Advertisement

Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 99, Issue 1–4, pp 207–225 | Cite as

Stochastic Optimization of Insurance Portfolios for Managing Exposure to Catastrophic Risks

  • Y.M. Ermoliev
  • T.Y. Ermolieva
  • G.J. MacDonald
  • V.I. Norkin
Article

Abstract

A catastrophe may affect different locations and produce losses that are rare and highly correlated in space and time. It may ruin many insurers if their risk exposures are not properly diversified among locations. The multidimentional distribution of claims from different locations depends on decision variables such as the insurer's coverage at different locations, on spatial and temporal characteristics of possible catastrophes and the vulnerability of insured values. As this distribution is analytically intractable, the most promising approach for managing the exposure of insurance portfolios to catastrophic risks requires geographically explicit simulations of catastrophes. The straightforward use of so-called catastrophe modeling runs quickly into an extremely large number of “what-if” evaluations. The aim of this paper is to develop an approach that integrates catastrophe modeling with stochastic optimization techniques to support decision making on coverages of losses, profits, stability, and survival of insurers. We establish connections between ruin probability and the maximization of concave risk functions and we outline numerical experiments.

catastrophe modeling insurance risk stochastic optimization adaptive Monte Carlo nonsmooth optimization ruin probability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    A. Amendola, Y. Ermoliev, T. Ermolieva, V. Gitits, G. Koff and J. Linnerooth-Bayer, A systems approach to modeling catastrophic risk and insurability, Natural Hazards Journal (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    K.J. Arrow, The theory of risk-bearing: Small and great risks, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 12 (1996) 103–111.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    R. Beard, T. Pentikainen and E. Pesonen, Risk Theory (University Printing House, Cambridge, 1984).Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    K. Borch, Equilibrium in a reinsurance market, Econometrica 30(3) (1962) 424–444.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    H. Buhlmann, Mathematical Methods in Risk Theory (Springer, New York, 1970).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    B. Digas, Generators of seismic events and losses: Scenario-based insurance optimization, IIASA Interim Report IR–98–079 (1998).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Y.M. Ermoliev, T.Y. Ermolieva, G.J. MacDonald and V.I. Norkin, On the design of catastrophic risk portfolios, IIASA Interim Report IR–98–056 (1998).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Y.M. Ermoliev and V.I. Norkin, Stochastic generalized gradient method with application to insurance risk management, IIASA Interim Report IR–97–021 (1997), Kibernetika i Sistemnyi Analiz 2 (1998) 50–71.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Y.M. Ermoliev and V.I. Norkin, On nonsmooth and discontinuous problems of stochastic systems optimization, European Journal of Operational Research 101(2) (1997) 230–244.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Y.M. Ermoliev and V.I. Norkin, Monte Carlo optimization and path dependent nonstationary laws of large numbers, IIASA Interim Report IR–98–009 (1998).Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Y. Ermoliev and R. Wets, Numerical Techniques for Stochastic Optimization (Computational Mathematics, Springer, Berlin, 1988).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    T.Y. Ermolieva, The design of optimal insurance decisions in the presence of catastrophic risks, IIASA Interim Report IR–97–068 (1997).Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    V. Ginsburg and M. Keyzer, The Structure of Applied General Equilibrium Models (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1997).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Insurance Service Office, The Impact of Catastrophes on Property Insurance (Insurance Service Of-fice, New York, 1994).Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    H. Konno and H. Yamazaki, Mean absolute deviation portfolio optimization model and its application to Tokyo stock market, Management Science 37 (1991) 519–531.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    G.J. MacDonald, Persistance in Climate, JSR–91–340 (The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Verginia, 22102–3481, 1992).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    H.M. Markowitz, Mean Variance Analysis in Portfolio Choice and Capital Markets (Blackwell, Oxford, 1987).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    O. Pavlov, G. Koff and N. Frolova, Seismic hazard and seismic risk mapping for Irkutsk city, in: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Seismic Zonation, Nice, France (1995) pp. 1999–2019.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    E.L. Pugh, A gradient technique of adaptive Monte Carlo, SIAM Review 8(3) (1966) 346–355.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    E. Raik, Qualitative investigation of nonlinear stochastic programming problems, Izvestia Akademii Nauk Estonskoi SSR, Fizika i Matematika (Communications of the Estonian Academy of Sciences, Physics and Mathematics) 21(1) (1971) 8–14.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    J.M. Stone, A theory of capacity and the insurance of catastrophe risks, Parts 1, 2, The Journal of Risk and Insurance 40 (1973) 231–244 and 339–355.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    G.R.Walker, Current developments in catastrophe modeling, in: Financial Risk Management for Natural Catastrophes, eds. N.R. Britton and J. Oliver, Aon Group Australia Limited, Griffith University, Brisbane (1997) pp. 17–35.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    R.J.-B.Wets, Challenges in stochastic programming, Mathematical Programming 75 (1996) 115–135.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y.M. Ermoliev
    • 1
  • T.Y. Ermolieva
    • 1
  • G.J. MacDonald
    • 2
  • V.I. Norkin
    • 3
  1. 1.IIASALaxenburgAustria
  2. 2.IIASALaxenburgAustria
  3. 3.Institute of CyberneticsKievUkraine

Personalised recommendations