How can cat bonds plan for a natural disaster?
What is a cat bond?
Cat bonds are a unique hybrid insurance-cum-debt financial product that transforms insurance cover into a tradable security. These bonds transfer hazard risk from the at-risk state to not just the limited stock of global re-insurers, but to deep-pocketed global financial markets through securitisation, opening up a much larger quantum of funds for post-disaster relief and reconstruction. Cat bonds are effective in transferring pre-defined risk to bond investors, ensuring quicker payouts and a much-reduced counter-party risk.
Players that create cat bonds are sovereign nations, which sponsor the bond and pay the premium, with the principal being the sum insured. The sponsor requires an intermediary to issue the bond to reduce counter-party risk. Intermediaries can include the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank or a reinsurance company. If a disaster does occur, the investor runs the risk of losing a part of the principal — a key reason for higher coupon rates of such bonds, compared to regular debt instruments. There is much variation in coupon rates for a cat bond depending on the risks — earthquakes garner lower premiums, as low as 1-2%, compared to hurricanes or cyclones.
Are cat bonds profitable?
Nobel Prize-winner Harry Markowitz had famously stated that risk diversification is 'truly the only free lunch in finance'. Risk-seeking investors find the disaster risk curve most attractive for diversification, since climate or geological hazards are historically not related to financial market movements, being mutually exclusive and independent of the financial risk curve. Probabilistic and deterministic financial risk curves move differently from cat-risk curves, in effect de-risking the entire portfolio of an investor. Leading the pack of cat bond investors are pension funds, with a minority share being occupied by hedge funds and family offices, seeking to de-risk their market-centric risk profiles for sovereign-sponsored cat bonds.
Observers assess that since the onset of cat bonds, there have been $180 billion worth new issuances of cat bonds globally with about $50 billion currently outstanding.
Does India need a cat bond?
In these times of climate change, disaster risk can become unprofitable for insurers and re-insurers, as is increasingly evident in the U.S. with the rising intensity of hurricanes and forest fires. This causes premiums to rise and demand to fall, leading to risk ratcheting back to the harried victim of disasters. This is where governments can step-in, sponsoring instruments like cat bonds. The unpredictability and increase in frequency of extreme weather events like cyclones, floods, forest fires and devastating earthquakes in South Asia have increased India's exposure to disaster-risk. India needs to ring-fence its public finances for post-disaster reconstruction. Given the credit standing of the Indian sovereign and the scale of India's hazard risk profile, it could be cost-effective to sponsor such an instrument, through an intermediary like the World Bank, utilising its established bond curves. Apart from assessing the existing risk curve, insurance companies typically build clauses requiring disaster mitigation into contracts with countries, in the absence of which coupon rates rise. On that count, the Indian government is far ahead, having already demonstrated pro-active risk reduction by allocating mitigation and capacity building funds worth $1.8 billion per annum since FY21-22.
Given India's size and financial stability, India could be lead-sponsor for a South Asian cat bond, given that most such regional risks remain unhedged. In addition, the regional hazard matrix reveals an interesting variety of hazards, each with their own risk curve and a different flavour of history, vulnerability, and exposure. Imagine a regional cat bond for high-impact hazards like an earthquake in Bhutan, Nepal and India; or for a supra-cyclone or tsunami in India, Bangladesh, Maldives, Myanmar and Sri Lanka. A South Asian cat bond would spread risk, reduce premium costs and over time, make the region financially stronger to face disasters.
What are the disadvantages?
A defectively designed cat bond could lead to no payout despite a significant disaster. For example, an earthquake cat bond designed for a magnitude threshold of 6.6M for a certain grid may fail if a 6.5M event occurs and causes extensive damage. In addition, despite a contract if a disaster doesn't occur, it could lead to questions on the desirability of such expense. Hence, comparison of premium to be paid discovered through transparent government procedure, with historical annual costs of post-disaster reconstruction could be the best way forward.
