FROM STRUCTURAL PERFORMANCE TO LOSS ESTIMATION FOR (RE)INSURANCE INDUSTRY NEEDS: AN OVERVIEW OF THE VULNERABILITY ESTIMATION APPROACHES WITHIN EARTHQUAKE CATASTROPHE MODELS


Abstract eng:
One of performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE) targeted eventual applications in practice is within catastrophe models. Vendor catastrophe models are broadly used within the (re)insurance industry for pricing natural catastrophe risk. The aim of the vulnerability module of all catastrophe models is common, to connect hazard intensities to loss due to damage. Nevertheless there is huge variation in the methods adopted and assumptions made within each model’s vulnerability module, depending on the vintage of the model and the understanding of the seismic hazard in the region. This overview was conceived after close evaluation of a large number of vendor catastrophe models for earthquake (for different regions and from different vendors). We summarize the general structure of catastrophe models and focus on the vulnerability module of seismic catastrophe models, including how PBEE approaches are used for vulnerability estimation and how uncertainty is quantified. The existing gap between the PBEE output and the loss calculation of catastrophe models is highlighted. A discussion is aimed to be initiated, regarding the future potential of PBEE to provide more useful outputs for loss estimation within cat models, for use in the (re)insurance industry.

Contributors:
Publisher:
National Technical University of Athens, 2017
Conference Title:
Conference Title:
COMPDYN 2017 - 6th International Thematic Conference
Conference Venue:
Rhodes Island (GR)
Conference Dates:
2017-06-15 / 2017-06-17
Rights:
Text je chráněný podle autorského zákona č. 121/2000 Sb.



Record appears in:



 Record created 2017-06-22, last modified 2017-06-22


Original version of the author's contribution as presented on CD, section: [MS19] Loss, Risk, Uncertainty and Nonlinear Modeling for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering .:
Download fulltext
PDF

Rate this document:

Rate this document:
1
2
3
 
(Not yet reviewed)