National Flood Insurance Program that may be able to assist in decreasing community flood risk. Topics discussed include flood policy and federal flood-related activities, introduction to flood insurance and related policies, significant flood management responsibilities of the government and activities to decrease damage and prevent loss of life,

The NFIP was established by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (NFIA, 42 U.S.C. §4001 et seq.), and was most recently reauthorized by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (Title II of P.L. 112-141). The general purpose of the NFIP is both to offer primary flood insurance to properties with significant flood risk, and to reduce flood risk through the adoption of floodplain management standards. Generally, communities volunteer to participate in the NFIP in order to have access to flood insurance, and in return are required to adopt minimum standards. FEMA manages a process, called Risk MAP, which conducts Flood Insurance Studies (FISs) to produce Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs). Depicted on FIRMs are Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs), which is the area exposed to a 1 in 100 or greater risk of annual flooding. FIRMs vary in age across the country, and are updated on a prioritized basis with no definitive timetable. The Risk MAP process provides extensive outreach and appeal opportunities for communities. Updating a community's FIRMs can take as long as three to five years or more. Participating communities must adopt a flood map and enact minimum floodplain standards to regulate development in the SFHA. FEMA encourages communities to enhance their floodplain standards by offering reduced premium rates through the Community Rating System (CRS). FEMA also manages a Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) grant program using NFIP revenues to further reduce comprehensive flood risk. NFIP flood insurance uses one of three types of Standard Flood Insurance Policies (SFIPs). SFIPs have maximum coverage limits set by law. Any federal entity that makes, guarantees, or purchases mortgages will require property owners in the SFHA to purchase flood insurance, generally through the NFIP. In moderate risk areas, community members may purchase Preferred Risk Policies (PRPs) that offer less costly insurance. NFIP policies also provide Increased Cost of Compliance (ICC) coverage to offset the cost of complying with floodplain management standards, such as elevating a substantially damaged property. The day-to-day sale, servicing, and claims processing of NFIP policies are conducted by private industry partners. Most policies are serviced by companies that are reimbursed through the Write Your Own (WYO) Program. The premium rate for most NFIP policies is intended to reflect the true flood risk. However, Congress has directed FEMA to subsidize flood insurance for properties built before the community's first FIRM (i.e., the pre-FIRM subsidy). FEMA also "grandfathers" properties at their rate from past FIRMs to updated FIRMs through a cross-subsidy. Congress also directed the development of an Affordability Study, and a forthcoming Draft Affordability Framework, to evaluate methods for making flood insurance more affordable. Participating communities that fail to adopt FIRMs or maintain minimum floodplain standards can be put on probation or suspended from the NFIP. In communities that do not participate in the NFIP, or have been suspended, individuals cannot purchase NFIP flood insurance. Individuals in these communities also face challenges receiving federal disaster assistance in flood hazard areas, and have difficulties receiving federally-backed mortgages. Congress has provided discretionary appropriations to the NFIP for some of the cost of Risk MAP. Congress also authorizes the use of premium revenues for other NFIP costs, including administration, salaries, and other expenses. NFIP premiums also include additional charges, including a Federal Policy Fee, a Reserve Fund assessment, and a surcharge that help fund the NFIP. The NFIP currently owes $23 billion to the U.S. Treasury, leaving $7.425 billion in borrowing authority from a $30.425 billion limit in law. This debt is serviced by the NFIP, not the general taxpayer, and interest is paid through premiums. Though an exact timetable is unknown and depends heavily on future flood losses, it is unlikely that the debt will be repaid within 10 years or longer. After September 30, 2017, key authorities of the NFIP, such as the authority to issue new insurance contracts, will expire if they are not reauthorized by Congress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on partnership between Iceye, an ambitious European commercial Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) satellite operator and insurance firm Swiss Re aims to advance flood risk management, assist disaster response, and speed up claim payments.

The article looks at the possible changes in the flood insurance market in 2021. According to the insurance company Munich Re, the value of the market is expected to reach 27.31 billion dollars. It mentions the trend in partnerships in flood insurance including the strategic partnership between Swiss Re and commercial satellite operator ICEYE. Also cited is the significance of the expansion of private players and increase in innovations concerning flood risk reporting.

The article provides insights on flood damage financing and flood insurance availability. According to the company Aon, flooding caused global economic losses that exceed 600 billion dollars from 2011 to 2019. It explains the reason behind the reluctance of insurance carriers to write flood cover in the U.S. It cites the significance of technological innovations in mining and analyzing data to identify the relative flood risk of a property and possibility of a significant flood event.

The article offers information about updating Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Topics include digital viewing of modern FIRMs using Geographic Information System (GIS), Coordinated Needs Management Strategy (CNMS) in managing the needs of Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP), and the Technical Mapping Advisory Council (TMAC) reestablished by the Congress.

The article offers information on flood-risk zones as depicted on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) in the U.S. These flood-risk zones include an area of special flood hazard without determined water surface elevations, area of minimal hazards, and area of flood-related erosion hazards. Particular focus is also given to the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) on the FIRM.

The article offers information on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and the Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) process by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Topics include the responsibility of FEMA for undertaking Flood Insurance Studies (FISs), revision of authorities by FEMA on flood hazard mapping, and the Congress.

The article discusses the purposes of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) in the U.S. The purposes include providing access to flood insurance that permits financial risk transfer to the government, and eliminating and reducing the risk of flood in the U.S. through carrying out standards for floodplain management.

The article focuses on water management-related activities of the British Geological Survey (BGS) in Great Britain as of January 2011. Topics discussed include a monthly review of groundwater levels in the nation in collaboration with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH), collaboration with the CEH and the consultancy Wallingford HydroSolutions Ltd. (WHS) on the Future Flows and Groundwater Levels project and the development of a groundwater flooding susceptibility map.

The article reports on the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Grant Program operated by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the reduction of the comprehensive risk of flood.

The article discusses the goal of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to reduce flood risk through the collaboration of the communities with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to adopt the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and the enactment of floodplain standards.