Safi Ahsan Rizvi is an IPS officer and adviser to the NDMA.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
7 hours ago
- Indian Express
America is going back on all the things that made it great. India's must seize the opportunity
An autoimmune disease occurs when your body's immune system treats its own healthy tissues as invaders and attacks them. America's policies currently targeting its three powerful muscles — universities, companies and immigration — create short-term pain for India in remittances, student enrolment, manufacturing jobs, foreign investment and exports. While these attacks feel like a passing shower, it's too early to conclude they aren't the climate change of Pax Americana ending. Regardless of how politics unfolds in America, India must seize the long-term economic opportunities by making itself stronger through a 180-day plan for deregulation for employers, decentralisation of power and deepening of human capital. Some people date Pax Americana — US dominance in the world order — to World War II. I prefer January 1992, when President George H W Bush, referring to the Soviet Union's collapse, said, 'The last year has seen changes of biblical proportions. By the grace of God … a world once divided … now recognises one sole and preeminent power, the United States of America.' Despite this biblical hubris — and 9/11, two wars, a financial crisis and Covid since — the US has dominated in digital innovation, new drugs and stock market growth because it stole the best people in the world, made public investments in basic science and its companies globalised their supply chains. But America is now pouncing on all three. America's universities are home to 50 per cent of Nobel Prize winners. Funding from the National Institutes of Health contributed to 99 per cent of all drugs approved between 2010 and 2019. In biotech, US government funding accounted for 38 per of total investment in 2024, almost as much as all global venture capital combined. Global consumers of medicine and information technology innovations (chips, internet, and GPS) have benefited from generous US government funding that supported cutting-edge basic science research and grants to academic scientists. Some of the backlash against universities is earned as some intolerant humanities professors with physics envy gift-wrapped their disciplines as social sciences, ignoring Richard Feynman's warning that physics would be impossible if electrons had feelings. This conversion of economics to mathematics, political science to statistics, and sociology/anthropology to racism paralleled a crisis in peer-reviewed, journal-published academic papers around replicability, scalability, and generalisability. It's also unclear whether a private university like Harvard, with an endowment of $50 billion, should take $90,000 per student per year in government funding. President Donald Trump's economically illiterate advice to Walmart, a hyper-efficient American retailer with 3 per cent profit margins, to 'eat' his import tariffs is a long way from the global supply chains described in the new book Apple in China by Patrick McGee. Ignoring the author's patronising and unfair portrayal of Apple's motivations, the book insightfully demonstrates how the globalisation of manufacturing supply chains became the most significant factor in reducing global poverty by attracting investment, training managers and accelerating productivity. India came late to manufacturing supply chains; only one in 10 of our workers works in a factory. However, China's recent dismissal of Deng Xiaoping's economic genius presents India with a manufacturing opportunity to attract factory refugees despite America's tariff drama. If demography is destiny, immigration has ensured America doesn't face the problems of Japan (adult diapers outsell baby diapers) or China (Nigeria may have more people by 2060). Approximately 14 per cent of Americans are foreign-born, and immigrants, including their US-born children, account for 27 per cent of the country's population. These numbers conceal the disproportionate contributions of Indian immigrants to new company formation, university teaching, scientific research, technology innovation, and taxes. India's improbable success in two Indian industries — economists never envisioned poor countries exporting software and medicines — benefited from America's skilled worker visa regime and brain circulation. A new book by Srinath Raghavan of Ashoka University on the Indira Gandhi years suggests they represent conjoined crises of hegemony, representation, and governance. This may also explain America's political backlash. Universities became idealists with illusions. The geographic (rural) and sectoral (manufacturing) concentration of wage declines were ignored. Liberals denied that illegal migration would hurt legal migration, a path to citizenship is not necessary for a path to work. And migrants are easier to vilify than technology. The political popularity of America's economic irrationality — Make America Great Again, feels like Make America White Again —suggests healing will take time. But Indians showing schadenfreude at America's challenges should pause. Despite our short-term pain from the US's actions, its democracy remains the best partner for India's students, emigrants, investment needs and exports. Suppose the government-funded American research engine in basic science suffers. It's hard to imagine the Indian state or pharma, software, and manufacturing companies responding with resources of the same intensity and impact. Let's compare America to the alternative; imagine the tyranny and soullessness of a global order hinged on China. Every problem is an opportunity. India must capitalise on this one in three ways. First, cut employer compliance, filing and criminal provisions. Second, shift some of Delhi's power (funds, functions and functionaries) to state and city governments. Third, while the troubles of America's Ivy League universities are probably temporary, granting poorna swaraj to IISC, IITs, IIMs, and Ashoka to innovate, disrupt and teach would accelerate their disruption of global university rankings. All three reforms are hard. But as a song from the movie Pink reminded us, Jo tujh se lipti bediyaan samajh na inko vastra tu/ ye bediyaan pighal ke banale in ko shastra tu (Don't mistake the chains that bind you for clothes/ Melt these chains into weapons). In policy, there is no such thing as being too late, but there is a 'fierce urgency of now'. Success is far from guaranteed but the moment feels auspicious. The writer is co-founder of Teamlease Services
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Time of India
Rs 56 crore assets restituted in Era Infra probe: ED
NEW DELHI: ED has restituted assets worth over Rs 56 crore to the successful resolution applicant in the case of Era Infra Engineering Ltd. The company was accused of laundering over Rs 250 crore from a Rs 650-crore loan it had taken from UCO Bank. NCLT had declared SA Infrastructure Consultants Pvt Ltd as the successful resolution applicant in June last year. Era Infra's portfolio spans airports, power plants, industrial projects and multiplexes, including work for PSUs, the private sector, CPWD and Asian Development Bank-aided initiatives. After the new management sought transfer of all assets earlier attached, ED agreed to restore them. These included two tunnel boring machines and bank balances. A PMLA court approved the move, allowing restoration of assets worth Rs 56 crore. "The company obtained a Rs 650-crore loan and siphoned off funds by diverting them to group firms for purposes beyond loan terms," ED said. The account was declared NPA in July 2013. CBI filed an FIR against the company and its directors, after which ED began PMLA proceedings, issuing three attachment orders and filing a prosecution complaint in March 2021.
