Many businesses have suffered severe economic losses due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Because property business interruption (BI) policies generally do not cover losses caused by a virus, this has led to proposals for some form of government program that would provide this coverage. We explain why private BI pandemic insurance on a broad scale is infeasible. Arguably, BI pandemic insurance has substantial positive externalities and this has implications with respect to the desirability of government provision of this coverage and its financing. Our paper considers the goals of a government BI pandemic insurance program and the challenges it would face with respect to its design and implementation and how they could be addressed. In this context, we evaluate current proposals for such a program, including legislation currently being considered by the Congress. We conclude that creating such a program requires thorough and careful consideration of its features and the tradeoffs involved with its structure. The essential question for policymakers is whether the best possible program would be in the public interest and increase social welfare. Further, political considerations will likely influence the design of any program in ways that would make it less efficient and possibly less equitable.

No abstract

Depuis la crise financière de 2008, de nombreuses entreprises ont mis en œuvre une Gestion des Risques d’Entreprise (GRE) dans leur organisation, en créant des programmes entièrement nouveaux ou en renforçant des départements existants. 98 % des entreprises interrogées en 2013 reconnaissent aussi que la GRE est même encore plus importante aux yeux de l’organisation qu’elle ne l’était il y a deux ans. De plus, la nécessité d’une stratégie GRE augmente en raison d’une sur veillance accrue de la part du législateur et des agences de notation. En dépit de l’intérêt accru porté à la question, la façon dont les entreprises définissent la GRE et son rôle dans l’organisation varient beaucoup. La Section 1 de ce document donne un aperçu des diverses définitions de la GRE utilisées par les entreprises et les organisations. Dans la Section 2, nous discutons des risques majeurs identifiés par les entreprises en 2013 pour nous permettre d’appréhender le monde complexe dans lequel la fonction GRE doit désormais opérer. Dans la Section 3, nous discutons les différences de structure de la GRE entre les entreprises pour identifier et atténuer ces risques. Nous abordons aussi le rôle de la loi et de la conformité dans leur relation avec la fonction GRE. En conclusion, nous parlons des caractéristiques des programmes de GRE efficaces dont les entreprises en Europe et aux Etats-Unis pourraient tirer partie. En outre, les auteurs ont interviewé des professionnels de la gestion des risques de deux sociétés, Coca-Cola et United Parcel Service, deux entreprises internationales du Fortune 100 et ont inclus les informations obtenues tout au long de l’étude pour illustrer les différentes manières avec lesquelles les entreprises abordent la GRE.

In this study, the authors analyze the rise of social media claims and how such consumer usage of social media and other types of data might be analyzed to ascertain predictive and appropriate rate factors. Rates must be based on approved rate factors, which must correlate with the risk, be predictive of losses, and not be unfairly discriminatory.

Among the tenets of enterprise risk management (ERM) is the need to instill a risk-aware culture throughout the firm. Yet, how to actually interpret and change organizational culture is generally missing from the ERM literature. Prior surveys found risk managers lacked useful information about organizational culture and cultural change to implement a “risk aware culture.” Our survey of risk managers found this gap persists. The disciplines of organizational studies, business anthropology and sociology provide guidance on organizational culture, which involves identifying and interpreting the embedded assumptions, values, myths, artifacts, rituals, and stories that communicate and perpetuate a culture. The risk manager can use this knowledge to apply change to the culture. Changing behavior without changing culture may simply result in compliance without adoption. This article seeks to bridge the studies of organizational culture and change to the risk manager.