New Zealand society and earthquake insurance: effectiveness versus avoidance?.
Material type:
TextLanguage: ENG Publication details: 01 JUL 1982Description: 13p., 33 refsReport number: AcademicSubject: The risks associated with earthquake insurance range from a lack of adequate statistical data relating to frequency of earthquake occurrence, through to the lack of awareness by the general public of the safeguarding effects such a disaster insurance scheme has due to its loss-distributing capabilities. Such risks can be reduced if disaster insurance is made compulsory. New Zealand's compulsory natural hazard insurance scheme is examined, and it is suggested that one reason why the scheme is running into difficulty is because of New Zealand's social welfare tradition. Other reasons are also stated in relation to the effectiveness of this unique insurance scheme. The discussion is then broadened to include the lack of understanding of insurance programmes in Australia and the United States, as well as in New Zealand. The author concludes that compulsory earthquake insurance should be introduced into the Australian and the United States systems as part of a multiple hazard reduction programme
| Item type | Current library | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Books
|
Australian Emergency Management Library | BOOK | 368.122 BRI (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | Available | 005258612 |
Browsing Australian Emergency Management Library shelves, Collection: BOOK Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Conference Dates 28 June - 1 July 1982 (Topic 11: Socio-economic and Insurance considerations)
The risks associated with earthquake insurance range from a lack of adequate statistical data relating to frequency of earthquake occurrence, through to the lack of awareness by the general public of the safeguarding effects such a disaster insurance scheme has due to its loss-distributing capabilities. Such risks can be reduced if disaster insurance is made compulsory. New Zealand's compulsory natural hazard insurance scheme is examined, and it is suggested that one reason why the scheme is running into difficulty is because of New Zealand's social welfare tradition. Other reasons are also stated in relation to the effectiveness of this unique insurance scheme. The discussion is then broadened to include the lack of understanding of insurance programmes in Australia and the United States, as well as in New Zealand. The author concludes that compulsory earthquake insurance should be introduced into the Australian and the United States systems as part of a multiple hazard reduction programme
There are no comments on this title.