No abstract

No abstract

The yearly increase in the number of natural catastrophes is tangible and most probably to persist. It is therefore necessary to build a legal framework that can respond timely and efficiently to events of this scale by formulating a structural, comprehensive and efficient compensation model. This article aims, first, at giving policymakers and legal scholars some clear starting points for setting up such a compensation model to the victims of a natural catastrophe. The article will, second, sketch the compensation systems in Belgium and the Netherlands, discussing only the main compensation regime specifically designed for victims of natural catastrophes. Third and finally, these two systems will be compared using the insights from the economic analysis of law.

The paper presents a comparative analysis of the development and present state of compensation for victims of catastrophes in Belgium and the Netherlands. These two neighbouring countries have both seen legislative changes in this field in recent years, albeit with different outcomes. The paper thus analyses to what extent the two compensation scheme structures allow for conclusions as to the comparative benefits of a comprehensive insurance scheme for natural disasters. 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 examined. Drawing on practical experience, such as the case of flood risks, the solutions are tested in view of incentive-based financing. The paper concludes that the private insurance market is more developed in Belgium than it is in the Netherlands, where the reform process has not yet ended.

The paper presents a comparative analysis of the development and present state of compensation for victims of catastrophes in Belgium and the Netherlands. These two neighbouring countries have both seen legislative changes in this field in recent years, albeit with different outcomes. The paper thus analyses to what extent the two compensation scheme structures allow for conclusions as to the comparative benefits of a comprehensive insurance scheme for natural disasters. 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 examined. Drawing on practical experience, such as the case of flood risks, the solutions are tested in view of incentive-based financing. The paper concludes that the private insurance market is more developed in Belgium than it is in the Netherlands, where the reform process has not yet ended.