Red River Basin Disaster Information Network
On-Line Workshop
May 4, 2000 -- 12:00 Noon CDT

The Role of the Insurance Industry in Disaster Mitigation
A Canadian Perspective

Featuring

Alan W. Pang
Managing Director
Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction

Moderated by

Amy Sebring
EIIP Technical Projects Coordinator

[Opening]

Amy Sebring: Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us in the Red River room of the EIIP Virtual Forum.

First, if you see a blue Web address, you can click on it and the referenced Web page should appear in a browser window. After the first one, the browser window may not automatically come to the top, so you may need to bring it forward by clicking on a button at the status bar at the bottom of your screen. Then to return to the chat, you will need to bring your chat window back to the top.

Background information for today's session may be found at http://www.emforum.org/redriver/workshop/wk000504.htm

[Introduction]

If you are familiar with the IJC Task Force Final Report, you may recall that recommendations are made for a flood mitigation strategy in the region, and a national mitigation strategy for Canada, so we thought this might be a good time to look at this issue again.

We are very pleased to have Alan Pang, Managing Director of the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction with us today to tell us about their efforts in Canada.

Alan has been on secondment from his position as Vice President of Aon Re Canada since May 1998, and has helped formulate Canada's National Mitigation Policy (under review) and the insurance industry's Natural Disaster Reduction Plan.

Alan was born and educated in the City of Winnipeg, so he certainly can relate to the Red River! Welcome Alan and thank you for being here today.

Alan Pang: Thank you Amy, I am happy to be here.

Natural disasters are increasing at an alarming frequency worldwide. Although Canada has been spared from many of the kinds of disasters seen around the world, Canada has sustained 3 major natural disasters the last 4 years, i.e., the '96 Saguenay Flood, '97 Red River Flood, and the '98 eastern Canada Ice Storm.

The Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction was established in 1998 by the Canadian Insurers. Its mission is stated on this first slide.

[Slide 1]

The insurance community accepts its leadership role in helping Canadians to manage the risk of catastrophic losses from natural disasters. We help Canadians recover and find ways to lower the risk. The key result areas shown on this next Slide helps ICLR deal with the 4 factors contributing to increased catastrophic losses in Canada, i.e. population growth, urbanization, aging infrastructure, and climate change.

[Slide 2]

Our focus is on applied research. We are not interested in studying bumble bees after a flood! This next Slides show some of the projects we have been involved with.

[Slide 3]

[Slide 4]

No one organization can do this alone, and ICLR does not have the expertise or the resources to develop or implement mitigation strategies, so our second key result area is to establish working partnerships. We are working with 6 key partners as shown on the next Slide.

[Slide 5]

The insurance industry is part of the problem and part of the solution. We found our conference audiences are made up of representatives from the insurance, emergency management and government communities.

This next Slide shows some of the activities we have been involved with in the third key result area, enhancing industry awareness.

[Slide 6]

In the last quarter of ‘98, we conducted regional workshops and a national mitigation conference. We heard from 400 key stakeholders and they came up with the 9 recommendations for a national mitigation policy.

[Slide 7]

[Slide 8]

In 1999, ICLR and its sister organization the Insurance Bureau of Canada formulated the Natural Disaster Reduction Plan. There are 5 key components as shown on the next 2 Slides.

[Slide 9]

[Slide 10]

We presented the plan to Canada's Federal Government House of Commons Finance Committee yesterday, May 3rd. Our plan, along with the evidence given by the partners and other technical experts, was very well received by the committee. Similar presentations have also been made to the Senate Finance Committee. The advantages/benefits should be obvious.

[Slide 11]

In the last 5 years, Canadian governments are spending an average of $500 million per year in response and recovery costs. In the 1980's, the average was about $100 million per year. This money should be spent in education, health, debt reduction etc. Mitigation is an investment!

[Slide 12]

Overall, the Canadian Insurance Industry has attempted to reduce natural disaster losses though the 5 strategies listed on this last Slide.

[Slide 13]

Today, my presentation has focused on the last 3 strategies, and I will be happy to try and answer your questions now. Thank you.

Amy Sebring: Thank you very much for the overview Alan. We will take audience comments and questions next. Please indicate you wish to be recognized by sending in a question mark at any time. Then compose your question, have it ready so we can keep the flow moving, but hold it until you are recognized. We now invite your questions or comments.

[Questions/Answers]

Question:

Tricia Wachtendorf: Alan, I'm not sure how familiar you are with FEMA's Project Impact (PI) mitigation initiative here in the US. It's push is to really get local communities to take ownership of some of these mitigation activities and decide on its own vision for disaster resistance in the future. It has focused on partnerships at the local as well as the national level (and have been more successful in some cases than others). Does the initiative you are involved with in Canada also have a more local community component in terms of partnerships? And can you discuss in a little more detail how some of these overall goals can be implemented in Canadian communities.

Alan Pang: Under the Natural Disaster Reduction Plan, the idea is to invite initiatives from the local communities. We believe local communities have a better idea of the lay of the land. Also, the plan could run similar to the old Canada infrastructure program which basically shut down in 1997.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities is one of our partners. The FCM represents 740 municipalities across Canada. Over 75% of Canadians live in these communities.

Question:

Avagene Moore: Alan, the National Mitigation Strategy mentions the need for a "culture of preparedness" and the possible formation of a National Mitigation Secretariat. Globally the idea of a "culture of prevention or preparedness" is becoming a household concept in this business. Two questions: Did Canada participate in the efforts of the International Decade for Natural Hazards Reduction (IDNDR)? Are there plan's to work with the IDNDR's successor organization (I forget the exact name and acronym; think it is ISDR)? I can see benefits of a global sharing.

Alan Pang: Yes, Canada did participate in IDNDR. Dr. Alan Davenport is the Research Director for ICLR at the University of Western Ontario. There is a natural linkage.

Question:

Amy Sebring: I understand that Canada is planning to undertake a national natural hazards assessment, and is meeting this month to start that effort. Will you be involved, and do you think this will be helpful?

Alan Pang: I will be participating at the National Hazard Assessment Workshop. Hopefully, we can learn from Dennis Milletti and Mary Fran Myers efforts.

Question:

Tricia Wachtendorf: How are First Nations communities being integrated into the mitigation initiative?

Alan Pang: We have invited Chief Phil Fontaine to our ICLR Building Resilient Communities Symposium. We also had the Federal Government's Department of Northern Affairs participate at the Sept. 21, 1998 Regional Mitigation Workshop at University of Alberta.

Question:

Slobodan Simonovic: Alan, thank you for the nice overview. Is there any other international experience with national mitigation policy?

Alan Pang: With respect to the National Mitigation Policy, the United States, Australia, etc. The regional differences vary tremendously across Canada. Canada is a rugged country and it is vast so naturally the geography varies significantly. Also, the level of natural hazard assessment and quality of research varies across the country.

Question:

Avagene Moore: Alan, how are you publicizing the disaster resistance communities concept? Can you share details of your public awareness campaign (planned or underway?)

Alan Pang: We will be publicizing the resistant communities concept. Hopefully, our politicians will help also when they put money into the 2001 budget! We will be glad to share the information and our approach. Canadians will be able to read about our efforts with the House of Commons Finance Committee in the newspapers tomorrow if not sooner.

Question:

Amy Sebring: Alan, have you published a report of your national conference? Or have any future plans for reports?

Alan Pang: We did publish a report on the Dec. 2, 1998 National Mitigation Conf. We publish the proceedings from each conference.

Question:

Amy Sebring: If you will permit a follow up, can copies be requested Alan?

Alan Pang: Sure.

Question:

Tricia Wachtendorf: You just briefly touched on this a few lines back, but what kind of financial support will communities be given for mitigation activities? Is there a formalized structure for cost-sharing or seed money or something along that line?

Alan Pang: $2.65B was allocated to improve municipal infrastructure. We are trying to convince the govt. that with each improvement they should consider the potential impact to the communities with respect to natural disasters. At the same time, we are strongly suggesting that $150 m per year for the next 5 years should be set aside for mitigation projects coming from the local communities.

Question:

Amy Sebring: You mentioned testifying before the subcommittee. Do you expect any action from the federal government in the near future?

Alan Pang: As you know, we have made our presentation and it was well received. Our plan has been sent to the Prime Minister's Office. If they could agree to make sure all infrastructure projects include some consideration on natural disasters. We would have made some progress. It would be a good start.

Final Question:

Amy Sebring: Alan, what events do you have coming up, and where can people find out about them? Do you have a mailing list?

Alan Pang: May 10 - Earthquake, Montreal; June 23rd - Tornadoes, Edmonton, Oct. 6th - Infrastructure, Halifax and Nov. 15 - ICLR's 2nd Annual Building Resilient Communities Symposium, Toronto. Our conferences are open to everybody. We would like to add interested individuals to our list for further information.

Amy Sebring: They can contact you at apang@iclr.org to request to be put on mailing list Alan?

Alan Pang: Yes, please.

[Closing]

Amy Sebring: Thank you very much, Alan, for hanging in there with us. Thank you to all our participants today. A transcript will be posted later, and we will notify you via mailing list when it is available.

I would like to mention that we will have a regular monthly meeting tomorrow morning at 9:00 AM and all are invited to participate.

Don't forget the IJC Public Hearing on May 10th at 1:00 PM Central time. This will be open to all, and will be held in the IJC Hearing room we have set up.

Thanks, Alan; we will officially adjourn.