Skip to main content

Introduction: Needs, Stakeholders, and Government Initiatives

  • Chapter
Catastrophe Modeling: A New Approach to Managing Risk

Part of the book series: Catastrophe Modeling ((HSRI,volume 25))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

1.5. References

  • A.M. Best (2001). Preface: An explanation of Best’s rating system and procedures. 2001 Best’s Insurance Reports — Property / Casualty. <http://www.ambest.com/ratings/2001/pcbirpreface.pdf>

    Google Scholar 

  • American Re (2002). Topics: Annual Review of North American Natural Catastrophes 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atwater, B. and Hemphill-Haley, E. (1997). Recurrence intervals for great earthquakes of the past 3,500 years at northeastern Willapa Bay, Washington. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1576. 108p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaulieu, J. (2001). Personal communication with Don Windeler, April 30, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • California Earthquake Authority (2003). Weekly Policy and Premium Status Report, July 31, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clague, J., Atwater, B.F., Wang, K., Wang, Y, and Wong, I. eds. (2000). Consensus statement. in Penrose Conference 2000, Great Cascadia Earthquake Tricentennial. Oregon Dept. of Geol. and Mineral Industries Special Paper 33. 17–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Emergency Management Agency (1997). Report on Costs and Benefits of Natural Hazard Mitigation, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Emergency Management Agency (2000). HAZUS99 Estimated Annualized Earthquake Losses for the United States, FEMA 366, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinstein Press Release (March 2001). http://feinstein.senate.gov/releases01/earthquakes.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grossi, P. and Kunreuther, H. (2000). “Public Policy,” Chapter 2 in Financial Management of Earthquake Risk, Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Insurance Information Institute (2001). <http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/ xxx/>

    Google Scholar 

  • Interagency Flood Plain Management Review Committee (1994). Sharing the Challenge: Floodplain Management into the 21st Century, Washington, D.C: USGPO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lecomte, E. and Gahagan, K. (1998). “Hurricane Insurance Protection in Florida,” Chapter 5 in Kunreuther, H. and Roth, R. Paying the Price: The Status and Role of Insurance Against Natural Disasters in the United States. Washington, D.C: Joseph Henry Press, p. 97–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, J. (1996). Freddie Mac takes industry lead, tackles earthquake risk head on. Secondary Mortgage Markets: A Freddie Mac Quarterly 13(2): 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, D. (2002). When All Else Fails, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Munich Re (2002). Topics: Natural Catastrophes 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palm, R. (1981). Real Estate Agents and Special Studies Zones Disclosure. Boulder: Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasterick, E. (1998). “The National Flood Insurance Program,” Chapter 6 in Kunreuther, H. and Roth, R. Paying the Price: The Status and Role of Insurance Against Natural Disasters in the United States. Washington, D.C: Joseph Henry Press, p. 125–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shah, H., and Rosenbaum, D. (1996). Earthquake risk shakes mortgage industry. Secondary Mortgage Markets: A Freddie Mac Quarterly 13(2): 12–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vinson, B. and Miller, T.H. (2000). Pilot project: Eugene-Springfield earthquake damage and loss estimate final report, January 1999. Oregon Dept. of Geol. and Mineral Industries Open-File Rept. O-00-02.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, Y. and Clark, J.L (1999). Earthquake damage in Oregon: Preliminary estimates of future earthquake losses. Oregon Dept. of Geol. and Mineral Industries Special Paper 29.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Grossi, P., Kunreuther, H. (2005). Introduction: Needs, Stakeholders, and Government Initiatives. In: Grossi, P., Kunreuther, H. (eds) Catastrophe Modeling: A New Approach to Managing Risk. Catastrophe Modeling, vol 25. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23129-3_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics