Show simple item record

contributor authorDebra Javeline
contributor authorTracy Kijewski-Correa
contributor authorAngela Chesler
date accessioned2022-05-07T20:14:27Z
date available2022-05-07T20:14:27Z
date issued2021-11-02
identifier other(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000533.pdf
identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4282164
description abstractSubsidized insurance is often described as a perverse incentive, moral hazard, or maladaptation that perpetuates coastal residencies in vulnerable homes despite increasing safety and economic risks from hurricanes, sea level rise, and other climate change impacts. Insurance is also often described as a positive factor in coastal risk reduction if insurers proactively reward homeowners for upgrades that mitigate losses from hurricanes. The empirical and policy-relevant question remains whether homeowners perceive insurance incentives as perverse or positive. A new survey of 662 North Carolina coastal homeowners shows that most are failing to upgrade their homes to address hurricane risk or plan for coastal retreat but not because they expect insurance to cover losses. Rather those aware of insurance incentives are more likely to live in better-protected residences and take the incentivized actions. Limited awareness of existing policies suggests a need for greater outreach by policymakers, lenders, and insurers.
publisherASCE
titleDo Perverse Insurance Incentives Encourage Coastal Vulnerability?
typeJournal Paper
journal volume23
journal issue1
journal titleNatural Hazards Review
identifier doi10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000533
journal fristpage04021057
journal lastpage04021057-14
page14
treeNatural Hazards Review:;2021:;Volume ( 023 ):;issue: 001
contenttypeFulltext


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record