NDTV
a day ago
- NDTV
Even 190% Tariffs Can't Shake US Shoemaker's Reliance On China
When an $80,000 tariff bill landed on her desk in May, Haley Pavone did what many small business owners might do: she froze hiring and added an online checkout fee to help cover the cost. Pavone, founder of California-based Pashion Footwear, which imports shoes from China, hasn't moved production out of the country. Not because she hasn't tried, but because, like many, it wasn't a viable option. Since President Donald Trump raised tariffs on Chinese goods after returning to office, Pavone has scouted factories in Brazil, India and Vietnam. But she quickly ran into problems: they all required higher minimum orders, and staff lacked training, particularly to make her unique shoes that convert from flats to heels. Even if she could find companies with skilled workers, they'd still need to import key components from China. A test run of a strappy heel from a factory in Vietnam proved to be "inelegant." So even as tariffs on some of her products peaked at a whopping 190% in April, she decided to stick with existing suppliers for now. With US tariffs on Vietnam now close to the levels on China, there's even less impetus to shift production away from the world's second-largest economy. "No one is as optimized as China," 29-year-old Pavone said. "Just the level of skill and implied knowledge in the workforce there for these different industries so dramatically exceeds what you'll find elsewhere." Pavone's predicament is faced by companies globally that rely on US consumers and Chinese producers. Diversification from China since 2017 has largely been concentrated in textiles, electronics, autos and in assembly, yet even firms in those areas are often still largely relying on China-based firms for inputs, according to Rhodium Group. "No country can replicate China's highly optimized production ecosystem at scale, so firms remain slow to relocate to alternative production hubs," analysts including Agatha Kratz wrote in the 2025 report. Relocation is likely even lower than reported in headline data. When including the surge in de minimis shipments - or US imports that avoided duties if priced below $800 - and rerouting of Chinese goods through third countries, US dependence on China eased by a quarter less than thought, falling by 6 percentage points rather than 8 percentage points since 2017, according to new research from a team of academics from institutions including the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. "China is replacing itself to a greater extent than either Mexico or Vietnam is replacing China in the US market," according to the researchers, led by economist Caroline Freund, Dean of the UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy. Recent trade data underscores the dynamic: China's exports to the US have plummeted while exports to Southeast Asia surged. Yet shipments from Southeast Asia to the US have also skyrocketed - often by record amounts - indicating that goods and parts from China are still very much in demand in the US. The US and China finalized a trade "understanding" in late June, meaning Pavone and importers like her no longer face the most extreme tariffs. President Trump's April 2 Liberation Day levies had sparked a tit-for-tat battle that sent US charges on good from China to 145%, and to about 190% for some of Pashion Footwear's products that already faced pre-existing levies. Yet there's still no clarity on where the final tariff level will land. Pashion's shoes retail for around $200 a pair, with styles spanning a range of price points. The levies are eating into margins, but she says the business remains profitable for now. For Pavone, it's tough to compare with facilities she's used for nearly a decade in Dongguan, China, a world headquarters for textile production. The required plastic, metal and fabric components she needs come in through a carefully calibrated supply chain and most inputs are nearby. Pavone can order in smaller batches to test new designs, meaning less financial risk. And then there's the expertise. Yaqin Long, the owner of her supplier Lovejoy Studio is a second generation footwear maker. Half of the staff at the factory of about 2,000 where Pashion's shoes are made are engineers. Long added a factory in Vietnam in 2014 and plans to build another in Indonesia to save on labor costs, but that will also take training, investment and time to get right. "US customers are pushing us to go abroad but it's hard to move production," Long said from her office in Dongguan. For Pavone, shifting orders to Vietnam would require upfront costs of at least $50,000, she estimates. And it's still not clear what tariff levels she'll face in much of the world. All of that means Pavone is still doing the math on the best path forward for her company, which began as a startup about six years ago and pitched on Shark Tank. "It's just bad, it's very bad. I just don't know how I'm supposed to do my job," Pavone said. "It should have been a great year, and instead, it's going to be a year defined by if we stay alive or not."
